NO EVIDENCE OF GODS

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 4:09?pm, "jl" <jls1...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > On Mar 8, 11:10 pm, "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> > ? So why am I supposed to need a Christian
> >
> > > lawyer?
> > > Robert B. Winn
> >
> > May I suggest an atheist lawyer? ?Atheist lawyers don't suffer from
> > delusions or superstitions, are better prepared, and won't try to
> > "turn it over to Jeezus."
>
> You can suggest it. I am not going to hire a lawyer of any kind. I
> always represent myself in court.

He who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 1:45?pm, "jl" <jls1...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > On Mar 8, 3:56 pm, "Pastor Frank" <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > "Free Lunch" <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
> >
> > >news:ijapu2hpqemgb5942fpgn11tc5uba0t3fu@4ax.com...> On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 13:59:47 +0800, in alt.atheism
> > > > "Pastor Frank" <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote in
> > > > <45ebceae$0$16281$88260...@free.teranews.com>:
> >
> > > >> ? ?You need to show at least some evidence to be taken seriously. But
> > > >> then
> > > >>we all get the impression you're just chanting atheist mantras again, and
> > > >>that's all you aspire to.
> >
> > > > For someone who makes all sorts of claims without ever providing a shred
> > > > of evidence, it's pretty rich for you to ask for evidence.
> >
> > > ? ? When will you get serious? Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16).
> >
> > No he's not. ?He stains the earth with innocent blood, scatters it
> > with poverty, starvation, war, famine, disease, and ruin; sacrifices
> > virgins for his own sadistic blood lust; demands on pain of blood
> > curses that he be loved and worshiped; shows his ass to Moses; shows
> > his face, his UFO and his angels to Isaiah; invests his powers in
> > clergy who rape, steal, murder and pillage; and giggles while David (a
> > man after God's own heart) commits premeditated murder and steals
> > another man's wife, estate, and vineyards.
> >
> > Oh, and did I mention he (after getting the idea from pagan gods who
> > raped mortals and begat babies on them) dispatched a ghost to
> > fornicate with Mary against her will and knocked her up even though
> > she was betrothed to Joseph.
>
> Why don't you discuss your ideas with Jesus Christ when he returns to
> judge the earth?

Because he's imaginary.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 12:12?pm, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > Well, compare your statement with one from Isaiah.
> >
> > Irrelevant.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> Well, that would be your opinion.

Nope. Fact.

> Isaiah actually said something when he put words together.

You should look up what the word "irrelevant" means.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 12:11?pm, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > Logic is universal, bobby. ?You lose again.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> I don't remember losing anything.

That happens a lot with brain damage as extensive as yours.

> What do you claim I lost?

Both the argument and your mind.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 12:11?pm, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > On Mar 8, 8:08?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > > > rbwinn wrote:
> > > > > On Mar 7, 6:10?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > rbwinn wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mar 7, 12:10?am, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 6 Mar 2007 14:52:00 -0800, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > ? - Refer: <1173221520.689544.138...@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
> > > > > > > > >Have you considered you're just making an ass of yourself?
> >
> > > > > > > > That appears to be an avowed goal of his.
> >
> > > > > > > Now why would an atheist be concerned about what my goals are?
> >
> > > > > > Because you keep defecating in alt.atheism.
> >
> > > > > > > Do atheists concern themselves with the goals of all people?
> >
> > > > > > No, just the goals of people trying to impose their religious beliefs on everyone.
> >
> > > > > As I understand it, you are saying that you are opposed to freedom of speech.
> >
> > > > Golly, did I say anything even remotely like that? ?Nope.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > Well, I think you did.
> >
> > Then show where I did.- Hide quoted text -
>
> OK. You said you were going to concern yourself in trying to oppose
> people who speak about religious beliefs.

No, I didn't; it's just a few lines up, you should reread it a few
times and let it sink in. Either you're lying, an idiot, or both.
Sad, in any event

> Evidently you believe that this one group of people should not have freedom of speech.

Nope. Not even close. Care to try again?

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 12:11?pm, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > On Mar 8, 8:07?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > > > rbwinn wrote:
> > > > > On Mar 7, 4:25?am, "Mettas Mother" <Mettas_Moth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Theists are also inventive. ?Can you deny that theist invented god!
> >
> > > > > God is eternal.
> >
> > > > Unsupported assertion.
> >
> > > Wrong. ?God sent his Only Begotten Son.
> >
> > Circular argument.
>
> It is not an argument.

Yes, it is. You should learn was an argument is.

> It is a fact.

No, it isn't. You should learn what a fact is.

> Sorry you disapprove of what God did.

There is no evidence for any deities. Therefore, there is no evidence
any deities ever did anything. I can hardly disapprove of what a non-
existent thing couldn't have done; it would be pointless. I can,
though, point out your delusions, lies, and hypocrisies.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 8:19?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > On Mar 8, 1:51?pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 10:45:02 -0500, "Robibnikoff"<witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > ? - Refer: <55ap1eF23djd...@mid.individual.net>
> >
> > > > >"JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote in message
> > > > >news:1173304704.711023.6770@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > > > >> rbwinn wrote:
> > > > >>> On Mar 6, 8:40?pm, scottrichter...@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote:
> > > > >>> > rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > >>> > > > > Latin is a dead language used by people who have nothing to say.
> >
> > > > >>> > > > Much like quoting from the Bible...
> >
> > > > >>> > > Well, Jesus Christ said, Search the scriptures, for in them ye think
> > > > >>> > > ye have eternal life.
> >
> > > > >>> > You've long since proven you have nothing to say. No need to provide
> > > > >>> > any
> > > > >>> > more evidence, little fella...
> >
> > > > >>> Well, I don't need to have anything to say.
> >
> > > > >> Lucky break for you.
> >
> > > > >>> I am talking to atheists.
> >
> > > > >> No, you're babbling at atheists, in an atheist newsgroup. ?Have you
> > > > >> noticed how none of your theist buddies are coming to your defense?
> >
> > > > >They never have and I highly doubt they ever will.
> >
> > > > Christians all like a bribe, and respond nicely to threats.
> > > > Perhaps if he threatens them with his eternal blather they might
> > > > relent, just to be rid of him.
> >
> > > Isaiah is all the defense I ever need.
> >
> > But you aren't "defending" anything; you're just babbling. ?Babbling
> > isn't defense.
> >
> > > I never saw an atheist yet who could hang with Isaiah.
> >
> > I think you mean "I never saw an atheist yet who didn't get bored with
> > my pointless babbling."- Hide quoted text -
> >
> Either way, it always works.

By which you mean, "It might have worked once, but who can be sure."

> It is about as close to having a
> conversation with an atheist as anyone is going to come.

Demonstrably false.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 8:17?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > Well, I have two of them. ?The Chinese people write to me using this
> > > one: ?rbwi...@juno.com.
> > > Did you know that atheists and Chinese people use the English language
> > > in a very similar manner?
> > > additional provide require.
> >
> > "additional provide require." ?Is that an example of Chinese, or of
> > English?- Hide quoted text -
> >
> Chinese trying to use English words. Haven't you ever received an e-
> mail from a Chinese entrepenuer?

Don't know. Don't read spam.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 8:15?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > Well, why would I call it atheistic mythology if it was not make believe?
> >
> > Because you're an idiot.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> Well, you are certainly welcome to your unsupported assertations.

It isn't an unsupported assertion; it's supported by virtually every
one of your posts, this one included.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 9, 7:58?am, scottrichter...@yahoo.com (Scott Richter) wrote:
> > rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > > > God is eternal.
> >
> > > > Unsupported assertion.
> >
> > > Wrong. ?God sent his Only Begotten Son.
> >
> > Let me get this straight. You claim one unsupported assertion is "wrong"
> > by repeating ANOTHER unsupported assertion--which is completely
> > unrelated to the first?
> >
> > Do you not hear how foolish you sound? Do you not see why no one
> > respects your opinion? All you are doing is parroting little phrases you
> > learned as a child.
> >
> > Sheesh...
>
> I take it you have never read the Bible.

Non sequitur. Learn some logic.

> Would you like me to send you a copy?

I'd like you to send a copy to Jesse Ventura.

 

[JessHC]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 8, 10:07?pm, "Mettas Mother" <Mettas_Moth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > GOD is the SON of GOD? ?What an invention!
> >
> > "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:1173412155.210261.253480@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 8, 8:07?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > > > rbwinn wrote:
> > > > > On Mar 7, 4:25?am, "Mettas Mother" <Mettas_Moth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Theists are also inventive. ?Can you deny that theist invented god!
> >
> > > > > God is eternal.
> >
> > > > Unsupported assertion.
> >
> > > Wrong. ?God sent his Only Begotten Son.
> > > Robert B. Winn- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Jesus Christ said he was Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament. He
> also has a Father.

Clark Kent says he's Superman, sent by his father to protect the Earth.

 

[jesshc]

stumper wrote:
> JessHC wrote:
>> stumper wrote:
>>> JessHC wrote:
>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 00:00:35 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> - Refer: <75WdnXqXUp7BBXLYnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:36:27 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> - Refer: <kLSdncz2_8r-0XLYnZ2dnUVZ_riknZ2d@ptd.net>
>>>>>>>>> JessHC wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> JessHC wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you ask?
>>>>>>>>>>> Just wondering how he can be so certain that the Christian
>>>>>>>>>>> God does not exist.
>>>>>>>>>> The exact same way you can be so certain Zeus doesn't exist.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you know what it means
>>>>>>>>> for someone to believe in God?
>>>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>>>> It is the same as any belief that is not supported by a scrap of
>>>>>>>> evidence.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is the evidence for "(-2)(-3) = 6"?
>>>>>>> What is the evidence for "Matter is in space and time"?
>>>>>> How do those utterly facile questions justify your irrational belief
>>>>>> in one god out of an infinite possible selection?
>>>>> Who said I believe in any god?
>>>> Pretty much you did with your fuzzy questions.
>>>>
>>>>> Do you even know what it is?
>>>> Doesn't matter. Atheists don't believe in them.
>>> Do you believe in non-existence of God?
>>
>> I lack belief in deities. All of them.
>>
>>> Don't you have to know what it is to believe in non-existence of it?
>>
>> Do you know what Xzyianpoli is? Do you believe in the non-existence
>> of it?
>>
>
> I don't know what it is.
> Therefore I have no opinion about its existence.
>
> Do you know what God is?

I know it's something some people believe in without any objective,
verifiable evidence. Unfortunately, no two people can actually agree on
what it's supposed to be or do.

 

[jesshc]

stumper wrote:
> JessHC wrote:
>> stumper wrote:
>>> JessHC wrote:
>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>> What does that have to with your meaningless phrase:
>>>>>> "Rather like Nothingness to some."??
>>>>>> (Apart from more philosophical bullshit, that is.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just what is your goal here?
>>>>>> You are like an intellectual mosquito.
>>>>>> Distracting, mildly annoying, a completely useless parasite, and when
>>>>>> any light is shone on the subject, you are nowhere to be seen.
>>>>> I'm here to lessen the needless suffering of some people.
>>>> Whose suffering do you think you're lessening?
>>
>> Why didn't you answer this question?
>>
>>>>> What is your issue?
>>>> People who think they know how to "lessen the needless suffering of
>>>> some people."
>>> Why don't you help them
>>
>> Who?
>>
>>> instead of increasing your own suffering?
>>
>> Unsupported assertion.
>
> Are you suffering?

No.

 

[jesshc]

stumper wrote:
> JessHC wrote:
>> stumper wrote:
>>> JessHC wrote:
>>>> stumper wrote:
>>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 18:19:03 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> How do you know that you exist?
>>>>>>> Do you even know what you are?
>>>>>> ****ing idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was right:
>>>>>> You are an annoying and pointless wanker.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I gather you didn't read widely.
>>
>> Non sequitur.
>>
>>>> You mean woo-woo books?
>>
>> Why didn't you answer this question?
>>
>>>>> But that would not excuse your bad manners.
>>>> So "wide reading" is your excuse for yours?
>>
>> Why did you ignore this question?
>>
>>>>> Is your life worth living?
>>>> Life is MORE valuable without deities.
>>> Life is too valuable to be bothered with things you don't believe in,
>>> unless you get paid to do so.
>>
>> Non sequitur.
>>
>>> Do you believe in anything?
>>
>> Not ANYTHING; SOME things.
>>
>
> Is your life worth living?

Yes.

 

[jesshc]

rbwinn wrote:
> On Mar 6, 11:06�pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> On 6 Mar 2007 14:32:53 -0800, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com>
>> wrote:
>> � - Refer: <1173220373.586251.210...@8g2000cwh.googlegroups.com>
>>> So you think it's a good idea to deliberately disobey orders straight
>> >from your deity. �How's that working out for you?
>>
>> The nurses tighten his jacket straps tomorrow.
>>
> Well, here we have people from medical science claiming to be my diety.

Where? Who said THAT?

> Atheists are nothing if not inventive.

 

[jesshc]

Pastor Frank wrote:
> "Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1hue7f7.1snh7swcxfzxbN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...
>> Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>>> So now we are told thet there "is no such thing" as profanity, and
>>>>> according to atheists dictionaries and Bibles are lying, for only
>>>>> atheists know the truth, ...only privately so however, for they can't
>>>>> seem to evidence this truth.
>>>> Atheists are not 'all knowing', but they do use their common sense and
>>>> logic - THAT is the big difference
>>>>
>>> There is no way values on the scale of good vs. evil, can be
>>> determined
>>> by "common sense and logic".
>> Nor can be it determined by nonsense and superstition. But that hasn't
>> stopped you from trying, now has it?
>>
> Neither you parents telling you to be a "good boy" without explaining
> logically what they mean, nor Jesus Christ's commandments to love are
> "nonsense" nor "superstition". You just never thought about this, for you
> are here not to think, but to condemn, are you not?

No, we're not like you, Frank.

 

[rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 5:52�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> rbwinn wrote:
> > On Mar 9, 6:27?pm, Al Klein <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote:
> > > On 8 Mar 2007 07:08:42 -0800, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > >rbwinn wrote:
> > > >> On Mar 7, 6:10?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > >> > > On Mar 7, 12:10?am, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > > >> > > > On 6 Mar 2007 14:52:00 -0800, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com>
> > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > ? - Refer: <1173221520.689544.138...@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
> > > >> > > > >Have you considered you're just making an ass of yourself?
>
> > > >> > > > That appears to be an avowed goal of his.
>
> > > >> > > Now why would an atheist be concerned about what my goals are?
>
> > > >> > Because you keep defecating in alt.atheism.
>
> > > >> > > Do atheists concern themselves with the goals of all people?
>
> > > >> > No, just the goals of people trying to impose their religious beliefs
> > > >> > on everyone.
>
> > > >> As I understand it, you are saying that you are opposed to freedom of
> > > >> speech.
>
> > > >Golly, did I say anything even remotely like that? ?Nope.
>
> > > Robert's definition of "freedom of speech" is "freedom to force you to
> > > accept what he says", and you're against that.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Al, good to see you.
>
> Especially in light of the fact you'd claimed he'd been chased away by
> your nonsensical bible quotes.
>
> > I knew you would be back to read another verse from Isaiah.
>
> Hmm.

 

[rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 5:16�am, "Mettas Mother" <Mettas_Moth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> How do you know that he was telling the truth!
>
> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1173490918.699638.222590@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Jesus Christ said he was Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament.

 

[rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 5:55�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> rbwinn wrote:
> > On Mar 9, 5:24?pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > > On 9 Mar 2007 11:12:49 -0800, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > ? - Refer: <1173467568.901846.277...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
> > > >rbwinn wrote:
> > > >> On Mar 8, 8:06?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > >> > > On Mar 7, 12:09?am, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > > >> > > > On Tue, 6 Mar 2007 21:53:34 -0800, scottrichter...@yahoo.com (ScottRichter) wrote:
>
> > > >> > > > ? - Refer: <1hukpsp.1pxrmuu1t335k3N%scottrichter...@yahoo.com>
>
> > > >> > > > >rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > > > >> > > Why don't you explain it to Jesus Christ when he returns to judge the
> > > >> > > > >> > > earth?
>
> > > >> > > > >> > That's so adorable! You think some guy who lived 2000 years ago (if he
> > > >> > > > >> > existed at all) is going to "return to judge the earth"? It's just too
> > > >> > > > >> > cute for words!
>
> > > >> > > > >> > No, wait... You're an ADULT, right? Hmmm, scratch what I said, it's not
> > > >> > > > >> > cute at all, it's just ridiculous.
>
> > > >> > > > >> Well, Scot, I would not be the one to discuss your idea with. ?Why
> > > >> > > > >> don't you take an opportunity to discuss it with Jesus Christ after he
> > > >> > > > >> returns to judge the earth?
>
> > > >> > > > >Like I said, a grown man saying these things: ridiculous.
>
> > > >> > > > >Here's a tip, Skippy. For a threat to work, the person at whom the
> > > >> > > > >threat is directed has to believe the threat is real. Otherwise, you
> > > >> > > > >come across like a four year old child trying to scare his parents by
> > > >> > > > >claiming a monster is in the closet.
>
> > > >> > > > >Does any of this make sense to you?
>
> > > >> > > > Too many big words.
> > > >> > > > Too much threatening reality.
> > > >> > > > Too much sanity for pathetic little Bobby.
>
> > > >> > > I have never seen an atheist say anything that had much meaning.
>
> > > >> > That's the sad result of your inability to interact with reality.
>
> > > >> > > Now, Isaiah was a person who could make meaningful statements.
>
> > > >> > As is this statement.-
>
> > > >> Well, compare your statement with one from Isaiah.
>
> > > >Irrelevant.
>
> > > Perhaps not.
>
> > > I partially quote from a scholarly analysis of the great Qumran Isaiah
> > > Scroll:
> > > "An example of other frequently found editorial corrections: A good
> > > example of an unmarked redundancy is in Isaiah 38:19 and 20. In verse
> > > 20, (line 12) after the second word "le-hoshiy'eniy" ?(to save me) the
> > > whole of verse 19 is repeated as well as the first two words of verse
> > > 20. There is nothing to indicate the repetition which is an obvious
> > > error. But an omission in the next two verses is corrected in the
> > > margin. The last word of verse 21 and the first 6 words of 22 were
> > > omitted and an editor with a different hand and stroke and spelling
> > > (kiy without the aleph) entered the omitted words in the left margin
> > > vertically. There is no way to account for a careful editor spotting
> > > the omitted words and not noting the redundancy which he could not
> > > have avoided seeing."
>
> > > As one can plainly see, Robby the Robot's Isaiah is chock full of
> > > errors, corrections and mistakes.
>
> > > (But I am referring to an original 1st century scroll, in Hebrew and
> > > Aramaic. Obviously inferior to Bobbie's little "illustrated book of
> > > bible stories for boys and girls" that he uses when he is lucid enough
> > > to be able to read.)
>
> > The Nelson version of the Bible printed one particular year does the
> > same thing.

 

[rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 5:57�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:
> rbwinn wrote:
> > On Mar 9, 5:14?pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > > On 9 Mar 2007 07:15:24 -0800, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > ? - Refer: <1173453324.815936.78...@30g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
>
> > > >rbwinn wrote:
> > > >> On Mar 9, 1:08?am, Sippuuden <s...@macrosoft.net> wrote:
> > > >> > rbwinn wrote:
> > > >> > > On Mar 8, 2:39?am, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> > > >> > >> On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 01:23:22 -0800, Sippuuden <s...@macrosoft..net>
> > > >> > >> wrote:
> > > >> > >> ? - Refer: <erCdnYJ9sbKWS3LYnZ2dnUVZ_trin...@comcast.com>
>
> > > >> > >>> Michael Gray wrote:
> > > >> > >>>> On 7 Mar 2007 14:43:40 -0800, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail..com>
> > > >> > >>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >>>> ? - Refer: <1173307420.007287.59...@30g2000cwc.googlegroups..com>
> > > >> > >>>>> Michael Gray wrote:
> > > >> > >>>>>> On 7 Mar 2007 09:49:42 -0800, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com>
> > > >> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> > >>>>>> ? - Refer: <1173289782.480046.72...@64g2000cwx.googlegroups.com>
> > > >> > >>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
> > > >> > >>>>>>>> On Mar 6, 2:21?pm, Sippuuden <s...@macrosoft.net> wrote:
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> Robert, why would you believe that you are somehow exempt from a simple
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> instruction in your manual: to beat a speedy retreat from any place like
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> alt dot atheism where your proselytizing is not welcome, and 'shake the
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> dust of that place off your feet' [don't have anything further to do
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> with it]?
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> Your hypothesis that things in your manual only apply to the original
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> twelve apostles is just the fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis. If they were
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> to apply only to the original twelve apostles then there would be no
> > > >> > >>>>>>>>> proselytizing today, would there?- Hide quoted text -
> > > >> > >>>>>>>> Who told you I was proselytizing?
> > > >> > >>>>>>> What do YOU think you're doing?
> > > >> > >>>>>> Bzzzt!
> > > >> > >>>>>> Meaningless question.
> > > >> > >>>>>> Bobby is quite incapable of thought.
> > > >> > >>>>> Point taken; I withdraw the question.
> > > >> > >>>> Objection sustained.
> > > >> > >>>> Now, what about this defence of...
> > > >> > >>>> <shuffles papers>
> > > >> > >>>> Erm "Not guilty by way of insanity"?
> > > >> > >>>> What does the defendent have to say?
> > > >> > >>>> You will stand when you address the court Mr. Winn.
> > > >> > >>>> Remove that canvas jacket from him will you, usher?
> > > >> > >>> Take off his straight jacket? I object!
> > > >> > >> The learned counsel's objection is sustained.
> > > >> > >> Mr. Winn is a clear and present danger to rationality.
>
> > > >> > >> The Jury will now consider it's verdict.
>
> > > >> > > Well, here is some more atheistic mythology. ?So who do you claim has
> > > >> > > ever had a trial by jury at a sanity hearing? ?
>
> > > >> > ?>
> > > >> > It's not a real trial, moron, it is just make believe on Usenet. We are
> > > >> > just making fun of you. Can't you tell the difference? Errrm ... never
> > > >> > mind. You aren't known for your ability to tell real from make believe,
> > > >> > are you?-
>
> > > >> Well, why would I call it atheistic mythology if it was not make believe?
>
> > > >Because you're an idiot.
>
> > > And a compulsive liar and chronic confabulator.
>
> > Calling me names does not change atheistic mythology.
>
> Nobody's calling you names.