Religions > Bible > definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank)
| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Saul_Sabia" |
| Date: |
16 Aug 2004 05:17:23 PM |
| Object: |
definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
Atheism
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=atheist
one who disbelieves or denies the existence of god or gods.
a godless person.
Theism
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=theist
Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief
in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.
so if someone believes in a _pagan_ god, like Zeus, Jupiter, Mithra,
Bob the Omnificent, Jahweh, or Jesus, then that person must be a THEIST.
if someone does not believe in the existence of gods, like a
buddhist, or possibly an agnostic, that person is an ATHEIST.
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians* atheists
if they disagree with you! you have not bothered to stop and _think_ for
two seconds about who says what - as soon as someone posts even a slightly
different opinion, YOU go off about how they are atheists, and how they
are flaming everyone. the funny thing is that you are always the first
one to flame _them_, the first one to crosspost into other newsgroups,
and the first to personally attack! you ignore everything that doesn't
fit into your little world-view, and fanatically reject all else!
if you can't accept ngs as opportunities for *discussion* then why
don't you leave?
and as far as your "christian" ngs being "pristine", remember that Jesus
kicked it with the sinners too! except that he turned a lot more cheek
with a lot more self-control and aplomb than you have!
i'm now waiting for the return post that will ignore 9/10ths of what
i've said, call me an atheist proselytizing atheist drivel, personally
attack me and accuse me of some imagined crime or behavior, then tell
me i need to "read below" for some stupid quote from the bible that won't
make any sense to the topic on hand.
Saul Sabia
saul_sabia@yaho[o].com
.
|
|
| User: "AnotherObserver®" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
17 Aug 2004 04:05:33 PM |
|
|
(Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians* atheists
if they disagree with you! you have not bothered to stop and _think_ for
two seconds about who says what - as soon as someone posts even a slightly
different opinion, YOU go off about how they are atheists, and how they
are flaming everyone. the funny thing is that you are always the first
one to flame _them_, the first one to crosspost into other newsgroups,
and the first to personally attack! you ignore everything that doesn't
fit into your little world-view, and fanatically reject all else!
if you can't accept ngs as opportunities for *discussion* then why
don't you leave?
and as far as your "christian" ngs being "pristine", remember that Jesus
kicked it with the sinners too! except that he turned a lot more cheek
with a lot more self-control and aplomb than you have!
i'm now waiting for the return post that will ignore 9/10ths of what
i've said, call me an atheist proselytizing atheist drivel, personally
attack me and accuse me of some imagined crime or behavior, then tell
me i need to "read below" for some stupid quote from the bible that won't
make any sense to the topic on hand.
Psst... you're only stroking his ego and with the excitement this will
render, you may as well stroke his member.
--
Davidwd
~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wicca Joe" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
17 Aug 2004 04:09:14 PM |
|
|
<AnotherObserver®> wrote in message
news:cjr4i05qlv4copqbmdj16h4dlnbq10k6jd@4ax.com...
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians* atheists
if they disagree with you! you have not bothered to stop and _think_ for
two seconds about who says what - as soon as someone posts even a slightly
different opinion, YOU go off about how they are atheists, and how they
are flaming everyone. the funny thing is that you are always the first
one to flame _them_, the first one to crosspost into other newsgroups,
and the first to personally attack! you ignore everything that doesn't
fit into your little world-view, and fanatically reject all else!
if you can't accept ngs as opportunities for *discussion* then why
don't you leave?
and as far as your "christian" ngs being "pristine", remember that Jesus
kicked it with the sinners too! except that he turned a lot more cheek
with a lot more self-control and aplomb than you have!
i'm now waiting for the return post that will ignore 9/10ths of what
i've said, call me an atheist proselytizing atheist drivel, personally
attack me and accuse me of some imagined crime or behavior, then tell
me i need to "read below" for some stupid quote from the bible that won't
make any sense to the topic on hand.
Psst... you're only stroking his ego and with the excitement this will
render, you may as well stroke his member.
--
Davidwd
Hahahahaha! Stroke his member and Father Frank will eat from your well! :)
WJ
~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
19 Aug 2004 02:07:29 AM |
|
|
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:EoPUc.100628$sb.29403@nntp-post.primus.ca...
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists
whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians* atheists
if they disagree with you!
Wrong!!!! You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as
much as you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the reference
of everything I say.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
Plain Old (but normal) Frank Bull *****!
It has been pointed out, OVER AND OVER, you call "atheist" ANYONE who dares
disagree with you!
As a mater of fact, people have ALREADY, many times, reposted YOUR OWN
POSTS, showing your arrogance and hypocrisy!
What are your posting rules?
The truth, AND standing up for my OWN words. ...which is more than I can say
for you, *****!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Frank" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
19 Aug 2004 09:05:19 AM |
|
|
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:10i8kdm2htfre00@corp.supernews.com...
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:EoPUc.100628$sb.29403@nntp-post.primus.ca...
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists
whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians*
atheists
if they disagree with you!
Wrong!!!! You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as
much as you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the
reference
of everything I say.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
Plain Old (but normal) Frank Bull *****!
It has been pointed out, OVER AND OVER, you call "atheist" ANYONE who
dares
disagree with you!
As a mater of fact, people have ALREADY, many times, reposted YOUR OWN
POSTS, showing your arrogance and hypocrisy!
What are your posting rules?
The truth, AND standing up for my OWN words. ...which is more than I can
say
for you, *****!
"*****" Indeed!!!! You are flaming the poster again and this belongs
in flame NGs, not our pristine Christian NGs. I will post you over to some.
They will love your rich vocabulary of insulting epithets. LOL
.
|
|
|
| User: "St. Jacknapes" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
20 Aug 2004 04:18:05 AM |
|
|
%In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Pastor Frank said...%
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:10i8kdm2htfre00@corp.supernews.com...
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:EoPUc.100628$sb.29403@nntp-post.primus.ca...
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists
whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians*
atheists
if they disagree with you!
Wrong!!!! You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as
much as you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the
reference
of everything I say.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
Plain Old (but normal) Frank Bull *****!
It has been pointed out, OVER AND OVER, you call "atheist" ANYONE who
dares
disagree with you!
As a mater of fact, people have ALREADY, many times, reposted YOUR OWN
POSTS, showing your arrogance and hypocrisy!
What are your posting rules?
The truth, AND standing up for my OWN words. ...which is more than I can
say
for you, *****!
"*****" Indeed!!!! You are flaming the poster again and this belongs
in flame NGs, not our pristine Christian NGs. I will post you over to some.
They will love your rich vocabulary of insulting epithets. LOL
So who's this troll that's cloned Pastor Frank?
--
St. Jackanapes
http://www.jackanapes.ws
.
|
|
|
| User: "bluskie" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
20 Aug 2004 06:02:42 PM |
|
|
St. Jacknapes <blowme@jesus.78668org> wrote in message news:<cg4fki$bl0$0@pita.alt.net>...
%In alt.flame.jesus.christ, Pastor Frank said...%
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:10i8kdm2htfre00@corp.supernews.com...
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:EoPUc.100628$sb.29403@nntp-post.primus.ca...
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists
whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians*
atheists
if they disagree with you!
Wrong!!!! You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as
much as you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the
reference
of everything I say.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
Plain Old (but normal) Frank Bull *****!
It has been pointed out, OVER AND OVER, you call "atheist" ANYONE who
dares
disagree with you!
As a mater of fact, people have ALREADY, many times, reposted YOUR OWN
POSTS, showing your arrogance and hypocrisy!
What are your posting rules?
The truth, AND standing up for my OWN words. ...which is more than I can
say
for you, *****!
"*****" Indeed!!!! You are flaming the poster again and this belongs
in flame NGs, not our pristine Christian NGs. I will post you over to some.
They will love your rich vocabulary of insulting epithets. LOL
So who's this troll that's cloned Pastor Frank?
the same guy that cloned ed oldguytech?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Saul_Sabia" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
18 Aug 2004 11:56:43 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message news:<EoPUc.100628$sb.29403@nntp-post.primus.ca>...
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians* atheists
if they disagree with you!
Wrong!!!! You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as
much as you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the reference
of everything I say.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
What are your posting rules?
rules of posting, my *****! (actually quite funny when you take the comma out)
as much as you hate to admit it, you attack. alan, for instance, is
christian, yet you call him an atheist. steel wolf may not be christian
necessarily, but he's certainly not an atheist, yet you call him that
all the time. have you ever asked him what he believes? no... hmm...
_you_, not the rest of us, YOU, are the one who puts forth his opinions
and attacks all others when they disagree with you. i waver between atheism
and agnosticism, that is obvious. yet even when i'm not in 'atheist attack!'
mode, you still slander me! why?
you never attack anyone who posts in regards to christ? well, i hate to
break it to you, but that involves atheists who disagree with your
christian beliefs, who raise valid concerns with your beliefs, and
point out the wrongful things you say and do on these ngs!
my question to _you_ is why, if you don't answer any atheist posts,
do you, good sir, continually answer them, say "stop proselytizing atheism
in our pristine christian ngs" and then post them over to atheist
newsgroups?!?!?
i noticed you have avoided the rest of this thread. amazingly enough.
are you a coward, as well as a hypocrite?
i'm sure most of us _would_ accept an apology, if you were willing to
change your ways and be right with your self-professed christian morals.
all it takes is just _listening_ for five seconds, instead of accusing
and going off spuriously! maybe ask questions like "so why would you
say that, when scripture xx:xx says ... ?" that's called DEBATE, and is
a critical part of the learning and communicating process.
just IGNORE the trolls, and don't BE one. it's hard, really it is! your
sensibilities get inflamed, passions run high, the juices start dribbling,
and you want to defend your faith... perfectly natural, in a primal,
unevolved sort of way. instead, take a deep breath, and refute that person
on logical terms.
instead of calling them an illogical fuckwit, maybe respond logically
to what they have to say?
i mean, unless you don't have anything logically to say. when you can't
say anything, of course i suppose it would be natural to start calling
people names.
but you wouldn't stoop that low, no, would you pastor frank?
(there was seriously no sarcasm in that sentence. seriously.)
i expect a response, something like : "i don't have the time to respond
to each and every challenge to my faith, i just put myself out there and
represent the lord and only have the time to speak with those who believe
like i do."
if you don't have the time to respond coherently or logically,
why are you here?
jesus spent a great deal of his time with the common folk, the
common sinners... not condemning them or ignoring them, which would've
gotten him nowhere, but by showing them that he understood where
they were coming from, and responded to them in a thoughtful,
heartfelt, compassionate way. (you said he was a psychologist, right?)
if you can't do that, you will never bring any others
to the kingdom of god.
all you will do is show other christians how arrogant and
self-righteous you are, and show people who _might_ think
about believing, like me, how stupid the idea must actually
be.
i've gone on long enough. if you don't get it by now what i'm
trying to say to you, you won't ever. maybe god will take over
for me then. assuming Odin cares one whit about you,
you ripe candidate for vulture-fodder, you.
Saul
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Frank" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
19 Aug 2004 09:00:09 AM |
|
|
"Saul_Sabia" <saul_sabia@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:262c34a5.0408182056.2ee4eeda@posting.google.com...
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:<EoPUc.100628$sb.29403@nntp-post.primus.ca>...
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists
whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians*
atheists
if they disagree with you!
Wrong!!!! You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as
much as you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the
reference
of everything I say.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
What are your posting rules?
rules of posting, my *****! (actually quite funny when you take the comma
out)
as much as you hate to admit it, you attack. alan, for instance, is
christian, yet you call him an atheist. steel wolf may not be christian
necessarily, but he's certainly not an atheist, yet you call him that
all the time. have you ever asked him what he believes? no... hmm...
_you_, not the rest of us, YOU, are the one who puts forth his opinions
and attacks all others when they disagree with you. i waver between
atheism
and agnosticism, that is obvious. yet even when i'm not in 'atheist
attack!'
mode, you still slander me! why?
you never attack anyone who posts in regards to christ? well, i hate to
break it to you, but that involves atheists who disagree with your
christian beliefs, who raise valid concerns with your beliefs, and
point out the wrongful things you say and do on these ngs!
my question to _you_ is why, if you don't answer any atheist posts,
do you, good sir, continually answer them, say "stop proselytizing atheism
in our pristine christian ngs" and then post them over to atheist
newsgroups?!?!?
i noticed you have avoided the rest of this thread. amazingly enough.
are you a coward, as well as a hypocrite?
i'm sure most of us _would_ accept an apology, if you were willing to
change your ways and be right with your self-professed christian morals.
all it takes is just _listening_ for five seconds, instead of accusing
and going off spuriously! maybe ask questions like "so why would you
say that, when scripture xx:xx says ... ?" that's called DEBATE, and is
a critical part of the learning and communicating process.
just IGNORE the trolls, and don't BE one. it's hard, really it is! your
sensibilities get inflamed, passions run high, the juices start dribbling,
and you want to defend your faith... perfectly natural, in a primal,
unevolved sort of way. instead, take a deep breath, and refute that person
on logical terms.
instead of calling them an illogical fuckwit, maybe respond logically
to what they have to say?
i mean, unless you don't have anything logically to say. when you can't
say anything, of course i suppose it would be natural to start calling
people names.
but you wouldn't stoop that low, no, would you pastor frank?
(there was seriously no sarcasm in that sentence. seriously.)
i expect a response, something like : "i don't have the time to respond
to each and every challenge to my faith, i just put myself out there and
represent the lord and only have the time to speak with those who believe
like i do."
if you don't have the time to respond coherently or logically,
why are you here?
jesus spent a great deal of his time with the common folk, the
common sinners... not condemning them or ignoring them, which would've
gotten him nowhere, but by showing them that he understood where
they were coming from, and responded to them in a thoughtful,
heartfelt, compassionate way. (you said he was a psychologist, right?)
if you can't do that, you will never bring any others
to the kingdom of god.
all you will do is show other christians how arrogant and
self-righteous you are, and show people who _might_ think
about believing, like me, how stupid the idea must actually
be.
i've gone on long enough. if you don't get it by now what i'm
trying to say to you, you won't ever. maybe god will take over
for me then. assuming Odin cares one whit about you,
you ripe candidate for vulture-fodder, you.
Saul
You don't tell us why you promote and proselytize for atheism, yet want
us to believe you are "not an atheist"? As Christians we always have to be
on guard for Satan's minions infiltrating our ranks. We recognise them when
they call themselves Christians or "not atheist" yet being down on Christ,
Christians, etc. and doing, justifying and promoting the opposite from what
Christ preached. Satan is a liar and the father of all lies and when we see
lies against Christ or us, we know we are talking to one Satan possessed.
Stick to debating rules, no ad hominem, no trashing and no flaming and
everything you say referenced to authoritative text and we get along just
fine. "you ripe candidate for culture-fodder, you" indeed!!!!!!! The latter
being flames again, I post you over to some flame groups which get their
jollies from such trashing and flaming.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BMR" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
20 Aug 2004 11:59:00 AM |
|
|
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:rG5Vc.102551$TB3.81667@nntp-post.primus.ca...
You don't tell us why you promote and proselytize for atheism, yet
want
us to believe you are "not an atheist"? As Christians we always have to be
on guard for Satan's minions infiltrating our ranks. We recognise them
when
they call themselves Christians or "not atheist" yet being down on
Christ,
Christians, etc. and doing, justifying and promoting the opposite from
what
Christ preached. Satan is a liar and the father of all lies and when we
see
lies against Christ or us, we know we are talking to one Satan possessed.
Stick to debating rules, no ad hominem, no trashing and no flaming and
everything you say referenced to authoritative text and we get along just
fine. "you ripe candidate for culture-fodder, you" indeed!!!!!!! The
latter
being flames again, I post you over to some flame groups which get their
jollies from such trashing and flaming.
Excuse me if I might interfere with your private concerns... that may
involve any "misbeliever". And sorry for my sloppy english; it isn't my
language, but I guess you'll be able to catch the sense anyway.
It is always a pleasure to have a peek at your funny "group", at least to
have some sane hours of laughs to forget the lies, the tragedies, and the
scams flowing from the most ridiculous, absurd, nonsensical superstition
ever brought in the world. But alas, laughs are not yet a way to forget
completely; one might laugh about both your ludicrous pretenses and
folkloristic absurdities, not yet about their effects.
Indeed, people believing in absurdities, but having the needs to prop a ng
just to ridiculize atheism, are a real scandal to the reason, besides to
mankind as a whole.
Are you soldiers for god, then? Oh well, so we see the omnipotent par
excellence having some needs to be defended by its "creatures", that is men,
"these worms, these nullities" (Job's pal says this)... maybe he's busy
doing something much more important, than to pay heed to such "offenses";
so, better you wait for his return, in order to get his counseil instead of
acting through "his" holy writ. Otherwise, you, being nothing but "worms",
you might misunderstand a so perfect legacy...
It is amazing that "Satan" didn't yet conquered a world inhabited by such
wretches, although it is much more probable that he's caring to let it roll
away just because of this.
Go in peace: if you can...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
19 Aug 2004 05:06:33 PM |
|
|
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message news:<rG5Vc.102551$TB3.81667@nntp-post.primus.ca>...
*****.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Saul_Sabia" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
21 Aug 2004 05:38:25 AM |
|
|
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message news:<rG5Vc.102551$TB3.81667@nntp-post.primus.ca>...
"Saul_Sabia" <saul_sabia@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:262c34a5.0408182056.2ee4eeda@posting.google.com...
"Pastor Frank" <PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote in message
news:<EoPUc.100628$sb.29403@nntp-post.primus.ca>...
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists
whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians*
atheists
if they disagree with you!
Wrong!!!! You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as
much as you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the
reference
of everything I say.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
What are your posting rules?
rules of posting, my *****! (actually quite funny when you take the comma
out)
as much as you hate to admit it, you attack. alan, for instance, is
christian, yet you call him an atheist. steel wolf may not be christian
necessarily, but he's certainly not an atheist, yet you call him that
all the time. have you ever asked him what he believes? no... hmm...
_you_, not the rest of us, YOU, are the one who puts forth his opinions
and attacks all others when they disagree with you. i waver between
atheism
and agnosticism, that is obvious. yet even when i'm not in 'atheist
attack!'
mode, you still slander me! why?
you never attack anyone who posts in regards to christ? well, i hate to
break it to you, but that involves atheists who disagree with your
christian beliefs, who raise valid concerns with your beliefs, and
point out the wrongful things you say and do on these ngs!
my question to _you_ is why, if you don't answer any atheist posts,
do you, good sir, continually answer them, say "stop proselytizing atheism
in our pristine christian ngs" and then post them over to atheist
newsgroups?!?!?
i noticed you have avoided the rest of this thread. amazingly enough.
are you a coward, as well as a hypocrite?
i'm sure most of us _would_ accept an apology, if you were willing to
change your ways and be right with your self-professed christian morals.
all it takes is just _listening_ for five seconds, instead of accusing
and going off spuriously! maybe ask questions like "so why would you
say that, when scripture xx:xx says ... ?" that's called DEBATE, and is
a critical part of the learning and communicating process.
just IGNORE the trolls, and don't BE one. it's hard, really it is! your
sensibilities get inflamed, passions run high, the juices start dribbling,
and you want to defend your faith... perfectly natural, in a primal,
unevolved sort of way. instead, take a deep breath, and refute that person
on logical terms.
instead of calling them an illogical fuckwit, maybe respond logically
to what they have to say?
i mean, unless you don't have anything logically to say. when you can't
say anything, of course i suppose it would be natural to start calling
people names.
but you wouldn't stoop that low, no, would you pastor frank?
(there was seriously no sarcasm in that sentence. seriously.)
i expect a response, something like : "i don't have the time to respond
to each and every challenge to my faith, i just put myself out there and
represent the lord and only have the time to speak with those who believe
like i do."
if you don't have the time to respond coherently or logically,
why are you here?
jesus spent a great deal of his time with the common folk, the
common sinners... not condemning them or ignoring them, which would've
gotten him nowhere, but by showing them that he understood where
they were coming from, and responded to them in a thoughtful,
heartfelt, compassionate way. (you said he was a psychologist, right?)
if you can't do that, you will never bring any others
to the kingdom of god.
all you will do is show other christians how arrogant and
self-righteous you are, and show people who _might_ think
about believing, like me, how stupid the idea must actually
be.
i've gone on long enough. if you don't get it by now what i'm
trying to say to you, you won't ever. maybe god will take over
for me then. assuming Odin cares one whit about you,
you ripe candidate for vulture-fodder, you.
Saul
You don't tell us why you promote and proselytize for atheism, yet want
us to believe you are "not an atheist"?
you don't get it, do you? atheism is not the only alternative to
christianity...
As Christians we always have to be on guard for Satan's minions
infiltrating our ranks. We recognise them when they call themselves
Christians or "not atheist" yet being down on Christ, Christians,
etc. and doing, justifying and promoting the opposite from what
Christ preached. Satan is a liar and the father of all lies and
when we see lies against Christ or us, we know we are talking to
one Satan possessed.
so by your definition, any christian who disagrees with you is
probably satan-possessed, because they promote something opposite
of what you believe. how paranoid!
Stick to debating rules, no ad hominem, no trashing and no flaming and
everything you say referenced to authoritative text and we get along just
fine. "you ripe candidate for culture-fodder, you" indeed!!!!!!! The latter
being flames again, I post you over to some flame groups which get their
jollies from such trashing and flaming.
"vulture-fodder" not culture-fodder.
and as always, you have ignored 9/10ths of what i posted and latched
on to one or two phrases and spouted off from them.
i'm done believing that you are an open-minded person.
i'm done believing that you are not a troll.
i'm done believing that you aren't a self-righteous, self-deluded
little man.
you take about debating, but you don't listen enough to debate.
you take about no flaming and no trashing, but you do it too.
since i don't believe any text is really all that "authoritative",
i can't really oblige you there. but you don't, either, so i don't
feel too bad. most of the time, as i've said at least twice before,
you post some long scripture in your sig and vaguely try and relate
it to your post.
whatever. i tried, i guess you can lead a troll to the bridge but
you can't throw him off it without him really liking it.
Sault
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
21 Aug 2004 01:40:33 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 03:38:25 -0700 in episode
<262c34a5.0408210238.5bd65003@posting.google.com> we saw our hero
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia):
so by your definition, any christian who disagrees with you is probably
satan-possessed, because they promote something opposite of what you
believe. how paranoid!
But that *is what he means.
Also, "atheist" means "disagrees with Lord Almighty, Defender of the One
True Faith Frank."
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Steel Wolf" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
18 Aug 2004 06:25:31 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:58:03 -0400, "Pastor Frank"
<PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote:
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as much as
you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the reference
of everything I say.
The Bible does not exist in a vacuum. As with any other text, and
*especially* with texts that are heavy on parables and metaphor such
as the Bible, meaning cannot exist without interpretation. This is a
basic tenet of Biblical hermeneutics. To speak of disagreeing with
the Bible, over and above disagreeing with a specific interpretation
of the Bible, is therefore meaningless.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
Then you have failed miserably.
--
http://axismundi.wersh.com
"Homo homini lupus." -- Plautus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Zerubbabel" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
19 Aug 2004 08:16:31 PM |
|
|
"meaning cannot exist without interpretation"??? Says who? Sounds like the
foolish question: "if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear
it, does it make a sound?" Such statements betray ones deification of man.
Man is not the measure of all things, nor is the Bible's meaning dependent
of man's interpretation. For, in fact, and contrary to the presupositions
inherent in such notions, GOD EXISTS and He has spoken. In the final
analysis, your or my interpretation is of no account; it is only GOD'S
viewpoint that truly matters. True hermeneutics involves trying to push
past our sin and the traditions that blind us and prevent us from seeing
what GOD has clearly and openly stated.
It is perfectly consistent and logical for Christians to disagree over
interpretation, recognizing our fallen state, and yet insist that all who
love the Lord must agree that His Word is the authority. The problem is not
with God's speach but with our fingers stuck in our ears.
"The Steel Wolf" <steelwolf1@cox.net> wrote in message
news:p6p7i01oqef8o67bhaambss7a52t2l5ocs@4ax.com...
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:58:03 -0400, "Pastor Frank"
<PastorFrank@Christfirst.com> wrote:
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia) wrote:
You can "disagree" with me over Biblical interpretation as much as
you want, but not over the Bible itself, for that is the reference
of everything I say.
The Bible does not exist in a vacuum. As with any other text, and
*especially* with texts that are heavy on parables and metaphor such
as the Bible, meaning cannot exist without interpretation. This is a
basic tenet of Biblical hermeneutics. To speak of disagreeing with
the Bible, over and above disagreeing with a specific interpretation
of the Bible, is therefore meaningless.
I NEVER attack anyone who posts in regards to Christ and His
Christianity to our pristine Christian NGs, and aim to never answer ANY
atheist post that has atheist NGs in the header.
Then you have failed miserably.
--
http://axismundi.wersh.com
"Homo homini lupus." -- Plautus
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Steel Wolf" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
20 Aug 2004 02:55:45 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 18:16:31 -0700, "Zerubbabel"
<stevea@awesomenet.net> wrote:
"meaning cannot exist without interpretation"??? Says who?
It's a fundamental premise of hermeneutics. There is no communication
without context, and hermeneutical interpretation is the attempt to
discern the appropriate context within a given text.
Man is not the measure of all things
Whatever your feelings on the philosophy of Protagoras, the latter has
little bearing on textual interpretation.
nor is the Bible's meaning dependent of man's interpretation.
So do you mean to tell me that a painting, or a piece of poetry, or a
great song, are all completely unambiguous in their meaning, and mean
only what the artist or poet wishes it to mean? A person can never
read something into a work that is completely other than the
originator intended? I find that rather implausible.
Meaning is a collaborative effort. It is neither the sole province of
the author, as you seem to be claiming; nor is it the sole province of
the reader, as you seem to think I am claiming.
For, in fact, and contrary to the presupositions inherent in such
notions, GOD EXISTS and He has spoken.
I would not disagree with either of those claims. I would not agree,
however, that the Bible represents a perfect record of His speech.
In the final analysis, your or my interpretation is of no account;
it is only GOD'S viewpoint that truly matters.
And, assuming for the purposes of discussion that the Bible is the
inerrant word of God, how is it that we determine God's viewpoint?
By interpretation, of course.
The only way you can get around this is by using a very bizarre
definition of the word 'interpretation', in which it does not pertain
to attempts to discern the authorial intent behind a given text.
True hermeneutics involves trying to push past our sin and the
traditions that blind us and prevent us from seeing what GOD has
clearly and openly stated.
Hermeneutics is not a solely Biblical discipline, nor is Biblical
hermeneutics unique from the rest. Your definition seems to me far
too narrowly specific to be useful.
It is perfectly consistent and logical for Christians to disagree over
interpretation, recognizing our fallen state, and yet insist that all who
love the Lord must agree that His Word is the authority.
Consistent? Yes. Logical? Yes. Correct? That's up for debate.
The problem is not with God's speach but with our fingers stuck in
our ears.
Perhaps so, but we are not going to circumvent this problem by
minimising the role of our own interpretation in determining the
meaning behind Biblical teaching.
--
http://axismundi.wersh.com
Ex Deo nascimur, in Jesu morimur, per Spiritum Sanctum reviviscimus.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Zerubbabel" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
20 Aug 2004 01:17:08 PM |
|
|
Well, I guess it depends on whether your regard hermeneutics as a guide (man
made) for proper biblical interpretation or the Authority for
interpretation.
Its the same problem as the principle dispute of the Reformation. Where is
Authority located?
Modern man has made everything homo-concentric (no pun intended). But this
is silly, and carries the implicit assumption that God does not exist. I
may say (not wearing my glasses), 'the room is fuzzy.' But it is not! It
only look fuzzy, and that only to me.
The same proble is betrayed by Schroedenger's Cat (my spelling is wrong).
He postulated that the existence of the cat was dependent of the presence of
the observer. For the Christian, the question become moot, because one
universal, eternal observer exists.
Now, my biblical interpretation may be fuzzy because of my glasses, but only
with the advent of modern-modern man would it be argued that the problem is
with the text and not my eyes.
The same this has permiated academia. With historical deconstructionism,
what the author intended to communicate is of little importance, it is only
what the text means to ME that matters.
This attitude permeates modern culture and even fundamentalist churchianity.
Too many times, one hears, "well, this is what that means to me", as if, the
search for personal meaning is the great purpose of all existence.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Steel Wolf" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
20 Aug 2004 06:37:34 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 11:17:08 -0700, "Zerubbabel"
<stevea@awesomenet.net> wrote:
Well, I guess it depends on whether your regard hermeneutics as a
guide (man made) for proper biblical interpretation or the Authority
for interpretation.
Given that hermeneutics *is* in fact a man-made literary and
philosophical discipline devoted to textual interpretation, if one
regards hermeneutics as the latter one does so wrongly. It's just a
matter of definition.
The problem of authority is an absolutely massive issue in any sort of
theology, and in Christian theology especially--but it is a different
matter from that of hermeneutics.
Modern man has made everything homo-concentric (no pun intended).
I absolutely agree with you. (I tend generally to see the word
'anthropocentric' used instead, though, just as a minor terminological
nit-pick.) But then, given that we are only able to relate to things
as the human beings that we are, is this really so surprising--and for
that matter, could it ever be any other way? I have a hard time
seeing how it could be so, as long as we only experience life and
reality as human beings instead of as something else.
But this is silly, and carries the implicit assumption that God does
not exist.
Not at all. Even those who believe in God have historically been very
anthropocentric in, for example, the language that they use to
describe God. The Bible, especially in the Old Testament, portrays
God in a very human manner. As a perfectly good, omniscient,
omnipotent, and omnipresent humanlike being, to be sure--but as a
humanlike being nonetheless.
We do the same thing with animals. Even though we don't have access
to their mental states to know what animals are thinking, we say that
they are happy, or upset, or angry, or what have you--because their
behaviour appears to be similar to our own. We assume that there is
some fundamental mental similarity there between them and ourselves,
whether or not this similarity actually exists. But because we only
have our own mental states and our own experiences from which to make
evaluations, we really aren't capable of doing any differently.
The same proble is betrayed by Schroedenger's Cat (my spelling is
wrong). He postulated that the existence of the cat was dependent
of the presence of the observer. For the Christian, the question
become moot, because one universal, eternal observer exists.
Well, technically it wasn't the *existence* of the cat that was
dependent on the presence of the observer. Schrödinger used the
famous cat example to illustrate the nature of quanta: things which
exist in states that are unknown to us. In actuality, even if there
is no divine observer, the cat *is* either alive or dead, and this
doesn't change depending on whether it is observed. But to the
observer who has not yet looked in the box to see which it is, the
cat's state of being alive exists in a quantum state--meaning that it
simply isn't known.
Now, my biblical interpretation may be fuzzy because of my glasses,
but only with the advent of modern-modern man would it be argued
that the problem is with the text and not my eyes.
Oh, not at all. I think this tends to be an unfortunate *reading* of
postmodernism, rather than the postmodern stance in itself.
Interpretation (at least in my opinion) isn't about the text per se,
but rather which eyes--or which set of glasses, to extend your
metaphor--you view the Bible through. The trick is determining which
one is the best to use with a given text--and *that's* more what
hermeneutics and interpretation in general are about.
With historical deconstructionism, what the author intended to
communicate is of little importance, it is only what the text means
to ME that matters.
I'm not an historian, and so I can't profess to know anything about
the methodology currently being used in that field. My understanding
of deconstructionism in general, though, is that it's more about
looking at what cultural ideas are reflected in a given text rather
than looking at the content of the text as a unified whole, and rather
than simply the meaning that the individual deconstructionist reads
into the text. If you're familiar with the idea of memes, my
impression is almost that deconstructionism is about identifying memes
and tracing their propagation. But then I'm not more than passingly
familiar with Derrida and his deconstructionist philosophy either, so
I could be well off the mark on that.
Too many times, one hears, "well, this is what that means to me", as
if, the search for personal meaning is the great purpose of all
existence.
I think you're absolutely right in that we've tended to make religion
subjective while at the same time holding on to pretenses of
objectivity--which ends up really getting into problems. At the same
time, though, I think that the ability to take individual meaning from
religion in general and from the Bible specifically is one of
Christianity's strong points, adaptively speaking. As cultural and
historical views have changed over the centuries, many different views
of Christianity have arisen and then passed into obscurity, but the
ability for this to happen is in my opinion one of the reasons why it
has lasted so long and experienced the degree of success that it has.
I suppose that really it's a balancing act: the challenge inherent in
Christianity, and I suppose in all genuine religion per se, is to
strike a balance between the communal and the individual. If a
religion is so objectified that it only works within the context of a
certain community, then the religion will always be only as large as
that community itself is, and runs the risk of dying off should the
community change or disappear. If it's so subjectified that it *has*
no sense of community, however, you end up with a religion that is
essentially meaningless save to your own self. The trick is finding
the middle ground.
--
http://axismundi.wersh.com
"Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game
because they almost always turn out to be--or to be indistinguishable
from--self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possesing infinite amounts of
free time." -- Neal Stephenson, _Cryptonomicon_
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
16 Aug 2004 10:27:57 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 15:17:23 -0700 in episode
<262c34a5.0408161417.2f53cdea@posting.google.com> we saw our hero
saul_sabia@yahoo.com (Saul_Sabia):
Atheism
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=atheist
one who disbelieves or denies the existence of god or gods. a godless
person.
Theism
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=theist
Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal
God as creator and ruler of the world.
so if someone believes in a _pagan_ god, like Zeus, Jupiter, Mithra, Bob
the Omnificent, Jahweh, or Jesus, then that person must be a THEIST.
if someone does not believe in the existence of gods, like a buddhist, or
possibly an agnostic, that person is an ATHEIST.
Frank, i am getting tired of you calling the rest of us atheists whenever
we disagree with you! you have been calling other *Christians* atheists if
they disagree with you!
Frank is at his most vicious when a Christian disagrees with him. Some of
us atheists think it's because Frank actually is an atheist but can't come
to terms with it and is afraid Christians will find out he's a fraud who
can't bring himself to actually believe in god.
you have not bothered to stop and _think_ for two
seconds about who says what - as soon as someone posts even a slightly
different opinion, YOU go off about how they are atheists, and how they
are flaming everyone. the funny thing is that you are always the first one
to flame _them_, the first one to crosspost into other newsgroups, and the
first to personally attack! you ignore everything that doesn't fit into
your little world-view, and fanatically reject all else!
Yep. First one to do everything he accuses everybody else of.
if you can't accept ngs as opportunities for *discussion* then why don't
you leave?
and as far as your "christian" ngs being "pristine", remember that Jesus
kicked it with the sinners too! except that he turned a lot more cheek
with a lot more self-control and aplomb than you have!
i'm now waiting for the return post that will ignore 9/10ths of what i've
said, call me an atheist proselytizing atheist drivel, personally attack
me and accuse me of some imagined crime or behavior, then tell me i need
to "read below" for some stupid quote from the bible that won't make any
sense to the topic on hand.
*Now you get it!
Welcome to Planet Frank. It's a weird place lemme tell ya...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
--------------------------------------------------
"Come to think of it, there are already a million
monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet
is NOTHING like Shakespeare!" -- Blair Houghton
.
|
|
|
| User: "Boxer" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
16 Aug 2004 11:11:35 PM |
|
|
Hi Father Frank: LOL
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: definition of atheism vs. theism (for pastor frank) |
16 Aug 2004 11:08:56 PM |
|
|
One day in alt.atheism, Also Sprach Mark K. Bilbo:
Welcome to Planet Frank. It's a weird place lemme tell ya...
Oh good, you retained the crossposting to the pristine christian
newsgroups.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
______________
The whole foundation of Christianity is based on the idea that
intellectualism is the work of the Devil. Remember the apple on the tree?
Okay, it was the Tree of Knowledge. "You eat this apple, you're going to be
as smart as God. We can't have that."
[Frank Zappa]
.
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|