Discussion:
Four Historical Facts that Prove Jesus Rose from the Dead
Add Reply
Bob
2017-06-13 03:57:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message

--
"When atheists are presented with critical reasoned arguments, they often
respond with either personal insults, twisted logic and reasoning along
with semantics with excessive detail of complete speculation presented
as truth, to deviate from the critical argument at hand, and talk at
cross purposes to evade it." --Retro
a322x1n
2017-06-13 05:08:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
https://www.youtube.com/watch-Bob-give-himself-a-blow-job/
<http://scienceblogs.com/evolutionblog/2014/12/19/intelligent-design-
still-dead/>

<http://tinyurl.com/kwyrtku>

<http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danthropology/2014/08/ken-hams-10-facts-
that-prove-creationism-debunked/>

<http://tinyurl.com/hor4bam>

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District>

<http://tinyurl.com/bmxa4rc>

<https://sphericalbullshit.wordpress.com/2013/05/02/what-i-would-say-
to-creationists-if-i-was-more-of-a-dick/>

<http://tinyurl.com/zascach>
Gronk
2017-06-18 05:19:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Credit card receipts.

Rambling Letter to the Editor.

Spotted on the security cam of a 7-11.

Made crank call to local radio host.
John Ritson
2017-06-13 09:10:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
--
John Ritson

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Bob
2017-06-13 14:50:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.

It's just that simple.
--
"When atheists are presented with critical reasoned arguments, they often
respond with either personal insults, twisted logic and reasoning along
with semantics with excessive detail of complete speculation presented
as truth, to deviate from the critical argument at hand, and talk at
cross purposes to evade it." --Retro
John Ritson
2017-06-13 18:07:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Robert Duncan/Jeremy Brown/Calvin Ramsay/Matthias Sereno/Michael
Lankford/Kelli Gibson/Stu D. Baker/Edsel D. Soto/Kevin Madison/Molly
Quel/Ellas McDaniel/Hunsawa Shayar/Bob <***@null.null>
claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".

But consistency has never been a Christian characteristic.

He's just that simple.
--
John Ritson

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Bob
2017-06-13 19:13:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".

So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
--
"When atheists are presented with critical reasoned arguments, they often
respond with either personal insults, twisted logic and reasoning along
with semantics with excessive detail of complete speculation presented
as truth, to deviate from the critical argument at hand, and talk at
cross purposes to evade it." --Retro
Ted
2017-06-14 00:40:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Do you believe in astronomy, Bob?
Christopher A. Lee
2017-06-14 01:02:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Because these things simply don't happen - at least,not that way.
Post by Ted
Do you believe in astronomy, Bob?
Probably not.
Ted
2017-06-14 21:57:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by Ted
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Because these things simply don't happen - at least,not that way.
Post by Ted
Do you believe in astronomy, Bob?
Probably not.
He didn't answer me, so apparently he doesn't know what it is.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-06-14 04:37:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
aaa
2017-06-14 07:04:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about the
resurrection of Jesus.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
hypatiab7
2017-06-14 16:02:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about the
resurrection of Jesus.
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
aaa
2017-06-15 00:19:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about the
resurrection of Jesus.
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
His answer only proves his ignorance. If you can't understand the Bible
philosophically and spiritually, you can't understand the Bible at all.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Lucifer Morningstar
2017-06-15 04:03:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
His answer only proves his ignorance.
His answer proves your ignorance.
Post by aaa
If you can't understand the Bible philosophically and spiritually,
you can't understand the Bible at all.
We understand the bible. You don't.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-06-15 09:38:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about the
resurrection of Jesus.
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
His answer only proves his ignorance.
Wrong, it shows that I do understand.

If you can't understand the Bible
Post by aaa
philosophically
It is a philosophy of death. Life is just something people are supposed to put up with until they get to heaven after they die.


and spiritually,

Nothing spiritual there or anywhere.

you can't understand the Bible at all.
Wrong again Retardo. It's you who doesn't understand because of your brain damage mucking up all your input and causing you to think you know more than you do. You say you haven't even read the bible, so how the hell would you know anything about it?
aaa
2017-06-15 15:49:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the
Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In
fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe
them. Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the
Word of God. Therefore, only the chosen elect will
believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent
killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at
least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not
believe that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created
for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
His answer only proves his ignorance.
Wrong, it shows that I do understand.
No. There is nothing philosophical in what you said. The resurrection
has profound philosophical and spiritual meanings. It is the work of God
that will happen again and again on this planet until all the good souls
have been found and secured. God does not do his work by
representatives. God works with his own hands.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
If you can't understand the Bible
Post by aaa
philosophically
It is a philosophy of death. Life is just something people are
supposed to put up with until they get to heaven after they die.
No. The Bible is the philosophy of truth, and the Gospels are the
philosophy of life in Jesus Christ that has overcome death.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
and spiritually,
Nothing spiritual there or anywhere.
The spiritual meaning is not easily seen. You need to meditate on it.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
you can't understand the Bible at all.
Wrong again Retardo. It's you who doesn't understand because of your
brain damage mucking up all your input and causing you to think you
know more than you do. You say you haven't even read the bible, so
how the hell would you know anything about it?
My spiritual understanding of the Bible does not come easily. It comes
from the inspirations of God.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Smiler
2017-06-15 18:26:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In fact, I'm
saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them. Only the
chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God. Therefore,
only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe
that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for
idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about
the resurrection of Jesus.
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
His answer only proves his ignorance.
Wrong, it shows that I do understand.
No. There is nothing philosophical in what you said.
How can a lot of pieces of paper with type on them be philosophical?
Post by aaa
The resurrection has profound philosophical and spiritual meanings.
Only to those that believe that nonsense.
Post by aaa
It is the work of God
That would be the god for which you cannot show a scrap of evidence.
Post by aaa
that will happen again and again on this planet until all the good souls
That would be the soul for which you cannot show a scrap of evidence.
Post by aaa
have been found and secured. God does not do his work by
representatives.
Then why are you representing it?
Post by aaa
God works with his own hands.
That would be the god for which you cannot show a scrap of evidence.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
If you can't understand the Bible
Post by aaa
philosophically
It is a philosophy of death. Life is just something people are
supposed to put up with until they get to heaven after they die.
No. The Bible is the philosophy of truth
Merely your stupid unevidenced belief.
Post by aaa
and the Gospels are the
philosophy of life in Jesus Christ that has overcome death.
That would be the Jesus for which you cannot show a scrap of evidence.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
and spiritually,
Nothing spiritual there or anywhere.
The spiritual meaning is not easily seen. You need to meditate on it.
You spelt 'masturbate' incorrectly.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
you can't understand the Bible at all.
Wrong again Retardo. It's you who doesn't understand because of your
brain damage mucking up all your input and causing you to think you
know more than you do. You say you haven't even read the bible, so how
the hell would you know anything about it?
My spiritual understanding of the Bible does not come easily. It comes
from the inspirations of God.
You have no understanding of anything, moron
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
aaa
2017-06-16 02:51:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In fact, I'm
saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them. Only the
chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God. Therefore,
only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe
that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for
idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about
the resurrection of Jesus.
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
His answer only proves his ignorance.
Wrong, it shows that I do understand.
No. There is nothing philosophical in what you said.
How can a lot of pieces of paper with type on them be philosophical?
Post by aaa
The resurrection has profound philosophical and spiritual meanings.
Only to those that believe that nonsense.
Post by aaa
It is the work of God
That would be the god for which you cannot show a scrap of evidence.
Post by aaa
that will happen again and again on this planet until all the good souls
That would be the soul for which you cannot show a scrap of evidence.
Post by aaa
have been found and secured. God does not do his work by
representatives.
Then why are you representing it?
Post by aaa
God works with his own hands.
That would be the god for which you cannot show a scrap of evidence.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
If you can't understand the Bible
Post by aaa
philosophically
It is a philosophy of death. Life is just something people are
supposed to put up with until they get to heaven after they die.
No. The Bible is the philosophy of truth
Merely your stupid unevidenced belief.
Post by aaa
and the Gospels are the
philosophy of life in Jesus Christ that has overcome death.
That would be the Jesus for which you cannot show a scrap of evidence.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
and spiritually,
Nothing spiritual there or anywhere.
The spiritual meaning is not easily seen. You need to meditate on it.
You spelt 'masturbate' incorrectly.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
you can't understand the Bible at all.
Wrong again Retardo. It's you who doesn't understand because of your
brain damage mucking up all your input and causing you to think you
know more than you do. You say you haven't even read the bible, so how
the hell would you know anything about it?
My spiritual understanding of the Bible does not come easily. It comes
from the inspirations of God.
You have no understanding of anything, moron
You have no understanding of anything, moron.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Smiler
2017-06-16 20:07:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 10:51:34 +0800, aaa wrote:

<snip>
Post by aaa
You have no understanding of anything, moron.
I don't understand how bacteria can pray.
I don't understand how the SLoT works in your world.
I don't understand your belief in unevidenced things and beings.
I don't understand the nonsense in your posts.
I don't understand how you can reject reality.
I don't understand how you can be so stupid.
That's all because I'm sane and you're not.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Peter Pan
2017-06-16 20:12:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
<snip>
Post by aaa
You have no understanding of anything, moron.
I don't understand how bacteria can pray.
I don't understand how the SLoT works in your world.
I don't understand your belief in unevidenced things and beings.
I don't understand the nonsense in your posts.
I don't understand how you can reject reality.
I don't understand how you can be so stupid.
That's all because I'm sane and you're not.
Nobody understands teh Tripe.

That just proves she's the only sane one on the planet,
right?
Smiler
2017-06-16 23:25:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Smiler
<snip>
Post by aaa
You have no understanding of anything, moron.
I don't understand how bacteria can pray.
I don't understand how the SLoT works in your world.
I don't understand your belief in unevidenced things and beings.
I don't understand the nonsense in your posts.
I don't understand how you can reject reality.
I don't understand how you can be so stupid.
That's all because I'm sane and you're not.
Nobody understands teh Tripe.
That just proves she's the only sane one on the planet,
right?
Which planet? Surely not the one we call Earth.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
aaa
2017-06-19 19:36:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
<snip>
Post by aaa
You have no understanding of anything, moron.
I don't understand how bacteria can pray.
I don't understand how the SLoT works in your world.
I don't understand your belief in unevidenced things and beings.
I don't understand the nonsense in your posts.
I don't understand how you can reject reality.
I don't understand how you can be so stupid.
That's all because I'm sane and you're not.
How can it be sane when you are utterly ignorant of everything? Is an
intellectual retard sane? If no, why is a spiritual retard considered
sane by you?
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
hypatiab7
2017-06-19 02:10:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the
Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In
fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe
them. Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the
Word of God. Therefore, only the chosen elect will
believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not
believe that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created
for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
His answer only proves his ignorance.
Wrong, it shows that I do understand.
No. There is nothing philosophical in what you said. The resurrection
has profound philosophical and spiritual meanings. It is the work of God
that will happen again and again on this planet until all the good souls
have been found and secured. God does not do his work by
representatives. God works with his own hands.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
If you can't understand the Bible
Post by aaa
philosophically
It is a philosophy of death. Life is just something people are
supposed to put up with until they get to heaven after they die.
No. The Bible is the philosophy of truth, and the Gospels are the
philosophy of life in Jesus Christ that has overcome death.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
and spiritually,
Nothing spiritual there or anywhere.
The spiritual meaning is not easily seen. You need to meditate on it.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
you can't understand the Bible at all.
Wrong again Retardo. It's you who doesn't understand because of your
brain damage mucking up all your input and causing you to think you
know more than you do. You say you haven't even read the bible, so
how the hell would you know anything about it?
My spiritual understanding of the Bible does not come easily. It comes
from the inspirations of God.
It came under the inspiration of whatever bopped you in the head and turned
you into a religious whacko.
%
2017-06-19 02:18:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by hypatiab7
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the
Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In
fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe
them. Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the
Word of God. Therefore, only the chosen elect will
believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not
believe that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created
for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
He answered your question and you spoke mud.
His answer only proves his ignorance.
Wrong, it shows that I do understand.
No. There is nothing philosophical in what you said. The resurrection
has profound philosophical and spiritual meanings. It is the work of
God that will happen again and again on this planet until all the
good souls have been found and secured. God does not do his work by
representatives. God works with his own hands.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
If you can't understand the Bible
Post by aaa
philosophically
It is a philosophy of death. Life is just something people are
supposed to put up with until they get to heaven after they die.
No. The Bible is the philosophy of truth, and the Gospels are the
philosophy of life in Jesus Christ that has overcome death.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
and spiritually,
Nothing spiritual there or anywhere.
The spiritual meaning is not easily seen. You need to meditate on it.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
you can't understand the Bible at all.
Wrong again Retardo. It's you who doesn't understand because of
your brain damage mucking up all your input and causing you to
think you know more than you do. You say you haven't even read the
bible, so how the hell would you know anything about it?
My spiritual understanding of the Bible does not come easily. It
comes from the inspirations of God.
It came under the inspiration of whatever bopped you in the head and
turned you into a religious whacko.
live and let live
Smiler
2017-06-15 00:16:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about the
resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
aaa
2017-06-15 06:32:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about the
resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified by
anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you fail to
realize and understand.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-06-15 09:45:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about the
resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified by
anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you fail to
realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.

The truth is nobody can prove Jesus ever existed.

No person who understands the message of the bible would ever want to adhere to its teachings. All you have to do is look around the NG and you can see what kind of damage religion has done to our resident theists. They are all damaged, they are all forced to lie to defend their faith, they can't win any argument on facts, which is why they use circular reasoning and the redefinition of words.
It is quite obvious that religion is not a force for good in the world, but more like an anchor holding humanity back.
aaa
2017-06-15 16:02:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the
Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In
fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe
them. Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the
Word of God. Therefore, only the chosen elect will
believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent
killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at
least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not
believe that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created
for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified
by anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you
fail to realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
The truth is nobody can prove Jesus ever existed.
His teaching has already proven it.
Post by Cloud Hobbit
No person who understands the message of the bible would ever want to
adhere to its teachings. All you have to do is look around the NG
and you can see what kind of damage religion has done to our resident
theists. They are all damaged, they are all forced to lie to defend
their faith, they can't win any argument on facts, which is why they
use circular reasoning and the redefinition of words. It is quite
obvious that religion is not a force for good in the world, but more
like an anchor holding humanity back.
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2017-06-15 17:31:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the
Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In
fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe
them. Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the
Word of God. Therefore, only the chosen elect will
believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not
believe that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created
for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified
by anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you
fail to realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.

These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.

<cue blind denial>
Smiler
2017-06-15 18:41:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In fact,
I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them. Only
the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe
that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for
idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified
by anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you
fail to realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at sea level are
infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to love one another as He has
loved spaghetti.
That, truly, can not be dismissed as fictional.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies of those who
practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the author of his speeches, can
not be dismissed as fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank you for
receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
Ramen, Brother Pan. Spoken like a true gnocchic.

Pasta Al Dente,
Chief Colander of the Most Holey Church of the FSM.
May you be touched by his noodly appendage
and may the parmesan be with you always.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Peter Pan
2017-06-15 19:48:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In fact,
I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them. Only
the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe
that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for
idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified
by anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you
fail to realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at sea level are
infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to love one another as He has
loved spaghetti.
That, truly, can not be dismissed as fictional.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies of those who
practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the author of his speeches, can
not be dismissed as fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank you for
receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
Ramen, Brother Pan. Spoken like a true gnocchic.
Pasta Al Dente,
Chief Colander of the Most Holey Church of the FSM.
May you be touched by his noodly appendage
and may the parmesan be with you always.
I bet you never thought aaa would be the one to offer
Ultimate Proof of the FSM.

Weird times.
aaa
2017-06-15 18:39:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the
Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In
fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe
them. Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the
Word of God. Therefore, only the chosen elect will
believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not
believe that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created
for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified
by anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you
fail to realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2017-06-15 19:54:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?

I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.

Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
aaa
2017-06-16 07:52:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2017-06-16 09:26:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
I seem to know more about the teachings of Jesus than you
do.

You can't explain why i can't extrapolate what you said
to any religious leader, including The FSM (sauce be upon
Him). So your "proof" breaks down completely.

Now what?
aaa
2017-06-16 12:38:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
I seem to know more about the teachings of Jesus than you
do.
If that were true, you would have never made your stupid comparison.
Post by Peter Pan
You can't explain why i can't extrapolate what you said
to any religious leader, including The FSM (sauce be upon
Him). So your "proof" breaks down completely.
Now what?
Now you need to better understand the teaching of Jesus by actually
practicing it in your real life. Without the actual spiritual
experience, there can't be the real understanding.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2017-06-16 16:19:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
I seem to know more about the teachings of Jesus than you
do.
If that were true, you would have never made your stupid comparison.
Knowing about Jesus isn't the same as believing it. The
more you know about a religion, the less believable it
becomes.

You are just mad that i took the wind out of your sails
by demonstrating that your "proof" means nothing.
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
You can't explain why i can't extrapolate what you said
to any religious leader, including The FSM (sauce be upon
Him). So your "proof" breaks down completely.
Now what?
Now you need to better understand the teaching of Jesus by actually
practicing it in your real life. Without the actual spiritual
experience, there can't be the real understanding.
Been there, done that.

This is just your way of looking for an out. You will
claim that one can't understand the teachings of jesus
without being a practicing christian. We both know
that's bunk, but it makes you feel better to say it
anyway.

Don't be so discouraged. Some day you might win an
argument with duke.
aaa
2017-06-19 05:36:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
I seem to know more about the teachings of Jesus than you
do.
If that were true, you would have never made your stupid comparison.
Knowing about Jesus isn't the same as believing it. The
more you know about a religion, the less believable it
becomes.
You are just mad that i took the wind out of your sails
by demonstrating that your "proof" means nothing.
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
You can't explain why i can't extrapolate what you said
to any religious leader, including The FSM (sauce be upon
Him). So your "proof" breaks down completely.
Now what?
Now you need to better understand the teaching of Jesus by actually
practicing it in your real life. Without the actual spiritual
experience, there can't be the real understanding.
Been there, done that.
Yet, you simply want to show the exact opposite of that.
Post by Peter Pan
This is just your way of looking for an out. You will
claim that one can't understand the teachings of jesus
without being a practicing christian. We both know
that's bunk, but it makes you feel better to say it
anyway.
Don't be so discouraged. Some day you might win an
argument with duke.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2017-06-19 06:33:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
I seem to know more about the teachings of Jesus than you
do.
If that were true, you would have never made your stupid comparison.
Knowing about Jesus isn't the same as believing it. The
more you know about a religion, the less believable it
becomes.
You are just mad that i took the wind out of your sails
by demonstrating that your "proof" means nothing.
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
You can't explain why i can't extrapolate what you said
to any religious leader, including The FSM (sauce be upon
Him). So your "proof" breaks down completely.
Now what?
Now you need to better understand the teaching of Jesus by actually
practicing it in your real life. Without the actual spiritual
experience, there can't be the real understanding.
Been there, done that.
Yet, you simply want to show the exact opposite of that.
Of course, because my personal life experience was that
christianity is bunkus.

Again, your claims about the teaching of Jesus are
equally applicable to any nominal spiritual leader,
including the FSM. They don't "prove" anything else.
aaa
2017-06-19 19:28:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
I seem to know more about the teachings of Jesus than you
do.
If that were true, you would have never made your stupid comparison.
Knowing about Jesus isn't the same as believing it. The
more you know about a religion, the less believable it
becomes.
You are just mad that i took the wind out of your sails
by demonstrating that your "proof" means nothing.
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
You can't explain why i can't extrapolate what you said
to any religious leader, including The FSM (sauce be upon
Him). So your "proof" breaks down completely.
Now what?
Now you need to better understand the teaching of Jesus by actually
practicing it in your real life. Without the actual spiritual
experience, there can't be the real understanding.
Been there, done that.
Yet, you simply want to show the exact opposite of that.
Of course, because my personal life experience was that
christianity is bunkus.
The topic is the teaching of Jesus instead of religion or religious
organization. I see you are good at changing the subject.
Post by Peter Pan
Again, your claims about the teaching of Jesus are
equally applicable to any nominal spiritual leader,
including the FSM. They don't "prove" anything else.
No. The teaching of Jesus has to be practiced to understand the truth of
the teaching. You can disagree with religion or people who practice
religion, but you have no ground to disagree with the teaching of Jesus.
Your ignorance of his teaching keeps you from comparing it with
anything. You don't know what you are talking about.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2017-06-19 19:52:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did i deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
I seem to know more about the teachings of Jesus than you
do.
If that were true, you would have never made your stupid comparison.
Knowing about Jesus isn't the same as believing it. The
more you know about a religion, the less believable it
becomes.
You are just mad that i took the wind out of your sails
by demonstrating that your "proof" means nothing.
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
You can't explain why i can't extrapolate what you said
to any religious leader, including The FSM (sauce be upon
Him). So your "proof" breaks down completely.
Now what?
Now you need to better understand the teaching of Jesus by actually
practicing it in your real life. Without the actual spiritual
experience, there can't be the real understanding.
Been there, done that.
Yet, you simply want to show the exact opposite of that.
Of course, because my personal life experience was that
christianity is bunkus.
The topic is the teaching of Jesus instead of religion or religious
organization. I see you are good at changing the subject.
Christianity *is* about following the teachings of Jesus,
whatever one might perceive them to be.

So you are saying someone has to accept Jesus as their
savior, and practice everything he supposedly taught
(your version), or one cannot have an opinion.

I'm saying that's bunkus.
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Again, your claims about the teaching of Jesus are
equally applicable to any nominal spiritual leader,
including the FSM. They don't "prove" anything else.
No. The teaching of Jesus has to be practiced to understand the truth of
the teaching. You can disagree with religion or people who practice
religion, but you have no ground to disagree with the teaching of Jesus.
Your ignorance of his teaching keeps you from comparing it with
anything. You don't know what you are talking about.
The teachings of the FSM must be practiced to understand
the Truth. Have you ever boiled the pasta for exactly 10
min, 20 sec? Do you not believe in loving one another?

You have no grounds to disagree with the teaching of FSM.
Your ignorance of His teaching keeps you from comparing
it with anything. You don't know what you are talking
about.

You obviously reject the FSM because you have no love in
your heart.
Lucifer Morningstar
2017-06-16 10:50:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did I deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
Why are you so critical of the way God created?
Do you think you know better than God?
aaa
2017-06-16 12:41:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lucifer Morningstar
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did I deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
Why are you so critical of the way God created?
Do you think you know better than God?
Why are you so twisted in your own speech? What the fuck are you talking
about?
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Lucifer Morningstar
2017-06-16 13:53:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Lucifer Morningstar
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it, he, as the author of his speeches, can not be
dismissed as fictional.
The FSM teaches that noodles boiled for 10 min, 20 sec at
sea level are infinitely perfect. He also teaches us to
love one another as He has loved spaghetti.
These teachings are proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice them. Therefore the FSM, as the
author of his speeches, can not be dismissed as
fictional.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching. No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
That also proves the teachings of FSM are perfect. Thank
you for receiving the FSM into your heart.
<cue blind denial>
So you know you are blindly denying the teaching of Jesus. Why do you
think it's justified for you to do this?
What did I deny, blindly or sightedly?
I'm not arguing about it. I'm just pointing out the
obvious -- your "proof" of Jesus is just as valid if we
apply it to the FSM.
Will you blindly deny the teaching of FSM? Why do you
think it's justified for you to do that? If you deny the
FSM, you deny Jesus.
No. The teaching of Jesus has real meanings to the real personal life
that can not be fully understood without the actual practice. You are
clueless to such meanings. You don't know and don't want to know that
the teaching of Jesus is a real living philosophy that can benefit life
both spiritually and physically. That is why you are completely wrong to
compare such teaching with an imaginary teaching of your imaginary FSM.
Why are you so critical of the way God created?
Do you think you know better than God?
Why are you so twisted in your own speech? What the fuck are you talking
about?
Why can't you say anything good about the way God created?
Your hatred of God shows in all your posts.
Smiler
2017-06-15 19:26:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In fact, I'm
saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them. Only the
chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God. Therefore,
only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe
that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for
idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about
the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified by
anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you fail to
realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it,
Then all religions are true by that measure.
Hindus, for example, say the same about Krishna.
Post by aaa
he, as the author of his speeches,
How do you know that? All you have, at best, is hearsay by written by
people many years after his supposed death.
Post by aaa
can not be dismissed as fictional.
I, and many others, do dismiss it as fiction.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
The truth is nobody can prove Jesus ever existed.
His teaching has already proven it.
Back to the circular arguments.
The teaching of Dawkins has already proven evolution.
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
No person who understands the message of the bible would ever want to
adhere to its teachings. All you have to do is look around the NG and
you can see what kind of damage religion has done to our resident
theists. They are all damaged, they are all forced to lie to defend
their faith, they can't win any argument on facts, which is why they
use circular reasoning and the redefinition of words. It is quite
obvious that religion is not a force for good in the world, but more
like an anchor holding humanity back.
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching.
The teaching of Dawkins is a perfect teaching.
Post by aaa
No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
No matter what happens to evolution or people in general, Dawkins'
teaching can not be denied.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
aaa
2017-06-16 03:14:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In fact, I'm
saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them. Only the
chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God. Therefore,
only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe
that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for
idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about
the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified by
anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you fail to
realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies of
those who practice it,
Then all religions are true by that measure.
Hindus, for example, say the same about Krishna.
In God's house there are many mansions. Buddhism, for example, is no
different from the teaching of Christ spiritually. The Buddha nature is
in fact the Christ consciousness.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
he, as the author of his speeches,
How do you know that? All you have, at best, is hearsay by written by
people many years after his supposed death.
I know that because his words have guided me in living my life that has
helped me to better understand life and the truth of God. The truth that
is revealed in his words can not be a mere hearsay.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
can not be dismissed as fictional.
I, and many others, do dismiss it as fiction.
That's because you are ignorant of the actual truth revealed in his
words. You only blindly deny what you don't really know.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
The truth is nobody can prove Jesus ever existed.
His teaching has already proven it.
Back to the circular arguments.
The teaching of Dawkins has already proven evolution.
The teaching of Dawkins has been shown to be contradictory to the second
law of thermodynamics. The teaching of Christ has been shown to be the
truth in living life.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
No person who understands the message of the bible would ever want to
adhere to its teachings. All you have to do is look around the NG and
you can see what kind of damage religion has done to our resident
theists. They are all damaged, they are all forced to lie to defend
their faith, they can't win any argument on facts, which is why they
use circular reasoning and the redefinition of words. It is quite
obvious that religion is not a force for good in the world, but more
like an anchor holding humanity back.
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching.
The teaching of Dawkins is a perfect teaching.
Except it has been proven wrong by someone who does understand life a
lot better than him. No one has been able to prove the teaching of Jesus
to be wrong.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
No matter what happens to
religion or people in general, his teaching can not be denied.
No matter what happens to evolution or people in general, Dawkins'
teaching can not be denied.
It's already denied according to the second law of thermodynamics.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Smiler
2017-06-16 20:19:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
writes
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In fact,
I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them. Only
the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe
that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for
idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified
by anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you
fail to realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the testimonies
of those who practice it,
Then all religions are true by that measure.
Hindus, for example, say the same about Krishna.
In God's house there are many mansions. Buddhism, for example, is no
different from the teaching of Christ spiritually. The Buddha nature is
in fact the Christ consciousness.
Yet some sects of Buddhism are atheistic.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
he, as the author of his speeches,
How do you know that? All you have, at best, is hearsay by written by
people many years after his supposed death.
I know that because his words have guided me in living my life that has
helped me to better understand life and the truth of God. The truth that
is revealed in his words can not be a mere hearsay.
How do you know that they are 'his words'?
He didn't write them himself, so they are merely hearsay, at best.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
can not be dismissed as fictional.
I, and many others, do dismiss it as fiction.
That's because you are ignorant of the actual truth revealed in his
words.
What 'his words'? He wrote nothing.
Post by aaa
You only blindly deny what you don't really know.
I, at least know that he wrote nothing and, therefore, there are no 'his
words'.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
The truth is nobody can prove Jesus ever existed.
His teaching has already proven it.
Just as the teaching of Superman has already proven that Superman existed.
Circular much?
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Back to the circular arguments.
The teaching of Dawkins has already proven evolution.
The teaching of Dawkins has been shown to be contradictory to the second
law of thermodynamics.
Only by you and your illegitimate version of the second law.
Post by aaa
The teaching of Christ has been shown to be the truth in living life.
Only to the insane.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
No person who understands the message of the bible would ever want to
adhere to its teachings. All you have to do is look around the NG
and you can see what kind of damage religion has done to our resident
theists. They are all damaged, they are all forced to lie to defend
their faith, they can't win any argument on facts, which is why they
use circular reasoning and the redefinition of words. It is quite
obvious that religion is not a force for good in the world, but more
like an anchor holding humanity back.
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching.
The teaching of Dawkins is a perfect teaching.
Except it has been proven wrong by someone who does understand life a
lot better than him.
Who would that be, liar?
Post by aaa
No one has been able to prove the teaching of Jesus to be wrong.
The 'teaching' written by others who live many years after his supposed
death.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
No matter what happens to religion or people in general, his teaching
can not be denied.
No matter what happens to evolution or people in general, Dawkins'
teaching can not be denied.
It's already denied according to the second law of thermodynamics.
Only by your illegitimate version of the second law.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
aaa
2017-06-19 20:26:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
On Tuesday, June 13, 2017 at 12:13:50 PM UTC-7, Bob
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
No one is saying you have to believe they're
true. In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite;
you cannot believe them. Only the chosen elect
believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe
them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread
"permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of
saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular,
do not believe that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction
created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical
understanding about the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any
evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be
verified by anyone who practices the teaching. It is the
living truth you fail to realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the
testimonies of those who practice it,
Then all religions are true by that measure. Hindus, for example,
say the same about Krishna.
In God's house there are many mansions. Buddhism, for example, is
no different from the teaching of Christ spiritually. The Buddha
nature is in fact the Christ consciousness.
Yet some sects of Buddhism are atheistic.
Irrelevant. I don't consider all atheists as having denied God who is
the truth. Atheists can be rather enlightening truth seekers. Their
wisdom proves their knowledge of God even though they don't worship God
religiously. God does not require worship. We humans require worshiping
God to learn and understand God's truth.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
he, as the author of his speeches,
How do you know that? All you have, at best, is hearsay by
written by people many years after his supposed death.
I know that because his words have guided me in living my life that
has helped me to better understand life and the truth of God. The
truth that is revealed in his words can not be a mere hearsay.
How do you know that they are 'his words'? He didn't write them
himself, so they are merely hearsay, at best.
No. The Gospels have to be the result of inspiration and revelation from
God. The simple words of Jesus show genuine understanding of the truth
that has to be based on actual enlightenment by Jesus himself. It's just
like the wisdom words of the Buddha except it's spoken with the most
understandable common words. People who don't have the direct experience
of the truth can't make up such words of wisdom.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
can not be dismissed as fictional.
I, and many others, do dismiss it as fiction.
That's because you are ignorant of the actual truth revealed in
his words.
What 'his words'? He wrote nothing.
His words were heard and recorded by others.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
You only blindly deny what you don't really know.
I, at least know that he wrote nothing and, therefore, there are no
'his words'.
No. Those words were spoken by him. He did not have to write it down as
ancient people were good at memorizing speeches. It's why many ancient
cultures rely on oral history.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
The truth is nobody can prove Jesus ever existed.
His teaching has already proven it.
Just as the teaching of Superman has already proven that Superman
existed. Circular much?
No. The truth revealed in his teaching has proven his existence. It
would be the same as relativity has proven the existence of Albert
Einstein. You can deny Jesus as a person, but you can never deny the
truth that is shown in his teaching.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Back to the circular arguments. The teaching of Dawkins has
already proven evolution.
The teaching of Dawkins has been shown to be contradictory to the
second law of thermodynamics.
Only by you and your illegitimate version of the second law.
I don't have my version of the second law. It is a universal law.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
The teaching of Christ has been shown to be the truth in living life.
Only to the insane.
That's just your ignorant belief. You don't know what you are talking about.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
No person who understands the message of the bible would ever
want to adhere to its teachings. All you have to do is look
around the NG and you can see what kind of damage religion
has done to our resident theists. They are all damaged, they
are all forced to lie to defend their faith, they can't win
any argument on facts, which is why they use circular
reasoning and the redefinition of words. It is quite obvious
that religion is not a force for good in the world, but more
like an anchor holding humanity back.
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching.
The teaching of Dawkins is a perfect teaching.
Except it has been proven wrong by someone who does understand life
a lot better than him.
Who would that be, liar?
This person speaking to you does understand life spiritually a lot
better than Mr. Dawkins. It just happens that I have proven evolution
wrong with every one of my posts, and nobody has been able to prove me
wrong.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
No one has been able to prove the teaching of Jesus to be wrong.
The 'teaching' written by others who live many years after his
supposed death.
Irrelevant. Ancient people are good at keeping oral history.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
No matter what happens to religion or people in general, his
teaching can not be denied.
No matter what happens to evolution or people in general,
Dawkins' teaching can not be denied.
It's already denied according to the second law of thermodynamics.
Only by your illegitimate version of the second law.
There is nothing wrong in my understanding of the second law, and it's
not my version. It's the only version taught in all universities. The
only difference is, I'm able to apply the second law to life. It's not
very difficult if you can understand the second law.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, peace, freedom, and life itself.
Peter Pan
2017-06-19 21:27:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
he, as the author of his speeches,
How do you know that? All you have, at best, is hearsay by
written by people many years after his supposed death.
I know that because his words have guided me in living my life that
has helped me to better understand life and the truth of God. The
truth that is revealed in his words can not be a mere hearsay.
How do you know that they are 'his words'? He didn't write them
himself, so they are merely hearsay, at best.
No. The Gospels have to be the result of inspiration and revelation from
God. The simple words of Jesus show genuine understanding of the truth
that has to be based on actual enlightenment by Jesus himself. It's just
like the wisdom words of the Buddha except it's spoken with the most
understandable common words. People who don't have the direct experience
of the truth can't make up such words of wisdom.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
can not be dismissed as fictional.
I, and many others, do dismiss it as fiction.
That's because you are ignorant of the actual truth revealed in
his words.
What 'his words'? He wrote nothing.
His words were heard and recorded by others.
Wait a minute. Didn't you just say, in another thread,
the people who wrote the bible were untrustworthy? Oh
yeah...

The fact is, they persecuted God's prophets and
killed God's son while claiming to believe in God.
If their actions do not reflect their belief, how
can you take everything they said as the truth?

Yeah, you sure did. You claim the bible is unreliable.
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
You only blindly deny what you don't really know.
I, at least know that he wrote nothing and, therefore, there are no
'his words'.
No. Those words were spoken by him. He did not have to write it down as
ancient people were good at memorizing speeches. It's why many ancient
cultures rely on oral history.
"Oral history" is another term for myths.
Smiler
2017-06-20 00:10:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by aaa
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by Bob
No one is saying you have to believe they're true. In fact,
I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them. Only
the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not
believe that that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do. Because it is a complete AND total fiction created
for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding
about the resurrection of Jesus.
What Jesus? The one for which you cannot show any evidence?
The evidence of Jesus is his teaching which can always be verified
by anyone who practices the teaching. It is the living truth you
fail to realize and understand.
That does not fit the definition of proof.
Yes, it does. If his teaching is proven to be true by the
testimonies of those who practice it,
Then all religions are true by that measure. Hindus, for example,
say the same about Krishna.
In God's house there are many mansions. Buddhism, for example, is no
different from the teaching of Christ spiritually. The Buddha nature
is in fact the Christ consciousness.
Yet some sects of Buddhism are atheistic.
Irrelevant.
I agree that your mention of Buddhism is irrelevant.
Post by John Ritson
I don't consider all atheists as having denied God
What is there to deny?
Atheists do not believe in any gods, yours included.
Post by John Ritson
who is the truth.
Only to the insane.
Post by John Ritson
Atheists can be rather enlightening truth seekers. Their
wisdom proves their knowledge of God even though they don't worship God
religiously.
Atheists do not worship _any_ god(s).
Post by John Ritson
God does not require worship. We humans require worshiping
God to learn and understand God's truth.
Unevidenced bullshit.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
he, as the author of his speeches,
How do you know that? All you have, at best, is hearsay by written by
people many years after his supposed death.
I know that because his words have guided me in living my life that
has helped me to better understand life and the truth of God. The
truth that is revealed in his words can not be a mere hearsay.
How do you know that they are 'his words'? He didn't write them
himself, so they are merely hearsay, at best.
No. The Gospels have to be the result of inspiration and revelation from
God.
Or just unevidenced myths.
Post by John Ritson
The simple words of Jesus show genuine understanding of the truth
that has to be based on actual enlightenment by Jesus himself.
That would be the supposed Jesus for which you cannot show any evidence.
Post by John Ritson
It's just
like the wisdom words of the Buddha except it's spoken with the most
understandable common words. People who don't have the direct experience
of the truth can't make up such words of wisdom.
Joseph Smith managed it, as did L. Ron Hubbard.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
can not be dismissed as fictional.
I, and many others, do dismiss it as fiction.
That's because you are ignorant of the actual truth revealed in his
words.
What 'his words'? He wrote nothing.
His words were heard and recorded by others.
Thanks for admitting that all you have is hearsay.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
You only blindly deny what you don't really know.
I, at least know that he wrote nothing and, therefore, there are no
'his words'.
No. Those words were spoken by him.
Yet you cannot show that he ever existed.
Post by John Ritson
He did not have to write it down as
ancient people were good at memorizing speeches. It's why many ancient
cultures rely on oral history.
AKA hearsay.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
The truth is nobody can prove Jesus ever existed.
His teaching has already proven it.
Just as the teaching of Superman has already proven that Superman
existed. Circular much?
No. The truth revealed in his teaching has proven his existence.
Just as the teaching of Superman has already proven that Superman
existed. Circular much?
Post by John Ritson
It
would be the same as relativity has proven the existence of Albert
Einstein.
How has it done that?
Post by John Ritson
You can deny Jesus as a person, but you can never deny the
truth that is shown in his teaching.
It's only hearsay.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Back to the circular arguments. The teaching of Dawkins has already
proven evolution.
The teaching of Dawkins has been shown to be contradictory to the
second law of thermodynamics.
Only by you and your illegitimate version of the second law.
I don't have my version of the second law. It is a universal law.
Yes you do, liar.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
The teaching of Christ has been shown to be the truth in living life.
Only to the insane.
That's just your ignorant belief. You don't know what you are talking about.
Another Irony meter vaporised.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
No person who understands the message of the bible would ever want
to adhere to its teachings. All you have to do is look around the
NG and you can see what kind of damage religion has done to our
resident theists. They are all damaged, they are all forced to lie
to defend their faith, they can't win any argument on facts, which
is why they use circular reasoning and the redefinition of words.
It is quite obvious that religion is not a force for good in the
world, but more like an anchor holding humanity back.
The teaching of Jesus is a perfect teaching.
The teaching of Dawkins is a perfect teaching.
Except it has been proven wrong by someone who does understand life a
lot better than him.
Who would that be, liar?
This person speaking to you does understand life spiritually
'Spiritually' is just your meaningless invented word.
Post by John Ritson
a lot
better than Mr. Dawkins. It just happens that I have proven evolution
wrong with every one of my posts,
No you haven't, liar.
Post by John Ritson
and nobody has been able to prove me wrong.
Because you don't and won't use the second law as it was written.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
No one has been able to prove the teaching of Jesus to be wrong.
The 'teaching' written by others who live many years after his supposed
death.
Irrelevant. Ancient people are good at keeping oral history.
Oral History = Hearsay.
Post by John Ritson
Post by Smiler
Post by aaa
Post by aaa
No matter what happens to religion or people in general, his
teaching can not be denied.
No matter what happens to evolution or people in general, Dawkins'
teaching can not be denied.
It's already denied according to the second law of thermodynamics.
Only by your illegitimate version of the second law.
There is nothing wrong in my understanding of the second law,
Yes there is, liar.
Post by John Ritson
and it's not my version.
It's not the original published version.
Post by John Ritson
It's the only version taught in all universities.
Nope, liar.
Post by John Ritson
The only difference is, I'm able to apply my own perverted version of the
second law to life.
CIFY.
Post by John Ritson
It's not very difficult if you can understand the second law.
It's a pity that you don't.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Ted
2017-06-15 00:34:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about the
resurrection of Jesus.
I once read an interesting article about the power of crystal pyramids
and about how some prestigious scholars believe the resurrection of Jesus
to have been associated.
Smiler
2017-06-15 19:32:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ted
Post by aaa
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Ooh, I do.
Because it is a complete AND total fiction created for idiots by assholes.
That only shows your total lack of philosophical understanding about
the resurrection of Jesus.
I once read an interesting article about the power of crystal pyramids
and about how some prestigious scholars believe the resurrection of
Jesus to have been associated.
I suspect that 'prestigious' is not the correct word to use for them.
Try 'demented' (or a synonym thereof).
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
John Ritson
2017-06-14 09:27:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Bob claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
Don't be so scared. "Permanent" is my way of saying "at least a year".
You were a lot more specific last August when you said:

"I'll let you out for just a little while right after Christmas
in 2018. That is if you're still alive. <vbg> Until then,
<bitch-slap and a smirk>."

Is Robert Duncan/Jeremy Brown/Calvin Ramsay/Matthias Sereno/Michael
Lankford/Kelli Gibson/Stu D. Baker/Edsel D. Soto/Kevin Madison/Molly
Quel/Ellas McDaniel/Hunsawa Shayar/Bob <***@null.null>getting confused,
or posting while drunk again?
Post by Bob
So, do you understand now why you, in particular, do not believe that
that Jesus rose from the dead?
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables called
the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he lived he
was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose from the dead.

You might as well believe in the resurrection of Mithras or Osiris.
--
John Ritson

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Bob
2017-06-14 14:19:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables called
the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he lived he
was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.

Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.

"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children
of God."
(Romans 8:16)

"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from
the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand
them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
(1 Corinthians 2:14)

You're welcome.
--
"When atheists are presented with critical reasoned arguments, they often
respond with either personal insults, twisted logic and reasoning along
with semantics with excessive detail of complete speculation presented
as truth, to deviate from the critical argument at hand, and talk at
cross purposes to evade it." --Retro
hypatiab7
2017-06-14 16:09:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables called
the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he lived he
was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children
of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from
the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand
them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
(1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology explains nothing
but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for your obeisance. He'll do
your thinking for you.
Don Martin
2017-06-14 22:19:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 09:09:29 -0700 (PDT), hypatiab7
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables called
the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he lived he
was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children
of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from
the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand
them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
(1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology explains nothing
but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for your obeisance. He'll do
your thinking for you.
It would appear that he already does.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Smiler
2017-06-15 00:20:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he
lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose
from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children
of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come
from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot
understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
(1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology explains
nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Don Martin
2017-06-15 22:59:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he
lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose
from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children
of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come
from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot
understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
(1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology explains
nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
And would not fill the skull of a malnourished skunk.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Smiler
2017-06-16 20:20:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he
lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose
from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are
children of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come
from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot
understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
(1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology explains
nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
And would not fill the skull of a malnourished skunk.
They would not even fill the skull of a malnourished gnat.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Don Martin
2017-06-16 22:17:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he
lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose
from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are
children of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come
from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot
understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
(1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology explains
nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
And would not fill the skull of a malnourished skunk.
They would not even fill the skull of a malnourished gnat.
I was being generous, Mr S.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Smiler
2017-06-16 23:27:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if
he lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he
rose from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are
children of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come
from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot
understand them because they are discerned only through the
Spirit." (1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology explains
nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
And would not fill the skull of a malnourished skunk.
They would not even fill the skull of a malnourished gnat.
I was being generous, Mr S.
So was I.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Don Martin
2017-06-17 12:42:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if
he lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he
rose from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are
children of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come
from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot
understand them because they are discerned only through the
Spirit." (1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology explains
nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
And would not fill the skull of a malnourished skunk.
They would not even fill the skull of a malnourished gnat.
I was being generous, Mr S.
So was I.
Ah, in this sour age, 'tis rare to find such great heartedness in one
man, let alone two.

Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-06-17 13:44:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.

She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...

http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-william-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960

Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.

This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.

Jeremy Corbyn did well, too - hugging one of them to comfort her...

https://www.indy100.com/article/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-grenfell-fire-survivors-firefighters-compare-pictures-7791821
Mitchell Holman
2017-06-17 15:31:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.
She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-willia
m-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960
Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.
This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.
Jeremy Corbyn did well, too - hugging one of them to comfort her...
https://www.indy100.com/article/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-grenfell-fire
-survivors-firefighters-compare-pictures-7791821
This reminds me of Hurricane Katrina, when a number of
actors went down to New Orleans to help with the rescue
efforts and Rush Limbaugh sneering at them from his NY
penthouse, accusing them of "just seeking a photo op" and
being "publicity hounds". While he himself did nothing to
help, of course.......
Kevrob
2017-06-19 21:06:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.
She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-willia
m-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960
Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.
This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.
Jeremy Corbyn did well, too - hugging one of them to comfort her...
https://www.indy100.com/article/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-grenfell-fire
-survivors-firefighters-compare-pictures-7791821
This reminds me of Hurricane Katrina, when a number of
actors went down to New Orleans to help with the rescue
efforts and Rush Limbaugh sneering at them from his NY
penthouse,
Sure about that? I thought El Rushbo had decamped to Florida
well before then. No state personal income tax, unlike in
the Vampire State.
Post by Mitchell Holman
accusing them of "just seeking a photo op" and
being "publicity hounds". While he himself did nothing to
help, of course.......
Unless you count raising money for the American Red Cross:

"Rush on Broadway" was a benefit fro Katrina victims.
Amazon (or an Amazon partner) has a DVD of it.

BTW, I think he's scum for backing his golf buddy, Trump, and
his hypocrisy on the drug laws is legendary. But, I'm a
libertarian, not a conservative, and stopped listening to the
Astounding Orotundity over a decade ago.

Give him credit where credit is due. Did he write any checks
himself, on his personal account? Who knows?

Kevin R
Don Martin
2017-06-17 16:21:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:44:43 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.
She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-william-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960
Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.
This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.
Jeremy Corbyn did well, too - hugging one of them to comfort her...
https://www.indy100.com/article/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-grenfell-fire-survivors-firefighters-compare-pictures-7791821
Both ends of the political spectrum showing compassion; U.S. Tories
are without it, too.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
John Locke
2017-06-17 19:02:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:44:43 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.
She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-william-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960
Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.
This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.
...regardless of the royalty thing, she's simply a good person.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Jeremy Corbyn did well, too - hugging one of them to comfort her...
https://www.indy100.com/article/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-grenfell-fire-survivors-firefighters-compare-pictures-7791821
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Christopher A. Lee
2017-06-17 20:40:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 12:02:22 -0700, John Locke
Post by Don Martin
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:44:43 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.
She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-william-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960
Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.
This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.
...regardless of the royalty thing, she's simply a good person.
Her mother was, too.

Especially considering that she and her husband were only King and
Queen by accident because Edward VIII abdicated.

During the WW2 Luftwaffe bombing, she refused when the government
wanted the Royals to be evacuated to Canada because she said she would
never be able to look Londoners in the face.

And when Buckingham Palace and its grounds were bombed, she said it
made her feel closer to the rest of the Londoners.

http://www.westendatwar.org.uk/page_id__39_path__0p2p.aspx

People loved her for that, even long after the war, and even when she
became a bit eccentric in old age.
Post by Don Martin
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Jeremy Corbyn did well, too - hugging one of them to comfort her...
https://www.indy100.com/article/theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn-grenfell-fire-survivors-firefighters-compare-pictures-7791821
Alex W.
2017-06-19 02:18:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 12:02:22 -0700, John Locke
Post by Don Martin
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:44:43 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.
She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-william-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960
Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.
This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.
...regardless of the royalty thing, she's simply a good person.
Her mother was, too.
Especially considering that she and her husband were only King and
Queen by accident because Edward VIII abdicated.
During the WW2 Luftwaffe bombing, she refused when the government
wanted the Royals to be evacuated to Canada because she said she would
never be able to look Londoners in the face.
And when Buckingham Palace and its grounds were bombed, she said it
made her feel closer to the rest of the Londoners.
http://www.westendatwar.org.uk/page_id__39_path__0p2p.aspx
People loved her for that, even long after the war, and even when she
became a bit eccentric in old age.
Talking to republicans (*) -- British, American or Australian -- I am
always met with a deafening silence when I ask them how many of our
elected politicians have not only served themselves but sent their
children to do the same. There are a few -- a very few -- servicemen
who go into politics, such as McCain in the US or Paddy Ashdown in the
UK, but the British royal family serve the country in uniform as a
matter of course. When Prince Philip or William wear uniform, it is not
just royals playing dress-up. They have earned it. And that is one big
reason why they get the respect of the people.


(*) that's "republican" with a small "r" as in "proponents of a republic
who wish to abolish the monarchy".
Peter Pan
2017-06-19 05:08:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alex W.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 12:02:22 -0700, John Locke
Post by Don Martin
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:44:43 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.
She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-william-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960
Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.
This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.
...regardless of the royalty thing, she's simply a good person.
Her mother was, too.
Especially considering that she and her husband were only King and
Queen by accident because Edward VIII abdicated.
During the WW2 Luftwaffe bombing, she refused when the government
wanted the Royals to be evacuated to Canada because she said she would
never be able to look Londoners in the face.
And when Buckingham Palace and its grounds were bombed, she said it
made her feel closer to the rest of the Londoners.
http://www.westendatwar.org.uk/page_id__39_path__0p2p.aspx
People loved her for that, even long after the war, and even when she
became a bit eccentric in old age.
Talking to republicans (*) -- British, American or Australian -- I am
always met with a deafening silence when I ask them how many of our
elected politicians have not only served themselves but sent their
children to do the same. There are a few -- a very few -- servicemen
who go into politics, such as McCain in the US or Paddy Ashdown in the
UK, but the British royal family serve the country in uniform as a
matter of course. When Prince Philip or William wear uniform, it is not
just royals playing dress-up. They have earned it. And that is one big
reason why they get the respect of the people.
Most US presidents served in the military, the last 4
being exceptions (unless you count Bush2's national guard
hitch as real military service). I suspect at least half
of congressmen have also served, but not sure.
Post by Alex W.
(*) that's "republican" with a small "r" as in "proponents of a republic
who wish to abolish the monarchy".
America has no monarchy, and no one cares what we think
about Britain abolishing her monarchy. But QEII is a
class act all the way. She reflects well on her country.
Alex W.
2017-06-19 07:51:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Alex W.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 12:02:22 -0700, John Locke
Post by Don Martin
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:44:43 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 08:42:05 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors
of the fire whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns. This
rather defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
Yes. A frail, 91-year old lady showing the kind of compassion and
class which the Prime minister didn't.
She spoke with and sympathised with survivors...
http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/queen-elizabeth-prince-william-meet-london-fire-survivors-48083960
Her age and frailty make it even more impressive.
This is why people like her, even if they don't particularly like the
idea of Royalty.
...regardless of the royalty thing, she's simply a good person.
Her mother was, too.
Especially considering that she and her husband were only King and
Queen by accident because Edward VIII abdicated.
During the WW2 Luftwaffe bombing, she refused when the government
wanted the Royals to be evacuated to Canada because she said she would
never be able to look Londoners in the face.
And when Buckingham Palace and its grounds were bombed, she said it
made her feel closer to the rest of the Londoners.
http://www.westendatwar.org.uk/page_id__39_path__0p2p.aspx
People loved her for that, even long after the war, and even when she
became a bit eccentric in old age.
Talking to republicans (*) -- British, American or Australian -- I am
always met with a deafening silence when I ask them how many of our
elected politicians have not only served themselves but sent their
children to do the same. There are a few -- a very few -- servicemen
who go into politics, such as McCain in the US or Paddy Ashdown in the
UK, but the British royal family serve the country in uniform as a
matter of course. When Prince Philip or William wear uniform, it is not
just royals playing dress-up. They have earned it. And that is one big
reason why they get the respect of the people.
Most US presidents served in the military, the last 4
being exceptions (unless you count Bush2's national guard
hitch as real military service). I suspect at least half
of congressmen have also served, but not sure.
Draft service, or volunteers?

"At least 79 House Representatives will have military experience (there
were 81 in the 114th Congress), while there will be 21 such in the
Senate, a plus one from the last Congress.

One characteristic to note among veteran legislators is the increasing
numbers of young veteran legislators. As the Military Times notes, the
number of young veterans in Congress has increased every election since
2006, with at least 27 veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
winning congressional races on November 8th. Thirty-four percent of all
veterans running for national election in 2016 served after 2001, while
new research of the veteran composition of state legislatures has found
that post-9/11 veterans alone total 20% of all veteran legislators
(veteran legislators, on average, make up 14% of all state legislatures)"

http://www.aei.org/publication/veterans-in-the-115th-congress/

As to presidents, I will grant you that ... sort of. Officially, 32 out
of the 44 presidents have a military service record, but if you deduct
membership in a state militia, that brings it down to 23.
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Alex W.
(*) that's "republican" with a small "r" as in "proponents of a republic
who wish to abolish the monarchy".
America has no monarchy, and no one cares what we think
about Britain abolishing her monarchy. But QEII is a
class act all the way. She reflects well on her country.
No one cares ... until Americans think they can share their opinion on
the matter with the rest of the world on their home turf. I've had a
few discussions with visiting Americans in the UK ....

The best one can hope for on this side of the pond is for them to regard
our royal family as a tourist attraction. That leaves room for
educating them.

And a special place is reserved for the lady from OK who was standing
next to me at the Changing of the Guards at Buckingham Palace one day (I
was showing round some friends from Europe) and who exclaimed to her
hubby in a tone of wonder "hon, I never knew the English had a military".
Peter Pan
2017-06-19 10:35:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alex W.
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Alex W.
Talking to republicans (*) -- British, American or Australian -- I am
always met with a deafening silence when I ask them how many of our
elected politicians have not only served themselves but sent their
children to do the same. There are a few -- a very few -- servicemen
who go into politics, such as McCain in the US or Paddy Ashdown in the
UK, but the British royal family serve the country in uniform as a
matter of course. When Prince Philip or William wear uniform, it is not
just royals playing dress-up. They have earned it. And that is one big
reason why they get the respect of the people.
Most US presidents served in the military, the last 4
being exceptions (unless you count Bush2's national guard
hitch as real military service). I suspect at least half
of congressmen have also served, but not sure.
Draft service, or volunteers?
"At least 79 House Representatives will have military experience (there
were 81 in the 114th Congress), while there will be 21 such in the
Senate, a plus one from the last Congress.
One characteristic to note among veteran legislators is the increasing
numbers of young veteran legislators. As the Military Times notes, the
number of young veterans in Congress has increased every election since
2006, with at least 27 veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
winning congressional races on November 8th. Thirty-four percent of all
veterans running for national election in 2016 served after 2001, while
new research of the veteran composition of state legislatures has found
that post-9/11 veterans alone total 20% of all veteran legislators
(veteran legislators, on average, make up 14% of all state legislatures)"
http://www.aei.org/publication/veterans-in-the-115th-congress/
Doh! I'd thought there were more veterans than that.
Post by Alex W.
As to presidents, I will grant you that ... sort of. Officially, 32 out
of the 44 presidents have a military service record, but if you deduct
membership in a state militia, that brings it down to 23.
I didn't count Bush2's Guard service only because it was
really a draft dodge, and he was AWOL much of the time.

Eisenhauer thru Bush1 all served as officers in WWII,
except Carter who served post-WWII. Reagan only made
training films during the war.
Post by Alex W.
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Alex W.
(*) that's "republican" with a small "r" as in "proponents of a republic
who wish to abolish the monarchy".
America has no monarchy, and no one cares what we think
about Britain abolishing her monarchy. But QEII is a
class act all the way. She reflects well on her country.
No one cares ... until Americans think they can share their opinion on
the matter with the rest of the world on their home turf. I've had a
few discussions with visiting Americans in the UK ....
The best one can hope for on this side of the pond is for them to regard
our royal family as a tourist attraction. That leaves room for
educating them.
And a special place is reserved for the lady from OK who was standing
next to me at the Changing of the Guards at Buckingham Palace one day (I
was showing round some friends from Europe) and who exclaimed to her
hubby in a tone of wonder "hon, I never knew the English had a military".
LOL.
Don Martin
2017-06-19 22:46:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Alex W.
As to presidents, I will grant you that ... sort of. Officially, 32 out
of the 44 presidents have a military service record, but if you deduct
membership in a state militia, that brings it down to 23.
I didn't count Bush2's Guard service only because it was
really a draft dodge, and he was AWOL much of the time.
As an old Regular Army guy, I don't count National Guard service
during the Viet Nam era as anything else. It was the only time the
sons of the rich and powerful were lining up to get in it. And Bush
2's shameful use of the Guard and Reserves instead of regulars in Iraq
and Afghanistan was probably an attempt to make his "service" look
plausible.
Post by Peter Pan
Eisenhauer thru Bush1 all served as officers in WWII,
except Carter who served post-WWII. Reagan only made
training films during the war.
Oh, but he was _very_ heroic in them!

Incidentally, Truman was an artillery captain in WWI.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-06-19 23:15:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:46:12 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Alex W.
As to presidents, I will grant you that ... sort of. Officially, 32 out
of the 44 presidents have a military service record, but if you deduct
membership in a state militia, that brings it down to 23.
I didn't count Bush2's Guard service only because it was
really a draft dodge, and he was AWOL much of the time.
As an old Regular Army guy, I don't count National Guard service
during the Viet Nam era as anything else. It was the only time the
sons of the rich and powerful were lining up to get in it. And Bush
2's shameful use of the Guard and Reserves instead of regulars in Iraq
and Afghanistan was probably an attempt to make his "service" look
plausible.
Post by Peter Pan
Eisenhauer thru Bush1 all served as officers in WWII,
except Carter who served post-WWII. Reagan only made
training films during the war.
Oh, but he was _very_ heroic in them!
And he told Yitzhak Rabin that he had filmed the liberation of Nazi
concentation camps - which was actually a part he played in a movie.
Post by Don Martin
Incidentally, Truman was an artillery captain in WWI.
Smiler
2017-06-18 01:55:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that
if he lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that
he rose from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are
children of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that
come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and
cannot understand them because they are discerned only through
the Spirit." (1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology
explains nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for
your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
And would not fill the skull of a malnourished skunk.
They would not even fill the skull of a malnourished gnat.
I was being generous, Mr S.
So was I.
Ah, in this sour age, 'tis rare to find such great heartedness in one
man, let alone two.
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors of
the fire
Mine too. BTW, Prince William was there with her.
Post by Don Martin
whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns.
Such cowardice is unforgivable.
Post by Don Martin
This rather
defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
As do the actions of the police, fire service and NHS staff.

I'm wondering why the government hasn't sent in the army (logistics corps)
to help deal with the distribution of all the donated aid, and the
catering corps to provide meals for all the displaced people. Such aid, in
what can only be described as a disaster, would be welcome to all involved.
Even the Red Cross haven't turned up to help. It has just been left to
local, untrained, volunteers, who are doing a great job in very difficult
circumstances.

But it's good to see Muslims, Christians, Hindus, people of other faiths
and atheists working together for the common good. It restores one's faith
in humanity.

There are 17 known deaths and a further 58 reported as missing (presumed
dead). The death toll may be even greater. The fire service and police
were only able to enter the building today. Many areas of it are unsafe,
so the investigation and recovery of the bodies will take some time.
Several weeks has been suggested.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Don Martin
2017-06-18 11:44:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that
if he lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that
he rose from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been
rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are
children of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that
come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and
cannot understand them because they are discerned only through
the Spirit." (1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology
explains nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for
your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
And would not fill the skull of a malnourished skunk.
They would not even fill the skull of a malnourished gnat.
I was being generous, Mr S.
So was I.
Ah, in this sour age, 'tis rare to find such great heartedness in one
man, let alone two.
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors of
the fire
Mine too. BTW, Prince William was there with her.
Post by Don Martin
whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns.
Such cowardice is unforgivable.
Post by Don Martin
This rather
defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
As do the actions of the police, fire service and NHS staff.
I'm wondering why the government hasn't sent in the army (logistics corps)
to help deal with the distribution of all the donated aid, and the
catering corps to provide meals for all the displaced people. Such aid, in
what can only be described as a disaster, would be welcome to all involved.
Even the Red Cross haven't turned up to help. It has just been left to
local, untrained, volunteers, who are doing a great job in very difficult
circumstances.
But it's good to see Muslims, Christians, Hindus, people of other faiths
and atheists working together for the common good. It restores one's faith
in humanity.
There are 17 known deaths and a further 58 reported as missing (presumed
dead). The death toll may be even greater. The fire service and police
were only able to enter the building today. Many areas of it are unsafe,
so the investigation and recovery of the bodies will take some time.
Several weeks has been suggested.
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex
has had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a
plumber sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that
great an involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy
construction is always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't
enough. The news clips I have seen make it pretty clear that the
building lacked a working alarm system to at least wake people up.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
John Ritson
2017-06-18 14:39:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables
called the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that
if he lived he was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that
he rose from the dead.
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been
rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are
children of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that
come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and
cannot understand them because they are discerned only through
the Spirit." (1 Corinthians 2:14)
You're welcome.
No one is thanking you, smirkles. And your Bible mythology
explains nothing but your ignorance. Run to aaa. He's waiting for
your obeisance.
He'll do your thinking for you.
Their two brains together would still be incapable of any thinking.
And would not fill the skull of a malnourished skunk.
They would not even fill the skull of a malnourished gnat.
I was being generous, Mr S.
So was I.
Ah, in this sour age, 'tis rare to find such great heartedness in one
man, let alone two.
Incidentally, my hat is off to HRH Elizabeth, visiting the survivors of
the fire
Mine too. BTW, Prince William was there with her.
Post by Don Martin
whom your PM avoided out of "security" concerns.
Such cowardice is unforgivable.
Post by Don Martin
This rather
defines nobility for those of us who see precious little of it.
As do the actions of the police, fire service and NHS staff.
I'm wondering why the government hasn't sent in the army (logistics corps)
to help deal with the distribution of all the donated aid, and the
catering corps to provide meals for all the displaced people. Such aid, in
what can only be described as a disaster, would be welcome to all involved.
Even the Red Cross haven't turned up to help. It has just been left to
local, untrained, volunteers, who are doing a great job in very difficult
circumstances.
But it's good to see Muslims, Christians, Hindus, people of other faiths
and atheists working together for the common good. It restores one's faith
in humanity.
There are 17 known deaths and a further 58 reported as missing (presumed
dead). The death toll may be even greater. The fire service and police
were only able to enter the building today. Many areas of it are unsafe,
so the investigation and recovery of the bodies will take some time.
Several weeks has been suggested.
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex
has had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a
plumber sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that
great an involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy
construction is always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't
enough. The news clips I have seen make it pretty clear that the
building lacked a working alarm system to at least wake people up.
The immediate cause appears to have been the explosion of a refrigerator
in a fourth-floor flat. But the damage should then have been limited to
that flat, or that floor. Gas pipes left unshielded in recent
refurbishment may have contributed to the problem. But ultimately the
recent installation of cheap cladding over the exterior walls,
containing inflammable heat-insulating plastic material appears to have
caused the fire to become an inferno.
--
John Ritson

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Don Martin
2017-06-18 17:12:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:39:21 +0100, John Ritson
Post by John Ritson
Post by Don Martin
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex
has had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a
plumber sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that
great an involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy
construction is always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't
enough. The news clips I have seen make it pretty clear that the
building lacked a working alarm system to at least wake people up.
The immediate cause appears to have been the explosion of a refrigerator
in a fourth-floor flat. But the damage should then have been limited to
that flat, or that floor. Gas pipes left unshielded in recent
refurbishment may have contributed to the problem. But ultimately the
recent installation of cheap cladding over the exterior walls,
containing inflammable heat-insulating plastic material appears to have
caused the fire to become an inferno.
Refrigerators explode? Who knew? Otherwise it looks like shoddy work
to save money adding up to a clusterfuck.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Peter Pan
2017-06-18 19:03:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:39:21 +0100, John Ritson
Post by John Ritson
Post by Don Martin
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex
has had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a
plumber sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that
great an involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy
construction is always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't
enough. The news clips I have seen make it pretty clear that the
building lacked a working alarm system to at least wake people up.
The immediate cause appears to have been the explosion of a refrigerator
in a fourth-floor flat. But the damage should then have been limited to
that flat, or that floor. Gas pipes left unshielded in recent
refurbishment may have contributed to the problem. But ultimately the
recent installation of cheap cladding over the exterior walls,
containing inflammable heat-insulating plastic material appears to have
caused the fire to become an inferno.
Refrigerators explode? Who knew? Otherwise it looks like shoddy work
to save money adding up to a clusterfuck.
Refrigerators explode for the same reason that supernovae
explode. They exceed their Tripe Limit for exported
entropy, then ka-BOOM! they become unstable and blow the
doors off in a frenzied freon-fueled fireball.

This is all explained by the Second Suggestion of
Thermodynamics.
Don Martin
2017-06-18 19:31:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:39:21 +0100, John Ritson
Post by John Ritson
Post by Don Martin
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex
has had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a
plumber sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that
great an involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy
construction is always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't
enough. The news clips I have seen make it pretty clear that the
building lacked a working alarm system to at least wake people up.
The immediate cause appears to have been the explosion of a refrigerator
in a fourth-floor flat. But the damage should then have been limited to
that flat, or that floor. Gas pipes left unshielded in recent
refurbishment may have contributed to the problem. But ultimately the
recent installation of cheap cladding over the exterior walls,
containing inflammable heat-insulating plastic material appears to have
caused the fire to become an inferno.
Refrigerators explode? Who knew? Otherwise it looks like shoddy work
to save money adding up to a clusterfuck.
Refrigerators explode for the same reason that supernovae
explode. They exceed their Tripe Limit for exported
entropy, then ka-BOOM! they become unstable and blow the
doors off in a frenzied freon-fueled fireball.
This is all explained by the Second Suggestion of
Thermodynamics.
Ah. It is all so much clearer now . . . .
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Peter Pan
2017-06-18 20:01:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Martin
Post by Peter Pan
Post by Don Martin
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:39:21 +0100, John Ritson
Post by John Ritson
Post by Don Martin
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex
has had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a
plumber sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that
great an involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy
construction is always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't
enough. The news clips I have seen make it pretty clear that the
building lacked a working alarm system to at least wake people up.
The immediate cause appears to have been the explosion of a refrigerator
in a fourth-floor flat. But the damage should then have been limited to
that flat, or that floor. Gas pipes left unshielded in recent
refurbishment may have contributed to the problem. But ultimately the
recent installation of cheap cladding over the exterior walls,
containing inflammable heat-insulating plastic material appears to have
caused the fire to become an inferno.
Refrigerators explode? Who knew? Otherwise it looks like shoddy work
to save money adding up to a clusterfuck.
Refrigerators explode for the same reason that supernovae
explode. They exceed their Tripe Limit for exported
entropy, then ka-BOOM! they become unstable and blow the
doors off in a frenzied freon-fueled fireball.
This is all explained by the Second Suggestion of
Thermodynamics.
Ah. It is all so much clearer now . . . .
We don't have the androgenous anti-atheist around any
more to explain these things, so somebody has to step up.

YW, HTH.
Smiler
2017-06-19 00:04:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Martin
Post by John Ritson
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex has
had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a plumber
sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that great an
involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy construction is
always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't enough. The news clips
I have seen make it pretty clear that the building lacked a working
alarm system to at least wake people up.
The immediate cause appears to have been the explosion of a refrigerator
in a fourth-floor flat. But the damage should then have been limited to
that flat, or that floor. Gas pipes left unshielded in recent
refurbishment may have contributed to the problem. But ultimately the
recent installation of cheap cladding over the exterior walls,
containing inflammable heat-insulating plastic material appears to have
caused the fire to become an inferno.
Refrigerators explode? Who knew? Otherwise it looks like shoddy work
to save money adding up to a clusterfuck.
The original cause of the fire has been reported as a refrigerator
exploding, but that has not yet been confirmed. There are to be several
enquiries. A fire brigade investigation into the probable cause of the
fire, a police investigation into why such flammable materials were used
to clad the building and who is to blame for that (possible corporate
manslaughter charges) and a government enquiry (not yet started) into the
reason for the high death toll and how such tragedies can be prevented in
future. The first priority, however, is to recover the dead.

On tonight's news we were shown pictures from inside one of the flats, one
where all the occupants escaped safely. There was _nothing_ left intact,
not even partition walls, except the burnt out frame of an exercise
bicycle.
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-06-19 13:03:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by John Ritson
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex has
had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a plumber
sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that great an
involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy construction is
always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't enough. The news clips
I have seen make it pretty clear that the building lacked a working
alarm system to at least wake people up.
The immediate cause appears to have been the explosion of a refrigerator
in a fourth-floor flat. But the damage should then have been limited to
that flat, or that floor. Gas pipes left unshielded in recent
refurbishment may have contributed to the problem. But ultimately the
recent installation of cheap cladding over the exterior walls,
containing inflammable heat-insulating plastic material appears to have
caused the fire to become an inferno.
Refrigerators explode? Who knew? Otherwise it looks like shoddy work
to save money adding up to a clusterfuck.
The original cause of the fire has been reported as a refrigerator
exploding, but that has not yet been confirmed. There are to be several
enquiries. A fire brigade investigation into the probable cause of the
fire, a police investigation into why such flammable materials were used
to clad the building and who is to blame for that (possible corporate
manslaughter charges) and a government enquiry (not yet started) into the
reason for the high death toll and how such tragedies can be prevented in
future. The first priority, however, is to recover the dead.
On tonight's news we were shown pictures from inside one of the flats, one
where all the occupants escaped safely. There was _nothing_ left intact,
not even partition walls, except the burnt out frame of an exercise
bicycle.
The walls inside each apartment are just partitions, but the walls,
ceilings and floors between apartments are required to be
fire-resistant for an hour, as are the front doors.

When the block was built, it would have been all-electric because a
few years earlier, a block collapsed in 1967 after a gas explosion
blew out an exterior wall panel that side of the building collapsed
like dominos.

Part of the 2016 Grenfell Tower refurbishment was "community heating"
which would have replaced the original electric heating. I would
suspect that it would be ducted warm air which would have breached the
fireproofing
Don Martin
2017-06-19 22:46:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Don Martin
Post by John Ritson
Any findings on the cause or contributing factors yet? The complex has
had some renovation work of late, so my first thought is of a plumber
sweating a pipe in the wall and igniting the framing, but that great an
involvement suggests arson. Of course, plain old shoddy construction is
always a fall-back position when paranoia isn't enough. The news clips
I have seen make it pretty clear that the building lacked a working
alarm system to at least wake people up.
The immediate cause appears to have been the explosion of a refrigerator
in a fourth-floor flat. But the damage should then have been limited to
that flat, or that floor. Gas pipes left unshielded in recent
refurbishment may have contributed to the problem. But ultimately the
recent installation of cheap cladding over the exterior walls,
containing inflammable heat-insulating plastic material appears to have
caused the fire to become an inferno.
Refrigerators explode? Who knew? Otherwise it looks like shoddy work
to save money adding up to a clusterfuck.
The original cause of the fire has been reported as a refrigerator
exploding, but that has not yet been confirmed. There are to be several
enquiries. A fire brigade investigation into the probable cause of the
fire, a police investigation into why such flammable materials were used
to clad the building and who is to blame for that (possible corporate
manslaughter charges) and a government enquiry (not yet started) into the
reason for the high death toll and how such tragedies can be prevented in
future. The first priority, however, is to recover the dead.
On tonight's news we were shown pictures from inside one of the flats, one
where all the occupants escaped safely. There was _nothing_ left intact,
not even partition walls, except the burnt out frame of an exercise
bicycle.
Ah, plastic: another fine petrochemical product guaranteed to look
god for decades (so long as kept away from fire).
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
John Ritson
2017-06-14 19:32:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Because we have no evidence not coming from that book of fables called
the Bible that this 'Jesus' character ever lived, that if he lived he
was crucified, or that if he was crucified, that he rose from the dead.
Appearing and disappearing angels, multiple visits, multiple visions, an
un-noticed earthquake, zombies walking the streets of Jerusalem.

It was all just a fantasy invented by members of a religious cult
desperate to keep their members after their whole Messiah dream had
collapsed.
Post by Bob
By "we" I, of course, take that to mean those who have been rejected by God,
and are without the benefit of having the Holy Spirit.
Whereas, we, the chosen elect, have the evidence that you are lacking in.
"The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children
of God."
(Romans 8:16)
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from
the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand
them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
(1 Corinthians 2:14)
Standard theist excuse, not even original with Christianity, possibly
copied from the older religion of Hinduism.
"The endeavoring transcendentalists who are situated in
self-realization can see all this clearly. But those whose minds are
not developed and who are not situated in self-realization cannot see
what is taking place, though they may try to." (Bhagavad Gita 15.11)
Post by Bob
You're welcome.
--
John Ritson

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Bob
2017-06-14 23:03:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Ritson
Standard theist excuse, not even original with Christianity, possibly
copied from the older religion of Hinduism.
"The endeavoring transcendentalists who are situated in
self-realization can see all this clearly. But those whose minds are
not developed and who are not situated in self-realization cannot see
what is taking place, though they may try to." (Bhagavad Gita 15.11)
How many times have I proven you wrong about that, and now here
you are using the same old lie again.

Genesis 4:1-7 occurred long before there was any Hinduism.

Anyone can see, you're just craving for a little attention, any way you
can get it.

You're pitiful. You like being a clown, don't you?

It's back in the killfile for you. There's no telling when I might have
mercy on you and let you out for a day or two, depending on how
you act. After this little charade, that might never happen.
--
"When atheists are presented with critical reasoned arguments, they often
respond with either personal insults, twisted logic and reasoning along
with semantics with excessive detail of complete speculation presented
as truth, to deviate from the critical argument at hand, and talk at
cross purposes to evade it." --Retro
John Ritson
2017-06-15 09:42:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Standard theist excuse, not even original with Christianity, possibly
copied from the older religion of Hinduism.
"The endeavoring transcendentalists who are situated in
self-realization can see all this clearly. But those whose minds are
not developed and who are not situated in self-realization cannot see
what is taking place, though they may try to." (Bhagavad Gita 15.11)
How many times have I proven you wrong about that, and now here
you are using the same old lie again.
Genesis 4:1-7 occurred long before there was any Hinduism.
Genesis 4:1-7 is a fictional story about Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel.
Nothing to do with the Christian doctrine of divine incomprehensibility.
Post by Bob
Anyone can see, you're just craving for a little attention, any way you
can get it.
You're pitiful. You like being a clown, don't you?
It's back in the killfile for you. There's no telling when I might have
mercy on you and let you out for a day or two, depending on how
you act. After this little charade, that might never happen.
--
John Ritson

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Peter Pan
2017-06-15 09:59:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Genesis 4:1-7 occurred
Highly doubtful.
Post by Bob
long before there was any Hinduism.
No, because hinduism predates judaism by a millenia or 2.
hypatiab7
2017-06-14 01:08:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Robert Duncan/Jeremy Brown/Calvin Ramsay/Matthias Sereno/Michael
Lankford/Kelli Gibson/Stu D. Baker/Edsel D. Soto/Kevin Madison/Molly
claimed that he had put me into his dread "permanent killfile".
nevets is another nym. Steven spelled backwards. His middle name?
Post by John Ritson
But consistency has never been a Christian characteristic.
He's just that simple.
I wonder if he's the Robert Steven Duncan in Florida or Kentucky or Oregon.
hypatiab7
2017-06-14 00:21:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Yep. You can't even prove that you are one of the Elect. You can't prove
that heaven or hell exist. You can't prove that your god exists. Without
evidence and proof, nothing you write or say is worth doggy doo. Faith means nothing. Your Bible means nothing except as fictional literature.
%
2017-06-14 01:44:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God.
Therefore, only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Yep. You can't even prove that you are one of the Elect. You can't prove
that heaven or hell exist. You can't prove that your god exists. Without
evidence and proof, nothing you write or say is worth doggy doo.
Faith means nothing. Your Bible means nothing except as fictional
literature.
like i said , no proof will be accepted
Smiler
2017-06-15 00:22:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by %
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Bob
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
No one is saying you have to believe they're true.
In fact, I'm saying quite the opposite; you cannot believe them.
Only the chosen elect believe the Bible is the Word of God. Therefore,
only the chosen elect will believe them.
It's just that simple.
Yep. You can't even prove that you are one of the Elect. You can't
prove that heaven or hell exist. You can't prove that your god exists.
Without evidence and proof, nothing you write or say is worth doggy
doo. Faith means nothing. Your Bible means nothing except as fictional
literature.
like i said , no proof will be accepted
What have you got?
--
Smiler, The godless one.
aa #2279
Gods are all tailored to order. They are made
to exactly fit the prejudices of the believer.
Bob Officer
2017-06-14 04:00:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Ritson
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
Historical? Each of the 'facts' comes from the Bible.
Is not him citing the Bible as history the same as citing Greek mythology?
--
Dunning's work explained in clear, concise and simple terms.
John Cleese on Stupidity

Stephen Fry on Dunning Kruger examples:

Mitchell Holman
2017-06-13 12:30:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
1) The Bible is infallible

But how do you know that?

2) Because the Bible is the Word of God

But how do you know that?

3) Because the Bible says so.

But why do you believe it.

4) Because the Bible is infallible
Bob
2017-06-13 15:03:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg

1. The honorable burial of Jesus.
2. The discovery of his empty tomb.
3. The post-mortem appearances of Jesus.
4. The origin of the disciples' belief.


Besides, your number 3 is incorrect, and out of place.


-- "When atheists are presented with critical reasoned arguments, they often
respond with either personal insults, twisted logic and reasoning along
with semantics with excessive detail of complete speculation presented
as truth, to deviate from the critical argument at hand, and talk at
cross purposes to evade it." --Retro
Mitchell Holman
2017-06-14 01:54:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
1. The honorable burial of Jesus.
No proof outside the Bible.
Post by Bob
2. The discovery of his empty tomb.
No proof outside the Bible.
Post by Bob
3. The post-mortem appearances of Jesus.
No proof outside the Bible.
Post by Bob
4. The origin of the disciples' belief.
No proof outside the Bible.
Post by Bob
Besides, your number 3 is incorrect, and out of place.
Citing the Bible to prove the Bible is not proof.
%
2017-06-14 02:16:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
1. The honorable burial of Jesus.
No proof outside the Bible.
Post by Bob
2. The discovery of his empty tomb.
No proof outside the Bible.
Post by Bob
3. The post-mortem appearances of Jesus.
No proof outside the Bible.
Post by Bob
4. The origin of the disciples' belief.
No proof outside the Bible.
Post by Bob
Besides, your number 3 is incorrect, and out of place.
Citing the Bible to prove the Bible is not proof.
there is no proof you will accept so why ask for it
hypatiab7
2017-06-14 01:12:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
1) The Bible is infallible
But how do you know that?
2) Because the Bible is the Word of God
But how do you know that?
3) Because the Bible says so.
But why do you believe it.
4) Because the Bible is infallible
Round and round and round you go.
All fall down.

The Bible is just a collection of myths, outdated laws and hot ancient
Egyptian love poems.
%
2017-06-14 01:45:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by Bob
http://youtu.be/JmEFiXguwkg
1) The Bible is infallible
But how do you know that?
2) Because the Bible is the Word of God
But how do you know that?
3) Because the Bible says so.
But why do you believe it.
4) Because the Bible is infallible
Round and round and round you go.
All fall down.
The Bible is just a collection of myths, outdated laws and hot ancient
Egyptian love poems.
so , what is the atheist book
Loading...