Discussion:
The Myth of The Smarter Atheist
Add Reply
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-07 19:58:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/08/24/the-myth-of-the-smarter-atheist/
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-07 20:02:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/08/24/the-myth-of-the-smarter-atheist/
The author:

About Randy Olson
Dr. Randy Olson is a Senior Data Scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, where he develops state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms with a focus on biomedical applications.
Jeanne Douglas
2017-10-08 00:03:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/08/24/the-myth-of-the-smarter-atheist/
About Randy Olson
Dr. Randy Olson is a Senior Data Scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, where he develops state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms with a focus on biomedical applications.
You got a peer-reviewed article from his on this subject. His blog post is worthless.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
Robert Carnegie
2017-10-08 11:23:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/08/24/the-myth-of-the-smarter-atheist/
About Randy Olson
Dr. Randy Olson is a Senior Data Scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, where he develops state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms with a focus on biomedical applications.
You got a peer-reviewed article from his on this
subject. His blog post is worthless.
Just to check, Jeanne: did you mean to say,
"Do you have a peer-reviewed article from him
on this subject?" Because that is closer to
a response I'd expect from you, than what you
wrote is.

Of course, atheism doesn't require a belief that
atheists are all smarter than religious people -
although it's been reported before. (And even
peer-reviewed papers may include errors or even
deliberate falsehood.) We presume that newborn
babies are atheists, and they're pretty stupid.
Religion may be a mental disease that smart and
rich people are more liable to get, such as due
to fear of dying. And for most of history,
religious people have been legally allowed to
kill atheists, so, smart people wouldn't get
caught being atheists.

Since my definition of atheism is "not worshipping
gods", it's easy enough to perform worship for show,
but doing that also makes you not an atheist.
Well... if you avoid performing human sacrifices
then you aren't doing so badly.
Jeanne Douglas
2017-10-08 21:46:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/08/24/the-myth-of-the-smarter-atheist/
About Randy Olson
Dr. Randy Olson is a Senior Data Scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, where he develops state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms with a focus on biomedical applications.
You got a peer-reviewed article from his on this
subject. His blog post is worthless.
Just to check, Jeanne: did you mean to say,
"Do you have a peer-reviewed article from him
on this subject?"
Yes, a typo.
Post by Robert Carnegie
Because that is closer to
a response I'd expect from you, than what you
wrote is.
Of course, atheism doesn't require a belief that
atheists are all smarter than religious people -
although it's been reported before. (And even
peer-reviewed papers may include errors or even
deliberate falsehood.) We presume that newborn
babies are atheists, and they're pretty stupid.
Religion may be a mental disease that smart and
rich people are more liable to get, such as due
to fear of dying. And for most of history,
religious people have been legally allowed to
kill atheists, so, smart people wouldn't get
caught being atheists.
Since my definition of atheism is "not worshipping
gods", it's easy enough to perform worship for show,
but doing that also makes you not an atheist.
Well... if you avoid performing human sacrifices
then you aren't doing so badly.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
TheRealMccoy
2017-10-08 21:49:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Jeanne Douglas
You got a peer-reviewed article from his on this
subject. His blog post is worthless.
Just to check, Jeanne: did you mean to say,
"Do you have a peer-reviewed article from him
on this subject?"
Yes, a typo.
You caught your own typos?
Robert Carnegie
2017-10-09 22:06:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by TheRealMccoy
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Jeanne Douglas
You got a peer-reviewed article from his on this
subject. His blog post is worthless.
Just to check, Jeanne: did you mean to say,
"Do you have a peer-reviewed article from him
on this subject?"
Yes, a typo.
You caught your own typos?
You're still pretending to believe that you aren't
in the presence of a dozen people who are much smarter
than you - but just one terrifying, transvestite,
man of mystery?

That's me, and I can social-medially kick your ass
on my own.

But so can everyone else, when you play stupid.
More stupid.
Smiler
2017-10-10 23:54:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by TheRealMccoy
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Jeanne Douglas
You got a peer-reviewed article from his on this subject. His
blog post is worthless.
Just to check, Jeanne: did you mean to say,
"Do you have a peer-reviewed article from him on this subject?"
Yes, a typo.
You caught your own typos?
You're still pretending to believe that you aren't in the presence of a
dozen people who are much smarter than you - but just one terrifying,
transvestite,
man of mystery?
That's me, and I can social-medially kick your ass on my own.
But so can everyone else, when you play stupid.
More stupid.
He's still pretending to believe that he has presence of mind.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Cloud Hobbit
2017-10-11 22:23:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
He's still pretending to believe that he has presence of mind.

Shouldn't that be presence of A mind?
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Smiler
2017-10-12 02:05:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
He's still pretending to believe that he has presence of mind.
Shouldn't that be presence of A mind?
You're correct.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Kurt Nicklas
2017-10-11 22:37:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by TheRealMccoy
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Jeanne Douglas
You got a peer-reviewed article from his on this
subject. His blog post is worthless.
Just to check, Jeanne: did you mean to say,
"Do you have a peer-reviewed article from him
on this subject?"
Yes, a typo.
You caught your own typos?
You're still pretending to believe that you aren't
in the presence of a dozen people who are much smarter
than you - but just one terrifying, transvestite,
man of mystery?
That's me, and I can social-medially kick your ass
on my own.
You're a joke.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-10-08 00:32:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Bob
2017-10-08 02:13:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Atheists never receive that evidence.

Only those whom God has chosen receive that evidence.

See Romans 8:16.

So there's no way for you to know one way or the other.

Too bad.

<smirk>
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.

Or, as the Gospel of John very concisely puts it:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 00:01:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and reject it
automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars. Your arguments
against religion and God are so full of ignorance and strawmen that it's obvious
you have no real understanding of religion at all.Against this backdrop,
believers know not to take your arguments seriously.
Mitchell Holman
2017-10-11 01:59:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".

Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.

Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?





Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible

Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.

"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."

Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.

The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 03:14:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
Yap Honghor
2017-10-11 07:12:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 07:36:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
Listen carefully, dumbass. I know you can't read, so I'll explain it to you. Holman cited Israeli archaeologists because he assumed all Israelis are observant Jews and
they would have no reason to distort their findings on a religious issue. Some Israelis are atheists and they, like you, reject the bible stories out of hand. This is a possible motive of theirs in rejecting the Old Testament.Their opinion may thus be based on atheist prejudice against the bible rather than the actual evidence they found or failed to find. There are hundreds of archaeologists on Earth, yet, Holman mentioned only 2 of them. That is hardly a conclusive majority.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 07:42:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
Listen carefully, dumbass. I know you can't read, so I'll explain it to you. Holman cited Israeli archaeologists because he assumed all Israelis are observant Jews and
they would have no reason to distort their findings on a religious issue. Some Israelis are atheists and they, like you, reject the bible stories out of hand. This is a possible motive of theirs in rejecting the Old Testament.Their opinion may thus be based on atheist prejudice against the bible rather than the actual evidence they found or failed to find. There are hundreds of archaeologists on Earth, yet, Holman mentioned only 2 of them. That is hardly a conclusive majority.

Yap Honghor
2017-10-11 07:54:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
Listen carefully, dumbass. I know you can't read, so I'll explain it to you. Holman cited Israeli archaeologists because he assumed all Israelis are observant Jews and
they would have no reason to distort their findings on a religious issue. Some Israelis are atheists and they, like you, reject the bible stories out of hand. This is a possible motive of theirs in rejecting the Old Testament.Their opinion may thus be based on atheist prejudice against the bible rather than the actual evidence they found or failed to find. There are hundreds of archaeologists on Earth, yet, Holman mentioned only 2 of them. That is hardly a conclusive majority.
Of course I understand even factual conclusion of science can be interpreted differently or prejudicely too. We know there are a lot of Jews who are Christians or other evil sects.

We reject bible because they give contradictory tales which are all illogical written in the olden days. We are not finding this type of nonsense in our present day fiction books, right????

There are many archaeologists who are hunting evidence and fail...Holman need not mention all the names. Their arguments are not only logical but also based on their personal efforts...all of which is brushed aside by you theists! You bloody believers take thing for granted by assuming the con bible to be true, without using your bird brains to analyze.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 07:57:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
Listen carefully, dumbass. I know you can't read, so I'll explain it to you. Holman cited Israeli archaeologists because he assumed all Israelis are observant Jews and
they would have no reason to distort their findings on a religious issue. Some Israelis are atheists and they, like you, reject the bible stories out of hand. This is a possible motive of theirs in rejecting the Old Testament.Their opinion may thus be based on atheist prejudice against the bible rather than the actual evidence they found or failed to find. There are hundreds of archaeologists on Earth, yet, Holman mentioned only 2 of them. That is hardly a conclusive majority.
Of course I understand even factual conclusion of science can be interpreted differently or prejudicely too. We know there are a lot of Jews who are Christians or other evil sects.
We reject bible because they give contradictory tales which are all illogical written in the olden days. We are not finding this type of nonsense in our present day fiction books, right????
There are many archaeologists who are hunting evidence and fail...Holman need not mention all the names. Their arguments are not only logical but also based on their personal efforts...all of which is brushed aside by you theists! You bloody believers take thing for granted by assuming the con bible to be true, without using your bird brains to analyze.
Прикрепи свою голову к своей заднице.
Mitchell Holman
2017-10-11 12:09:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Listen carefully, dumbass. I know you can't read, so I'll explain it
to you. Holman cited Israeli archaeologists because he assumed all
Israelis are observant Jews and they would have no reason to distort
their findings on a religious issue. Some Israelis are atheists and
they, like you, reject the bible stories out of hand. This is a
possible motive of theirs in rejecting the Old Testament.
Why would Jews reject the Old Testament?

Esp professional ones with every motive to
VERIFY the Old Testament...........







"Between 1967, when Israel captured the Sinai Peninsula
from Egypt, and 1982, when it was returned in the peace
treaty, Israeli archaeologists made dozens of expeditions
throughout the peninsula. Yet, not a single shred of evidence
for an ancient Israelite presence was found. Great schools of
Jewish archaeology, given every motive to find to the contrary,
and given every chance to find, in the Sinai and the region,
any evidence of the Exodus, were unable to do so. Came back
empty handed and admitted that there was no evidence for any
Jewish life in Egypt or in the Sinai desert."

http://tinyurl.com/hum5ba6
Christopher A. Lee
2017-10-11 14:33:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 07:09:23 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Listen carefully, dumbass. I know you can't read, so I'll explain it
to you. Holman cited Israeli archaeologists because he assumed all
Israelis are observant Jews and they would have no reason to distort
their findings on a religious issue. Some Israelis are atheists and
they, like you, reject the bible stories out of hand. This is a
possible motive of theirs in rejecting the Old Testament.
Once again, the paranoid liar invents motivations that atheists don't
have, to use as an ad hominem instead of actually addressing what is
said,
Post by Mitchell Holman
Why would Jews reject the Old Testament?
Esp professional ones with every motive to
VERIFY the Old Testament...........
any evidence of the Exodus, were unable to do so. Came back
empty handed and admitted that there was no evidence for any
Jewish life in Egypt or in the Sinai desert."
http://tinyurl.com/hum5ba6
There is none, for the reasons we have given Mad Joe (and supported)
over and over again.

If we had posted articles like this one to Jewish newsgroups, he could
rightfully be offended - but then we don't behave the way he does
towards us.
hypatiab7
2017-10-11 17:04:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only some religious archaeologists. You only ever say what you want to believe.
If the truth disagrees with you, you arrange for it to agree with you.
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
What does Dershowitz have to do with anything being discussed? And, if the woman you dated was an atheist, she was no longer Jewish.
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Yap Honghor
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
Listen carefully, dumbass. I know you can't read, so I'll explain it to you. Holman cited Israeli archaeologists because he assumed all Israelis are observant Jews and
This is something else you've pulled out of the air. You have no way of proving your stupid allegation. And, your atheist date and Dershowitz still have nothing to do with the discussion.
Post by v***@gmail.com
they would have no reason to distort their findings on a religious issue. Some Israelis are atheists and they, like you, reject the bible stories out of hand. This is a possible motive of theirs in rejecting the Old Testament.Their opinion may thus be based on atheist prejudice against the bible rather than the actual evidence they found or failed to find. There are hundreds of archaeologists on Earth, yet, Holman mentioned only 2 of them. That is hardly a conclusive majority.
I have also read "The Bible Unearthed". In the about ten years since
it came out, nothing in it has been disproved. You, on the other hand
dreamed up reasons for why you refuse to believe anything the writers
wrote. You say they lied because they are atheists - which neither of
them is. Also, the back of the book has a Bibliography which many archaeologists and their works. You seem to have missed that completely.
It sounds like you've neither read this book or have ever even seen it.

By the way Neil Asher Silberman is an American from Boston, Mass. He is now
the head OF The University of Massachusetts Dept. of Archaeology.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-10-12 02:21:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Wrong Art he cited Israeli archaeologists because they have the most to gain by discovering if the Exodus happened.

The fact that they nor Egyptian nor anyone else could find any evidence that it had or that any the Patriarcs or Moses, or Noah ever existed.

The bible is simply bad fiction.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-14 18:41:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Wrong Art he cited Israeli archaeologists because they have the most to gain by discovering if the Exodus happened.
That's only true if they are observant Jews. Atheist Jews claim the bible is all fiction.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 07:48:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
Failed dating????ROTFL! I went out with her once and did not ask her again because she was an obnoxious control freak who tried to tell me how to drive my car while I was driving it.
I don't take that kind of crap from anybody, least of all a supposed "girlfriend."
Cloud Hobbit
2017-10-11 22:43:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
--------------
It is not some archaeologists.
It's the overwhelming majority of archaeologists. Even after having spent much time and money looking for evidence none could be found.

You simply refuse to accept that the most qualified people to find evidence for the fictional Exodus were unable to find any.
!! Atheist ------------------------------
2017-10-12 00:47:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
--------------
It is not some archaeologists.
It's the overwhelming majority of archaeologists. Even after having spent much time and money looking for evidence none could be found.
You simply refuse to accept that the most qualified people to find evidence for the fictional Exodus were unable to find any.
Who ya talkin to dickhead?

If duke dreamed of an Exodus, isn't that evidence? Why else would God give him the dream?

Answer that! dickhead.
--
There is no verifiable evidence of any god(s). None whatsoever.
Extortion (Believe or Burn) is *THE* foundation of Christianity.
Sycophant: a compulsive ass-kisser of un-evidenced dictator god.
Yap Honghor
2017-10-12 00:58:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
You like to deny it, but the stories of the Exodus are controversial, which means some archaeologists say there is evidence and some say there is none.
Only someone as intellectually dishonest as you are would insist that all archaeologists agree with one side of the controversy. There is disagreement among Jews on this issue, as there is on many issues. Some Israelis are atheists, just as some American Jews are. My nephew does not believe in God and I dated a Jewish woman years ago who was a confirmed Atheist. Law Professor Alan Dershowitz is an atheist, too.
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
Failed dating????ROTFL! I went out with her once and did not ask her again because she was an obnoxious control freak who tried to tell me how to drive my car while I was driving it.
I don't take that kind of crap from anybody, least of all a supposed "girlfriend."
Now, you seemed to have problem with driving? Speeding or reckless?

But, as just a first, she was never your girlfriend, right?
Peter Pan
2017-10-14 18:55:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Failed dating????ROTFL! I went out with her once and did not ask her again because she was an obnoxious control freak who tried to tell me how to drive my car while I was driving it.
So you don't drive very well and she feared for her life.
Post by v***@gmail.com
I don't take that kind of crap from anybody, least of all a supposed "girlfriend."
Then she dumped you.
Kevrob
2017-10-11 15:23:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
He was like Moses. 40 years he wasted on her, and he was still
kept out of the Promised Land. :)

Kevin R
TheRealMccoy
2017-10-11 15:25:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
He was like Moses. 40 years he wasted on her, and he was still
kept out of the Promised Land. :)
Kevin R
why you only minute by minute instead of long term vision?

now short time for you, you keep typing stupid ridiculous nonsense.

you no see where this go yet, dummy?
hypatiab7
2017-10-11 17:06:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by TheRealMccoy
Post by Kevrob
He was like Moses. 40 years he wasted on her, and he was still
kept out of the Promised Land. :)
Kevin R
why you only minute by minute instead of long term vision?
now short time for you, you keep typing stupid ridiculous nonsense.
you no see where this go yet, dummy?
I see you write stupid messages.
hypatiab7
2017-10-12 06:15:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by TheRealMccoy
Post by Kevrob
He was like Moses. 40 years he wasted on her, and he was still
kept out of the Promised Land. :)
Kevin R
why you only minute by minute instead of long term vision?
now short time for you, you keep typing stupid ridiculous nonsense.
you no see where this go yet, dummy?
You sound like an ass when you write this way. You must really want people to
believe you're stupid.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 15:43:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by Yap Honghor
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
He was like Moses. 40 years he wasted on her, and he was still
kept out of the Promised Land. :)
Kevin R
I went out with her ONCE, you dimwit.

That sort of baseless theorizing is typical for you stupid atheists. You fuckers are allergic to facts. What a bunch of incompetent, inept assholes you are.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 15:44:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Kevrob
Post by Yap Honghor
What has the non-event of your failed dating of an atheist woman anything to do with the exodus issue????
He was like Moses. 40 years he wasted on her, and he was still
kept out of the Promised Land. :)
Kevin R
I went out with her ONCE, you dimwit.
That sort of baseless theorizing is typical for you stupid atheists. You fuckers are allergic to facts. What a bunch of incompetent, inept assholes you are.

TheRealMccoy
2017-10-12 15:01:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
That sort of baseless theorizing is typical for you stupid atheists. You fuckers are allergic to facts. What a bunch of incompetent, inept assholes you are.
Recall the time he couldn't count to ten ...
Christopher A. Lee
2017-10-11 14:12:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:59:37 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
He'll scream that you are a liar for posting that, and "prove" it
with a cut'n'paste saying that the earliest secular mention is a
thousand years after the claimed events.
Kurt Nicklas
2017-10-11 14:19:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:59:37 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
He'll scream that you are a liar for posting that, and "prove" it
with a cut'n'paste saying that the earliest secular mention is a
thousand years after the claimed events.
CHRISTopher and other atheists scream for cites and support then call them
'cut n paste' when they're provided.

Just a part of their hypocrisy.
hypatiab7
2017-10-12 06:11:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kurt Nicklas
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:59:37 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
He'll scream that you are a liar for posting that, and "prove" it
with a cut'n'paste saying that the earliest secular mention is a
thousand years after the claimed events.
CHRISTopher and other atheists scream for cites and support then call them
'cut n paste' when they're provided.
Just a part of their hypocrisy.
Prove this lie.
Kurt Nicklas
2017-10-12 11:36:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kurt Nicklas
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:59:37 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
He'll scream that you are a liar for posting that, and "prove" it
with a cut'n'paste saying that the earliest secular mention is a
thousand years after the claimed events.
CHRISTopher and other atheists scream for cites and support then call them
'cut n paste' when they're provided.
Just a part of their hypocrisy.
Prove this lie.
LOL He did it just above. How stupid are you??
hypatiab7
2017-10-12 17:42:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kurt Nicklas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kurt Nicklas
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:59:37 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
He'll scream that you are a liar for posting that, and "prove" it
with a cut'n'paste saying that the earliest secular mention is a
thousand years after the claimed events.
CHRISTopher and other atheists scream for cites and support then call them
'cut n paste' when they're provided.
Just a part of their hypocrisy.
Prove this lie.
LOL He did it just above. How stupid are you??
Trolls don't prove anything but that they are bigoted trolls. You and ArtieJoe
fit in that category completely.
Kurt Nicklas
2017-10-12 20:12:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kurt Nicklas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kurt Nicklas
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:59:37 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and
reject it automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
Your arguments against religion and God are so full of ignorance and
strawmen that it's obvious you have no real understanding of religion
at all.Against this backdrop, believers know not to take your
arguments seriously.
Funny you call yourself "believers", and
"people of faith".
Point is, facts don't need belief, facts
don't require faith.
Intelligent jews admit when facts disprove
their faith. Couldn't you be more like them?
Archeology is Demolishing the History of the Bible
Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology
Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology
historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published
a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's
New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its
Sacred Text.
"The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander
in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan]
in a military campaign and did not pass it on to
the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to
swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David
and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional
power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."
Jerusalem was essentially a cow town, not the glorious
capital of an empire. These findings have been accepted
by the majority of biblical scholars and archaeologists
for years and even decades.
The tales of the patriarchs -- Abraham, Isaac and
Joseph among others -- were the first to go when
biblical scholars found those passages rife with
anachronisms and other inconsistencies. The story
of Exodus, one of the most powerful epics of
enslavement, courage and liberation in human
history, also slipped from history to legend when
archaeologists could no longer ignore the lack of
corroborating contemporary Egyptian accounts and
the absence of evidence of large encampments in
the Sinai Peninsula ("the wilderness" where Moses
brought the Israelites after leading them through
the parted Red Sea).
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/archeology.html
He'll scream that you are a liar for posting that, and "prove" it
with a cut'n'paste saying that the earliest secular mention is a
thousand years after the claimed events.
CHRISTopher and other atheists scream for cites and support then call them
'cut n paste' when they're provided.
Just a part of their hypocrisy.
Prove this lie.
LOL He did it just above. How stupid are you??
Trolls don't prove anything but that they are bigoted trolls. You and ArtieJoe
fit in that category completely.
All you had to do was look up 2 lines for proof of what I said but instead you simply cut another brainless, stinky brainfart.
Marvin Sebourn
2017-10-11 03:15:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and reject it
automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
No. How do you know that atheists as a group 1) refuse to consider the available evidence, and 2) reject it automatically? You don't

Even if universally true, that would not make them propagandists. Surely you have access to a dictionary-look up the word propagandist. Do these people necessarily make propaganda? No. Do they necessarily spread it? No.

Do you consider the available evidence showing that you are completely wrong in your conception of the definition of propagandist? No, you don't.

Do you reject the dictionary definition of propagandist, fail to acknowledge that you are wrong? Yes, likely, otherwise you would rephrase your silly claim.

But even though you fit your requirements as being a propagandist, that doesn't mean you are one. It does mean that you are willfully close-minded and deliberately ignorant.

I doubt if any of us here considered you to be a scholar in this case, so don't worry about us thinking of you as such.

And if you want to add some real variety to you language skills, give us a "no" in Basque. Atlatl likely can.

Don't bother to curse me in Russian. I know no Russian other than a half-dozen words or so, but at least I had enough interest and appreciation of their culture to twice visit Crimea, the Aurora cruiser in St. Petersburg, Livadia Palace in Yalta, the returned Tatars on Ai Petri, the Swallow's Nest, the Potemkin Stairs in Odessa, the Peter and Paul Fortress and the tombs of the czars, and a dozen or so other places of historical importance. You undoubtedly know much more of their history, but I have twice visited there. I breathed the air of Russia, felt the pock-marked bullet holes in their city walls, supped with the Russians and shared vodka with them, so get off your "Nyet" high-horse and consult a dictionary.

Marvin Sebourn
Post by v***@gmail.com
Your arguments
against religion and God are so full of ignorance and strawmen that it's obvious
you have no real understanding of religion at all.Against this backdrop,
believers know not to take your arguments seriously.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-10-11 14:41:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:15:13 -0700 (PDT), Marvin Sebourn
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and reject it
automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars.
WHAT FUCKING "AVAILABLE EVIDENCE"?

Nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided, to
reject.

Mad Joe has been lying about this to us for years.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
No. How do you know that atheists as a group 1) refuse to consider
the available evidence, and 2) reject it automatically? You don't
Because none has ever been provided that can be defended as such.

But, just like every other theist who makes this claim, he lies
because he has nothing and uses these lies as an ad hominem instead
of addrressing what is said.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Even if universally true, that would not make them propagandists. Surely
you have access to a dictionary-look up the word propagandist. Do these
people necessarily make propaganda? No. Do they necessarily spread it?
No.
Which he would know if he weren't so nastily stupid.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Do you consider the available evidence showing that you are completely
wrong in your conception of the definition of propagandist? No, you don't.
Just like pretty well all of his in-your-face, unsolicited rudeness
and stupidity.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Do you reject the dictionary definition of propagandist, fail to acknowledge
that you are wrong? Yes, likely, otherwise you would rephrase your s
illy claim.
Does he ever acknoeledge it, when he is wrong?
Post by Marvin Sebourn
But even though you fit your requirements as being a propagandist, that
doesn't mean you are one. It does mean that you are willfully close-minded
and deliberately ignorant.
I doubt if any of us here considered you to be a scholar in this case, so
don't worry about us thinking of you as such.
And if you want to add some real variety to you language skills, give us a
"no" in Basque. Atlatl likely can.
Don't bother to curse me in Russian. I know no Russian other than a half-dozen
words or so, but at least I had enough interest and appreciation of their culture
to twice visit Crimea, the Aurora cruiser in St. Petersburg, Livadia Palace in
Yalta, the returned Tatars on Ai Petri, the Swallow's Nest, the Potemkin Stairs
in Odessa, the Peter and Paul Fortress and the tombs of the czars, and a dozen
or so other places of historical importance. You undoubtedly know much more
of their history, but I have twice visited there. I breathed the air of Russia, felt
the pock-marked bullet holes in their city walls, supped with the Russians and
shared vodka with them, so get off your "Nyet" high-horse and consult a
dictionary.
Too much to ask.

Even under the soviets, it was a major cultural destination.
Post by Marvin Sebourn
Marvin Sebourn
Post by v***@gmail.com
Your arguments
against religion and God are so full of ignorance and strawmen that it's obvious
you have no real understanding of religion at all.Against this backdrop,
believers know not to take your arguments seriously.
TheRealMccoy
2017-10-11 14:45:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:15:13 -0700 (PDT), Marvin Sebourn
Even under the soviets
And they whine about the number of govt helpers china has to control public opinion on the internet in china ...
Smiler
2017-10-12 02:10:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by TheRealMccoy
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:15:13 -0700 (PDT), Marvin Sebourn
Even under the soviets
And they whine about the number of govt helpers china has to control
public opinion on the internet in china ...
Who 'they'?
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
hypatiab7
2017-10-11 13:29:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and reject it
automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars. Your arguments
against religion and God are so full of ignorance and strawmen that it's obvious
you have no real understanding of religion at all.Against this backdrop,
believers know not to take your arguments seriously.
Your word has long been worthless. Ask.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-10-11 22:13:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence and reject it
automatically. That makes them propagandists, not scholars. Your arguments
against religion and God are so full of ignorance and strawmen that it's obvious
you have no real understanding of religion at all.Against this backdrop,
believers know not to take your arguments seriously.

------------------

As usual you focus on the irrelevant. One does not need need any knowledge of any religion beyond the fact that theists believe in a God or gods.

Nothing ever offered as evidence for your imaginary friend has ever been shown to be true.

If you do learn about religion it will only reinforce one's atheism because it is obvious to anybody who think rationally that it's nonsense.

It's no different than beliefs in Thor, Zeus, the Wizard of Oz.
It's all fiction.

Until such time as a God shows up and proves itself no other conclusion makes any sense.

You can't get around the fact that the tiny amount of things that are referenced in the bible that have been shown to be true in any way give any credence to any of the supernatural crap mentioned in the bible or that the overwhelming majority of archaeologists have concluded that most of the bible is either pure fiction or exaggerated beyond recognition.

There simply is Nothing that confirms most of the events or most of the important people mentioned in the bible.

There is no reason to believe any of it until confirmed independently of the bible.

Be glad you live somewhere that makes it legal to believe anything. Many people throughout history and in the present are not so lucky.

Just don't expect atheists to take anything on faith.

Don't expect anyone here to take YOUR word for anything when you have repeatedly been shown to be a liar or a fool.
Jeanne Douglas
2017-10-12 05:17:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence
What evidence? None has EVER been provided.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 00:08:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Horse dung. You atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which paints you as propagandists. Your arguments against God and religion are so
infected with ignorance and strawmen, that it's obvious you have no understanding of the religion you criticize.

I still remember your claim that the Old testament was written by Christians.
The OT was complete and in full effect for 1000 years before Jesus was even born.
Yap Honghor
2017-10-11 00:50:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Horse dung. You atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which paints you as propagandists. Your arguments against God and religion are so
infected with ignorance and strawmen, that it's obvious you have no understanding of the religion you criticize.
What ignorance or strawmen when you theists cannot show us evidence for the existence of a pixie????

You blame you inability of such action on us?????
Post by v***@gmail.com
I still remember your claim that the Old testament was written by Christians.
The OT was complete and in full effect for 1000 years before Jesus was even born.
The OT was adopted by Christians but changed to NT...all of which were from paganism, right?
Jeanne Douglas
2017-10-12 05:18:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Horse dung. You atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence,
No evidence has EVER been presented, so there's nothing to consider.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-14 18:51:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Horse dung. You atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence,
No evidence has EVER been presented, so there's nothing to consider.
THAT'S A LIE

https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/proof-that-god-exists-faq.htm


https://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/does-god-exist/

http://lifeteen.com/blog/are-you-there-god-5-ways-to-prove-god-exists/

http://gradresources.org/evidence-for-gods-existence/

http://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/galleries/shocking-proof-of-gods-existence-inside-the-human-body.aspx

https://strangenotions.com/god-exists/

http://www.scottmsullivan.com/how-to-prove-that-god-exists/

http://www.catholic.org/news/technology/story.php?id=69335
Yap Honghor
2017-10-15 01:59:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Horse dung. You atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence,
No evidence has EVER been presented, so there's nothing to consider.
THAT'S A LIE
https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/proof-that-god-exists-faq.htm
https://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/does-god-exist/
http://lifeteen.com/blog/are-you-there-god-5-ways-to-prove-god-exists/
http://gradresources.org/evidence-for-gods-existence/
http://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/galleries/shocking-proof-of-gods-existence-inside-the-human-body.aspx
https://strangenotions.com/god-exists/
http://www.scottmsullivan.com/how-to-prove-that-god-exists/
http://www.catholic.org/news/technology/story.php?id=69335
Blogs and bible studies are personal opinion or delusion....not evidence, you stupid fellow.
Jeanne Douglas
2017-10-16 22:48:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Horse dung. You atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence,
No evidence has EVER been presented, so there's nothing to consider.
THAT'S A LIE
You KNOW that every one of those things has been refuted so posting them again is lying.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 00:13:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Yap Honghor
2017-10-11 00:51:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
What evidence you have posted????????????????????????????????????????
hypatiab7
2017-10-11 14:33:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
We have read your so-called evidence and people have commented on it.
I used to comment on it until you became tiresome. You simply can't
accept it when anyone disagrees with you. You've always been this way.
That's why so many people have stopped responding to you. That and all
your lies about atheists and atheist individuals in this newsgroup.

There is no spiritual, ArtieJoe. You've never been able to prove there is.

If anyone has a closed 'mind', it's you, Arthur Joseph Tandy.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-18 08:03:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
We have read your so-called evidence and people have commented on it.
I used to comment on it until you became tiresome. You simply can't
accept it when anyone disagrees with you. You've always been this way.
That's why so many people have stopped responding to you. That and all
your lies about atheists and atheist individuals in this newsgroup.
There is no spiritual, ArtieJoe. You've never been able to prove there is.
You are totally insignificant.Nothing you say is worth consideration by anyone with common sense. Lying is only a small part of your intellectual and moral deficiency.

It astounds me that you actually believe that any opinion of yours is meaningful.People who read my posts will make their own judgement on my credibility regardless of the inane babbling that flows from your foolish mouth.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-10-11 22:20:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
____________________

What do you expect when nothing ever offered as evidence for a God has ever been shown to be true or in many cases anywhere near reasonable?

Opinions are not evidence.
The bible is not evidence.
The number of believers is not evidence.
Bob
2017-10-11 23:45:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence of
mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Post by v***@gmail.com
____________________ >
What do you expect when nothing ever offered as evidence for a God
has ever been shown to be true or in many cases anywhere near
reasonable?
I'd say you were making what's known as a "category mistake".

You're asking for scientifically testable, material, non-transcendent
evidence for an immaterial, transcendent God.

That's a "category mistake".

Therefore your request is illegitimate, and can be ignored.

You're welcome.

Now grow up you little idiot.

<smirk>
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.

Or, as the Gospel of John very concisely puts it:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
Cloud Hobbit
2017-10-12 02:15:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Bob the real mistake is claiming a nonmaterial God exists when the is no evidence that such a thing exists or even possible.

You start with an Unevidenced assertion and wind up as a smirking shithead whose mission seems to to explore how big of a smug, condescending asshole you can be.
Bob
2017-10-12 02:30:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Bob the real mistake is claiming a nonmaterial God exists when the is
no evidence that such a thing exists or even possible.
No, you're missing the point.

If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and transcendent.

So you asking for material, non-transcendent evidence for him is a mistake,
and your question can be dismissed as an illegitimate and invalid question.

Any detective, or any lawyer would tell you the same thing. Your question
is a "category mistake".

This webpage will tell you the same thing:
https://carm.org/atheist-error-asking-for-material-evidence-for-god

Right now it's just a matter of how mature you are to accept it that you are
wrong for asking that question.
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.

Or, as the Gospel of John very concisely puts it:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
hypatiab7
2017-10-12 06:23:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Bob the real mistake is claiming a nonmaterial God exists when the is
no evidence that such a thing exists or even possible.
No, you're missing the point.
If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and transcendent.
So you asking for material, non-transcendent evidence for him is a mistake,
and your question can be dismissed as an illegitimate and invalid question.
Any detective, or any lawyer would tell you the same thing. Your question
is a "category mistake".
https://carm.org/atheist-error-asking-for-material-evidence-for-god
Right now it's just a matter of how mature you are to accept it that you are
wrong for asking that question.
You have no idea what your god is. And, since the immaterial god argument
is fairly recent, it was made up as an excuse for your cowardly god not
showing itself.
!! Atheist ------------------------------
2017-10-12 07:05:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and transcendent.
There is no verifiable evidence of any immaterial god(s) either. None whatsoever.
--
Extortion (Believe or Burn) is *THE* foundation of Christianity.
Sycophant: a compulsive ass-kisser of un-evidenced dictator god.
Bob
2017-10-12 12:09:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by !! Atheist ------------------------------
Post by Bob
If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and
transcendent.
There is no verifiable evidence of any immaterial god(s) either. None whatsoever.
How would you know? What would you use to verify the evidence?
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.

Or, as the Gospel of John very concisely puts it:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
Bob
2017-10-12 12:08:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Bob the real mistake is claiming a nonmaterial God exists when the is
no evidence that such a thing exists or even possible.
No, you're missing the point.
If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and transcendent.
So you asking for material, non-transcendent evidence for him is a mistake,
and your question can be dismissed as an illegitimate and invalid question.
Any detective, or any lawyer would tell you the same thing. Your question
is a "category mistake".
https://carm.org/atheist-error-asking-for-material-evidence-for-god
Right now it's just a matter of how mature you are to accept it that you are
wrong for asking that question.
You have no idea what God is.
We have inferred enough from his Word to know.

You may not have. Be we have.

Don't feel bad if you don't get it. Not everyone is allowed to get it.

"So you see, God chooses to show mercy to some, and he chooses to harden
the hearts of others so they refuse to listen." [Romans 9:18]

You should be able to infer from that which group you're in.

You're welcome.

<smirk>
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.

Or, as the Gospel of John very concisely puts it:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
hypatiab7
2017-10-12 17:58:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by Bob
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Bob the real mistake is claiming a nonmaterial God exists when the is
no evidence that such a thing exists or even possible.
No, you're missing the point.
If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and transcendent.
So you asking for material, non-transcendent evidence for him is a mistake,
and your question can be dismissed as an illegitimate and invalid question.
Any detective, or any lawyer would tell you the same thing. Your question
is a "category mistake".
https://carm.org/atheist-error-asking-for-material-evidence-for-god
Right now it's just a matter of how mature you are to accept it that you are
wrong for asking that question.
You have no idea what God is.
We have inferred enough from his Word to know.
You may not have. Be we have.
Don't feel bad if you don't get it. Not everyone is allowed to get it.
You should be able to infer from that which group you're in.
You're welcome.
< silly smirk>
You still haven't provided evidence that your god exists or ever existed.
Nothing else you have to say about your unproven 'God' means anything. And nothing connected to your unproven 'God' means anything (Jesus, heaven, hell,
miracles and other religious nonsense.) Plus, you aren't scaring us, since we don't believe in your hateful nonsense.

By the way, you have no way of knowing whether you are 'elect' or not. I know
that scares you no end. Too bad. It's what you deserve.
Bob
2017-10-12 18:04:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
You still haven't provided evidence that your god exists or ever existed.
Only God can do that. And he only does it for his elect.

Are you inferring anything with that?

<smirk>
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.

Or, as the Gospel of John very concisely puts it:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
Yap Honghor
2017-10-13 01:06:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by hypatiab7
You still haven't provided evidence that your god exists or ever existed.
Only God can do that. And he only does it for his elect.
If that is true, it does not come forward while authorizing you to be his spokesman?
Post by Bob
Are you inferring anything with that?
<smirk>
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
Yap Honghor
2017-10-12 06:59:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Bob the real mistake is claiming a nonmaterial God exists when the is
no evidence that such a thing exists or even possible.
No, you're missing the point.
If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and transcendent.
You don't even care for your aging parents, but how can a pixie be of yours?
Post by Bob
So you asking for material, non-transcendent evidence for him is a mistake,
and your question can be dismissed as an illegitimate and invalid question.
If it isn't material, it then has no existence. If it is just an energy, it will not have thinking ability.
From any angle, a pixie=god is impossible.
Post by Bob
Any detective, or any lawyer would tell you the same thing. Your question
is a "category mistake".
From the common sense, your delusion is stupid.
Post by Bob
https://carm.org/atheist-error-asking-for-material-evidence-for-god
Right now it's just a matter of how mature you are to accept it that you are
wrong for asking that question.
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
Bob
2017-10-12 12:14:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Bob
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Bob the real mistake is claiming a nonmaterial God exists when the is
no evidence that such a thing exists or even possible.
No, you're missing the point.
If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and transcendent.
You don't even care for your aging parents, but how can a pixie be of yours?
I don't understand your question, Yap. You need to hire a translator, Yap.

(That's just too funny.)
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Bob
So you asking for material, non-transcendent evidence for him is a mistake,
and your question can be dismissed as an illegitimate and invalid question.
If it isn't material, it then has no existence. If it is just an energy, it will not have thinking ability.
From any angle, a pixie=god is impossible.
You're speaking of a non-transcendent god.

We believe in a transcendent God.

You're welcome.
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.

Or, as the Gospel of John very concisely puts it:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
Yap Honghor
2017-10-13 01:03:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Bob
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Bob the real mistake is claiming a nonmaterial God exists when the is
no evidence that such a thing exists or even possible.
No, you're missing the point.
If God exists (emphasis on 'If'), he would be immaterial and transcendent.
You don't even care for your aging parents, but how can a pixie be of yours?
I don't understand your question, Yap. You need to hire a translator, Yap.
If you don;t care about your parents who have sacrificed for you, why would you care about a pixie in the sky which is nothing to you???????

You need to provide a sensible answer to this.
Post by Bob
(That's just too funny.)
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by Bob
So you asking for material, non-transcendent evidence for him is a mistake,
and your question can be dismissed as an illegitimate and invalid question.
If it isn't material, it then has no existence. If it is just an energy, it will not have thinking ability.
From any angle, a pixie=god is impossible.
You're speaking of a non-transcendent god.
We believe in a transcendent God.
So, make a definition for it....
Why would a god want to have anything to do with you, or care for you when evidences have shown that there were no interference in our natural disasters to protect believers from harm???????

Obviously, you would try to make excuses....
Post by Bob
You're welcome.
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
hypatiab7
2017-10-12 06:20:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence of
mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Post by v***@gmail.com
____________________ >
What do you expect when nothing ever offered as evidence for a God
has ever been shown to be true or in many cases anywhere near
reasonable?
I'd say you were making what's known as a "category mistake".
You're asking for scientifically testable, material, non-transcendent
evidence for an immaterial, transcendent God.
That's a "category mistake".
Therefore your request is illegitimate, and can be ignored.
All you've proved is that you can't use science. Science is a threat
to you.
Post by v***@gmail.com
You're welcome.
Now grow up you little idiot.
<smirk>
You sound like such an immature jerk.
Bob
2017-10-12 12:18:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
All you've proved is that you can't use science.
All you're proven is you can't think transcendentally.

If God exists, then he would be transcendent.
--
The unregenerate non-elect will always believe what another unregenerate
non-elect says, whereas the regenerate chosen elect will intrinsically
recognize what the unregenerate non-elect says as a lie. Therefore those
who were predestined for Hell, will still end up in Hell, and those who
are predestined for Heaven are still going to go to Heaven. Nothing in
God's plan will change. For by convincing other unregenerate non-elects
to believe his lies, he is fulfilling that part of God's plan that God
has predestined just for him.

Or, as the Gospel of John very concisely puts it:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the
door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber.
But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the
gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep
by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he
goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A
stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do
not know the voice of strangers."
[John 10:1-5]
TheRealMccoy
2017-10-12 15:00:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bob
Post by hypatiab7
All you've proved is that you can't use science.
All you're proven is you can't think transcendentally.
If God exists, then he would be transcendent.
The father certainly is, but there is another sense of that word.
To excel or go beyond, meaning your abilities ...
Jeanne Douglas
2017-10-12 05:26:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence,
What evidence? None has EVER been produced here.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
Yap Honghor
2017-10-12 07:00:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence,
What evidence? None has EVER been produced here.
You have asked twice now, and all we have is just cricket....
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 00:17:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Mitchell Holman
2017-10-11 01:52:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Show us the "available evidence".
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-11 03:03:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Show us the "available evidence".
Go read the posts of Andrew and Duke. They posted plenty. You athies already know that, which is why you call them liars and fools.
Mitchell Holman
2017-10-11 12:05:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence,
which paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is
evidence of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Show us the "available evidence".
Go read the posts of Andrew and Duke. They posted plenty. You athies
already know that, which is why you call them liars and fools.
As a Jew you depend on Christians for
proof of your faith?

Wait until your rabbi hears about this...
hypatiab7
2017-10-11 14:36:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Show us the "available evidence".
Go read the posts of Andrew and Duke. They posted plenty. You athies already know that, which is why you call them liars and fools.
Excellent! A troll recommending that we read other trolls.
Jeanne Douglas
2017-10-12 07:01:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Show us the "available evidence".
Go read the posts of Andrew and Duke. They posted plenty.
Where? When?
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
hypatiab7
2017-10-12 17:35:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously
smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Show us the "available evidence".
Go read the posts of Andrew and Duke. They posted plenty.
Where? When?
Well, they have posted a bunch of religious crap that they know we don't
believe in over the years. As far as any religious evidence from them,
no way. They post mythology and silly scare tactics that never work. And,
they post the same stuff over and over and over and ... because THEY believe
it. We don't. (Of course, they have gotten to the point where most of them
are merely annoyance trolls. They know they're wasting their time. They're
stupid that way.)
Peter Pan
2017-10-14 19:14:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
Show us the "available evidence".
Go read the posts of Andrew and Duke. They posted plenty. You athies already know that, which is why you call them liars and fools.
As long as we're paying homage to the mentally deficient,
don't forget your li'l buddy aaa. He proved abiogenesis
and evolution are mathematically impossible, then proved
God via the "philosophical evidence".
Christopher A. Lee
2017-10-11 13:35:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:52:35 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
And Mad Joe lies that he never lies, yet again.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Show us the "available evidence".
Nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided, let alone
defended as such,

The actual issue, is "What is behind his neverending stream of lies
about aqteists, posted in the atheist group for so many years?".
hypatiab7
2017-10-12 06:10:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:52:35 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
And Mad Joe lies that he never lies, yet again.
Post by Mitchell Holman
Show us the "available evidence".
Nothing remotely resembling evidence has ever been provided, let alone
defended as such,
The actual issue, is "What is behind his neverending stream of lies
about aqteists, posted in the atheist group for so many years?".
ArtieJoe doesn't act like a Jew. He acts like a religious fanatic Christian.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-17 23:57:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:52:35 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
And Mad Joe lies that he never lies, yet again.
Show us where I said that.
Yap Honghor
2017-10-18 01:25:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:52:35 -0500, Mitchell Holman
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
Nyet. Atheists refuse to even consider the available evidence, which
paints them as propagandists, not scholars. A closed mind is evidence
of mental and spiritual weakness, not intelligence.
And Mad Joe lies that he never lies, yet again.
Show us where I said that.
As long as you have acknowledged that you lie, that is good enough for us.
No need any show...
Cloud Hobbit
2017-10-11 22:15:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
What evidence should we consider that has not already been debunked Art?
duke
2017-10-12 16:58:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:15:20 -0700 (PDT), Cloud Hobbit
Post by Cloud Hobbit
What evidence should we consider that has not already been debunked Art?
Thousands and thousands of books available. Maybe you can't read.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****
Peter Pan
2017-10-14 19:19:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by duke
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:15:20 -0700 (PDT), Cloud Hobbit
Post by Cloud Hobbit
What evidence should we consider that has not already been debunked Art?
Thousands and thousands of books available. Maybe you can't read.
Read thousands & thousands of books just to find one
little paragraph that might be convincing?

If it exists, why haven't you mentioned it before?

Talk about re-inventing the wheel... Sheesh!
duke
2017-10-15 17:16:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter Pan
Post by duke
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:15:20 -0700 (PDT), Cloud Hobbit
Post by Cloud Hobbit
What evidence should we consider that has not already been debunked Art?
Thousands and thousands of books available. Maybe you can't read.
Read thousands & thousands of books just to find one
little paragraph that might be convincing?
Thousands and thousands of coverage on the issue.
Post by Peter Pan
If it exists, why haven't you mentioned it before?
Talk about re-inventing the wheel... Sheesh!
the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****
Kurt Nicklas
2017-10-11 12:07:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
If you were smarter, you'd understand that you must made an irrational statement.

But you're not.
v***@gmail.com
2017-10-18 07:56:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kurt Nicklas
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Since there is no evidence that any gods exist atheists are obviously smarter.
If you were smarter, you'd understand that you must made an irrational statement.
But you're not.
That motherfucker has the IQ of a carrot. My neighbor's dog makes more intelligent noises than he does.
Yap Honghor
2017-10-08 02:26:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by v***@gmail.com
Post by v***@gmail.com
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/08/24/the-myth-of-the-smarter-atheist/
About Randy Olson
Dr. Randy Olson is a Senior Data Scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, where he develops state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms with a focus on biomedical applications.
A moron who knows nothing, do not know how to conduct a research?
Davej
2017-10-11 13:41:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
[...]
Dr. Randy Olson is a Senior Data Scientist...
Dr. Randy Olson is an utter nobody. However... extremely
intelligent people can indeed suffer from the effects of
childhood religious indoctrination. Isaac Newton wasted
years of his life on utter nonsense due to this.
Loading...