Guest Richo Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 On Mar 5, 1:29 pm, "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote: > On Mar 4, 7:15?pm, "Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 4, 6:05 pm, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > "Scott Richter" <scottrichter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > >news:1hue729.pr88setfk8njN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com... > > > > > rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote: > > > > No Evidence of God?? Is this a claim? > > > Yes. > > > > If so, whose responsibility > > > is proof? > > > Anybody can prove it wrong at any time by presenting evidence. > > Nobody can ever prove it correct. > > > > I would contend there is no way to prove such a > > > claim, therefore, the claimant would likely attempt to shift the > > > responsibility to those whom he considers his opponents. > > > "The claim cannot be proved - so therefore it is the claiments > > responsibility to prove it." > > That doesn't sound at all logical to me - forcing the impossible onto > > a party as an obligation. > > > Cheers, Mark. > > Would you like me to send you a copy of the Bible, Mark? No thanks. Cheers, Mark. Quote
Guest Richo Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 On Mar 5, 3:36 pm, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > "Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote in message > > news:1173060933.990849.262500@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > On Mar 4, 6:05 pm, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > "Scott Richter" <scottrichter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > >news:1hue729.pr88setfk8njN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com... > > > > > rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote: > > > > No Evidence of God?? Is this a claim? > > > Yes. > > > > If so, whose responsibility > > > is proof? > > > Anybody can prove it wrong at any time by presenting evidence. > > Nobody can ever prove it correct. > > > > I would contend there is no way to prove such a > > > claim, therefore, the claimant would likely attempt to shift the > > > responsibility to those whom he considers his opponents. > > > "The claim cannot be proved - so therefore it is the claiments > > responsibility to prove it." > > That doesn't sound at all logical to me - forcing the impossible onto > > a party as an obligation. > > If the claiment cannot prove his claim, he is a fool to make it; > trying to shift the burden of proof doesn't get him off the hook! > I would like to point out that calling every belief a person has a "claim" would be misleading. If someone says "I believe I saw a cat." - in some technical sense this is a claim - but to insist that every thought, belief or impression one has ever had about the truth of something needs "proof" is unreasonable. The vast majority of things humans believe they do so without "proof" - but that doesnt make the beliefs foolish or unreasonable. So if someone genuinely believes "there is no evidence of Gods existence" then it would seem to me that to call this a "claim" is to exagerate. Indeed if it was expressed as "I believe there is no evidence for God" then instead of trying to get them on some technicality of rhetoric it would be a lot more straightforward just to produce the evidence. (Assuming the evidence existed of course.) Cheers, Mark. Quote
Guest rbwinn Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 On Mar 5, 1:27�am, "Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote: > On Mar 5, 3:36 pm, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > "Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote in message > > >news:1173060933.990849.262500@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > > On Mar 4, 6:05 pm, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > "Scott Richter" <scottrichter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:1hue729.pr88setfk8njN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com... > > > > > > rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote: > > > > > No Evidence of God?? Is this a claim? > > > > Yes. > > > > > If so, whose responsibility > > > > is Quote
Guest thomas p. Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 On 4 Mar., 18:27, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote in message > > news:1173019052.691420.283990@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > H. Wm. Esque wrote: > > > > No Evidence of God?? Is this a claim? If so, whose responsibility > > > is proof? I would contend there is no way to prove such a > > > claim, therefore, the claimant would likely attempt to shift the > > > responsibility to those whom he considers his opponents. > > > No, it's more a statement about the absolute dearth of actual, > > legitimate, objective, verifiable evidence for any deities ever in the > > universe. > > There is no proof. Absolute certainty is not available where the > Deity is concerned. > People of faith accept the Existence of God as a matter of faith, > and not because of hard empirical evidence. If this is what is > demanded by you, then you are demanding this of God because > he has not provided it. If someone claims that some god exists, I see nothing wrong with asking for evidence. I certainly do not demand evidence; asking is not demanding, nor is asking a believer for evidence the same as asking god or demanding of god anything. > > If you have some, please feel free to present it; many of> us atheists have politely asked for such evidence literally for years > > if not entire lifetimes, and so far have been perpetually sorely > > disappointed. > > You want absolute certainty, a guarantee, but you have no > certainty in anything: your job, your mate, your future or > a long happy life. But you demand more from God. Why? > I find this surprising. I wish that I found it surprising that you said that absolute certainty was asked for, but sadly that kind of distortion is very common. Evidence of anything does not provide "absolute certainty". The request was for evidence not certainty. > > Be aware, though, that the standards of evidence for> such supernatural claims is pretty high; statements like "I don't > > understand something, therefore god must have done it" or "I get a > > warm fuzzy feeling when I pray" won't cut it. > > I can understand you want a idyllic existence where there is > only perfect knowledge, proof of everything even direct > empirical the existence of God, but it does not exist > so you will not find it. Could you possibly respond without distorting what was said? Please point out where certainty was requested. Quote
Guest jl Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 On Mar 4, 11:36 pm, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > "Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote in message > > news:1173060933.990849.262500@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Mar 4, 6:05 pm, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > "Scott Richter" <scottrichter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > >news:1hue729.pr88setfk8njN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com... > > > > > rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote: > > > > No Evidence of God?? Is this a claim? > > > Yes. > > > > If so, whose responsibility > > > is proof? > > > Anybody can prove it wrong at any time by presenting evidence. > > Nobody can ever prove it correct. > > > > I would contend there is no way to prove such a > > > claim, therefore, the claimant would likely attempt to shift the > > > responsibility to those whom he considers his opponents. > > > "The claim cannot be proved - so therefore it is the claiments > > responsibility to prove it." > > That doesn't sound at all logical to me - forcing the impossible onto > > a party as an obligation. > > If the claiment (sic) cannot prove his claim, he is a fool to make it; > trying to shift the burden of proof doesn't get him off the hook! See what I mean? This one is shifty. He (Wm. H. Esque), with sly words multifplied for the purpose, has shifted the burden of proof from the plaintiff to the defendant and, with so much shystering leger de main, required the defendant to file and prove a counterclaim, when it is incumbent upon the plaintiff and the plaintiff alone to prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant may stand mute and say nothing. He is not required to pursue an affirmative defense. Hell, plaintiff can't even prove his case by the preponderance of the evidence, since no evidence exists and the case was taken on faith and faith alone. The judge has stricken Esque's case, has issued a directed verdict. It didn't even make it to the jury. Costs are taxed against the plaintiff because he didn't even have a scintilla of evidence and certainly nothing to get by a motion to dismiss. Just be glad you didn't get sanctioned for filing a frivolous complaint. Call your next case, counselor. This one is dead and incapable of resurrection. Meanwhile, Winnie is whining that he was denied a jury trial. Quote
Guest Sippuuden Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 H. Wm. Esque wrote: > If the claiment cannot prove his claim, he is a fool to make it I think it's spelled 'claimant'. You mean like your argument _ad ignorantiam_ that there might be a God anyway, even though you cannot produce any evidence of any such thing, because there is no proof your conjecture is false? Quote
Guest thomas p. Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 On 4 Mar., 18:27, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote in message > > news:1173019052.691420.283990@n33g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > > > H. Wm. Esque wrote: > > > > No Evidence of God?? Is this a claim? If so, whose responsibility > > > is proof? I would contend there is no way to prove such a > > > claim, therefore, the claimant would likely attempt to shift the > > > responsibility to those whom he considers his opponents. > > > No, it's more a statement about the absolute dearth of actual, > > legitimate, objective, verifiable evidence for any deities ever in the > > universe. > > There is no proof. Absolute certainty is not available where the > Deity is concerned. Why mention proof? Nobody asked for proof? > People of faith accept the Existence of God as a matter of faith, > and not because of hard empirical evidence. If this is what is > demanded by you, then you are demanding this of God because > he has not provided it. Evidence is asked for not proof, and it is not asked of god. > > If you have some, please feel free to present it; many of> us atheists have politely asked for such evidence literally for years > > if not entire lifetimes, and so far have been perpetually sorely > > disappointed. > > You want absolute certainty, a guarantee, You must think you can read minds. Nobody asked for a guarantee. but you have no > certainty in anything: your job, your mate, your future or > a long happy life. But you demand more from God. Why? > I find this surprising. You did not find it at all; you made it up. Proof or certainty was not asked for, and nothing was demanded. > > Be aware, though, that the standards of evidence for> such supernatural claims is pretty high; statements like "I don't > > understand something, therefore god must have done it" or "I get a > > warm fuzzy feeling when I pray" won't cut it. > > I can understand you want a idyllic existence where there is > only perfect knowledge, proof of everything even direct > empirical the existence of God, but it does not exist > so you will not find it. Perhaps that is why it was not asked for. Why do you keep pretending that it was? Quote
Guest thomas p. Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 On 4 Mar., 17:21, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote in message > > news:1173018520.978855.246000@64g2000cwx.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > On Mar 4, 12:05?am, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > "Scott Richter" <scottrichter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message snip > > Matthew 10:14 > > And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye > > depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. > > Christians who do not heed this verse are in violation of the very > faith they profess. There is no Biblical authorization to "shove ones > religion down the throat of another person". An atheist who wants > a defense against over-bearing proselytizers should be able to > point to this verse as a defense We have, and, just like you and the inane champion of the world (little Winn), they ignore it. Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 "H. Wm. Esque" <HEsque@bellsouth.net> wrote in snip > There is no proof. Absolute certainty is not available where the > Deity is concerned. What diety? > People of faith accept the Existence of God Which god? as a matter of faith, > and not because of hard empirical evidence. If this is what is > demanded by you, then you are demanding this of God because > he has not provided it. Which god? snip > You want absolute certainty, a guarantee, but you have no > certainty in anything: your job, your mate, your future or > a long happy life. Yeah, so? > But you demand more from God. Why? Sorry, but I don't demand anything from supernatural beings. > I find this surprising. So do I as demanding anything from a being you don't believe exists is just ridiculous. > > Be aware, though, that the standards of evidence for >> such supernatural claims is pretty high; statements like "I don't >> understand something, therefore god must have done it" or "I get a >> warm fuzzy feeling when I pray" won't cut it. >> > I can understand you want a idyllic existence where there is > only perfect knowledge, proof of everything even direct > empirical the existence of God, but it does not exist > so you will not find it. And he didn't say that he was looking for it either. Learn to speak for yourself and not for others. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest stumper Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > "stumper" <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote in message > news:N7OdnXGAFvDSUXTYnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@ptd.net... >> Pastor Frank wrote: >>> "stumper" <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote in message >>> news:eumdnS9prupYvHrYnZ2dnUVZ_qrinZ2d@ptd.net... >>>> Pastor Frank wrote: >>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:1172556961.386584.45770@z35g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... >>>>> On Feb 26, 8:25�pm, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >>>>>> I don't. I just think it's amusing how childish you are. >>>>>> >>>>> I have never thought you were amusing. And you are not childish. You >>>>> are evil. >>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>> --------- >>>>> These insults are just refuting ploys by Satan's minions to make >>>>> people STOP talking about Jesus. Will we let them? Hell NO!!!! We will >>>>> shout His most holy and perfect name from the roof tops if need be, and >>>>> no atheists are going to stop us!!!!! >>>> Just like suicide bombers in Iraq? >>>> ~Stumper >>>> >>> Notice the Golden Rule of Christ below. Are you telling us you would >>> never become a terrorist were your country bombed and invaded. Would you >>> be suitably shocked and awed and become immediately compliant and docile? >>> If not that, what would you do? >>> >>> Pastor Frank >>> >>> The most important, yet most ignored commandments of Christ, which >>> would >>> make war, if not ALL of man's inhumanity to man extinct, nay totally >>> unthinkable: >>> THE ROYAL LAW OF CHRIST >>> Jesus in Mk 12:30: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy >>> heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy >>> strength: this is the first commandment. >>> 31: And the second is alike, namely this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour >>> as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. >>> Jesus in Mat 22:40 "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two >>> commandments." >>> THE GOLDEN RULE OF CHRIST, or Ethic of Reciprocity >>> Jesus in Matt. 7:12: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that >>> men >>> should do to you, do ye even so to them...." >> First thing first. Would you stone adulterers? >> ~Stumper >> > That's a stupid question about Judaism. Jesus saved the adulteress from > getting stoned. But then some butt heads like getting stoned, ...and pay > good money for it too!!! > > > Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments? -- ~Stumper Quote
Guest stumper Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > "stumper" <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote in message > news:FtKdneWQEuiDUnTYnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@ptd.net... >> Pastor Frank wrote: >>> Are you simple minded, that you should believe Satan's minions >>> who claim to be followers of Christ, yet do the opposite from >>> what Christ commanded, as well as justify doing so. That's why >>> Jesus said: By their actions ye shall know them. Yet you believe >>> their words instead of their actions? >> You are right. Would you be kind enough to let us know whether you >> would stone all adulterers or not? ~Stumper >> > Why would keep asking a Christian a question about keeping the laws > of Judaism? We don't keep the laws of Judaism, save perhaps the 10 > commandments. Those who call themselves Christians are to follow > Christ and do what He would do. See below > > Pastor Frank > > Jesus in John 8:3: And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a > woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4: > They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the > very act. 5: Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be > stoned: but what sayest thou? 6: This they said, tempting him, that > they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his > finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7: So when > they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, > He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. > 8: And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9: And they > which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one > by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was > left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10: When Jesus had > lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, > Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? > 11: She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I > condemn thee: go, and sin no more. > NIV Matthew 19 > 16Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing > must I do to get eternal life?" > > 17"Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is > only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the > commandments." > > 18"Which ones?" the man inquired. > > Jesus replied, " 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not > steal, do not give false testimony, 19honor your father and > mother,'[d] and 'love your neighbor as yourself.'[e]" > > 20"All these I have kept," the young man said. "What do I still > lack?" > > 21Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your > possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in > heaven. Then come, follow me." > > 22When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had > great wealth. > What would you do if they don't obey? -- ~Stumper Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > > "Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > news:e7ghu2li7og5pchn1mj0eu3q8s97anmkol@4ax.com... > > On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 02:05:05 +0800, in alt.atheism > > "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in > >> > >> Which "liberties" are those? And does Bush really "destroy" them? > >> Prove > >>it. > > > > I guess you haven't been following the President's decision to use the > > NSA to spy in a way that is not allowed in the US. Too bad. It's scary > > that people who don't even know what our president has been doing are > > willing to give him the benefit of the doubt just because he makes a big > > noise about being a Christian. I don't believe him for a minute, but > > apparently he's only trying to con Christians. > > > >>Jesus is waiting to get your attention. > > > > There is no evidence that Jesus exists. > > > Jesus resurrected in all our hearts and minds, only atheists make a > point of ignoring Him. ----------------- No. He may not even really have lived. History doesn't know. Saying this imagined guy "resurrected" is specious, and that somehow he did so "in all our hearts and minds" is laughable sophistry! You don't know any such thing, you just WISH for it to be true, and that's NOT the same as knowing, nor is it even the same as faith! Why do you clowns recite mystical crap phrases over and over to try to get attention? Steve Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > > "Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > news:fffhu2l7rseou0g46cau3mflesq5qri2jb@4ax.com... > > On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 01:48:55 +0800, in alt.atheism > > "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in > > <45e85c7a$0$16391$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>: > >>"Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > >>news:394cu2tpt6togrpci9p4fh67ghn7b3j801@4ax.com... > >>> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 05:01:50 +0800, in alt.atheism > >>> "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in > >>> <45e5e38b$0$16375$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>: > >>>><pbamvv@worldonline.nl> wrote in message > >>>>news:1172554645.503230.296520@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com... > >>>>> On 22 feb, 17:08, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote: > >>>>>> "Free Lunch" wrote in > >>>>>> messagenews:8vnpt2dbg15v1o4t4gi1od6t5c2d1r8el6@4ax.com... > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > There is no evidence for God or Satan or any other gods of > >>>>>> > Christianity > >>>>>> > or any other religions. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I respect this as a tenet of your belief that you religiously adhere > >>>>>> to > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> evangelistically proclaim. > >>>>> > >>>>> You shouldn't > >>>>> If you disagree, you should produce the evidence. > >>>>> You do not, therefore I suspect you agree. > >>>>> Peter van Velzen > >>>>> February 2007 > >>>>> Thung Song > >>>>> Thailand > >>>>> > >>>> You haven't been around much, or you would know that there are gods > >>>>aplenty in our museums and libraries, containing both concrete and > >>>>abstract > >>>>gods. In Thailand you will find people having altars stocked with gods > >>>>of > >>>>all kinds. > >>>> What atheists mean is: There are no gods of atheist definition, and > >>>> we > >>>>theists tend to agree with them. > >>> > >>> It would be interesting if you could point to evidence that those who > >>> have these statues think that the statues themselves are the gods rather > >>> than representations of the gods. > >>> > >> Are we seeing an atheist acknowledging gods, whether real or > >>representational etc. or not? You better be careful, or atheist central > >>will > >>be yanking your number. > > > > I acknowledge that people claim gods exist. I am completely open to > > evidence to show that any god does exist. So far, no one, except 'Richo' > > in <1172814337.257713.200830@30g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> in the Define > > "God" thread, is willing to state that gods are nothing more than what > > people worship as gods. If you want to define gods as nothing more than > > that, I cannot argue with you. If God is only love for you, but has no > > actual power, I cannot argue with you. I will consider you silly, but > > nothing else. > > > "Actual power"? You must be kidding. Don't you know amor vincit omnia? > Show me something that has more power than love. ----------------- That's just another crap phrase people recite because they might wish it so, but "love" doesn't conquer ANYTHING, that isn't what it does, in the first place, and many things can destroy love quite easily, torture, guns, affairs, minor squabbles, egotism, etc. Steve Quote
Guest Michael Gray Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 16:07:11 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote: - Refer: <FOidnYaw9ND0G3HYnZ2dnUVZ_sDinZ2d@ptd.net> >Pastor Frank wrote: >> "stumper" <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote in message >> news:N7OdnXGAFvDSUXTYnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@ptd.net... >>> Pastor Frank wrote: >>>> "stumper" <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote in message >>>> news:eumdnS9prupYvHrYnZ2dnUVZ_qrinZ2d@ptd.net... >>>>> Pastor Frank wrote: >>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:1172556961.386584.45770@z35g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... >>>>>> On Feb 26, 8:25?pm, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >>>>>>> I don't. I just think it's amusing how childish you are. >>>>>>> >>>>>> I have never thought you were amusing. And you are not childish. You >>>>>> are evil. >>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>> --------- >>>>>> These insults are just refuting ploys by Satan's minions to make >>>>>> people STOP talking about Jesus. Will we let them? Hell NO!!!! We will >>>>>> shout His most holy and perfect name from the roof tops if need be, and >>>>>> no atheists are going to stop us!!!!! >>>>> Just like suicide bombers in Iraq? >>>>> ~Stumper >>>>> >>>> Notice the Golden Rule of Christ below. Are you telling us you would >>>> never become a terrorist were your country bombed and invaded. Would you >>>> be suitably shocked and awed and become immediately compliant and docile? >>>> If not that, what would you do? >>>> >>>> Pastor Frank >>>> >>>> The most important, yet most ignored commandments of Christ, which >>>> would >>>> make war, if not ALL of man's inhumanity to man extinct, nay totally >>>> unthinkable: >>>> THE ROYAL LAW OF CHRIST >>>> Jesus in Mk 12:30: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy >>>> heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy >>>> strength: this is the first commandment. >>>> 31: And the second is alike, namely this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour >>>> as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. >>>> Jesus in Mat 22:40 "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two >>>> commandments." >>>> THE GOLDEN RULE OF CHRIST, or Ethic of Reciprocity >>>> Jesus in Matt. 7:12: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that >>>> men >>>> should do to you, do ye even so to them...." >>> First thing first. Would you stone adulterers? >>> ~Stumper >>> >> That's a stupid question about Judaism. Jesus saved the adulteress from >> getting stoned. But then some butt heads like getting stoned, ...and pay >> good money for it too!!! >> >> >> > >Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments? Which version? -- Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > > "Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > news:6cghu29quo7kfilb4o8j45kt7dqpum3btn@4ax.com... > > On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 02:09:24 +0800, in alt.atheism > > "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in > > <45e85c85$0$16391$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>: > >> > >> And you are an inerrant judge in matters of lies? > > > > I test statements against reality. You can, too. > > > You reality is permanent dis-satisfaction with reality, for you always > complain. ------------------------- I don't see that, this seems to be what you WISH was true, to meet YOUR sick needs, and not any kind of truth! > >>You sound more and more like some infallible atheist potentate. > > > > His lies have nothing to do with atheism. > > > >> Jesus is there to give you direction. Take His advice and follow Him. > > > > There is no evidence that Jesus exists. > > > There is plenty of evidence "that Jesus exists" and lives in your heart > and mind yet you are intent on ignoring Him. Why is that? --------------------------- There is evidence that YOU believe in some guy History has no solid record of, and which, like an evil rumor crossing a room, has been bouncing around for two millenia getting distorted. But nothing more. Steve Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > > "Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > news:sg2ju29v8q0tho940jn1a3e6d73dbcfpcg@4ax.com... > > On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 12:46:07 +0800, in alt.atheism > > "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in > > <45e8f9fe$0$16381$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>: > >>"Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > >>news:croeu25amqqusj8b7cv0qcff7tul8hho4e@4ax.com... > >>> > >>> Apparently you are a bot of very little memory. If you had any memory at > >>> all, you would know that you had already tried this lie on me and that I > >>> pointed out that I own a number of Bibles and have read it through. You > >>> would also remember that the Bible does not qualify as evidence in > >>> support of the claim that gods exist. It is no more evidence than any of > >>> the other religious and religiously-inspired books. Many people, some > >>> just for kicks, have written religious texts. None are supported by any > >>> evidence. > >>> > >> There you go again specifying that a God to exists, he must be > >> evidenced > >>to your specifications and approval. There is no such requirement. It's a > >>free country and everyone can regard anything or anyone as their god, no > >>matter whether abstract or concrete. > > > > Go ahead, define any god and show the evidence for his existence. You > > will either end up with a trivially true god, e.g. god is the universe, > > or a god unsupported by the evidence, e.g. the god defined in the Nicene > > Creed. > > Feel free to avoid false equivocation however. You don't get to invent > > one definition for god to show that evidence exists for it and then > > redefine god to claim that an afterlife exists. > > > What's with the specifications? Did I not just say, that atheists want > us have our God approved by them before we believe in Him? ---------------------------- And erroneously as well! Atheists want nothing to do with your fantasies. Steve Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > > "Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > news:un2ju256eskd972bacbeq4s16nsshq7m4m@4ax.com... > > On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 12:50:19 +0800, in alt.atheism > > "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in > > <45e8fa01$0$16381$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>: > >>"Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > >>news:70qeu21934vf7sp50ejdu2g6eduqn4ljtb@4ax.com... > >>> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 22:44:09 +0800, in alt.atheism > >>> "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in > >>> <45e7076a$0$16281$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>: > >>>>"Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > >>>>news:2ho9u25n0bfth0pee9taf3gkua6vn3tev2@4ax.com... > >>>>> On 26 Feb 2007 22:20:17 -0800, in alt.atheism > >>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in > >>>>>> > >>>>>>In any event, if you think I am mocking Jesus, why don't you take your > >>>>>>complaint to him when he returns to judge the earth? > >>>>> > >>>>> Because there is no evidence that Jesus will ever return and there is > >>>>> a > >>>>> great deal of evidence that people are harmed by the teachings of > >>>>> those > >>>>> who claim to be the followers of Jesus. > >>>>> > >>>> There you go again making broad accusations without presenting a > >>>> shred > >>>>of evidence. > >>> > >>> Are you trying to deny that there have been people who claim to be > >>> followers of Jesus but have caused serious harm in the world with their > >>> evil? > >>> > >> Are you simple minded, that you should believe Satan's minions who > >> claim > >>to be followers of Christ, yet do the opposite from what Christ commanded, > >>as well as justify doing so. That's why Jesus said: By their actions ye > >>shall know them. Yet you believe their words instead of their actions? > > > > I don't believe their words. I never claimed to. I'm perfectly willing > > to accept that Falwell, Robertson, Bush, Cheney, Franklin Graham, and > > the rest of these supposed Christians are not Christian in any way. Your > > problem is offering objective evidence about who is Christian and who is > > not. > > > Christ tells me not to judge people. All I am allowed is to judge > actions. ----------------- First we kill all the amateur lawyers. I don't think that Jesus meant that you could seperate the two, he just didn't tell you because he expected you to understand what he wa saying, your version is just YOUR ignorant wish-fulfillment!! Steve Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > > "Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:1hue903.11f3o7h1wjt4t8N%scottrichter422@yahoo.com... > > Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote: > >> > >> Are you simple minded, that you should believe Satan's minions who > >> claim > >> to be followers of Christ, yet do the opposite from what Christ > >> commanded, > >> as well as justify doing so. That's why Jesus said: By their actions ye > >> shall know them. Yet you believe their words instead of their actions? > > > > If someone claims to be a Christian, constantly prays to Jesus, and > > employs the words of Christ to justify their actions, then he is a > > Christian, period. > > The problem, however, is that you apparently can't reconcile the fact > > that those actions often are heinous acts of violence. But an evil > > Christian is still a Christian, because he still inhabits the fantasy > > world you all share... > > > Look up the word "Christian" in you dictionary. It means FOLLOWERS OF > CHRIST. Not someone who merely calls himself that, but does the opposite > from what Christ preached, as well as justify such action. --------------------- Oops, looks like YOU'RE not one! He who is without sin... You don't have the vaguest notion what Jesus meant. Steve Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Pastor Frank wrote: > > "Gospel Bretts" <bretts1967@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:fcrju21lmkm7pet0li48fj4h0sl59l023t@4ax.com... > > On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 12:50:19 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> > > wrote: > >>"Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > >>news:70qeu21934vf7sp50ejdu2g6eduqn4ljtb@4ax.com... > >>> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 22:44:09 +0800, in alt.atheism > >>> "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote in > >>> <45e7076a$0$16281$88260bb3@free.teranews.com>: > >>>>"Free Lunch" <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message > >>>>news:2ho9u25n0bfth0pee9taf3gkua6vn3tev2@4ax.com... > >>>>> On 26 Feb 2007 22:20:17 -0800, in alt.atheism > >>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in > >>>>>> > >>>>>>In any event, if you think I am mocking Jesus, why don't you take your > >>>>>>complaint to him when he returns to judge the earth? > >>>>> > >>>>> Because there is no evidence that Jesus will ever return and there is > >>>>> a > >>>>> great deal of evidence that people are harmed by the teachings of > >>>>> those > >>>>> who claim to be the followers of Jesus. > >>>>> > >>>> There you go again making broad accusations without presenting a > >>>> shred > >>>>of evidence. > >>> > >>> Are you trying to deny that there have been people who claim to be > >>> followers of Jesus but have caused serious harm in the world with their > >>> evil? > >>> > >> Are you simple minded, that you should believe Satan's minions who > >> claim > >>to be followers of Christ, yet do the opposite from what Christ commanded, > >>as well as justify doing so. That's why Jesus said: By their actions ye > >>shall know them. Yet you believe their words instead of their actions? > > > > Don't you think that a true follower of Christ should respect truth > > then, Pastor Frank? Should a follower of Christ engage in constant > > self-deception and try to deceive others? Why are all of you christers > > such deliberately illogical liars? Why is there no christer who really > > does respect Truth? > > Gospel Bretts > > a.a. Atheist #2262 > > Fundy Xian Atheist > > > 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. ---------------------- Well, that's all YOU'RE doing. He's just making fun of you! Steve Quote
Guest Libertarius Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Of course there is "evidence". Ask any believer. His/her answer is evidence ther is "god" created and residing inside his/her mind. -- L. Quote
Guest R. Steve Walz Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 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". ----------------------- Sure they are, they're ambiguous as all hell! For example, if the greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as you would wish to be loved, then why not begin to have sex with your neighbor? That IS what you wish she'd do to you!?!! And how many cheeks do you turn if someone is beating you to death? It gets totally crazy when examined, folks, it was intended to confuse slaves out of attacking their masters, not as a moral code!! > You just never thought about this, for you > are here not to think, but to condemn, are you not? ------------------------ Oh quit your phony posturing! Steve Quote
Guest Libertarius Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 rbwinn wrote: > On Mar 4, 12:05�am, "H. Wm. Esque" <HEs...@bellsouth.net> wrote: > >>"Scott Richter" <scottrichter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> >>news:1hue729.pr88setfk8njN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com... >> >> >>>rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote: >> >>No Evidence of God?? Is this a claim? If so, whose responsibility >>is �proof? �I would contend there is no way to prove such a >>claim, therefore, the claimant would likely attempt to shift the >>responsibility to those whom he considers his opponents. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>>>>>>Well, you are an apostate Christian. ?That means you are more >>>>>>>>dishonest than a person who was raised atheist. >>>>>>>>Robert B. Winn >> >>>>>>>On the contrary, my dear Winnie, the ex-Christian has turned away >> >>from >> >>>>>>>dishonesty and embraced truth. ?He is to be more admired and >> >>esteemed >> >>>>>>>for having grappled himself up out of the stifling quicksands of >>>>>>>religion and walked in the verdant and enlightened fields of >> >>atheism. >> >> >>>>>>Well, if you atheists are so happy, why can't you stay away from >>>>>>trying to discredit religion? >> >>>>>Because our world is under assault by religious groups who invoke >> >>their >> >>>>>superstitions to control what others think and do. Did you miss 9/11? >>>>>Have you not listened to Pat Robertson and other power mad >> >>evangelicals? >> >>>>>Have you not watched the creationists trying to take America back to >> >>the >> >>>>>Dark Ages? Have you not heard the suicide bombers screaming "God is >>>>>great"? >> >>>>>It is increasingly clear that religion is a plague on civilization, so >>>>>why would we "stay away" from such an important issue? >> >>>>I see. �Well, we Christians are supposed to return good for evil, so >>>>here is a verse from Isaiah to brighten your day. >> >>>It appears that you confuse talk about evil with the evil itself, and >>>that you do not recognize yourself in that evil. >> >>>>Isaiah3:13 �The Lord standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge the >>>>people. >> >>>And so you retreat to your warm fairy tales. >> >>>Interesting choice of verse, by the way. After all, Christianity (as >>>most religions) employs judgement has a primary tool of control. As I've >>>said before, Christians all seem to LOVE to judge people; I guess you're >>>no exception...- Hide quoted text - >> >>- Show quoted text - > > > Atheists reject the Bible and say it proves nothing even though some > will actually admit that the Bible exists. ===>RIDICULOUS! There is no "atheist" that would deny that the Bible exists. You're such a pathetic ignoramus, your comments are good only for a LAUGH! -- L. Quote
Guest Libertarius Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 JessHC wrote: > H. Wm. Esque wrote: > >>No Evidence of God?? Is this a claim? If so, whose responsibility >>is proof? I would contend there is no way to prove such a >>claim, therefore, the claimant would likely attempt to shift the >>responsibility to those whom he considers his opponents. > > > No, it's more a statement about the absolute dearth of actual, > legitimate, objective, verifiable evidence for any deities ever in the > universe. ===>Of course there is "evidence". Ask any believer. His/her answer is evidence ther is a "god" -- created and residing inside his/her mind. -- L. Quote
Guest stumper Posted March 5, 2007 Posted March 5, 2007 Michael Gray wrote: > On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 16:07:11 -0500, stumper <stumper@newvessel.com> > wrote: > - Refer: <FOidnYaw9ND0G3HYnZ2dnUVZ_sDinZ2d@ptd.net> >> Pastor Frank wrote: >>> "stumper" <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote in message >>> news:N7OdnXGAFvDSUXTYnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@ptd.net... >>>> Pastor Frank wrote: >>>>> "stumper" <stumper@newvessel.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:eumdnS9prupYvHrYnZ2dnUVZ_qrinZ2d@ptd.net... >>>>>> Pastor Frank wrote: >>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:1172556961.386584.45770@z35g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>> On Feb 26, 8:25?pm, Don Kresch <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> I don't. I just think it's amusing how childish you are. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have never thought you were amusing. And you are not childish. You >>>>>>> are evil. >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>> --------- >>>>>>> These insults are just refuting ploys by Satan's minions to make >>>>>>> people STOP talking about Jesus. Will we let them? Hell NO!!!! We will >>>>>>> shout His most holy and perfect name from the roof tops if need be, and >>>>>>> no atheists are going to stop us!!!!! >>>>>> Just like suicide bombers in Iraq? >>>>>> ~Stumper >>>>>> >>>>> Notice the Golden Rule of Christ below. Are you telling us you would >>>>> never become a terrorist were your country bombed and invaded. Would you >>>>> be suitably shocked and awed and become immediately compliant and docile? >>>>> If not that, what would you do? >>>>> >>>>> Pastor Frank >>>>> >>>>> The most important, yet most ignored commandments of Christ, which >>>>> would >>>>> make war, if not ALL of man's inhumanity to man extinct, nay totally >>>>> unthinkable: >>>>> THE ROYAL LAW OF CHRIST >>>>> Jesus in Mk 12:30: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy >>>>> heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy >>>>> strength: this is the first commandment. >>>>> 31: And the second is alike, namely this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour >>>>> as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. >>>>> Jesus in Mat 22:40 "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two >>>>> commandments." >>>>> THE GOLDEN RULE OF CHRIST, or Ethic of Reciprocity >>>>> Jesus in Matt. 7:12: "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that >>>>> men >>>>> should do to you, do ye even so to them...." >>>> First thing first. Would you stone adulterers? >>>> ~Stumper >>>> >>> That's a stupid question about Judaism. Jesus saved the adulteress from >>> getting stoned. But then some butt heads like getting stoned, ...and pay >>> good money for it too!!! >>> >>> >>> >> Shouldn't you obey the Ten Commandments? > > Which version? > Which one do you have in mind? -- ~Stumper 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.