NO EVIDENCE OF GODS

Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:

> >> We have nothing to talk about. I use words with their actual
> >> meanings, not with meanings given to them by atheists.
> >
> > The word "fetus" is a precise, specific term--unlike the many nonsense
> > religious terms created solely to inflame emotions over the abortion
> > issue.
> >
> >> The fact that atheists can say that unborn children are not human beings
> >> means nothing to me.
> >
> > Actually, the law says that "unborn children" (there's one of those
> > nonsense terms) are not human beings.
> >
> "not human beings" like Jews were in Germany perhaps, or Negros were in
> the USA?

No, "not human beings" like not having a birth date...
 
rbwinn <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:

> As I understand it Jesse Ventura has made threats against anyone who
> would send him a Bible. I was going to send him one with an
> explanation that you had convinced me to do it.

Sure you were, little fella. Sure you were...
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:17:35 -0400, stumper wrote:

> Michael Gray wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:25:03 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>> wrote:
>> - Refer: <pcednR2sCP77WG3YnZ2dnUVZ_revnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 17:58:19 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> - Refer: <oumdnZlvocZvCW3YnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:18:20 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> - Refer: <P8ydnfZCSKse4G3YnZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:45:50 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> - Refer: <QJWdnVzGDdRYxG3YnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:50:43 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <upadnfHJF_WXC3LYnZ2dnUVZ_v7inZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:35:26 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <yumdnbGnWIeDo3LYnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which version?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which one do you have in mind?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ve ask ze qvestions here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are two versions at least in the Hebrew, many,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many more if you "rely" on the excresent English or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Latin translations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you trying to say that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can read Hebrew?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can read the Bible in Hebrew, yes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you speak Aramaic as well?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't "speak" it, but can read it, after a fashion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I heard Benny Hinn does.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Benny Hinn only speaks the pure bullshit language of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heartless con-artist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is a criminally fraudulent money vampire who is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for much suffering and premature death in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his single-minded pursuit of the dollar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He makes Dracula look like Albert Schweitzer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can God speak Chinese?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which god?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you believe in any?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you familiar with the Christian God?
>>>>>>>>>>>> As familiar as I am with Sherlock Holmes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How do you know it does not exist?
>>>>>>>>>> What "it" are you referring to, child?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are a vicously
>>>>>>>>>> retarded infantile illiterate, who is wilfully ignorant to a
>>>>>>>>>> truly astounding extent.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can you supply me with some minimal evidence to show that such a
>>>>>>>>>> conclusion is unwarranted?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I read philosophy and law.
>>>>>>>>> How about you?
>>>>>>>> 1) You are anonymous, so that assertion is baseless. 2)
>>>>>>>> Qualifications are not evidence in refutation of my assertion. 3)
>>>>>>>> What have my qualifications got to do with my human ability to
>>>>>>>> judge your maturity, literacy and ignorance, as displayed in your
>>>>>>>> posts here?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Uou confirm my dianosis with every illogical retort. Your
>>>>>>>> responses are all logical fallacies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But, I see that you are a philosopher. No ****ing wonder you
>>>>>>>> cannot employ logic or reason!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm a student of Dao and Zen.
>>>>>> A Zen philoso-wanker.
>>>>>> Now I understand why you are a babbling incoherent woo-woo
>>>>>> mental-cripple.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What makes you think logic is reasonable?
>>>>>> It works.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Are you always logical and reasonable?
>>>> Not always.
>>>> Especially when I am being annoyed by pointlessly disconnected
>>>> chakra-babble from an infant-school philosopher.
>>>>
>>>> You never did answer my question as to whether or not you were lying
>>>> when you implied that you are an atheist. But then again, I do not
>>>> expect to get any form of reality or honesty from you.
>>>> I see that you have not disappointed me in that respect.
>>>>
>>>> I think that I have got better things to do than engage in a battle of
>>>> wits with an unarmed opponent.
>>>>
>>> Unlike some clueless people,
>>> I don't feel the need to answer
>>> all questions once and for all.
>>>
>>> Things change.
>>> People change.
>>> Knowledge increases.
>>> Science gets better.
>>> Even theology advances.
>>>
>>> You would feel a lot better
>>> once you learn to live with uncertainty.
>>>
>>> Do you know when you are going to die?
>>
>> I find this is very scary, when put in to context with your obsessive
>> stalking of me.
>>
>> --
>
>
> If anything happens to me or my family because you have posted here
> certain name and address, you will be criminally responsible for it.
>
> Happy now?
>
> Better start praying
> for the safety of me and my family now.

Your paranoid delusions are getting the upper hand. You should see someone
about that...

--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace
alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing
it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken
 
On Mar 18, 8:29�am, scottrichter...@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote:
> Pastor Frank <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote:
> > >> We have nothing to talk about.
 
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:

> Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) as demonstrated by Jesus
> Christ on the cross of Calvary. So our God is fairly easy to "justify",
> unless you have no idea what love is beyond some funny feelings in your
> crotch.

Frank and his amazing purple "Chubby for Jesus"...
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 11:02:52 -0500, in alt.atheism
Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in
<m8oqv29atkos8nabi4lg9vkv56cru3tqor@4ax.com>:
>On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 10:56:40 +0800, in alt.atheism
>"Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in
><45fcb9c5$0$16292$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>:
>>"Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>>news:jh6ov2l668b81vrva3hqf6v8s58kgkjbb6@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:20:48 +0800, in alt.atheism
>>> "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in
>>> <45fb10d5$0$16367$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> We have no idea if any of the claims made in the gospels are true.
>>>>> We have no idea what Jesus actually said.
>>>>> We have no idea whether Jesus had anything to do with any god or not.
>>>>> We have no idea whether you have interpreted what is written correctly.
>>>>
>>>> Is that what you are going to use to justify your disbelief? I.e. "I
>>>> had
>>>>no idea" that almighty God exists, and actually is going to judge us all.
>>>
>>> I don't have to justify my 'disbelief'. The mere fact that you cannot
>>> justify your beliefs is sufficient for me not to accept your claims
>>> about gods or religion.
>>>
>> Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) as demonstrated by Jesus
>>Christ on the cross of Calvary. So our God is fairly easy to "justify",
>>unless you have no idea what love is beyond some funny feelings in your
>>crotch.
>
>You've demonstrated a complete unwillingness to listen and an unfettered
>willingness to lie and misrepresent what is going on, but let me try
>once more to help you understand why you are lying about everything
>here, including Christianity.
>
>Love is a supposed attribute of the particular God you worship. There is
>no evidence at all that any gods exist or that any of the asserted
>attributes are true. There is no evidence that the stories of the
>Gospels are true. Christians accept all of this by faith, not because
>they have evidence. Those who claim to have evidence are repeating
>falsehoods. Some, like you, already know that the claim that there is
>evidence is false. When you claim that there is evidence, but know there
>is none, you are lying.
>
>The fact that love exists does not provide any evidence that the God you
>worship exists. The Sun exists, but that does not mean that any of the
>Sun gods exist. It is a logical error, which has been pointed out to you
>already, to claim that A exists because a supposed attribute of A
>exists.
>
>You need to stop lying if you want anyone to take you seriously as a
>person or as a self-described Christian. Nothing you have posted in
>these many months persuades me that you follow the teachings of Jesus.
>Since that is the case, why should I, or anyone else, accept any of your
>assertions about what Christians teach?
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 10:56:40 +0800, in alt.atheism
"Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in
<45fcb9c5$0$16292$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>:
>"Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>news:jh6ov2l668b81vrva3hqf6v8s58kgkjbb6@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:20:48 +0800, in alt.atheism
>> "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in
>> <45fb10d5$0$16367$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>:
>>>>
>>>> We have no idea if any of the claims made in the gospels are true.
>>>> We have no idea what Jesus actually said.
>>>> We have no idea whether Jesus had anything to do with any god or not.
>>>> We have no idea whether you have interpreted what is written correctly.
>>>
>>> Is that what you are going to use to justify your disbelief? I.e. "I
>>> had
>>>no idea" that almighty God exists, and actually is going to judge us all.
>>
>> I don't have to justify my 'disbelief'. The mere fact that you cannot
>> justify your beliefs is sufficient for me not to accept your claims
>> about gods or religion.
>>
> Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) as demonstrated by Jesus
>Christ on the cross of Calvary. So our God is fairly easy to "justify",
>unless you have no idea what love is beyond some funny feelings in your
>crotch.

You've demonstrated a complete unwillingness to listen and an unfettered
willingness to lie and misrepresent what is going on, but let me try
once more to help you understand why you are lying about everything
here, including Christianity.

Love is a supposed attribute of the particular God you worship. There is
no evidence at all that any gods exist or that any of the asserted
attributes are true. There is no evidence that the stories of the
Gospels are true. Christians accept all of this by faith, not because
they have evidence. Those who claim to have evidence are repeating
falsehoods. Some, like you, already know that the claim that there is
evidence is false. When you claim that there is evidence, but know there
is none, you are lying.

The fact that love exists does not provide any evidence that the God you
worship exists. The Sun exists, but that does not mean that any of the
Sun gods exist. It is a logical error, which has been pointed out to you
already, to claim that A exists because a supposed attribute of A
exists.

You need to stop lying if you want anyone to take you seriously as a
person or as a self-described Christian. Nothing you have posted in
these many months persuades me that you follow the teachings of Jesus.
Since that is the case, why should I, or anyone else, accept any of your
assertions about what Christians teach?

--

"Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel
to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy
Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should
take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in
which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh
it to scorn." -- Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis
 
On 18 Mar 2007 08:56:07 -0700, in alt.atheism
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in
<1174233367.533631.313160@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>On Mar 18, 8:29?am, scottrichter...@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote:
>> Pastor Frank <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote:
>> > >> We have nothing to talk about. use words with their actual
>> > >> meanings, not with meanings given to them by atheists.
>>
>> > > The word "fetus" is a precise, specific term--unlike the many nonsense
>> > > religious terms created solely to inflame emotions over the abortion
>> > > issue.
>>
>> > >> The fact that atheists can say that unborn children are not human beings
>> > >> means nothing to me.
>>
>> > > Actually, the law says that "unborn children" (there's one of those
>> > > nonsense terms) are not human beings.
>>
>> > "not human beings" like Jews were in Germany perhaps, or Negros were in
>> > the USA?
>>
>> No, "not human beings" like not having a birth date...- Hide quoted text -
>>
>The term "human being" has nothing to do with time. All it means is
>that the individual is human and exists. With regard to the term
>child, I use it the same way it was used in the Bible. Luke 2:5 To
>be taxed with Mary his espoused wife being great with child.
>As you can see from this verse of the Bible, Jesus Christ was a child
>while he was still in his mother's womb.

The law has never treated fetuses as if they were children. Get over it.
 
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:17:35 -0400, stumper wrote:
>
>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:25:03 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> - Refer: <pcednR2sCP77WG3YnZ2dnUVZ_revnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 17:58:19 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> - Refer: <oumdnZlvocZvCW3YnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:18:20 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> - Refer: <P8ydnfZCSKse4G3YnZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:45:50 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <QJWdnVzGDdRYxG3YnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:50:43 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <upadnfHJF_WXC3LYnZ2dnUVZ_v7inZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:35:26 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <yumdnbGnWIeDo3LYnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which version?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which one do you have in mind?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ve ask ze qvestions here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are two versions at least in the Hebrew, many,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many more if you "rely" on the excresent English or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Latin translations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you trying to say that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can read Hebrew?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can read the Bible in Hebrew, yes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you speak Aramaic as well?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't "speak" it, but can read it, after a fashion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I heard Benny Hinn does.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Benny Hinn only speaks the pure bullshit language of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heartless con-artist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is a criminally fraudulent money vampire who is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for much suffering and premature death in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his single-minded pursuit of the dollar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He makes Dracula look like Albert Schweitzer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can God speak Chinese?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which god?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you believe in any?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you familiar with the Christian God?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As familiar as I am with Sherlock Holmes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How do you know it does not exist?
>>>>>>>>>>> What "it" are you referring to, child?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are a vicously
>>>>>>>>>>> retarded infantile illiterate, who is wilfully ignorant to a
>>>>>>>>>>> truly astounding extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Can you supply me with some minimal evidence to show that such a
>>>>>>>>>>> conclusion is unwarranted?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I read philosophy and law.
>>>>>>>>>> How about you?
>>>>>>>>> 1) You are anonymous, so that assertion is baseless. 2)
>>>>>>>>> Qualifications are not evidence in refutation of my assertion. 3)
>>>>>>>>> What have my qualifications got to do with my human ability to
>>>>>>>>> judge your maturity, literacy and ignorance, as displayed in your
>>>>>>>>> posts here?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Uou confirm my dianosis with every illogical retort. Your
>>>>>>>>> responses are all logical fallacies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But, I see that you are a philosopher. No ****ing wonder you
>>>>>>>>> cannot employ logic or reason!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm a student of Dao and Zen.
>>>>>>> A Zen philoso-wanker.
>>>>>>> Now I understand why you are a babbling incoherent woo-woo
>>>>>>> mental-cripple.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What makes you think logic is reasonable?
>>>>>>> It works.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you always logical and reasonable?
>>>>> Not always.
>>>>> Especially when I am being annoyed by pointlessly disconnected
>>>>> chakra-babble from an infant-school philosopher.
>>>>>
>>>>> You never did answer my question as to whether or not you were lying
>>>>> when you implied that you are an atheist. But then again, I do not
>>>>> expect to get any form of reality or honesty from you.
>>>>> I see that you have not disappointed me in that respect.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that I have got better things to do than engage in a battle of
>>>>> wits with an unarmed opponent.
>>>>>
>>>> Unlike some clueless people,
>>>> I don't feel the need to answer
>>>> all questions once and for all.
>>>>
>>>> Things change.
>>>> People change.
>>>> Knowledge increases.
>>>> Science gets better.
>>>> Even theology advances.
>>>>
>>>> You would feel a lot better
>>>> once you learn to live with uncertainty.
>>>>
>>>> Do you know when you are going to die?
>>> I find this is very scary, when put in to context with your obsessive
>>> stalking of me.
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> If anything happens to me or my family because you have posted here
>> certain name and address, you will be criminally responsible for it.
>>
>> Happy now?
>>
>> Better start praying
>> for the safety of me and my family now.
>
> Your paranoid delusions are getting the upper hand. You should see someone
> about that...
>


To give cops some head start,
I might blog in my website
what you did for me and my family.

--
~Stumper
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:42:26 -0400, stumper wrote:

> Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:17:35 -0400, stumper wrote:
>>
>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:25:03 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> - Refer: <pcednR2sCP77WG3YnZ2dnUVZ_revnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 17:58:19 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> - Refer: <oumdnZlvocZvCW3YnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:18:20 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> - Refer: <P8ydnfZCSKse4G3YnZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:45:50 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <QJWdnVzGDdRYxG3YnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:50:43 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <upadnfHJF_WXC3LYnZ2dnUVZ_v7inZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:35:26 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <yumdnbGnWIeDo3LYnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which version?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which one do you have in mind?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ve ask ze qvestions here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are two versions at least in the Hebrew, many,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many more if you "rely" on the excresent English or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Latin translations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you trying to say that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can read Hebrew?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can read the Bible in Hebrew, yes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you speak Aramaic as well?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't "speak" it, but can read it, after a fashion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I heard Benny Hinn does.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Benny Hinn only speaks the pure bullshit language of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heartless con-artist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is a criminally fraudulent money vampire who is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for much suffering and premature death in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his single-minded pursuit of the dollar. He makes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dracula look like Albert Schweitzer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can God speak Chinese?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which god?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you believe in any?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you familiar with the Christian God?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As familiar as I am with Sherlock Holmes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How do you know it does not exist?
>>>>>>>>>>>> What "it" are you referring to, child?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are a vicously
>>>>>>>>>>>> retarded infantile illiterate, who is wilfully ignorant to a
>>>>>>>>>>>> truly astounding extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you supply me with some minimal evidence to show that such
>>>>>>>>>>>> a conclusion is unwarranted?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I read philosophy and law.
>>>>>>>>>>> How about you?
>>>>>>>>>> 1) You are anonymous, so that assertion is baseless. 2)
>>>>>>>>>> Qualifications are not evidence in refutation of my assertion.
>>>>>>>>>> 3) What have my qualifications got to do with my human ability
>>>>>>>>>> to judge your maturity, literacy and ignorance, as displayed in
>>>>>>>>>> your posts here?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Uou confirm my dianosis with every illogical retort. Your
>>>>>>>>>> responses are all logical fallacies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But, I see that you are a philosopher. No ****ing wonder you
>>>>>>>>>> cannot employ logic or reason!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm a student of Dao and Zen.
>>>>>>>> A Zen philoso-wanker.
>>>>>>>> Now I understand why you are a babbling incoherent woo-woo
>>>>>>>> mental-cripple.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What makes you think logic is reasonable?
>>>>>>>> It works.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you always logical and reasonable?
>>>>>> Not always.
>>>>>> Especially when I am being annoyed by pointlessly disconnected
>>>>>> chakra-babble from an infant-school philosopher.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You never did answer my question as to whether or not you were lying
>>>>>> when you implied that you are an atheist. But then again, I do not
>>>>>> expect to get any form of reality or honesty from you. I see that
>>>>>> you have not disappointed me in that respect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that I have got better things to do than engage in a battle
>>>>>> of wits with an unarmed opponent.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Unlike some clueless people,
>>>>> I don't feel the need to answer
>>>>> all questions once and for all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Things change.
>>>>> People change.
>>>>> Knowledge increases.
>>>>> Science gets better.
>>>>> Even theology advances.
>>>>>
>>>>> You would feel a lot better
>>>>> once you learn to live with uncertainty.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you know when you are going to die?
>>>> I find this is very scary, when put in to context with your obsessive
>>>> stalking of me.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>
>>> If anything happens to me or my family because you have posted here
>>> certain name and address, you will be criminally responsible for it.
>>>
>>> Happy now?
>>>
>>> Better start praying
>>> for the safety of me and my family now.
>>
>> Your paranoid delusions are getting the upper hand. You should see
>> someone about that...
>>
>>
>
> To give cops some head start,
> I might blog in my website
> what you did for me and my family.

I did nothing for you nor your family.

Have you spoken to a shrink yet about your pathological lying?

--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace
alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing
it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken
 
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:42:26 -0400, stumper wrote:
>
>> Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
>>> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:17:35 -0400, stumper wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:25:03 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> - Refer: <pcednR2sCP77WG3YnZ2dnUVZ_revnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 17:58:19 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> - Refer: <oumdnZlvocZvCW3YnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:18:20 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <P8ydnfZCSKse4G3YnZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:45:50 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <QJWdnVzGDdRYxG3YnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:50:43 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <upadnfHJF_WXC3LYnZ2dnUVZ_v7inZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:35:26 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <yumdnbGnWIeDo3LYnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which version?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which one do you have in mind?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ve ask ze qvestions here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are two versions at least in the Hebrew, many,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many more if you "rely" on the excresent English or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Latin translations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you trying to say that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can read Hebrew?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can read the Bible in Hebrew, yes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you speak Aramaic as well?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't "speak" it, but can read it, after a fashion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I heard Benny Hinn does.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Benny Hinn only speaks the pure bullshit language of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heartless con-artist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is a criminally fraudulent money vampire who is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for much suffering and premature death in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his single-minded pursuit of the dollar. He makes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dracula look like Albert Schweitzer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can God speak Chinese?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which god?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you believe in any?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you familiar with the Christian God?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As familiar as I am with Sherlock Holmes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How do you know it does not exist?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What "it" are you referring to, child?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are a vicously
>>>>>>>>>>>>> retarded infantile illiterate, who is wilfully ignorant to a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> truly astounding extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you supply me with some minimal evidence to show that such
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a conclusion is unwarranted?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I read philosophy and law.
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about you?
>>>>>>>>>>> 1) You are anonymous, so that assertion is baseless. 2)
>>>>>>>>>>> Qualifications are not evidence in refutation of my assertion.
>>>>>>>>>>> 3) What have my qualifications got to do with my human ability
>>>>>>>>>>> to judge your maturity, literacy and ignorance, as displayed in
>>>>>>>>>>> your posts here?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Uou confirm my dianosis with every illogical retort. Your
>>>>>>>>>>> responses are all logical fallacies.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But, I see that you are a philosopher. No ****ing wonder you
>>>>>>>>>>> cannot employ logic or reason!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm a student of Dao and Zen.
>>>>>>>>> A Zen philoso-wanker.
>>>>>>>>> Now I understand why you are a babbling incoherent woo-woo
>>>>>>>>> mental-cripple.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What makes you think logic is reasonable?
>>>>>>>>> It works.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Are you always logical and reasonable?
>>>>>>> Not always.
>>>>>>> Especially when I am being annoyed by pointlessly disconnected
>>>>>>> chakra-babble from an infant-school philosopher.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You never did answer my question as to whether or not you were lying
>>>>>>> when you implied that you are an atheist. But then again, I do not
>>>>>>> expect to get any form of reality or honesty from you. I see that
>>>>>>> you have not disappointed me in that respect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that I have got better things to do than engage in a battle
>>>>>>> of wits with an unarmed opponent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unlike some clueless people,
>>>>>> I don't feel the need to answer
>>>>>> all questions once and for all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Things change.
>>>>>> People change.
>>>>>> Knowledge increases.
>>>>>> Science gets better.
>>>>>> Even theology advances.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You would feel a lot better
>>>>>> once you learn to live with uncertainty.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you know when you are going to die?
>>>>> I find this is very scary, when put in to context with your obsessive
>>>>> stalking of me.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> If anything happens to me or my family because you have posted here
>>>> certain name and address, you will be criminally responsible for it.
>>>>
>>>> Happy now?
>>>>
>>>> Better start praying
>>>> for the safety of me and my family now.
>>> Your paranoid delusions are getting the upper hand. You should see
>>> someone about that...
>>>
>>>
>> To give cops some head start,
>> I might blog in my website
>> what you did for me and my family.
>
> I did nothing for you nor your family.
>
> Have you spoken to a shrink yet about your pathological lying?
>

Were you trying to harm someone
when you posted his full contact information
without permission?

--
~Stumper
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 19:55:30 -0400, stumper wrote:

> Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:42:26 -0400, stumper wrote:
>>
>>> Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 12:17:35 -0400, stumper wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:25:03 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> - Refer: <pcednR2sCP77WG3YnZ2dnUVZ_revnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 17:58:19 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> - Refer: <oumdnZlvocZvCW3YnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:18:20 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <P8ydnfZCSKse4G3YnZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:45:50 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <QJWdnVzGDdRYxG3YnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:50:43 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <upadnfHJF_WXC3LYnZ2dnUVZ_v7inZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:35:26 -0500, stumper
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <yumdnbGnWIeDo3LYnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which version?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which one do you have in mind?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ve ask ze qvestions here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are two versions at least in the Hebrew, many,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many more if you "rely" on the excresent English or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Latin translations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you trying to say that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can read Hebrew?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can read the Bible in Hebrew, yes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you speak Aramaic as well?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't "speak" it, but can read it, after a fashion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I heard Benny Hinn does.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Benny Hinn only speaks the pure bullshit language of a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heartless con-artist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is a criminally fraudulent money vampire who is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for much suffering and premature death in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> his single-minded pursuit of the dollar. He makes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dracula look like Albert Schweitzer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can God speak Chinese?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which god?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you believe in any?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you familiar with the Christian God?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As familiar as I am with Sherlock Holmes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How do you know it does not exist?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What "it" are you referring to, child?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are a vicously
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> retarded infantile illiterate, who is wilfully ignorant to a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> truly astounding extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you supply me with some minimal evidence to show that such
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a conclusion is unwarranted?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I read philosophy and law.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about you?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) You are anonymous, so that assertion is baseless. 2)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Qualifications are not evidence in refutation of my assertion.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) What have my qualifications got to do with my human ability
>>>>>>>>>>>> to judge your maturity, literacy and ignorance, as displayed in
>>>>>>>>>>>> your posts here?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Uou confirm my dianosis with every illogical retort. Your
>>>>>>>>>>>> responses are all logical fallacies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But, I see that you are a philosopher. No ****ing wonder you
>>>>>>>>>>>> cannot employ logic or reason!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm a student of Dao and Zen.
>>>>>>>>>> A Zen philoso-wanker.
>>>>>>>>>> Now I understand why you are a babbling incoherent woo-woo
>>>>>>>>>> mental-cripple.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What makes you think logic is reasonable?
>>>>>>>>>> It works.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Are you always logical and reasonable?
>>>>>>>> Not always.
>>>>>>>> Especially when I am being annoyed by pointlessly disconnected
>>>>>>>> chakra-babble from an infant-school philosopher.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You never did answer my question as to whether or not you were lying
>>>>>>>> when you implied that you are an atheist. But then again, I do not
>>>>>>>> expect to get any form of reality or honesty from you. I see that
>>>>>>>> you have not disappointed me in that respect.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that I have got better things to do than engage in a battle
>>>>>>>> of wits with an unarmed opponent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unlike some clueless people,
>>>>>>> I don't feel the need to answer
>>>>>>> all questions once and for all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Things change.
>>>>>>> People change.
>>>>>>> Knowledge increases.
>>>>>>> Science gets better.
>>>>>>> Even theology advances.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You would feel a lot better
>>>>>>> once you learn to live with uncertainty.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you know when you are going to die?
>>>>>> I find this is very scary, when put in to context with your obsessive
>>>>>> stalking of me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>> If anything happens to me or my family because you have posted here
>>>>> certain name and address, you will be criminally responsible for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Happy now?
>>>>>
>>>>> Better start praying
>>>>> for the safety of me and my family now.
>>>> Your paranoid delusions are getting the upper hand. You should see
>>>> someone about that...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> To give cops some head start,
>>> I might blog in my website
>>> what you did for me and my family.
>>
>> I did nothing for you nor your family.
>>
>> Have you spoken to a shrink yet about your pathological lying?
>>
>
> Were you trying to harm someone
> when you posted his full contact information
> without permission?

"Someone?"

You get confused easily it seems. Have you spoken to your shrink about
this?

--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace
alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing
it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken
 
On Mar 18, 10:55�am, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> On 18 Mar 2007 08:56:07 -0700, in alt.atheism
> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in
> <1174233367.533631.313...@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Mar 18, 8:29?am, scottrichter...@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote:
> >> Pastor Frank <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote:
> >> > >> We have nothing to talk about.
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 10:32:48 +0800, Pastor Frank wrote:

> Atheists<SMACK>

Bad troll!

--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace
alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing
it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."
- H. L. Mencken
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 10:44:29 +0800, in alt.atheism
"Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in
<45fcb9bf$0$16292$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>:
>"Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1hv3ycb.lnc03k1xa85e6N%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...

....

>> Actually, the law says that "unborn children" (there's one of those
>> nonsense terms) are not human beings.
>>
> "not human beings" like Jews were in Germany perhaps, or Negros were in
>the USA?

Not really.

By the way, I have no use for abortion, but the folks who call
themselves 'pro-life' have proven themselves to be some of the most
vile, corrupt people in American politics today. They are offensive
beyond words. None of their actions are motivated by Christian charity.

When the pro-life people start to work to make certain that people
aren't at all interested in getting abortions -- don't feel any need to
get one, when they vote for decent social welfare programs, when they
abandon their bloodlust toward those who have been convicted, sometimes
wrongly, then I will consider what they have to say. Right now, the
pro-life people are just too despicable to ever support.
 
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 11:17:35 -0400, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <HsKdncdpxLSbxWDYnZ2dnUVZ_u-unZ2d@ptd.net>
>Michael Gray wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 21:25:03 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>> wrote:
>> - Refer: <pcednR2sCP77WG3YnZ2dnUVZ_revnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 17:58:19 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> - Refer: <oumdnZlvocZvCW3YnZ2dnUVZ_ujinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 16:18:20 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> - Refer: <P8ydnfZCSKse4G3YnZ2dnUVZ_hzinZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 13:45:50 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> - Refer: <QJWdnVzGDdRYxG3YnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 23:50:43 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <upadnfHJF_WXC3LYnZ2dnUVZ_v7inZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:35:26 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Refer: <yumdnbGnWIeDo3LYnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which version?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which one do you have in mind?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ve ask ze qvestions here!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are two versions at least in the Hebrew, many, many more if you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "rely" on the excresent English or Latin translations.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you trying to say that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can read Hebrew?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can read the Bible in Hebrew, yes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you speak Aramaic as well?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't "speak" it, but can read it, after a fashion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I heard Benny Hinn does.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Benny Hinn only speaks the pure bullshit language of a heartless
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> con-artist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is a criminally fraudulent money vampire who is responsible for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much suffering and premature death in his single-minded pursuit of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dollar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He makes Dracula look like Albert Schweitzer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can God speak Chinese?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which god?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you believe in any?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you familiar with the Christian God?
>>>>>>>>>>>> As familiar as I am with Sherlock Holmes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How do you know it does not exist?
>>>>>>>>>> What "it" are you referring to, child?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that you are a vicously retarded
>>>>>>>>>> infantile illiterate, who is wilfully ignorant to a truly astounding
>>>>>>>>>> extent.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can you supply me with some minimal evidence to show that such a
>>>>>>>>>> conclusion is unwarranted?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I read philosophy and law.
>>>>>>>>> How about you?
>>>>>>>> 1) You are anonymous, so that assertion is baseless.
>>>>>>>> 2) Qualifications are not evidence in refutation of my assertion.
>>>>>>>> 3) What have my qualifications got to do with my human ability to
>>>>>>>> judge your maturity, literacy and ignorance, as displayed in your
>>>>>>>> posts here?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Uou confirm my dianosis with every illogical retort.
>>>>>>>> Your responses are all logical fallacies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But, I see that you are a philosopher.
>>>>>>>> No ****ing wonder you cannot employ logic or reason!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm a student of Dao and Zen.
>>>>>> A Zen philoso-wanker.
>>>>>> Now I understand why you are a babbling incoherent woo-woo
>>>>>> mental-cripple.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What makes you think logic is reasonable?
>>>>>> It works.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Are you always logical and reasonable?
>>>> Not always.
>>>> Especially when I am being annoyed by pointlessly disconnected
>>>> chakra-babble from an infant-school philosopher.
>>>>
>>>> You never did answer my question as to whether or not you were lying
>>>> when you implied that you are an atheist.
>>>> But then again, I do not expect to get any form of reality or honesty
>>>> from you.
>>>> I see that you have not disappointed me in that respect.
>>>>
>>>> I think that I have got better things to do than engage in a battle of
>>>> wits with an unarmed opponent.
>>>>
>>> Unlike some clueless people,
>>> I don't feel the need to answer
>>> all questions once and for all.
>>>
>>> Things change.
>>> People change.
>>> Knowledge increases.
>>> Science gets better.
>>> Even theology advances.
>>>
>>> You would feel a lot better
>>> once you learn to live with uncertainty.
>>>
>>> Do you know when you are going to die?
>>
>> I find this is very scary, when put in to context with your obsessive
>> stalking of me.
>>
>> --
>
>
>If anything happens to me or my family
>because you have posted here certain name and address,
>you will be criminally responsible for it.

This outright lie is legally actionable, and has been recorded.

You must supply me with the contact details of your legal
representative immediately.

>Happy now?
>
>Better start praying
>for the safety of me and my family now.

--
 
On Feb 13, 12:13 am, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

> Because we aren't smug gits like you. We haven't already judged
> ourselves and decided that we passed and that everyone who disagrees
> with us will go to hell. Of course, I think you made it all up with your
> personal interpretation of the Bible, so I don't really care what you
> do. However much I might be satisfied with the result, I know that no
> one is going to send you to hell for being self-righteous.

No one will go to Hell for being self-righteous, but atheists who are
completely certain in their BELIEF of the lack of any Gods are just as
self-righteous and smug as any Fundamentalist Christian out there --
and for the record, I don't think either side is right. I am
absolutely opposed to the Fundamentalist view of Heaven and Hell and
religion in general, but I am equally opposed to Atheists who are so
certain in THEIR beliefs that they can't stand the thought that there
might be something out there more impressive then humans. Granted,
the Atheist isn't going to try and condemn me to eternal suffering
because I disagree with them, but some of them still tend to be self-
righteous jerks, or "smug gits," if you prefer.

Sorry for the harsh tone, but come on, someone else's belief in Hell
isn't hurting you, so take the high ground and be polite about
things. You can't possibly know the One Certain Truth any more then
your average Christian does, and except for a small minority of evil,
angry religious people who try to justify their evil actions by
twisting religion to their purposes, the vast majority of people who
hold some sort of religious belief are not hurting ANYONE. No matter
how much they believe in Hell, they aren't going to make it true.

FYI, I like to believe that there is some sort of God or group of Gods
out there, but I don't for a moment pretend to know for sure, and
since no one could possibly know the Truth for sure, I'm willing to
live and let live, unless someone is acting like an ass because of
their belief or lack thereof, at which point I'll....um....give them a
(hopefully!) polite lecture, apparently ;).

-Andi :)
 
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1174186556.970790.212960@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 17, 7:13�am, scottrichter...@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote:
> rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > We've heard your lame argument that "Stalin was an atheist and he
> > > > > killed
> > > > > millions of people" countless times before. It doesn't stand up.
> > > > > Stalin's atheism had nothing to do with his motives, he didn't
> > > > > kill in
> > > > > the name of atheism--unlike the nineteen hijackers.
>
> > > > Well, I think he did. What about abortion doctors? They have killed
> > > > about 60,000,000 Americans since 1973. Are you saying that they do
> > > > not do what they do in the name of atheism?
>
> > >No, of course they don't.
>
> > > Do you have any conception (nopun intended) that other people can have
> > > different opinions about issues like abortion without being atheists
> > > or
> > > doing things "in the name of atheism" (whatever that means)? Abortion
> > > is
> > > a safe and legal medical procedure, and is done at the request of the
> > > woman seeking medical attention. Your moral posturing contributes
> > > nothing to the discussion.
>
> > > Your figure of 60,000,000 abortions in the US since 1973 is too high
> > > by
> > > at least a factor of two; if you're going to quote statistics, please
> > > be
> > > a little more accurate.
>
> > > And finally, we're not talking about "Americans" any more than you
> > > could
> > > describe unborn fetuses as "truck drivers" or "golfers" or "Dixie
> > > Chicks
> > > fans". They're FETUSES, they aren't people. I'm not sure where you
> > > come
> > > up with such kooky descriptions (actually, I am pretty sure where
> > > you
> > > come up with such kooky descriptions.)
>
> > > If this is the level of your debating skills, then we have little
> > > further to talk about.
>
> > We have nothing to talk about. I use words with their actual
> > meanings, not with meanings given to them by atheists.
>
> The word "fetus" is a precise, specific term--unlike the many nonsense
> religious terms created solely to inflame emotions over the abortion
> issue.
>
> > The fact that atheists can say that unborn children are not human beings
> > means nothing to me.
>
> Actually, the law says that "unborn children" (there's one of those
> nonsense terms) are not human beings.
>
> > I can tell that they are human beings.
>
> Actually, I'd bet you can't.- Hide quoted text -
>
I just did. Hitler and the Nazis said that Jews were not human
beings. You are no different in your statement about unborn children.
Robert B. Winn
------------------
Don't forget that the USA Government declared native Americans to be
"varmint" to be eradicated, even paying bounty for the scalps of native men
women and children. Later, the US Supreme Court ruled, that Negroes weren't
persons and had no human rights, but were chattel and could be disposed of
as their owners saw fit.
Disregarding the opinion of the to be aborted human is the last vestige
of this kind of mentality.




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
 
On Mar 20, 6:31 am, andi1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 13, 12:13 am, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
> > Because we aren't smug gits like you. We haven't already judged
> > ourselves and decided that we passed and that everyone who disagrees
> > with us will go to hell. Of course, I think you made it all up with your
> > personal interpretation of the Bible, so I don't really care what you
> > do. However much I might be satisfied with the result, I know that no
> > one is going to send you to hell for being self-righteous.
>
> No one will go to Hell for being self-righteous,

You cant know that.
No one can.

> but atheists who are
> completely certain in their BELIEF of the lack of any Gods are just as
> self-righteous and smug as any Fundamentalist Christian out there --
> and for the record, I don't think either side is right.

I dont believe in the certainty of atheists.
I think it's largely religious propaganda.

> I am
> absolutely opposed to the Fundamentalist view of Heaven and Hell and
> religion in general, but I am equally opposed to Atheists who are so
> certain in THEIR beliefs that they can't stand the thought that there
> might be something out there more impressive then humans.

What percentage of atheists do you imagine feel this certainty?
Has a priest given you any official numbers on this?
Also I believe whales are very impressive and so is the Sun - and yet
I am still a godless infidel and unbeliever.

> Granted,
> the Atheist isn't going to try and condemn me to eternal suffering
> because I disagree with them, but some of them still tend to be self-
> righteous jerks, or "smug gits," if you prefer.
>
Sure.
Some tall people are self righteous jerks - and dont get me started on
men with moustaches!

> Sorry for the harsh tone, but come on, someone else's belief in Hell
> isn't hurting you, so take the high ground and be polite about
> things.
Have you ever thought about the psychological trauma inflicted on
children that are taught to believe in Hell?
These beliefs are not as harmless as you would at first think.
How about the belief in marterdom?
Thats another harmless religious belief.

> You can't possibly know the One Certain Truth any more then
> your average Christian does, and except for a small minority of evil,
> angry religious people who try to justify their evil actions by
> twisting religion to their purposes, the vast majority of people who
> hold some sort of religious belief are not hurting ANYONE. No matter
> how much they believe in Hell, they aren't going to make it true.
>
An idea does not have to be true to be harmful.
How about the idea that some races of human are "inferiour"?
How about the belief in the manifest destinyt of white christian
people to conquere the world?

> FYI, I like to believe that there is some sort of God or group of Gods
> out there, but I don't for a moment pretend to know for sure, and
> since no one could possibly know the Truth for sure, I'm willing to
> live and let live, unless someone is acting like an ass because of
> their belief or lack thereof, at which point I'll....um....give them a
> (hopefully!) polite lecture, apparently ;).
>
> -Andi :)

I dont believe in any gods - and I believe that worshiping gods is
always a bad idea - it is corrosive of human dignity, wisdom and
ethics.


Cheers, Mark.
 
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:26:05 -0400, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
wrote:

>Paul Ransom Erickson wrote:
>> stumper <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It's not easy to prove that something does not exist.
>>> It would be a lot easier to show that
>>> you can be kinder and gentler without relying on it.
>>
>> Who is trying to prove that something doesn't exist? Not me.
>>
>> I don't even think it can be done for "god", unless the definition of
>> some partucular god is self-contradictory.
>>
>> I think that you have a lot of assumptions hidden behind your zennish
>> prose. Go honk at yourself.
>>
>>
>
>Wonderful.
>
>Care to help me pin down those assumptions?

Ok, and do the same for me.

Here is one that I think I see:

It looks like you think the atheists you are talking to are all
interested in disproving the existence of a character that other
people believe in. You might not have picked up on it yet, but in
alt.atheism "atheism" usually means "someone who does not have a
belief in what are called gods".

Yes, it is a vexed description because the word "god" is vexed. But
at least it does not mean that to be an atheist is to be focused on
the nonexistence of some such entity -- or on the attempt to prove
that it does not exist.

It is true that there are some here who do focus on just that, but
that depends on the individual. The self-appelation "atheist" does
not tell you enough about a person to lecture them about, eg,
"atheism" being a Christian theology, etc.
 

Similar threads

R
NO EVIDENCE OF ANY GODS
Replies
5
Views
18
Richo
R
B
A CHALLENGE FOR RELIGIONISTS
Replies
6
Views
18
Steve Hayes
S
B
FALSE GODS
2 3
Replies
55
Views
56
bob young
B
B
EVIDENCE OF NO REAL GOD
Replies
4
Views
21
Christopher A.Lee
C
B
GOD MYTHS AND FABLES
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
71
bob young
B
Back
Top