| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Not-easily-duped" |
| Date: |
24 Nov 2003 11:14:27 AM |
| Object: |
Separation Of Church And State Is It What God Wants? |
When you reach the Land that the Lord your God is giving you,
and occupy it, and settle down in it, and then declare to yourself:
"I must place a king over me like all the nations around me,"
make sure you place over you the king your God chooses.
You must choose one of your countrymen king over you.
You shall not put a foreigner over you who is not from among
your brethren...
As soon as he takes his seat on his royal throne, he must write
for himself a copy of this Law/Torah, he must keep it and
read it all the day of his life that he may learn to revere the Lord
his God, by being careful to observe all the Law and serve with
justice his fellow men. Deut 17:14-20
How can anyone tell me that this God is nolonger interested in
matters related to states, therefor we should separate Church and State?
This God is the source of Law and the God of principalities and dominions
How could he possibly be indiferent to politics?
WOE TO THOSE WHO SAY:"LET US SEPARATE CHRIST AND STATE."
.
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
27 Dec 2003 11:50:48 PM |
|
|
(Gene Hanson) wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message
Mark Johnson <102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"SumBuny" <sumbunyTHIS_DOES_NOT_BELONG_HERE@cox.net> wrote:
You seem overly familiar to "no answer to someone's question"...
Is _that_ an answer to the question?
No...it is an *observation*
So what's your answer then?
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . . .
Incorrect copying of DNA and mutations which leads to changes
in the gene pool.
So where did DNA come from ?
Why ask that question? Can't stand to have some unsolved mystery
that you think about? Better to make up some invisible god which
created DNA and that makes you feel all better somehow?
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
| User: "SumBuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
29 Dec 2003 01:18:10 PM |
|
|
I remember an old joke, where man told God that he was now able to create
life...so God told him to go ahead....man picked up an handleful of dirt and
God said, "no..you have to make your own dirt..."
Buny
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
28 Dec 2003 12:44:01 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 05:50:48 GMT, Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net>
posted to alt.atheism:
icxc_nika_@yahoo.com (Gene Hanson) wrote in alt.atheism
So where did DNA come from ?
Why ask that question? Can't stand to have some unsolved mystery
that you think about? Better to make up some invisible god which
created DNA and that makes you feel all better somehow?
Even if the answer *is* trivial, and misplaced. The question he wants
to ask is where life came from, of course.
--
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of
themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
- Bertrand Russell
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
28 Dec 2003 01:32:59 AM |
|
|
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> posted to alt.atheism:
icxc_nika_@yahoo.com (Gene Hanson) wrote in alt.atheism
So where did DNA come from ?
Why ask that question? Can't stand to have some unsolved mystery
that you think about? Better to make up some invisible god which
created DNA and that makes you feel all better somehow?
Even if the answer *is* trivial, and misplaced. The question he wants
to ask is where life came from, of course.
I'm willing to bet he wants to believe in some creator which can make
him live forever, but I could be wrong.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
28 Dec 2003 01:56:50 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 07:32:59 GMT, Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net>
posted to alt.atheism:
Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> posted to alt.atheism:
icxc_nika_@yahoo.com (Gene Hanson) wrote in alt.atheism
So where did DNA come from ?
Why ask that question? Can't stand to have some unsolved mystery
that you think about? Better to make up some invisible god which
created DNA and that makes you feel all better somehow?
Even if the answer *is* trivial, and misplaced. The question he wants
to ask is where life came from, of course.
I'm willing to bet he wants to believe in some creator which can make
him live forever, but I could be wrong.
Nah. Ya think?
--
"Damn. Looks like all of usenet agrees that you don't have the logical
faculties to prove the statement 'dogshit is not peanut butter' if we
gave you a jar of each and a box of crackers" - John Hattan to Tichy
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gene Hanson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
24 Dec 2003 09:30:39 AM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in message news:<ernguvovdfajslobj3nri3tq0bqcu87l7e@4ax.com>...
Mark Johnson <102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote in alt.atheism
"SumBuny" <sumbunyTHIS_DOES_NOT_BELONG_HERE@cox.net> wrote:
You seem overly familiar to "no answer to someone's question"...
Is _that_ an answer to the question?
No...it is an *observation*
So what's your answer then?
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . . .
Incorrect copying of DNA and mutations which leads to changes
in the gene pool.
Where did DNA come from ?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
24 Dec 2003 05:01:32 AM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . . .
Incorrect copying of DNA and mutations which leads to changes
in the gene pool.
That last would be your 'fact of'.
So all you really mean to say is:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by mutation and .
.. mutation.
Did you mean something other than, mutation, by "incorrect copying of
DNA"?
Merry Christmas.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Bernard: Argentina's not coming. There's a bit of luck.
Graham: Because of the Falklands?
Bernard: No, because their anthem goes on for about six minutes.
- Yes, Prime Minister, A Diplomatic Incident
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
21 Dec 2003 10:46:16 AM |
|
|
Mark Johnson wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and you know what.
As many times as I've posted it, we should both know what by now.
Then why can't you remember?
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and you know what.
Tell you what....the person you are pumping gets the credit
for that--in return for admitting most everything since was of man's
efforts, that there was no magical involvement from outside sources.
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alberich" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
21 Dec 2003 12:40:33 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 07:32:27 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and you know what.
As many times as I've posted it, we should both know what by now.
Then why can't you remember?
Gee, Markie, still being obtuse. (I'll give you a minute to pull up a
dictionary for that one. Got it...good!) This is quite easy: If
*you* remember what I wrote, and *I* remember what I wrote, there can
be no valid reason to ask me to write it again. This leads to only
two possible conclusions: Either (1) You can't remember what I wrote
and refuse to look it up, or (2) You do remember, but are trying to
play some sort of game instead of addressing the topic. Which part of
this do you have trouble understanding?
And Happy New Year,
Alberich
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
22 Dec 2003 12:55:47 AM |
|
|
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 07:32:27 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and you know what.
As many times as I've posted it, we should both know what by now.
Then why can't you remember?
Gee, Markie, still being obtuse. (I'll give you a minute to pull up a
dictionary for that one.
Just wondered if you're having trouble remembering what you might have
answered, before. So what say you, today?
Merry Christmas.
---------------------------------------
One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot
discern truth from lies. Another is when they don't even bother
to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear.
[Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alberich" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
22 Dec 2003 01:16:09 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 22:55:47 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003 07:32:27 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and you know what.
As many times as I've posted it, we should both know what by now.
Then why can't you remember?
Gee, Markie, still being obtuse. (I'll give you a minute to pull up a
dictionary for that one.
Just wondered if you're having trouble remembering what you might have
answered, before. So what say you, today?
Let's try this, since you like Groups.Google so much. You go find
what I said last week. You post it again. You ask me if I still mean
the same thing. And you know what? I'll tell you that I do. What's
so hard about that?
Alberich
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
22 Dec 2003 06:52:14 AM |
|
|
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
Let's try this, since you like Groups.Google so much.
Let me see if I can remember the question, first of all:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and complete the sentence, if you think you still can.
Merry Christmas.
---------------------------------------
One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot
discern truth from lies. Another is when they don't even bother
to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear.
[Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alberich" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
22 Dec 2003 10:59:46 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 04:52:14 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
Let's try this, since you like Groups.Google so much.
Let me see if I can remember the question, first of all:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and complete the sentence, if you think you still can.
Congratulations, you did. Now search for the answer.
Alberich
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
22 Dec 2003 07:13:23 PM |
|
|
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 04:52:14 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
Let's try this, since you like Groups.Google so much.
Let me see if I can remember the question, first of all:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and complete the sentence, if you think you still can.
Congratulations, you did. Now search for the answer.
Why not just say what you think it is? It's Christmastime. You seem so
angry.
Merry Christmas.
---------------------------------------
One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot
discern truth from lies. Another is when they don't even bother
to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear.
[Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
23 Dec 2003 04:25:58 AM |
|
|
Mark Johnson wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 04:52:14 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
Let's try this, since you like Groups.Google so much.
Let me see if I can remember the question, first of all:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . .
and complete the sentence, if you think you still can.
Congratulations, you did. Now search for the answer.
Why not just say what you think it is? It's Christmastime. You seem so
angry.
Um...because like Mark's parents, Alberich's mom and dad won't go
***** over teakettle into debt to buy him enough expensive presents to
impress the crowd down at the Latin church?
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "dots@fat b a b i e s.com Alhazred" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
23 Dec 2003 05:06:01 AM |
|
|
And thence there was but Alhazred's reply to Alberich
<Alberich@NoSpam.com>:
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:24:59 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . . .
and just complete the sentence.
No, I remember. Perhaps you've forgotten?
Gee, Al, still being difficult?
Gee, Markie, still being obtuse. (I'll give you a minute to pull up a
dictionary for that one. Got it...good!) This is quite easy: If
*you* remember what I wrote, and *I* remember what I wrote, there can
be no valid reason to ask me to write it again. This leads to only
two possible conclusions: Either (1) You can't remember what I wrote
and refuse to look it up, or (2) You do remember, but are trying to
play some sort of game instead of addressing the topic. Which part of
this do you have trouble understanding?
Good to be back in alt.atheism.
-----
Eric Alhazred
"Jesus Christ, son of God and noted pro-life activist,
killed two and critically wounded seven others when He
opened fire in the waiting room of a Huntsville abortion
clinic Tuesday."
--The Onion (www.theonion.com)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
14 Dec 2003 12:20:07 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:10:30 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 01:07:14 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
wryan@mindspring.com (Will) wrote:
I'll go ya one better. You tell . . me . . what IS . . The Theory of
evolution, just to begin with:
The Theory of evolution is that evolution is caused by . . .
and just complete the sentence.
Same ol' song, eh Markie? I thought you were ready to discuss the
science here?
Evolutionism, Al. That's why science doesn't enter into it. I mean,
just look at the basic question. Look at the difficulty you have even
answering that. Science? You don't know what the word means.
those of us who ARE scientists, however, see evolution as science
as, of course, does the pope.
---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field
check my blog at:
http://www.bobview.blogspot.com/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alberich" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
10 Dec 2003 10:41:14 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 02:57:47 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
If anything we realized that discussing evolution with the likes of
you was like teaching a pygmy how to slam-dunk a basketball.
Alberich
Maybe when asked for specifics, you found out that you had nothing to
say?
Actually, I do have this to say: Thanks for reposting this. When I
look at the phrasing of my statement, I have to smile. Thanks!
Alberich
PS--You've got your definition, now, let's see if you'll talk science
or not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
11 Dec 2003 11:31:21 AM |
|
|
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
Maybe when asked for specifics, you found out that you had nothing to
say?
Actually, I do have this to say: Thanks for reposting this. When I
look at the phrasing of my statement, I have to smile.
Because you act like a jerk? I guess that's "to smile".
Seriously, what I find funny is that you say you're an evolutionist -
with a straight face. That gag is funny. You can't define what
evolutionism . . IS. You apparently couldn't understand what someone
in the field was saying about it. I posted part of a conclusion from
basically just a randomly selected paper which mentioned evolution in
the conclusion, and asked for comments.
Maybe you just don't get the joke, I suppose. But you can't say it's
not funny when a guy insists he confesses a creed and then when asked
simply to define that creed, can't seem to quite put his finger on
just what it is.
Peace.
---------------------------------------
One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot
discern truth from lies. Another is when they don't even bother
to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear.
[Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alberich" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
11 Dec 2003 11:46:27 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:31:21 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Seriously, what I find funny is that you say you're an evolutionist -
with a straight face. That gag is funny. You can't define what
evolutionism . . IS.
Wrong, done in a different thread.
You apparently couldn't understand what someone
in the field was saying about it. I posted part of a conclusion from
basically just a randomly selected paper which mentioned evolution in
the conclusion, and asked for comments.
Maybe you just don't get the joke, I suppose. But you can't say it's
not funny when a guy insists he confesses a creed and then when asked
simply to define that creed, can't seem to quite put his finger on
just what it is.
What I find funny is when an uninformed person such as yourself tells
me that I profess a "creed" in something that I give no religious
value whatsoever. It's akin to me saying that you profess a "creed"
in Latin. Utterly laughable.
But what's sad--really sad--is that no matter how many people tell you
this, or how often they do so, you won't listen to them. You, who
have obviously never studied evolution, know more about the subject
that people with degrees in it, and aren't afraid to tell them so.
Sad that you feel that way.
Alberich
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
11 Dec 2003 04:06:33 PM |
|
|
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:31:21 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Seriously, what I find funny is that you say you're an evolutionist -
with a straight face. That gag is funny. You can't define what
evolutionism . . IS.
Wrong, done in a different thread.
Wrong - you dodged and weaved and avoided answering, yet again, in
another thread.
And I just told you, in that thread, in my followup, that you, Al,
personally, have no reason to confess evolutionism, particularly on
any scientific basis. That's not what the cult is about. I think
you've proved that. I pointed out your many insults to me. That,
rather, was your only 'argument'.
Now you know, and you can reassess.
What I find funny is when an uninformed person such as yourself
At this point, I'd say you haven't clue one about any evolutionism,
since you cannot even really say what it is, much less which metrics
might be employed, or what the studies would attempt to prove by way
of a The Theory of that you can't seem to get a handle on.
value whatsoever. It's akin to me saying that you profess a "creed"
in Latin. Utterly laughable.
It's funny, what you do. But you don't get the joke. That's what I
said to you, before.
But what's sad--really sad--is that no matter how many people tell you
this, or how often they do so, you won't listen to them.
Al, 1000 screamin Democrats could threaten me to vote for Howard Dean.
And 1000 screamin Democrats would be wrong, particularly since I'll
probably vote for Bush, unless his own 'triangulation strategy' just
gets too much to bear for this conservative.
Peace.
---------------------------------------
One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot
discern truth from lies. Another is when they don't even bother
to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear.
[Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
14 Dec 2003 08:44:21 AM |
|
|
Mark Johnson wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:31:21 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Seriously, what I find funny is that you say you're an evolutionist -
with a straight face. That gag is funny. You can't define what
evolutionism . . IS.
Wrong, done in a different thread.
Wrong - you dodged and weaved and avoided answering, yet again, in
another thread.
And I just told you, in that thread, in my followup, that you, Al,
personally, have no reason to confess evolutionism, particularly on
any scientific basis. That's not what the cult is about. I think
you've proved that. I pointed out your many insults to me. That,
rather, was your only 'argument'.
Now you know, and you can reassess.
What I find funny is when an uninformed person such as yourself
At this point, I'd say you haven't clue one about any evolutionism,
since you cannot even really say what it is, much less which metrics
might be employed, or what the studies would attempt to prove by way
of a The Theory of that you can't seem to get a handle on.
value whatsoever. It's akin to me saying that you profess a "creed"
in Latin. Utterly laughable.
It's funny, what you do. But you don't get the joke. That's what I
said to you, before.
But what's sad--really sad--is that no matter how many people tell you
this, or how often they do so, you won't listen to them.
Al, 1000 screamin Democrats could threaten me to vote for Howard Dean.
And 1000 screamin Democrats would be wrong, particularly since I'll
probably vote for Bush, unless his own 'triangulation strategy' just
gets too much to bear for this conservative.
But if he shoots the first gay couple who try to marry legally, it
will make up for it in Mark's mind.
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alberich" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
11 Dec 2003 06:34:22 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:06:33 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:31:21 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Seriously, what I find funny is that you say you're an evolutionist -
with a straight face. That gag is funny. You can't define what
evolutionism . . IS.
Wrong, done in a different thread.
Wrong - you dodged and weaved and avoided answering, yet again, in
another thread.
And I just told you, in that thread, in my followup, that you, Al,
personally, have no reason to confess evolutionism, particularly on
any scientific basis.
If that's your only concern, then rest easy. Niether I nor any
scientist "confess evolutionism."
What I find funny is when an uninformed person such as yourself
At this point, I'd say you haven't clue one about any evolutionism,
Well yoy might be on to something here. I have no clue about
"evolutionism." Evolution, however, is something that I have
significant knowledge of.
value whatsoever. It's akin to me saying that you profess a "creed"
in Latin. Utterly laughable.
It's funny, what you do. But you don't get the joke. That's what I
said to you, before.
Again, I note your complete avoidance of the point made.
Alberich
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
12 Dec 2003 09:31:05 PM |
|
|
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:06:33 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:31:21 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Wrong - you dodged and weaved and avoided answering, yet again, in
another thread.
And I just told you, in that thread, in my followup, that you, Al,
personally, have no reason to confess evolutionism, particularly on
any scientific basis.
If that's your only concern, then rest easy. Niether I nor any
scientist
Don't talk about science, Al. We're talking evolutionism, here.
What I find funny is when an uninformed person such as yourself
At this point, I'd say you haven't clue one about any evolutionism,
Well yoy might be on to something here. I have no clue about
"evolutionism."
Well, someone who doesn't know who the first President of the United
States was, might say that.
value whatsoever. It's akin to me saying that you profess a "creed"
in Latin. Utterly laughable.
It's funny, what you do. But you don't get the joke. That's what I
said to you, before.
Again, I note your complete avoidance of the point made.
Alberich
You mean that there is no translation of the Latin - no 'facing
pages'.
But I would argue to the contrary, particularly as I typed in every
word, at one point:
http://www.geocities.com/ymjcath/The_Mass.htm
Peace.
----------------------------------------
Theorem: All numbers are equal.
Choose arbitrary a and b, and let t = a + b.
(a + b)(a - b) = t(a - b)
a^2 - b^2 = ta - tb
a^2 - ta = b^2 - tb
a^2 - ta + (t^2)/4 = b^2 - tb + (t^2)/4
(a - t/2)^2 = (b - t/2)^2
a - t/2 = b - t/2
a = b
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alberich" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
12 Dec 2003 09:42:44 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 19:31:05 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:06:33 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:31:21 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Wrong - you dodged and weaved and avoided answering, yet again, in
another thread.
And I just told you, in that thread, in my followup, that you, Al,
personally, have no reason to confess evolutionism, particularly on
any scientific basis.
If that's your only concern, then rest easy. Niether I nor any
scientist
Don't talk about science, Al. We're talking evolutionism, here.
Which I have pointed out to you, time and again, is not science, and
is certainly not a good representation of evolutionary science. I'm
glad it's starting to sink in.
What I find funny is when an uninformed person such as yourself
At this point, I'd say you haven't clue one about any evolutionism,
Well yoy might be on to something here. I have no clue about
"evolutionism."
Well, someone who doesn't know who the first President of the United
States was, might say that.
No-one will think the worse of you if you admit your fault. We only
laugh when you refuse to.
However, the point of this is, or was, do you want to discuss the
SCIENCE of EVOLUTION? Not the RELIGION of fundie-made EVOLUTIONISM.
Alberich
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
13 Dec 2003 01:19:40 PM |
|
|
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 19:31:05 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:06:33 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 09:31:21 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Don't talk about science, Al. We're talking evolutionism, here.
Which I have pointed out to you, time and again, is not science, and
is certainly not a good representation of evolutionary science.
But see, Al, that you're oxymoron. And look at another way. Remember,
when I quoted excerpts from a paper written by a guy who actually used
the word, evolution, in his conclusion, you had no clue what he was
talking about. I asked repeatedly for your comment, your
clarification, your depth of understanding. And of course, you were
silent.
Well yoy might be on to something here. I have no clue about
"evolutionism."
Well, someone who doesn't know who the first President of the United
States was, might say that.
No-one will think the worse of you if you admit your fault.
Al, the first President of the United States was, and complete the
sentence . . . and I gave you even the URL for the White House
website, with their bio of President Washington (oops . . did I give
it away?).
Peace.
---------------------------------------
One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot
discern truth from lies. Another is when they don't even bother
to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear.
[Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "maf 1029" |
|
| Title: Re: Discussing evolution (wasRe: Still a Christian Nation) |
13 Dec 2003 02:58:22 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 03:42:44 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com>
wrote:
Well, someone who doesn't know who the first President of the United
States was, might say that.
No-one will think the worse of you if you admit your fault. We only
laugh when you refuse to.
I know about 5 people who will faint dead away, and one 'super-expert'
who will stroke out if he has to admit he's wrong.
And then there's me, who has bet a helluva lot of money on St. *****
never admitting he's wrong, and I don't want to lose all that cash. I
have a dog to feed, ya know.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "maf 1029" |
|
| Title: Re: Still a Christian Nation (wasRe: Separation Of Church And State) |
06 Dec 2003 01:01:04 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 17:38:31 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 08:43:39 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Well, let's review, just to be clear:
Cause here's the problem you have with that:
But they did not want to limit, or chill, the free exercise of
religion.
Okay - now back to you.
Is this the new soundbite? What happened? Couldn't hold your own on
evolution so you had to switch to a new topic? Anyway, I suggest you
study your American history before you delve too deeply here.
Al, sweetie, you missed the *****-kicking he got in alt.language.latin.
It was priceless.
just as IT'S not allowed to practice the illegal parts of its belief,
neither are Christians.
But you've a problem, there. It's the same old problem:
Our founding fathers did not want to limit, or chill, the free
exercise of religion.
*Must* be the new soundbite!
You also remember what I said, now - right:
"That's not the gubment's business to stifle the free exercise of
religion. There may be harm in certain practices, violence and civil
crimes. But nothing like that occured in the case of Justice Moore and
his granite block."
If you mean harm to you, sure.
"You only had about three Catholics. You had a bunch of
Congregationalists, not surprisingly. There were a fair number of
Presbyterians. You had Episcopaleans, like Pres. Washington. There was
a Huguenot who signed the articles, as did at least one Catholic - so
politics. You only had about three or four Quaker/Shakers. And so on.
There were some one just . . didn't know. Believe it or not, there was
actually someone from the Church of England, of all things. So you've
got Anglicans, Huguenots, Catholics, and Quakers, along with the
'respectable' Episcopalean and Methodist, etc. All of them worked
together."
Gee, there were Anglicans as well as Episcopaleans? What a remarkable
coincidence...
Alberich
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Still a Christian Nation (wasRe: Separation Of Church And State) |
06 Dec 2003 01:23:06 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 19:01:04 GMT, maf 1029 <m@bringonthespambaby.de>
wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 17:38:31 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 08:43:39 -0800, Mark Johnson
<102334.12@compuserve.com> wrote:
Well, let's review, just to be clear:
Cause here's the problem you have with that:
But they did not want to limit, or chill, the free exercise of
religion.
Okay - now back to you.
Is this the new soundbite? What happened? Couldn't hold your own on
evolution so you had to switch to a new topic? Anyway, I suggest you
study your American history before you delve too deeply here.
Al, sweetie, you missed the *****-kicking he got in alt.language.latin.
It was priceless.
He was demolished in alt.atheism as soon as he arrived, in a thread
about first-cause proofs for God. He went into complete melt-done. I'd
never seen anything like it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: Still a Christian Nation (wasRe: Separation Of Church And State) |
06 Dec 2003 02:47:25 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee <calee@optonline.net> wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 19:01:04 GMT, maf 1029 <m@bringonthespambaby.de>
wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 17:38:31 GMT, Alberich <Alberich@NoSpam.com>
wrote:
Al, sweetie, you missed the *****-kicking he got in alt.language.latin.
It was priceless.
The 'maf' troll imagines quite a lot. But groups.google simply shows
what was posted. Oh, well.
He was demolished in alt.atheism as soon as he arrived, in a thread
about first-cause proofs for God. He went into complete melt-done. I'd
never seen anything like it.
I'd love to see _that_ thread. What's the URL?
See, that's why - groups.google.com. A ng poster's friend.
Peace.
---------------------------------------
One mark of a deteriorating society is when its people cannot
discern truth from lies. Another is when they don't even bother
to try and will believe whatever their itching ears want to hear.
[Cal Thomas, 4 SEP 2000]
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Separation of church and state myth buster. Founder wants GOD in gov.
Nebraska Democratic State Senator Sues God Over Natural Disasters
Re: God Signed with Noah on Ararat on 27.02.601 the Eternal Covenant to inherit Earth, His Kingdom, and enforce His Law of Love for Him and Neighbor by His Ministers, Colored Hamito-Semites as Criminals for denying, and to deny them, such State, but
Thank God for Seporation of Church from State
Our Christian Nation & God in the State Constitutions
Re: God Signed with Noah on Ararat on 27.02.601 the Eternal Covenant to inherit Earth, His Kingdom, and enforce His Law of Love for Him and Neighbor by His Ministers, Colored Hamito-Semites as Criminals for denying, and to deny them, such State, but
Re: God fixin' to Maim and Kill some red-state neo-con Repugnikkkans ... yeeeeeeeeee haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Nebraska state senator sues God
| Re: State constitutions recognize God as source of rights and freedom
Mention of God in state preambles
is god just a state of mind? the gravitational pullery of goddery.
Re: God fixin' to Maim and Kill some red-state neo-con Repugnikkkans ... yeeeeeeeeee haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
God blessed the Great State of Texas again by moving Rita to Louisiana
Re: State constitutions recognize God as source of rights and freedom
Texans vote to add 'God' to state pledge
|
|
|
