EXPOSING THE ATHEIST

Religions > Atheism > EXPOSING THE ATHEIST

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 2 of 14

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"Soren K."
Date:	15 Aug 2004 11:15:19 PM
Object:	EXPOSING THE ATHEIST

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C4830C.F7F792A0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_000A_01C4830C.F7F792A0"
------=_NextPart_001_000A_01C4830C.F7F792A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Blank=20
EXPOSING THE ATHEIST
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
The following articles are samplings of principles that demonstrate that =
atheism is pure heathenism and error. They present some of the reasons =
why you should turned away from atheism and nonbelief - to a staunch =
belief in the Almighty GOD. I ask you to examine these articles very =
carefully.=20
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
The best way to understand the nature of atheism is to understand its =
author. satan is its author.=20
It's important to remain conscious of the fact that satan had his origin =
in heaven, and is thoroughly familiar with the fact of the existence of =
God, heaven, the angels, hell and etc. Thus despite what you have been =
previously deceptively taught and despite the deceptive dictionary's =
meaning of atheism, atheism is properly defined as a denial of the =
existence of God in the midst of full knowledge that the true God does =
indeed exist. Atheism knows God exists; it is quite familiar with that =
fact, but it says "under no circumstance or situation will I admit to =
God's existence."=20
Atheism clearly perceives the fingerprints of God on all of creation, =
but refuses to admit He is the Creator. Atheism perceives the divine =
authorship of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, but refuses to admit that God is =
their Author. Atheism perceives the decorousness and perfection of the =
TEN COMMANDMENTS, but refuses to admit they are superior to all other =
laws. Atheism clearly perceives the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, =
but refuses to admit His divinity. If an atheist could see the wounds in =
the body of Christ and actually feel them with his hands, he would deny =
that the wounds are there. Atheism is deliberate effort to never admit =
the existence of God.=20
Atheism is the ultimate of satanism. Ask satan does God exist and he =
will deny it. Ask him does satan exist and he will deny his own =
existence even while in your presence. Atheism holds the Bible in one =
hand, but deny its existence by denying its truth with the other.=20
In order to properly understand the nature of atheism, one must =
understand the natures of righteousness and sin. The two principles are =
antithetical to one another. Since sin is antithetical to righteousness, =
its very antithetical nature seeks to nullify righteousness. Since it is =
an antithetical principle to righteousness, it must remain true to its =
nature even in the most insane instances. Therefore it must hate God =
even though God is righteous and has given it no just cause for its =
hatred. It is this antithetical principle, called "the law of sin" which =
is at work in the hearts of atheists causing them to reject God. The law =
of sin is none other than the law that governs satan's kingdom.=20
Below are articles I've presented in effort to expose the true satanic =
nature of atheism, the great harm it is doing to the american society =
and the world community and to prove and demonstrate that atheists and =
all other nonbelievers in the true God are the actual criminals of the =
world community. I hope these articles will enable people to see that =
atheists are extremely dangerous people. Therefore laws should be made =
against them by all the governments of the world community.=20
--=20
Celebrating the stupidity of Atheists
www.atheistfools.com
------=_NextPart_001_000A_01C4830C.F7F792A0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE id=3DridTitle>Blank</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica
}
P.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; =
FONT-FAMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
LI.msoNormal {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; COLOR: #ffffcc; =
FONT-FAMILY: Helvetica, "Times New Roman"
}
</STYLE>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1458" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=3DridBody bgColor=3D#ffffff=20
background=3Dcid:000401c48347$a454e400$0300a8c0@desktop>
<DIV><A name=3DTOP> 
<CENTER><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><B>EXPOSING THE =
ATHEIST</B></FONT></CENTER>
<P> </P>
<CENTER> </CENTER>
<HR>
<P>The following articles are samplings of principles that demonstrate =
that=20
atheism is pure heathenism and error. They present some of the reasons =
why you=20
should turned away from atheism and nonbelief - to a staunch belief in =
the=20
Almighty GOD. I ask you to examine these articles very carefully. </P>
<HR>
<P>The best way to understand the nature of atheism is to understand its =
author.=20
satan is its author. </P>
<P>It's important to remain conscious of the fact that satan had his =
origin in=20
heaven, and is thoroughly familiar with the fact of the existence of =
God,=20
heaven, the angels, hell and etc. Thus despite what you have been =
previously=20
deceptively taught and despite the deceptive dictionary's meaning of =
atheism,=20
<B>atheism is properly defined as a denial of the existence of God in =
the midst=20
of full knowledge that the true God does indeed exist.</B> Atheism knows =
God=20
exists; it is quite familiar with that fact, but it says "under no =
circumstance=20
or situation will I admit to God's existence." </P>
<P>Atheism clearly perceives the fingerprints of God on all of creation, =
but=20
refuses to admit He is the Creator. Atheism perceives the divine =
authorship of=20
the TEN COMMANDMENTS, but refuses to admit that God is their Author. =
Atheism=20
perceives the decorousness and perfection of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, but =
refuses=20
to admit they are superior to all other laws. Atheism clearly perceives =
the=20
divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, but refuses to admit His divinity. If =
an=20
atheist could see the wounds in the body of Christ and actually feel =
them with=20
his hands, he would deny that the wounds are there. Atheism is =
deliberate effort=20
to never admit the existence of God. </P>
<P>Atheism is the ultimate of satanism. Ask satan does God exist and he =
will=20
deny it. Ask him does satan exist and he will deny his own existence =
even while=20
in your presence. Atheism holds the Bible in one hand, but deny its =
existence by=20
denying its truth with the other. </P>
<P>In order to properly understand the nature of atheism, one must =
understand=20
the natures of righteousness and sin. The two principles are =
antithetical to one=20
another. Since sin is antithetical to righteousness, its very =
antithetical=20
nature seeks to nullify righteousness. Since it is an antithetical =
principle to=20
righteousness, it must remain true to its nature even in the most insane =
instances. Therefore it must hate God even though God is righteous and =
has given=20
it no just cause for its hatred. It is this antithetical principle, =
called "the=20
law of sin" which is at work in the hearts of atheists causing them to =
reject=20
God. The law of sin is none other than the law that governs satan's =
kingdom.=20
</P>
<P>Below are articles I've presented in effort to expose the true =
satanic nature=20
of atheism, the great harm it is doing to the american society and the =
world=20
community and to prove and demonstrate that atheists and all other =
nonbelievers=20
in the true God are the actual criminals of the world community. I hope =
these=20
articles will enable people to see that atheists are extremely dangerous =
people.=20
Therefore laws should be made against them by all the governments of the =
world=20
community. </P></A></DIV>
<DIV><BR>-- <BR>Celebrating the stupidity of Atheists<BR><A=20
href=3D"http://www.atheistfools.com">www.atheistfools.com</A></DIV>
<P> </P></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_000A_01C4830C.F7F792A0--
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C4830C.F7F792A0
Content-Type: image/gif;
name="Blank Bkgrd.gif"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <000401c48347$a454e400$0300a8c0@desktop>
R0lGODlhLQAtAID/AP////f39ywAAAAALQAtAEACcAxup8vtvxKQsFon6d02898pGkgiYoCm6sq2
7iqWcmzOsmeXeA7uPJd5CYdD2g9oPF58ygqz+XhCG9JpJGmlYrPXGlfr/Yo/VW45e7amp2tou/lW
xo/zX513z+Vt+1n/tiX2pxP4NUhy2FM4xtjIUQAAOw==
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C4830C.F7F792A0--
.

User: "Dixit"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	18 Aug 2004 01:22:28 PM

Chris Devol wrote:

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:mnpUc.1345$Fg5.1259@attbi_s53...

Pastor Dave wrote:

...God is not
physical and therefore, needs no physical cause.

That's just logical fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis, mon fr�re.

Incorrect. It's not an hypothesis at all.

Don't be stupid.

It's a standard definition, "God
is not physical", followed by an inference "and therefore needs no physical
cause".

You need to go back to school.

<snip>

It's the logical fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis, knucklehead:
[unsnip]
Pastor Dave wrote:

...God is not
physical and therefore, needs no physical cause.

That's just logical fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis, mon fr�re.
"An ad hoc hypothesis is one created to explain away facts that seem to
refute one�s theory." -- http://skepdic.com/adhoc.html
If you can demonstrate anything not physical you win $1,000,000.
http://www.randi.org/research/index.html
There is no such thing as God�, and cannot possibly be. There is no
possibility that there might actually be such a thing as God�, the
theists' hypothetical first cause/creator of everything, due to the
fatal problem (special pleading) inherent in the very idea of God�,
which Russell points out.
It's a very simple problem for anybody who still believes as you do that
there might be one anyway. All they have to do is come up with an
argument for God�, the hypothetical first cause/creator of the universe,
that does not run into this fatal problem (special pleading) inherent in
the very idea of it, which Russell points out.
<cue the chirping cicadas>
.

User: "smiller"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	18 Aug 2004 03:37:12 PM

In article , Mad Scientist <alice@in.wonderland> wrote:
>Uri Gellar has already proved mind over matter ...
Jumping Jehosaphat. So you think Uri Gellar is a real psychic.
No wonder zany religious myths make sense to you.
smiller
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail sent to this io.com account goes directly to /dev/null. To send
me email, please use:

[remove the NOSPAM]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
.

User: "Mad Scientist"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	18 Aug 2004 03:38:56 PM

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You are more
brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as a source
of information, you might as well quote Hitler as an authoritarian
source on Judaism.
smiller wrote:

User: "Chris Devol"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	18 Aug 2004 03:58:33 PM

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message
news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You are more
brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as a source of
information, you might as well quote Hitler as an authoritarian source on
Judaism.

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad hoc
hypothesis klan.
His idea is, basically:
1) Nothing exists except matter. (The Mother of all ad hoc hypotheses).
2) Therefore, all claims of non-material phenomena must be lies or
illusions.
3) Therefore, no proof of the existence of nonmaterial phenomena can be
valid.
4) Therefore person X, who claims Y nonmaterial phenomenon, is either a
fraud or delusional.
Unfortunately, since the laws of logic are nonmaterial, Randi must dismiss
them as lies or delusions. And his sub-retarded verbal buffonery amply
demonstrates that he has done just that!
.

User: "Mad Scientist"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	18 Aug 2004 04:07:44 PM

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message
news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You are more
brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as a source of
information, you might as well quote Hitler as an authoritarian source on
Judaism.

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad hoc
hypothesis klan.

His idea is, basically:

1) Nothing exists except matter. (The Mother of all ad hoc hypotheses).
2) Therefore, all claims of non-material phenomena must be lies or
illusions.
3) Therefore, no proof of the existence of nonmaterial phenomena can be
valid.
4) Therefore person X, who claims Y nonmaterial phenomenon, is either a
fraud or delusional.

Unfortunately, since the laws of logic are nonmaterial, Randi must dismiss
them as lies or delusions. And his sub-retarded verbal buffonery amply
demonstrates that he has done just that!

LOL good one! I'll have to quote you on that. Randi couldn't debunk
his own stupidity even if someone paid him.
.

User: "Dixit"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	24 Aug 2004 01:10:37 PM

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message
news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You are more
brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as a source of
information, you might as well quote Hitler as an authoritarian source on
Judaism.

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?
Logical fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis:
"An ad hoc hypothesis is one created to explain away facts that seem to
refute one�s theory." -- http://skepdic.com/adhoc.html
That's like your ad hoc hypothesis that nobody can see God because God
is magically invisible, spiritual, non-material, etc.

His idea is, basically:

1) Nothing exists except matter.

Balderdash! The assertion is made by your side, that there might be some
paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event. The offer is
plain, that if you can demonstrate any paranormal, supernatural, or
occult power or event then you earn $1,000,000.
http://www.randi.org/research/index.html
"At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show,
under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal,
supernatural, or occult power or event."
What could be simpler?
Any questions?
.

User: "Chris Devol"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	24 Aug 2004 02:37:22 PM

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:xwLWc.82368$TI1.9212@attbi_s52...

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message
news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?

Yes, I do. An example of an ad hoc hypothesis is the one made by the less
intelligent, including yourself, that God doesn't exist. That is very much
an ad hoc hypothesis, created to explain away the incontrovertible fact that
many, many people throughout history, and at the present, have heard, seen,
touched, and spoken with God.

Logical fallacy of ad hoc hypothesis:
"An ad hoc hypothesis is one created to explain away facts that seem to
refute one�s theory." -- http://skepdic.com/adhoc.html

That's like your ad hoc hypothesis that nobody can see God because God is
magically invisible, spiritual, non-material, etc.

Please cite the post where I made the statement that "nobody can see God".
Or perhaps you'd care to start reading and thinking more carefully. I won't
hold my breath waiting for that, however!
.

User: "Don Kresch"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	24 Aug 2004 04:38:11 PM

In alt.atheism on Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:37:22 GMT, "Chris Devol"
<eat@joes.pub> let us all know that:

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:xwLWc.82368$TI1.9212@attbi_s52...

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message
news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?

No, the ad hoc is the notion of god, and the unsupported
assertion is hearing, seeing, touching, and speaking to god.
Try again.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.

User: "Chris Devol"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	24 Aug 2004 06:35:52 PM

"Don Kresch" <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message
news:hjdni0dd3c32it5ame6nse3uh61c2e5dcm@4ax.com...

In alt.atheism on Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:37:22 GMT, "Chris Devol"
<eat@joes.pub> let us all know that:

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:xwLWc.82368$TI1.9212@attbi_s52...

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message
news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?

Yes, I do. An example of an ad hoc hypothesis is the one made by the less
intelligent, including yourself, that God doesn't exist. That is very much
an ad hoc hypothesis, created to explain away the incontrovertible fact
that
many, many people throughout history, and at the present, have heard,
seen,
touched, and spoken with God.

No, the ad hoc is the notion of god, and the unsupported
assertion is hearing, seeing, touching, and speaking to god.

The assertion of hearing, seeing touching, and speaking with God is by no
means unsupported, being corroborated by many witnesses throughout history.
On the other hand, the ad hoc hypothesis of "there is no God" is completely
unsupported, since it cannot ever be demonstrated, even in principle.
No cigar, chap.

Try again.

Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"

User: "Tom"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	24 Aug 2004 07:15:17 PM

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:shQWc.12215$3O3.1572@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Don Kresch" <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message
news:hjdni0dd3c32it5ame6nse3uh61c2e5dcm@4ax.com...

In alt.atheism on Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:37:22 GMT, "Chris Devol"
<eat@joes.pub> let us all know that:

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:xwLWc.82368$TI1.9212@attbi_s52...

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message

news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You are

brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as a

source

of information, you might as well quote Hitler as an authoritarian
source
on Judaism.

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?

Yes, I do. An example of an ad hoc hypothesis is the one made by the

less

intelligent, including yourself, that God doesn't exist. That is very

much

an ad hoc hypothesis, created to explain away the incontrovertible fact
that
many, many people throughout history, and at the present, have heard,
seen,
touched, and spoken with God.

No, the ad hoc is the notion of god, and the unsupported
assertion is hearing, seeing, touching, and speaking to god.

The assertion of hearing, seeing touching, and speaking with God is by no
means unsupported, being corroborated by many witnesses throughout

history.
Name a few and tell us the methods by which we can determine the accuracy of
these 'witnesses'.
<snip>
.

User: "Chris Devol"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	24 Aug 2004 07:30:46 PM

"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10inmgmi3jfmme0@corp.supernews.com...

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:shQWc.12215$3O3.1572@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Don Kresch" <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message
news:hjdni0dd3c32it5ame6nse3uh61c2e5dcm@4ax.com...

In alt.atheism on Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:37:22 GMT, "Chris Devol"
<eat@joes.pub> let us all know that:

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:xwLWc.82368$TI1.9212@attbi_s52...

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message

news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You are

brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as a

source

of information, you might as well quote Hitler as an authoritarian
source
on Judaism.

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad
hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?

Yes, I do. An example of an ad hoc hypothesis is the one made by the

less

intelligent, including yourself, that God doesn't exist. That is very

much

an ad hoc hypothesis, created to explain away the incontrovertible fact
that
many, many people throughout history, and at the present, have heard,
seen,
touched, and spoken with God.

No, the ad hoc is the notion of god, and the unsupported
assertion is hearing, seeing, touching, and speaking to god.

The assertion of hearing, seeing touching, and speaking with God is by no
means unsupported, being corroborated by many witnesses throughout

history.

Name a few and tell us the methods by which we can determine the accuracy
of
these 'witnesses'.

If you tell me what general area you live in, I will direct you to people
who see, hear, touch, and speak with God all the time. By practicing their
standard methods of perception, you can then find out for yourself whether
their witness is accurate.
But I think your request is bogus. It's not what you really want, and you'll
no doubt find an excuse not to follow up on it.
.

User: "Tom"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	24 Aug 2004 08:11:28 PM

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:W4RWc.32793$9Y6.11261@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10inmgmi3jfmme0@corp.supernews.com...

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:shQWc.12215$3O3.1572@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Don Kresch" <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message
news:hjdni0dd3c32it5ame6nse3uh61c2e5dcm@4ax.com...

In alt.atheism on Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:37:22 GMT, "Chris Devol"
<eat@joes.pub> let us all know that:

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:xwLWc.82368$TI1.9212@attbi_s52...

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message

news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You are

brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as a

source

of information, you might as well quote Hitler as an authoritarian
source
on Judaism.

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad
hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?

Yes, I do. An example of an ad hoc hypothesis is the one made by the

less

intelligent, including yourself, that God doesn't exist. That is very

much

an ad hoc hypothesis, created to explain away the incontrovertible

fact

that
many, many people throughout history, and at the present, have heard,
seen,
touched, and spoken with God.

No, the ad hoc is the notion of god, and the unsupported
assertion is hearing, seeing, touching, and speaking to god.

The assertion of hearing, seeing touching, and speaking with God is by

means unsupported, being corroborated by many witnesses throughout

history.

Name a few and tell us the methods by which we can determine the

accuracy

of
these 'witnesses'.

If you tell me what general area you live in, I will direct you to people
who see, hear, touch, and speak with God all the time. By practicing their
standard methods of perception, you can then find out for yourself whether
their witness is accurate.

But I think your request is bogus. It's not what you really want, and

you'll

no doubt find an excuse not to follow up on it.

I was a Christian for 45 years, and I never saw anyone do what you claim. I
saw many who said that they 'talked' to god but when you really got to the
bottom of their claim they had no claim, other than their word. I saw many
people who said that they were called by god to do something, yet they had
no evidence of this.
I just want you folks to cut out the ***** and the hocus pocus and show
me these miraculous occurrences. I have found that if I pray to my 'pet
rock' I get the exact same results that I had in my 45 years in
Christianity. Now Chris, do you have tangible evidence to present or are you
just long on talk??
.

User: "Chris Devol"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	24 Aug 2004 08:43:14 PM

"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10inpq2jh6tet56@corp.supernews.com...

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:W4RWc.32793$9Y6.11261@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10inmgmi3jfmme0@corp.supernews.com...

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:shQWc.12215$3O3.1572@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Don Kresch" <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message
news:hjdni0dd3c32it5ame6nse3uh61c2e5dcm@4ax.com...

In alt.atheism on Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:37:22 GMT, "Chris Devol"
<eat@joes.pub> let us all know that:

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:xwLWc.82368$TI1.9212@attbi_s52...

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message

news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You
are

brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as a

source

of information, you might as well quote Hitler as an
authoritarian
source
on Judaism.

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the ad
hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?

Yes, I do. An example of an ad hoc hypothesis is the one made by the

less

intelligent, including yourself, that God doesn't exist. That is
very

much

an ad hoc hypothesis, created to explain away the incontrovertible

fact

that
many, many people throughout history, and at the present, have
heard,
seen,
touched, and spoken with God.

No, the ad hoc is the notion of god, and the unsupported
assertion is hearing, seeing, touching, and speaking to god.

The assertion of hearing, seeing touching, and speaking with God is by

means unsupported, being corroborated by many witnesses throughout

history.

Name a few and tell us the methods by which we can determine the

accuracy

of
these 'witnesses'.

If you tell me what general area you live in, I will direct you to people
who see, hear, touch, and speak with God all the time. By practicing
their
standard methods of perception, you can then find out for yourself
whether
their witness is accurate.

But I think your request is bogus. It's not what you really want, and

you'll

no doubt find an excuse not to follow up on it.

I was a Christian for 45 years, and I never saw anyone do what you claim.
I
saw many who said that they 'talked' to god but when you really got to the
bottom of their claim they had no claim, other than their word. I saw many
people who said that they were called by god to do something, yet they had
no evidence of this.

I just want you folks to cut out the ***** and the hocus pocus and show
me these miraculous occurrences. I have found that if I pray to my 'pet
rock' I get the exact same results that I had in my 45 years in
Christianity. Now Chris, do you have tangible evidence to present or are
you
just long on talk??

As I said, your request is bogus. The proof is that you have not provided
the information necessary to steer you in the direction of the "evidence"
you demand. Therefore, since you clearly don't want what you pretend to ask
for, all I can say is: bite me, douche bag.
Have a nice yuga!
.

User: "Tom"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	25 Aug 2004 07:46:36 AM

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:S8SWc.32834$9Y6.18962@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10inpq2jh6tet56@corp.supernews.com...

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:W4RWc.32793$9Y6.11261@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10inmgmi3jfmme0@corp.supernews.com...

"Chris Devol" <eat@joes.pub> wrote in message
news:shQWc.12215$3O3.1572@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...

"Don Kresch" <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message
news:hjdni0dd3c32it5ame6nse3uh61c2e5dcm@4ax.com...

In alt.atheism on Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:37:22 GMT, "Chris Devol"
<eat@joes.pub> let us all know that:

"Dixit" <dix@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:xwLWc.82368$TI1.9212@attbi_s52...

Chris Devol wrote:

"Mad Scientist" <alice@in.wonderland> wrote in message

news:A7PUc.1801873$Ar.1451913@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...

You think Randi really debunked anyone in all of history? You
are

brainwashed than I thought possible. Yikes! Quoting Randi as

source

of information, you might as well quote Hitler as an
authoritarian
source
on Judaism.

Well, James Randi seems to be the Grand Imperial Wizard of the

hoc
hypothesis klan.

Do you understand what ad hoc hypothesis is?

Yes, I do. An example of an ad hoc hypothesis is the one made by

the

less

intelligent, including yourself, that God doesn't exist. That is
very

much

an ad hoc hypothesis, created to explain away the incontrovertible

fact

that
many, many people throughout history, and at the present, have
heard,
seen,
touched, and spoken with God.

No, the ad hoc is the notion of god, and the unsupported
assertion is hearing, seeing, touching, and speaking to god.

The assertion of hearing, seeing touching, and speaking with God is

means unsupported, being corroborated by many witnesses throughout

history.

Name a few and tell us the methods by which we can determine the

accuracy

of
these 'witnesses'.

If you tell me what general area you live in, I will direct you to

people

who see, hear, touch, and speak with God all the time. By practicing
their
standard methods of perception, you can then find out for yourself
whether
their witness is accurate.

But I think your request is bogus. It's not what you really want, and

you'll

no doubt find an excuse not to follow up on it.

I was a Christian for 45 years, and I never saw anyone do what you

claim.

I
saw many who said that they 'talked' to god but when you really got to

the

bottom of their claim they had no claim, other than their word. I saw

many

people who said that they were called by god to do something, yet they

had

no evidence of this.

I just want you folks to cut out the ***** and the hocus pocus and

show

me these miraculous occurrences. I have found that if I pray to my 'pet
rock' I get the exact same results that I had in my 45 years in
Christianity. Now Chris, do you have tangible evidence to present or are
you
just long on talk??

ask

for, all I can say is: bite me, douche bag.

Have a nice yuga!

Kiss my *****, *****.
.

User: "Christopher A. Lee"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	25 Aug 2004 08:11:13 AM

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:46:36 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

I just want you folks to cut out the ***** and the hocus pocus and
show
me these miraculous occurrences. I have found that if I pray to my 'pet
rock' I get the exact same results that I had in my 45 years in
Christianity. Now Chris, do you have tangible evidence to present or are
you
just long on talk??

As I said, your request is bogus. The proof is that you have not provided
the information necessary to steer you in the direction of the "evidence"
you demand.

Which is of course a stupid, dishonest lie used as a transparent
copout.
Instead of either putting up or shutting up, the liar pretends that
the only reason to ask for proof, is "because we are interested enough
to ask for it for ourselves". And if we're not, the liar attacks us
instead of providing it.
Which just demonstrates the sheer nastiness as well as dishonesty of
his kind of Christian.
When he knows it's for his benefit, not ours. Because we couldn't give
a ***** what he believes as long as he doesn't rub it in our faces.
When he does that, he has taken on the burden of proof. And its up to
him to come up with something from the real world, to convince people
who don't already believe what he does. Anything. And it's his
problem, not ours.

Therefore, since you clearly don't want what you pretend to
ask for, all I can say is: bite me, douche bag.

What a transparently dishonest, nasty piece of work.

Have a nice yuga!

Kiss my *****, *****.

User: "Mad Scientist"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	25 Aug 2004 08:32:00 AM

ANother Usenet sociopath demands evidence while completely denying
personality responsibility to go and find it himself.
Christopher A. Lee wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 08:46:36 -0400, "Tom" <mmman_90@yahoo.com> wrote:

As I said, your request is bogus. The proof is that you have not provided
the information necessary to steer you in the direction of the "evidence"
you demand.

Which is of course a stupid, dishonest lie used as a transparent
copout.

Instead of either putting up or shutting up, the liar pretends that
the only reason to ask for proof, is "because we are interested enough
to ask for it for ourselves". And if we're not, the liar attacks us
instead of providing it.

Which just demonstrates the sheer nastiness as well as dishonesty of
his kind of Christian.

When he knows it's for his benefit, not ours. Because we couldn't give
a ***** what he believes as long as he doesn't rub it in our faces.

When he does that, he has taken on the burden of proof. And its up to
him to come up with something from the real world, to convince people
who don't already believe what he does. Anything. And it's his
problem, not ours.

Therefore, since you clearly don't want what you pretend to
ask for, all I can say is: bite me, douche bag.

What a transparently dishonest, nasty piece of work.

Have a nice yuga!

Kiss my *****, *****.

User: "Mad Scientist"
Title: Re: EXPOSING THE ATHEIST	25 Aug 2004 08:25:33 AM

Tom wrote: