Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way... Eph. 2:12

[old man joe]

" That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and
strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world "
Eph. 2:12 KJV

*****************************************************************************************************************

" without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word " atheist. "

as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God and man expressed in their
point of view with cursing's and shouting's. they challenge the Word of God, the Bible, from
every conceivable angle as though they are capable in expounding the Scriptures... a thing not even
the Pharisees were capable of with a lifetime of devotion to the written Word. they get their
information from Atheist TV shows such as History Channel and Hollywood movies such as the da Vinci
Code and they automatically think themselves capable to expound the Holy Scriptures...

God says otherwise... Ps 50:16 " But to the wicked God says, "What right have you to tell of My
statutes and to take My covenant in your mouth? "

an Atheist is God's property as the elect are His property. ( Ez. 18:4 ) He has made one vessel for
honor and the other for dishonor. ( Ro. 9:21; 2 Tim. 2:20; Pv. 3:35 ) curse and revile as they
do, this is the life they are assigned to live by God. He has made them for dishonor.

they are treated by Him as " stranger's and aliens " and they have " no hope " since they are
" without God " by His design. it is then not surprising at all to find them posting blasphemous
opinions about God and their fellow man... it's all part of an outward display of the inward
appointment of what it is to be " without God... " " you are of your father the devil " Christ says
" and you want to do the desires of your father... " Jn. 8:44

and this they do well.

what value then is an Atheist in this world ? these are given as a sign to God's elect... " in no
way alarmed by your opponents--which is a sign of destruction for them, but of salvation for you,
and that too, from God. " Php 1:28

the Life given to His elect ones contrasts against the darkness of those who are given as a sign of
destruction. while His elect praise Him the Atheist's curse Him... the mouth speaks out of that
which fills the heart. Lk. 6:45

His elect ones are reminded that they came into this world as Atheist's, also. ( Ps. 58:3 ) it is
only by the grace of God that they are elect unto salvation. it is only by the new birth of Jn. 3:3
given to His elect ones that they are made different than those who are perishing. being ever
thankful to God for His grace in Spirit and in Truth is the mark of salvation.

[Robibnikoff]

"old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote

Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
BAAWA Knight
#1557

[i***@gmail.com]

On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
> "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
>
> Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
> --
> Robyn
> Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
> BAAWA Knight
> #1557

Theres no such thing as a real atheist. It is impossible to have the
kind of faith to be one based on the obvious evidence of an
intelligent willful Designer , all around. No one looks upon their
human body and concludes it was an accident , no one looks at the
complexity of DNA and concludes it was thrown together by
happenstance, no one looks at the many Physics Constants needed for
earth to exist so we can have a place to live...as coming from a
random big explosion , et al, ad nauseum. In order for atheism to be
real, everything should resembly nothing but a huge amount of chaos
and nothing resembling design. And in reality, that is far far from
what we do have . I know atheism is a convenient excuse for not
wanting to move closer in relationship to the personal Creator God of
our universe for the reason of not wanting to be owned by someone
higher and better than oneself. And that is an eternal crime
indeed. Atheism also has the 'benefit' of allowing the person to
act, behave, and talk in a vile and foul manner because , allegedly,
there is no ultimate moral accountability . At least not in this short
lived life.

[Father Haskell]

On Feb 1, 9:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
>
> > "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
>
> > Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
> > --
> > Robyn
> > Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
> > BAAWA Knight
> > #1557
>
> Theres no such thing as a real atheist.  It is impossible to have the
> kind of faith to be one based on the obvious evidence of an
> intelligent willful Designer , all around.  No one looks upon their
> human body and concludes it was an accident , no one looks  at the
> complexity of DNA  and concludes it was thrown together by
> happenstance,  no one looks at the many Physics Constants needed for
> earth to exist so we can have a place to live...as coming from a
> random big explosion , et al, ad nauseum.   In order for atheism to be
> real,  everything should resembly nothing but a huge amount of chaos
> and nothing resembling design.  And in reality,  that is far far from
> what we do have .  I know atheism is a convenient excuse for not
> wanting to move closer in relationship to the personal Creator God of
> our universe for the reason of not wanting to be owned by someone
> higher and better than oneself.    And that is an eternal crime
> indeed.   Atheism also has the 'benefit' of allowing the person to
> act, behave, and talk in a vile and foul manner because , allegedly,
> there is no ultimate moral accountability . At least not in this short
> lived life.

So why are so many astronomers atheists?

[St. Jackanapes]

Inalt.flame.jesus.christ, Father Haskell said...

>
> On Feb 1, 9:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
> >
> > > Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
> > > --
> > > Robyn
> > > Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
> > > BAAWA Knight
> > > #1557
> >
> > Theres no such thing as a real atheist.  It is impossible to have the
> > kind of faith to be one based on the obvious evidence of an
> > intelligent willful Designer , all around.  No one looks upon their
> > human body and concludes it was an accident , no one looks  at the
> > complexity of DNA  and concludes it was thrown together by
> > happenstance,  no one looks at the many Physics Constants needed for
> > earth to exist so we can have a place to live...as coming from a
> > random big explosion , et al, ad nauseum.   In order for atheism to be
> > real,  everything should resembly nothing but a huge amount of chaos
> > and nothing resembling design.  And in reality,  that is far far from
> > what we do have .  I know atheism is a convenient excuse for not
> > wanting to move closer in relationship to the personal Creator God of
> > our universe for the reason of not wanting to be owned by someone
> > higher and better than oneself.    And that is an eternal crime
> > indeed.   Atheism also has the 'benefit' of allowing the person to
> > act, behave, and talk in a vile and foul manner because , allegedly,
> > there is no ultimate moral accountability . At least not in this short
> > lived life.
>
> So why are so many astronomers atheists?

Because they are busy looking up at something much more
important than their own assholes.

There is one exception that I'm aware of, however. I was
humoring my long-time friend that I've known since we were 5th
graders in 1966 - he'd fallen into the Christian trap in the
80's. I was an atheist all my life. But we'd both go to the bar
and have a good time debating religion. He asked me if I'd go
with him to a big event being held up on the OSU campus. It was
called the Veritas Forums (LOL!)

Most of it was unmemorable and immediately forgotten, but my
friend had brought me to see one particular speaker. An
astronomer. My friend knew how much I read and knew about the
sciences, and how I used science to disprove his religion's
wacky ideas.

So he thought that if I heard this man of science, a real
astronomer, who used real science and real mathematics to prove
that life could only have come to earth via a deity, and not via
panspermia, which was my belief. And still is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia

This "man of science" is named Hugh Ross. I just looked him up
and see that he now is billing himself as a creationist. Maybe
he wasn't getting enough billings by calling himself a scientist
and astronomer with the nut case crowd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Ross_(creationist)

This clown had my friend spellbound by his mathematical
"proofs" from his own "observations & calculations" that showed
that *beyond any doubt* that of all the stars in all of the
Milky Way - *and* all of the stars in the other galaxies could
not possibly have planets ion orbit around them. He laid a thick
line of smoke, mirrors and bullshit that I couldn't follow, but
if you just listened to him, you'd think that he was right.

I have to drop my jeans to be able to count to 21, so you know
that I'm severely lacking in mathematical skills. But when I
watched this dolt trying to prove that none of the stars in the
Universe could have planets except our sun by using odds, I knew
that the guy was throwing out a huge line of hooey.

I'm not sure of the exact number, but since I saw him tell that
lie in circa 1993, there have been more than 90 planets
discovered around stars in the Milky Way. So much for his
calculations - and very telling why he now calls himself a
creationist instead of a scientist as he did in the 90's.

Reading his Wikipedia page it sounds like he's even pissed off
his fellow creation liars.

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[Father Haskell]

On Feb 15, 4:47 am, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
> Inalt.flame.jesus.christ, Father Haskell said...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 1, 9:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
>
> > > > "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
>
> > > > Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
> > > > --
> > > > Robyn
> > > > Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
> > > > BAAWA Knight
> > > > #1557
>
> > > Theres no such thing as a real atheist.  It is impossible to have the
> > > kind of faith to be one based on the obvious evidence of an
> > > intelligent willful Designer , all around.  No one looks upon their
> > > human body and concludes it was an accident , no one looks  at the
> > > complexity of DNA  and concludes it was thrown together by
> > > happenstance,  no one looks at the many Physics Constants needed for
> > > earth to exist so we can have a place to live...as coming from a
> > > random big explosion , et al, ad nauseum.   In order for atheism to be
> > > real,  everything should resembly nothing but a huge amount of chaos
> > > and nothing resembling design.  And in reality,  that is far far from
> > > what we do have .  I know atheism is a convenient excuse for not
> > > wanting to move closer in relationship to the personal Creator God of
> > > our universe for the reason of not wanting to be owned by someone
> > > higher and better than oneself.    And that is an eternal crime
> > > indeed.   Atheism also has the 'benefit' of allowing the person to
> > > act, behave, and talk in a vile and foul manner because , allegedly,
> > > there is no ultimate moral accountability . At least not in this short
> > > lived life.
>
> > So why are so many astronomers atheists?
>
> Because they are busy looking up at something much more
> important than their own assholes.
>
> There is one exception that I'm aware of, however. I was
> humoring my long-time friend that I've known since we were 5th
> graders in 1966 - he'd fallen into the Christian trap in the
> 80's. I was an atheist all my life. But we'd both go to the bar
> and have a good time debating religion. He asked me if I'd go
> with him to a big event being held up on the OSU campus. It was
> called the Veritas Forums (LOL!)
>
> Most of it was unmemorable and immediately forgotten, but my
> friend had brought me to see one particular speaker. An
> astronomer. My friend knew how much I read and knew about the
> sciences, and how I used science to disprove his religion's
> wacky ideas.
>
> So he thought that if I heard this man of science, a real
> astronomer, who used real science and real mathematics to prove
> that life could only have come to earth via a deity, and not via
> panspermia, which was my belief. And still is.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia
>
> This "man of science" is named Hugh Ross. I just looked him up
> and see that he now is billing himself as a creationist. Maybe
> he wasn't getting enough billings by calling himself a scientist
> and astronomer with the nut case crowd.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Ross_(creationist)
>
> This clown had my friend spellbound by his mathematical
> "proofs" from his own "observations & calculations" that showed
> that *beyond any doubt* that of all the stars in all of the
> Milky Way - *and* all of the stars in the other galaxies could
> not possibly have planets ion orbit around them. He laid a thick
> line of smoke, mirrors and bullshit that I couldn't follow, but
> if you just listened to him, you'd think that he was right.

Take those args a step further, and our own star should
not have planets around it, unless you dump in a
big, steaming pile of special pleading.

> I have to drop my jeans to be able to count to 21, so you know
> that I'm severely lacking in mathematical skills. But when I
> watched this dolt trying to prove that none of the stars in the
> Universe could have planets except our sun by using odds, I knew
> that the guy was throwing out a huge line of hooey.
>
> I'm not sure of the exact number, but since I saw him tell that
> lie in circa 1993, there have been more than 90 planets
> discovered around stars in the Milky Way. So much for his
> calculations - and very telling why he now calls himself a
> creationist instead of a scientist as he did in the 90's.

Wouldn't be surprised if almost all stars had planets. Seems
like all you have to do is look long and close enough with a
large enough telescope and spectrometer.

> Reading his Wikipedia page it sounds like he's even pissed off
> his fellow creation liars.
>
> --
> St. Jackanapes
> -------------------------------
> Anti-Jesus Forum:http://www.voy.com/20630/- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[St. Jackanapes]

In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Father Haskell said...

>
> On Feb 15, 4:47 am, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
> > Inalt.flame.jesus.christ, Father Haskell said...

[EDITED FOR BANDWIDTH SANITY]

> > > So why are so many astronomers atheists?
> >
> > Because they are busy looking up at something much more
> > important than their own assholes.
> >
> > There is one exception that I'm aware of, however. I was
> > humoring my long-time friend that I've known since we were 5th
> > graders in 1966 - he'd fallen into the Christian trap in the
> > 80's. I was an atheist all my life. But we'd both go to the bar
> > and have a good time debating religion. He asked me if I'd go
> > with him to a big event being held up on the OSU campus. It was
> > called the Veritas Forums (LOL!)
> >
> > Most of it was unmemorable and immediately forgotten, but my
> > friend had brought me to see one particular speaker. An
> > astronomer. My friend knew how much I read and knew about the
> > sciences, and how I used science to disprove his religion's
> > wacky ideas.
> >
> > So he thought that if I heard this man of science, a real
> > astronomer, who used real science and real mathematics to prove
> > that life could only have come to earth via a deity, and not via
> > panspermia, which was my belief. And still is.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia
> >
> > This "man of science" is named Hugh Ross. I just looked him up
> > and see that he now is billing himself as a creationist. Maybe
> > he wasn't getting enough billings by calling himself a scientist
> > and astronomer with the nut case crowd.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Ross_(creationist)
> >
> > This clown had my friend spellbound by his mathematical
> > "proofs" from his own "observations & calculations" that showed
> > that *beyond any doubt* that of all the stars in all of the
> > Milky Way - *and* all of the stars in the other galaxies could
> > not possibly have planets ion orbit around them. He laid a thick
> > line of smoke, mirrors and bullshit that I couldn't follow, but
> > if you just listened to him, you'd think that he was right.
>
> Take those args a step further, and our own star should
> not have planets around it, unless you dump in a
> big, steaming pile of special pleading.

That's exactly what this Dr. Ross did during his lecture. God
doesn't give a rat's ass about all of the other 99.999999999% of
the entire and unimaginably massive universe that must have
really worn his ass out creating, but only cares about this
unimpressive backwater minor star and it's tenacious life. No,
not it's life - but just the speaking apes that inhabit one of
the lumps of rock that spin around it...Parts that were supposed
to be part of that star but just hadn't spun into it yet.

> > I have to drop my jeans to be able to count to 21, so you know
> > that I'm severely lacking in mathematical skills. But when I
> > watched this dolt trying to prove that none of the stars in the
> > Universe could have planets except our sun by using odds, I knew
> > that the guy was throwing out a huge line of hooey.
> >
> > I'm not sure of the exact number, but since I saw him tell that
> > lie in circa 1993, there have been more than 90 planets
> > discovered around stars in the Milky Way. So much for his
> > calculations - and very telling why he now calls himself a
> > creationist instead of a scientist as he did in the 90's.
>
> Wouldn't be surprised if almost all stars had planets. Seems
> like all you have to do is look long and close enough with a
> large enough telescope and spectrometer.

The Universe, as harsh and unfriendly to life as it appears to
us, is the thing that gave birth to life. As Hubble shows us
what is out there, it's the same pattern over & over. Mostly
spiral galaxies fill the universe - within them are starts with
planets spinning around. The Universe gave life it's chemistry
framework to build upon, and gave it the energy fuels it needed
so that it could grow and be innovative so that it could survive
in the most unfriendly and harshest environments that it may
find itself in.

This life wasn't snapped into existence by a cosmic thumb &
finger. It's taken time beyond our comprehension to get Life's
basic framework to the point where life is so liquid and elastic
that it can grow and flourish anywhere it finds even the basic
necessities to reproduce.

When I look at all life on this planet, from the tube-worms
living down in the deep ocean hot smokers where light never can
be, I see life that can change itself from a sunlight-only form
to a chemical-only form. And the body shapes from insects,
reptiles, mammals, whatever, all follow some simple structures
of form in their bodies and how they feed, reproduce, and
process their energy requirements.

If life had started here on this planet - and no where else in
the Universe, I seriously doubt that it would be so variable,
advanced, tenacious, and hardy. Life must have carried along
with it a special code that would allow it to adapt to whatever
ecosystem that it may find itself upon.

Looking back at the lifeforms that were on their way to world
conquest before the various mass extinction events, it appears
to me that they weren't much different than the forms that came
after. That makes me think that life has a certain code it
follows that direct it's evolution.

To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being was bored
and lonely one day, so he created a race of little people to
amuse himself with. Little people created in his image, but
without his powers, that he would visit in forms such as burning
bushes or a finger of lightening, all to instill terror and awe
in his little friends.

An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle, mean and
sadistic that he had a perverse love of torturing his favorite
little pals - even the most loyal of them all, by torturing them
and slaying his family and children. This deity even created
another race of little people - or did he? - they worshiped
another god, despite God telling his little pals that there
weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this distinct race
of little people just so his chosen little pals could perform
genocide and be as sick, murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even
baby killers just like their creator and torturer, God.

Am I the only person on this planet who sees the Universe this
way?


--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[Father Haskell]

On Feb 27, 10:40 pm, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
> In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Father Haskell said...
>
> > Take those args a step further, and our own star should
> > not have planets around it, unless you dump in a
> > big, steaming pile of special pleading.
>
> That's exactly what this Dr. Ross did during his lecture. God
> doesn't give a rat's ass about all of the other 99.999999999% of
> the entire and unimaginably massive universe that must have
> really worn his ass out creating, but only cares about this
> unimpressive backwater minor star and it's tenacious life. No,
> not it's life - but just the speaking apes that inhabit one of
> the lumps of rock that spin around it...Parts that were supposed
> to be part of that star but just hadn't spun into it yet.

All the interesting stuff is either out in the boondocks or
in the galactic core. Nothing cool or interesting ever
happens in the Orion arm.

> > > I have to drop my jeans to be able to count to 21, so you know
> > > that I'm severely lacking in mathematical skills. But when I
> > > watched this dolt trying to prove that none of the stars in the
> > > Universe could have planets except our sun by using odds, I knew
> > > that the guy was throwing out a huge line of hooey.
>
> > > I'm not sure of the exact number, but since I saw him tell that
> > > lie in circa 1993, there have been more than 90 planets
> > > discovered around stars in the Milky Way. So much for his
> > > calculations - and very telling why he now calls himself a
> > > creationist instead of a scientist as he did in the 90's.
>
> > Wouldn't be surprised if almost all stars had planets.  Seems
> > like all you have to do is look long and close enough with a
> > large enough telescope and spectrometer.
>
> The Universe, as harsh and unfriendly to life as it appears to
> us, is the thing that gave birth to life. As Hubble shows us
> what is out there, it's the same pattern over & over. Mostly
> spiral galaxies fill the universe - within them are starts with
> planets spinning around. The Universe gave life it's chemistry
> framework to build upon, and gave it the energy fuels it needed
> so that it could grow and be innovative so that it could survive
> in the most unfriendly and harshest environments that it may
> find itself in.
>
> This life wasn't snapped into existence by a cosmic thumb &
> finger. It's taken time beyond our comprehension to get Life's
> basic framework to the point where life is so liquid and elastic
> that it can grow and flourish anywhere it finds even the basic
> necessities to reproduce.
>
> When I look at all life on this planet, from the tube-worms
> living down in the deep ocean hot smokers where light never can
> be, I see life that can change itself from a sunlight-only form
> to a chemical-only form. And the body shapes from insects,
> reptiles, mammals, whatever, all follow some simple structures
> of form in their bodies and how they feed, reproduce, and
> process their energy requirements.
>
> If life had started here on this planet - and no where else in
> the Universe, I seriously doubt that it would be so variable,
> advanced, tenacious, and hardy. Life must have carried along
> with it a special code that would allow it to adapt to whatever
> ecosystem that it may find itself upon.

DNA. DNA's chief talent is, it records its own
mistakes. Because it's complicated, it can survive
alterations to single parts in more or less viable
condition.

[Enlightened One]

St. Jackanapes wrote:

> In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Father Haskell said...
>
>
>> On Feb 15, 4:47 am, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
>> > Inalt.flame.jesus.christ, Father Haskell said...
>
> [EDITED FOR BANDWIDTH SANITY]

Allow me to point out your many confusions...

>> Take those args a step further, and our own star should not have
>> planets around it, unless you dump in a big, steaming pile of special
>> pleading.
>
> That's exactly what this Dr. Ross did during his lecture. God doesn't
> give a rat's ass about all of the other 99.999999999% of the entire and
> unimaginably massive universe that must have really worn his ass out
> creating, but only cares about this unimpressive backwater minor star
> and it's tenacious life.

The implication is that Dr. Ross has special knowledge of creation.
Perhaps Dr Ross is a god?

> The Universe, as harsh and unfriendly to life as it appears to us, is
> the thing that gave birth to life.

No proof. Claim fails.

> This life wasn't snapped into existence by a cosmic thumb & finger.

Opinion stated as fact.

> To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being was bored and
> lonely one day, so he created a race of little people to amuse himself
> with. Little people created in his image, but without his powers, that
> he would visit in forms such as burning bushes or a finger of
> lightening, all to instill terror and awe in his little friends.

You seem to suffer under the after-effects of man-made fire and brimstone
religion. All of that is irrelevant to uncovering the true origin of life.

> An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle, mean and sadistic that
> he had a perverse love of torturing his favorite little pals - even the
> most loyal of them all, by torturing them and slaying his family and
> children. This deity even created another race of little people - or did
> he? - they worshiped another god, despite God telling his little pals
> that there weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this distinct
> race of little people just so his chosen little pals could perform
> genocide and be as sick, murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even baby
> killers just like their creator and torturer, God.

Blame the Pope for that.

> Am I the only person on this planet who sees the Universe this way?

No, you are not. Your confusion is that your view of the universe is
real. Apart from nothing, what do you know about quantum mechanics?

--
From the light I came, and to light I shall return.

[raven1]

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:22:32 -0500, Enlightened One
<***@one.1> wrote:

>No, you are not. Your confusion is that your view of the universe is
>real. Apart from nothing, what do you know about quantum mechanics?

I'd wager that you know nothing about QM at all. Surprise me.

[Enlightened One]

raven1 wrote:

> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:22:32 -0500, Enlightened One <***@one.1>
> wrote:
>
>>No, you are not. Your confusion is that your view of the universe is
>>real. Apart from nothing, what do you know about quantum mechanics?
>
> I'd wager that you know nothing about QM at all. Surprise me.

What, and allow you to divert attention from your inability to question
your own one-eyed beliefs?

snork

--
From the light I came, and to light I shall return.

[Robibnikoff]

"Enlightened One" <***@one.1> wrote in message
news:***@news.alt.net...
> raven1 wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:22:32 -0500, Enlightened One <***@one.1>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>No, you are not. Your confusion is that your view of the universe is
>>>real. Apart from nothing, what do you know about quantum mechanics?
>>
>> I'd wager that you know nothing about QM at all. Surprise me.
>
> What, and allow you to divert attention from your inability to question
> your own one-eyed beliefs?

Oh dear. Another asshole for the killfile.
--
Robyn
BAAWA Knight
#1557

[raven1]

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 02:30:21 -0500, Enlightened One
<***@one.1> wrote:

>raven1 wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:22:32 -0500, Enlightened One <***@one.1>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>No, you are not. Your confusion is that your view of the universe is
>>>real. Apart from nothing, what do you know about quantum mechanics?
>>
>> I'd wager that you know nothing about QM at all. Surprise me.
>
>What, and allow you to divert attention from your inability to question
>your own one-eyed beliefs?

Non-response duly noted.

[Rick]

St. Jackanapes wrote:
[one heck of long and rather well-written treatise]
...


> To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being was bored
> and lonely one day, so he created a race of little people to
> amuse himself with. Little people created in his image, but
> without his powers, that he would visit in forms such as burning
> bushes or a finger of lightening, all to instill terror and awe
> in his little friends.
>
> An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle, mean and
> sadistic that he had a perverse love of torturing his favorite
> little pals - even the most loyal of them all, by torturing them
> and slaying his family and children. This deity even created
> another race of little people - or did he? - they worshiped
> another god, despite God telling his little pals that there
> weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this distinct race
> of little people just so his chosen little pals could perform
> genocide and be as sick, murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even
> baby killers just like their creator and torturer, God.
>
> Am I the only person on this planet who sees the Universe this
> way?

You are not alone in that.

But you do sound particularly angry and bitter about the god whom you
deny exists yet to whom you attribute such vile intent.

[thomas p.]

"Rick" <***@gmail.com.lessspam> skrev i meddelelsen
news:hme1an$t02$***@news.eternal-september.org...
> St. Jackanapes wrote:
> [one heck of long and rather well-written treatise]
> ...
>
>
>> To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being was bored
>> and lonely one day, so he created a race of little people to
>> amuse himself with. Little people created in his image, but
>> without his powers, that he would visit in forms such as burning
>> bushes or a finger of lightening, all to instill terror and awe
>> in his little friends.
>>
>> An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle, mean and
>> sadistic that he had a perverse love of torturing his favorite
>> little pals - even the most loyal of them all, by torturing them
>> and slaying his family and children. This deity even created
>> another race of little people - or did he? - they worshiped
>> another god, despite God telling his little pals that there
>> weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this distinct race
>> of little people just so his chosen little pals could perform
>> genocide and be as sick, murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even
>> baby killers just like their creator and torturer, God.
>>
>> Am I the only person on this planet who sees the Universe this
>> way?
>
> You are not alone in that.
>
> But you do sound particularly angry and bitter about the god whom you deny
> exists yet to whom you attribute such vile intent.

Do you really and truly believe that he was expressing anger at a god?
Why do theists always pretend that they do not understand the concept
usually called "for the sake of argument"? One can just see the smarmy
look of concern as the question is asked. On the other hand maybe you
really are incapable of understanding, but I find that so depressing.

[Rick]

thomas p. wrote:
> "Rick"<***@gmail.com.lessspam> skrev i meddelelsen
> news:hme1an$t02$***@news.eternal-september.org...
>> St. Jackanapes wrote:
>> [one heck of long and rather well-written treatise]
>> ...
>>
>>
>>> To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being was bored
>>> and lonely one day, so he created a race of little people to
>>> amuse himself with. Little people created in his image, but
>>> without his powers, that he would visit in forms such as burning
>>> bushes or a finger of lightening, all to instill terror and awe
>>> in his little friends.
>>>
>>> An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle, mean and
>>> sadistic that he had a perverse love of torturing his favorite
>>> little pals - even the most loyal of them all, by torturing them
>>> and slaying his family and children. This deity even created
>>> another race of little people - or did he? - they worshiped
>>> another god, despite God telling his little pals that there
>>> weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this distinct race
>>> of little people just so his chosen little pals could perform
>>> genocide and be as sick, murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even
>>> baby killers just like their creator and torturer, God.
>>>
>>> Am I the only person on this planet who sees the Universe this
>>> way?
>>
>> You are not alone in that.
>>
>> But you do sound particularly angry and bitter about the god whom you deny
>> exists yet to whom you attribute such vile intent.
>
> Do you really and truly believe that he was expressing anger at a god?

Not angry at god ("about god") just plain angry at all and sundry.


> Why do theists always pretend that they do not understand the concept
> usually called "for the sake of argument"?

I think I understand, but I'll try not to be defensive about it.

Perhaps your point is that many people take things too seriously!

[thomas p.]

Rick wrote:
> thomas p. wrote:
>> "Rick"<***@gmail.com.lessspam> skrev i
>> meddelelsen
>> news:hme1an$t02$***@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> St. Jackanapes wrote:
>>> [one heck of long and rather well-written treatise]
>>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>>> To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being
>>>> was bored and lonely one day, so he created a race of
>>>> little people to amuse himself with. Little people
>>>> created in his image, but without his powers, that he
>>>> would visit in forms such as burning bushes or a
>>>> finger of lightening, all to instill terror and awe in
>>>> his little friends. An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle,
>>>> mean
>>>> and sadistic that he had a perverse love of torturing
>>>> his favorite little pals - even the most loyal of them
>>>> all, by torturing them and slaying his family and
>>>> children. This deity even created another race of
>>>> little people - or did he? - they worshiped another
>>>> god, despite God telling his little pals that there
>>>> weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this
>>>> distinct race of little people just so his chosen
>>>> little pals could perform genocide and be as sick,
>>>> murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even baby killers
>>>> just like their creator and torturer, God. Am I the only person on
>>>> this planet who sees the
>>>> Universe this way?
>>>
>>> You are not alone in that.
>>>
>>> But you do sound particularly angry and bitter about
>>> the god whom you deny exists yet to whom you attribute
>>> such vile intent.
>>
>> Do you really and truly believe that he was expressing
>> anger at a god?
>
> Not angry at god ("about god") just plain angry at all
> and sundry.
>
>> Why do theists always pretend that they do not
>> understand the concept usually called "for the sake of
>> argument"?
>
> I think I understand, but I'll try not to be defensive
> about it.
> Perhaps your point is that many people take things too
> seriously!

What an incredible clown you are.

[Rick]

thomas p. wrote:
> Rick wrote:
>> thomas p. wrote:
>>> "Rick"<***@gmail.com.lessspam> skrev i
>>> meddelelsen
>>> news:hme1an$t02$***@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> St. Jackanapes wrote:
>>>> [one heck of long and rather well-written treatise]
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being
>>>>> was bored and lonely one day, so he created a race of
>>>>> little people to amuse himself with. Little people
>>>>> created in his image, but without his powers, that he
>>>>> would visit in forms such as burning bushes or a
>>>>> finger of lightening, all to instill terror and awe in
>>>>> his little friends. An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle,
>>>>> mean
>>>>> and sadistic that he had a perverse love of torturing
>>>>> his favorite little pals - even the most loyal of them
>>>>> all, by torturing them and slaying his family and
>>>>> children. This deity even created another race of
>>>>> little people - or did he? - they worshiped another
>>>>> god, despite God telling his little pals that there
>>>>> weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this
>>>>> distinct race of little people just so his chosen
>>>>> little pals could perform genocide and be as sick,
>>>>> murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even baby killers
>>>>> just like their creator and torturer, God. Am I the only person on
>>>>> this planet who sees the
>>>>> Universe this way?
>>>>
>>>> You are not alone in that.
>>>>
>>>> But you do sound particularly angry and bitter about
>>>> the god whom you deny exists yet to whom you attribute
>>>> such vile intent.
>>>
>>> Do you really and truly believe that he was expressing
>>> anger at a god?
>>
>> Not angry at god ("about god") just plain angry at all
>> and sundry.
>>
>>> Why do theists always pretend that they do not
>>> understand the concept usually called "for the sake of
>>> argument"?
>>
>> I think I understand, but I'll try not to be defensive
>> about it.
>> Perhaps your point is that many people take things too
>> seriously!
>
> What an incredible clown you are.


Why not just killfile my nic then? What keeps you going? Your anger
makes you spew insults when you cannot deal with the ideas.
Do get your meds adjusted.

[Father Haskell]

On Feb 28, 10:07 am, Rick <***@gmail.com.lessspam> wrote:
> St. Jackanapes wrote:
>
> [one heck of long and rather well-written treatise]
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being was bored
> > and lonely one day, so he created a race of little people to
> > amuse himself with. Little people created in his image, but
> > without his powers, that he would visit in forms such as burning
> > bushes or a finger of lightening, all to instill terror and awe
> > in his little friends.
>
> > An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle, mean and
> > sadistic that he had a perverse love of torturing his favorite
> > little pals - even the most loyal of them all, by torturing them
> > and slaying his family and children. This deity even created
> > another race of little people - or did he? - they worshiped
> > another god, despite God telling his little pals that there
> > weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this distinct race
> > of little people just so his chosen little pals could perform
> > genocide and be as sick, murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even
> > baby killers just like their creator and torturer, God.
>
> > Am I the only person on this planet who sees the Universe this
> > way?
>
> You are not alone in that.
>
> But you do sound particularly angry and bitter about the god whom you
> deny exists yet to whom you attribute such vile intent.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Replace "god" with "feeble and obvious human invention" and things
will be much, much clearer.

[St. Jackanapes]

In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Father Haskell said...

>
> On Feb 28, 10:07 am, Rick <***@gmail.com.lessspam> wrote:
> > St. Jackanapes wrote:
> >
> > [one heck of long and rather well-written treatise]
> > ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > To try and argue that some invisible omnipotent being was bored
> > > and lonely one day, so he created a race of little people to
> > > amuse himself with. Little people created in his image, but
> > > without his powers, that he would visit in forms such as burning
> > > bushes or a finger of lightening, all to instill terror and awe
> > > in his little friends.
> >
> > > An omnipotent being that was so fucking fickle, mean and
> > > sadistic that he had a perverse love of torturing his favorite
> > > little pals - even the most loyal of them all, by torturing them
> > > and slaying his family and children. This deity even created
> > > another race of little people - or did he? - they worshiped
> > > another god, despite God telling his little pals that there
> > > weren't any other gods. Obviously God created this distinct race
> > > of little people just so his chosen little pals could perform
> > > genocide and be as sick, murderous, sadistic, hateful, and even
> > > baby killers just like their creator and torturer, God.
> >
> > > Am I the only person on this planet who sees the Universe this
> > > way?
> >
> > You are not alone in that.
> >
> > But you do sound particularly angry and bitter about the god whom you
> > deny exists yet to whom you attribute such vile intent.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Replace "god" with "feeble and obvious human invention" and things
> will be much, much clearer.

Thank you.

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[Virgil]

In article
<ef5220e2-f1e7-427d-b930-***@u41g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
"***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
> > "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
> >
> > Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
> > --
> > Robyn
> > Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
> > BAAWA Knight
> > #1557
>
> Theres no such thing as a real atheist.

There is no such thing as a real theist.

Those who claim to be theists are just those too afraid to face the
world without an imaginary "parent figure" to protect them from reality.

[raven1]

On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 18:57:37 -0800 (PST), "***@gmail.com"
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
>> "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
>>
>> Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
>> --
>> Robyn
>> Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
>> BAAWA Knight
>> #1557
>
>Theres no such thing as a real atheist. It is impossible to have the
>kind of faith to be one based on the obvious evidence of an
>intelligent willful Designer , all around. No one looks upon their
>human body and concludes it was an accident , no one looks at the
>complexity of DNA and concludes it was thrown together by
>happenstance, no one looks at the many Physics Constants needed for
>earth to exist so we can have a place to live...as coming from a
>random big explosion , et al, ad nauseum. In order for atheism to be
>real, everything should resembly nothing but a huge amount of chaos
>and nothing resembling design. And in reality, that is far far from
>what we do have . I know atheism is a convenient excuse for not
>wanting to move closer in relationship to the personal Creator God of
>our universe for the reason of not wanting to be owned by someone
>higher and better than oneself. And that is an eternal crime
>indeed. Atheism also has the 'benefit' of allowing the person to
>act, behave, and talk in a vile and foul manner because , allegedly,
>there is no ultimate moral accountability . At least not in this short
>lived life.

Yep, you're still determined to remain the dumbest human I've ever
encountered on Usenet or in real life. Congratulations.

[Drafterman]

On Feb 1, 9:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
>
> > "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
>
> > Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
> > --
> > Robyn
> > Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
> > BAAWA Knight
> > #1557
>
> Theres no such thing as a real atheist.  It is impossible to have the
> kind of faith to be one based on the obvious evidence of an
> intelligent willful Designer , all around.

It doesn't take faith to not see evidence that doesn't exist.

> No one looks upon their
> human body and concludes it was an accident , no one looks  at the
> complexity of DNA  and concludes it was thrown together by
> happenstance,  no one looks at the many Physics Constants needed for
> earth to exist so we can have a place to live...as coming from a
> random big explosion , et al, ad nauseum.

You're right. I look upon my body and conclude that it was a result of
natural evolution, not "an accident".
I look at DNA and conclude it came about via the laws of chemistry
under conditions whose details we are still uncovering, not "by
happenstance"
I look at the many physical constants that allow life to exist and
realize that don't know enough to determine whether or not this
specific configuration of reality is more special than any other, but
it is certainly not the result of a "random big explosion".

Notice that I neither adhere to your misrepresentations of science nor
fall to religious mumbo jumbo by default.

Lesson: The middle hates to be excluded -OR- straw men hate their
lives.

> In order for atheism to be
> real,  everything should resembly nothing but a huge amount of chaos
> and nothing resembling design.

Why?

> And in reality,  that is far far from
> what we do have .

Despite your assertions to this, at no point in the past hundreds of
years of classical and modern physics has there been accepted any
theory that incorporates design or a designer. Given the fact that the
entire body of science transcends religion, culture, time, and
politics, this cannot be attributed to some sort of conspiracy.

So how do you explain it?

> I know atheism is a convenient excuse for not
> wanting to move closer in relationship to the personal Creator God of
> our universe for the reason of not wanting to be owned by someone
> higher and better than oneself.

I'm not aware of any creator god that could even claim to own me. If
you have some way of contacting this being, please let me know.

> And that is an eternal crime
> indeed.   Atheism also has the 'benefit' of allowing the person to
> act, behave, and talk in a vile and foul manner because , allegedly,
> there is no ultimate moral accountability . At least not in this short
> lived life.

That atheism incorporates no moral code is not the same thing as
saying atheists themselves have no morals. It just means they get
their morals elsewhere.

[Syd M.]

On Feb 1, 9:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
>
> > "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
>
> > Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
> > --
> > Robyn
> > Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
> > BAAWA Knight
> > #1557
>
> Theres no such thing as a real atheist.

You just won't stop lying, huh, Davie??

PDW

[Richo]

On Feb 2, 1:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 8:51 am, "Robibnikoff" <***@broomstick.com> wrote:
>
> > "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote
>
> > Fuck off, you flaming asshole.
> > --
> > Robyn
> > Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
> > BAAWA Knight
> > #1557
>
> Theres no such thing as a real atheist.

Oh I am real enough.


> It is impossible to have the
> kind of faith to be one based on the obvious evidence of an
> intelligent willful Designer , all around.

There is no "obvious evidence of an
intelligent willful Designer"


> No one looks upon their
> human body and concludes it was an accident , no one looks  at the
> complexity of DNA  and concludes it was thrown together by
> happenstance,  no one looks at the many Physics Constants needed for
> earth to exist so we can have a place to live...as coming from a
> random big explosion , et al, ad nauseum.

Of course not.
They are all ridiculous strawmen.

>  In order for atheism to be
> real,  everything should resembly nothing but a huge amount of chaos
> and nothing resembling design.

No.

>  And in reality,

<sarcasm>
A topic you know a lot about of course.
<end sarcasm>

> that is far far from
> what we do have .  I know atheism is a convenient excuse for not
> wanting to move closer in relationship to the personal Creator God of
> our universe for the reason of not wanting to be owned by someone
> higher and better than oneself.

No - its just an ordinary fact.
I don't believe in God.
I am male, I am 5' 7" tall, I have brown hair (going silver in places)
and I dont believe in God.
Just plain, unremarkable, facts.

>  And that is an eternal crime
> indeed.   Atheism also has the 'benefit' of allowing the person to
> act, behave, and talk in a vile and foul manner because , allegedly,
> there is no ultimate moral accountability . At least not in this short
> lived life.

There is no "ultimate" moral accountability.
So what? There is still moral accountability.
Everyone is accountable to our fellow sentient beings and our own
conscience.

If I am hungry I can eat bread.
It doesn't matter that it isnt "ultimate" bread.

If the sun is hot I can wear a hat.
It doesn't matter that it isnt an "ultimate" hat.

If I am thirsty I can drink a glass of clean cool water.
It doesnt matter that it isnt the "ultimate" glass of "ultimately"
clean "ultimately" cool water.
Just ordinary cool, clean, water is fine.

Mark.

[raven1]

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 08:01:21 -0500, old man joe <***@home.com>
wrote:

>
>" That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and
>strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world "
>Eph. 2:12 KJV
>
>*****************************************************************************************************************
>
>" without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word " atheist. "
>
>as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God and man expressed in their
>point of view with cursing's and shouting's. they challenge the Word of God, the Bible, from
>every conceivable angle as though they are capable in expounding the Scriptures... a thing not even
>the Pharisees were capable of with a lifetime of devotion to the written Word. they get their
>information from Atheist TV shows such as History Channel and Hollywood movies such as the da Vinci
>Code and they automatically think themselves capable to expound the Holy Scriptures...
>
>God says otherwise... Ps 50:16 " But to the wicked God says, "What right have you to tell of My
>statutes and to take My covenant in your mouth? "
>
>an Atheist is God's property as the elect are His property. ( Ez. 18:4 ) He has made one vessel for
>honor and the other for dishonor. ( Ro. 9:21; 2 Tim. 2:20; Pv. 3:35 ) curse and revile as they
>do, this is the life they are assigned to live by God. He has made them for dishonor.
>
>they are treated by Him as " stranger's and aliens " and they have " no hope " since they are
>" without God " by His design. it is then not surprising at all to find them posting blasphemous
>opinions about God and their fellow man... it's all part of an outward display of the inward
>appointment of what it is to be " without God... " " you are of your father the devil " Christ says
>" and you want to do the desires of your father... " Jn. 8:44
>
>and this they do well.
>
>what value then is an Atheist in this world ? these are given as a sign to God's elect... " in no
>way alarmed by your opponents--which is a sign of destruction for them, but of salvation for you,
>and that too, from God. " Php 1:28
>
>the Life given to His elect ones contrasts against the darkness of those who are given as a sign of
>destruction. while His elect praise Him the Atheist's curse Him... the mouth speaks out of that
>which fills the heart. Lk. 6:45
>
>His elect ones are reminded that they came into this world as Atheist's, also. ( Ps. 58:3 ) it is
>only by the grace of God that they are elect unto salvation. it is only by the new birth of Jn. 3:3
>given to His elect ones that they are made different than those who are perishing. being ever
>thankful to God for His grace in Spirit and in Truth is the mark of salvation.

"Wow, you're pretty fucking stupid, aren't you?" - Tim the Enchanter

[old man joe]

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 12:22:45 -0500, raven1 <***@nevermore.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 08:01:21 -0500, old man joe <***@home.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>" That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and
>>strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world "
>>Eph. 2:12 KJV
>>
>>*****************************************************************************************************************
>>
>>" without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word " atheist. "
>>
>>as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God and man expressed in their
>>point of view with cursing's and shouting's. they challenge the Word of God, the Bible, from
>>every conceivable angle as though they are capable in expounding the Scriptures... a thing not even
>>the Pharisees were capable of with a lifetime of devotion to the written Word. they get their
>>information from Atheist TV shows such as History Channel and Hollywood movies such as the da Vinci
>>Code and they automatically think themselves capable to expound the Holy Scriptures...
>>
>>God says otherwise... Ps 50:16 " But to the wicked God says, "What right have you to tell of My
>>statutes and to take My covenant in your mouth? "
>>
>>an Atheist is God's property as the elect are His property. ( Ez. 18:4 ) He has made one vessel for
>>honor and the other for dishonor. ( Ro. 9:21; 2 Tim. 2:20; Pv. 3:35 ) curse and revile as they
>>do, this is the life they are assigned to live by God. He has made them for dishonor.
>>
>>they are treated by Him as " stranger's and aliens " and they have " no hope " since they are
>>" without God " by His design. it is then not surprising at all to find them posting blasphemous
>>opinions about God and their fellow man... it's all part of an outward display of the inward
>>appointment of what it is to be " without God... " " you are of your father the devil " Christ says
>>" and you want to do the desires of your father... " Jn. 8:44
>>
>>and this they do well.
>>
>>what value then is an Atheist in this world ? these are given as a sign to God's elect... " in no
>>way alarmed by your opponents--which is a sign of destruction for them, but of salvation for you,
>>and that too, from God. " Php 1:28
>>
>>the Life given to His elect ones contrasts against the darkness of those who are given as a sign of
>>destruction. while His elect praise Him the Atheist's curse Him... the mouth speaks out of that
>>which fills the heart. Lk. 6:45
>>
>>His elect ones are reminded that they came into this world as Atheist's, also. ( Ps. 58:3 ) it is
>>only by the grace of God that they are elect unto salvation. it is only by the new birth of Jn. 3:3
>>given to His elect ones that they are made different than those who are perishing. being ever
>>thankful to God for His grace in Spirit and in Truth is the mark of salvation.
>
>"Wow, you're pretty fucking stupid, aren't you?" - Tim the Enchanter

just like i said, an Atheist is an atheist showing himself a hater of God and man... thank you for
proving it. think you can say 3 words in a row without cursing ?

[Robibnikoff]

"old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote

> just like i said, an Atheist is an atheist showing himself a hater of God

Hey, you illiterate crossposting dipshit - How can you hate something you
don't believe in?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & Belly Dancer Supreme
BAAWA Knight
#1557

[raven1]

On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 04:17:17 -0500, old man joe <***@home.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 12:22:45 -0500, raven1 <***@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 08:01:21 -0500, old man joe <***@home.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>" That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and
>>>strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world "
>>>Eph. 2:12 KJV
>>>
>>>*****************************************************************************************************************
>>>
>>>" without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word " atheist. "
>>>
>>>as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God and man expressed in their
>>>point of view with cursing's and shouting's. they challenge the Word of God, the Bible, from
>>>every conceivable angle as though they are capable in expounding the Scriptures... a thing not even
>>>the Pharisees were capable of with a lifetime of devotion to the written Word. they get their
>>>information from Atheist TV shows such as History Channel and Hollywood movies such as the da Vinci
>>>Code and they automatically think themselves capable to expound the Holy Scriptures...
>>>
>>>God says otherwise... Ps 50:16 " But to the wicked God says, "What right have you to tell of My
>>>statutes and to take My covenant in your mouth? "
>>>
>>>an Atheist is God's property as the elect are His property. ( Ez. 18:4 ) He has made one vessel for
>>>honor and the other for dishonor. ( Ro. 9:21; 2 Tim. 2:20; Pv. 3:35 ) curse and revile as they
>>>do, this is the life they are assigned to live by God. He has made them for dishonor.
>>>
>>>they are treated by Him as " stranger's and aliens " and they have " no hope " since they are
>>>" without God " by His design. it is then not surprising at all to find them posting blasphemous
>>>opinions about God and their fellow man... it's all part of an outward display of the inward
>>>appointment of what it is to be " without God... " " you are of your father the devil " Christ says
>>>" and you want to do the desires of your father... " Jn. 8:44
>>>
>>>and this they do well.
>>>
>>>what value then is an Atheist in this world ? these are given as a sign to God's elect... " in no
>>>way alarmed by your opponents--which is a sign of destruction for them, but of salvation for you,
>>>and that too, from God. " Php 1:28
>>>
>>>the Life given to His elect ones contrasts against the darkness of those who are given as a sign of
>>>destruction. while His elect praise Him the Atheist's curse Him... the mouth speaks out of that
>>>which fills the heart. Lk. 6:45
>>>
>>>His elect ones are reminded that they came into this world as Atheist's, also. ( Ps. 58:3 ) it is
>>>only by the grace of God that they are elect unto salvation. it is only by the new birth of Jn. 3:3
>>>given to His elect ones that they are made different than those who are perishing. being ever
>>>thankful to God for His grace in Spirit and in Truth is the mark of salvation.
>>
>>"Wow, you're pretty fucking stupid, aren't you?" - Tim the Enchanter
>
>just like i said, an Atheist is an atheist showing himself a hater of God and man...

Nope, just someone who doesn't suffer fools gladly.

[Virgil]

In article <***@4ax.com>,
old man joe <***@home.com> wrote:


> >"Wow, you're pretty fucking stupid, aren't you?" - Tim the Enchanter
>
> just like i said, an Atheist is an atheist showing himself a hater of God and
> man.

On the contrary, there does not seem to be any god to hate.
At least there is no serious evidence for the existence of any god, much
less any particular god.

Non-theists do not waste their emotional energy on things non-existent
the way theists do.

And the only theists that we non-theists hate are those whom attack us
or other innocents.

[St. Jackanapes]

Inalt.flame.jesus.christ, old man joe said...

> just like i said, an Atheist is an atheist showing himself a hater of God and man... thank you for
> proving it. think you can say 3 words in a row without cursing ?
>

Joe - That line of garbage above just shows how full of bitter
bile, hate and blind racism you are full of. You have no
consideration for your fellow man if he's not of the same
superstitious persuasion that you are. You make me want to
retch. You are more upset about "3" words that you are about the
lives of people who do not believe the way that you do. Actions
mean more than words - when was the last time that you did
anything for someone who was suffering?

When was the last time you helped a dying person feel alive?

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[Virgil]

In article <***@4ax.com>,
old man joe <***@home.com> wrote:

> " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
> commonwealth of Israel, and
> strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in
> the world "
> Eph. 2:12 KJV
>
> ******************************************************************************
> ***********************************
>
> " without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word "
> atheist. "
>
> as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God and
> man expressed in their
> point of view with cursing's and shouting's.

Then you must be finding it in yourselves since an atheist would find it
impossible to feel hate for what he does not believe is there to be
hated.

Now an atheist might well find many theists hateful, such as those
self-righteous nuts like you, but they at least exist to be hated.

What you theists misinterpret as our hatred for god is actually only
your own paranoia the about the validity of your faith in the presence
of those who are free of it and still happy.

[old man joe]

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 12:50:10 -0700, Virgil <***@home.esc> wrote:

>In article <***@4ax.com>,
> old man joe <***@home.com> wrote:
>
>> " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
>> commonwealth of Israel, and
>> strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in
>> the world "
>> Eph. 2:12 KJV
>>
>> ******************************************************************************
>> ***********************************
>>
>> " without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word "
>> atheist. "
>>
>> as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God and
>> man expressed in their
>> point of view with cursing's and shouting's.
>
>Then you must be finding it in yourselves since an atheist would find it
>impossible to feel hate for what he does not believe is there to be
>hated.
>
>Now an atheist might well find many theists hateful, such as those
>self-righteous nuts like you, but they at least exist to be hated.
>
>What you theists misinterpret as our hatred for god is actually only
>your own paranoia the about the validity of your faith in the presence
>of those who are free of it and still happy.

yet another Atheist who needs to make a personal attack as the means to prove to himself he's better
than the rest of us.

sad to say, but your hatred overwhelms your thought process... it is not you who came to the
conclusion there is no God by some mental process of your's but rather, God wants nothing to do with
you and because He doesn't, therefore you are " hardened " by Him.

... " He hardens whom He desires. " Ro. 9:18

supposing as you do there is no God to answer to is the abandonment you're assigned to; no apology
offered... you bring glory to God by showing us your reprobation.

[raven1]

On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 04:29:10 -0500, old man joe <***@home.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 12:50:10 -0700, Virgil <***@home.esc> wrote:
>
>>In article <***@4ax.com>,
>> old man joe <***@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
>>> commonwealth of Israel, and
>>> strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in
>>> the world "
>>> Eph. 2:12 KJV
>>>
>>> ******************************************************************************
>>> ***********************************
>>>
>>> " without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word "
>>> atheist. "
>>>
>>> as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God and
>>> man expressed in their
>>> point of view with cursing's and shouting's.
>>
>>Then you must be finding it in yourselves since an atheist would find it
>>impossible to feel hate for what he does not believe is there to be
>>hated.
>>
>>Now an atheist might well find many theists hateful, such as those
>>self-righteous nuts like you, but they at least exist to be hated.
>>
>>What you theists misinterpret as our hatred for god is actually only
>>your own paranoia the about the validity of your faith in the presence
>>of those who are free of it and still happy.
>
>yet another Atheist who needs to make a personal attack as the means to prove to himself he's better
>than the rest of us.
>
>sad to say, but your hatred overwhelms your thought process... it is not you who came to the
>conclusion there is no God by some mental process of your's but rather, God wants nothing to do with
>you and because He doesn't, therefore you are " hardened " by Him.
>
>... " He hardens whom He desires. " Ro. 9:18
>
>supposing as you do there is no God to answer to is the abandonment you're assigned to; no apology
>offered... you bring glory to God by showing us your reprobation.

Serious question: do you really believe this nonsense?

[Virgil]

In article <***@4ax.com>,
old man joe <***@home.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 12:50:10 -0700, Virgil <***@home.esc> wrote:
>
> >In article <***@4ax.com>,
> > old man joe <***@home.com> wrote:
> >
> >> " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
> >> commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of
> >> promise, having no hope, and without God in the world " Eph. 2:12
> >> KJV
> >>
> >> *******************************************************************
> >> ******** *** ***********************************
> >>
> >> " without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get
> >> our word " atheist. "
> >>
> >> as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred
> >> for God and man expressed in their point of view with cursing's
> >> and shouting's.
> >
> >Then you must be finding it in yourselves since an atheist would
> >find it impossible to feel hate for what he does not believe is
> >there to be hated.
> >
> >Now an atheist might well find many theists hateful, such as those
> >self-righteous nuts like you, but they at least exist to be hated.
> >
> >What you theists misinterpret as our hatred for god is actually
> >only your own paranoia the about the validity of your faith in the
> >presence of those who are free of it and still happy.
>
> yet another Atheist who needs to make a personal attack as the means
> to prove to himself he's better than the rest of us.

If old-man-joe regards my comments above as a personal attack, but does
not regard his own personal attacks as sufficient provocation, he
reveals the depth and paranoia of his unreasoning hatred.
>
> sad to say, but your hatred overwhelms your thought process... it is
> not you who came to the conclusion there is no God by some mental
> process of your's



I, and most other non-theists, have not concluded that there is no god,
merely that there is no valid reason to suppose that there is one.

Old-man-joe conflates non-theism with anti-theism.
We non-theists have no beliefs re gods.
Those anti-theists believe that there are no gods.
Get it straight.


> ... " He hardens whom He desires. " Ro. 9:18

Is "He" more effective at that than Viagra?
>
> supposing as you do there is no God

It is you who are doing all this alleged what you are supposing are
conditions contrary to fact.

What I "suppose" is that there is no conclusive and undeniable evidence
for the existence of any god, including whichever ones you favor.

And the only evidences against existence of any vision of god would be
in such logical inconsistencies as might occur within that vision.

And there seem to be a number of those inconsistencies in your own
visions, so you ought not rely to heavily on your visions being correct.

[St. Jackanapes]

Inalt.flame.jesus.christ, old man joe said...

> yet another Atheist who needs to make a personal attack as the means to prove to himself he's better
> than the rest of us.
>

The typical Christian response when they know that they don't
have a logical leg to stand on.

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[St. Jackanapes]

In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Virgil said...

>
> In article <***@4ax.com>,
> old man joe <***@home.com> wrote:
>
> > " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
> > commonwealth of Israel, and
> > strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in
> > the world "
> > Eph. 2:12 KJV
> >
> > ******************************************************************************
> > ***********************************
> >
> > " without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word "
> > atheist. "
> >
> > as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God and
> > man expressed in their
> > point of view with cursing's and shouting's.
>
> Then you must be finding it in yourselves since an atheist would find it
> impossible to feel hate for what he does not believe is there to be
> hated.
>
> Now an atheist might well find many theists hateful, such as those
> self-righteous nuts like you, but they at least exist to be hated.
>
> What you theists misinterpret as our hatred for god is actually only
> your own paranoia the about the validity of your faith in the presence
> of those who are free of it and still happy.

Joe's no Christian - He's a troll. Don't fall for his posts.

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[Less religion, More brains]

"old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
>
> " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
> commonwealth of Israel, and
> strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God
> in the world "
> Eph. 2:12 KJV
>
> *****************************************************************************************************************
>
> " without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word
> " atheist. "
>
> as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God
> and man expressed in their
> point of view with cursing's and shouting's. they challenge the Word of
> God, the Bible, from
> every conceivable angle as though they are capable in expounding the
> Scriptures... a thing not even
> the Pharisees were capable of with a lifetime of devotion to the written
> Word. they get their
> information from Atheist TV shows such as History Channel and Hollywood
> movies such as the da Vinci
> Code and they automatically think themselves capable to expound the Holy
> Scriptures...
>
> God says otherwise... Ps 50:16 " But to the wicked God says, "What right
> have you to tell of My
> statutes and to take My covenant in your mouth? "
>
> an Atheist is God's property as the elect are His property. ( Ez. 18:4 )
> He has made one vessel for
> honor and the other for dishonor. ( Ro. 9:21; 2 Tim. 2:20; Pv. 3:35 )
> curse and revile as they
> do, this is the life they are assigned to live by God. He has made them
> for dishonor.
>
> they are treated by Him as " stranger's and aliens " and they have " no
> hope " since they are
> " without God " by His design. it is then not surprising at all to find
> them posting blasphemous
> opinions about God and their fellow man... it's all part of an outward
> display of the inward
> appointment of what it is to be " without God... " " you are of your
> father the devil " Christ says
> " and you want to do the desires of your father... " Jn. 8:44
>
> and this they do well.
>
> what value then is an Atheist in this world ? these are given as a sign
> to God's elect... " in no
> way alarmed by your opponents--which is a sign of destruction for them,
> but of salvation for you,
> and that too, from God. " Php 1:28
>
> the Life given to His elect ones contrasts against the darkness of those
> who are given as a sign of
> destruction. while His elect praise Him the Atheist's curse Him... the
> mouth speaks out of that
> which fills the heart. Lk. 6:45
>
> His elect ones are reminded that they came into this world as Atheist's,
> also. ( Ps. 58:3 ) it is
> only by the grace of God that they are elect unto salvation. it is only
> by the new birth of Jn. 3:3
> given to His elect ones that they are made different than those who are
> perishing. being ever
> thankful to God for His grace in Spirit and in Truth is the mark of
> salvation.
>

So Atheists aren't going to hell?
You can't be punished just for being the way you're made.

[Michael Gordge]

On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
wrote:

> Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...

Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.

MG

[Nicodemus]

Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote in news:6440465a-cbb5-4c5e-
b3f1-***@k6g2000prg.googlegroups.com:

> On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> MG
>

Did you forget your place under this firmament


I Vote

Thankful for the full breath

[b***@gmail.com]

On Feb 2, 5:47 am, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> MG

So neither images exist.

BOfL

[Michael Gordge]

On Feb 2, 11:07 am, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Feb 2, 5:47 am, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > MG
>
> So neither images exist.
>
> BOfL

Images exist ewe idiot and your mission, should you ever choose to
awaken from your Kantian nightmate, is to identify what it is that the
images exist as, e.g. a recreation e.g. an image of a specific tree or
a fabrication e.g. any god.

MG

[St. Jackanapes]

In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Michael Gordge said...

>
> On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> MG

touche'

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 5:34 am, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
> In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Michael Gordge said...
>
>
>
> > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > MG
>
> touche'
>
> --
> St. Jackanapes
> -------------------------------
> Anti-Jesus Forum:http://www.voy.com/20630/

Well, St. Jackass, you reveal yourself to be as ignorant of religion
as that guy is.

[Father Haskell]

On Mar 1, 9:45 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 5:34 am, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Michael Gordge said...
>
> > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > MG
>
> > touche'
>
> > --
> > St. Jackanapes
> > -------------------------------
> > Anti-Jesus Forum:http://www.voy.com/20630/
>
> Well, St. Jackass, you reveal yourself to be as ignorant of religion
> as that guy is.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Only one question about religion remains unanswered.

Is it an illness, or is it a symptom?

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 4:12 pm, Father Haskell <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 9:45 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 5:34 am, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
>
> > > In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Michael Gordge said...
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > touche'
>
> > > --
> > > St. Jackanapes
> > > -------------------------------
> > > Anti-Jesus Forum:http://www.voy.com/20630/
>
> > Well, St. Jackass, you reveal yourself to be as ignorant of religion
> > as that guy is.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Only one question about religion remains unanswered.
>
> Is it an illness, or is it a symptom?

It is symptomic response to the urging of an innate divinity, an
intuitive awareness of God.

[Virgil]

In article
<d8b157cf-3c07-47c7-ab7a-***@15g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:

> On Mar 1, 4:12 pm, Father Haskell <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 9:45 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 1, 5:34 am, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Michael Gordge said...
> >
> > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > > > > MG
> >
> > > > touche'
> >
> > > > --
> > > > St. Jackanapes
> > > > -------------------------------
> > > > Anti-Jesus Forum:http://www.voy.com/20630/
> >
> > > Well, St. Jackass, you reveal yourself to be as ignorant of religion
> > > as that guy is.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > Only one question about religion remains unanswered.
> >
> > Is it an illness, or is it a symptom?
>
> It is symptomic response to the urging of an innate divinity, an
> intuitive awareness of God.

Religions without built in gods may be healthy, but religions with built
in gods are sick.

[dorayme]

In article <***@news.alt.net>,
"St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:

> In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Michael Gordge said...
>
> >
> > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > MG
>
> touche'

Yeah right! So He is a bad speller too! Geez!

--
dorayme

[Errol]

On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> MG

So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > MG
>
> So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful

Atheists invented the god that they argue against. But their god is
not the God, Allah, Brahman, Great Spirit of religions.

[Drafterman]

On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > MG
>
> > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against. But their god is
> not the God, Allah, Brahman, Great Spirit of religions.

Oh please, omprem, tell me what my god is, and why it is necessarily a
god.

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 11:27 am, Drafterman <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against. But their god is
> > not the God, Allah, Brahman, Great Spirit of religions.
>
> Oh please, omprem, tell me what my god is, and why it is necessarily a
> god.

You propose an individuated God and none of the religions you argue
against claim that God is individuated. There may some fundamentalist
sects of the major religions who claim God is individuated but that
just means that Atheism as a fundamentalist religion is arguing only
with the fundamentalists of other religious sects.

[Jimbo]

On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > MG
>
> > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.

What a ludicrous statement.

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 11:35 am, Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
>
> What a ludicrous statement.

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 11:35 am, Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
>
> What a ludicrous statement.

In what way????

[Jimbo]

On Mar 1, 1:22 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 11:35 am, Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > > MG
>
> > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
>
> > What a ludicrous statement.
>
> In what way????- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Atheist do not create gods, they have no need for them. If your gods
get out of your control, the blame is yours.

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 3:43 pm, Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 1:22 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 11:35 am, Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > > > MG
>
> > > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
>
> > > What a ludicrous statement.
>
> > In what way????- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Atheist do not create gods, they have no need for them.  If your gods
> get out of your control, the blame is yours.

Atheists believe that God is individuated. No major religion believes
that. Atheists have invented the individuated God and then argue
against it. How schizophrenic is that.

[Virgil]

In article
<a362d96e-ae2e-4d8f-abf8-***@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:

> On Mar 1, 3:43 pm, Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 1:22 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 1, 11:35 am, Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains"
> > > > > > > <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > > > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > > > > > > MG
> >
> > > > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
> >
> > > > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
> >
> > > > What a ludicrous statement.
> >
> > > In what way????- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > Atheist do not create gods, they have no need for them.  If your gods
> > get out of your control, the blame is yours.
>
> Atheists believe that God is individuated.

Atheists have no beliefs about gods at all. It is the ABSENCE of such
beliefs that makes them atheists.

> No major religion believes
> that. Atheists have invented the individuated God and then argue
> against it. How schizophrenic is that.

Only theists invent gods or any claims about godly properties.

Atheists have no beliefs about gods at all. It is the ABSENCE of such
beliefs that makes them atheists.

[John Stafford]

In article
<f0d52eb5-bb50-4ab2-83ca-***@e23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > > > MG
> >
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
> >
> > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
>
> What a ludicrous statement.

Maybe oprem doesn't know what a Straw Man is.

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 2:44 pm, John Stafford <***@droffats.net> wrote:
> In article
> <f0d52eb5-bb50-4ab2-83ca-***@e23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>  Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > > MG
>
> > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
>
> > What a ludicrous statement.
>
> Maybe oprem doesn't know what a Straw Man is.

Rather than misrepresenting Atheism I have represented what Atheists
say about their own belief system. Of course, I then point out that
each and every claim of the atheist belief system is based on a
logical or factual error or both.

[Virgil]

In article
<0f03b172-c3e6-4e1d-bf84-***@v20g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>,
omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:

> On Mar 1, 2:44 pm, John Stafford <***@droffats.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <f0d52eb5-bb50-4ab2-83ca-***@e23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >
> >
> >  Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> > > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > > > > > MG
> >
> > > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
> >
> > > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
> >
> > > What a ludicrous statement.
> >
> > Maybe oprem doesn't know what a Straw Man is.
>
> Rather than misrepresenting Atheism I have represented what Atheists
> say about their own belief system.

Atheists do not have a "belief system".

Atheists may have a system of non-belief, if one choses to characterize
them that way, but not a system of belief.

Theists believe in gods, atheists lack belief in gods.



> Of course, I then point out that
> each and every claim of the atheist belief system is based on a
> logical or factual error or both.

Since it is already an error to claim that our system of non-belief is a
system of belief, "oprem" is totally wrong.

[Reverend Dave]

Virgil <***@home.esc> wrote in
news:Virgil-***@bignews.usenetmonster.com:

> In article
> <0f03b172-c3e6-4e1d-bf84-***@v20g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>,
> omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Mar 1, 2:44 pm, John Stafford <***@droffats.net> wrote:
>> > In article
>> > <f0d52eb5-bb50-4ab2-83ca-***@e23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >  Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>> > > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains"
>> > > > > > <***@fundyfarm.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that
>> > > > > > > way...
>> >
>> > > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore
>> > > > > > athiest.
>> >
>> > > > > > MG
>> >
>> > > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>> >
>> > > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
>> >
>> > > What a ludicrous statement.
>> >
>> > Maybe oprem doesn't know what a Straw Man is.
>>
>> Rather than misrepresenting Atheism I have represented what Atheists
>> say about their own belief system.
>
> Atheists do not have a "belief system".
>
> Atheists may have a system of non-belief, if one choses to
> characterize them that way, but not a system of belief.
>
> Theists believe in gods, atheists lack belief in gods.

Here's an analogy that I always liked.

Atheism is a belief system in the same way that not collecting stamps is
a hobby.




--
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is
those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert
that this or that problem will never be solved by science. - Charles
Darwin

[Virgil]

In article <***@news.albasani.net>,
Reverend Dave <***@minister.com> wrote:

> Virgil <***@home.esc> wrote in
> news:Virgil-***@bignews.usenetmonster.com:
>
> > In article
> > <0f03b172-c3e6-4e1d-bf84-***@v20g2000yqv.googlegroups.com>,
> > omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mar 1, 2:44 pm, John Stafford <***@droffats.net> wrote:
> >> > In article
> >> > <f0d52eb5-bb50-4ab2-83ca-***@e23g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >  Jimbo <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> >> > > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz>
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains"
> >> > > > > > <***@fundyfarm.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that
> >> > > > > > > way...
> >> >
> >> > > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore
> >> > > > > > athiest.
> >> >
> >> > > > > > MG
> >> >
> >> > > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
> >> >
> >> > > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
> >> >
> >> > > What a ludicrous statement.
> >> >
> >> > Maybe oprem doesn't know what a Straw Man is.
> >>
> >> Rather than misrepresenting Atheism I have represented what Atheists
> >> say about their own belief system.
> >
> > Atheists do not have a "belief system".
> >
> > Atheists may have a system of non-belief, if one choses to
> > characterize them that way, but not a system of belief.
> >
> > Theists believe in gods, atheists lack belief in gods.
>
> Here's an analogy that I always liked.
>
> Atheism is a belief system in the same way that not collecting stamps is
> a hobby.

Nice! May I borrow it?

[Father Haskell]

On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > MG
>
> > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against. But their god is
> not the God, Allah, Brahman, Great Spirit of religions.

You're praising allah AND brahman? You *do* realize
that the moslems and the hindus have a hardon to
nuke each other into ashes?

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 4:15 pm, Father Haskell <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against. But their god is
> > not the God, Allah, Brahman, Great Spirit of religions.
>
> You're praising allah AND brahman?  You *do* realize
> that the moslems and the hindus have a hardon to
> nuke each other into ashes?

Not because of religion but because boundary disputes in Kashmir.

[Virgil]

In article
<40edd737-5f79-4dfa-a84c-***@z35g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:

> On Mar 1, 4:15 pm, Father Haskell <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 9:47 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > > > > MG
> >
> > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
> >
> > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against. But their god is
> > > not the God, Allah, Brahman, Great Spirit of religions.
> >
> > You're praising allah AND brahman?  You *do* realize
> > that the moslems and the hindus have a hardon to
> > nuke each other into ashes?
>
> Not because of religion but because boundary disputes in Kashmir.

They have been at each others throats long before Kashmir was an issue.

And it IS a religious issue.

When the Brits left India, it split along religious lines.

[Michael Gordge]

On Mar 1, 11:47 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > MG
>
> > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.

But you mystics claim there is only one god, make up your mind.

MG

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 4:54 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 11:47 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
>
> But you mystics claim there is only one god, make up your mind.
>
> MG

No mystic makes that claim. That is an atheist invention.

[Virgil]

In article
<d6c436e0-2c1a-4869-a9da-***@15g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:

> On Mar 1, 4:54 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 11:47 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 1, 6:27 am, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > > > > MG
> >
> > > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
> >
> > > Atheists invented the god  that they  argue against.
> >
> > But you mystics claim there is only one god, make up your mind.
> >
> > MG
>
> No mystic makes that claim. That is an atheist invention.

All Hebrew mystics, Christian mystics and Muslim mystics make that
claim, so that "omprem" must be calling all of them atheists.

[Michael Gordge]

On Mar 1, 8:27 pm, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > MG
>
> So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful

Hey dopey, man is born athiest.

MG

[Errol]

On Mar 1, 11:53 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 8:27 pm, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > MG
>
> > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> Hey dopey, man is born athiest.
>
> MG

OK! That's fine ! I need not point out then, that it would be an
oxymoron for god to be invented by an atheist.

[Michael Gordge]

On Mar 2, 11:56 pm, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 11:53 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 8:27 pm, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > Hey dopey, man is born athiest.
>
> > MG
>
> OK! That's fine ! I need not point out then, that it would be an
> oxymoron for god to be invented by an atheist.

Hey dopey, man is born a-thiest and the a-thiest is as capable of
inventing and embracing mystical mind dependent garbage as any other
idiot is, e.g. the athiest socialist, the athiest communist, the
athiest conservatist, the athiest republican, the athiest democrat to
name but a few.

MG

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 4:53 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 8:27 pm, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > MG
>
> > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> Hey dopey, man is born athiest.
>
> MG

Exactly the opposite. We are born with knowledge of God and other
dimensions but have it socialized out of us quickly as well as by
choice as we become mesmerized by and addicted to our sense
impressions.

[Virgil]

In article
<10a1e44a-c356-4ebf-ac6c-***@q16g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:

> On Mar 1, 4:53 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 8:27 pm, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > > > MG
> >
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
> >
> > Hey dopey, man is born athiest.
> >
> > MG
>
> Exactly the opposite.

Wrong! Children do not have any innate belief in or knowledge of gods.



There are too many mutually incompossible gods being bandied around for
there to be only one god. If there were any, then there would be lots of
them.

[Father Haskell]

On Mar 2, 9:53 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 4:53 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 8:27 pm, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > Hey dopey, man is born athiest.
>
> > MG
>
> Exactly the opposite. We are born with knowledge of God and other
> dimensions but have it socialized out of us quickly as well as by
> choice as we become mesmerized by and addicted to our sense
> impressions.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

That sounds like acidhead talk.

[Michael Gordge]

On Mar 3, 11:53 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 4:53 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 8:27 pm, Errol <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 1, 11:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > > MG
>
> > > So atheists made god? ewe are pitiful
>
> > Hey dopey, man is born athiest.
>
> > MG
>
> Exactly the opposite. We are born with knowledge of God.......

HaHAHAHHAHAHAH....hahahahahaha, my sides ache, ewe mystics sure are
funny, so how come ewe mystics can never agree on a definition of and
or for it?

MG

[omprem]

On Feb 1, 4:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> MG

That idea does not refer to physical image. It is a metaphor. Can you
spell M-E-T-A-P-H-O-R?

God is everywhere all the time. The idea you present means that part
of each person is innate divinity and it is up to each to make the
choice of embracing that divinity or wallowing in addiction to sense
impression and ego. Religionists strive for the former while atheists
are mired in the latter.

[SkyEyes]

On Mar 1, 7:32 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> On Feb 1, 4:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > MG
>
> That idea does not refer to physical image. It is a metaphor. Can you
> spell M-E-T-A-P-H-O-R?
>
> God is everywhere all the time.

And you have objective, physical evidence to support this contention?
Or do you just expect us to take it on your say-so?

>  The idea you present means that part
> of each person is innate divinity and it is up to each to make the
> choice of embracing that divinity or wallowing in addiction to sense
> impression and ego.

Oh, horsepucky. First you have to provide evidence that there is such
a thing or quality as "divinity" that actually exists. *Then* you
need to show evidence that "each person is innate divinity."

I'm sick unto *death* of that old theist canard that rationists are
addicted to the senses. What we're "addicted to" is *reality*, not
fairy tales, which is what *you* are addicted to.

Set forth your evidence that there is such a thing as "divinity," or
STFU.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 3:39 pm, SkyEyes <***@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 7:32 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 1, 4:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
>
> > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
>
> > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
>
> > > MG
>
> > That idea does not refer to physical image. It is a metaphor. Can you
> > spell M-E-T-A-P-H-O-R?
>
> > God is everywhere all the time.
>
> And you have objective, physical evidence to support this contention?
> Or do you just expect us to take it on your say-so?
>
> >  The idea you present means that part
> > of each person is innate divinity and it is up to each to make the
> > choice of embracing that divinity or wallowing in addiction to sense
> > impression and ego.
>
> Oh, horsepucky.  First you have to provide evidence that there is such
> a thing or quality as "divinity" that actually exists.  *Then* you
> need to show evidence that "each person is innate divinity."
>
> I'm sick unto *death* of that old theist canard that rationists are
> addicted to the senses.  What we're "addicted to" is *reality*, not
> fairy tales, which is what *you* are addicted to.
>
> Set forth your evidence that there is such a thing as "divinity," or
> STFU.
>
> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
> BAAWA Knight
> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> skyeyes nine at cox dot net

Omprem: God is everywhere all the time.

SE: And you have objective, physical evidence to support this
contention?

Omprem: Do you atheists ever actually think about what you say?
Empiricism is based on difference, God is One. Therefore, as there is
no 'where' that God is not there is no differentiation possible and
empiricism is useless in spiritual matters. However, there are
spiritual practices that can change the consciousness and enable other
methods to be used to be aware of God directly.

[Virgil]

In article
<9721499d-8392-447d-b3d8-***@y17g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:

> On Mar 1, 3:39 pm, SkyEyes <***@cox.net> wrote:
> > On Mar 1, 7:32 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 1, 4:47 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Feb 2, 5:33 am, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > Atheists are atheists simply because God made them that way...
> >
> > > > Man made god in the image of himself, god is therefore athiest.
> >
> > > > MG
> >
> > > That idea does not refer to physical image. It is a metaphor. Can you
> > > spell M-E-T-A-P-H-O-R?
> >
> > > God is everywhere all the time.
> >
> > And you have objective, physical evidence to support this contention?
> > Or do you just expect us to take it on your say-so?
> >
> > >  The idea you present means that part
> > > of each person is innate divinity and it is up to each to make the
> > > choice of embracing that divinity or wallowing in addiction to sense
> > > impression and ego.
> >
> > Oh, horsepucky.  First you have to provide evidence that there is such
> > a thing or quality as "divinity" that actually exists.  *Then* you
> > need to show evidence that "each person is innate divinity."
> >
> > I'm sick unto *death* of that old theist canard that rationists are
> > addicted to the senses.  What we're "addicted to" is *reality*, not
> > fairy tales, which is what *you* are addicted to.
> >
> > Set forth your evidence that there is such a thing as "divinity," or
> > STFU.
> >
> > Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
> > BAAWA Knight
> > EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> > skyeyes nine at cox dot net
>
> Omprem: God is everywhere all the time.
>
> SE: And you have objective, physical evidence to support this
> contention?
>
> Omprem: Do you atheists ever actually think about what you say?


We do, do you?

<nonsense deleted>

[Michael Gordge]

On Mar 1, 11:32 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> That idea does not refer to physical image.

Either it is physical or it is an image, check your premises.

> God is everywhere all the time.

Hahaha you mystics are funny.

>  The idea you present means that part
> of each person is innate divinity..

Nope it means, the athiest created god in the image of himself, god is
therefore athiest, or are you suggesting there is more than one god
thereby contradicting the mystic's claim that there is only one god?

MG

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 5:02 pm, Michael Gordge <***@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 11:32 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > That idea does not refer to physical image.
>
> Either it is physical or it is an image, check your premises.

Omprem: Your forced choice is factually wrong and a logical error.
>
> > God is everywhere all the time.
>
> Hahaha you mystics are funny.
>
> >  The idea you present means that part
> > of each person is innate divinity..
>
> Nope it means, the athiest created god in the image of himself, god is
> therefore athiest, or are you suggesting there is more than one god
> thereby contradicting the mystic's claim that there is only one god?
>
> MG

[Virgil]

On Mar 1, 11:32 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:



> Nope it means, the athiest created god in the image of himself

Being an atheist requires not having any gods.

That someone who believes in gods has trouble comprehending that some of
us don't is only one of the evil effects of theism.

[Michael Gordge]

On Mar 3, 12:54 pm, Virgil <***@home.esc> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 11:32 pm, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> > Nope it means, the athiest created god in the image of himself
>
> Being an atheist requires not having any gods.

On the contrary, billions of athiests have many gods they worship,
e.g. the athiest socialist worships the mind dependent non-sense of
being his brother's keeper. i.e. the brother's keeper is as mystical
in origin as any god.

MG

[Immortalist]

On Feb 1, 12:33 pm, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
wrote:
> "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote in messagenews:***@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
> > commonwealth of Israel, and
> > strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God
> > in the world "
> > Eph. 2:12  KJV
>
>
> So Atheists aren't going to hell?
> You can't be punished just for being the way you're made.

So if one theory is that "Atheists are atheists simply because God
made them that way" then other theories with scientific evidence could
claim conversely "human apes have the drive to be religious, like a
sin of the flesh, because evolution put these neural structures
there ...rar"

The mind is composed of a large number of mental modules each designed
to solve a specific problem. For example, there is one mechanism for
perceiving three dimensions, another for anger, another for falling in
love. The mind is like a Swiss Army knife; i.e., it has lots of
specialized tools. There is no such thing as general intelligence,
general learning, or any other general ability to solve problems.

http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/463evolpsyIQ.html

Evolutionary psychologists like Pascal Boyer, Dan Sperber and Justin
Barrett are beginning to provide an explanation as to why certain
religious ideas, specifically, the personal nature of "spirit" persist
in cultures worldwide. These explanations have to do with the evolved
structure of the brain and how this translates to the kind of concept
that is attractive to the mind. That is, there are certain concepts
that our minds easily entertain. Much like language acquisition, the
mind automatically receives certain concepts more readily than
others.

Since Chomsky's work in the late 60s linguists generally acknowledge
that the brain has innate structures that aid the acquisition of
language. More recent work by evolutionary psychologists indicates
that it is not only language that is facilitated by innate brain
structures. Indeed it seems that these structures are responsible for
all cognition, including the elaboration of religious ideation. This
work explains why supernatural realities are always imagined to be
personal because the brain is specifically structured to deal with the
personal. In other words, evolution has provided us with specific
adaptations that are unconscious, mandatory and fast and respond when
we are dealing with others. These adaptations are intimately involved
in religious ideation: that is why "the force" will never be a key
religious concept.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/2002/aug02/Sellick.htm

Across the globe and throughout history, human beings have engaged in
a variety of religious practices and have held a diversity of
religious beliefs. These phenomena have been explained in a variety of
different ways by anthropologists, psychologists, and other scholars,
as well as by religious practitioners themselves, with varying degrees
of success. Perhaps more puzzling, and just in need of an explanation,
is the fact that human beings have religion in the first place.

...Religion is a by-product of the way our minds evolved to negotiate
the natural and, more importantly, the social world. Evolutionary
Psychology's naturalistic and cognitivist approach is at variance with
many established traditions in the study of the religion and his
approach may seem wrong-headed to many...

http://www.semcoop.com/detail/0465006965

"The Swiss Army knife is a flexible tool. Its flexibility is not the
result of having just one tool that is applied to all problems.
Instead, it is a bundle of tools, each well-designed for solving a
different problem – scissors for cutting paper, corkscrew for opening
wine, toothpick for cleaning teeth. Each solves a different problem
well, thereby providing flexible problem solving ability. Similarly,
the human mind does not have just one blunt tool for solving all
problems – and if it did, we would be very limited indeed. Each human
mind contains a large number of programs, each well-designed for
solving a different adaptive problem: choosing a good mate, caring for
children, foraging for food, avoiding predators, navigating a
landscape, forming coalitions, trading, defending one’s family against
aggression, and so on. We are flexible problem solvers in part because
our minds contain so many well-engineered tools."

- - Leda Cosmides
http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/ledainterview.htm

...we are endowed with a moral faculty that delivers judgments of
right and wrong based on unconsciously operative and inaccessible
principles of action. The theory posits a universal moral grammar,
built into the brains of all humans. The grammar is a set of
principles that operate on the basis of the causes and consequences of
action. Thus, in the same way that we are endowed with a language
faculty that consists of a universal toolkit for building possible
languages, we are also endowed with a moral faculty that consists of a
universal toolkit for building possible moral systems.

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/11/marc-hauser-mor.html

Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal
Sense of Right and Wrong - by Marc Hauser
http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Minds-Nature-Designed-Universal/dp/0060780703

[omprem]

On Feb 1, 7:16 pm, Immortalist <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 1, 12:33 pm, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
> wrote:
>
> > "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote in messagenews:***@4ax.com...
>
> > > " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
> > > commonwealth of Israel, and
> > > strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God
> > > in the world "
> > > Eph. 2:12  KJV
>
> > So Atheists aren't going to hell?
> > You can't be punished just for being the way you're made.
>
> So if one theory is that "Atheists are atheists simply because God
> made them that way" then other theories with scientific evidence could
> claim conversely "human apes have the drive to be religious, like a
> sin of the flesh, because evolution put these neural structures
> there ...rar"
>
> The mind is composed of a large number of mental modules each designed
> to solve a specific problem. For example, there is one mechanism for
> perceiving three dimensions, another for anger, another for falling in
> love. The mind is like a Swiss Army knife; i.e., it has lots of
> specialized tools. There is no such thing as general intelligence,
> general learning, or any other general ability to solve problems.
>
> http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/463evolpsyIQ.html
>
> Evolutionary psychologists like Pascal Boyer, Dan Sperber and Justin
> Barrett are beginning to provide an explanation as to why certain
> religious ideas, specifically, the personal nature of "spirit" persist
> in cultures worldwide. These explanations have to do with the evolved
> structure of the brain and how this translates to the kind of concept
> that is attractive to the mind. That is, there are certain concepts
> that our minds easily entertain. Much like language acquisition, the
> mind automatically receives certain concepts more readily than
> others.
>
> Since Chomsky's work in the late 60s linguists generally acknowledge
> that the brain has innate structures that aid the acquisition of
> language. More recent work by evolutionary psychologists indicates
> that it is not only language that is facilitated by innate brain
> structures. Indeed it seems that these structures are responsible for
> all cognition, including the elaboration of religious ideation. This
> work explains why supernatural realities are always imagined to be
> personal because the brain is specifically structured to deal with the
> personal. In other words, evolution has provided us with specific
> adaptations that are unconscious, mandatory and fast and respond when
> we are dealing with others. These adaptations are intimately involved
> in religious ideation: that is why "the force" will never be a key
> religious concept.
>
> http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/2002/aug02/Sellick.htm
>
> Across the globe and throughout history, human beings have engaged in
> a variety of religious practices and have held a diversity of
> religious beliefs. These phenomena have been explained in a variety of
> different ways by anthropologists, psychologists, and other scholars,
> as well as by religious practitioners themselves, with varying degrees
> of success. Perhaps more puzzling, and just in need of an explanation,
> is the fact that human beings have religion in the first place.
>
> ...Religion is a by-product of the way our minds evolved to negotiate
> the natural and, more importantly, the social world. Evolutionary
> Psychology's naturalistic and cognitivist approach is at variance with
> many established traditions in the study of the religion and his
> approach may seem wrong-headed to many...
>
> http://www.semcoop.com/detail/0465006965
>
> "The Swiss Army knife is a flexible tool. Its flexibility is not the
> result of having just one tool that is applied to all problems.
> Instead, it is a bundle of tools, each well-designed for solving a
> different problem – scissors for cutting paper, corkscrew for opening
> wine, toothpick for cleaning teeth. Each solves a different problem
> well, thereby providing flexible problem solving ability. Similarly,
> the human mind does not have just one blunt tool for solving all
> problems – and if it did, we would be very limited indeed. Each human
> mind contains a large number of programs, each well-designed for
> solving a different adaptive problem: choosing a good mate, caring for
> children, foraging for food, avoiding predators, navigating a
> landscape, forming coalitions, trading, defending one’s family against
> aggression, and so on. We are flexible problem solvers in part because
> our minds contain so many well-engineered tools."
>
>  - - Leda Cosmideshttp://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/ledainterview.htm
>
> ...we are endowed with a moral faculty that delivers judgments of
> right and wrong based on unconsciously operative and inaccessible
> principles of action. The theory posits a universal moral grammar,
> built into the brains of all humans. The grammar is a set of
> principles that operate on the basis of the causes and consequences of
> action. Thus, in the same way that we are endowed with a language
> faculty that consists of a universal toolkit for building possible
> languages, we are also endowed with a moral faculty that consists of a
> universal toolkit for building possible moral systems.
>
> http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/11/marc-hauser-mor.html
>
> Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal
> Sense of Right and Wrong - by Marc Hauserhttp://www.amazon.com/Moral-Minds-Nature-Designed-Universal/dp/006078...

The so-called cognitive science of religion is fatally flawed. It
mistakes some measurable side effects of religious practice with the
central, non-measurable reason for religious practice.

It is assumes what it needs to prove, i.e. that religion is not about
knowing God and that it is merely a survival technique.

It's mistakenly focuses on the brain as the only center of
consciousness and wisdom when it is well known that consciousness
resides every human cell.

It mistakenly believes that the only way to acquire wisdom is through
the seriously flawed and linear approach of science.

It is essentially in the same junk science camp as climate change
deniers or the earlier pro-smoking groups.

[SkyEyes]

On Mar 1, 7:41 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:

> It's mistakenly focuses on the brain as the only center of
> consciousness and wisdom when it is well known that consciousness
> resides every human cell.

And your evidence for this is...what, exactly? Please point me to a
study to demonstrates that long muscle cells experience
consciousness. Or any other type of cells not found in the brain.

> It mistakenly believes that the only way to acquire wisdom is through
> the seriously flawed and linear approach of science.

Science deals with knowledge, not wisdom. Knowledge is *facts*.
"Wisdom" is how you apply them. We are well aware of the distinction.

> It is essentially in the same junk science camp as climate change
> deniers or the earlier pro-smoking groups.

Okay. Now we know which group of kooks *you* belong to.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net

[haiku jones]

On Mar 1, 1:43 pm, SkyEyes <***@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 7:41 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>


> > It's mistakenly focuses on the brain as the only center of
> > consciousness and wisdom when it is well known that consciousness
> > resides every human cell.
>


> And your evidence for this is...what, exactly?  Please point me to a
> study to demonstrates that long muscle cells experience
> consciousness.  Or any other type of cells not found in the brain.

I'm dazzled by the concept of a hundred million conscious
sperm cells chittering away down there. Are they cursing
the fact that they're only going to live such fleeting little
lives?


Haiku Jones



>
> > It mistakenly believes that the only way to acquire wisdom is through
> > the seriously flawed and linear approach of science.
>
> Science deals with knowledge, not wisdom.  Knowledge is *facts*.
> "Wisdom" is how you apply them.  We are well aware of the distinction.
>
> > It is essentially in the same junk science camp as climate change
> > deniers or the earlier pro-smoking groups.
>
> Okay.  Now we know which group of kooks *you* belong to.
>
> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
> BAAWA Knight
> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> skyeyes nine at cox dot net

[SkyEyes]

On Mar 1, 2:14 pm, haiku jones <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 1:43 pm, SkyEyes <***@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 1, 7:41 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> > > It's mistakenly focuses on the brain as the only center of
> > > consciousness and wisdom when it is well known that consciousness
> > > resides every human cell.
>
> > And your evidence for this is...what, exactly?  Please point me to a
> > study to demonstrates that long muscle cells experience
> > consciousness.  Or any other type of cells not found in the brain.
>
> I'm dazzled by the concept of a hundred million conscious
> sperm cells chittering away down there.  Are they cursing
> the fact that they're only going to live such fleeting little
> lives?

<Feeling faint>

Yikes, Haiku! I don't think I'll ever be able to give another blow
job again as long as I live. Not after that image!

Brenda

[Robibnikoff]

"SkyEyes" <***@cox.net> wrote in message
news:d144df4e-567c-4fee-9c21-***@m27g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 1, 2:14 pm, haiku jones <***@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 1:43 pm, SkyEyes <***@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 1, 7:41 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> > > It's mistakenly focuses on the brain as the only center of
> > > consciousness and wisdom when it is well known that consciousness
> > > resides every human cell.
>
> > And your evidence for this is...what, exactly? Please point me to a
> > study to demonstrates that long muscle cells experience
> > consciousness. Or any other type of cells not found in the brain.
>
> I'm dazzled by the concept of a hundred million conscious
> sperm cells chittering away down there. Are they cursing
> the fact that they're only going to live such fleeting little
> lives?

<Feeling faint>

>Yikes, Haiku! I don't think I'll ever be able to give another blow
>job again as long as I live. Not after that image!

SNORT!! Oh my ;)
--
Robyn
BAAWA Knight
#1557

[omprem]

On Mar 1, 3:43 pm, SkyEyes <***@cox.net> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 7:41 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> > It's mistakenly focuses on the brain as the only center of
> > consciousness and wisdom when it is well known that consciousness
> > resides every human cell.
>
> And your evidence for this is...what, exactly?  Please point me to a
> study to demonstrates that long muscle cells experience
> consciousness.  Or any other type of cells not found in the brain.
>
> > It mistakenly believes that the only way to acquire wisdom is through
> > the seriously flawed and linear approach of science.
>
> Science deals with knowledge, not wisdom.  Knowledge is *facts*.
> "Wisdom" is how you apply them.  We are well aware of the distinction.
>
> > It is essentially in the same junk science camp as climate change
> > deniers or the earlier pro-smoking groups.
>
> Okay.  Now we know which group of kooks *you* belong to.
>
> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
> BAAWA Knight
> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> skyeyes nine at cox dot net

For a start, refer to Molecules of Emotion by Candace Pert, Ph D.

[Father Haskell]

On Mar 1, 9:41 am, omprem <***@magma.ca> wrote:
>
> It's mistakenly focuses on the brain as the only center of
> consciousness and wisdom when it is well known that consciousness
> resides every human cell.

Go chop your head off and report back your findings.

Thank you.

[St. Jackanapes]

In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Less religion, More brains said...

>
> "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote in message
> news:***@4ax.com...
> >
> > " That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
> > commonwealth of Israel, and
> > strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God
> > in the world "
> > Eph. 2:12 KJV
> >
> > *****************************************************************************************************************
> >
> > " without God " in this passage is " atheos, " from which we get our word
> > " atheist. "
> >
> > as we read the posts made by Atheists we find an intense hatred for God
> > and man expressed in their
> > point of view with cursing's and shouting's. they challenge the Word of
> > God, the Bible, from
> > every conceivable angle as though they are capable in expounding the
> > Scriptures... a thing not even
> > the Pharisees were capable of with a lifetime of devotion to the written
> > Word. they get their
> > information from Atheist TV shows such as History Channel and Hollywood
> > movies such as the da Vinci
> > Code and they automatically think themselves capable to expound the Holy
> > Scriptures...
> >
> > God says otherwise... Ps 50:16 " But to the wicked God says, "What right
> > have you to tell of My
> > statutes and to take My covenant in your mouth? "
> >
> > an Atheist is God's property as the elect are His property. ( Ez. 18:4 )
> > He has made one vessel for
> > honor and the other for dishonor. ( Ro. 9:21; 2 Tim. 2:20; Pv. 3:35 )
> > curse and revile as they
> > do, this is the life they are assigned to live by God. He has made them
> > for dishonor.
> >
> > they are treated by Him as " stranger's and aliens " and they have " no
> > hope " since they are
> > " without God " by His design. it is then not surprising at all to find
> > them posting blasphemous
> > opinions about God and their fellow man... it's all part of an outward
> > display of the inward
> > appointment of what it is to be " without God... " " you are of your
> > father the devil " Christ says
> > " and you want to do the desires of your father... " Jn. 8:44
> >
> > and this they do well.
> >
> > what value then is an Atheist in this world ? these are given as a sign
> > to God's elect... " in no
> > way alarmed by your opponents--which is a sign of destruction for them,
> > but of salvation for you,
> > and that too, from God. " Php 1:28
> >
> > the Life given to His elect ones contrasts against the darkness of those
> > who are given as a sign of
> > destruction. while His elect praise Him the Atheist's curse Him... the
> > mouth speaks out of that
> > which fills the heart. Lk. 6:45
> >
> > His elect ones are reminded that they came into this world as Atheist's,
> > also. ( Ps. 58:3 ) it is
> > only by the grace of God that they are elect unto salvation. it is only
> > by the new birth of Jn. 3:3
> > given to His elect ones that they are made different than those who are
> > perishing. being ever
> > thankful to God for His grace in Spirit and in Truth is the mark of
> > salvation.
> >
>
> So Atheists aren't going to hell?
> You can't be punished just for being the way you're made.

You can if God made you gay. Gays were God's gifts to his most
fanatical followers. It gave them a local source of "different"
folk so that they could keep themselves in practice at stake
burnings, baby roastings, and the drawing out of intestines and
the like. They'd had to keep themselves at the ready for the
next big crusade, pogrom, or genocide.

If you don't use it, you lose it! Just look at our own
government. We became such soft pussies about treating our
enemies with kindness that when we decided it was time to get
tough and throw human rights into the toilet, our own CIA didn't
know how the fuck it was done - they had to look up how to
torture in history books and ask the fucking insane Arabs how
they did it.

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[Immortalist]

On Feb 1, 12:33 pm, "Less religion, More brains" <***@fundyfarm.com>
wrote:
> "old man joe" <***@home.com> wrote in messagenews:***@4ax.com...

>
> >
> > His elect ones are reminded that they came into this world as Atheist's,
> > also. ( Ps. 58:3 ) it is
> > only by the grace of God that they are elect unto salvation. it is only
> > by the new birth of Jn. 3:3
>
> So Atheists aren't going to hell?
> You can't be punished just for being the way you're made.

If the concept of omnibenevolence stems from two basic ideas of God:
that God is perfect and that God is morally good, then God must
possess perfect goodness, hence being perfectly good must entail being
good in all ways at all times and towards all other beings, then this
God myth is obligated to punish the children of some supposed sinners
in the past. Its all good brau, right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo9kJZvYBB0

In the beginning Man created God; and in the image of Man created he
him.

2 And Man gave unto God a multitude of names, that he might be Lord
over all the earth when it was suited to Man.

3 And on the seven millionth day Man rested and did lean heavily on
his God and saw that it was good.

4 And Man formed Aqualung of the dust of the ground, and a host of
others likened unto his kind.

5 And these lesser men Man did cast into the void. And some were
burned; and some were put apart from their kind.

6 And Man became the God that he had created and with his miracles did
rule over all the earth.

7 But as all these things did come to pass, the Spirit that did cause
man to create his God lived on within all men: even withing Aqualung.

8 And man saw it not.

9 But for Christ's sake he'd better start looking.

From the back side of the Jethro Tull album:
Aqualung 1971 origional version only.
http://www.cupofwonder.com/aqualung.html

[Ken]

On Feb 1, 6:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com>
wrote: a LOAD OF CRAP

Dickhead Dave saz: Did you know that radiocarbon dating may
offer supporting evidence for Noah's Flood?
Dimwit dave Saz: "However, THIS one is Creationists can certainly
prove an intelligent Designer/Creator for the Cosmos"
Dumbfuck Dave saz: "If you cant see the vast evidences for special
Creation..." there is good evidence that the leviathan described in
the book of Job was a large dinosaur.

What "supporting evidence",
What "proof",
What "vast evidences"?

[St. Jackanapes]

In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Ken said...

>
> On Feb 1, 6:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com>
> wrote: a LOAD OF CRAP
>
> Dickhead Dave saz: Did you know that radiocarbon dating may
> offer supporting evidence for Noah's Flood?
> Dimwit dave Saz: "However, THIS one is Creationists can certainly
> prove an intelligent Designer/Creator for the Cosmos"
> Dumbfuck Dave saz: "If you cant see the vast evidences for special
> Creation..." there is good evidence that the leviathan described in
> the book of Job was a large dinosaur.
>
> What "supporting evidence",
> What "proof",
> What "vast evidences"?

Yeah, I'd love to see it! Convince me so I too can be one of
God's chosen sheeps.

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/

[Father Haskell]

On Mar 1, 5:42 am, "St. Jackanapes" <***@nowhere.org> wrote:
> In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Ken said...
>
>
>
> > On Feb 1, 6:57 pm, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com>
> > wrote: a LOAD OF CRAP
>
> > Dickhead Dave saz: Did you know that radiocarbon dating may
> > offer supporting evidence for  Noah's Flood?
> > Dimwit dave Saz: "However, THIS one is Creationists can certainly
> > prove an intelligent Designer/Creator for the Cosmos"
> > Dumbfuck Dave saz: "If you cant see the vast evidences for special
> > Creation..." there is good evidence that the leviathan described in
> > the book of Job was a large dinosaur.
>
> > What "supporting evidence",
> > What "proof",
> > What "vast evidences"?
>
> Yeah, I'd love to see it! Convince me so I too can be one of
> God's chosen sheeps.

"Evidence" = "I think so."

[Pious Paul]

Blame God



Saint Pious IV

[Pious Paul]

Oh God make my penis erect and strong. Allow my jizz to flow like the river
styx into the waiting thighs of a deprived Xian maiden so she may be led out
of darkness into the light of reality. Oh while I'm thinking of it please
cure my 10 month old son's terminal cancer.

Thanks,

PiousIV

[St. Jackanapes]

In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Pious Paul said...

>
> Oh God make my penis erect and strong. Allow my jizz to flow like the river
> styx into the waiting thighs of a deprived Xian maiden so she may be led out
> of darkness into the light of reality. Oh while I'm thinking of it please
> cure my 10 month old son's terminal cancer.
>
> Thanks,
>
> PiousIV

Hard on & jizz - *fixed*! Lil' sonny's cancer - sorry. He hasn't
lived long enough to have donated any cash to God's money
machine. You have to pray & pay to play.

NEXT!

--
St. Jackanapes
-------------------------------
Anti-Jesus Forum: http://www.voy.com/20630/