NO EVIDENCE OF GODS

[Guest 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.

[Guest 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.

[Guest 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.

[Guest 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?

>>>>>> Fucking 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.

[Guest 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.

[Guest 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.

[Guest 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.

[Guest 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.

[Guest 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.

[Guest 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.

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 5:58�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> rbwinn wrote:

> > On Mar 9, 4:13?pm, "jl" <jls1...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> > > On Mar 8, 11:20 pm, "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:

>

> > > > On Mar 8, 1:51?pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:

> > > ?[...]

> > > > > 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. ?I never saw an atheist yet who

> > > > could hang with Isaiah.

> > > > Robert B. Winn

>

> > > Who would want to hang with Isaiah? ?Nobody wants to hang, period.

>

> > > If Isaiah wants to hang, let him hang alone. ?That 6-wing angel

> > > already burnt his mouth to a crisp.

>

> > OK.

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:00�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:00?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.- Hide quoted text -

>

Well, he would be the one to tell your idea. Just speak right up and

tell him when he returns to judge the earth.

Robert B. Winn

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:02�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

[Guest H. Wm. Esque]

"jesshc" <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote in message

news:wUyIh.8357$PL.240@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...

> rbwinn wrote:

> > On Mar 6, 11:06?pm, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:

<SNIP>

> > Well, here we have people from medical science claiming to be my diety.

>

> Where? Who said THAT?

>

> >Atheists are nothing if not inventive.

 

The six fundamental numbers spelled out by Martin Rees

are brute fact. How do you explain these numbers?

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:02�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:03?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

 

You sound as though you are trying to initiate a competency hearing.

Actually, you would have to present your petition to a judge in order

for it to have any meaning.

Robert B. Winn

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:07�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:11�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:14?am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.- Hide quoted text -

>

Well, let's see your demonstration then.

Robert B. Winn

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:15�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

[Guest rbwinn]

On Mar 10, 6:20�am, "JessHC" <jes...@phantomemail.com> wrote:

> 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.

[Guest H. Wm. Esque]

"Libertarius" <Libertarius@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote in message

news:QvKdnUc3MaTsA3HYnZ2dnUVZ_rbinZ2d@comcast.com...

> Of course there is "evidence".

> Ask any believer.

> His/her answer is evidence there is a "god" --

> created and residing inside his/her mind. -- L.

>

Martin Rees identifies six numbers that if they were

varied just a tiny little bit, there would be no universe,

no matter and no life. He calls this a brute fact . This

fine tuning implies a creator who tweaked the numbers.

In order to around this discovery, Rees conjectures

up infinite numbers of universes each with its own set

of numbers. Our universe in a sense won the lottery.

But the _simplest_ explanation for this fine tuning, is

the hand of a creator.

Thus this brute fact is hard evidence of a creator God.

[Guest Scott Richter]

rbwinn <rbwinn3@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.

 

You take it wrong. What a surprise...

 

> Would you like me to send you a copy?

 

No, I have all I need.

[Guest Scott Richter]

rbwinn <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:

> Evidently your idea is that if you can convince me of something then it

> will work on Jesus Christ.

 

What a truly bizarre comment. You really are a Christian nutcase...