NO EVIDENCE OF GODS

[Free Lunch]

On 19 Feb 2007 22:06:00 -0800, in alt.atheism
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in
<1171951560.711343.126340@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>:
>On Feb 19, 4:33?pm, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> On 19 Feb 2007 02:50:40 -0800, in alt.atheism
>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in
>> <1171882240.560918.302...@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>:

....

>> So all Christian and LDS priests are not priests.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>All priests of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are
>priests. Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ordained by John the
>Baptist. Later they were given authority to ordain others by Peter,
>James, and John.

I had never heard that story before.

 

[jl]

On Feb 20, 12:41 am, "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> Well, here is a scripture from Isaiah. Why don't you try to tell us
> what it says?
> Isaiah 2:19 And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into
> the caves of the earth, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his
> majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
> Robert B. Winn

It may well be talking about the fleeing into caves of those heretic
sects the Florida fundy was talking about yesterday when he tongue-
lashed Mitt Romney. "You don't know OUR Lord," the fundy scolded.

Isn't it amusing? If you Christians with the dramatic variances in
interpretations of the bible weren't railing at us atheists, you'd be
fighting among yourselves.

Let's go to Isaiah, ch. 6, one of my favorites. We had a local lady
here write a book claiming there were UFO's, flying saucers, in the
bible, and this chapter provided ample evidence thereof.

Of course, I don't see it, but I do detect a glaring contradiction
here. Moses longed aloud to see God. So God showed Moses his
backside, saying that if Mo had seen his face he would surely die.
But here Isaiah is privileged to see the throned God with his train
(whatever that is) and angels high and lifted up in the temple.

1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the LORD sitting upon a
throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.


2 Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he
covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain
he did fly.


3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD
of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.

Then an angel, a seraphim, flits down, all six wings a-whirring, and
anoints Isaiah by burning his mouth with a red-hot coal from God's
altar. The seraphim holds the fiery hot coal in tongs so as not to
burn himself.

Well, I guess that's about all for now in our studies of Isaiah except
one more observation that it looks as though a man will have seven
wives when this new kingdom is established. Not as enticing as 72
maidens with regenerating maidenheads but still quite nice.

I wonder what Isaiah was smoking when he wrote chapter 6. Maybe he
ate a mushroom.

 

[Andrew]

"Free Lunch" wrote in message news:bedkt25jc2k340fjstt9r0ftctvkun83ns@4ax.com...

> You are the one who calls atheism a belief system. I call you on your
> lie. Atheism is not a form of belief. Lack of belief is not a system.

A federal court has ruled that atheism IS a religion. Also, the Supreme Court has
said that a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme be-
ing. In the 1961case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the Court described secular humanism
as "a religion." http://www.afa.net/clp/ReleaseDetail.asp?id=102

"Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no God."
http://patriot.net/~bmcgin/atheismisareligion.txt

Religion may be defined as a personal set of attitudes, beliefs, and practices relating
to one's understanding of a deity. Atheists do not believe in Deity (God). They can
not -prove- this. It is their BELIEF. It is in fact therefore their religion as affirmed
by the courts.


Andrew

 

[Darrell Stec]

After serious contemplation, on or about Tuesday 20 February 2007 7:33
am rbwinn perhaps from rbwinn3@juno.com wrote:

> On Feb 20, 12:39?am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...@webpagesorcery.com>
> wrote:
>> After serious contemplation, on or about Tuesday 20 February 2007
>> 12:44 am rbwinn perhaps from rbwi...@juno.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Feb 19, 10:14?am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...@webpagesorcery.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> After serious contemplation, on or about Monday 19 February 2007
>> >> 6:02 am rbwinn perhaps from rbwi...@juno.com wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Feb 18, 10:21?pm, bob young <alaspect...@netvigator.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> Michael Gray wrote:
>> >> >> > On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 14:33:04 -0500, Darrell Stec
>> >> >> > <darrell_s...@webpagesorcery.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > ?? - Refer: <53rnsvF1u88b...@mid.individual.net>
>> >> >> > >After serious contemplation, on or about Sunday 18 February
>> >> >> > >2007 10:53 am rbwinn perhaps from rbwi...@juno.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >> > >> So when Jesus Christ said that he was not the offspring of
>> >> >> > >> monkeys, you claim that he was telling a "yarn"?
>> >> >> > >> Robert B. Winn
>>
>> >> >> > >I'm unfamiliar with that scripture. ??Perhaps you might
>> >> >> > >tells us what the phantom bible you got that from says?
>>
>> >> >> > The Ladybird Illustrated Book of Bible stories for Children.
>>
>> >> >> Or the other one
>>
>> >> >> "How to brainwash your children into following The Father"
>>
>> >> >> We jest, but the truth is these things happen
>> >> >> and it should be declared a criminal offence
>>
>> >> > So if the government could be persuaded into burning all Bibles,
>> >> > there could be world peace?
>> >> > Robert B. Winn
>>
>> >> That would be an exercise in futility. ??First (and there is
>> >> historical precedence for it) not all bibles would be burned.
>> >> ??Some would be squirreled away (that's why we know about early
>> >> Christians like the Marcionites, Ebonites, Arianims, and others
>> >> like the Gnostics.
>>
>> >> Secondly some nuts would come along and invent some new stories
>> >> for a bible (for instance the one that was later translated as the
>> >> KJV). ??And in case you haven't noticed, it has been Christianity
>> >> that burned books throughout history. ??Thinking people are not
>> >> afraid of ideas. ??If those ideas are wrong then that will be
>> >> exposed. ??Christians burn the books in order to keep the ideas
>> >> from being expressed and examined.
>>
>> >> --
>> >> Later,
>> >> Darrell Stec ?? ?? ??dars...@neo.rr.com
>> > So the best you can do is pretend that you cannot understand what
>> > the Bible says.
>> > Robert B. Winn
>>
>> Not only can I understand it, I can and have read the Hebrew
>> versions, the Greek versions and even Jerome's Latin Vulgate. ??I had
>> a formal education in the classic languages and theology. ??How about
>> you?
>>
> Jesus Christ never went to college. I went one year. The Apostle
> Peter never went to college. Here is what he said about it.2 Peter
> 1:19-21 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do
> well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place,
> until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
> Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any
> private interpretation.
> For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men
> of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

In other words they made stuff up for a people who were even more
ignorant then them. The spirit that moved them was more likely
alcohol. And considering they were Christians (meaning oiled ones
because they drenched themselves in sacred oil) they were almost
certainly high on psychotropic drugs. Try reading Leviticus for the
recipe for making anointing oil. For one it contained seed from the
cannabis plant and several other psychotropic materials such as myrrh
and spikard.


> Robert B. Winn

Peter didn't write that. It was written well after the designated
character of the gospel fictions was supposed to have lived. I doubt
you could find a serious biblical scholar today that believes Peter
wrote that Epistle. Peter as portrayed in the gospels is an ignorant
fisherman. He could not have written the polished Greek of that
letter. Nor was the theology expressed in that letter mature enough
during his designated lifetime.

--
Later,
Darrell Stec darstec@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages

 

[Darrell Stec]

After serious contemplation, on or about Tuesday 20 February 2007 7:37
am rbwinn perhaps from rbwinn3@juno.com wrote:

> On Feb 20, 12:44?am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...@webpagesorcery.com>
> wrote:
>> After serious contemplation, on or about Tuesday 20 February 2007
>> 12:45 am rbwinn perhaps from rbwi...@juno.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Feb 19, 10:16?am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...@webpagesorcery.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> After serious contemplation, on or about Monday 19 February 2007
>> >> 6:01 am rbwinn perhaps from rbwi...@juno.com wrote:
>>
>> >> > On Feb 18, 10:17?pm, bob young <alaspect...@netvigator.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> Darrell Stec wrote:
>> >> >> > After serious contemplation, on or about Sunday 18 February
>> >> >> > 2007 11:20 am rbwinn perhaps from rbwi...@juno.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >> > > Well, yes it does. ??Jesus Christ said that he was the son
>> >> >> > > of God.
>>
>> >> >> > Where?
>>
>> >> >> They make it up as they go along, they have nothing else
>>
>> >> > So why do they have nothing else? ??Don't they have the trees
>> >> > and sky and the mountains, etc.? ??Or did all of these things
>> >> > belong to environmentalists back then like they do today?
>> >> > Robert B. Winn
>>
>> >> Yours is a totally irrational reply. ??It has nothing to do with
>> >> the topic. ??Now try answering the question. ??Where does Joshua
>> >> the oiled one say he is the son of god?
>>
>> >> --
>> >> Later,
>> >> Darrell Stec ?? ?? ??dars...@neo
>> > If you want to advertise that you have never read the Bible,
>> > Darrell, go right ahead.
>> > Robert B. Winn
>>
>> Quite the opposite Bobbie. ??Not only have I read the Bible many,
>> many times and own quite a few English versions, I've read the
>> originals. It is obvious that you have not. ??You avoided my few
>> questions like the plague. ??But I understand =-- you can only parrot
>> a few memorized passages from the worst English translation every
>> created.
>>
> Well, Darrell, you are certainly welcome to your own opinion. What do
> you think of this verse from Isaiah?
> Isaiah 3:4 And I will give children to be their princes, and babes
> shall rule over them.
> Robert B. Winn

What is so enlightening about that? Most of their neighbors for a
thousand years had monarchies or for Israel/Judea clan chiefs who often
assumed leadership with the true proxy leaders calling the shots. They
were primitive people back then and might meant right. Their gods
followed the same pattern as humans of the time -- my god is bigger and
badder than your god.

--
Later,
Darrell Stec darstec@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages

 

[Tim]

On Feb 11, 4:20 pm, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> It is interesting to observe that there are thousands of different God
> beliefs but NO OBJECTIVE VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE ANY of these Gods actually
> exist.

fools. define God first. why does God have to be omnipotent? where do
you get that idea? why does God have to be loving and kind? where do
you get that idea? If I said I am God and by what evidence do you have
to prove that I don't exist? fools. You have on categories for God and
you list all these non-sense gods.

If you get the idea of omnipotent and loving from the Bible, why would
you reject the fact that God is invisible, undetectable, unfathomable
from the Bible? Jesus showed up and said I am God, what other evidence
do you need? You don't believe him because you have no categories to
fit him in. Once again I ask you, If the writer of this post claims
to be God, would you believe him? You won't. You first of all reject
the Biblical definition of God, and pick something from the Bible to
mock at, and then prove that there is no god. What a fool. Because
your little brain cannot fit God in does not prove that there is no
God.

Those who have ear let him hear.

 

[Darrell Stec]

After serious contemplation, on or about Tuesday 20 February 2007 7:40
am rbwinn perhaps from rbwinn3@juno.com wrote:

> On Feb 20, 4:41?am, bob young <alaspect...@netvigator.com> wrote:
>> Darrell Stec wrote:
>> > After serious contemplation, on or about Sunday 18 February 2007
>> > 10:59 am rbwinn perhaps from rbwi...@juno.com wrote:
>>
>> > > I feel better already. ??Here is a verse from Isaiah to brighten
>> > > your day.
>>
>> > Which Isaiah? ??You realize that there were at least four people or
>> > schools writing under the name of Isaiah and throughout several
>> > centuries don't you? ??Isaiah is a composition by many not the work
>> > of one man.
>>
>> "... the Bible was a collection of books written at different times
>> by different men, a strange mixture of diverse human documents, and a
>> tissue of irreconcilable notions. Inspired? The Bible is not even
>> intelligent. It is not even good craftsmanship, but is full of
>> absurdities and contradictions."
>> [E. Haldeman-Julius, "The Meaning Of Atheism"]
>>
>
> Sorry, Darrell, no one can fake writing like Isaiah. He was the only
> one who wrote the way he wrote.
> Robert B. Winn

How can you make statements like that? You can't read the Hebrew it was
written in. Even several of my bibles explicity state that Isaiah was
written by a minimum of three different schools or persons. The
grammar and syntax varies in style (and content) among those writers.
You can't read the originals, nor understand the fine nuances of the
Hebrew language. Can you name any real biblical scholar of today who
shares your viewpoint?

Your own LDS scholars do not agree with you. Note: "John Tvedtnes,
senior project manager for FARMS, has written technical studies on
Hebraisms and Isaiah variants in the Book of Mormon." which can be
found at http://www.apologeticsindex.org/cpoint10-2.html.

--
Later,
Darrell Stec darstec@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages

 

[jl]

On Feb 20, 10:33 am, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Free Lunch" wrote in messagenews:bedkt25jc2k340fjstt9r0ftctvkun83ns@4ax.com...
> > You are the one who calls atheism a belief system. I call you on your
> > lie. Atheism is not a form of belief. Lack of belief is not a system.
>
> A federal court has ruled that atheism IS a religion. Also, the Supreme Court has
> said that a religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme be-
> ing. In the 1961case of Torcaso v. Watkins, the Court described secular humanism
> as "a religion." http://www.afa.net/clp/ReleaseDetail.asp?id=102
>
> "Atheism is the religion whose belief about God is that there is no God."
> http://patriot.net/~bmcgin/atheismisareligion.txt
>
> Religion may be defined as a personal set of attitudes, beliefs, and practices relating
> to one's understanding of a deity. Atheists do not believe in Deity (God). They can
> not -prove- this. It is their BELIEF. It is in fact therefore their religion as affirmed
> by the courts.
>
> Andrew

The dictum, a mere footnote by Justice Hugo Black, in Torcaso is of no
help to you. It is not a ruling and does not constitute precedent.
Nor is the Wisconsin prison case of any merit on the legal definition
of religion, although you're welcome to embrace the smug idea all you
want. Sorry, no cigar for you, fundy. Nice try by that fundy website
too.

You'll have to pack SCOTUS with more religious rightie justices to get
it to rule that atheism is a religion, and then they would be
contradicting original intent and the Founders' definition of
religion. Atheism is the unreligion.

 

[jl]

On Feb 19, 10:10 pm, "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:

>
> Well, I am probably less impressed by lawyers than Brigham Young was.

Judging by his many lawsuits and his comments about the lawyers
afterwards, he hated them. You can read the particulars in an article
by Orma Linford, "The Mormons, the Law, and the Territory of Utah,"
and in many of Young's writings.

If it is any consolation to you I'm sure the Mormons had reason to
distrust law and lawyers from their many bad experiences in Missouri
and Illinois.

> Since you know so much about law, perhaps you could tell us your
> interpretation of the sixth amendment to the Constitution of the
> United States.

A conscientious writer could spend a year writing about the 6th
Amendment, it is so rich with caselaw and judicial gloss. Moreover,
because of the 19th century's 14th Amendment, the 6th Amendment is now
applied to the states and their subdivisions, including Utah and SLC.

Legal issues:
pretrial rights
venue
in gremio legis
speedy trial
open proceedings, no closed courtrooms, no secret trials
impartial jury of peers
jurisdiction
no ex post facto
notice of charges in full particulars of facts and law so that accused
may prepare his defense
opportunity to be heard
confrontation with witnesses, no trial in absentia
subpoena power to compel attendance of witness and to bring documents
and things
(subpoena ad testificandum, subpoena duces tecum)
right to attorney


What part of it piques your curiosity? Or is it the whole damn thing?

AMENDMENT VI.
Right to speedy trial, witnesses, etc.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a
speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and
district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district
shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of
the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the
witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining
witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his
defence.

Now, Robbie, don't be sending me off another one of those wild goose
chases.
We're talking about whether there is a god, and btw the brains who
drafted the 6th did not believe in a god, at least not in an
intervenor who paid any attention to the affairs of humanity.

 

[Dan@V.A.]

"jl" <jls1016@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1171920944.399528.97790@l53g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 19, 2:15 pm, "D...@V.A." <d...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > "John Popelish" <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote in message
> >
> > news:Za6dnScGA9ood0TYnZ2dnUVZ_tqnnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > D...@V.A. wrote:
> > > > "John Popelish" <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote in message
> > > >news:2KednRE7E4QGR0TYnZ2dnUVZ_qCmnZ2d@comcast.com...
> > > >> D...@V.A. wrote:
> > > >>> It seems to me that atheist who invade Religious Newsgroups
> > > >>> with their challenges, insults and attacks on Christians and the
> > > >>> Christian Religion are in reality expressing their great hope.
> > > >>> IE _the hope that there is no God.
> > > >> Dan, please apply that train of thought to religious
> > > >> missionaries that go out into areas where their beliefs are
> > > >> strange and mistrusted, essentially an attack of the
> > > >> indigenous belief structure of the people that minister to.
> > > >> So Christian missionaries are out there only because they
> > > >> hope there is a god. It is an expression of their doubt?
> >
> > > > I would say that doubt is something we all live with at times.
> > > >>> Could it be that they are searching for some reassurance of
> > > >>> their own positions in respect to God and religion.
> > > >> Likewise Christian missionaries?
> >
> > > Yet, you see an atheists "missionary" attempts as an
> > > expression of doubt. Seems like a double standard.
> >
> > > > My wife and I recently entertained two Mormon missionaries.
> > > > I did not see any doubt in them.
> >
> > > And, yet, when you see an atheist trying to be persuasive
> > > about their stance on religion, you don't see a search for
> > > truth, but an expression of doubt.
> >
> > > > They were trying to win converts to one Joseph Smith, their
> > > > prophet, seer and revelator - the American Mohammed.
> > > > We are also frequently called upon by Jehovas Witnesses,
> > > > but no one else. These are fringe groups, not mainstream
> > > > Christanity. So I doubt American Atheist are bothered
> > > > by triditiona; Christian missionaries.
> >
> > > Atheists are bothered by the intrusion of religious belief
> > > almost every day. For example, my money has an expression
> > > of religious faith printed on it by my government, as if it
> > > is speaking for me. If I use that money without complaint
> > > or objection is I am essentially being dishonest. I don't
> > > like being coerced into being dishonest.
> >
> > I can see this as a conflict of interest. It never bothered me
> > even when I considered myself agnostic. If you do, I sorry.
> > I agree it should not be printed on US monies.
> >
> > > >> But atheists get tired of being "lead to the water" over and
> > > >> over. It is not the water that is the problem, but the
> > > >> incessant "leading".
> >
> > > > You don't have to go. You don't have to follow.
> >
> > > I agree. I can politely disagree and decline, just as you
> > > can do when an atheist tries to lead you out of your
> > > delusions. And I generally do just that, until they get pushy.
> >
> > Delusions?
> > It's amazing that atheist can absolutely without any reservation
> > at all what-so-ever, somehow claim to _know_ there is no god
> > and that its all delusions. This is a claim. A claim that has yet
> > to be proven.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > >> Perhaps. But have you seriously considered any other
> > > >> possibilities? Perhaps they feel a great sadness that so
> > > >> many of their fellow men are living a dangerous delusion.
> > > >> Isn't this what really motivates Christian missionaries?
> > > >> Atheists who "invade" Christian or other religious forums
> > > >> may have just as good and positive motivations as any
> > > >> Christian missionary. They are bringing what to their minds
> > > >> is truth. I would think you could appreciate their
> > > >> motivation.
> >
> > > > To a large extent, I'm speaking from personal experience from
> > > > the time I was an agnostic with serious doubts. I don't think I
> > > > was ever an atheist. The happiness I saw in religious people
> > > > galled me. I resented their satisifaction and wanted to deprive
> > > > them when I could.
> >
> > > You describe resentment that is foreign to me. I see lots
> > > of expressions of contentment and satisfaction with
> > > religious experience and also high divorce rates, child
> > > abuse, smugness, superiority complexes and all sorts of
> > > other none enviable aspects of religious belief. I cannot
> > > muster envy of smug claims of satisfaction that do not ring
> > > true.
> >
> > Divorce rate, child abuse etc are not the properity of the
> > religious.
> >
> > Dan
>
> Certainly they are the province of the religious. Find a red state
> and therein you will see more divorces, more child molesting, more
> lawlessness than in blue states.
>
I can believe this. The so-called blue states have an high
minority population where unwed mothers, never marry,
but have the highest rate illicit sex and illegitimate offspring.
Thanks to the social welfare system.
Also the Blue states with the high minority percentage have
the lowest education level, with the highest percentage of
high school dropouts.
Uneducated minority males constituting the highest prison
populations. So, if never married, never divorced.
Uneducated no job skills, Children without a father, born
addicted to crack cocaine and is the worse form of child
abuse. The so-called blue states exceed in these categories.
>
> Go to the seats of mormondom if you wish to see plenty of hanky-
> panky. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals just recently restrained
> the Mormons from taking over Salt Lake City and crushing free speech.
> Mormons just love theocracy and Brigham Young, the namesake of their
> university who had 55 wives, some of whom divorced him and some of
> whom disappeared into thin air. Young's angry ravings against law and
> lawyers are a great source of entertainment among the bar of Utah,
> well, at least among the non-Mormon bar.
>
Mormonism and Jehovah witnesses are extremes, far out in their beliefs
and practices. Several Mormon groups in Utah, Arizona Montana and
other states still practice polygamy. This is abuse of women and their
offspring. A practice condemned by all Christians.

Dan Wood, DDS

 

[Sippuuden]

Tim wrote:
> On Feb 11, 4:20 pm, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> It is interesting to observe that there are thousands of different God
>> beliefs but NO OBJECTIVE VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE ANY of these Gods actually
>> exist.
>
> fools. define God first. why does God have to be omnipotent? where do
> you get that idea? why does God have to be loving and kind? where do
> you get that idea? If I said I am God and by what evidence do you have
> to prove that I don't exist? fools. You have on categories for God and
> you list all these non-sense gods.
>
> If you get the idea of omnipotent and loving from the Bible, why would
> you reject the fact that God is invisible, undetectable, unfathomable
> from the Bible?

Because that is simply the fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis. It isn't allowed.

Logical fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis:

"An ad hoc hypothesis is one created to explain away facts that seem to
refute one

 

[Robibnikoff]

"Dan@V.A." <danW@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:8vkCh.12996$O8.6455@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>
>
>
> It seems to me that atheist who invade Religious Newsgroups
> with their challenges, insults and attacks on Christians and the
> Christian Religion are in reality expressing their great hope.
> IE _the hope that there is no God.

That's nice.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557

 

[Al Klein]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 12:51:17 -0500, "Dan@V.A." <danW@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

>Mormonism and Jehovah witnesses are extremes, far out in their beliefs
>and practices. Several Mormon groups in Utah, Arizona Montana and
>other states still practice polygamy. This is abuse of women and their
>offspring. A practice condemned by all Christians.

Not by two Christian sects - Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses.

 

[thomas p.]

On 20 Feb., 17:18, "Tim" <timop...@gmail.com> wrote:

That he was an arrogant moron.

 

[Al Klein]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 15:33:47 GMT, "Andrew" <andrew.321remov@usa.net>
wrote:

>"Free Lunch" wrote in message news:bedkt25jc2k340fjstt9r0ftctvkun83ns@4ax.com...
>
>> You are the one who calls atheism a belief system. I call you on your
>> lie. Atheism is not a form of belief. Lack of belief is not a system.
>
>A federal court

There's a big difference between the legal definition of a word and
the actual definition of that word. Many legal fictions make a
complete mockery of language. (A legally insane person can be quite
sane and a legally sane person can be completely psychotic.)

 

[Michael Gray]

On 20 Feb 2007 05:26:01 -0600, bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com>
wrote:
- Refer: <45DADA68.7EE38985@netvigator.com>
>
>
>rbwinn wrote:
>
>> On Feb 19, 2:49??

 

[Michael Gray]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:39:16 GMT, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us>
wrote:
- Refer: <2fult2hjddagclm28rieodft7c6do97b44@4ax.com>
>On 19 Feb 2007 22:06:00 -0800, in alt.atheism
>"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in
><1171951560.711343.126340@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>:
>>On Feb 19, 4:33?pm, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>> On 19 Feb 2007 02:50:40 -0800, in alt.atheism
>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in
>>> <1171882240.560918.302...@v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>:
>
>...
>
>>> So all Christian and LDS priests are not priests.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>All priests of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints are
>>priests. Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ordained by John the
>>Baptist. Later they were given authority to ordain others by Peter,
>>James, and John.
>
>I had never heard that story before.

It was doing the rounds of the Mental Asylum that Bob Winn is
currently incarcerated.

--

 

[Michael Gray]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:28:53 -0500, Darrell Stec
<darrell_stec@webpagesorcery.com> wrote:
- Refer: <540lrlF1uf6pqU1@mid.individual.net>
>After serious contemplation, on or about Tuesday 20 February 2007 7:40
>am rbwinn perhaps from rbwinn3@juno.com wrote:
>
>> On Feb 20, 4:41?am, bob young <alaspect...@netvigator.com> wrote:
>>> Darrell Stec wrote:
>>> > After serious contemplation, on or about Sunday 18 February 2007
>>> > 10:59 am rbwinn perhaps from rbwi...@juno.com wrote:
>>>
>>> > > I feel better already. ??Here is a verse from Isaiah to brighten
>>> > > your day.
>>>
>>> > Which Isaiah? ??You realize that there were at least four people or
>>> > schools writing under the name of Isaiah and throughout several
>>> > centuries don't you? ??Isaiah is a composition by many not the work
>>> > of one man.
>>>
>>> "... the Bible was a collection of books written at different times
>>> by different men, a strange mixture of diverse human documents, and a
>>> tissue of irreconcilable notions. Inspired? The Bible is not even
>>> intelligent. It is not even good craftsmanship, but is full of
>>> absurdities and contradictions."
>>> [E. Haldeman-Julius, "The Meaning Of Atheism"]
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, Darrell, no one can fake writing like Isaiah. He was the only
>> one who wrote the way he wrote.
>> Robert B. Winn
>
>How can you make statements like that?

Quite simply, really.
He just unashamedly lies through his teeth about it.

It is the Christian way.

>You can't read the Hebrew it was
>written in. Even several of my bibles explicity state that Isaiah was
>written by a minimum of three different schools or persons. The
>grammar and syntax varies in style (and content) among those writers.
>You can't read the originals, nor understand the fine nuances of the
>Hebrew language. Can you name any real biblical scholar of today who
>shares your viewpoint?
>
>Your own LDS scholars do not agree with you. Note: "John Tvedtnes,
>senior project manager for FARMS, has written technical studies on
>Hebraisms and Isaiah variants in the Book of Mormon." which can be
>found at http://www.apologeticsindex.org/cpoint10-2.html.

--

 

[Dan@V.A.]

"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:sipmt25ulnut5m4tlcdvvtujhq6st6b1pe@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 12:51:17 -0500, "Dan@V.A." <danW@bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Mormonism and Jehovah witnesses are extremes, far out in their beliefs
> >and practices. Several Mormon groups in Utah, Arizona Montana and
> >other states still practice polygamy. This is abuse of women and their
> >offspring. A practice condemned by all Christians.
>
> Not by two Christian sects - Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses.
>
Right! I'm sorry if I was unclear, but I did state that it was "several
_Mormon_ Groups......."

Dan Wood, DDS

 

[Dan@V.A.]

"Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote in message
news:5411o6F1u4oblU1@mid.individual.net...
>
> "Dan@V.A." <danW@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:8vkCh.12996$O8.6455@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
> >
> >
> >
> > It seems to me that atheist who invade Religious Newsgroups
> > with their challenges, insults and attacks on Christians and the
> > Christian Religion are in reality expressing their great hope.
> > IE _the hope that there is no God.
>
> That's nice.
>
Given the two choices:
1) A CREATOR exist and he created the universe
2) There is no god, therefore, the Universe could not
have been created by a God.
>
I believe to the totally _unbiased_ the evidence, I believe
comes down on the side of those people who believe in the
existence of God. It may or may _not_ have been the God
of the Bible.

Dan Wood