Tuesday, September 30, 2014

[AvC] Re: Kurt is rued, insulting , and in general an uninteresting and ill informed jerk contributing little to our group.

barking up a tree with no cat in it is more likely to have some effect ... 

On Monday, September 29, 2014 6:26:49 PM UTC-4, Observer wrote:
 I recommend we ignore him completely , neither reading nor replying to him until he learns some manners.

The moderators can notify us if his demeanor and the quality of his posts improve. 

Lets see if we can, thereby, help him improve to an acceptable, and reasonable level.

Dave

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [AvC] Re: Human Sacrifice of One's Own Children, in the Bible

ALL forum theists have knowledge of one thing FOR SURE ... that you are a meaningless idiot (to be polite) ... 

On Monday, September 29, 2014 1:26:23 AM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
So are you totally ignorant of the most important archeological site known to man too? LL admitted she is.

But heck, of what importance is knowledge to a forum atheist? You don't get that way giving a damn about that.

On Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:36:36 PM UTC-4, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Saturday, September 27, 2014 11:41:15 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
And the Talking Snake slithers under the segmented post rock.


Snake? Where's the snake. I love a properly seasoned snake...tastes like chicken. :)

On Saturday, September 27, 2014 11:28:58 PM UTC-4, LL wrote:







On Sep 27, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Kurt <passer...@gmail.com> wrote:

Here's the problem, and it's grim.

When we invented fire about a million years ago, cannibalism became profitable.

# 1 we didn't invent fire. 

# 2 how did fire make cannibalism profitable? 



Always risky but a lot less risky if it's cooked.

All meat was less risky if cooked. They didn't cook it because they knew it was less risky. They cooked it to make it easier to chew and digest and probably to improve flavor. 


Given a choice between starvation and risking it, Darwin makes an easy choice.

It's why humans are so mean to other groups, or a lot of the reason for some of the really evil stuff.

Starting about the same time as farming, about half the bones are the results of cannibal feasts.

You have a valid, supported citation for this, don't you? 

And the percentage is going up, as old bones are re-examined.

You have a valid citation for this, too, don't you? We know you would never make anything up. 

It's depressing. Granted it may be cannibal feasts are easy to find or whatever.

Citation? 

But with the invention of farming, the alternative was no longer starvation, the poor had gruel and the rich had animal meat. So Darwin says to no longer eat humans, but we still had that blood lust from a million years of selection.

Another citation? 

And there have always been unwanted children, and they are defenseless. 

This has what to do with cannibalism or Darwin or fire? What changed? There have been unwanted, defenseless children from the dawn of humanity. What's your point in stating it here?

LL

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [AvC] Re: Human Sacrifice of One's Own Children, in the Bible

what are you doing, taking over my job? ... sorry about top posting ;-^)

On Sunday, September 28, 2014 12:05:52 AM UTC-4, LL wrote:



On Sep 27, 2014, at 8:41 PM, Kurt <passer...@gmail.com> wrote:

And the Talking Snake slithers under the segmented post rock.

No, the anti-segmented post snake slithers here, there and everywhere--makes no sense whatsoever and decides that criticizing segmented posts justifies not answering the points presented. 

That's ok, Kurt. Keep it up. It just supports our suspicion that you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about, which is obvious to anyone with at least half a brain in so many other ways. 

I will continue to use segmented posts because it suits me and annoys the one fool on this forum who objects to them. I have never had the misfortune of running into anyone on any discussion group who uses such a lame excuse for not responding to posts. But go ahead. It tells us all a lot more than you could ever tell us otherwise. You are a fraud and  a fool and as dumb as a box of rocks. There isn't one person on this forum who agrees with your drivel, so why don't you go to one where your special brand of drivel is appreciated? Some nice website with other fools such as yourself would suit you just fine--perhaps a fundamentalist religion one or one that discusses alien abductions.  There are plenty of those to choose from. You can surely find many people on such forums that will believe your drivel and lame excuses. You won't find them here. 

LL

On Saturday, September 27, 2014 11:28:58 PM UTC-4, LL wrote:







On Sep 27, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Kurt <passer...@gmail.com> wrote:

Here's the problem, and it's grim.

When we invented fire about a million years ago, cannibalism became profitable.

# 1 we didn't invent fire. 

# 2 how did fire make cannibalism profitable? 



Always risky but a lot less risky if it's cooked.

All meat was less risky if cooked. They didn't cook it because they knew it was less risky. They cooked it to make it easier to chew and digest and probably to improve flavor. 


Given a choice between starvation and risking it, Darwin makes an easy choice.

It's why humans are so mean to other groups, or a lot of the reason for some of the really evil stuff.

Starting about the same time as farming, about half the bones are the results of cannibal feasts.

You have a valid, supported citation for this, don't you? 

And the percentage is going up, as old bones are re-examined.

You have a valid citation for this, too, don't you? We know you would never make anything up. 

It's depressing. Granted it may be cannibal feasts are easy to find or whatever.

Citation? 

But with the invention of farming, the alternative was no longer starvation, the poor had gruel and the rich had animal meat. So Darwin says to no longer eat humans, but we still had that blood lust from a million years of selection.

Another citation? 

And there have always been unwanted children, and they are defenseless. 

This has what to do with cannibalism or Darwin or fire? What changed? There have been unwanted, defenseless children from the dawn of humanity. What's your point in stating it here?

LL

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [AvC] Re: Human Sacrifice of One's Own Children, in the Bible

fuck off (to be polite) ... just a suggestion ;-^)

On Saturday, September 27, 2014 11:41:15 PM UTC-4, Kurt wrote:
And the Talking Snake slithers under the segmented post rock.

On Saturday, September 27, 2014 11:28:58 PM UTC-4, LL wrote:







On Sep 27, 2014, at 8:15 PM, Kurt <passer...@gmail.com> wrote:

Here's the problem, and it's grim.

When we invented fire about a million years ago, cannibalism became profitable.

# 1 we didn't invent fire. 

# 2 how did fire make cannibalism profitable? 



Always risky but a lot less risky if it's cooked.

All meat was less risky if cooked. They didn't cook it because they knew it was less risky. They cooked it to make it easier to chew and digest and probably to improve flavor. 


Given a choice between starvation and risking it, Darwin makes an easy choice.

It's why humans are so mean to other groups, or a lot of the reason for some of the really evil stuff.

Starting about the same time as farming, about half the bones are the results of cannibal feasts.

You have a valid, supported citation for this, don't you? 

And the percentage is going up, as old bones are re-examined.

You have a valid citation for this, too, don't you? We know you would never make anything up. 

It's depressing. Granted it may be cannibal feasts are easy to find or whatever.

Citation? 

But with the invention of farming, the alternative was no longer starvation, the poor had gruel and the rich had animal meat. So Darwin says to no longer eat humans, but we still had that blood lust from a million years of selection.

Another citation? 

And there have always been unwanted children, and they are defenseless. 

This has what to do with cannibalism or Darwin or fire? What changed? There have been unwanted, defenseless children from the dawn of humanity. What's your point in stating it here?

LL

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [AvC] Is Obama an atheist?



On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 6:53:39 AM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Monday, September 29, 2014 7:00:05 PM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:52:14 PM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Sunday, September 28, 2014 12:06:39 PM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Sunday, September 28, 2014 1:00:29 PM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:50:21 AM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 10:40:31 PM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 3:53:32 PM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 2:03:51 PM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 9:09:09 AM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 8:22:24 AM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Friday, September 19, 2014 7:56:23 PM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:



It's your claim, Yarr, defend it or don't.  Perhaps you'd like to explain again how Obama's grades in college are relevant to terrorists today?

  Why don't you explain where you got the idea that my focus was on his grades, rather than his honesty regarding his grades and how his dishonesty could be used by opportunistic jihadis (yeah...they are extremely opportunistic and particularly so their religious leaders who latch on to every moral misstep of the west(but I suspect that you aren't that familiar with their ways as you are not likely to speak Farsi or Arabic))? The other question you might want to answer is ... Why I should feel obligated to defend a claim I did not make?


Ok, so you claimed that Jihadis were exploiting his dishonest about his grades.  It's every bit as laughable.  Ha!  Ha ha ha!

  Ok, Bob, I can agree with you on it being laughable, but you seem unable to grasp the fact that they do not see it that way. You and I can laugh our way right into the path of their bullets or shrapnel from their bombs. This kind of cavalier attitude is what allowed us to end up with 3000 people dead in the twin towers. Like I said before, he who does not learn from the past is doomed to repeat it.


You're right, Yarr!  Everybody knows that Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 because Bush lied about his grades.  Oh, wait, no they didn't!  In fact, Bush's grades had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks of 9/11, just as Obama's grades have nothing to do with present-day terrorism

It is most interesting that you are finding fault with your own misinterpretation of what I said. You disagree with yourself. That must be quite a conundrum for you.



What interpretation of what you said made any sense whatsoever?  Muslim terrorists care about Obama's grades because

   ...lying about them makes him morally inferior to them and thus they are more worthy of your following their ideology and fighting for it to death for it...killing the infidel(Americans included) in the process.

It seems that you have made it clear that propaganda as a tool against the west makes no sense to you. That is an odd position to hold.


What's an odd position to hold is that Al Qaeda is motivated by Obama's "lying" about his grades.  That's some cuckoo shit right there - what are you smoking?


  There you go...what he was smoking might also be another tool for the propagandist. Good point. You see...any fault you can find in your opponent can be used as a weapon to prove your point. You're using the same tactic right here. So, you can't pretend that you don't know what I am talking about, your response to me proves my point. So, thanks for proving it...saves me the work.


Your argument is simple, easy-to-understand, and completely wrong.  Al Qaeda could care less about American right-wing conspiracy theories. 

"Oh, look, the Great Satan won't release his grades!  I hate him even more now!!!!!!" 

Of course it is. You have just proven that you are incapable of putting yourself in their shoes and coming up with an argument that they would come up with. You lack that ability, that is why you can only come up with unconvincing and silly arguments. It is a good thing that you are not in charge of this country's defense.


You're right - I "lack the ability" to make up a story about Al Qaeda and convince myself to believe it. 


  Actually, they are all about conspiracy theories. Have you even ever talked to a Muslim? One of them has got my father bamboozled about 9/11 conspiracies. You have no idea what you are talking about when you make the kind of statements that you just made.
 

I laugh at your "theory" - "Ha! Ha! Ha!" - because it's ridiculous.  "I thought Obama was OK, but then I learned he was keeping his college grades confidential"  Death to America!"


  Enjoying your straw-man arguments?
 

- Bob T
 

How absurd.

- Bob

- Bob T
 

 
_________.  No matter how you fill in the blank, it doesn't make any sense. 

- Bob T

 
 
 
 

  I don't know if you are having trouble following the flow of thought in reading things people write or if you are intentionally refusing to address the issues I raised. Only you know the answer to that until you come clean about that. If you are just hiding behind a wall of words without caring one bit about this topic and are encouraging others to adopt the same attitude, I suggest that you get prepared for funerals of your family members when they become the next victims of a terrorist attack. But you can just laugh it off or shrug it off. You can be as oblivious as the families of those lost on 9/11, prior to the attack. Ideas have consequences and ideas that give birth to the same complacency that led to 9/11 is something that we cannot afford...some 3000 souls lost that day is a high price to pay for that lesson and it seems that folks like you have failed to learn it and those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Do you want the victim number to rise another 3000 to 6 grand? You want to call my statements fear mongering? Maybe you want to tell that to the families of the victims of 9/11...tell them that there is nothing to be afraid of. Tell those in the Boston marathon who were injured or killed or injured due to the terrorist attack.


Yep, the 9/11 victims were all killed by Jihadis who were... concerned about Bush's honesty about his grades?

   More like they were looking at the laughing Americans like you and seeing that you did not take them seriously, thereby seeing a nation unprepared and ripe for attack.


I'm not laughing at _them, Yarr, I'm laughing at _you_!

  Well, since you have addressed only your own ideas instead of mine, you are laughing at yourself and at the same time convinced that you're laughing at me.
What a sad...sad...foolishness it is that you have embraced.


 

- Bob T 

 
 

   You see, we can have our fancy discussions and debates here on the web, but this is not the real world, which is why so many atheists feel comfortable within its confines and thus flock to build online communities like the one found in this newsgroup. It is so much easier to live in a virtual world than in the substantial and real one. Here you can fool yourself left and right out there...beyond this matrix...things are not quite as rosy.


You live in a fantasy world,

  
 
Yarr, and sometimes we in the real world attempt to communicate with you.  Hello?  Obama's grades?  Hardy-har-har.

- Bob T
 
 

- Bob T 

- Bob T
 
 

- Bob T 
 
</di
...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [AvC] Is Obama an atheist?



On Monday, September 29, 2014 7:00:05 PM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:52:14 PM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Sunday, September 28, 2014 12:06:39 PM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Sunday, September 28, 2014 1:00:29 PM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Sunday, September 28, 2014 7:50:21 AM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 10:40:31 PM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 3:53:32 PM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 2:03:51 PM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 9:09:09 AM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:


On Saturday, September 20, 2014 8:22:24 AM UTC-4, Bob T. wrote:


On Friday, September 19, 2014 7:56:23 PM UTC-7, yar...@aol.com wrote:



It's your claim, Yarr, defend it or don't.  Perhaps you'd like to explain again how Obama's grades in college are relevant to terrorists today?

  Why don't you explain where you got the idea that my focus was on his grades, rather than his honesty regarding his grades and how his dishonesty could be used by opportunistic jihadis (yeah...they are extremely opportunistic and particularly so their religious leaders who latch on to every moral misstep of the west(but I suspect that you aren't that familiar with their ways as you are not likely to speak Farsi or Arabic))? The other question you might want to answer is ... Why I should feel obligated to defend a claim I did not make?


Ok, so you claimed that Jihadis were exploiting his dishonest about his grades.  It's every bit as laughable.  Ha!  Ha ha ha!

  Ok, Bob, I can agree with you on it being laughable, but you seem unable to grasp the fact that they do not see it that way. You and I can laugh our way right into the path of their bullets or shrapnel from their bombs. This kind of cavalier attitude is what allowed us to end up with 3000 people dead in the twin towers. Like I said before, he who does not learn from the past is doomed to repeat it.


You're right, Yarr!  Everybody knows that Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 because Bush lied about his grades.  Oh, wait, no they didn't!  In fact, Bush's grades had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks of 9/11, just as Obama's grades have nothing to do with present-day terrorism

It is most interesting that you are finding fault with your own misinterpretation of what I said. You disagree with yourself. That must be quite a conundrum for you.



What interpretation of what you said made any sense whatsoever?  Muslim terrorists care about Obama's grades because

   ...lying about them makes him morally inferior to them and thus they are more worthy of your following their ideology and fighting for it to death for it...killing the infidel(Americans included) in the process.

It seems that you have made it clear that propaganda as a tool against the west makes no sense to you. That is an odd position to hold.


What's an odd position to hold is that Al Qaeda is motivated by Obama's "lying" about his grades.  That's some cuckoo shit right there - what are you smoking?


  There you go...what he was smoking might also be another tool for the propagandist. Good point. You see...any fault you can find in your opponent can be used as a weapon to prove your point. You're using the same tactic right here. So, you can't pretend that you don't know what I am talking about, your response to me proves my point. So, thanks for proving it...saves me the work.


Your argument is simple, easy-to-understand, and completely wrong.  Al Qaeda could care less about American right-wing conspiracy theories. 

"Oh, look, the Great Satan won't release his grades!  I hate him even more now!!!!!!" 

Of course it is. You have just proven that you are incapable of putting yourself in their shoes and coming up with an argument that they would come up with. You lack that ability, that is why you can only come up with unconvincing and silly arguments. It is a good thing that you are not in charge of this country's defense.


You're right - I "lack the ability" to make up a story about Al Qaeda and convince myself to believe it. 


  Actually, they are all about conspiracy theories. Have you even ever talked to a Muslim? One of them has got my father bamboozled about 9/11 conspiracies. You have no idea what you are talking about when you make the kind of statements that you just made.
 

I laugh at your "theory" - "Ha! Ha! Ha!" - because it's ridiculous.  "I thought Obama was OK, but then I learned he was keeping his college grades confidential"  Death to America!"

- Bob T
 

How absurd.

- Bob

- Bob T
 

 
_________.  No matter how you fill in the blank, it doesn't make any sense. 

- Bob T

 
 
 
 

  I don't know if you are having trouble following the flow of thought in reading things people write or if you are intentionally refusing to address the issues I raised. Only you know the answer to that until you come clean about that. If you are just hiding behind a wall of words without caring one bit about this topic and are encouraging others to adopt the same attitude, I suggest that you get prepared for funerals of your family members when they become the next victims of a terrorist attack. But you can just laugh it off or shrug it off. You can be as oblivious as the families of those lost on 9/11, prior to the attack. Ideas have consequences and ideas that give birth to the same complacency that led to 9/11 is something that we cannot afford...some 3000 souls lost that day is a high price to pay for that lesson and it seems that folks like you have failed to learn it and those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Do you want the victim number to rise another 3000 to 6 grand? You want to call my statements fear mongering? Maybe you want to tell that to the families of the victims of 9/11...tell them that there is nothing to be afraid of. Tell those in the Boston marathon who were injured or killed or injured due to the terrorist attack.


Yep, the 9/11 victims were all killed by Jihadis who were... concerned about Bush's honesty about his grades?

   More like they were looking at the laughing Americans like you and seeing that you did not take them seriously, thereby seeing a nation unprepared and ripe for attack.


I'm not laughing at _them, Yarr, I'm laughing at _you_!

  Well, since you have addressed only your own ideas instead of mine, you are laughing at yourself and at the same time convinced that you're laughing at me.
What a sad...sad...foolishness it is that you have embraced.


 

- Bob T 

 
 

   You see, we can have our fancy discussions and debates here on the web, but this is not the real world, which is why so many atheists feel comfortable within its confines and thus flock to build online communities like the one found in this newsgroup. It is so much easier to live in a virtual world than in the substantial and real one. Here you can fool yourself left and right out there...beyond this matrix...things are not quite as rosy.


You live in a fantasy world,

  
 
Yarr, and sometimes we in the real world attempt to communicate with you.  Hello?  Obama's grades?  Hardy-har-har.

- Bob T
 
 

- Bob T 

- Bob T
 
 

- Bob T 
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Monday, September 29, 2014

[AvC] Re: Why is it that Christians and others of equally profane ideologies can not intelligently provide any intelligently derived and testable reasons for believing in a god?



On Monday, September 29, 2014 5:28:27 PM UTC-7, Smoley wrote:


On Friday, September 26, 2014 9:12:46 PM UTC-4, Observer wrote:


On Friday, September 26, 2014 3:23:30 PM UTC-7, mspm...@comcast.net wrote:

The problem lies with the creator of Christianity, Jesus Christ.  Jesus was very emphatic that faith was a central part of his religion.

Observer

The problem with Jesus, that is, if he ever existed, was at his teachings were abject nonsense, for the most part and further, the claims made about him were entirely bogus when it comes to anything pertaining to the unnatural/supernatural qualities attributed to him.Anyone who understands the value, indeed, the necessity of combining reason, logic, scientific method, a reasonable reliance  on the produce there of, and the temperance provided by adherence to the clear and concise application of critical thinking ( all of which are jointly necessary to any intelligent  investigation) is confronted with the simple fact that there is no evidence or even the smallest inference that the Christian  God hypothesis is useful , meaningful, or necessary in explaining the existence or functions of the ever changing objective reality within which we live. .Therefore, any belief in such us unwarranted, poorly thought out, and counterproductive. Further it is miss-construed and of false data which is used to support such a meaningless useless hypothesis (the hypothetical Christian or other God), which stems from a complete playing of understanding as to the above mentioned intelligent and, by the way, the only dependable investigative tools ever discovered by human kind.

Dave, you think you are reasonable and logical, but you are not.

Observer

I must, then ask you, to provide evidence that following the above mentioned and only dependable intellectual processes ever devised or discovered by humankind is productive of what is not reasonable and logical?


 You believe in a chaotic creation, driven by trillions of accidents gone right, but you ignore the fact that this is illogical and unreasonable. 

Observer

I believe absolutely nothing. I simply have reasonable expectations that what has been tested and determined to be, thereby, inerrantly dependable ,and which provides for accurate prognostications  should be the best choice as to explaining the functions of objective reality , must, needs be, of infinitely greater probability that any set of hypotheses, otherwise conjured by pure imagination in the past, present or future. (e.g. , the anecdotal superstitious stories contained in the so-called "Bible".) Further, it is reasonable to reject such as meaningless and unworthy of any consideration. This of course includes the failed hypotheses of an existent God.

Smoley wrote:
 The ORDER of the universe was not given to us by trillions of random accidents. I don't care how many brainwashed com-padres you have with you that believe such nonsense, it isn't reasonable, logical, or something that should be believed in. 

Observer

Is a great deal of difference between being brainwashed and having a useful education. As an example, I offer you the following:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EilZ4VY5Vs

Please listen to the entire lecture. It's very important to our discussion.

Smoley wrote:

God's creation shows His handiwork. The invisible things of Him are clearly seen by the things which are made.  All things are ORDERED by the Word of His mouth. And no matter how hard you imagine it to be otherwise y will ou will not change the truth.

Observer

There is not the smallest bit of evidence or even any tiny inference that such as the God thing believed in only by Christian ideologues ever existed or committed any act in or upon the universe (s) nor is  that hypothesis necessary in explaining the existence of, or the functions of objective reality.

If you disagree, then by all means, show us we are wrong, using the necessary combination of logic, reason, scientific method, a reasonable reliance on the produce thereof, and the temperance supplied by the clear and concise rules of critical thinking.

Should you attempt to infer that the Bible supplies such evidence, then we must insist that you supply data acquired by the above described, and only dependable method of intellectual inquiry, evidence for the veracity of the Bible itself.



  

 
Were you to take the time to try to understand the meaning of each of those words listed above in the explication relating to intelligent investigation, it would be made very clear to you ,and all others clinging to this hideously debilitating superstitious belief that there is nothing out there that gives us shit about you or them, save perhaps other people and some of our animal friends, and that  the entire Christian God hypothesis is useless and meaningless and stands in the way of understanding the wonders of the universe within which we live, as well as the means and methods necessary to our survival and out of our children.

Smoley wrote:
The Word of God is the ONLY thing that makes any sense out of life.  It is what gives our lives meaning. It is the Word of life.

Observer

In order to accept that there is such a thing as the word of God, you must first establish, according to the above and only dependable method of intellectual inquiry that such as the God of Christianity ever existed.

Smoley wrote:

If you cared to even consider it, you would find the answers, but it's hard to see the truth when you've closed your eyes so tightly.

Observer

I considered it deeply and I was educated in one of the finest Christian universities in the country. And then I took the time to read the Bible cover to cover twice and was appalled at the hideous; superstitious, pathological, misanthropic, misogynistic content thereof.



Smoley wrote:
If you want to know about life, then you must know about the Lord Jesus Christ.  He is our life.

Observer

That is nothing but superstitious nonsense. Poor Jesus. That is, if the biblical Jesus ever actually lived, was made into a God fraud by the psychotic ramblings of Paul or Whoever wrote using Paul's name.

Smoley wrote:
All the answers are there in the Word.

Even the existence of "the word." It's just more superstitious, meaningless nonsense. And unworthy of any reasonable consideration.

Why has God turned His back on us?  Why did God turn His back on Jesus Christ?

Observer

You have yet to establish such as this, God hypothesized only by Christian ideologues ever existed.

Why is there suffering and death?  Why did Jesus suffer and die?

Observer

There suffering and death, because of the chaotic principle sub-standing the very structure of the universe.




Smoley wrote:
Why doesn't God seem to answer prayers?  Why did Jesus' prayer go unanswered?

Observer

It has never been established that such as the Christian God exists, and of course the nonexistent cannot answer prayers, no matter from whom.




Smoley wrote:
Is there hope for mankind?  Did Jesus rise from the grave?  Was Jesus glorified in Heaven? Will he live eternally in paradise?

Observer

Yes, there is indeed hope for mankind. If and when those influencing his sociological structures learns understand the interdependency and in the relationship of all sentient creature. No, relying upon on the above described, and only dependable methods rational investigation, Jesus did not arise from the grave and no, he will not live eternally in paradise.



On Monday, September 29, 2014 5:28:27 PM UTC-7, Smoley wrote:


On Friday, September 26, 2014 9:12:46 PM UTC-4, Observer wrote:


On Friday, September 26, 2014 3:23:30 PM UTC-7, mspm...@comcast.net wrote:

The problem lies with the creator of Christianity, Jesus Christ.  Jesus was very emphatic that faith was a central part of his religion.

Observer

The problem with Jesus, that is, if he ever existed, was at his teachings were abject nonsense, for the most part and further, the claims made about him were entirely bogus when it comes to anything pertaining to the unnatural/supernatural qualities attributed to him.Anyone who understands the value, indeed, the necessity of combining reason, logic, scientific method, a reasonable reliance  on the produce there of, and the temperance provided by adherence to the clear and concise application of critical thinking ( all of which are jointly necessary to any intelligent  investigation) is confronted with the simple fact that there is no evidence or even the smallest inference that the Christian  God hypothesis is useful , meaningful, or necessary in explaining the existence or functions of the ever changing objective reality within which we live. .Therefore, any belief in such us unwarranted, poorly thought out, and counterproductive. Further it is miss-construed and of false data which is used to support such a meaningless useless hypothesis (the hypothetical Christian or other God), which stems from a complete playing of understanding as to the above mentioned intelligent and, by the way, the only dependable investigative tools ever discovered by human kind.

Dave, you think you are reasonable and logical, but you are not.

Observer

I must, then ask you, to provide evidence that following the above mentioned and only dependable intellectual processes ever devised or discovered by humankind is productive of what is not reasonable and logical?


 You believe in a chaotic creation, driven by trillions of accidents gone right, but you ignore the fact that this is illogical and unreasonable. 

Observer

I believe absolutely nothing. I simply have reasonable expectations that what has been tested and determined to be, thereby, inerrantly dependable ,and which provides for accurate prognostications  should be the best choice as to explaining the functions of objective reality , must, needs be, of infinitely greater probability that any set of hypotheses, otherwise conjured by pure imagination in the past, present or future. (e.g. , the anecdotal superstitious stories contained in the so-called "Bible".) Further, it is reasonable to reject such as meaningless and unworthy of any consideration. This of course includes the failed hypotheses of an existent God.

Smoley wrote:
 The ORDER of the universe was not given to us by trillions of random accidents. I don't care how many brainwashed com-padres you have with you that believe such nonsense, it isn't reasonable, logical, or something that should be believed in. 

Observer

Is a great deal of difference between being brainwashed and having a useful education. As an example, I offer you the following:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EilZ4VY5Vs

Please listen to the entire lecture. It's very important to our discussion.

Smoley wrote:

God's creation shows His handiwork. The invisible things of Him are clearly seen by the things which are made.  All things are ORDERED by the Word of His mouth. And no matter how hard you imagine it to be otherwise y will ou will not change the truth.

Observer

There is not the smallest bit of evidence or even any tiny inference that such as the God thing believed in only by Christian ideologues ever existed or committed any act in or upon the universe (s) nor is  that hypothesis necessary in explaining the existence of, or the functions of objective reality.

If you disagree, then by all means, show us we are wrong, using the necessary combination of logic, reason, scientific method, a reasonable reliance on the produce thereof, and the temperance supplied by the clear and concise rules of critical thinking.

Should you attempt to infer that the Bible supplies such evidence, then we must insist that you supply data acquired by the above described, and only dependable method of intellectual inquiry, evidence for the veracity of the Bible itself.



  

 
Were you to take the time to try to understand the meaning of each of those words listed above in the explication relating to intelligent investigation, it would be made very clear to you ,and all others clinging to this hideously debilitating superstitious belief that there is nothing out there that gives us shit about you or them, save perhaps other people and some of our animal friends, and that  the entire Christian God hypothesis is useless and meaningless and stands in the way of understanding the wonders of the universe within which we live, as well as the means and methods necessary to our survival and out of our children.

Smoley wrote:
The Word of God is the ONLY thing that makes any sense out of life.  It is what gives our lives meaning. It is the Word of life.

Observer

In order to accept that there is such a thing as the word of God, you must first establish, according to the above and only dependable method of intellectual inquiry that such as the God of Christianity ever existed.

Smoley wrote:

If you cared to even consider it, you would find the answers, but it's hard to see the truth when you've closed your eyes so tightly.

Observer

I considered it deeply and I was educated in one of the finest Christian universities in the country. And then I took the time to read the Bible cover to cover twice and was appalled at the hideous; superstitious, pathological, misanthropic, misogynistic content thereof.



Smoley wrote:
If you want to know about life, then you must know about the Lord Jesus Christ.  He is our life.

Observer

That is nothing but superstitious nonsense. Poor Jesus. That is, if the biblical Jesus ever actually lived, was made into a God fraud by the psychotic ramblings of Paul or Whoever wrote using Paul's name.

Smoley wrote:
All the answers are there in the Word.

Even the existence of "the word." It's just more superstitious, meaningless nonsense. And unworthy of any reasonable consideration.

Why has God turned His back on us?  Why did God turn His back on Jesus Christ?

Observer

You have yet to establish such as this, God hypothesized only by Christian ideologues ever existed.

Why is there suffering and death?  Why did Jesus suffer and die?

Observer

There suffering and death, because of the chaotic principle sub-standing the very structure of the universe.




Smoley wrote:
Why doesn't God seem to answer prayers?  Why did Jesus' prayer go unanswered?

Observer

It has never been established that such as the Christian God exists, and of course the nonexistent cannot answer prayers, no matter from whom.




Smoley wrote:
Is there hope for mankind?  Did Jesus rise from the grave?  Was Jesus glorified in Heaven? Will he live eternally in paradise?

Observer

Yes, there is indeed hope for mankind. If and when those influencing his sociological structures learns understand the interdependency and in the relationship of all sentient creature. No, relying upon on the above described, and only dependable methods rational investigation, Jesus did not arise from the grave and no, he will not live eternally in paradise.

If you want to understand your own life, then you must understand the life of Christ, because we are in Christ and Christ in us.
As He was in this world, so are we.

So then by faith we take up our crosses and follow Him, knowing that the body of sin must be destroyed, and that we must be changed.  This is the message of the gospel, and the gospel is the Light that brings understanding to the world.

Observer

The above is absolute abject bull shit. Just more superstitious crap.


You can continue to dwell in ignorance if you like, but some of us believe this "foolishness" and have faith toward God that we, like Christ, will escape the corruption of this life, and will enter into paradise as new creatures.

This life is temporal, a stepping stone into eternity. Our bodies will die, but our souls will go on. Those who rejected the Words of Life will be sentenced to eternal death, a place call the "lake of fire".  There are no rules, no commandments, no order, no "love thy neighbor" laws to obey..... only chaos and suffering.  All those who hated the light, who hated the law, who hated the Words of Life will be placed there, the place of their choosing, but those who hated their sins and rebellion, those who thirsted for righteousness shall be filled.

Don't be a fool. Take up your cross and follow the Lord into eternity. Don't let your pride cause you to lose your life forever.

Observer

Another load of crap.

Psychonomist

 

  Christianity was not geared toward ivory tower intellectuals but toward the poor, who often did not use things like intellectual proofs.

Each and every person used in intellectual process in determining what he or she will believe, unfortunately , most have chosen to accept being told what to think and never take the time to understand how to think. And of course this is a very sad and dangerous way to live. All of humanity must learn to learn if they are to become contributing members of our society.



 Yes, if you could make a formal proof of Christianity it would probably still have people who believed in it and people who the damned, but by Christian standards these would be the wrong people in both departments.

Observer

When it comes to learning to understand the world within which we live. There are no wrong people. (Christian standards be damned)

Psychonomist

Sorry.

Matt

On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:06:56 PM UTC-5, e_space wrote:
belief doesn't require scientific proof to exist, or to thrive ... although i am not a christian, there are events that happened in my life that science doesn't provide answers for, and that in no way diminishes their value ... to refer to someones belief as "filthy" is a sign that, even though you might be intelligent, you have learned nothing about social grace ... you certainly don't attract anybody to your way of thinking by using such caustic and ignorant language ... 

speaking of education ... you are most likely more educated than i am, but even i know that it is bad grammar to use a major word twice in the same sentence, as you did in your title ... it is unbecoming for someone to bash others for their lack of education while flaunting such themselves ... 

back to the subject at hand ... have you never held out hope for something to happen? do you consider placebo's entirely worthless? are humans supposed to banish any experience of thought from their minds simply because science doesn't have an answer for it? didn't a belief that a certain condition of thing exist drive a scientist into the lab to find out if his/her idea held merit?

On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:45:58 PM UTC-4, Observer wrote:

Observer
 
Are there no Christians, among us, who are sufficiently intelligent ,and educated enough  to offer us an argument consistent with the following intellectual processes, and whom are able to provide reliable extra biblical data substantiating their belief system (the  belief in a god  extrapolated ideology by which they purport to live)?
 
Anyone who understands the value, indeed, the necessity of combining reason, logic, scientific method, a reasonable reliance  on the produce there of, and the temperance provided by adherence to the clear and concise application of critical thinking ( all of which are jointly necessary to any intelligent  investigation) is confronted with the simple fact that there is no evidence or even the smallest inference that the Christian  God hypothesis is useful , meaningful, or necessary in explaining the existence or functions of the ever changing objective reality within which we live. .Therefore, any belief in such us unwarranted, poorly thought out, and counterproductive. Further it is miss-construed and of false data which is used to support such a meaningless useless hypothesis (the hypothetical Christian or other God), which stems from a complete lack of understanding as to the above mentioned intelligent and, by the way, the only dependable investigative tools ever discovered by human kind.

Come on ,believers,  if you can not build a comprehensive argument for the existence of a God , then what the hell are you doing here but wasting band width and enjoining atheists to laugh at you?

Psychonomist

If you want to understand your own life, then you must understand the life of Christ, because we are in Christ and Christ in us.
As He was in this world, so are we.

So then by faith we take up our crosses and follow Him, knowing that the body of sin must be destroyed, and that we must be changed.  This is the message of the gospel, and the gospel is the Light that brings understanding to the world.

The above is absolute abject bull shit. Just more superstitious crap.


You can continue to dwell in ignorance if you like, but some of us believe this "foolishness" and have faith toward God that we, like Christ, will escape the corruption of this life, and will enter into paradise as new creatures.

This life is temporal, a stepping stone into eternity. Our bodies will die, but our souls will go on. Those who rejected the Words of Life will be sentenced to eternal death, a place call the "lake of fire".  There are no rules, no commandments, no order, no "love thy neighbor" laws to obey..... only chaos and suffering.  All those who hated the light, who hated the law, who hated the Words of Life will be placed there, the place of their choosing, but those who hated their sins and rebellion, those who thirsted for righteousness shall be filled.

Don't be a fool. Take up your cross and follow the Lord into eternity. Don't let your pride cause you to lose your life forever.

Observer

Another load of crap.

Psychonomist

 

  Christianity was not geared toward ivory tower intellectuals but toward the poor, who often did not use things like intellectual proofs.

Each and every person used in intellectual process in determining what he or she will believe, unfortunately , most have chosen to accept being told what to think and never take the time to understand how to think. And of course this is a very sad and dangerous way to live. All of humanity must learn to learn if they are to become contributing members of our society.



 Yes, if you could make a formal proof of Christianity it would probably still have people who believed in it and people who the damned, but by Christian standards these would be the wrong people in both departments.

Observer

When it comes to learning to understand the world within which we live. There are no wrong people. (Christian standards be damned)

Psychonomist

Sorry.

Matt

On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:06:56 PM UTC-5, e_space wrote:
belief doesn't require scientific proof to exist, or to thrive ... although i am not a christian, there are events that happened in my life that science doesn't provide answers for, and that in no way diminishes their value ... to refer to someones belief as "filthy" is a sign that, even though you might be intelligent, you have learned nothing about social grace ... you certainly don't attract anybody to your way of thinking by using such caustic and ignorant language ... 

speaking of education ... you are most likely more educated than i am, but even i know that it is bad grammar to use a major word twice in the same sentence, as you did in your title ... it is unbecoming for someone to bash others for their lack of education while flaunting such themselves ... 

back to the subject at hand ... have you never held out hope for something to happen? do you consider placebo's entirely worthless? are humans supposed to banish any experience of thought from their minds simply because science doesn't have an answer for it? didn't a belief that a certain condition of thing exist drive a scientist into the lab to find out if his/her idea held merit?

On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:45:58 PM UTC-4, Observer wrote:

Observer
 
Are there no Christians, among us, who are sufficiently intelligent ,and educated enough  to offer us an argument consistent with the following intellectual processes, and whom are able to provide reliable extra biblical data substantiating their belief system (the  belief in a god  extrapolated ideology by which they purport to live)?
 
Anyone who understands the value, indeed, the necessity of combining reason, logic, scientific method, a reasonable reliance  on the produce there of, and the temperance provided by adherence to the clear and concise application of critical thinking ( all of which are jointly necessary to any intelligent  investigation) is confronted with the simple fact that there is no evidence or even the smallest inference that the Christian  God hypothesis is useful , meaningful, or necessary in explaining the existence or functions of the ever changing objective reality within which we live. .Therefore, any belief in such us unwarranted, poorly thought out, and counterproductive. Further it is miss-construed and of false data which is used to support such a meaningless useless hypothesis (the hypothetical Christian or other God), which stems from a complete lack of understanding as to the above mentioned intelligent and, by the way, the only dependable investigative tools ever discovered by human kind.

Come on ,believers,  if you can not build a comprehensive argument for the existence of a God , then what the hell are you doing here but wasting band width and enjoining atheists to laugh at you?

Psychonomist

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.