Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On 27 Jun., 19:23, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182943627.114275.286...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 27 Jun., 02:48, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:53:44 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote in > > > <1182873224.668805.269...@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>: snip > > > > You are confusing two different wars. The war in the south was the > > > Moslems of the north against the animists and Christians of the south. > > > The war in Darfur is more tribal, but generally everyone involved is > > > Moslem. > > > This from "On Line Report" > > > "Rebel Groups in Darfur > > > Although unified in their desire for an independent Darfur, the rebel > > groups fighting the Sudanese government have been plagued by deep > > internal divisions and power struggles. > > > The region's many rebel groups agreed on Jan. 20, 2006 to join forces > > under the Alliance of Revolutionary Forces of Western Sudan, however, > > several months later, the rebels still were negotiating with the > > African Union and the Sudanese government through different leaders > > and factions. > > > There are two main rebel groups within the alliance. The larger one, > > the Sudanese Liberation Army/Movement, represents non-Muslim tribal > > Africans and is led by Minni Arcua Minnawi and Abdel Wahed Mohamed el- > > Nur." > > > As you see the largest group is non Moslem. > > Thanks for your post.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On 27 Jun., 19:31, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182956416.213454.77...@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 27 Jun., 07:08, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182920084.264354.52...@k29g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > On 26 Jun., 21:00, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <1182873774.679677.7...@u2g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, > > > snip > > > > > The relevant question is why do you argue for a position that has > > > > already been demonstrated to be wrong? The article you yourself > > > > posted contradicts your description of the situation in Darfur. In > > > > any event I would be very surprised if there were no Arabs in Darfur, > > > > or Frenchmen or Americans etc., but you are still completely wrong; > > > > and you have provided documentation that shows you are wrong. > > > > Yes, I found out from my web search that the Christians live in the > > > southern part of the Sudan. I was under the impression there were some > > > Christians living in Darfur but found out I was wrong. > > > There are Christians in Darfur. > > > There are Arabs in > > > Darfur that are funded by Arabs from the Middle East. > > > The local tribal militias are funded by the government of the Sudan. > > Your article confirms this. > > > The Arabs in the > > > Middle East probably have a long range plan that involves taking over all > > > oil wells in the Sudan. > > > And you base that on your fantasy. > > > I only posted one of the reports that I read. > > > The one you posted contradicts your claims. > > > > Jason- Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > > > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn - > > I did not post it Yes you did, and you know it; since you just removed it after writing the above. >On Jun 26, 2:08 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> csmonitor.com - The Christian Science Monitor Online Furthermore I asked you on the 27'th if the article was correct, and you said that you believed it was. Thank you for the evidence that you are a conscious liar. >but found at least one or two sites indicating that > Muslims from the middle east are funding the Arab Muslims in Darfur. I > found it by conducting a google search for "Arabs in Darfur". > > I surmised the reason why this is happening. There are oil wells in the > South part of Sudan. It's my guess that is the ultimate goal of the > Muslims from the middle east. They understand the importance of having > control over those oil wells. These are my opinions. > Jason- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On 27 Jun., 19:34, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <1182943044.707042.5...@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > On 27 Jun., 01:42, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > In article <1182890874.445300.325...@q69g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, > > > > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > On 26 Jun., 20:10, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > In article <1182873615.385634.169...@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, > > snip > > > > > The question was whether or not teachers should go along with teaching > > > > that the Earth is flat if the majority wanted that taught. You did > > > > not address that question at all. It is amazing how you lie about > > > > what everybody can see. > > > > One reason I did not respond is because that would never happen. Is the > > > correct term for this: non sequitur?- > > > No, the question was quite valid. You want to allow the majority > > determine what will be taught regardless of their knowledge or > > experience. Are you willing to apply this to anything at all? Should > > we teach astrology in an astronomy class, since so many people believe > > in astronomy? Should the curriculum of medical schools be subject to > > popular vote? Why, in short, should we limit majority rule to just > > the teaching of creation science or ID? The question is very valid, > > yet you avoid it. > > I understand your point of view.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On 27 Jun., 20:15, "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > On Jun 27, 10:46 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > > > > In article <1182952838.174078.301...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 26, 11:25 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > > In article <4681fb79$0$30597$4c368...@roadrunner.com>, "Christopher > > > > > Morris" <Drac...@roadrunner.com> wrote: > > > > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:Jason-2606072216110001@66-52-22-64.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > > > > In article <fqp3839gge41v4q43tmsag4qdme6g95...@4ax.com>, Matt > > Silberstein > > > > > > <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nos...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 21:12:36 -0700, in alt.atheism , J...@nospam.com > > > > > >> (Jason) in > > > > > >> <Jason-2606072112370...@66-52-22-64.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> wrote: > > > > > > >> >In article <vfk383lau8cr3oq9f2kglqucrlkn8mg...@4ax.com>, Matt > > > > > >> >Silberstein > > > > > >> ><RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nos...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > > > > >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:49:32 -0700, in alt.atheism , J...@nospam.com > > > > > >> >> (Jason) in > > > > > >> >> <Jason-2606071749330...@66-52-22-20.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> wrote: > > > > > > >> >> [snip] > > > > > > >> >> >The poll indicated that over 60% of the people that live in Ohio > > > > > >> >> >wanted > > > > > >> >> >both ID and evolution be taught in the public schools. > > > > > > >> >> What if 60% wanted separate schools for blacks and whites? > > > > > > >> >It would be illegal for a school board to do that. > > > > > > >> And it was illegal for the school board to put ID into the curriculum. > > > > > > >> I suggest you go and look up the history of complaint about > > > > > >> legislation from the bench. They started in the '50s pretty much with > > > > > >> Brown v Topeka Board of Education. When people complained about the > > > > > >> Court making law what they specifically meant was when the Court ruled > > > > > >> that separate but "equal" schools were illegal. > > > > > > > Yes, we studied that case while I was in college. I understand > > your point. > > > > > > The ID people should have done a better job in making sure they had no > > > > > > religion mixed in--they failed. Perhaps they will do a better job > > the next > > > > > > time. > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > Jason Brown had nothing to do with ID especially since ID was not > > thought up > > > > > yet as a new lie for Creationism. Now more to the point of the case if and > > > > > when the ID people come up with an actual scientific theory it can be > > > > > considered as being taught in classrooms, but they do not even claim they > > > > > have that. They have nothing to teach not a thing is was all a scam > > and now > > > > > they are looking for their next scam and next group of marks to pull > > it on. > > > > > Try not and be among the marks this time for these conmen in labcoats they > > > > > are trying to sell you snake oil. > > > > > I hope that the people in the ID movement do a better job during the next > > > > court case. It's obvious to me that the evolutionists are afraid that the > > > > children will realize that ID makes more sense than evolution so they will > > > > spend millions to keep any school systems from teaching ID. If they were > > > > really sure that evolution would win the competition--they would not be > > > > concerned if it was taught in the public schools. > > > > You have said this before, and it is nonsense. We don't want ID > > > taught in our schools for two reasons: > > > > 1) It is religion, not science. > > > 2) It is not true. > > > > Do you want your children taught that Thor uses his mighty hammer to > > > make the thunder? Why not? Is it because you are afraid that > > > children will realize that "Thor's hammer makes more sense than > > > meteorology"? Of course not - you don't want your children taught > > > about Thor for two reasons: > > > > 1) Norse mythology is a religious belief, not science. > > > 2) Norse mythology is not true. > > > > - Bob T. > > > I understand your point. > > Thanks. By the way, unlike some of the other atheists discussing > things with you, I respect the way you debate. I do not think you are > a "troll", or that you are a liar. I do think you are wrong about > many things, but I think you are sincere in your beliefs and, at least > to some extent, willing to learn from others' opinions. > > - Bob T.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Michael Gray Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:26:34 -0000, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: - Refer: <1183112794.458388.199570@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com> >On Jun 29, 1:01 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> In article <f608fq$pr...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> > Jason wrote: >> > > In article <f5tl6k$53...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> > >> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own >> > >> bible? >> >> > > The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time aspects >> > > than we know today since they were witnesses. >> >> > So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than >> > 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. >> > So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. >> > It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") >> >> Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers >> that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples > >The disciples never existed, Jason. They are fictional characters in >a fictional story. Jason has proven time andd time again that he is so retarded that he is quite unable to distinguish fiction from fact. -- Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On 27 Jun., 22:52, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > In article <BUzgi.2268$K9....@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > > > > > <mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message > >news:Jason-2706071037190001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > > In article <f5tl6k$53...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > > >> > In article <1182914771.873163.36...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > >> > Martin > > >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> >> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > > >> >>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim > > >> >>> mosque in > > >> >>> the world? > > >> >> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? Why > > >> >> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, > > >> >> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the > > >> >> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance which > > >> >> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why do > > >> >> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed that > > >> >> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and > > >> >> therefore on Monday? > > > >> >> Answer the damn questions, Jason. > > > >> >> Martin > > > >> > I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research > > >> > regarding > > >> > Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of saints. > > >> > Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope.. You > > >> > may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the > > >> > professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I suggest > > >> > that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly states > > >> > that > > >> > Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. > > > >> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. > > > >> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own > > >> bible? > > > > The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time aspects > > > than we know today since they were witnesses. > > > Jason > > > What time aspects Jason? Three days and three nights is the same today as it > > was two thousand years ago. > > Our days end at 12 midnight. Are you 100% sure that was the way is was in > the first century?- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On 28 Jun., 02:43, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 04:27:07 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > gudl...@yahoo.com wrote in > <1182943627.114275.286...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>: > > > > > > >On 27 Jun., 02:48, Free Lunch <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 08:53:44 -0700, in alt.talk.creationism > >> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote in > >> <1182873224.668805.269...@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>: > > >> >On 26 Jun., 01:46, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >> In article <1182812406.148531.4...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, > > >> >> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote: > >> >> > On 25 Jun., 08:31, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >> > > In article <1182751329.065068.288...@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "Bob > > >> >> > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > >> >> > > > On Jun 24, 9:31 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >> > > > > In article <1182738013.400195.243...@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, "= > >> >> > Bob > > >> >> > > > > T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote: > >> >> > > > > > On Jun 24, 6:35 pm, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > > >> >> > > > > > > Here is some information about the Christians in Iran. > > >> >> > > > > > <snip article> > > >> >> > > > > > Iran is an excellent example of what happens when religious nutcases > >> >> > > > > > are allowed to rule a country. And you, Jason, clearly wish that > >> >> > > > > > America was more like Iran. > > >> >> > > > > > - Bob T. > > >> >> > > > > Yes, it would be wonderful if everyone in the world were Christians. > > >> >> > > > Yes, then the world would be just like Iran - run by superstitious > >> >> > > > fools who allow no dissent. How would you like to live under Muslim > >> >> > > > religious law, Jason? Well, that's what the world you envision would > >> >> > > > be like - we would all have to worry about the Inquisition knocking on > >> >> > > > our door at any moment to check on our sex lives. > > >> >> > > > I much prefer to live in America, which is still a land of freedom, > >> >> > > > including freedom from religion. > > >> >> > > > - Bob T. > > >> >> > > I also like living in America. The end goal of the Muslims are to take > >> >> > > over the world--one country at a time. > > >> >> > It is also the goal of Christians. You said so. > > >> >> There is a BIG difference. If people refuse to become Muslims, the Muslims > >> >> chop off thier heads. If people refuse to become Christians, we don't harm > >> >> them in any way. Has any Christian ever harmed you or threatened you? > > >> >> > They are presently committing > >> >> > > genocide on the people that live in Darfur. > > >> >> > All the Moslems are doing that? Even the ones that are at war with > >> >> > each other? Stop being such a fool. > > >> >> > After they take over control > >> >> > > of the Sudan, they will use the Sudan as a staging ground to take over > >> >> > > surrounding countries. > > >> >> > The Sudan is a Muslem country and has been for many centuries. > > >> >> The Muslims from Middle east are taking over the Sudan. They are either > >> >> killing the Black Muslims or forcing them to leave the country. > > >> >The ones doing the killing are nomadic tribesmen in the Sudan. The > >> >Blacks are animists and Christians. You are once again exposed as an > >> >ignorant liar. > > >> You are confusing two different wars. The war in the south was the > >> Moslems of the north against the animists and Christians of the south. > >> The war in Darfur is more tribal, but generally everyone involved is > >> Moslem. > > >This from "On Line Report" > > >"Rebel Groups in Darfur > > >Although unified in their desire for an independent Darfur, the rebel > >groups fighting the Sudanese government have been plagued by deep > >internal divisions and power struggles. > > >The region's many rebel groups agreed on Jan. 20, 2006 to join forces > >under the Alliance of Revolutionary Forces of Western Sudan, however, > >several months later, the rebels still were negotiating with the > >African Union and the Sudanese government through different leaders > >and factions. > > >There are two main rebel groups within the alliance. The larger one, > >the Sudanese Liberation Army/Movement, represents non-Muslim tribal > >Africans and is led by Minni Arcua Minnawi and Abdel Wahed Mohamed el- > >Nur." > > >As you see the largest group is non Moslem. > > Interesting. I see differing reports. I assume that this non-Moslem > group is not Christian.- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest gudloos@yahoo.com Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On 29 Jun., 13:42, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:26:34 -0000, Martin <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > - Refer: <1183112794.458388.199...@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com> > > > > > > >On Jun 29, 1:01 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> In article <f608fq$pr...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> > Jason wrote: > >> > > In article <f5tl6k$53...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >> > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > >> > >> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own > >> > >> bible? > > >> > > The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time aspects > >> > > than we know today since they were witnesses. > > >> > So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than > >> > 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. > >> > So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. > >> > It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") > > >> Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers > >> that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples > > >The disciples never existed, Jason. They are fictional characters in > >a fictional story. > > Jason has proven time andd time again that he is so retarded that he > is quite unable to distinguish fiction from fact. > > --- Skjul tekst i anf Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2806071947450001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <1qYgi.655$Qz4.434@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-2806071711050001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <KwVgi.1532$ca.1504@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Jason-2706072123380001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> > In article <1182999837.081663.66570@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, >> >> > Martin >> >> > <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> On Jun 28, 10:42 am, John Popelish <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: >> >> >> > Martin Phipps wrote: >> >> >> > > On Jun 28, 8:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> I explained why I use the term 'evolutionist' in another post. >> >> >> > >> Summary >> >> >> > >> version: I found the term on page 8 of the Nov/2004 issue of >> >> >> > >> National >> >> >> > >> Geographic. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > "Scientists object to the terms evolutionism and evolutionist >> >> >> > > because >> >> >> > > the -ism and -ist suffixes accentuate belief rather than >> >> >> > > scientific >> >> >> > > study. Conversely, creationists use those same two terms partly >> >> >> > > because the terms accentuate belief, and partly perhaps because >> >> >> > > they >> >> >> > > provide a way to package their opposition into one group, >> >> >> > > seemingly >> >> >> > > atheist and materialist, designations which are irrelevant to >> >> >> > > science." >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > To use the term "evolutionist" makes as much sense as calling >> >> >> > > scientists who believe in gravity "gravitationists" as if >> >> >> > > gravity >> >> >> > > were >> >> >> > > something that one had to believe in. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Or studies. I can't get too offended by someone calling a >> >> >> > scientist who studies evolution, an evolutionist. Not when >> >> >> > other scientists are called chemists, physicists, >> >> >> > cosmologists and biologists. >> >> >> >> >> >> Perhaps, but the sciences are called chemistry, physics, cosmology >> >> >> and >> >> >> biology and not "chemistrism", "physicism", "cosmologism" or >> >> >> "biologism". Scientists who study evolution are studying evolution >> >> >> and not "evolutionism". The latter is a clear attempt of trying to >> >> >> paint science as religion. >> >> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> > >> >> > For some people, evolution appears to me to be their religion. >> >> >> >> Then you would be wrong. >> >> >> >> > If you went in to some churches and criticized their religion, they >> >> > may >> >> > get very upset with you. >> >> >> >> Connection??? >> >> >> >> > When I criticize aspects of evolution, some people in this newsgroup >> >> > get >> >> > so upset that they call me childest names. One person became so >> >> > upset >> >> > over >> >> > a minor criticism of evolution that he told me he would never again >> >> > respond to my posts. For those sorts of people, evolution is their >> >> > religion since they act just like religious people when you >> >> > criticize >> >> > their religion. >> >> >> >> No, they are just dealing with scientific illiterate's like you. It >> >> does >> >> make you made when someone with the low level of scientific knowledge >> >> that >> >> you posses, criticizes scientists who have spent their lives in their >> >> chosen >> >> fields. >> >> >> >> > However, many of the advocates of evolution do not treat evolution >> >> > as >> >> > their religion and as a result can discuss my criticisms without >> >> > becoming >> >> > upset. Many of those sorts of people would discard evolution if a >> >> > better >> >> > theory became available. >> >> >> >> Any true advocate of science would discard a theory if it were proven >> >> wrong. >> >> Unfortunately for you and your kind, ID and creation science are not >> >> scientific theories. In fact, evolution has no scientific challengers. >> > >> > I disagree. >> >> Wow. What more do we need? Jason, the scientific wonder disagrees. >> >> >> > The best decision that the advocates of evolution ever made >> > was to disassociate with the advocates of abiogenesis. >> >> It has always been a separate theory. >> >> >> > When I attended a >> > college biology class in 1971, abiogenesis was still an important >> > aspect >> > of evolution. The primordial pond (aka primordial soup) theory was in >> > our >> > text book and the professor (an advocate of evolution) firmly believed >> > it >> > happened. There is NO evidence to indicate that life evolved from >> > non-life >> > in a primordial soup. >> >> Abiogenesis is still mentioned in evolution class but it is still not a >> part >> of the TOE >> >> > I believe that Natural Selection is the best aspect of evolution. >> >> Who cares? Your scientific knowledge is abysmal. >> >> >> > I believe that intelligent design explains how life came to be on this >> > planet. It makes much more sense than abiogenesis. >> >> According to you. Unfortunately your opinion means nothing to anyone >> other >> than yourself. > > Keep in mind that about 88% of Americans agree with me related to this > issue. Are you telling me that only 12% of Americans support the TOE?? Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message news:Jason-2806071921530001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > In article <gDXgi.5693$09.1311@bignews8.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:Jason-2806071633490001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> > In article <wqVgi.1507$ca.1266@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> news:Jason-2706072141260001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> > In article <1182997554.014108.315410@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, >> >> > Martin >> >> > Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> On Jun 28, 8:44 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> > In article <jjk5835ml389gjcsnj4kbkiisposlq1...@4ax.com>, Don >> >> >> > Kresch >> >> >> > <ROT13.qxer...@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >> >> >> > > In alt.atheism On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:52:48 -0700, >> >> >> > > J...@nospam.com >> >> >> > > (Jason) let us all know that: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >In article <BUzgi.2268$K9....@bignews6.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" >> >> >> > > ><mmman...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> "Jason" <J...@nospam.com> wrote in message >> >> >> > > >>>news:Jason-2706071037190001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... >> >> >> > > >> > In article <f5tl6k$53...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> >> >> > > >> > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> Jason wrote: >> >> >> > > >> >> > In article >> >> >> > > >> >> > <1182914771.873163.36...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, >> >> >> > > >> >> > Martin >> >> >> > > >> >> > <phippsmar...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> every >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> Muslim >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> mosque in >> >> >> > > >> >> >>> the world? >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in >> >> > pictures? Why >> >> >> > > >> >> >> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on >> >> >> > > >> >> >> robes, >> >> >> > > >> >> >> banners, >> >> >> > > >> >> >> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames >> >> >> > > >> >> >> coming >> >> >> > > >> >> >> from the >> >> >> > > >> >> >> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a >> >> > monstrance which >> >> >> > > >> >> >> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during >> >> > processions? Why do >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old >> >> >> > > >> >> >> testament >> >> > claimed that >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Friday and >> >> >> > > >> >> >> therefore on Monday? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Answer the damn questions, Jason. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Martin >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> > I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any >> >> >> > > >> >> > research >> >> >> > > >> >> > regarding >> >> >> > > >> >> > Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the >> >> >> > > >> >> > heads >> >> >> > > >> >> > of >> >> > saints. >> >> >> > > >> >> > Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule >> >> >> > > >> >> > established >> >> >> > > >> >> > by a >> >> >> > Pope. You >> >> >> > > >> >> > may want to visit the art department and ask that >> >> >> > > >> >> > question >> >> >> > > >> >> > to >> >> >> > > >> >> > the >> >> >> > > >> >> > professor that teaches courses related to the history >> >> >> > > >> >> > of >> >> >> > > >> >> > art. >> >> >> > > >> >> > I >> >> >> > suggest >> >> >> > > >> >> > that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It >> >> > clearly states >> >> >> > > >> >> > that >> >> >> > > >> >> > Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after >> >> >> > > >> >> THREE >> >> >> > > >> >> days. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia >> >> >> > > >> >> over >> >> > your own >> >> >> > > >> >> bible? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> > The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about >> >> >> > > >> > the >> >> > time aspects >> >> >> > > >> > than we know today since they were witnesses. >> >> >> > > >> > Jason >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> What time aspects Jason? Three days and three nights is the >> >> >> > > >> same >> >> >> > today as it >> >> >> > > >> was two thousand years ago. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >Our days end at 12 midnight. Are you 100% sure that was the >> >> >> > > >way >> >> >> > > >is >> >> >> > > >was in >> >> >> > > >the first century? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > Sundown-sundown. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > That still doesn't make three days and three nights. >> >> >> >> >> >> > Does the Bible state that Jesus was in the tomb 72 hours or three >> >> >> > days? >> >> >> > If Jesus was placed in the tomb prior to sundown on Friday that >> >> >> > would >> >> > be day 1 >> >> >> > Saturday would be day 2 and Sunday-after sun-up would be day 3. >> >> >> > That >> >> >> > would >> >> >> > not be 72 hours but as far as the deciples were concerned--it >> >> >> > would >> >> >> > count >> >> >> > as the third day. >> >> >> >> >> >> but not "three days and three nights" as stated in Matthew. >> >> >> >> >> >> IF Jesus was entombed late Friday afternoon then you can't say that >> >> >> he >> >> >> had spent Friday in the tomb. Nor could you say that Jesus spent >> >> >> Sunday in the tomb IF he rose at sunset on Sunday. >> >> >> >> >> >> Your attempt to wiggle out of this proves your intellectual >> >> >> dishonesty. >> >> >> >> >> >> Martin >> >> > >> >> > I am not trying to wiggle out--The deciples are the witnesses and I >> >> > tried >> >> > to look at it from their point of view. >> >> >> >> What makes you think that the disciples were witnesses? >> > >> > There were thousands of people attending the crucifixion. The disciples >> > were probably part of the crowd. The Bible indicates that Joseph of >> > Arimathea; Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were present when Jesus >> > was >> > buried (Matthew 27: 57-61). >> > Jason >> >> Sorry to burst your bubble Jason, but the disciples were in hiding. > > That may or may not be true. At least three disciples discussed the > details of the crucifixtion in their gospels. One disciple was present at > the burial of Jesus and the two Marys. > Jason None of the writers of the gospels were eyewitnesses to anything Jesus did. Don't revel in your ignorance, learn how the bible was written! Quote
Guest Don Kresch Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 In alt.atheism On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 16:50:59 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) let us all know that: >In article <ome8839pa0tdhquoah9j858j14nqan8soq@4ax.com>, Don Kresch ><ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: > >> In alt.atheism On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:09:10 -0700, Jason@nospam.com >> (Jason) let us all know that: >> >> >In article <2nq783hp1qahgi8f07oq7p5t8bsd52jvt7@4ax.com>, Don Kresch >> ><ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote: >> > >> >> In alt.atheism On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 18:05:56 -0700, Jason@nospam.com >> >> (Jason) let us all know that: >> >> >> >> >> >> >Not according to polls. They took a poll in Ohio and the result was that >> >> >68% wanted both evolution and ID to be taught. >> >> > >> >> What if 68% of the people wanted to kill all christians? >> >> >> >> >> >> Don >> >> >Their opinions would be ignored. >> >> But would you think that they should be put into place? After >> all: it's 68%. >> >> >> Don >They can if they vote yes on a proposition or ballot measure. But do you think they should be put into place? After all: it's 68%. We can't go against the will of the majority, right? Christians shouldn't defend themselves against this: it's the will of the majority. The will of the majority is always right--isn't that right, Jason? Whatever the majority wants is what's right--isn't that right, Jason? I hope you can see how I'm mocking your continued use of useless statistics. 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 Robibnikoff Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 "johac" <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:jhachmann-5CD649.15412328062007@news.giganews.com... > In article <5ehujiF385pl0U1@mid.individual.net>, > "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > >> "johac" <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >> news:jhachmann-5CB182.16175027062007@news.giganews.com... >> > In article <5efchvF36n37vU1@mid.individual.net>, >> > "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >> > >> >> "Michael Gray" <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote in message >> >> news:1vj3835t86vajghq9n05jc1n7qdhe7ntud@4ax.com... >> >> > On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 15:58:27 -0700, johac >> >> > <jhachmann@remove.sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >> > - Refer: <jhachmann-2EB388.15582726062007@news.giganews.com> >> >> >>In article >> >> >><Jason-2506071038350001@66-52-22-83.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, >> >> >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> In article <5ea5jrF383thsU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" >> >> >>> <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > snip >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > > If they read their Bibles, they will know all about the true >> >> >>> > > God. >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > What makes your god the "true" one? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Books have been written on that subject. >> >> >> >> >> >>I read books on Greek mythology. Does that mean that Zeus is the >> >> >>true >> >> >>god? >> >> > >> >> > Of course. >> >> > The non-existent Zeus can kick the non-existent YHWH's butt any >> >> > time! >> >> >> >> True, but as a long-time fan of Norse mythology, I think Odin could >> >> give >> >> Zeus a run for his money >> > >> > I don't know. Maybe we could get all the gods in an arena and let them >> > fight it out to see who's the toughest non-existent being. Sort of a >> > divine bum fight. :-) >> >> LOL! Diety Death Match? Who knows how to do claymation? > > LOL! I wish I knew how! I'd love to put something like that on YouTube. > :-) That would be hilarious -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote snip > There were thousands of people attending the crucifixion. The disciples > were probably part of the crowd. How would you know? Were you there? -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Robibnikoff Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> snip > If people choose not to believe the information in the Bible, that is > their choice. According to the Time Almanac (2005), 1.9 billion people are > Christians so they do believe the information in the Bible. So? That doesn't make it true. -- Robyn Resident Witchypoo BAAWA Knight! #1557 Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f60utd$h19$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <f608fq$prp$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <f5tl6k$535$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>> In article <1182914771.873163.36550@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > Martin >>>>>>> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim >>> mosque in >>>>>>>>> the world? >>>>>>>> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? Why >>>>>>>> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, >>>>>>>> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the >>>>>>>> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance which >>>>>>>> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why do >>>>>>>> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed that >>>>>>>> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and >>>>>>>> therefore on Monday? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Answer the damn questions, Jason. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Martin >>>>>>> I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research > regarding >>>>>>> Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of saints. >>>>>>> Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope. You >>>>>>> may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the >>>>>>> professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I suggest >>>>>>> that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly > states that >>>>>>> Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. >>>>>> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. >>>>>> >>>>>> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own >>>>>> bible? >>>>> The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time aspects >>>>> than we know today since they were witnesses. >>>> So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than >>>> 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. >>>> So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. >>>> It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") >>> Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers >>> that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples worshipped on Sunday so >>> that is good enough for the millions of people that worship on Sunday. >> Like I said, it's not an essay question. You have a choice; Jesus lied >> or the disciples lied. Which was it? >> >> > Perhaps you could explain why people that don't believe in Jesus are >> > so concerned about how many days Jesus remained in the tomb. >> >> Perhaps you can tell us why you can't answer a simple question? > > The answer: I don't believe that Jesus or the disciples lied. Then you believe two contradictory things. Jesus said "3 days and 3 nights." The disciples said "less than 48 hours." Three days and 3 nights would have to be more than 48 hours. It's simple math (oh, wait, I forgot how boring math is to you.) Quote
Guest Ralph Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 "Mike" <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote in message news:f63eh0$3v5$1@news04.infoave.net... > Jason wrote: >> In article <f60utd$h19$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >> >>> Jason wrote: >>>> In article <f608fq$prp$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>> In article <f5tl6k$535$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>>> In article <1182914771.873163.36550@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, >> Martin >>>>>>>> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim >>>> mosque in >>>>>>>>>> the world? >>>>>>>>> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? >>>>>>>>> Why >>>>>>>>> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, >>>>>>>>> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the >>>>>>>>> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance >>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why >>>>>>>>> do >>>>>>>>> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed >>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and >>>>>>>>> therefore on Monday? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Answer the damn questions, Jason. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Martin >>>>>>>> I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research >> regarding >>>>>>>> Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of >>>>>>>> saints. >>>>>>>> Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope. >>>>>>>> You >>>>>>>> may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the >>>>>>>> professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I >>>>>>>> suggest >>>>>>>> that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly >> states that >>>>>>>> Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. >>>>>>> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your >>>>>>> own bible? >>>>>> The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time >>>>>> aspects >>>>>> than we know today since they were witnesses. >>>>> So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more >>>>> than 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so >>>>> hours. So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay >>>>> question. It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the >>>>> disciples.") >>>> Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers >>>> that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples worshipped on Sunday >>>> so >>>> that is good enough for the millions of people that worship on Sunday. >>> Like I said, it's not an essay question. You have a choice; Jesus lied >>> or the disciples lied. Which was it? >>> >>> > Perhaps you could explain why people that don't believe in Jesus are >>> > so concerned about how many days Jesus remained in the tomb. >>> >>> Perhaps you can tell us why you can't answer a simple question? >> >> The answer: I don't believe that Jesus or the disciples lied. > > Then you believe two contradictory things. > > Jesus said "3 days and 3 nights." The disciples said "less than 48 hours." > Three days and 3 nights would have to be more than 48 hours. It's simple > math (oh, wait, I forgot how boring math is to you.) I've yet to see the Christian who doesn't believe in contradictory things. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 In article <tvr983danoug2a215tderdq40s2fqfpoil@4ax.com>, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 10:26:34 -0000, Martin <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> > wrote: > - Refer: <1183112794.458388.199570@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com> > >On Jun 29, 1:01 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> In article <f608fq$pr...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >> <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> > Jason wrote: > >> > > In article <f5tl6k$53...@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >> > > <prabb...@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own > >> > >> bible? > >> > >> > > The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time aspects > >> > > than we know today since they were witnesses. > >> > >> > So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than > >> > 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. > >> > So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. > >> > It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") > >> > >> Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers > >> that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples > > > >The disciples never existed, Jason. They are fictional characters in > >a fictional story. > > Jason has proven time andd time again that he is so retarded that he > is quite unable to distinguish fiction from fact. > > -- And so are many advocates of evolution. Various posters have told me that there is evidence of life evolving from non-life. They seem to honestly believe there is evidence that life evolved from non-life. What is the fact? The fact is that no scientist has ever done a lab experiment that has indicated that life can evolve from non-life. It's SPECULATION that life can evolve from non-life. Even if a consesus of scientists believe that at one time in history--life evolved from non-life naturally--it does NOT mean those scientists are correct in regard to their speculations. Various posters that honestly believe life evolved from non-life are quite unable to distinquish fiction from fact. jason Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 In article <f63eh0$3v5$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > Jason wrote: > > In article <f60utd$h19$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > > > >> Jason wrote: > >>> In article <f608fq$prp$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>> In article <f5tl6k$535$3@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > >>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Jason wrote: > >>>>>>> In article <1182914771.873163.36550@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, > > Martin > >>>>>>> <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Jun 27, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Why is there a symbol of a crescent moon on top of every Muslim > >>> mosque in > >>>>>>>>> the world? > >>>>>>>> Why does a halo appear on the head of every saint in pictures? Why > >>>>>>>> does sun symbolism continue to the present day on robes, banners, > >>>>>>>> icons, behind the cross in a ray of light, flames coming from the > >>>>>>>> heart of Jesus, etc.? Who do priests bow and kiss a monstrance which > >>>>>>>> is a gold statue of the sun on a pedestal during processions? Why do > >>>>>>>> Christians go to church on Sunday when the old testament claimed that > >>>>>>>> Jesus would rise after three days, ie three days after Friday and > >>>>>>>> therefore on Monday? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Answer the damn questions, Jason. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Martin > >>>>>>> I am not a Catholic so as a result have never done any research > > regarding > >>>>>>> Catholics. I don't why artists painted halos on the heads of saints. > >>>>>>> Perhaps it was part of the culture or a rule established by a Pope. You > >>>>>>> may want to visit the art department and ask that question to the > >>>>>>> professor that teaches courses related to the history of art. I suggest > >>>>>>> that you visit Wikipedia and type "Easter Sunday". It clearly > > states that > >>>>>>> Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. > >>>>>> And yet your bible clearly says he would rise after THREE days. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Where's the 3rd day, Jason? Do you now believe wikipedia over your own > >>>>>> bible? > >>>>> The deciples worshipped on Sunday. They knew more about the time aspects > >>>>> than we know today since they were witnesses. > >>>> So was there some kind of "old math" in place? 3 days would be more than > >>>> 48 hours. From Friday evening to Sunday morning was only 36 or so hours. > >>>> So did Jesus lie or did the disciples? (this isn't an essay question. > >>>> It's a question answered only by either "Jesus" or "the disciples.") > >>> Yes, only the witnesses could properly answer the question. Any answers > >>> that I gave would only be guesses. The disciples worshipped on Sunday so > >>> that is good enough for the millions of people that worship on Sunday. > >> Like I said, it's not an essay question. You have a choice; Jesus lied > >> or the disciples lied. Which was it? > >> > >> > Perhaps you could explain why people that don't believe in Jesus are > >> > so concerned about how many days Jesus remained in the tomb. > >> > >> Perhaps you can tell us why you can't answer a simple question? > > > > The answer: I don't believe that Jesus or the disciples lied. > > Then you believe two contradictory things. > > Jesus said "3 days and 3 nights." The disciples said "less than 48 > hours." Three days and 3 nights would have to be more than 48 hours. > It's simple math (oh, wait, I forgot how boring math is to you.) The deciples believed it and that is good enough for me. The two Marys and one disciple was present when Jesus was buried in the tomb. Jason Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 cactus wrote: > Mike wrote: >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <f5tmlm$535$7@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <1182888536.294395.68200@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, >>>>> gudloos@yahoo.com wrote: >>>>>> Why do Christians celebrate a holiday named after a pagan goddess? >>>>> You failed to answer the above question. >>>>> I don't know if that is true. If it is true, I don't know the >>>>> reason. I am >>>>> not an expert related to Bible history. A Jehovahs Witness told me >>>>> something about the origin of Christmas. I don't worship any pagan >>>>> goddesses. >>>> You failed to answer the above question. >>> >>> Thanks for your post. >> >> You still failed to answer the question (did you honestly think we >> wouldn't notice?) > > You don't get it. Jason ignores questions he doesn't like, or can't face > and does the same for answers that he doesn't like. Except in the > latter case he gives an innocuous, meaningless reply before ignoring it. > He's sort of a chatterbot who can dodge anything except comments which > confront him to the point of being offensive. Oh, I get it; I just like to smear it back in his face. I don't really expect an honest answer. Quote
Guest John Baker Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:16:57 -0700, Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >In article ><DipthotDipthot-677E57.20063928062007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, >655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: > >> In article >> <Jason-2806071932410001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, >> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> >> > Do you believe humans evolved from other life-forms without any >> > involvement of god? yes or no >> >> That's easy: Why should I? There has been no good reason to do so. >> That's the main point for being an atheist. No one has set forth a good >> reason to believe in any gods. >> >> When posed with question whose answer is unknown, the skeptic is pretty >> darned comfortable with the answer, "As yet, the answer to that question >> is unknown." >> >> We don't feel the need to fill in the void with invented gods who, >> amazingly, fit the void so precisely that they, suddenly, simply must be >> true -- looking back post-invention, that is. >> >> > Do you believe that both evolution and intelligent design should be taught >> > in the public schools or just evolution? >> >> ID isn't something someone can teach, because there is no teachable >> element of it. It's all preaching when it comes to ID. You have to >> invent a god(s) concept to teach; you have to invent the process by >> which the god(s) did the creating, and then, perhaps the purpose. >> >> All this invention has nothing to do with observation. And that's what >> makes it unscientific. No "textbook" of any number of pages can conceal >> that fact. >> >> And teaching post-invention is PREACHING, pure and simple. >> >> So "teaching" ID has no place in public schools. Sunday School, >> perhaps. (Bad ones.) >> >> But you have run away from one of my questions. I'll repeat it here, >> and you'll probably run again, or pretend you didn't read it: >> >> How many of the numerous creation theories do you want to bring into >> the ID curriculum? One? A dozen? Two hundred? (Don't worry, there are >> that many -- scores more, in fact.) > >Only one--Visit the Discovery Institute website for details. They have >already published a textbook entitled, "Of Pandas and People". <sigh> OK, Jason. How much is the DI paying you to plug that stupid book? > > > > >> >> In other words, how far down the twisted, branched theological path do >> you want to take your 'science' students before you admit to them that >> you're NOT teaching them science at all? > >It's a basic course related to the basics of Intelligent Design. When I >took a high school biology class, we only spent about two weeks on >evolution. The teacher could cover Intelligent Design in about two weeks. > >> >> I anticipate that you will again run from this question. >> >> Do prove me wrong. I salivate at the opportunity. >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> "Creation theories" are more accurately called "myths," but I'll set >> that aside for now for the purpose of this discussion , because I know >> how skittish you believers get around that word. >> >> I choose to call this thread a "discussion" at this time, even though >> you, the dishonest coward that you will demonstrate that you are, will >> likely run from my question, which negates the possibility that it's a >> discussion at all. >> >> --------------------------------- > Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 In article <5eklksF39dc2mU1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> > > snip > > > If people choose not to believe the information in the Bible, that is > > their choice. According to the Time Almanac (2005), 1.9 billion people are > > Christians so they do believe the information in the Bible. > > So? That doesn't make it true. Many of the advocates of evolution believe that life evolved from non-life. That doesn't make it true. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 In article <5ekkkiF386fk4U1@mid.individual.net>, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote > > snip > > > There were thousands of people attending the crucifixion. The disciples > > were probably part of the crowd. > > How would you know? Were you there? It's speculation based upon the fact that at least three of the disciples discussed aspects of the crucifixion in their gospels. The Bible does indicate that one disciple and the two Marys were present when the body of Jesus was placed in the tomb. Quote
Guest John Baker Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 01:45:12 -0700, 655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: >In article ><Jason-2806072223150001@66-52-22-36.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> In article >> <DipthotDipthot-68E504.20110728062007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>, >> 655321 <DipthotDipthot@Yahoo.Yahoo.Com.Com> wrote: >> >> > In article >> > <Jason-2806071935400001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>, >> > Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >> > >> > > Based on what I have read, the IDers really screwed up in the Dover case. >> > > Hopefully, they have learned from their mistakes. >> > >> > The screwed up by trying to argue it. Their case was indefensible on >> > its face. >> > >> > This is the classic "we wuz robbed" defense made by the losing team. >> > The wind was blowing in our faces; our place-kicker missed that crucial >> > field goal; the ref blew a call. >> > >> > Only thing is, the game was a blowout. Not even close. >> >> Perhaps it will be different during the next court case. > >Put more dummies on the bench, and you may be right. You know, Reagan >once tried to argue that ketchup was a vegetable, and some people >believed him, too. Probably the same ones who voted for him in the first place... <G> Quote
Guest Mike Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 Jason wrote: > In article <f60tsr$fqm$2@news04.infoave.net>, Mike > <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: > >> Jason wrote: >>> In article <f5u2fa$imh$4@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jason wrote: >>>>> In article <f5j9aa$nq7$1@news04.infoave.net>, Mike >>>>> <prabbit1@shamrocksgf.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jason wrote: >>>>>>> In article <1182559237.898964.32770@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin >>>>>>> Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 23, 2:54 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: >>>>>>>>> In article <dgtn73hm11dl8eval8ne1s1155rl2td...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch >>>>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> What scientific facts can they teach about Intelligent Design? >>>>>>>>> They have a textbook. The teachers would use the text book and >>> curriculum >>>>>>>>> guide to teach those classes. >>>>>>>> You didn't answer the question, Jason. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Martin >>>>>>> Martin, >>>>>>> I don't have a copy of the textbook or curriculum guide so don't > know what >>>>>>> sort of facts are in that textbook and curriculum guide. >>>>>> Again, you didn't answer the question, Jason. It was "what scientific >>>>>> facts can they teach about ID?" and NOT "what scientific facts are >>>>>> contained in a specific book?" >>>>>> >>>>>> If ID is scientific, then there should be some specific scientific facts >>>>>> that can be taught about it. What are some of them? >>>>> Regardless, I don't know what scientific facts ID has. >>>> Then how do you know it's scientific? >> Still no answer to the question? >> >>>> Try visiting their >>>>> website. >>>> I don't need to. >>>> >>>>> You never did answer my question. >>>> Yes, I did and no, you didn't. >>>> >>>> You mentioned all of the research that >>>>> has been done on that cluster of cells. What sort of creature evolved from >>>>> that cluster of cells? >>>> All the creatures that you see around you. >>> Please tell me about an experiment where a cluster of cells evolved into a >>> life form. >> How can something evolve into the same thing? A "cluster of cells" IS a >> life form. > > Good point--I should have stated "into another life form" Ok, then, a clump of cells evolved into another life form when they reproduced. So it happens on a daily basis all over the world. Quote
Guest Jason Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 In article <l18hi.7339$s8.1925@bignews1.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > news:Jason-2806071947450001@66-52-22-115.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > > In article <1qYgi.655$Qz4.434@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> news:Jason-2806071711050001@66-52-22-101.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> > In article <KwVgi.1532$ca.1504@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "Ralph" > >> > <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> "Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message > >> >> news:Jason-2706072123380001@66-52-22-96.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net... > >> >> > In article <1182999837.081663.66570@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, > >> >> > Martin > >> >> > <phippsmartin@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> On Jun 28, 10:42 am, John Popelish <jpopel...@rica.net> wrote: > >> >> >> > Martin Phipps wrote: > >> >> >> > > On Jun 28, 8:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> I explained why I use the term 'evolutionist' in another post. > >> >> >> > >> Summary > >> >> >> > >> version: I found the term on page 8 of the Nov/2004 issue of > >> >> >> > >> National > >> >> >> > >> Geographic. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > "Scientists object to the terms evolutionism and evolutionist > >> >> >> > > because > >> >> >> > > the -ism and -ist suffixes accentuate belief rather than > >> >> >> > > scientific > >> >> >> > > study. Conversely, creationists use those same two terms partly > >> >> >> > > because the terms accentuate belief, and partly perhaps because > >> >> >> > > they > >> >> >> > > provide a way to package their opposition into one group, > >> >> >> > > seemingly > >> >> >> > > atheist and materialist, designations which are irrelevant to > >> >> >> > > science." > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > To use the term "evolutionist" makes as much sense as calling > >> >> >> > > scientists who believe in gravity "gravitationists" as if > >> >> >> > > gravity > >> >> >> > > were > >> >> >> > > something that one had to believe in. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Or studies. I can't get too offended by someone calling a > >> >> >> > scientist who studies evolution, an evolutionist. Not when > >> >> >> > other scientists are called chemists, physicists, > >> >> >> > cosmologists and biologists. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Perhaps, but the sciences are called chemistry, physics, cosmology > >> >> >> and > >> >> >> biology and not "chemistrism", "physicism", "cosmologism" or > >> >> >> "biologism". Scientists who study evolution are studying evolution > >> >> >> and not "evolutionism". The latter is a clear attempt of trying to > >> >> >> paint science as religion. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Martin > >> >> > > >> >> > For some people, evolution appears to me to be their religion. > >> >> > >> >> Then you would be wrong. > >> >> > >> >> > If you went in to some churches and criticized their religion, they > >> >> > may > >> >> > get very upset with you. > >> >> > >> >> Connection??? > >> >> > >> >> > When I criticize aspects of evolution, some people in this newsgroup > >> >> > get > >> >> > so upset that they call me childest names. One person became so > >> >> > upset > >> >> > over > >> >> > a minor criticism of evolution that he told me he would never again > >> >> > respond to my posts. For those sorts of people, evolution is their > >> >> > religion since they act just like religious people when you > >> >> > criticize > >> >> > their religion. > >> >> > >> >> No, they are just dealing with scientific illiterate's like you. It > >> >> does > >> >> make you made when someone with the low level of scientific knowledge > >> >> that > >> >> you posses, criticizes scientists who have spent their lives in their > >> >> chosen > >> >> fields. > >> >> > >> >> > However, many of the advocates of evolution do not treat evolution > >> >> > as > >> >> > their religion and as a result can discuss my criticisms without > >> >> > becoming > >> >> > upset. Many of those sorts of people would discard evolution if a > >> >> > better > >> >> > theory became available. > >> >> > >> >> Any true advocate of science would discard a theory if it were proven > >> >> wrong. > >> >> Unfortunately for you and your kind, ID and creation science are not > >> >> scientific theories. In fact, evolution has no scientific challengers. > >> > > >> > I disagree. > >> > >> Wow. What more do we need? Jason, the scientific wonder disagrees. > >> > >> > >> > The best decision that the advocates of evolution ever made > >> > was to disassociate with the advocates of abiogenesis. > >> > >> It has always been a separate theory. > >> > >> > >> > When I attended a > >> > college biology class in 1971, abiogenesis was still an important > >> > aspect > >> > of evolution. The primordial pond (aka primordial soup) theory was in > >> > our > >> > text book and the professor (an advocate of evolution) firmly believed > >> > it > >> > happened. There is NO evidence to indicate that life evolved from > >> > non-life > >> > in a primordial soup. > >> > >> Abiogenesis is still mentioned in evolution class but it is still not a > >> part > >> of the TOE > >> > >> > I believe that Natural Selection is the best aspect of evolution. > >> > >> Who cares? Your scientific knowledge is abysmal. > >> > >> > >> > I believe that intelligent design explains how life came to be on this > >> > planet. It makes much more sense than abiogenesis. > >> > >> According to you. Unfortunately your opinion means nothing to anyone > >> other > >> than yourself. > > > > Keep in mind that about 88% of Americans agree with me related to this > > issue. > > Are you telling me that only 12% of Americans support the TOE?? The poll indicates that only 12% of Americans believe "that humans evolved from other life-forms without any involvement of a god." source: Nov 2004 issue of National Geographic--page 6--article entitled: "Was Darwin Wrong?" 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.