You Will Burn in Hell!

[Reverend Wright]

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man
cometh unto the Father, but by me." �John 14:6

It's Jesus or Hell! The Pope cannot save you. The church cannot save
you. Good works cannot save you. Baptism cannot save you. Holy
Communion cannot save you. ONLY Jesus can save you. ONLY Jesus has the
nail-scared hands and feet.

ONLY Jesus shed His blood upon the cross. ONLY Jesus! If you try to
enter into Heaven some other way than through the Lord Jesus Christ,
than God says you are a "thief" and a "robber" trying to break in
illegally...

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into
the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a
robber." �John 10:1

There is only one DOOR into Heaven...

"I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall
go in and out, and find pasture." �John 10:9

Jesus is the Door to Heaven. If you miss Jesus, then you have missed
your only bus ticket to Heaven. This is what Paul meant when he warned
of "falling from grace" in Galatians 5:4. If you pass up the gospel of
Jesus Christ, then you are hopelessly lost without Christ. I say this
not to be unkind, but to be honest. The truth can be dealt with, but a
lie cannot. What will you do with Jesus? Would you like to KNOW for
certain that your name is written in Heaven? You can know for sure that
if you died this moment, you'd go to Heaven (1st John 5:13).

Salvation happens when a person acknowledges their guilt of sin, coming
to God on the basis of being a hell-deserving sinner; believing on
Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God to forgive their sins (Acts 10:43).
Salvation is receiving; not giving. Eternal life is the gift of God
(Romans 6:23). Salvation is freely given (Romans 5:15), freely offered
(Romans 10:13), and freely received (Revelation 22:17). We are saved
solely by Christ's righteousness, which is through faith in His precious
blood that washes our sins away. If you come to God as a guilty sinner
and believe on the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness, then you will
be saved. The choice is your alone to make friend. Will you accept
Christ's payment for your sins?

All God the Father asks is that you come to Him THROUGH His dear Son,
Jesus, the Christ, for forgiveness.






--
Rev. Paul Wright

[Kadaitcha Man]

On 25/12/13 16:34, Reverend Wright wrote:
>
> "Jesus

Fuck you, fuck your jeebus, and fuck the camel he rode in on.

[Les Hellawell]

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:34:00 -0800, Reverend Wright
<pauldav...@hotmail.com> wrote:




Violence is never far away from the thoughts of these nasty
people with these threats of 'burning in hell' simply because
we do not accept what they say on their say so

Christianity?

Just say NO!

<more boring religion snipped>

Can these obessiives never give it a rest the tedious
buggers.


--
Les Hellawell
Greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

[kni...@baawa.com]

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:34:00 -0800, Reverend Wright
<pauldav...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> ONLY Jesus has the
>nail-scared hands and feet.

That why he can't walk on water or eat Jelly Beans anymore.

Warlord Steve
BAAWA

[Dakota]

He can't play peek-a-boo either.

[THE COLONEL]

Thank, but I don't like yer momma's cookin'.
LOL

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <g7uuu.64429$gh2....@fx24.iad>,

Reverend Wright <pauldav...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man

> cometh unto the Father, but by me." �John 14:6

>
> It's Jesus or Hell!

Have you forgotten that until you provide some objective and verifiable
evidence that either of these exist there's nothing to discuss?

--

JD

"If our country is going broke, let it be from
feeding the poor and caring for the elderly.
And not from pampering the rich and fighting
wars for them."--Living Blue in a Red State (seen on Facebook)

[Doc Smartass]

Reverend Wright <pauldav...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:g7uuu.64429
$gh2....@fx24.iad:

> Subject: You Will Burn in Hell!

You go first. All fundies go there.

--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Heckling aa # 1939

Kooks! http://kookclearinghouse.blogspot.com/
Books! http://jw-bookblog.blogspot.com/
Everything Else! http://pareidolia-global.blogspot.com/

Sure, wingtards have opinions...but, like, who cares?

[SkyEyes]

Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote in
news:XnsA2A4D93D419...@216.196.121.131:

> Reverend Wright <pauldav...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:g7uuu.64429
> $gh2....@fx24.iad:
>
>> Subject: You Will Burn in Hell!
>
> You go first. All fundies go there.

"Go" there? Fundies already *are* there.

--
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com

[Alex W]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 07:41:05 +0000 (UTC), SkyEyes wrote:

> Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote in
> news:XnsA2A4D93D419...@216.196.121.131:
>
>> Reverend Wright <pauldav...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:g7uuu.64429
>> $gh2....@fx24.iad:
>>
>>> Subject: You Will Burn in Hell!
>>
>> You go first. All fundies go there.
>
> "Go" there? Fundies already *are* there.

Disagree.

A good image of hell would be being forced to share the
afterlife, fundies and non-believers cheek by jowl. They
would absolutely LOATHE it.

[James]

Reverend Wright <pauldav...@hotmail.com>

>
>"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man

>cometh unto the Father, but by me." �John 14:6

>
> It's Jesus or Hell! The Pope cannot save you. The church cannot save
>you. Good works cannot save you. Baptism cannot save you. Holy
>Communion cannot save you. ONLY Jesus can save you. ONLY Jesus has the
>nail-scared hands and feet.
>
>ONLY Jesus shed His blood upon the cross. ONLY Jesus! If you try to
>enter into Heaven some other way than through the Lord Jesus Christ,
>than God says you are a "thief" and a "robber" trying to break in
>illegally...
>
>"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into
>the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a

>robber." �John 10:1

>
>There is only one DOOR into Heaven...
>
>"I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall

>go in and out, and find pasture." �John 10:9

>
>Jesus is the Door to Heaven. If you miss Jesus, then you have missed
>your only bus ticket to Heaven. This is what Paul meant when he warned
>of "falling from grace" in Galatians 5:4. If you pass up the gospel of
>Jesus Christ, then you are hopelessly lost without Christ. I say this
>not to be unkind, but to be honest. The truth can be dealt with, but a
>lie cannot. What will you do with Jesus? Would you like to KNOW for
>certain that your name is written in Heaven? You can know for sure that
>if you died this moment, you'd go to Heaven (1st John 5:13).

The Bible teaches that not every good person goes to Heaven. For
example, John the Baptist (who was a good person) did not make it to
Heaven. Jesus tells us this at Mt 11:11,

"I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen
anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the
kingdom of heaven is greater than he." (NIV)

Also, King David, ("a man agreeable to my heart"-Ac 13:22), did not
make it to Heaven either. Ac 2:34,

"For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said, "The Lord said
to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand""" (NIV)

And Jesus plainly states that at the time he made the following
statement, NO human had ever been to Heaven. Not Moses, King David,
Ezekiel, etc, no one. Joh 3:13,

"No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from
heaven--the Son of Man." (NIV)

Thus at least up to Jesus' time, all good men who died did not go to
Heaven. Then where did they go? They are still in the common grave of
mankind, called "Sheol" in the Bible. The wise man Solomon said that
all men end up in Sheol. Ec 9:10,

"Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is
no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are
going." (RSV)

The hope for those in "sheol" is a resurrection. Luke wrote at Ac
24:15,

"and I have the same hope in God as these men, that there will be a
resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked." (NIV)

So who make it to Heaven? Jesus referred to those who will be in
Heaven as a "little flock". (Lu 12:32) Why is it "little"? Because the
number going to Heaven is limited to "a hundred and forty-four
thousand". (Re 7:4; 14:1)

What are those 144,000 going to do in Heaven, float around on clouds
and play harps? No, they are to going to be kings and priests, and
rule over those who will be on the earth. (If you are a king, you have
to have subjects) Re 5:10,

"You changed them into a kingdom and priests for our God. They will
rule over the earth." (Simple English Bible)

The rest of mankind will have the opportunity to live forever on the
earth, just as God originally intended with the human family when He
created Adam and Eve. Jesus referred to that group as "other sheep"
(John 10:16). Jesus also was talking about that group at Mt 5:5,

"Happy are the mild-tempered ones, since they will inherit the earth."

You can't "inherit the earth" or "rule" over it, if there is no one
left on it. (or if the earth has been destroyed) If all humans either
went to a 'hellfire' or to Heaven when they died (or got raptured),
there would be no one left. No, the Bible clearly shows that humans
will be on the earth forever, as well as some in Heaven forever.

Please verify these scriptures in your Bible and if you have any
questions don't hesitate to ask.


James
John 4:23,24
www.jw.org

[James]

Les Hellawell <l...@shant-tell.com>

The BIBLE does not teach of a sadistic God who fries people like on a
hot grill. To accuse God of such an astroncity should be a crime. The
bible "hell" is the common grave of dead mankind.

"In Old Testament times, the Israelites believed that all the dead,
both good and evil, went to a dark, unhappy place called Sheol." (The
1999 World Book Encyclopedia)



"hell

...It developed out of Hebrew sheol and Greek hades as the place of
the dead. (Webster's World Encyclopedia)

"...English translations have equally given Sheol a great variety of
appearances: it has been shown as "a pit," "a grave," or -
misleadingly - "hell."" (Webster's World Encyclopedia)

[thomas p.]

"James" <1ri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelelsen
news:c7e0c9la9eccdil94...@4ax.com...
> Reverend Wright <pauldav...@hotmail.com>
>>
snip

I have a question. Why do believe that the Bible is of divine origin?


snip--
thomas p

Ignorance is the mother of devotion.

David Hume

[thomas p.]

"James" <1ri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelelsen

news:8ge0c9pmlrh3fmn06...@4ax.com...

> Les Hellawell <l...@shant-tell.com>
>>On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:34:00 -0800, Reverend Wright
>><pauldav...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Violence is never far away from the thoughts of these nasty
>>people with these threats of 'burning in hell' simply because
>>we do not accept what they say on their say so
>>
>>Christianity?
>>
>>Just say NO!
>>
>><more boring religion snipped>
>>
>>Can these obessiives never give it a rest the tedious
>>buggers.
>>
>>
>>--
>>Les Hellawell
>>Greetings from
>>YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
>
> The BIBLE does not teach of a sadistic God who fries people like on a
> hot grill. To accuse God of such an astroncity should be a crime.

You are an idiot if you think we are accusing god of anything. You just
refuse to understand what is being said don't you.

The
> bible "hell" is the common grave of dead mankind.
>
> "In Old Testament times, the Israelites believed that all the dead,
> both good and evil, went to a dark, unhappy place called Sheol." (The
> 1999 World Book Encyclopedia)

Many cultures had such beliefs. It is strange that such primitive ideas
still persist in modern society - more sad than strange.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 10:07:41 -0500, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
wrote:

>Les Hellawell <l...@shant-tell.com>
>>On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:34:00 -0800, Reverend Wright
>><pauldav...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Violence is never far away from the thoughts of these nasty
>>people with these threats of 'burning in hell' simply because
>>we do not accept what they say on their say so
>>
>>Christianity?
>>
>>Just say NO!
>>
>><more boring religion snipped>
>>
>>Can these obessiives never give it a rest the tedious
>>buggers.
>>
>>
>>--
>>Les Hellawell
>>Greetings from
>>YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
>
>The BIBLE does not teach of a sadistic God who fries people like on a
>hot grill. To accuse God of such an astroncity should be a crime. The
>bible "hell" is the common grave of dead mankind.

The Bible doesn't "teach" anything at all, brainwashed moron - that is
an Orwellian redefinition to make it seem to the stupid and gullible
that it is authoritative.

AND NOBODY IS "ACCUSING" THE FICTIONAL OF ANYTHING, IMBECILE - JUST
APPLYING LOGIC TO WHAT YOU MORONS RUB IN OUR FACES ALL DAY AND EVERY
DAY.

>"In Old Testament times, the Israelites believed that all the dead,
>both good and evil, went to a dark, unhappy place called Sheol." (The
>1999 World Book Encyclopedia)

SO WHAT?

>"hell
>
>...It developed out of Hebrew sheol and Greek hades as the place of
>the dead. (Webster's World Encyclopedia)

And they're wrong - it comes from the Saxon and Norse Hel.

>"...English translations have equally given Sheol a great variety of
>appearances: it has been shown as "a pit," "a grave," or -
>misleadingly - "hell."" (Webster's World Encyclopedia)

Even if that were true, SO FUCKING WHAT?

>
>James
>John 4:23,24
>www.jw.org

Were you this stupid and this dishonest before you became a JW, or did
they do that to you?

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 10:03:26 -0500, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
wrote:

>"I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen
>anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the
>kingdom of heaven is greater than he." (NIV)

Why do you liars lie that t hisis "the truth", liar?

[Dakota]

Why do they call it a kingdom? Why not a goddom?

[SkyEyes]

Alex W <ing...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in news:1frm3o7u8mmw3.1aopuubiawz6f
$.d...@40tude.net:

Alex, I used to *be* a fundie. Trust me when I tell you how utterly and
completely miserable they all are, all the time. I met fundies who
*claimed* to be joyous and happy, but the condition never withstood close
scrutiny.

[thomas p.]

"Dakota" <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> skrev i meddelelsen
news:l9qgio$5ec$1...@dont-email.me...

It's a con job, so it should be called a condom.

Sorry, I am truly ashamed of myself - just not enough.

[thomas p.]

"Christopher A. Lee" <ca...@optonline.net> skrev i meddelelsen
news:7ja1c9pd9ibbkl6c4...@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 10:07:41 -0500, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
> wrote:
>

snip

>>...It developed out of Hebrew sheol and Greek hades as the place of
>>the dead. (Webster's World Encyclopedia)
>
> And they're wrong - it comes from the Saxon and Norse Hel.

About 4 miles from where I live there is a village named Helsted. It was
originally a center of worship for the god of the underworld Hel. It is
actually a nice little place, and human sacrifice has pretty much fallen
into disuse : )

>
>>"...English translations have equally given Sheol a great variety of
>>appearances: it has been shown as "a pit," "a grave," or -
>>misleadingly - "hell."" (Webster's World Encyclopedia)
>
> Even if that were true, SO FUCKING WHAT?
>
>>
>>James
>>John 4:23,24
>>www.jw.org
>
> Were you this stupid and this dishonest before you became a JW, or did
> they do that to you?

[James]

"thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com>

The Bible wants us to PROVE whatever we can. (1 Th 5:21) It has
prophecies which have been proven true. It describes things of science
which were not understood at the time. Such as a circular (spherical)
earth floating in space. (Isa 40:22; Job 26:7)

Also, the Bible tells us about the Creator, thus all these millions
complex machines running around just didn't piece themselves together
over time. Have you ever seen a machine piece itself together without
a mind behind it? Neither have I. Thus SOMEONE very powerful brought
all these things into existence.

James
John 4:23,24
www.jw.org


>
>

[James]

Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net>

The Bible says that some people will have the faith, and others not.
Thus we have a difference of opinion, but hopefully it won't always
be. (here, I left myself wide open, have fun)

[linuxgal]

James wrote:
> Have you ever seen a machine piece itself together without
> a mind behind it? Neither have I. Thus SOMEONE very powerful brought
> all these things into existence.

Who pieced that SOMEONE into existence?

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 13:53:35 -0500, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
wrote:

Books of myths don't "want" anything, imbecile.

But seeing how you stupidly imagine everybody takes it seriously, stop
being such a hypocrite and PROVE IT.

And when it finally percolates through your thick skull that you
can't, KEEP IT TO YOURSELF.

>prophecies which have been proven true. It describes things of science
>which were not understood at the time.

Why do you keep repeating this lie, imbecile?

> Such as a circular (spherical)
>earth floating in space. (Isa 40:22; Job 26:7)

CIRCLES AREN'T SPHERES, imbecile.

AND IT DOESN'T FLOAT.

>Also, the Bible tells us about the Creator,

Once again, you rudely and stupidly beg the question that you never
answer....

WHAT FUCKING CREATOR?

> thus all these millions
>complex machines running around just didn't piece themselves together
>over time. Have you ever seen a machine piece itself together without
>a mind behind it? Neither have I. Thus SOMEONE very powerful brought
>all these things into existence.

Failed logic 101, imbecile?

LOOK UP "NON-SEQUITUR".

>James
>John 4:23,24
>www.jw.org

Why aren't you in the psych ward?

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 14:00:34 -0500, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
wrote:

WHY DO YOU IMAGINE THE BIBLE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT, pathological
narcissist?

Here's a clue....

YOU FIRST HAVE TO PROVE THAT THE BIBLE IS AUTHORITATIVE.

But you can't, you just assume it.

Even though it demonstrably isn't - things that you assume must be
true because they're in it, include physical impossibilities like the
entire Genesis myths.

[Dakota]

Now I feel ashamed for laughing - but not too ashamed.

[linuxgal]

Yeah, time to upgrade. Goddom it.

[Mitchell Holman]

James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote in
news:qmf3c91oeqctkje3t...@4ax.com:

>
> The Bible wants us to PROVE whatever we can. (1 Th 5:21) It has
> prophecies which have been proven true. It describes things of science
> which were not understood at the time. Such as a circular (spherical)
> earth floating in space. (Isa 40:22; Job 26:7)

The Bible doesn't say that.



Revelation 7:1
After this I saw four angels standing at the
------> four corners of the earth <----------

Revelation 7:3
and will go out to deceive the nations in
-----> the four corners of the earth <---------

Job 28:24
for he views the ------> ends of the earth <------
and sees everything ----> under the heavens. <-------

Deuteronomy 28:49
The Lord will bring a nation against you from
far away, from -----> the ends of the earth <-------

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <qmf3c91oeqctkje3t...@4ax.com>,

You've been told that the earth is not floating in space, so why are
you repeating this lie?

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:

James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>> The Bible wants us to PROVE whatever we can. (1 Th 5:21) It has
>> prophecies which have been proven true. It describes things of science
>> which were not understood at the time. Such as a circular (spherical)
>> earth floating in space. (Isa 40:22; Job 26:7)

>You've been told that the earth is not floating in space, so why are
>you repeating this lie?

It is attached to nothing, neither is it secured in place by anything
physically
defined.

Jeff...

[thomas p.]

"James" <1ri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelelsen

news:qmf3c91oeqctkje3t...@4ax.com...

No.

It describes things of science
> which were not understood at the time. Such as a circular (spherical)
> earth floating in space. (Isa 40:22; Job 26:7)

Circular is not spherical, and there were people then who considered the
possibility that the world was spherical, it did not take divine inspiration
to figure it out.

>
> Also, the Bible tells us about the Creator, thus all these millions
> complex machines running around just didn't piece themselves together
> over time. Have you ever seen a machine piece itself together without
> a mind behind it? Neither have I. Thus SOMEONE very powerful brought
> all these things into existence.

False analogy. We are not machines. We are not put together as machines
are but are produced by natural processes. Now, once again, why do you
believe the Bible is of divine origin.

[thomas p.]

"James" <1ri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelelsen

news:rig3c9pbglt6d82bv...@4ax.com...

The Bible says a lot of things, many of them stupid, many of them barbaric,
many of them contradict each other. Try being honest with yourself.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <bif9pr...@mid.individual.net>,
"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist" <jnhic...@ntlworld.com>
wrote:

Sure it is. It's called gravity.

[August Rode]

The same is true of a stick lying on the ground but one wouldn't use the
word 'floating' to describe it.

[Christopher A. Lee]

Have these imbeciles never heard of gravity?

[Stephen Furley]

"Reverend Wright" wrote in message news:g7uuu.64429$gh2....@fx24.iad...

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man

cometh unto the Father, but by me." �John 14:6

<Snip lots of nonsense>

No, I will burn in a crematorium; hell does no exist.

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:

"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"

> "Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:
> James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
> >> The Bible wants us to PROVE whatever we can. (1 Th 5:21) It has
> >> prophecies which have been proven true. It describes things of science
> >> which were not understood at the time. Such as a circular (spherical)
> >> earth floating in space. (Isa 40:22; Job 26:7)
>
> >You've been told that the earth is not floating in space, so why are
> >you repeating this lie?
>
> It is attached to nothing, neither is it secured in place by anything
> physically
> defined.

~ Sure it is. It's called gravity.

An invisible force created by God that cannot be seen or touched.....{;o;}

Jeff...

[Free Lunch]

On Wed, 1 Jan 2014 20:36:29 -0000, "1st Century Apostolic
Traditionalist" <jnhic...@ntlworld.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

It is a force that can be measured.

Why do you allege that God created it. You know that you cannot back up
that claim.

[James]

At around 1400 BC, who what that?

>
>
>>
>> Also, the Bible tells us about the Creator, thus all these millions
>> complex machines running around just didn't piece themselves together
>> over time. Have you ever seen a machine piece itself together without
>> a mind behind it? Neither have I. Thus SOMEONE very powerful brought
>> all these things into existence.
>
>False analogy. We are not machines.

"The Cell as a Machine"
(www.columbia.edu/cu/biology/courses/w3150/lecture1.pdf?)

>We are not put together as machines
>are but are produced by natural processes. Now, once again, why do you
>believe the Bible is of divine origin.

Denying that we are not biological machines does not make it true.
Again, when have you ever seen a machine pop itself into existance?
Whether biological or mechanical?

[thomas p.]

"James" <1ri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelelsen

news:hv59c9hbn37cr9v33...@4ax.com...

The book has been dated to the 6'th century bc.

>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Also, the Bible tells us about the Creator, thus all these millions
>>> complex machines running around just didn't piece themselves together
>>> over time. Have you ever seen a machine piece itself together without
>>> a mind behind it? Neither have I. Thus SOMEONE very powerful brought
>>> all these things into existence.
>>
>>False analogy. We are not machines.
>
>
> "The Cell as a Machine"
> (www.columbia.edu/cu/biology/courses/w3150/lecture1.pdf?)

In other words it is analogous to a machine. It is absurd to stretch the
analogy into claiming that a living cell is a machine.

>>We are not put together as machines
>>are but are produced by natural processes. Now, once again, why do you
>>believe the Bible is of divine origin.
>
> Denying that we are not biological machines does not make it true.
> Again, when have you ever seen a machine pop itself into existance?
> Whether biological or mechanical?

When have I seen a non-mechanical machine pop into existence? I have never
seen a non-mechanical machine period. Is that something like non-wet water?

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <hv59c9hbn37cr9v33...@4ax.com>,

And declaring that we are does not make that true.

[thomas p.]

"Jeanne Douglas" <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> skrev i meddelelsen
news:hlwdjsd2-E10F1F...@news.giganews.com...

It seems that we are non-mechanical machines. Isn't that a fascinating
concept?

[James]

Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net>
>On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 14:00:34 -0500, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net>
>>>On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 10:03:26 -0500, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>"I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen
>>>>anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the
>>>>kingdom of heaven is greater than he." (NIV)
>>>
>>>Why do you liars lie that t hisis "the truth", liar?
>>
>>The Bible says that some people will have the faith, and others not.
>>Thus we have a difference of opinion, but hopefully it won't always
>>be. (here, I left myself wide open, have fun)
>
>WHY DO YOU IMAGINE THE BIBLE HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT, pathological
>narcissist?
>
>Here's a clue....
>
>YOU FIRST HAVE TO PROVE THAT THE BIBLE IS AUTHORITATIVE.
>
>But you can't, you just assume it.

You appear to have already made your mind up, so what's the use? I
don't recall if I have given you the following, but it helps to show
that the Bible is authoritative. If you can, just look at it with an
open mind, because you are missing out on knowledge with a closed
mind:

Around 2000 years before the time of Columbus, and when there were all
kinds of mythological descriptions concerning the earth, such as the
ancient Hindu writings of the Ramayana which says that it rested on
the back of a giant turtle supported by 8 elephants etc, a Hebrew
prophet wrote in Isaiah 40:22,

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,..." (NIV)

The Hebrew word used here for "circle" is "hhug" which according to
some Hebrew scholars also has the meaning of "sphere". (for example
see: "A Concordance of the Hebrew and Chaldee Scriptures by B.
Davidson")

Some other Bible translations therefore say, "the globe of the earth"
(Douay Version, DRA,), and "round ball of earth" (MSG), "the round
earth." (Moffatt).

Also, out of the Book of Job comes the statement at Job 26:7,

"He stretches out the north over the void, and hangs the earth upon
nothing." (RSV)

So the Bible in its poetic style, describes the earth as a circular
sphere 'hanging' upon "nothing" (floating) in a "void" (space). Since
orbital flight was not around back then, how could they have known
such things?

Even many of hundreds of years later from the writing of the book of
Job, the wise man Aristotle still believed things in the heavens were
attached to supports, not just floating there. Yet the Bible said the
earth "hangs...upon nothing." Pretty good 'guess' from a human's point
of view, about such things, if the Bible is only a fabrication of men,
is it not?

>
>Even though it demonstrably isn't - things that you assume must be
>true because they're in it, include physical impossibilities like the
>entire Genesis myths.

Alright, compare the Bible's accounts with true science. Just recall
that the men who wrote these things were not scientists, but usually
farmers etc:

"The science of mathematical probability offers striking proof that
the Genesis creation account must have come from a source with
knowledge of the events. The account lists 10 major stages in this
order: (1) a beginning; (2) a primitive earth in darkness and
enshrouded in heavy gases and water; (3) light; (4) an expanse or
atmosphere; (5) large areas of dry land; (6) land plants; (7) sun,
moon and stars discernible in the expanse, and seasons beginning; (8)
sea monsters and flying creatures; (9) wild and tame beasts, mammals;
(10) man. Science agrees that these stages occurred in this general
order. What are the chances that the writer of Genesis just guessed
this order? The same as if you picked at random the numbers 1 to 10
from a box, and drew them in consecutive order. The chances of doing
this on your first try are 1 in 3,628,800!" (Life- How did it get
here? By evolution or by creation?, 1985, p. 36)

Also compare the creation account in Genesis with the creation account
of the ancient Babylonians. (I don't recall if I mentioned this
before, but if not here it is)

The Babylonian creation account says the god Apsu along with the
goddess Tiamat created other gods. Apsu later on didn't like these
other gods and tried to kill them, but he ended up getting killed by
the god Ea. Tiamat was upset at the killing of Apsu and thus tried to
kill Ea. Instead, Ea's son Marduk killed her. Marduk split her body in
half, and with one half made the sky and the other half made the
earth. Marduk then with the help of Ra, made mankind from the blood of
the god, Kingu.

I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that Genesis had
access to information that the rest of humanity (at least the
Babylonians, and none other than I ever read about) did not have at
that time.

[James]

Job 26:7= 1473 BC
Isa 40:22= 732 BC

>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also, the Bible tells us about the Creator, thus all these millions
>>>> complex machines running around just didn't piece themselves together
>>>> over time. Have you ever seen a machine piece itself together without
>>>> a mind behind it? Neither have I. Thus SOMEONE very powerful brought
>>>> all these things into existence.
>>>
>>>False analogy. We are not machines.
>>
>>
>> "The Cell as a Machine"
>> (www.columbia.edu/cu/biology/courses/w3150/lecture1.pdf?)
>
>
>In other words it is analogous to a machine. It is absurd to stretch the
>analogy into claiming that a living cell is a machine.

I am not claiming anything. That university above called a cell a
machine. A living cell is a highly complex machine. Only until
miniaturization was copying such a thing even feasible.

>
>
>>>We are not put together as machines
>>>are but are produced by natural processes. Now, once again, why do you
>>>believe the Bible is of divine origin.
>>
>> Denying that we are not biological machines does not make it true.
>> Again, when have you ever seen a machine pop itself into existance?


>> Whether biological or mechanical?
>
>When have I seen a non-mechanical machine pop into existence? I have never
>seen a non-mechanical machine period. Is that something like non-wet water?

No, as the comparison showed, there are two kinds of machines on this
planet, living biological & non-living mechanical. A bicycle is an
example of a non-living mechanical machine. A rabbit is an example of
a living biological machine.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 15:38:31 -0500, James <1ri...@windstream.net>
wrote:

So what?

From your quibbling about that, you tacitly accept the rest of his
point.

>>>>> Also, the Bible tells us about the Creator, thus all these millions
>>>>> complex machines running around just didn't piece themselves together
>>>>> over time. Have you ever seen a machine piece itself together without
>>>>> a mind behind it? Neither have I. Thus SOMEONE very powerful brought
>>>>> all these things into existence.
>>>>
>>>>False analogy. We are not machines.
>>>
>>>
>>> "The Cell as a Machine"
>>> (www.columbia.edu/cu/biology/courses/w3150/lecture1.pdf?)
>>
>>
>>In other words it is analogous to a machine. It is absurd to stretch the
>>analogy into claiming that a living cell is a machine.
>
>I am not claiming anything. That university above called a cell a
>machine. A living cell is a highly complex machine. Only until
>miniaturization was copying such a thing even feasible.

ANALOGY, imbecile.

And like all analogies it only goes so far.

>>>>We are not put together as machines
>>>>are but are produced by natural processes. Now, once again, why do you
>>>>believe the Bible is of divine origin.
>>>
>>> Denying that we are not biological machines does not make it true.
>>> Again, when have you ever seen a machine pop itself into existance?

Do you honestly not understand the difference between natural and
manufactured, or are you just being dishonest again?

>>> Whether biological or mechanical?
>>
>>When have I seen a non-mechanical machine pop into existence? I have never
>>seen a non-mechanical machine period. Is that something like non-wet water?
>
>No, as the comparison showed, there are two kinds of machines on this
>planet, living biological & non-living mechanical. A bicycle is an
>example of a non-living mechanical machine. A rabbit is an example of
>a living biological machine.

Why can't you stop lying, pathological liar?

Is this a Jehovah's Witness sacrament?

>
>James
>John 4:23,24
>www.jw.org

Get help.

Seriously.

[Mitchell Holman]

James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote in
news:4pvac95pvidvhsti8...@4ax.com:

>
> Alright, compare the Bible's accounts with true science. Just recall
> that the men who wrote these things were not scientists, but usually
> farmers etc:
>
> "The science of mathematical probability offers striking proof that
> the Genesis creation account must have come from a source with
> knowledge of the events. The account lists 10 major stages in this
> order: (1) a beginning; (2) a primitive earth in darkness and
> enshrouded in heavy gases and water; (3) light; (4) an expanse or
> atmosphere; (5) large areas of dry land; (6) land plants; (7) sun,
> moon and stars discernible in the expanse, and seasons beginning; (8)
> sea monsters and flying creatures; (9) wild and tame beasts, mammals;
> (10) man. Science agrees that these stages occurred in this general
> order.

1) What science claims that birds existed
before land animals?

2) What science claims that the Earth
existed before the Sun did?

3) What science claims that water existed
on the earth before atmosphere and solid
ground did?

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

"Free Lunch" wrote in message news: "1st Century Apostolic

Traditionalist" <jnhic...@ntlworld.com> wrote in alt.atheism:
>"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:
>"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
>> "Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:
>> James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>> >> The Bible wants us to PROVE whatever we can. (1 Th 5:21) It has
>> >> prophecies which have been proven true. It describes things of science
>> >> which were not understood at the time. Such as a circular (spherical)
>> >> earth floating in space. (Isa 40:22; Job 26:7)
>>
>> >You've been told that the earth is not floating in space, so why are
>> >you repeating this lie?
>>
>> It is attached to nothing, neither is it secured in place by anything
>> physically
>> defined.
>
>~ Sure it is. It's called gravity.
>
>An invisible force created by God that cannot be seen or touched.....{;o;}
>
>Jeff...
>

~ It is a force that can be measured.

It still cannot be seen or even logically explained to anyone for thousands
of years.....{;o;}

>Why do you allege that God created it.

No-one else has the awesome knowledge or capability!

Jeff...






>that claim.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <t6ibc9tojc0j4ccg1...@4ax.com>,

A university is not a person so it can't call a cell anything.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <4pvac95pvidvhsti8...@4ax.com>,

James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:


> I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that Genesis had
> access to information that the rest of humanity (at least the
> Babylonians, and none other than I ever read about) did not have at
> that time.

You're right; it doesn't take a rocket scientist.

What it takes is a totally brainwashed and delusional idiot.

[Christopher A. Lee]

Where did you demonstrate its existence outside your deluded
imagination before rudely and stupidly talking AT those outside your
religion as if it did anything, imbecile?

>Jeff...

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 16:17:10 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>In article <4pvac95pvidvhsti8...@4ax.com>,
> James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>
>> I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that Genesis had
>> access to information that the rest of humanity (at least the
>> Babylonians, and none other than I ever read about) did not have at
>> that time.
>
>You're right; it doesn't take a rocket scientist.
>
>What it takes is a totally brainwashed and delusional idiot.

"The wholly babble is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
truth. So what they meant can only be my third-grade 'understanding'
of science. But there is no way they could have known it so it can
only have been inspired by a magical superbeing"

It's not just this loonie - Gordon/Antares is another. A particularly
stupid one was Vinod Isaac.

[thomas p.]

"James" <1ri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelelsen

news:t6ibc9tojc0j4ccg1...@4ax.com...

A living cell is not a machine. That you are unable to recognize an obvious
analogy is your problem.

>
>
>>
>>
>>>>We are not put together as machines
>>>>are but are produced by natural processes. Now, once again, why do you
>>>>believe the Bible is of divine origin.
>>>
>>> Denying that we are not biological machines does not make it true.
>>> Again, when have you ever seen a machine pop itself into existance?
>
>
>>> Whether biological or mechanical?
>>
>>When have I seen a non-mechanical machine pop into existence? I have
>>never
>>seen a non-mechanical machine period. Is that something like non-wet
>>water?
>

> No, as the comparison showed, there are two kinds of machines on this
> planet, living biological & non-living mechanical. A bicycle is an
> example of a non-living mechanical machine. A rabbit is an example of
> a living biological machine.

So you will continue to talk about non-mechanical machines. That is funny
and sad at the same time.

[Free Lunch]

On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 22:51:08 -0000, "1st Century Apostolic

Traditionalist" <jnhic...@ntlworld.com> wrote in alt.atheism:

>"Free Lunch" wrote in message news: "1st Century Apostolic
>Traditionalist" <jnhic...@ntlworld.com> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:
>>"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
>>> "Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:
>>> James <1ri...@windstream.net> wrote:
>>> >> The Bible wants us to PROVE whatever we can. (1 Th 5:21) It has
>>> >> prophecies which have been proven true. It describes things of science
>>> >> which were not understood at the time. Such as a circular (spherical)
>>> >> earth floating in space. (Isa 40:22; Job 26:7)
>>>
>>> >You've been told that the earth is not floating in space, so why are
>>> >you repeating this lie?
>>>
>>> It is attached to nothing, neither is it secured in place by anything
>>> physically
>>> defined.
>>
>>~ Sure it is. It's called gravity.
>>
>>An invisible force created by God that cannot be seen or touched.....{;o;}
>>
>>Jeff...
>>
>~ It is a force that can be measured.
>
>It still cannot be seen or even logically explained to anyone for thousands
>of years.....{;o;}

Science is complicated. It is much easier for some people to make up
stories about gods so they don't have to bother to do any work learning
about science.

>>Why do you allege that God created it.
>
>No-one else has the awesome knowledge or capability!

There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.

>Jeff...
>

>
>
>
>
>>that claim.
>
>

[James]

Like I said before, that Univeristy called a cell a machine. Thus it
can be thought of that way. A cell has moving parts, a rock does not.
Thus a rock is not a machine. If humans designed and created a complex
cell, would you not call it a machine?

>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>We are not put together as machines
>>>>>are but are produced by natural processes. Now, once again, why do you
>>>>>believe the Bible is of divine origin.
>>>>
>>>> Denying that we are not biological machines does not make it true.
>>>> Again, when have you ever seen a machine pop itself into existance?
>>
>>
>>>> Whether biological or mechanical?
>>>
>>>When have I seen a non-mechanical machine pop into existence? I have
>>>never
>>>seen a non-mechanical machine period. Is that something like non-wet
>>>water?
>>
>
>> No, as the comparison showed, there are two kinds of machines on this
>> planet, living biological & non-living mechanical. A bicycle is an
>> example of a non-living mechanical machine. A rabbit is an example of
>> a living biological machine.
>
>So you will continue to talk about non-mechanical machines. That is funny
>and sad at the same time.

What do you think the human body design is? It is a machine:

"THE BODY IS A COMPLEX MACHINE CONSISTING OF MANY SEPARATE,
INTERCONNECTED, INDIVIDUALLY VIBRATING MACHINES"
(http://www.anstendig.org/BodyAsMachine.html)

[thomas p.]

"James" <1ri...@windstream.net> skrev i meddelelsen

news:7dbec99lo58bkj3nl...@4ax.com...

Have a nice day.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <7dbec99lo58bkj3nl...@4ax.com>,

No. It is not.

'

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

"Free Lunch" wrote in message

news:4vmdc91mbsl3sp4rb...@4ax.com...

~There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.

The evidence is all around you throughout the earth, and the heavens,
if only you opened your eyes to see it.

Take a good look in the mirror and see a created miraculously living
creature before your very eyes.

For man with all his 'intelligence' cannot
create a living organism, the secret is denied to him.

Jeff...

[THE COLONEL]

The yung cunt said.
I then took both hands and pulled her skirt down around her ankles.
Then I spread her legs and fucked her, like a hounddog fuckin'a a football.
I blew my load.
End of story.

[Free Lunch]

On Sat, 4 Jan 2014 08:15:52 -0000, "1st Century Apostolic

No. You don't get to just assert that X is evidence. You need a
hypothesis and a test that shows that it is evidence.

>Take a good look in the mirror and see a created miraculously living
>creature before your very eyes.

There's nothing created or miraculous about people. You are making
empty, indefensible assertions.

>For man with all his 'intelligence' cannot
>create a living organism, the secret is denied to him.

How do you think we get babies.

[FIONA]

Note Quite the end of the story !!!

[FIONA]

On 5/01/2014 12:57 AM, THE COLONEL wrote:

Then the young cunt wanted to go hunt out and fuck THE COLONEL but his
penis would not rise to a second occassion, so he went and got his Mum
Fiona to get her Dildo and while he held down The Colonel she invaded
his anus and he loved it, apart from the fact his bowels were loose for
a week and he found it extremely hard to walk properly, but in the end
he figured it was well worth it.

[THE COLONEL]

"FIONA" <Bliz...@t4u.com> wrote in message
news:52c95714$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

The title of that short excerpt, folks, is Visions of a Shemale.
LOL

[FIONA]

No No No darling Colonel

I am just a normal hetro female who can recognise your secret desire to
be taught to be humble.
It is ok I do understand thisand am prepared to help you will salvation
from your predicament

FIONA

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

"Free Lunch" wrote in message news:

> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.

There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
Universe,
and science can barely scratch it's surface.

Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
remains
with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.

As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
intrinsic design.

"20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his
eternal power
and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has
been made, so that men are without excuse."
Romans 1:20 (NIV)

Jeff...

[August Rode]

On 08/01/2014 4:26 PM, 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
> "Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>
> There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
> The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
> Universe,
> and science can barely scratch it's surface.
>
> Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
> remains
> with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.
>
> As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
> intrinsic design.

Nice series of arguments from ignorance. Lovely. Got anything that isn't
fallacious?

[Ralph]

But...but...who created this 'god'. If you say he has always existed
you'll have to show me the evidence.

[Barry OGrady]

Are you going to provide us with some of this 'plenty' you say is
all around?

We do know there is no good and powerful God.

>Jeff...

--
If you don't like what I say you can go know yourself!

[Andrew]

"Ralph" wrote in message news:nIKdnWURVLP3ZlDP...@giganews.com...

You don't know, nevertheless He is.

[Andrew]

"August Rode" wrote in message news:P8lzu.206075$Rp6....@fx15.iad...

Yet you are *unable* to refute them. So you don't even try.

Which is in itself *evidence* of their veracity, and that you
have been *deceived* into accepting a false worldview.

[Andrew]

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message news:r7vrc9dutbrg6brm1...@4ax.com...

> "1st Century Apostolic
> Traditionalist" wrote:

>>"Free Lunch" wrote:
>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>>
>>There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
>>The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
>>Universe, and science can barely scratch it's surface.
>>
>>Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
>>remains with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.
>>
>>As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
>>intrinsic design.
>>
>>"20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his
>>eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being
>>understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
>>Romans 1:20 (NIV)
>
> Are you going to provide us with some of this 'plenty' you say is
> all around?
>
> We do know there is no good and powerful God.

We do know that He is, however it appears that
you have a question concerning His beneficence.

[Barry OGrady]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:03:05 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote:

I have no question. I'm just pointing out the rock solid proof
of no God that is both good and almighty.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

Are you going to provide us with some of this 'plenty' you say is
all around?

[Barry OGrady]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:00:08 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote:

The creator of God must be beyond awesome.
Such a finely tuned God can not have come about by chance.

[Barry OGrady]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:02:44 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote:

You think you know things you don't actually know.
I don't know either. But at least I know I don't know.
In that way I have an advantage over you.

[Andrew]

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message news:2spsc9h678c76q4c1...@4ax.com...
> "Andrew" wrote:

>>"Barry OGrady" wrote:
>>> "1st Century Apostolic
>>> Traditionalist" wrote:
>>>>"Free Lunch" wrote:
>>>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>>>>
>>>>There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
>>>>The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
>>>>Universe, and science can barely scratch it's surface.
>>>>
>>>>Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
>>>>remains with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.
>>>>
>>>>As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
>>>>intrinsic design.
>>>>
>>>>"20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his
>>>>eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being
>>>>understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
>>>>Romans 1:20 (NIV)
>>>
>>> Are you going to provide us with some of this 'plenty' you say is
>>> all around?
>>>
>>> We do know there is no good and powerful God.
>>
>>We do know that He is, however it appears that
>>you have a question concerning His beneficence.
>
> I have no question.

Intelligent folk should question.

> I'm just pointing out the rock solid
> proof of no God that is both good and almighty.

But you use *false reasoning* by constructing a simplistic
formula, ignoring other factors that will influence the true
outcome of the equation.

> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus
>
> Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
> Then he is not omnipotent.

He is both willing and able.

> Is he able, but not willing?
> Then he is malevolent.

But He is both willing and able.

> Is he both able and willing?
> Then whence cometh evil?

It is a *temporary* phenomena
in the light of all eternity.

> Is he neither able nor willing?

No, He is both willing and able.

> Then why call him God?

Because He is and His eternal
purposes of love will prevail.

[Andrew]

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message news:b5qsc9d3m2pctkb23...@4ax.com...
> "Andrew" wrote:

>> "August Rode" wrote:
>>> 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
>>>> "Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>>>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>>>>
>>>> There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
>>>> The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
>>>> Universe, and science can barely scratch it's surface.
>>>>
>>>> Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
>>>> remains with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.
>>>>
>>>> As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
>>>> intrinsic design.
>>>
>>> Nice series of arguments from ignorance.
>>
>>Yet you are *unable* to refute them. So you don't even try.
>>
>>Which is in itself *evidence* of their veracity, and that you
>>have been *deceived* into accepting a false worldview.
>
> You think you know things you don't actually know.

No, I positively know what I know because I have solid
evidence from multiple sources.

> I don't know either. But at least I know I don't know.

Then get to work and do your homework and personal
research.

> In that way I have an advantage over you.

No, ignorance is a disadvantage.

[Barry OGrady]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 02:17:00 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote:

>"Barry OGrady" wrote in message news:b5qsc9d3m2pctkb23...@4ax.com...
>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>> "August Rode" wrote:
> >>> 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
>>>>> "Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>>>>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>>>>>
>>>>> There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
>>>>> The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
>>>>> Universe, and science can barely scratch it's surface.
>>>>>
>>>>> Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
>>>>> remains with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
>>>>> intrinsic design.
>>>>
>>>> Nice series of arguments from ignorance.
>>>
>>>Yet you are *unable* to refute them. So you don't even try.
>>>
>>>Which is in itself *evidence* of their veracity, and that you
>>>have been *deceived* into accepting a false worldview.
>>
>> You think you know things you don't actually know.
>
>No, I positively know what I know because I have solid
>evidence from multiple sources.

Many Christians have made that claim but none have been
able to provide any evidence.

>> I don't know either. But at least I know I don't know.
>
>Then get to work and do your homework and personal
>research.

That's normally good advice but the information is not available.

You think you know things you don't actually know.

I don't know either. But at least I know I don't know.

In that way I have an advantage over you.

>> In that way I have an advantage over you.
>
>No, ignorance is a disadvantage.

You are ignorant of your ignorance.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing?

Then why call him God?

[Barry OGrady]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 02:00:31 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote:

You are not intelligent.

>> I'm just pointing out the rock solid
>> proof of no God that is both good and almighty.
>
>But you use *false reasoning* by constructing a simplistic
>formula, ignoring other factors that will influence the true
>outcome of the equation.

Steve Willson made that same claim but like you he was unable
to find a loophole.

>> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus
>>
>> Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
>> Then he is not omnipotent.
>
>He is both willing and able.

Then whence cometh evil?

>> Is he able, but not willing?
>> Then he is malevolent.
>
>But He is both willing and able.

Then whence cometh evil?

>> Is he both able and willing?
>> Then whence cometh evil?
>
>It is a *temporary* phenomena
>in the light of all eternity.

Then God is not both willing and able temporally.

>> Is he neither able nor willing?
>
>No, He is both willing and able.

Then whence cometh evil?

>> Then why call him God?
>
>Because He is and His eternal
>purposes of love will prevail.

If God was good he would want everything to be good for us.
If God was almighty he would be able to have what he wants.
That's logic and no amount of Christian bullshit can change that.

You think you know things you don't actually know.
I don't know either. But at least I know I don't know.
In that way I have an advantage over you.

[August Rode]

On 09/01/2014 3:02 AM, Andrew wrote:
> "August Rode" wrote in message news:P8lzu.206075$Rp6....@fx15.iad...
>> 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
>>> "Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>>>
>>> There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
>>> The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
>>> Universe, and science can barely scratch it's surface.
>>>
>>> Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
>>> remains with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.
>>>
>>> As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
>>> intrinsic design.
>>
>> Nice series of arguments from ignorance.
>
> Yet you are *unable* to refute them. So you don't even try.

What's to refute, Andrew? Some of his statements are true and the
remainder are his personal opinion, unsupported by any facts.

> Which is in itself *evidence* of their veracity, and that you
> have been *deceived* into accepting a false worldview.

When one side unilaterally declares victory before it fires the first
shot, the other side is permitted to laugh.

[duke]

Impossible. No flesh will ever be able to do that.

duke, American-American
*****
When Obama was elected, he said he couldn't be more
proud for this country. Now, after 5 years, we Americans
will never be more disgusted with the mess he as created.
*****

[Free Lunch]

On Wed, 8 Jan 2014 21:26:28 -0000, "1st Century Apostolic

Traditionalist" <jnhic...@ntlworld.com> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

>"Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>
>There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.

No, no, no, no, no. You are a screaming fool. You do _not_ get to claim
that X is evidence for W just because you want it to be when there is
absolutely no identified way to tie them together. I realize that this
is a common conceit of theists, but it is false, it is dishonest, it is
foolish.

>The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
>Universe, and science can barely scratch it's surface.

So what? That does not show us that there are any gods.

>Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
>remains with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.

It's not that much of a secret. It is an incredibly complex technical
undertaking that also requires a bit more scientific understanding. What
will your excuse be when scientists show that this can be done, just as
they have shown that viruses can be assembled.

>As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
>intrinsic design.

No it is not. There is absolutely no evidence at all that any gods, let
alone the one you prattle on about, had anything to do with anything at
all in the universe.

>"20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his
>eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being
>understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
>Romans 1:20 (NIV)

Don't waste our time with your meaningless quotations from any
scriptures until you can show that your scriptures are trustworthy.

[Free Lunch]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:02:44 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>

wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

What a pile of bovine excrement you spew.

[Free Lunch]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 02:17:00 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

>"Barry OGrady" wrote in message news:b5qsc9d3m2pctkb23...@4ax.com...
>> "Andrew" wrote:
>>> "August Rode" wrote:
> >>> 1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist wrote:
>>>>> "Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>>>>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>>>>>
>>>>> There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
>>>>> The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
>>>>> Universe, and science can barely scratch it's surface.
>>>>>
>>>>> Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
>>>>> remains with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
>>>>> intrinsic design.
>>>>
>>>> Nice series of arguments from ignorance.
>>>
>>>Yet you are *unable* to refute them. So you don't even try.
>>>
>>>Which is in itself *evidence* of their veracity, and that you
>>>have been *deceived* into accepting a false worldview.
>>
>> You think you know things you don't actually know.
>
>No, I positively know what I know because I have solid
>evidence from multiple sources.

Then you are not talking about your religious claims any more because
you know that you have absolutely no evidence to support your religious
claims.

>> I don't know either. But at least I know I don't know.
>
>Then get to work and do your homework and personal
>research.
>
>> In that way I have an advantage over you.
>
>No, ignorance is a disadvantage.

Yet you worship your own ignorance.

[Free Lunch]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 00:00:08 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

Andrew worships the falsehoods he preaches.

[Free Lunch]

On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 23:30:25 +1100, Barry OGrady
<ath...@hotmail.com.au> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:

Andrew is in denial about the absurd inconsistency of his indefensible
religious claims.

>>> Is he able, but not willing?
>>> Then he is malevolent.
>>
>>But He is both willing and able.
>
>Then whence cometh evil?
>
>>> Is he both able and willing?
>>> Then whence cometh evil?
>>
>>It is a *temporary* phenomena
>>in the light of all eternity.
>
>Then God is not both willing and able temporally.
>
>>> Is he neither able nor willing?
>>
>>No, He is both willing and able.
>
>Then whence cometh evil?
>
>>> Then why call him God?
>>
>>Because He is and His eternal
>>purposes of love will prevail.
>
>If God was good he would want everything to be good for us.
>If God was almighty he would be able to have what he wants.
>That's logic and no amount of Christian bullshit can change that.
>
>You think you know things you don't actually know.
>I don't know either. But at least I know I don't know.
>In that way I have an advantage over you.

If there were a god, it would be silly for him to hide from us. A god
that actually exists would have no need for "followers" who make excuses
for his disappearance and make excuses for evil.

[duke]

And YOU think you can challenge him? Haahaahaa.

[Ralph]

From your reply, it appears you don't know 'jack' either.

[Ralph]

Can you refute the claim that Pink Unicorns didn't create the universe
and that they are the gods of
the universe? Didn't think so.

[Ralph]

On 1/9/2014 3:03 AM, Andrew wrote:
> "Barry OGrady" wrote in message news:r7vrc9dutbrg6brm1...@4ax.com...
>> "1st Century Apostolic
>> Traditionalist" wrote:
>>> "Free Lunch" wrote:
>>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you descr

>>>> There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
>>>> The human brain we are informed is the most complicated object in the
>>>> Universe, and science can barely scratch it's surface.
>>>>
>>>> Man cannot create life, or even the smallest grass-seed as the secret
>>>> remains with an Almighty Intelligent Creator.
>>>>
>>>> As for the heavens, that is even more awesome proof of intelligent and
>>>> intrinsic design.
>>>>
>>>> "20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his
>>>> eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being
>>>> understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
>>>> Romans 1:20 (NIV)
>> Are you going to provide us with some of this 'plenty' you say is
>> all around?
>>
>> We do know there is no good and powerful God.
> We do know that He is, however it appears that
> you have a question concerning His beneficence.

Aw shit Andrew, give it a rest!

[Ralph]

We did and decided that your god is a a fraud.

>
>> I'm just pointing out the rock solid
>> proof of no God that is both good and almighty.
> But you use *false reasoning* by constructing a simplistic
> formula, ignoring other factors that will influence the true
> outcome of the equation.

In what ways, Andrew?

>
>> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus
>>
>> Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
>> Then he is not omnipotent.
> He is both willing and able.

Mmmm....any evidence of that?

>
>> Is he able, but not willing?
>> Then he is malevolent.
> But He is both willing and able.

Then why doesn't he?

>
>> Is he both able and willing?
>> Then whence cometh evil?
> It is a *temporary* phenomena
> in the light of all eternity.

Evidence????

>
>> Is he neither able nor willing?
> No, He is both willing and able.

Then why doesn't he?

>
>> Then why call him God?
> Because He is and His eternal
> purposes of love will prevail.
>
>

Sorry Andrew, your proposed god falls short on all three legs of the god
triangle.

[Barry OGrady]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 20:26:20 -0500, Ralph <mmma...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Christians don't know that they don't know things.

[Andrew]

"Ralph" wrote in message news:Xa6dnUC1UfHtA03P...@giganews.com...
> Andrew wrote:

>> "Barry OGrady" wrote:
>>>
>>> We do know there is no good and powerful God.
>>
>> We do know that He is, however it appears that
>> you have a question concerning His beneficence.
>
> Aw shit Andrew, give it a rest!

Yes, Ralph..


"Our hearts are restless, until they find rest
in Thee." ~ Augustine of Hippo

Then may you like Augustine, soon find the
healing rest that we all may find in Him, and
experience release from all of anxieties that
have plagued the soul.

"Come unto Me all ye that labor and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke
upon you and learn of Me, for I am meek and
lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your
souls." ~ Jesus

He is real.

He is the One who loves you.

[Andrew]

"Ralph" wrote in message news:Xa6dnUG1UfGKA03P...@giganews.com...
> Andrew wrote:

At least we agree that- the Universe
is the result of --> Creation.

[Barry OGrady]

On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 18:35:19 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote:

Like a pedophile 'loves' a child.

Is there some way we can escape God's 'love'?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing?

Then why call him God?

[1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist]

"Free Lunch" wrote in message news:

"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"

>"Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>
>>There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.

>No, no, no, no, no.

Yes! yes! yes! yes! yes!
No-one in their right thinking logical mind would suggest that all the
heavens
and the earth and the laws that govern the Universe and the miraculous
diversity of life
just on the earth itself, came into being by unintelligent and spasmodic
mutant
configurations, better known as sheer blind chance and hopeless
uncoordinated happenings.
It just is not feasible even to a 10 year old.

Jeff...

[Andrew]

Barry OGrady" wrote in message news:g4e1d9l7m7t2pa3bp...@4ax.com...
> "Andrew" wrote:

>>"Ralph" wrote:
>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>> "Barry OGrady" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We do know there is no good and powerful God.
>>>>
>>>> We do know that He is, however it appears that
>>>> you have a question concerning His beneficence.
>>>
>>> Aw shit Andrew, give it a rest!
>>
>>Yes, Ralph..
>>
>>"Our hearts are restless, until they find rest
>> in Thee." ~ Augustine of Hippo
>>
>>Then may you like Augustine, soon find the
>>healing rest that we all may find in Him, and
>>experience release from all of anxieties that
>>have plagued the soul.
>>
>>"Come unto Me all ye that labor and are heavy
>> laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke
>> upon you and learn of Me, for I am meek and
>> lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your
>> souls." ~ Jesus
>>
>>He is real.
>>
>>He is the One who loves you.
>

> Is there some way we can escape God's 'love'?

No, but you can foolishly turn away from Him
and reject it.

> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus
>
> Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
> Then he is not omnipotent.
> Is he able, but not willing?
> Then he is malevolent.
> Is he both able and willing?
> Then whence cometh evil?
> Is he neither able nor willing?
> Then why call him God?

There you go again reciting your foolish
mantra, the structure of which is based
upon false reasoning, by ignoring other
factors of the equation.

[Barry OGrady]

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 02:10:58 -0800, "Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net>
wrote:

I hoped that by now the church had worked out a way
for us to avoid being abused by God.

>> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus
>>
>> Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
>> Then he is not omnipotent.
>> Is he able, but not willing?
>> Then he is malevolent.
>> Is he both able and willing?
>> Then whence cometh evil?
>> Is he neither able nor willing?
>> Then why call him God?
>
>There you go again reciting your foolish
>mantra, the structure of which is based
>upon false reasoning, by ignoring other
>factors of the equation.

I am not aware of any other factors of the equation.
Would you be so kind as to elighten me?

[Barry OGrady]

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 07:44:27 -0000, "1st Century Apostolic
Traditionalist" <jnhic...@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>"Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>"1st Century Apostolic Traditionalist"
>>"Free Lunch" wrote in message news:
>>>> There's no evidence that your god exists or is as you describe.
>>
>>>There plenty all around you, if you can be bothered to open your eyes.
>
>>No, no, no, no, no.
>
>Yes! yes! yes! yes! yes!

Will you be giving us some examples?

You think you know things that you do not actually know.

http://www.jesusandmo.net/2008/02/08/wise/

>No-one in their right thinking logical mind would suggest that all the
>heavens and the earth and the laws that govern the Universe and the
>miraculous diversity of life just on the earth itself, came into being
>by unintelligent and spasmodic mutant configurations, better known as
>sheer blind chance and hopeless uncoordinated happenings.
>It just is not feasible even to a 10 year old.

No-one in their right thinking logical mind would suggest that a

magical God pre-loaded with all knowledge and power came into

being by unintelligent and spasmodic mutant configurations, better
known as sheer blind chance and hopeless uncoordinated happenings.
It just is not feasible even to a 10 year old.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

>Jeff...

[August Rode]

I don't know of *anyone* who makes such a claim.

> It just is not feasible even to a 10 year old.

Children have invisible friends.

[James]

Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>

The creator of billions of hot lumicent suns would vaporitize a
fleshly humns. Ex 33:20,

"But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and
live."" (NIV)

Thus be glad He doesn't appear before you. You would vaporize. As for
evil, That comes from demons and humans. As for God, Jas 1:13,

"When someone is being tested, he shouldn't think that God is tempting
him to do wrong. Evil cannot tempt God and God does not tempt anyone
with evil." (Simple English)

You are so wrong about your loving Creator. Don't mix up God's right
to punish wrongdoers with evil. God NEVER PUNISHED A RIGHTEOUS HUMAN.


James
John 4:23,24
www.jw.org


As for