| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Gandalf Grey" |
| Date: |
04 Jun 2006 04:42:53 PM |
| Object: |
Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1285l5nm3f8r301@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool wrote:
Religion in America is failed,
It supported genocidal dictators for 30 years.
God can be disproved
Not by you.
It has been done.
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it. If a
successful argument has been made, there will be historical notation to that
effect. The philosophical and scientific community should have recognized
this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts. Most
of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
.
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
04 Jun 2006 07:27:23 PM |
|
|
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it. If a
successful argument has been made, there will be historical notation to
that effect. The philosophical and scientific community should have
recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts. Most
of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
Why does this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent
designer, create killing Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruptions,
Wars, Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases, serious body
malfunctions and starvation? There are 12,000 known ailments and diseases
that torture and kill men, women and CHILDREN of all religious persuasions.
There as many thousands of diseases and birth defects that affect perfectly
innocent animals. Why would this omnificent all loving omnificent creator be
so brutal and uncaring?
Just one example of ridiculous ailments is a parasitic worm in West Africa
that bores through the eyes of innocent children and causes total blindness
for the rest of their lives. This is the work of an all caring and loving
god creator???
Why does this all powerful and caring god permit totally innocent children
to die at birth? Or worse, be born lacking eyesight, a fully developed
brain, deaf and dumb, missing limbs etc.? Why are some born idiots and
others with super intelligence? Why are some born into wealth and others
pauper poor? Why does he permit 2,000,000 TOTALLY INNOCENT CHILDREN to
suffer and die of starvation each year and many more to suffer and die from
punishing diseases? Why are his human creations designed to deteriorate into
a miserable and devastating old age?
Why did this all powerful and loving creator create things like sharks,
jelly fish, octopus, lions, tigers, rhinoceros, poisonous snakes, stinging
and poisonous insects, poisonous plants etc.? Why did this caring benevolent
god create animals (including man) that need to kill and eat other animals
to survive?
Why would God create a gene for vitamin C synthesis in all mammals, but
stop it working in humans and chimps?
Why would God create birds without the power of flight, yet give them
wings they cannot use?
Why would God create cave-dwelling creatures that live in complete
darkness, yet give them eyes that don't work?
God supposedly created man in his image. Why did he create sins, crime and
punishment?
Why does this all powerful, all caring and all loving god NOT permit those
in his heaven to communicate the supposed wonders of his heaven to their
living children, relatives and friends?
Why does he permit thousands of claims of different gods? If there is a real
god, why does he not announce clearly and unquestionably from his heaven
that he is the 'real' god and all the others are fakes? Why does he not
smite the thousands of fake gods?
Why all the secrecy and confusion? Unproven claims by the mentally deranged
and persons with selfish motives are not objective verifiable evidence -
they are just unsubstantiated silly claims.
The universe either does lack any gods or is totally indistinguishable from
a universe which lacks any gods.
The real objective evidence is that no god created man but quite the
contrary; that man created gods!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 12:28:38 PM |
|
|
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it. If
a successful argument has been made, there will be historical notation to
that effect. The philosophical and scientific community should have
recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts.
Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
Precisely the point.
It's not necessary for science to cough up an offensive against god, since
no viable theory, no empirical evidence and no successful logical argument
for god's existence has ever been made.
The problem arises when a blowhard like Barwell announces that he has a
simple, one size fits all, argument that disproves the existance of god.
That immediately leads to two problems.
1. He doesn't have such an argument. His constant flip flops, dodges and
retreats from facing crticism are proof of that.
2. By insisting that he has such an argument, he wrongfully shifts the
burden of proof from the religious community [which cannot prove its claims]
to the rational community.
.
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 12:39:52 PM |
|
|
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:448469b0$0$18506$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it. If
a successful argument has been made, there will be historical notation
to that effect. The philosophical and scientific community should have
recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts.
Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 12:55:03 PM |
|
|
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Qpydnfy3FtPu8RnZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:448469b0$0$18506$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it.
If a successful argument has been made, there will be historical
notation to that effect. The philosophical and scientific community
should have recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts.
Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
It's funny that you don't seem to notice how Barwell ignores most of the
posts criticizing his arguments.
Bill M's post is another example of the argument from evil. That's been
discussed for about three weeks now.
The argument from evil has various counter arguments. It is not a
conclusive argument against the existence of ANY god.
I suggest you do some reading before you leap in.
.
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 02:13:02 PM |
|
|
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44846fe1$0$18505$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Qpydnfy3FtPu8RnZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:448469b0$0$18506$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it.
If a successful argument has been made, there will be historical
notation to that effect. The philosophical and scientific community
should have recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts.
Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
It's funny that you don't seem to notice how Barwell ignores most of the
posts criticizing his arguments.
Bill M's post is another example of the argument from evil. That's been
discussed for about three weeks now.
The argument from evil has various counter arguments. It is not a
conclusive argument against the existence of ANY god.
I suggest you do some reading before you leap in.
It is if you're claiming an all powerful, all loving god
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 02:29:33 PM |
|
|
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:ObWdnX7SlYreHxnZnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44846fe1$0$18505$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Qpydnfy3FtPu8RnZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:448469b0$0$18506$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it.
If a successful argument has been made, there will be historical
notation to that effect. The philosophical and scientific community
should have recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts.
Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
It's funny that you don't seem to notice how Barwell ignores most of the
posts criticizing his arguments.
Bill M's post is another example of the argument from evil. That's been
discussed for about three weeks now.
The argument from evil has various counter arguments. It is not a
conclusive argument against the existence of ANY god.
I suggest you do some reading before you leap in.
It is if you're claiming an all powerful, all loving god
Please start reading some of the arguments before you make claims you can't
support. Not all assertions claim that god is all powerful. Not all
assertions claim that god is all loving. All powerful is considered to be
logically limited by even the orthodox scholastics, and the arguments
themselves place limits on what all loving can accomplish in a best of all
possible worlds.
If you can't get beyond your talking points view of what Christianity "must"
assume, you're not going to get much out of the variety of arguments out
there.
.
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 03:03:16 PM |
|
|
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44848606$0$18513$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:ObWdnX7SlYreHxnZnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44846fe1$0$18505$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Qpydnfy3FtPu8RnZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:448469b0$0$18506$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it.
If a successful argument has been made, there will be historical
notation to that effect. The philosophical and scientific community
should have recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts.
Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against
the existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
It's funny that you don't seem to notice how Barwell ignores most of the
posts criticizing his arguments.
Bill M's post is another example of the argument from evil. That's been
discussed for about three weeks now.
The argument from evil has various counter arguments. It is not a
conclusive argument against the existence of ANY god.
I suggest you do some reading before you leap in.
It is if you're claiming an all powerful, all loving god
Please start reading some of the arguments before you make claims you
can't support. Not all assertions claim that god is all powerful. Not
all assertions claim that god is all loving. All powerful is considered
to be logically limited by even the orthodox scholastics, and the
arguments themselves place limits on what all loving can accomplish in a
best of all possible worlds.
If you can't get beyond your talking points view of what Christianity
"must" assume, you're not going to get much out of the variety of
arguments out there.
Actually I didn't say or imply all christians believe in an all powerful,
all loving god. I was pointing out that if you were claiming your god was
all powerful and all loving you'd be in trouble.
And I'm not actually all that interested in debating with christians. It's
all a bit pointless - I have no desire to change your mind, you can believe
what you like. Which is why you don't find me on christian groups (on
purpose). I quite enjoy prodding trolls though.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 03:40:35 PM |
|
|
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:iMGdnX4W5LeIExnZRVnysw@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44848606$0$18513$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:ObWdnX7SlYreHxnZnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44846fe1$0$18505$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Qpydnfy3FtPu8RnZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:448469b0$0$18506$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to
it. If a successful argument has been made, there will be
historical notation to that effect. The philosophical and
scientific community should have recognized this successful
argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific
texts. Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against
the existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
It's funny that you don't seem to notice how Barwell ignores most of
the posts criticizing his arguments.
Bill M's post is another example of the argument from evil. That's
been discussed for about three weeks now.
The argument from evil has various counter arguments. It is not a
conclusive argument against the existence of ANY god.
I suggest you do some reading before you leap in.
It is if you're claiming an all powerful, all loving god
Please start reading some of the arguments before you make claims you
can't support. Not all assertions claim that god is all powerful. Not
all assertions claim that god is all loving. All powerful is considered
to be logically limited by even the orthodox scholastics, and the
arguments themselves place limits on what all loving can accomplish in a
best of all possible worlds.
If you can't get beyond your talking points view of what Christianity
"must" assume, you're not going to get much out of the variety of
arguments out there.
Actually I didn't say or imply all christians believe in an all powerful,
all loving god. I was pointing out that if you were claiming your god was
all powerful and all loving you'd be in trouble.
And I'm not actually all that interested in debating with christians.
Which works out great since I'm not a christian.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 06:03:09 PM |
|
|
kathryn wrote:
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44848606$0$18513$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:ObWdnX7SlYreHxnZnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44846fe1$0$18505$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Qpydnfy3FtPu8RnZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:448469b0$0$18506$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to
it. If a successful argument has been made, there will be
historical
notation to that effect. The philosophical and scientific
community should have recognized this successful argument you refer
to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific
texts. Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against
the existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
It's funny that you don't seem to notice how Barwell ignores most of
the posts criticizing his arguments.
Bill M's post is another example of the argument from evil. That's
been discussed for about three weeks now.
The argument from evil has various counter arguments. It is not a
conclusive argument against the existence of ANY god.
I suggest you do some reading before you leap in.
It is if you're claiming an all powerful, all loving god
Please start reading some of the arguments before you make claims you
can't support. Not all assertions claim that god is all powerful. Not
all assertions claim that god is all loving. All powerful is considered
to be logically limited by even the orthodox scholastics, and the
arguments themselves place limits on what all loving can accomplish in a
best of all possible worlds.
If you can't get beyond your talking points view of what Christianity
"must" assume, you're not going to get much out of the variety of
arguments out there.
Actually I didn't say or imply all christians believe in an all powerful,
all loving god. I was pointing out that if you were claiming your god was
all powerful and all loving you'd be in trouble.
And I'm not actually all that interested in debating with christians. It's
all a bit pointless - I have no desire to change your mind, you can
believe
what you like. Which is why you don't find me on christian groups (on
purpose). I quite enjoy prodding trolls though.
Gandy is not a christian, he is a pompous know it all of the self
proclaimed agnostic type. Like the non-ending Virgil vs Skeptic
agnostic thread. That kind, like Virgil.
He is not a troll, he is a kook. Think Dore or Georgeann.
He is absolutely sure he knows all but he doesn't.
He is bad tempered and nasty. Think Rev. Steve Winter. "Filth!"
Bon appetite!
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 06:20:48 PM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1289dl5949vnp3d@corp.supernews.com...
kathryn wrote:
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44848606$0$18513$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:ObWdnX7SlYreHxnZnZ2dnUVZ8qKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44846fe1$0$18505$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in message
news:Qpydnfy3FtPu8RnZnZ2dnUVZ8tKdnZ2d@bt.com...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:448469b0$0$18506$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:9aZgg.4868$ED2.3104@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to
it. If a successful argument has been made, there will be
historical
notation to that effect. The philosophical and scientific
community should have recognized this successful argument you
refer
to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific
texts. Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against
the existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
It's funny that you don't seem to notice how Barwell ignores most of
the posts criticizing his arguments.
Bill M's post is another example of the argument from evil. That's
been discussed for about three weeks now.
The argument from evil has various counter arguments. It is not a
conclusive argument against the existence of ANY god.
I suggest you do some reading before you leap in.
It is if you're claiming an all powerful, all loving god
Please start reading some of the arguments before you make claims you
can't support. Not all assertions claim that god is all powerful. Not
all assertions claim that god is all loving. All powerful is considered
to be logically limited by even the orthodox scholastics, and the
arguments themselves place limits on what all loving can accomplish in a
best of all possible worlds.
If you can't get beyond your talking points view of what Christianity
"must" assume, you're not going to get much out of the variety of
arguments out there.
Actually I didn't say or imply all christians believe in an all powerful,
all loving god. I was pointing out that if you were claiming your god
was
all powerful and all loving you'd be in trouble.
And I'm not actually all that interested in debating with christians.
It's
all a bit pointless - I have no desire to change your mind, you can
believe
what you like. Which is why you don't find me on christian groups (on
purpose). I quite enjoy prodding trolls though.
He is bad tempered and nasty. Think Rev. Steve Winter. "Filth!"
This from a guy who hasn't been able to keep obscenities out of his posts.
Irony.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Fool" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 07:16:24 PM |
|
|
wbarwell wrote:
kathryn wrote:
Gandy is not a christian, he is a pompous know it all of the self
proclaimed agnostic type. Like the non-ending Virgil vs Skeptic
agnostic thread. That kind, like Virgil.
He is not a troll, he is a kook. Think Dore or Georgeann.
He is absolutely sure he knows all but he doesn't.
He is bad tempered and nasty. Think Rev. Steve Winter. "Filth!"
Bon appetite!
Nothing but ranting insults, eh? You've lost it, kid.
It's also interesting that you (or Skeptic) tend not to get theists
upset, since they just laugh you off, they know you're impotent. It's
people who are skeptical of religion and the role of religion in modern
culture who find your style distasteful, because you are playing into
the hands of the right wing, who want to make it appear that atheists
are rabid religion hating irrational jerks.
The more I read your posts, the more convinced I am that you are a
religious fanatic trying to make atheists look bad. Your arguments are
so simplistic and bad, your writing full of mistakes and errors, and
your penchant to insult and repost long bits of drivel so transparent
that you can't be serious.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 07:56:31 PM |
|
|
"The Fool" <snerb@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:1149552984.420922.278140@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
wbarwell wrote:
kathryn wrote:
Gandy is not a christian, he is a pompous know it all of the self
proclaimed agnostic type. Like the non-ending Virgil vs Skeptic
agnostic thread. That kind, like Virgil.
He is not a troll, he is a kook. Think Dore or Georgeann.
He is absolutely sure he knows all but he doesn't.
He is bad tempered and nasty. Think Rev. Steve Winter. "Filth!"
Bon appetite!
Nothing but ranting insults, eh? You've lost it, kid.
It's also interesting that you (or Skeptic) tend not to get theists
upset, since they just laugh you off, they know you're impotent. It's
people who are skeptical of religion and the role of religion in modern
culture who find your style distasteful, because you are playing into
the hands of the right wing, who want to make it appear that atheists
are rabid religion hating irrational jerks.
The more I read your posts, the more convinced I am that you are a
religious fanatic trying to make atheists look bad. Your arguments are
so simplistic and bad, your writing full of mistakes and errors, and
your penchant to insult and repost long bits of drivel so transparent
that you can't be serious.
Which brings us back to my original [half-serious] speculation that Barwell
is a right wing stalking horse placed in the group in order to make rational
liberals look like wild-eyed religious fanatics.
After all, the religious right is so very fond of whining about how atheism
is just another religion. What better proof of that thesis than Barwell?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 05:56:11 PM |
|
|
kathryn wrote:
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
And he ignores some good proofs the omni-everything
creator god cannot exist.
He ignores facts and logic and rationality for something
or the other, what exactly who can say.
Why is it in the realm of natural evil, a world with a
supposedly supremely good god who loves us is exactly
like a world with no god at all?
Man's free will gains nothing by being tormented by awful
parasites or seeing his family swept away by tsunamis
or killed in an earthquake.
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 06:03:52 PM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1289d7m5hjofu0b@corp.supernews.com...
kathryn wrote:
And no proof that a god does not exist.
I noticed you ignored the rest of Bill M's post.
And he ignores some good proofs the omni-everything
creator god cannot exist.
Probably because EVERYONE knows that the Omnipotent God of the Argument from
Evil can't exist, you pathetic fool.
But you've made the claim that you can prove that NO god can exist.
Where's the argument, Barwell?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: God and science and Leuba and disteleology |
05 Jun 2006 05:36:55 PM |
|
|
Bill M wrote:
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it. If
a successful argument has been made, there will be historical notation to
that effect. The philosophical and scientific community should have
recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts.
Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
Why does this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent
designer, create killing Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruptions,
Wars, Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases, serious body
malfunctions and starvation? There are 12,000 known ailments and diseases
that torture and kill men, women and CHILDREN of all religious
persuasions.
There as many thousands of diseases and birth defects that affect
perfectly innocent animals. Why would this omnificent all loving
omnificent creator be so brutal and uncaring?
Gandy is an idiot so anything yu say to him goes through one ear
and out the other.
Its interesting that Nature has published a study confirmation of
professor James Leuba's studies that scientists are overwhelmingly Atheists,
especially the Nobel prize winners and more notable scientists.
They are away the bible sucksmn ad that ID is a crock and distelology
as you posted shows major theistic claims are bunk.
The fact most scientists are Atheists, especially the best ones should make
Gooseboy Gandy stop honking and think.
That does not.
There is then, some sort of pretty successful internal arguments in the
scientific community that are apparently pretty powerful, even if there is
no sort of formalized training in Atheism for scientists in their career.
Now what sort of arguments could these be? Gandy couldn't say
for the life of him.
One thing is sure, over 3000 years of bible gabbling and in all things the
bible has to say about the natural world, the bible has a perfect record,
always wrong, always. About everything.
That probably has a big effect on scientists.
Gandy is being infantile and juming up and down and
honking wildly, maybe he could look up the Witham and
Larson study and contemplate why so many scientists are
atheists and what arguments might be causing this.
But he won't because he is a jerk.
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: God and science and Leuba and disteleology |
05 Jun 2006 05:51:14 PM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1289c3v70j4jnc1@corp.supernews.com...
Bill M wrote:
"Gandalf Grey" <gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com> wrote in message
news:44835406$0$18476$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1286ihjrfepi48@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
By who? When? Cite? Cite the worldwide historical reaction to it. If
a successful argument has been made, there will be historical notation
to
that effect. The philosophical and scientific community should have
recognized this successful argument you refer to.
Where is it? What is it? Who Made it. Post it right here.
I've got an extensive library of philosophical and scientific texts.
Most of them cover the history of science and philosophy.
Not one of them notes that any successful global argument against the
existence of a god has ever been made by anyone.
Here's your chance to prove that you're not a liar, Barwell.
Post your proof.
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
Why does this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent
designer, create killing Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic
Eruptions,
Wars, Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases, serious body
malfunctions and starvation? There are 12,000 known ailments and
diseases
that torture and kill men, women and CHILDREN of all religious
persuasions.
There as many thousands of diseases and birth defects that affect
perfectly innocent animals. Why would this omnificent all loving
omnificent creator be so brutal and uncaring?
Gandy is an idiot so anything yu say to him goes through one ear
and out the other.
Whereas Barwell is so utterly moronic that it never even makes it through
the first ear.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Fool" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 02:32:54 PM |
|
|
Bill M wrote:
Firstly there is NO proof of ANY gods existence.
Why does this all powerful creator, all loving and caring intelligent
designer, create killing Plagues, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Volcanic Eruptions,
Wars, Cancers and hundreds of debilitating diseases, serious body
malfunctions and starvation? There are 12,000 known ailments and diseases
that torture and kill men, women and CHILDREN of all religious persuasions.
There as many thousands of diseases and birth defects that affect perfectly
innocent animals. Why would this omnificent all loving omnificent creator be
so brutal and uncaring?
Just one example of ridiculous ailments is a parasitic worm in West Africa
that bores through the eyes of innocent children and causes total blindness
for the rest of their lives. This is the work of an all caring and loving
god creator???
Why does this all powerful and caring god permit totally innocent children
to die at birth? Or worse, be born lacking eyesight, a fully developed
brain, deaf and dumb, missing limbs etc.? Why are some born idiots and
others with super intelligence? Why are some born into wealth and others
pauper poor? Why does he permit 2,000,000 TOTALLY INNOCENT CHILDREN to
suffer and die of starvation each year and many more to suffer and die from
punishing diseases? Why are his human creations designed to deteriorate into
a miserable and devastating old age?
Why did this all powerful and loving creator create things like sharks,
jelly fish, octopus, lions, tigers, rhinoceros, poisonous snakes, stinging
and poisonous insects, poisonous plants etc.? Why did this caring benevolent
god create animals (including man) that need to kill and eat other animals
to survive?
Why would God create a gene for vitamin C synthesis in all mammals, but
stop it working in humans and chimps?
Why would God create birds without the power of flight, yet give them
wings they cannot use?
Why would God create cave-dwelling creatures that live in complete
darkness, yet give them eyes that don't work?
God supposedly created man in his image. Why did he create sins, crime and
punishment?
Why does this all powerful, all caring and all loving god NOT permit those
in his heaven to communicate the supposed wonders of his heaven to their
living children, relatives and friends?
Why does he permit thousands of claims of different gods? If there is a real
god, why does he not announce clearly and unquestionably from his heaven
that he is the 'real' god and all the others are fakes? Why does he not
smite the thousands of fake gods?
Why all the secrecy and confusion? Unproven claims by the mentally deranged
and persons with selfish motives are not objective verifiable evidence -
they are just unsubstantiated silly claims.
The universe either does lack any gods or is totally indistinguishable from
a universe which lacks any gods.
The real objective evidence is that no god created man but quite the
contrary; that man created gods!
Ah, this goes back to Rousseau vs. Voltaire, two Deists. Voltaire made
quite the same argument you make, but concluded there was a god, but a
god who didn't really care much about the world (or so it seems). In
Candide he essentially ends up with the argument that humans have to
take responsibility for our world. God doesn't need our love, humans
do.
Rousseau argued that God had created the perfect world, and when bad
things happen that is a sign that humans are using their free will in
ways unnatural, and thus should change.
Ultimately, this is an argument where one has to simply make a call.
Is, as Rousseau would claim, the gift of free will worth all the evil
that it entails? Do we truly understand good and evil? Is this
reality really one where suffering ultimately matters, no matter how
much it seems so here?
Those who want to believe will find reasons to, even if they are struck
down. Those who find faith silly will shake their heads and consider
the faithful to be idiots.
Meanwhile, pragmatically, both could decide to, god or no god, do what
we can to make the world a better place.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
05 Jun 2006 05:51:49 PM |
|
|
The Fool wrote:
Those who want to believe will find reasons to, even if they are struck
down. Those who find faith silly will shake their heads and consider
the faithful to be idiots.
Meanwhile, pragmatically, both could decide to, god or no god, do what
we can to make the world a better place.
***********************************************************
The Failure of Christianity in America
W. C . Bar well 3-8-05
***********************************************************
Since Nixon, this nation has rapidly moved quite far to the
right, taken there mainly by christian right wingers who have
fully supported the GOP, as it has moved right to gain support
of christian right wingers. This started when Nixon played
the racist Southern Strategy card building on civil
rights era resentments by far right Southerners.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/2/23/172743.shtml
The turn towards Christian conservatives accelerated
under Reagan, who skilfully played the religious card and the
religious right joined the GOP-Reagan revolution that still
is a major influence and has given the GOP control of Congress
for years, especially thanks to Newt Gingrich and Trent Lott
who gained control of the Congress, House and Senate in 1995.
So we now have had a essentially a christian-GOP government
for 30 years.
RICHARD M. NIXON - GERALD FORD.
Christian Americans supported incompetent and corrupt
Vietnamese politicians. And a senseless war in Vietnam
that accomplished nothing, run by incompetents.
Nixon instigated awful and murderous policies as the CIA
run program Phoenix program of assassinations and murder.
Supported the secret bombings in Cambodia that killed
an estimated 600,000 innocent Cambodians.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=cambodia
Winked at the invasion of East Timur and parts of New
Guinea by our allies, the Indonesians.
The Indonesians killed 1/3 of the Timurese over several
decades, mass murder, genocide. 168,000 dead.
http://www.yale.edu/gsp/east_timor/unverdict.html
Winked at the Greek far right Junta that overthrew the
Greek government.
Supported the murderous far right Brazilian generals who
overthrew that democratically elected government in Brazil.
Supported the mass murdering Argentinian government and
their terroristic "Dirty War" of torture, mass murder
and disappearances.
Supported the murderous Pinochet of Chile, whom the US
helped overthrow Chile's democratically elected government.
No complaints about Pinochet's tortures and killings are
to be heard from Nixon, Reagan, or later Bush or the GOP
leaders of Senate and House.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/chile/index.html
No Christians respected life here. Or freedom. But supported
Nixon heartily despite the horrors we committed in Vietnam
and Cambodia and Chile and winked at support for others
mentioned above.
RONALD REAGAN 1981 - 1989
Throughout his administration Ronald Reagan supported
Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge as the official government
of note in Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge delegation
as the official UN delegation of Cambodia to the UN.
Aid is funneled to the Khmer Rouge including $81 million
dollars, and food and uniforms funneled through aid
organizations. Reagan winked as China rearmed Pol Pot,
and leaned on nations not to send aid to Cambodia despite
the devastation of nearly 1/3 of Cambodia's population
killed by Pol Pots genocidal regime.
Early in his administration Reagan lead the GOP in
support for military aid to the genocidal Rios Montt
of Guatemala, who practiced wholesale torture, rape
and genocide on the Mayan Indians of Guatemala.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/daily/march99/guatemala11.htm
Reagan and the GOP supported the mass murdering ex-Somoza
Guards of Nicaragua.
Reagan and the GOP supported Saddam Hussein of Iraq.
Reagan and the GOP supported the murderous Robert
D'Aubisson of El Salvador, a known far right death
squad leader.
The El Salvadoran government was involved in numerous
murders, and massacres, such as the killing of 400
villagers at a small village called El Mezote, most
of them young women and children.
http://www.usip.org/library/tc/doc/reports/el_salvador/tc_es_03151993_chron1.html
Reagan and the GOP supported Noriega of Panama.
Reagan and the GOP supported a number of murdering
far right extremist guerrilla movements in Africa including
the genocidal RENAMO in Mozambique.
The Christian and religious right heavily supported Reagan
and the GOP despite numerous examples of such evils as
listed above. The leader of the religious right never cared
nor complained, neither did the religious leaders of the
main stream christian denominations.
There was and is no respect for life in American
christianity as these wholesale and repeat failures of
America christianity collectively over 20 years shows.
GEORGE W. BUSH
Bush continued support for the evil dictators above,
including Pinochet, Pol Pot and others. However,
Saddam screwed us and invaded Iraq, mainly because
Bush screwed up and did not warn him to not do so
as Hussein repeatedly threatened to invade Kuwait
for nearly two months and coolly noted Bush's lack
of much response.
Bush did not act in case of genocide by Yugoslavia's
Milosevic, and Bush and the GOP's loud and obnoxious
foot-dragging here allowed Milosevic to kill
hundreds of thousands with near impunity.
The leaders of the GOP, House and Senate, and religious
leaders of the right and mainstream denominations never
cared about any of this.
In the Desert Storm war, Bush allowed the US air
force to bomb Iraq's water and sewer systems and
dams. A war crime as per Geneva conventions and
othere conventions the US signed.
The US placed sanctions on Iraq that made it impossible
to keep their water supplies safe resulting in numerous
deaths that eventually would total over 500,000 dead
Iraqi civilians, mostly children.
Our government coldly calculated that these sanctions would
indeed would cause mass epidemics and mass death, and did
it anyway.
Thomas Nagy, a California college professor used the FOIA
statutes to obtain these documents that were published
in September 2001 in the Progressive Magazine.
http://www.progressive.org/0801issue/nagy0901.html
No Christian leaders of either far right or mainstream
cared nor brought Bush and the GOP leadership of House
and Senate to task for this genocide of innocents.
Clinton:
Under Clinton this policy continued. Again, Christians did
not care. All Christians cared about was Clinton's
don't-ask-don't-tell gays in military policy and Clinton's
sex life and Whitewater. $47 million spent investigating
Whitewater while the Christian right roared with naked hate.
Money spent investigation mass murder in Iraq caused by
our purposeful by our sanctions? $0.
Roars of disprovable from Christian America over these mass
murders? None.
What has 30 years of right winged GOP government and right
winger christianity got us? Mass murder, genocide,
Nothing but callousness, disregard for human life,
a near total moral failure of religion, Christianity,
GOP and the American right.
Not once did religious christian Americans, either
leadership or rank and file ever find any of these
evils unacceptable or punish any who supported any
of this. Not the christian right nor leaders of
major US religious denominations.
Most GOP House and Senate members were people who
did these things claimed to be christians. Not one
cares, not a christian cares they did not care or act.
Many of those who presided over these massive moral
failures still hold office in the US Congress and
Senate, leaders and ran and file. Almost all claim
to be christians.
30 years of failure. 30 years of support for
far right genocidal bastards, mass murderers,
and evil.
Christians posture as moral, American christians have
a very bad track records when it comes to morality, they
will happily support any genocidal monster as long as he's
a right winger, and right winger politicians support
that monster no matter how murderous or genocidal he
and his evil regime is.
(End)
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Is A Liar: Hard Proof |
05 Jun 2006 06:05:33 PM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1289d0f3eobav20@corp.supernews.com...
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1287237o4d4d457@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:1284l2258b69ifd@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool wrote:
Well put. It's telling how Barwell and others don't even try to have a
rational discussion, it's just personal attack and assertion. You're
either with us or against us!
I point out that for thirty years the GOP has won power
with support of far right religious Americans and religious
leaders
And attempted to float the lie that NO religious leaders came out against
the excesses of the right.
I did not say no religious leaders
You, sir, are a flaming, barefaced Liar.
Proof follows
This should be the end of the question of Barlow's credibility.
Path:
g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!sn-xt-sjc-02!sn-xt-sjc-01!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: wbarwell <wbarw...@mylinuxisp.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.atheism,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: The Problem of Evil
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 03:01:20 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID:
Snip to relevant passages. [CAPs for emphasis are mine....GG]
***********************************************************
The Failure of Christianity in America
W. C . Barwell 3-8-05
***********************************************************
NO Christians respected life here. Or freedom. But supported
Nixon heartily despite the horrors we committed in Vietnam
and Cambodia and Chile and winked at support for others
mentioned above.
NO CHRISTIAN LEADERS of either far right or mainstream
cared nor brought Bush and the GOP leadership of House
and Senate to task for this genocide of innocents.
NOT ONCE did religious christian Americans, EITHER
LEADERSHIP or rank and file ever find any of these
evils unacceptable or punish any who supported any
of this. Not the christian right NOR LEADERS of
major US religious denominations.
Most GOP House and Senate members were people who
did these things claimed to be christians. NOT A ONE
CARES, NOT A CHRISTIAN CARES they did not care or act.
Many of those who presided over these massive moral
failures still hold office in the US Congress and
Senate, leaders and ran and file. Almost all claim
to be christians.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Fool" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell Makes a Universal Claim. Where's His Proof? |
06 Jun 2006 08:19:33 PM |
|
|
wbarwell wrote:
The Fool wrote:
Those who want to believe will find reasons to, even if they are struck
down. Those who find faith silly will shake their heads and consider
the faithful to be idiots.
Meanwhile, pragmatically, both could decide to, god or no god, do what
we can to make the world a better place.
***********************************************************
The Failure of Christianity in America
W. C . Bar well 3-8-05
As usual, the little spammer, when faced with things he cannot refute,
simply spams something he already posted, like a little boy, too proud
to admit he was wrong, going nananananananana, covering his ears and
running away when the truth is explained to him.
I think William Barwell is George W. Bush. He seems to have a similar
mindset.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Chritianity - moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 12:30:20 AM |
|
|
The Fool
Sorry, for 35 years the GOP gave us horror after horror,
supported genocidal dictator after genocidl dictator.
The facts are, America's numerous so called Christians
did not arise and halt these stupidties.
They had it in their to power to do so, and failed to do so.
That failure can never be forgotten, nor forgiven.
All your bitter squealing trying to make that fact go
away, fails.
Christianity in America is a proven failure. Sorry that
truth bothers you. Bitching and squealing lies about it
and calling me names doesn't change these sad facts.
And doesn't stop it form continuing.
What are you doing to stop this from continuing?
First of all to do anything, you have to admit we have a
problem with current christianity in America.
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Chritianity - moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 12:56:51 AM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128comn81ojkb3a@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool
Sorry, for 35 years the GOP gave us horror after horror,
supported genocidal dictator after genocidl dictator.
The facts are, America's numerous so called Christians
did not arise and halt these stupidties.
Neither did the atheists, Barwell.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Chritianity - moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 02:24:57 AM |
|
|
Gandalf Grey wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128comn81ojkb3a@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool
Sorry, for 35 years the GOP gave us horror after horror,
supported genocidal dictator after genocidl dictator.
The facts are, America's numerous so called Christians
did not arise and halt these stupidties.
Neither did the atheists, Barwell.
Its not the Atheists that have all these massive multi-million member
denominations that handed out voter''s guides saying exseentially always
vote conservative and straight GOP.
Atheists tend to be heavily liberal and independent.
Take a poll here and see, how many voted GOP.
Fred Stone and Fester wil be two exceptions.
Specifically because of these things, I despised Bush and
Reagan, and second time around I did not vote for Clinton,
I voted Nader, and then because Gore did not speak out, Nader again.
Right winger Christians went for Bush despite lying us into a failing war.
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell's moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 10:24:17 AM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128cvd7jtvhd74e@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128comn81ojkb3a@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool
Sorry, for 35 years the GOP gave us horror after horror,
supported genocidal dictator after genocidl dictator.
The facts are, America's numerous so called Christians
did not arise and halt these stupidties.
Neither did the atheists, Barwell.
Its not the Atheists that have all these massive multi-million member
denominations
So what? Does that make them mute? The humanists have their leaders.
Where were they? Post a protest from one.....Hell, try to think of one
[Barwell runs shrieking to Google]
Post it right here, Barwell----------->
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Fool" |
|
| Title: Re: Chritianity - moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 07:31:30 AM |
|
|
wbarwell wrote:
Gandalf Grey wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128comn81ojkb3a@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool
Sorry, for 35 years the GOP gave us horror after horror,
supported genocidal dictator after genocidl dictator.
The facts are, America's numerous so called Christians
did not arise and halt these stupidties.
Neither did the atheists, Barwell.
Its not the Atheists that have all these massive multi-million member
denominations that handed out voter''s guides saying exseentially always
vote conservative and straight GOP.
That's a tiny subset of Christianity.
Atheists tend to be heavily liberal and independent.
I suspect atheists, like Christians, tend to be diverse. But most
Democrats and most liberals are Christian or Jew.
Specifically because of these things, I despised Bush and
Reagan, and second time around I did not vote for Clinton,
I voted Nader, and then because Gore did not speak out, Nader again.
Right winger Christians went for Bush despite lying us into a failing war.
You seem driven by emotion and hate. That's not healthy. It probably
is having ramifications in your personal life. You should seek help.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Chritianity - moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 07:59:36 AM |
|
|
The Fool wrote:
wbarwell wrote:
Gandalf Grey wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128comn81ojkb3a@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool
Sorry, for 35 years the GOP gave us horror after horror,
supported genocidal dictator after genocidl dictator.
The facts are, America's numerous so called Christians
did not arise and halt these stupidties.
Neither did the atheists, Barwell.
Its not the Atheists that have all these massive multi-million member
denominations that handed out voter''s guides saying exseentially always
vote conservative and straight GOP.
That's a tiny subset of Christianity.
Atheists tend to be heavily liberal and independent.
I suspect atheists, like Christians, tend to be diverse. But most
Democrats and most liberals are Christian or Jew.
Specifically because of these things, I despised Bush and
Reagan, and second time around I did not vote for Clinton,
I voted Nader, and then because Gore did not speak out, Nader again.
Right winger Christians went for Bush despite lying us into a failing
war.
You seem driven by emotion and hate. That's not healthy. It probably
is having ramifications in your personal life. You should seek help.
I am driven by a deep sense of morality, something absent in most
Christians far righht, or left.
The right winger christians were postiviely for these bastards that
made the evil policies supporting these evil men, the left wing christians
as a whole didn't think it worth the effort to truely stand up and oppose
it.
A few small numbers of people did act, but they were small and
sneered as as liberals by uncaring evil men in Washington.
I do tend tioget emotional seeing my nation driven by
religuious montebanks into moral depravity, support for
mass murder, mass torture, mass rape, genocide and
outright evil.
If that doesn't bother you that they did this, it is you
who have a big problem, not me.
To say that to oppose this is to hate is of course
a way of saying "I don't care about religious support for
mass murder and genocide".
200 million christians sitting on their spotty butts failing to
stand up and stop that sort of policy.
Those who did were numerically speaking by comparison, rare.
You have a problem with your lack of morality.
Apparently a phd doesn't make one a decent, moral,
thinking man. Sociology did you say it was?
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Chritianity - moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 10:24:13 AM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128dj1348gqftc2@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool wrote:
wbarwell wrote:
Gandalf Grey wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128comn81ojkb3a@corp.supernews.com...
The Fool
Sorry, for 35 years the GOP gave us horror after horror,
supported genocidal dictator after genocidl dictator.
The facts are, America's numerous so called Christians
did not arise and halt these stupidties.
Neither did the atheists, Barwell.
Its not the Atheists that have all these massive multi-million member
denominations that handed out voter''s guides saying exseentially always
vote conservative and straight GOP.
That's a tiny subset of Christianity.
Atheists tend to be heavily liberal and independent.
I suspect atheists, like Christians, tend to be diverse. But most
Democrats and most liberals are Christian or Jew.
Specifically because of these things, I despised Bush and
Reagan, and second time around I did not vote for Clinton,
I voted Nader, and then because Gore did not speak out, Nader again.
Right winger Christians went for Bush despite lying us into a failing
war.
You seem driven by emotion and hate. That's not healthy. It probably
is having ramifications in your personal life. You should seek help.
I am driven by a deep sense of morality,
Appears to be more like a deep sense of intestinal gas.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Chritianity - moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 01:45:55 PM |
|
|
Gandalf Grey wrote:
I am driven by a deep sense of morality,
Appears to be more like a deep sense of intestinal gas.
You lack all morality also.
The far right Christians supported evil men actively and
wholeheartedly. The rest of the major denominations did nothing.
Christianity overall, failed.
That you cannot, will not admit these obvious facts makes you a
moral failure with them.
Did any of your process theology buddies speak out?
I do remember how Bertrand Russell was very active in getting
the nuclear disarmament movement growing that later gave
rise to the anti-Vietnam demonstrators.
Where were the mainstream denominations?
Why did they not follow?
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell's moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 01:53:08 PM |
|
|
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128e7a9cidia701@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
I am driven by a deep sense of morality,
Appears to be more like a deep sense of intestinal gas.
You lack all morality also.
Sad, sad, sad.
Nothing but ad homs.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Barwell's moral failure. Now what? |
07 Jun 2006 08:18:39 PM |
|
|
Gandalf Grey wrote:
"wbarwell" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:128e7a9cidia701@corp.supernews.com...
Gandalf Grey wrote:
I am driven by a deep sense of morality,
Appears to be more like a deep sense of intestinal gas.
You lack all morality also.
Sad, sad, sad.
Nothing but ad homs.
But you will not admit it was evil of the US to support genocidal dictators
for 35 years and you will not admit American Christianity's failure to
react to these facts is evil.
That certainly is not moral, yet you claim to believe in god.
Why is a religion that claims it is sole source of real morality not
held to high standards it has claimed in face of 35 years of support for
evil dictators and genocidla maniacs? Why is it not evil to sit blandly
making no strong stands in face of 35 years of outrages by the US
government?
This is indeed, evil.
Why do yiou protest so strongly? Because then you
have to admit, for all that time, I failed, I didn't even notice these
things.
Again, you keep this in the air, you keep replying and replying and
replying, but never deal with the heart of the issue.
For 35 years the US supported evil genocidal dictators and
major American religious denominations did nothing
to oppose this evil.
They had an obligation as religious and moral leaders
to act strongly until policy was changed for good and failed
to act srong and in fact change policy.
Bitter name calling from you cannot change the basic issue.
Knowing this is the issue and its true they did not act in
any meaningful way you slap and hit at me for mentioning the truth.
But can't stop yiourself from replying even knowing the issue is
what it is and you have no adequate answer.
Can you not be reasonable?
--
"Its the hit dog what yelps."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
