Guest Samuel W. Heywood Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Christopher A. Lee wrote: > On 21 Oct 2006 10:11:59 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > >>> From RCC catachism: >> >> II. WAYS OF COMING TO KNOW GOD > > Why are you cross-posting this stupidity to an atheist newsgroup? > > [snip wothless bullshit] It is because they feel that their faith requires them to preach their stuff to the entire world. They apparently don't even know that there are exhortations in the Bible against trying to foist off their beliefs onto people whom they know or ought to know they would offend by preaching at them. Sam Heywood -- Message handled by Pine, Version 4.62 Quote
Guest marcinmd Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 Christopher A. Lee wrote: > On 21 Oct 2006 10:11:59 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > > >>From RCC catachism: > > > > > >II. WAYS OF COMING TO KNOW GOD > > Why are you cross-posting this stupidity to an atheist newsgroup? > > [snip wothless bullshit] The question was about how the created order reveals God..This was the answer.You may need to switch to decaf Quote
Guest marcinmd Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 Samuel W. Heywood wrote: > On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Christopher A. Lee wrote: > > > On 21 Oct 2006 10:11:59 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > > > >>> From RCC catachism: > >> > >> II. WAYS OF COMING TO KNOW GOD > > > > Why are you cross-posting this stupidity to an atheist newsgroup? > > > > [snip wothless bullshit] > > It is because they feel that their faith requires them to preach > their stuff to the entire world.<< Just answering a question...Try to be brave about it > > They apparently don't even know that there are exhortations in the > Bible against trying to foist off their beliefs onto people whom they > know or ought to know they would offend by preaching at them.<< If simply discussion of the issues are too much for you to handle, perhaps lurking on the Internet is not a good hobby for you..Still lots of nice weather left for Golf. Quote
Guest Father Haskell Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 marcinmd wrote: > > > > So? Atheism is the lack of belief in god(s). That's it. It's not a > > philosophy and it's not a world view. > > -- > > Robyn > > Resident Witchypoo > > I think you are confusing Nilism Nihilism. Same root as annihilate. Nice to see you've read up on the subject. > with Atheism... Sure, some Atheists > could also be Nilists, same could be Anarchists etc...Stalnist > Communists were surely Atheists and they sure did have a World View.... Nietzsche thought xianity was a nihilistic religion. Quote
Guest Christopher A. Lee Posted October 21, 2006 Posted October 21, 2006 On 21 Oct 2006 11:42:49 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > >Christopher A. Lee wrote: >> On 21 Oct 2006 10:11:59 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: >> >> >>From RCC catachism: >> > >> > >> >II. WAYS OF COMING TO KNOW GOD >> >> Why are you cross-posting this stupidity to an atheist newsgroup? >> >> [snip worthless bullshit] > >The question was about how the created order reveals God..This was the >answer.You may need to switch to decaf Only because you claimed it did, moron. Are you really so stupid as to imagine the RCC catechism means anything outside the RCC? You have to start without any presumptions about your god or any of the other equivalent beliefs, and use real-world evidence and methods. Because, duh, this is the real world outside your religion. When you realise you can't, stop making such ridiculous claims. Quote
Guest marcinmd Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 > Nietzsche thought xianity was a nihilistic religion. And Hitler thought Nietzsche was on to something.... Quote
Guest marcinmd Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 > >> > > > > You don't trust the Holy Spirit then, do you? << Umm..Pentecost.....Decent on the Holy Spirit on to the Apostles.. Apostles begin The Church..Church continues in Apostolic succession...... etc. The Orthodox Church = Guarantee of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.... You would rather have ad > numerum, i.e. the traditional majority opinion of the church instead of the words of Jesus Christ as revealed to you by the Holy Spirit.<< Buzzzzt... . Straw man argument.... The words of Christ and the Holy Scriptures were written within the The Church and then compiled by the Church.. Therefore, they are the most authoritative interpretator of the Scriptures, not individual people sitting in their basement cleaning their guns and making up doctrine on the fly. > I would go the other way. I would listen to Christ but decline the Mary > worship of the RCC.<< I an not in the RCC.. But neither the RCC or the Orthodox Church "Worship" Mary... She is "Venerated" as the Mother of Our God... I find that people who have trouble with Mary often really are having trouble with the Incarnation of God as man. I don't know enough about Orthodox church doctrine to > tell how well they adhere to sola scriptura.<< here is a link: http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_solascriptura.aspx Putting aside who wrote the Scriptures for a moment, who do you think compiled them? ... How come there are four Gospels and not seven or ten or twelve? Who decided which of the many texts in use were God inspired and which were not? Why not one Gospel or just two...Who do you think decided? And why could they be trusted then but not now? Quote
Guest marcinmd Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Christopher A. Lee wrote: > On 21 Oct 2006 10:05:32 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > > > > >Christopher A. Lee wrote: > >> On 20 Oct 2006 12:44:43 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > > Here's what you snipped.... > > "That the material world reveals God? Geee.... Er...Blue Sky...Birds > in flight... Um Ocean crashing....Birth....etc.... Seems obvious and > the revelation of God through matter is in fact a long held tenant of > the Church." > > How is the irrelevant tenet (not tenant) of "the Church" evidence for > anything apart from the fact that its members believe something?<<< Just because your parents named you Chrisopher, does not mean that in the absolute sense that is who you "really" are.. We can play this game all day > > >> And how is that evidence? It's merely what some people out of touch > >> with reality think, who can't grasp that only people inside their > >> religion will think that. > > Now explain why it's evidence.<< Order implies an orderer..Elegance and beauty imply an intelligent source. Existence as opposed to non-existence implies a creator. > > Hint: you can't start off from the presumption of "the divine". See above > > >Because the World is ordered in such a way as to imply a divine hand. > > Only in your deluded fantasies.<< And yet... Rational people all through history see it in that way.. Maybe you are the one traped in a delusion? > > >Define "reality" > > That which doesn't go away when you stop believing it.<< Then I have won this argument... God is all in all and requires nothing from us.. Thanks for playing.. Marc Quote
Guest George Peatty Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 14:25:32 -0400, "Samuel W. Heywood" <sheywood@MyRealBox.com> wrote: >They apparently don't even know that there are exhortations in the >Bible against trying to foist off their beliefs onto people whom they >know or ought to know they would offend by preaching at them. Well, the Bible does say, cast not your pearls before swine. If the shoe fits, I guess .. Quote
Guest marcinmd Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 > . > > Are you really so stupid as to imagine the RCC catechism means > anything outside the RCC? Apparently so, since I am not in the RCC...... > > You have to start without any presumptions about your god or any of > the other equivalent beliefs, and use real-world evidence and methods. > Because, duh, this is the real world outside your religion.<< Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief changes nothing. Quote
Guest Christopher A. Lee Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 On 21 Oct 2006 17:52:38 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > >Christopher A. Lee wrote: >> On 21 Oct 2006 10:05:32 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >Christopher A. Lee wrote: >> >> On 20 Oct 2006 12:44:43 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: >> >> Here's what you snipped.... >> >> "That the material world reveals God? Geee.... Er...Blue Sky...Birds >> in flight... Um Ocean crashing....Birth....etc.... Seems obvious and >> the revelation of God through matter is in fact a long held tenant of >> the Church." >> >> How is the irrelevant tenet (not tenant) of "the Church" evidence for >> anything apart from the fact that its members believe something?<<< > > > >Just because your parents named you Chrisopher, does not mean that in >the absolute sense that is who you "really" are.. > >We can play this game all day Irrelevant. >> >> And how is that evidence? It's merely what some people out of touch >> >> with reality think, who can't grasp that only people inside their >> >> religion will think that. >> >> Now explain why it's evidence.<< > >Order implies an orderer..Elegance and beauty imply an intelligent >source. Existence as opposed to non-existence implies a creator. Look up "non-sequitur", instead of spouting more of the same stupid, pig-ignorant billshit. In other words you have nothing. >> Hint: you can't start off from the presumption of "the divine". > >See above Where, moron? >> >Because the World is ordered in such a way as to imply a divine hand. >> >> Only in your deluded fantasies.<< > >And yet... Rational people all through history see it in that way.. >Maybe you are the one traped in a delusion? Don't be so stupid. >> >Define "reality" >> >> That which doesn't go away when you stop believing it.<< > >Then I have won this argument... God is all in all and requires nothing >from us.. Prove it. >Thanks for playing.. That's what you're doing instead of backing up your baseless assertion, moron. >Marc Quote
Guest Don Kresch Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 In alt.atheism On 21 Oct 2006 10:05:32 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that: > >Christopher A. Lee wrote: >> On 20 Oct 2006 12:44:43 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: >> >> > >> And how is that vidence? It's merely what some people out of touch >> with reality think, who can't grasp that only people inside their >> religion will think that. > > >Because the World is ordered in such a way as to impy a divine hand. No, it isn't. Don --- aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" Quote
Guest Christopher A. Lee Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 On 21 Oct 2006 18:00:01 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > >> . >> >> Are you really so stupid as to imagine the RCC catechism means >> anything outside the RCC? > >Apparently so, since I am not in the RCC...... So why did you post such stupidity in an atheist newsgroup? >> You have to start without any presumptions about your god or any of >> the other equivalent beliefs, and use real-world evidence and methods. >> Because, duh, this is the real world outside your religion.<< > >Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief >changes nothing. No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of grasping the difference? Quote
Guest Christopher A. Lee Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 02:33:17 GMT, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >In alt.atheism On 21 Oct 2006 10:05:32 -0700, "marcinmd" ><marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that: > >> >>Christopher A. Lee wrote: >>> On 20 Oct 2006 12:44:43 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> And how is that vidence? It's merely what some people out of touch >>> with reality think, who can't grasp that only people inside their >>> religion will think that. >> >> >>Because the World is ordered in such a way as to impy a divine hand. > > No, it isn't. The loony needs to learn some basic logic. It is a presumption not a conclusion. There is nothing which implies "a divine hand" - he's rationalising his belief using fallacies, not concluding it. >Don >--- >aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde >Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. > >"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" >Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" Quote
Guest marcinmd Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 > >Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief > >changes nothing. > > No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of > grasping the difference? Thanks for your personal opinion... Most all of the world all through time has disagred with you... Nice work Quote
Guest Christopher A. Lee Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 On 21 Oct 2006 21:06:11 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > >> >Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief >> >changes nothing. >> >> No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of >> grasping the difference? > >Thanks for your personal opinion... Most all of the world all through >time has disagred with you... Nice work Translation: you have none. Look up "argument ad populum fallacy", moron, and then get back with that evidence. Hint: was the world really flat when people believed that? Quote
Guest Samuel W. Heywood Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 On Sun, 22 Oct 2006, Christopher A. Lee wrote: > On 21 Oct 2006 21:06:11 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: >>>> Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief >>>> changes nothing. >>> >>> No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of >>> grasping the difference? >> >> Thanks for your personal opinion... Most all of the world all through >> time has disagred with you... Nice work > > Translation: you have none. > > Look up "argument ad populum fallacy", moron, and then get back with > that evidence. > > Hint: was the world really flat when people believed that? The "argument ad populum fallacy", although it is indeed a fallacy, actually works quite well in convincing huge multitudes of idiots. That is why the "argument ad populum" fallacy is so often employed in advertising and marketing and in politics and religion. Sam Heywood -- USAR and MDARNG (Ret.) -- Message handled by Pine, Version 4.62 Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 marcinmd wrote: > > > >Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief > > >changes nothing. > > > > No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of > > grasping the difference? > > Thanks for your personal opinion... -------------------------- Actually, a Fact. No one can show they've SEEN Gawd, only BELIEVED they did. > Most all of the world all through > time has disagred with you... Nice work ------------------------ No. You aren't very aware of the nature of Asian beliefs, are you? MOST of the world is NOT stupid like you are. You see, you self-delusional wussies don't count. Your ilk can always be confused and enslaved. Steve Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 marcinmd wrote: > > Christopher A. Lee wrote: > > On 20 Oct 2006 12:44:43 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > > > > > > > And how is that vidence? It's merely what some people out of touch > > with reality think, who can't grasp that only people inside their > > religion will think that. > > Because the World is ordered in such a way as to impy a divine hand. ------------------------------- You have no evidence of this, it is merely something that pleases you to believe because you were brainwashed to do so. > Define "reality" --------------------------- Life. Steve Quote
Guest Don Kresch Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 In alt.atheism On 21 Oct 2006 21:06:11 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that: > >> >Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief >> >changes nothing. >> >> No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of >> grasping the difference? > >Thanks for your personal opinion... Most all of the world all through >time has disagred with you... Nice work So what? Are you saying that a billion-and-a-half or so Chinese can't be wrong? Don --- aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert. "No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another" Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man" Quote
Guest Christopher A. Lee Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 12:42:06 GMT, "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote: >marcinmd wrote: >> >> > >Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief >> > >changes nothing. >> > >> > No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of >> > grasping the difference? >> >> Thanks for your personal opinion... >-------------------------- >Actually, a Fact. No one can show they've SEEN Gawd, only BELIEVED >they did. You can tell the real loonies. They dismiss fact as "personal opinion". Anything to deny reality when it conflicts their beliefs. There are thousands of different deity beliefs out there. The beliefs are all part of the real world but only their believers think the object of their belief is real. For all the different deity-beliefs. The intelligent ones realise that those outside their religion, see it as "somebody else's belief". We see very few of them here because the intelligent ones are also sensible enough not to push their religion where it is inappropriate. >> Most all of the world all through >> time has disagred with you... Nice work >------------------------ >No. You aren't very aware of the nature of Asian beliefs, are you? >MOST of the world is NOT stupid like you are. Even most believers aren't. They manage to partition their minds between inside and outside the religion states. >You see, you self-delusional wussies don't count. >Your ilk can always be confused and enslaved. >Steve Quote
Guest Dichard Rawkins Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 marcinmd <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote in message <1161489971.379297.23020@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> > Thanks for your personal opinion... Most all of the world all through > time has disagred with you... Nice work Truth is not a democracy. -- Free Your Mind Posted with JSNewsreader Preview 0.9.4.2900 [ Followup-To: alt.bible ] Quote
Guest Pastor Frank Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote in message news:1161477417.269776.90530@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Putting aside who wrote the Scriptures for a moment, who do you think > compiled them? ... How come there are four Gospels and not seven or ten > or twelve? Who decided which of the many texts in use were God inspired > and which were not? Why not one Gospel or just two...Who do you think > decided? And why could they be trusted then but not now? > That's the case for sola scriptura, for the church often enough deviates from the very scriptures they compiled and are obligated to uphold and follow. When it comes to interpretation, there is only one valid question, which determines the right from the wrong interpretation, and it's not the church hierarchy. The question is: What Would Jesus Say or Do? Whatever Jesus would say or do IS the right interpretation, which leads to heaven. All other interpretations, even when sanctioned, advocated or promoted by the highest church authority, lead to hell. Quote
Guest Pastor Frank Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 "R. Steve Walz" <rstevew@armory.com> wrote in message news:453B67C4.11D1@armory.com... > marcinmd wrote: >> >> > >Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief >> > >changes nothing. >> > >> > No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of >> > grasping the difference? >> >> Thanks for your personal opinion... > > Actually, a Fact. No one can show they've SEEN Gawd, only BELIEVED > they did. > Wrong!!!! YOUR god or devil perhaps, because you make sure you define the word sufficient ludicrous to preclude any such construct from existing. Our Christian "God is love" (1 John 4:8,16) and we not only know our God but have seen Him in Jesus Christ, giving His life for us on the cross of Calvary, as well as in countless other loving and caring people, many not even Christians. Quote
Guest marcinmd Posted October 22, 2006 Posted October 22, 2006 Christopher A. Lee wrote: > On 21 Oct 2006 21:06:11 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote: > > > > >> >Duh...God is part of the "real World"... Your personal disbelief > >> >changes nothing. > >> > >> No, brainwashed moron - the BELIEF is. Are you even capable of > >> grasping the difference?<< Wow..quite a little ego trip you are on..Impressive.. So let me get this straight... Your personal belief is what you think determines reality..If you dont believe in something, then it has no independent reality. So then you do seem to think the Universe has a source..You just think it's you and your idea's and that somehow idea's/human belief is the central determinator of reality.... So it's not that you completely disbelieve in all the attributes of God, it's just that you want the job..Typical FYI..Idea's are not substantial. You can disbelieve in something and it may still have an independent reality.... You could simply be wrong..... > > > >Thanks for your personal opinion... Most all of the world all through > >time has disagreed with you... Nice work > > Translation: you have none.<< Hmm....Thought I did.. Perhaps you are so committed to defending your little agenda that you have a closed mind and cant see what nearly everyone else in the World sees... > > Look up "argument ad populum fallacy", moron, and then get back with > that evidence. > > Hint: was the world really flat when people believed that?<<< Define flat? Your conventional labels are just that..conventions.. Do you believe you are Christopher? Isn't that just a label your parents made up? Please point to the "real" Christopher. hint for you... There isn't just one level of reality..There is the "real" and then there is the "really real"..Conventional Truth and then Absolute Truth and ( not to confuse you)........ both at the same time. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.