| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Dr Tam" |
| Date: |
04 Apr 2005 10:02:18 PM |
| Object: |
Creation |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4408187.stm
A European team claims to have obtained the first direct image of a planet
beyond our own Solar System.
The "extrasolar planet" is said to orbit a star called GQ Lup - thought to
be like a young version of our Sun.
Similar claims have been made in the past, but sceptical scientists believe
the pictures merely show objects that share the same view in the sky.
The GQ Lup object is far more certain claims Ralph Neuhaeuser's team in the
journal Astronomy & Astrophysics.
GQ Lup and its companion are located in a star-forming region about 400
light-years away.
Dr Tam
.
|
|
| User: "Azrael" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 08:21:36 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:52:30 +1200, Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Azrael <god@my.computer.palace.com> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:40:27 +1200, Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
Wonder wrote:
What proof do you have that Noah's Flood never happened?
Bible Studier
If it can be proved that a herd of invisible black cats that fly through
everyone's bedrooms at midnight are not so, then maybe Noah's Ark can be
proved to be a negative.
So you don't have any proof that Noah's Flood never happened.
There is plenty of proof that it never happened. For a start, you can
look at the genetic make-up of every animal on the planet. That tells
us that all living things are not descended from a single pair of each
species within the last 10,000 years. That is conclusive proof that
the Noah story is a fabrication.
If you look at the measurements of the Ark, it would not be physically
possible to fit even a tiny fraction of the world's species on it, lat
alone their food supply. That also demonstrates that what is written
in the bible is not true. If they made up all the crap about every
animal being wiped out apart from the ones on the Ark, who's to say
the whole story is not a fabrication?
There's also the 'evil ducks' aspect which Eddie Izzard so brilliantly
pointed out. If every species needed to be reduced to a single pair,
in what way did sending a flood kill the aquatic species?
On top of that, we have the proof from the many layers of earth which
have been examined by archaeologists and geologists, and which show no
sign of a flood of that magnitude within the timescale suggested by
the bible. As a catastrophic event like that would have left massive
traces, that is also proof that it never happened.
In addition, there is the fact that the flood is not mentioned
anywhere else. It would undoubtedly have turned up in many written
traditions if it had happened. It does not.
The problem is not the lack of evidence - it's that you refuse to open
your eyes and look at it. Why ask for evidence when you will discount
it without even giving it a second thought?
Mephisto
God made it possible.
Bible Studier
ROFLMAO ... a genuine 'God Dunnit' ......... you just claimed in a
previous post that you 'weren't ignorant ' ........ now you are showing
your ignorance loud and clear ...... "Goddunnit" is NOT evidence of
anything except your pig ignorant education .... if God can break the
laws of Physics at will, then ALL our science is nonsense ....
God the great Practical Joker ? Floods the world some 6,000 years ago
and not only removes ALL trace of it, but alters the existing evidence
to make it look like it never happened !
And how do you know God made it possible ? Oh, that's right, you've got
a book of Bronze Age Fairy Tales that says so ....... well Boy Wonder, I
hope you can find some evidence to back up this claim ....
How did Noah keep the Koalas alive ? You know they can only eat 'fresh'
gum leaves .... ? For that matter how did Noah get to Australia ? Or New
Zealand ? Did the Kiwis swim all the way back from the Middle East.....?
I can give you a thousand more of these questions ..... but just answer
these for starters .....
Science does not have the answers to everything. There are still many
mysteries and things that science say are not possible yet we witness
them with our eyes.
Such as...?
You can take any book in a library and find fault with it.
Irrelevant
In the end it comes to this either you do choose to believe in the
bible or not. Those that believe in the bible find it easier to accept
what is written rather than challenge parts of the bible.
I believe eating the meat of chickens is piosonous to all people
becuase its easier to accept that then the fact that people eat
chicken all the time. It doesn't make my belief correct and has no
basis in fact even if you find a person allergic to chicken, even then
my belief would not be completely true.
If it was possible to prove 100% that something like the ark did exist
there would still be many that would not accept it.
The only things about the bible that one can prove is that it has been
written and some people about 1 in 6 or about 17% of people believe
it. It still does not make anything in it true.
Bible Studier
By telling you what I believe in I'm not forcing you to believe in the
bible unlike some people that do harm by forcing the believes of the
bible on to others.
Bible Studier
But you are, you try to get lays passed that violate my belief system,
and remove family decsicions and place those descicions into the hands
of legislatotrs and other.
And by failing to tell the truth to the most valunerable among us ie
the children you harm them by forceing your beliefs upon them. When I
hear some small child say something like jesus this______ or jesus
that____ or some other inane biblical reference extolling the virtues
of god/jesus it just makes me want to beat the parent with some common
sense. The one that I like the best though must be Child " Why did
_____ have to die?" Parent " Becuase god said it was time to come
home". Lying to your children does not help them it hurts them.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Masked Avenger" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
25 Apr 2005 06:45:58 AM |
|
|
Wonder wrote:
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
Wonder wrote:
What proof do you have that Noah's Flood never happened?
Bible Studier
If it can be proved that a herd of invisible black cats that fly through
everyone's bedrooms at midnight are not so, then maybe Noah's Ark can be
proved to be a negative.
So you don't have any proof that Noah's Flood never happened.
There is plenty of proof that it never happened. For a start, you can
look at the genetic make-up of every animal on the planet. That tells
us that all living things are not descended from a single pair of each
species within the last 10,000 years. That is conclusive proof that
the Noah story is a fabrication.
If you look at the measurements of the Ark, it would not be physically
possible to fit even a tiny fraction of the world's species on it, lat
alone their food supply. That also demonstrates that what is written
in the bible is not true. If they made up all the crap about every
animal being wiped out apart from the ones on the Ark, who's to say
the whole story is not a fabrication?
There's also the 'evil ducks' aspect which Eddie Izzard so brilliantly
pointed out. If every species needed to be reduced to a single pair,
in what way did sending a flood kill the aquatic species?
On top of that, we have the proof from the many layers of earth which
have been examined by archaeologists and geologists, and which show no
sign of a flood of that magnitude within the timescale suggested by
the bible. As a catastrophic event like that would have left massive
traces, that is also proof that it never happened.
In addition, there is the fact that the flood is not mentioned
anywhere else. It would undoubtedly have turned up in many written
traditions if it had happened. It does not.
The problem is not the lack of evidence - it's that you refuse to open
your eyes and look at it. Why ask for evidence when you will discount
it without even giving it a second thought?
Mephisto
God made it possible.
Bible Studier
ROFLMAO ... a genuine 'God Dunnit' ......... you just claimed in a
previous post that you 'weren't ignorant ' ........ now you are showing
your ignorance loud and clear ...... "Goddunnit" is NOT evidence of
anything except your pig ignorant education .... if God can break the
laws of Physics at will, then ALL our science is nonsense ....
God the great Practical Joker ? Floods the world some 6,000 years ago
and not only removes ALL trace of it, but alters the existing evidence
to make it look like it never happened !
And how do you know God made it possible ? Oh, that's right, you've got
a book of Bronze Age Fairy Tales that says so ....... well Boy Wonder, I
hope you can find some evidence to back up this claim ....
How did Noah keep the Koalas alive ? You know they can only eat 'fresh'
gum leaves .... ? For that matter how did Noah get to Australia ? Or New
Zealand ? Did the Kiwis swim all the way back from the Middle East.....?
I can give you a thousand more of these questions ..... but just answer
these for starters .....
Science does not have the answers to everything. There are still many
mysteries and things that science say are not possible yet we witness
them with our eyes.
You can take any book in a library and find fault with it.
In the end it comes to this either you do choose to believe in the
bible or not. Those that believe in the bible find it easier to accept
what is written rather than challenge parts of the bible.
If it was possible to prove 100% that something like the ark did exist
there would still be many that would not accept it.
Bible Studier
Well there's no hope for some people ...... you go on believing in your
Bible Fairy Tale ....... just don't expect any rational people here to
treat you with any respect ...... you're obviously too ignorant to get
your head out of your arse and look around ....... the Bible is
*****, pure and simple ..... a Con trick that simple folk like you
fall for all too often ..... as it stands now the score is : Evidence
for Ark = 0 , Evidence against Ark = overwhelming in many different
fields .....
--
Masked Avenger
aa#2224
EAC Chief Technician in charge of remotely rigging Fundie 'Spell
Checkers' so they all look like hick home schooled yokels
Does Schroedinger's cat have 18 half lives ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 01:49:46 AM |
|
|
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
Wonder wrote:
What proof do you have that Noah's Flood never happened?
Bible Studier
If it can be proved that a herd of invisible black cats that fly through
everyone's bedrooms at midnight are not so, then maybe Noah's Ark can be
proved to be a negative.
So you don't have any proof that Noah's Flood never happened.
There is plenty of proof that it never happened. For a start, you can
look at the genetic make-up of every animal on the planet. That tells
us that all living things are not descended from a single pair of each
species within the last 10,000 years. That is conclusive proof that
the Noah story is a fabrication.
If you look at the measurements of the Ark, it would not be physically
possible to fit even a tiny fraction of the world's species on it, lat
alone their food supply. That also demonstrates that what is written
in the bible is not true. If they made up all the crap about every
animal being wiped out apart from the ones on the Ark, who's to say
the whole story is not a fabrication?
There's also the 'evil ducks' aspect which Eddie Izzard so brilliantly
pointed out. If every species needed to be reduced to a single pair,
in what way did sending a flood kill the aquatic species?
On top of that, we have the proof from the many layers of earth which
have been examined by archaeologists and geologists, and which show no
sign of a flood of that magnitude within the timescale suggested by
the bible. As a catastrophic event like that would have left massive
traces, that is also proof that it never happened.
In addition, there is the fact that the flood is not mentioned
anywhere else. It would undoubtedly have turned up in many written
traditions if it had happened. It does not.
The problem is not the lack of evidence - it's that you refuse to open
your eyes and look at it. Why ask for evidence when you will discount
it without even giving it a second thought?
Mephisto
God made it possible.
Bible Studier
ROFLMAO ... a genuine 'God Dunnit' ......... you just claimed in a
previous post that you 'weren't ignorant ' ........ now you are showing
your ignorance loud and clear ...... "Goddunnit" is NOT evidence of
anything except your pig ignorant education .... if God can break the
laws of Physics at will, then ALL our science is nonsense ....
God the great Practical Joker ? Floods the world some 6,000 years ago
and not only removes ALL trace of it, but alters the existing evidence
to make it look like it never happened !
And how do you know God made it possible ? Oh, that's right, you've got
a book of Bronze Age Fairy Tales that says so ....... well Boy Wonder, I
hope you can find some evidence to back up this claim ....
How did Noah keep the Koalas alive ? You know they can only eat 'fresh'
gum leaves .... ? For that matter how did Noah get to Australia ? Or New
Zealand ? Did the Kiwis swim all the way back from the Middle East.....?
I can give you a thousand more of these questions ..... but just answer
these for starters .....
Science does not have the answers to everything. There are still many
mysteries and things that science say are not possible yet we witness
them with our eyes.
You can take any book in a library and find fault with it.
In the end it comes to this either you do choose to believe in the
bible or not. Those that believe in the bible find it easier to accept
what is written rather than challenge parts of the bible.
If it was possible to prove 100% that something like the ark did exist
there would still be many that would not accept it.
Bible Studier
Well there's no hope for some people ...... you go on believing in your
Bible Fairy Tale ....... just don't expect any rational people here to
treat you with any respect ...... you're obviously too ignorant to get
your head out of your arse and look around ....... the Bible is
*****, pure and simple ..... a Con trick that simple folk like you
fall for all too often ..... as it stands now the score is : Evidence
for Ark = 0 , Evidence against Ark = overwhelming in many different
fields .....
Why do you not respect what others choose to believe in?
Are you saying that because there is no evidence on things such as the
Ark then everyone should be like you and choose not to believe in the
bible?
Bible Studier
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jochen Lueg" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 06:34:02 AM |
|
|
In article <a4or619es4ic6o0tjuh6eu41r2aasgt6q4@4ax.com>,
Why do you not respect what others choose to believe in?
Why should one? People can chose to believe in the most disgusting things,
that does not mean that others have to respect that.
Jochen
--
------------------------------------
If you want to learn about Limavady, why not try
http://www.binevenagh.com
for some local history, photographs and the Roe Valley News Browser.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Liquid Grace" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 04:17:05 AM |
|
|
In article <a4or619es4ic6o0tjuh6eu41r2aasgt6q4@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com leapt about on one foot, screaching...
Well there's no hope for some people ...... you go on believing in your
Bible Fairy Tale ....... just don't expect any rational people here to
treat you with any respect ...... you're obviously too ignorant to get
your head out of your arse and look around ....... the Bible is
*****, pure and simple ..... a Con trick that simple folk like you
fall for all too often ..... as it stands now the score is : Evidence
for Ark = 0 , Evidence against Ark = overwhelming in many different
fields .....
Why do you not respect what others choose to believe in?
Are you saying that because there is no evidence on things such as the
Ark then everyone should be like you and choose not to believe in the
bible?
Bible Studier
I don't have to respect what you believe it. I don't mind if you
believe the moon is made of cheese, but go peddle it somewhere else.
Let me ask you a better question - if there's no evidence, why do you
believe it? If I told you that I was going to give you a million
dollars on some unspecified future date, but didn't give you proof of
this, would you believe me? No? Why? No evidence?
Hmmm....
Grace
EAC Vile Harridan and Deranged Harpy
a.a. #1752, BAAWA Knight who Demands Shrubbery!
Lost In Oz....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 07:40:57 AM |
|
|
Liquid Grace <yes@istillthink.not> wrote:
In article <a4or619es4ic6o0tjuh6eu41r2aasgt6q4@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com leapt about on one foot, screaching...
Well there's no hope for some people ...... you go on believing in your
Bible Fairy Tale ....... just don't expect any rational people here to
treat you with any respect ...... you're obviously too ignorant to get
your head out of your arse and look around ....... the Bible is
*****, pure and simple ..... a Con trick that simple folk like you
fall for all too often ..... as it stands now the score is : Evidence
for Ark = 0 , Evidence against Ark = overwhelming in many different
fields .....
Why do you not respect what others choose to believe in?
Are you saying that because there is no evidence on things such as the
Ark then everyone should be like you and choose not to believe in the
bible?
Bible Studier
I don't have to respect what you believe it. I don't mind if you
believe the moon is made of cheese, but go peddle it somewhere else.
What...you mean go to a bible newsgroup......wait a moment this is a
bible newsgroup
Let me ask you a better question - if there's no evidence, why do you
believe it?
I'm one of a large group of people around the world who believe in the
bible. Maybe the question should be why do thousands of people believe
in the bible.
If I told you that I was going to give you a million
dollars on some unspecified future date, but didn't give you proof of
this, would you believe me? No? Why? No evidence?
Many years ago their was no evidence that the earth was round so
everyone belived the world was flat. I understand that you need
evidence to believe in something.
Bible Studier
Hmmm....
Grace
EAC Vile Harridan and Deranged Harpy
a.a. #1752, BAAWA Knight who Demands Shrubbery!
Lost In Oz....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 07:46:47 AM |
|
|
"Wonder" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8vcs615ti6dabq04ima7e2279mc4oqqkkb@4ax.com...
Liquid Grace <yes@istillthink.not> wrote:
In article <a4or619es4ic6o0tjuh6eu41r2aasgt6q4@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com leapt about on one foot, screaching...
Well there's no hope for some people ...... you go on believing in
your
Bible Fairy Tale ....... just don't expect any rational people here to
treat you with any respect ...... you're obviously too ignorant to get
your head out of your arse and look around ....... the Bible is
*****, pure and simple ..... a Con trick that simple folk like you
fall for all too often ..... as it stands now the score is : Evidence
for Ark = 0 , Evidence against Ark = overwhelming in many different
fields .....
Why do you not respect what others choose to believe in?
Are you saying that because there is no evidence on things such as the
Ark then everyone should be like you and choose not to believe in the
bible?
Bible Studier
I don't have to respect what you believe it. I don't mind if you
believe the moon is made of cheese, but go peddle it somewhere else.
What...you mean go to a bible newsgroup......wait a moment this is a
bible newsgroup
Many of us are reading this from alt.atheism. Ever hear of crossposting?
Let me ask you a better question - if there's no evidence, why do you
believe it?
I'm one of a large group of people around the world who believe in the
bible. Maybe the question should be why do thousands of people believe
in the bible.
It's called brainwashing from childhood. I see it happening to my nieces
and nephew.
If I told you that I was going to give you a million
dollars on some unspecified future date, but didn't give you proof of
this, would you believe me? No? Why? No evidence?
Many years ago their was no evidence that the earth was round so
everyone belived the world was flat. I understand that you need
evidence to believe in something.
Exactly. Your point?
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Masked Avenger" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 07:11:20 AM |
|
|
Wonder wrote:
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
Wonder wrote:
What proof do you have that Noah's Flood never happened?
Bible Studier
If it can be proved that a herd of invisible black cats that fly through
everyone's bedrooms at midnight are not so, then maybe Noah's Ark can be
proved to be a negative.
So you don't have any proof that Noah's Flood never happened.
There is plenty of proof that it never happened. For a start, you can
look at the genetic make-up of every animal on the planet. That tells
us that all living things are not descended from a single pair of each
species within the last 10,000 years. That is conclusive proof that
the Noah story is a fabrication.
If you look at the measurements of the Ark, it would not be physically
possible to fit even a tiny fraction of the world's species on it, lat
alone their food supply. That also demonstrates that what is written
in the bible is not true. If they made up all the crap about every
animal being wiped out apart from the ones on the Ark, who's to say
the whole story is not a fabrication?
There's also the 'evil ducks' aspect which Eddie Izzard so brilliantly
pointed out. If every species needed to be reduced to a single pair,
in what way did sending a flood kill the aquatic species?
On top of that, we have the proof from the many layers of earth which
have been examined by archaeologists and geologists, and which show no
sign of a flood of that magnitude within the timescale suggested by
the bible. As a catastrophic event like that would have left massive
traces, that is also proof that it never happened.
In addition, there is the fact that the flood is not mentioned
anywhere else. It would undoubtedly have turned up in many written
traditions if it had happened. It does not.
The problem is not the lack of evidence - it's that you refuse to open
your eyes and look at it. Why ask for evidence when you will discount
it without even giving it a second thought?
Mephisto
God made it possible.
Bible Studier
ROFLMAO ... a genuine 'God Dunnit' ......... you just claimed in a
previous post that you 'weren't ignorant ' ........ now you are showing
your ignorance loud and clear ...... "Goddunnit" is NOT evidence of
anything except your pig ignorant education .... if God can break the
laws of Physics at will, then ALL our science is nonsense ....
God the great Practical Joker ? Floods the world some 6,000 years ago
and not only removes ALL trace of it, but alters the existing evidence
to make it look like it never happened !
And how do you know God made it possible ? Oh, that's right, you've got
a book of Bronze Age Fairy Tales that says so ....... well Boy Wonder, I
hope you can find some evidence to back up this claim ....
How did Noah keep the Koalas alive ? You know they can only eat 'fresh'
gum leaves .... ? For that matter how did Noah get to Australia ? Or New
Zealand ? Did the Kiwis swim all the way back from the Middle East.....?
I can give you a thousand more of these questions ..... but just answer
these for starters .....
Science does not have the answers to everything. There are still many
mysteries and things that science say are not possible yet we witness
them with our eyes.
You can take any book in a library and find fault with it.
In the end it comes to this either you do choose to believe in the
bible or not. Those that believe in the bible find it easier to accept
what is written rather than challenge parts of the bible.
If it was possible to prove 100% that something like the ark did exist
there would still be many that would not accept it.
Bible Studier
Well there's no hope for some people ...... you go on believing in your
Bible Fairy Tale ....... just don't expect any rational people here to
treat you with any respect ...... you're obviously too ignorant to get
your head out of your arse and look around ....... the Bible is
*****, pure and simple ..... a Con trick that simple folk like you
fall for all too often ..... as it stands now the score is : Evidence
for Ark = 0 , Evidence against Ark = overwhelming in many different
fields .....
Why do you not respect what others choose to believe in?
Are you saying that because there is no evidence on things such as the
Ark then everyone should be like you and choose not to believe in the
bible?
Bible Studier
It's not that I don't respect what others choose to believe in .......
it's just that I find it hard to respect people who expect me to believe
some bronze age fairy tale ....... you choose to live in ignorance of
the real world and instead wrap yourself in a dark cloak of Mythology
.... when the opportunity is given to you to look outside the 'cloak',
into the sunshine ...... you choose to ignore it, or at best, fail to
understand it ..... if the the story of the flood is wrong ( have you
read THIS yet ? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html )
then the whole Bible is suspect ..... the Flood is only one of many
false stories in the Bible, the Exodus .... never happened ... certainly
not out of Egypt .... no crossing of the Red Sea .... there is
absolutely NO evidence anywhere for it ..... there is no contemporary
record of Jesus ever existing, he may have, but no one alive at the time
recorded it ....... if the Bible is just another Myth ( amongst
thousands of others ) why believe it ?
simple question .... do you believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old ?
let's start here ..... and see how far we get .....
--
Masked Avenger
aa#2224
EAC Chief Technician in charge of remotely rigging Fundie 'Spell
Checkers' so they all look like hick home schooled yokels
Does Schroedinger's cat have 18 half lives ?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 07:45:05 AM |
|
|
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Science does not have the answers to everything. There are still many
mysteries and things that science say are not possible yet we witness
them with our eyes.
You can take any book in a library and find fault with it.
In the end it comes to this either you do choose to believe in the
bible or not. Those that believe in the bible find it easier to accept
what is written rather than challenge parts of the bible.
If it was possible to prove 100% that something like the ark did exist
there would still be many that would not accept it.
Bible Studier
Well there's no hope for some people ...... you go on believing in your
Bible Fairy Tale ....... just don't expect any rational people here to
treat you with any respect
This makes me wonder what the purpose of this newsgroup is about. Is
it to prove that the bible is false?
...... you're obviously too ignorant to get
your head out of your arse and look around ....... the Bible is
*****, pure and simple ..... a Con trick that simple folk like you
fall for all too often
Is that your purpose in this newsgroup...to tell others this?
...... as it stands now the score is : Evidence
for Ark = 0 , Evidence against Ark = overwhelming in many different
fields .....
Waiting for your answers.
Bible Studier
.
|
|
|
| User: "Masked Avenger" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
26 Apr 2005 08:55:23 AM |
|
|
Wonder wrote:
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Science does not have the answers to everything. There are still many
mysteries and things that science say are not possible yet we witness
them with our eyes.
You can take any book in a library and find fault with it.
In the end it comes to this either you do choose to believe in the
bible or not. Those that believe in the bible find it easier to accept
what is written rather than challenge parts of the bible.
If it was possible to prove 100% that something like the ark did exist
there would still be many that would not accept it.
Bible Studier
Well there's no hope for some people ...... you go on believing in your
Bible Fairy Tale ....... just don't expect any rational people here to
treat you with any respect
This makes me wonder what the purpose of this newsgroup is about. Is
it to prove that the bible is false?
...... you're obviously too ignorant to get
your head out of your arse and look around ....... the Bible is
*****, pure and simple ..... a Con trick that simple folk like you
fall for all too often
Is that your purpose in this newsgroup...to tell others this?
..... as it stands now the score is : Evidence
for Ark = 0 , Evidence against Ark = overwhelming in many different
fields .....
Waiting for your answers.
Bible Studier
mate, if you bothered to read the headers you'd see that you're cross
posting into alt.atheism ........ I'm an atheist ..... you want me to
tell you I believe in God ? ...... not likely is it ? I gave up childish
Fairy Tales like Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny and God many years ago
.... you should try it ..... it's very enlightening ......
--
Masked Avenger
aa#2224
EAC Chief Technician in charge of remotely rigging Fundie 'Spell
Checkers' so they all look like hick home schooled yokels
Does Schroedinger's cat have 18 half lives ?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Masked Avenger" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
23 Apr 2005 10:02:21 AM |
|
|
Wonder wrote:
Ronald Barnes <blue8@netcarrier.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
What proof do you have that Noah's Flood never happened?
Bible Studier
If it can be proved that a herd of invisible black cats that fly through
everyone's bedrooms at midnight are not so, then maybe Noah's Ark can be
proved to be a negative.
So you don't have any proof that Noah's Flood never happened.
Bible Studier
Can't you read for comprehension ?! Is it a pre-requisite for Christians
to be this ignorant ? I already offered you some evidence ......
READ THIS:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html
For Pete''s sake .... read some Geological literature, go to ANY
University Library ..... there's no evidence for a Global flood .... no
Noah ... no Ark .... show me the evidence for it ..... and I'm talking
'bona fide' evidence, not some article from AiG .....
--
Masked Avenger
aa#2224
EAC Chief Technician in charge of remotely rigging Fundie 'Spell
Checkers' so they all look like hick home schooled yokels
Does Schroedinger's cat have 18 half lives ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
24 Apr 2005 10:44:54 AM |
|
|
Masked Avenger <cootey_59@yahoo.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
Ronald Barnes <blue8@netcarrier.com> wrote:
Wonder wrote:
What proof do you have that Noah's Flood never happened?
Bible Studier
If it can be proved that a herd of invisible black cats that fly through
everyone's bedrooms at midnight are not so, then maybe Noah's Ark can be
proved to be a negative.
So you don't have any proof that Noah's Flood never happened.
Bible Studier
Can't you read for comprehension ?! Is it a pre-requisite for Christians
to be this ignorant ? I already offered you some evidence ......
READ THIS:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html
For Pete''s sake .... read some Geological literature, go to ANY
University Library ..... there's no evidence for a Global flood .... no
Noah ... no Ark .... show me the evidence for it ..... and I'm talking
'bona fide' evidence, not some article from AiG .....
With all the many posts on this subject I must have missed those
links. As I'm not ignorant I'll take a look at the sites the links
lead to. Thanks for the links.
Bible Studier
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ned Kelly" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
17 Apr 2005 08:20:37 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:29:38 +1200, Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
The Great Hairy One <the.great.hairy@GEEmail.com> wrote:
In article <t305611rcm062tma1t38o2kpnd7h61hn35@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com says...
I believe that Adam and Eve and their children were healthy without
and disease or adnormalites.
Can you provide any non-biblical evidence that they actually existed??
Cheers,
TGHO
In time with technical advances in science it will likely to be
proved.
There are some scientific evidence that Noah's Ark does exists.
Even if a large boat is found how would we know that it was Noah's
and, indeed, how did the animals unique to New Zealand get back to New
Zealand after the flood?
Letting alone, for an instant, the question about how Noah got to
those animals to start with...
Ned
.
|
|
|
| User: "IDphreak Out" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
29 Jan 2008 10:16:34 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:29:38 +1200, Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
The Great Hairy One <the.great.hairy@GEEmail.com> wrote:
In article <t305611rcm062tma1t38o2kpnd7h61hn35@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com says...
I believe that Adam and Eve and their children were healthy without
and disease or adnormalites.
Can you provide any non-biblical evidence that they actually existed??
Cheers,
TGHO
In time with technical advances in science it will likely to be
proved.
There are some scientific evidence that Noah's Ark does exists.
Even if a large boat is found how would we know that it was Noah's
and, indeed, how did the animals unique to New Zealand get back to New
Zealand after the flood?
Letting alone, for an instant, the question about how Noah got to
those animals to start with...
Why...didn't you see Evan Almighty? They animals just showed up in the
neighborhood, every kind of animal from every part of the globe, within hours
at that, were in his backyard (New Jersey wasn't it)? lol
Ned
--
Catholicism is nothing more than a happy-gay *fairy tail* connected
to a *queer monster* known as Theocracy...
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Féachadóir" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
17 Apr 2005 07:33:52 PM |
|
|
Scríobh Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com>:
The Great Hairy One <the.great.hairy@GEEmail.com> wrote:
In article <t305611rcm062tma1t38o2kpnd7h61hn35@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com says...
I believe that Adam and Eve and their children were healthy without
and disease or adnormalites.
Can you provide any non-biblical evidence that they actually existed??
Cheers,
TGHO
In time with technical advances in science it will likely to be
proved.
There are some scientific evidence that Noah's Ark does exists.
No, there aren't.
Time to start clearing this cross-posted nonsense from SCI.
*ploink*
--
'Donegal: Up Here It's Different'
© Féachadóir
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Masked Avenger" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
18 Apr 2005 08:41:04 AM |
|
|
Wonder wrote:
The Great Hairy One <the.great.hairy@GEEmail.com> wrote:
In article <t305611rcm062tma1t38o2kpnd7h61hn35@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com says...
I believe that Adam and Eve and their children were healthy without
and disease or adnormalites.
Can you provide any non-biblical evidence that they actually existed??
Cheers,
TGHO
In time with technical advances in science it will likely to be
proved.
now that's what I call 'wishful thinking' ..... apart from which .....
science seems to be moving in the 'other' direction .....
There are some scientific evidence that Noah's Ark does exists.
ROFLMAO...... of course there is ;) ...... and you can show us, right ?
--
Masked Avenger
aa#2224
EAC Chief Technician in charge of remotely rigging Fundie 'Spell
Checkers' so they all look like hick home schooled yokels
Does Schroedinger's cat have 18 half lives ?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tartarus-Sanctimonious" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
28 Jan 2008 09:21:50 PM |
|
|
"Wonder" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nt14611v3vaoos0kst28k6domoalv1h20p@4ax.com...
snip
But don't forget Adam and Eve were healthy without and disease or
adnormalites and the same goes for his children (you'd need to be in
great health to live will beyond 100 years).
Do you honestly believe this?
Of course the moron does, every reply is an invite to convert from the
asswipe. *****, that's all I can take today...I'll get to the other 270
threads by weeks end.
--
Spirituality without religion is like air without the smog...refreshing <g>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nebulous" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
29 Jan 2008 01:25:46 AM |
|
|
"Tartarus-Sanctimonious" <Sanctimonium@humancost.com> wrote in message
The Troubles of Matthew Mahoney
In a little town in Devonshire, in the mellow September moonlight,
A gentleman passing along a street saw a pitiful sight,
A man bending over the form of a woman on the pavement.
He was uttering plaintive words and seemingly discontent.
"What's the matter with the woman?" asked the gentleman,
As the poor, fallen woman he did narrowly scan.
"There's something the matter, as yer honour can see,
But it's not right to prate about my wife, blame me."
"Is that really your wife?" said the gentleman.
"Yes, sor, but she looks very pale and wan."
"But surely she is much younger than you?"
"Only fourteen years, sor, that is thrue."
"It's myself that looks a deal oulder nor I really am,
Throuble have whitened my heir, my good gintleman,
Which was once as black as the wings of a crow,
And it's throuble as is dyed it as white as the snow.
Come, my dear sowl, Bridget, it's past nine o'clock,
And to see yez lying there it gives my heart a shock."
And he smoothed away the raven hair from her forehead,
And her hands hung heavily as if she had been dead.
The gentleman saw what was the matter and he sighed again,
And he said, "It's a great trial and must give you pain,
But I see you are willing to help her all you can."
But the encouraging words was not lost upon the Irishman.
"Thrial!" he echoed, "Don't mintion it, yer honour,
But the blessing of God rest upon her.
Poor crathur, she's good barrin' this one fault,
And by any one I don't like to hear her miscault."
"What was the reason of her taking to drink?"
"Bless yer honour, that's jest what I oftentimes think,
Some things is done without any rason at all,
And, sure, this one to me is a great downfall.
'Ah, Bridget, my darlin', I never dreamt ye'd come to this,"
And stooping down, her cheek he did kiss.
While a glittering tear flashed in the moonlight to the ground,
For the poor husband's grief was really profound.
"Have you any children?" asked the gentleman.
"No, yer honour, bless the Lord, contented I am,
I wouldn't have the lambs know any harm o' their mother,
Besides, sor, to me they would be a great bother."
"What is your trade, my good man?"
"Gardening, sor, and mighty fond of it I am.
Kind sor, I am out of a job and I am dying with sorrow."
"Well, you can call at my house by ten o'clock to-morrow.
"And I'll see what I can do for you.
Now, hasten home with your wife, and I bid you adieu.
But stay, my good man, I did not ask your name."
"My name is Matthew Mahoney, after Father Matthew of great fame,"
Then Mahoney stooped and lifted Bridget tenderly,
And carried her home in his arms cheerfully,
And put her to bed while he felt quite content,
Still hoping Bridget would see the folly of drinking and repent.
And at ten o'clock next morning Matthew was at Blandford Hall,
And politely for Mr Gillespie he did call,
But he was told Mrs Gillespie he would see,
And was invited into the parlour cheerfully.
And when Mrs Gillespie entered the room
She said, "Matthew Mahoney, I suppose you want to know your doom.
Well, Matthew, tell your wife to call here to-morrow."
"I'll ax her, my lady, for my heart's full of sorrow."
So Matthew got his wife to make her appearance at Blandford Hall,
And, trembling, upon Mrs Gillespie poor Bridget did call,
And had a pleasant interview with Mrs Gillespie,
And was told she was wanted for a new lodge-keeper immediately.
"But, Bridget, my dear woman, you mustn't drink any more,
For you have got a good husband you ought to adore,
And Mr Gillespie will help you, I'm sure,
Because he is very kind to deserving poor."
And Bridget's repentance was hearty and sincere,
And by the grace of God she never drank whisky, rum, or beer,
And good thoughts come into her mind of Heaven above,
And Matthew Mahoney dearly does her love.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Great Hairy One" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
17 Apr 2005 07:28:04 AM |
|
|
In article <3cf2emF6ji74aU1@individual.net>,
says...
Do you honestly believe this?
I'm going to live to be a thousand! :)
--
The Great Hairy One,
ICQ: 118086514
All BAAWA and blue
SMASH! Aha! They'll save every one of us!
====================================
CEO EAC Roleplaying Division
The last thing many players
hear is me asking for 45d6...
(Remove spam block to email)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
17 Apr 2005 10:33:12 AM |
|
|
The Great Hairy One <the.great.hairy@GEEmail.com> wrote:
In article <3cf2emF6ji74aU1@individual.net>,
says...
Do you honestly believe this?
I'm going to live to be a thousand! :)
A thousand months if your lucky.
Bible Studier
.
|
|
|
| User: "Liquid Grace" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
18 Apr 2005 05:39:12 AM |
|
|
In article <p80561trs0f6fp8jsdinkn4vtkliihbnn7@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com leapt about on one foot, screaching...
The Great Hairy One <the.great.hairy@GEEmail.com> wrote:
In article <3cf2emF6ji74aU1@individual.net>,
says...
Do you honestly believe this?
I'm going to live to be a thousand! :)
A thousand months if your lucky.
Bible Studier
Hmmm...that's 83 years and a little bit. I could stand to be married to
Hairy till we're that old!
Grace
--
EAC Vile Harridan and Deranged Harpy
a.a. #1752, BAAWA Knight who Demands Shrubbery!
Lost In Oz....
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Great Hairy One" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
18 Apr 2005 07:09:43 AM |
|
|
In article <MPG.1cce3956c98f1c679896be@freenews.iinet.net.au>,
yes@istillthink.not says...
Hmmm...that's 83 years and a little bit. I could stand to be married to
Hairy till we're that old!
Except we'll be running about the old folks home yelling "what??!? Who
is that hairy old *****??" and making the nurses screech.
:P
--
The Great Hairy One,
ICQ: 118086514
All BAAWA and blue
SMASH! Aha! They'll save every one of us!
====================================
CEO EAC Roleplaying Division
The last thing many players
hear is me asking for 45d6...
(Remove spam block to email)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Liquid Grace" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
18 Apr 2005 07:29:35 AM |
|
|
In article <MPG.1cce4e8ee2202c779896c4@freenews.iinet.net.au>,
the.great.hairy@GEEmail.com leapt about on one foot, screaching...
In article <MPG.1cce3956c98f1c679896be@freenews.iinet.net.au>,
yes@istillthink.not says...
Hmmm...that's 83 years and a little bit. I could stand to be married to
Hairy till we're that old!
Except we'll be running about the old folks home yelling "what??!? Who
is that hairy old *****??" and making the nurses screech.
:P
"Hey, 'e looks just like that old ***** I used to be married
too...nurse, nurse, where's me teeth!"
Hee Hee
Grace
--
EAC Vile Harridan and Deranged Harpy
a.a. #1752, BAAWA Knight who Demands Shrubbery!
Lost In Oz....
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Great Hairy One" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
17 Apr 2005 04:23:58 PM |
|
|
In article <p80561trs0f6fp8jsdinkn4vtkliihbnn7@4ax.com>,
nospam@hotmail.com says...
A thousand months if your lucky.
Do you feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
;)
Cheers,
TGHO
--
The Great Hairy One,
ICQ: 118086514
All BAAWA and blue
SMASH! Aha! They'll save every one of us!
====================================
CEO EAC Roleplaying Division
The last thing many players
hear is me asking for 45d6...
(Remove spam block to email)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mephisto" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
18 Apr 2005 01:59:44 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 18:57:10 +1200, Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Mephisto <mephisto@go.away> wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:59:21 +1200, Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Ninth Commandment <ninthcommandment@yabbadabbadoo.com> wrote:
Unfortunatly there were lots of Elohim running around at the time.
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:57:40 +1200, Ned Kelly <republican@email.com>
wrote:
Tell me, if Adam and Eve were the first humans then didn't the third
generation come about by incest?
Isn't that wrong according to God?
Ned
As Adam and Eve were the first humans they were not related to each
other.
Eve was made from Adam's rib, so they would have been as closely
related as twins. That in itself is conclusive proof (as if any more
were needed) that the creation story has no basis in fact. If you try
and breed an entire population from a gene pool that small, disease
and abnormalities start to pervade and the population dies out.
Mephisto
But don't forget Adam and Eve were healthy without and disease or
adnormalites and the same goes for his children (you'd need to be in
great health to live will beyond 100 years). It's after many
generations that adnormalites started to appear.
No it isn't. They can appear in the first generation. I would have so
much more respect for the opinions of theists if they did not resort
to lies to defend their opinions. It's very difficult to have a
serious debate with someone who misrepresents the truth, intentionally
or otherwise.
Have you ever wondered how mankind has survives all these years when
many things could have wiped out the population of humans.
Same applies to every species that exists - would you attach the same
importance to the other species?
Something could have happened to wipe out our ancestors, then we would
not be here to debate it. It did not, so we are.
Mephisto
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ned Kelly" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
15 Apr 2005 04:19:47 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:59:21 +1200, Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Ninth Commandment <ninthcommandment@yabbadabbadoo.com> wrote:
Unfortunatly there were lots of Elohim running around at the time.
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:57:40 +1200, Ned Kelly <republican@email.com>
wrote:
Tell me, if Adam and Eve were the first humans then didn't the third
generation come about by incest?
Isn't that wrong according to God?
Ned
As Adam and Eve were the first humans they were not related to each
other. They did not have human parents. It was the will of god that
they mate and have children.
Yes...we're assuming that for the sake of argument...so they had
children who were *not* the product of incest yes...acceptable...but
where did the next generation come from then?
Ned
.
|
|
|
| User: "Da pASSshun Of Duh" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
28 Jan 2008 09:22:57 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:59:21 +1200, Wonder <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
Ninth Commandment <ninthcommandment@yabbadabbadoo.com> wrote:
Unfortunatly there were lots of Elohim running around at the time.
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:57:40 +1200, Ned Kelly <republican@email.com>
wrote:
Tell me, if Adam and Eve were the first humans then didn't the third
generation come about by incest?
Isn't that wrong according to God?
Ned
As Adam and Eve were the first humans they were not related to each
other. They did not have human parents. It was the will of god that
they mate and have children.
Yes...we're assuming that for the sake of argument...so they had
children who were *not* the product of incest yes...acceptable...but
where did the next generation come from then?
Adam...either/any way you copulate it, it's incest...
Ned
--
Great link BTW > > > --------------------vvvvvv------------------
Rev. Karl E. Taylor http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
Great link BTW > > > --------------------^^^^^^------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nebulous" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
29 Jan 2008 01:29:12 AM |
|
|
"Da' pASSshun Of Duh" <Pontiff-tongue@dabungholy.com> wrote in message
The Troubles of Matthew Mahoney
In a little town in Devonshire, in the mellow September moonlight,
A gentleman passing along a street saw a pitiful sight,
A man bending over the form of a woman on the pavement.
He was uttering plaintive words and seemingly discontent.
"What's the matter with the woman?" asked the gentleman,
As the poor, fallen woman he did narrowly scan.
"There's something the matter, as yer honour can see,
But it's not right to prate about my wife, blame me."
"Is that really your wife?" said the gentleman.
"Yes, sor, but she looks very pale and wan."
"But surely she is much younger than you?"
"Only fourteen years, sor, that is thrue."
"It's myself that looks a deal oulder nor I really am,
Throuble have whitened my heir, my good gintleman,
Which was once as black as the wings of a crow,
And it's throuble as is dyed it as white as the snow.
Come, my dear sowl, Bridget, it's past nine o'clock,
And to see yez lying there it gives my heart a shock."
And he smoothed away the raven hair from her forehead,
And her hands hung heavily as if she had been dead.
The gentleman saw what was the matter and he sighed again,
And he said, "It's a great trial and must give you pain,
But I see you are willing to help her all you can."
But the encouraging words was not lost upon the Irishman.
"Thrial!" he echoed, "Don't mintion it, yer honour,
But the blessing of God rest upon her.
Poor crathur, she's good barrin' this one fault,
And by any one I don't like to hear her miscault."
"What was the reason of her taking to drink?"
"Bless yer honour, that's jest what I oftentimes think,
Some things is done without any rason at all,
And, sure, this one to me is a great downfall.
'Ah, Bridget, my darlin', I never dreamt ye'd come to this,"
And stooping down, her cheek he did kiss.
While a glittering tear flashed in the moonlight to the ground,
For the poor husband's grief was really profound.
"Have you any children?" asked the gentleman.
"No, yer honour, bless the Lord, contented I am,
I wouldn't have the lambs know any harm o' their mother,
Besides, sor, to me they would be a great bother."
"What is your trade, my good man?"
"Gardening, sor, and mighty fond of it I am.
Kind sor, I am out of a job and I am dying with sorrow."
"Well, you can call at my house by ten o'clock to-morrow.
"And I'll see what I can do for you.
Now, hasten home with your wife, and I bid you adieu.
But stay, my good man, I did not ask your name."
"My name is Matthew Mahoney, after Father Matthew of great fame,"
Then Mahoney stooped and lifted Bridget tenderly,
And carried her home in his arms cheerfully,
And put her to bed while he felt quite content,
Still hoping Bridget would see the folly of drinking and repent.
And at ten o'clock next morning Matthew was at Blandford Hall,
And politely for Mr Gillespie he did call,
But he was told Mrs Gillespie he would see,
And was invited into the parlour cheerfully.
And when Mrs Gillespie entered the room
She said, "Matthew Mahoney, I suppose you want to know your doom.
Well, Matthew, tell your wife to call here to-morrow."
"I'll ax her, my lady, for my heart's full of sorrow."
So Matthew got his wife to make her appearance at Blandford Hall,
And, trembling, upon Mrs Gillespie poor Bridget did call,
And had a pleasant interview with Mrs Gillespie,
And was told she was wanted for a new lodge-keeper immediately.
"But, Bridget, my dear woman, you mustn't drink any more,
For you have got a good husband you ought to adore,
And Mr Gillespie will help you, I'm sure,
Because he is very kind to deserving poor."
And Bridget's repentance was hearty and sincere,
And by the grace of God she never drank whisky, rum, or beer,
And good thoughts come into her mind of Heaven above,
And Matthew Mahoney dearly does her love.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
28 Jan 2008 10:51:32 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:22:57 -0800, Da' pASSshun Of Duh
<Pontiff-tongue@dabungholy.com> spake thusly:
Adam...either/any way you copulate it, it's incest...
So let me get this straight...
If there's no law against it, it's incest anyway.
If there's no law against abortion, it's not murder,
even though it would have been when abortion
was not legal and even though if I kill a woman's
unborn child, I go up on murder today and even
though if the woman does it, it's premeditated.
Goodbye! And btw, thanks for all of the atheists
replying! I just expanded my kill file by leaps
and bounds! Especially with those who claim
that they couldn't care less about a God that they
claim doesn't exist and yet, their signature lists
one insult after another against Him!
Bawahahaha!!! <Chuckle!>
--
"Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself,
but talent instantly recognizes genius."
- Sir Arthur Doyle
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nebulous" |
|
| Title: Re: Isn't incest wrong Pastor Dave? |
29 Jan 2008 01:29:33 AM |
|
|
"Pastor Dave" <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote in message
The Troubles of Matthew Mahoney
In a little town in Devonshire, in the mellow September moonlight,
A gentleman passing along a street saw a pitiful sight,
A man bending over the form of a woman on the pavement.
He was uttering plaintive words and seemingly discontent.
"What's the matter with the woman?" asked the gentleman,
As the poor, fallen woman he did narrowly scan.
"There's something the matter, as yer honour can see,
But it's not right to prate about my wife, blame me."
"Is that really your wife?" said the gentleman.
"Yes, sor, but she looks very pale and wan."
"But surely she is much younger than you?"
"Only fourteen years, sor, that is thrue."
"It's myself that looks a deal oulder nor I really am,
Throuble have whitened my heir, my good gintleman,
Which was once as black as the wings of a crow,
And it's throuble as is dyed it as white as the snow.
Come, my dear sowl, Bridget, it's past nine o'clock,
And to see yez lying there it gives my heart a shock."
And he smoothed away the raven hair from her forehead,
And her hands hung heavily as if she had been dead.
The gentleman saw what was the matter and he sighed again,
And he said, "It's a great trial and must give you pain,
But I see you are willing to help her all you can."
But the encouraging words was not lost upon the Irishman.
"Thrial!" he echoed, "Don't mintion it, yer honour,
But the blessing of God rest upon her.
Poor crathur, she's good barrin' this one fault,
And by any one I don't like to hear her miscault."
"What was the reason of her taking to drink?"
"Bless yer honour, that's jest what I oftentimes think,
Some things is done without any rason at all,
And, sure, this one to me is a great downfall.
'Ah, Bridget, my darlin', I never dreamt ye'd come to this,"
And stooping down, her cheek he did kiss.
While a glittering tear flashed in the moonlight to the ground,
For the poor husband's grief was really profound.
"Have you any children?" asked the gentleman.
"No, yer honour, bless the Lord, contented I am,
I wouldn't have the lambs know any harm o' their mother,
Besides, sor, to me they would be a great bother."
"What is your trade, my good man?"
"Gardening, sor, and mighty fond of it I am.
Kind sor, I am out of a job and I am dying with sorrow."
"Well, you can call at my house by ten o'clock to-morrow.
"And I'll see what I can do for you.
Now, hasten home with your wife, and I bid you adieu.
But stay, my good man, I did not ask your name."
"My name is Matthew Mahoney, after Father Matthew of great fame,"
Then Mahoney stooped and lifted Bridget tenderly,
And carried her home in his arms cheerfully,
And put her to bed while he felt quite content,
Still hoping Bridget would see t | | | | |
