Re: No evidence of God yet...

Religions > Bible > Re: No evidence of God yet...

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 17 of 55

Topic:	Religions > Bible
User:	"John Rohrer"
Date:	23 Jan 2004 12:03:53 AM
Object:	Re: No evidence of God yet...

Douglas wrote:

I am an agnostic. Now that that's out of the way, I do not believe that
the God portrayed in Christian mythology or any other religion is real or
even close. Prayer and worship is just a waste of time because no God is
listening.

Well, there's the power of expectations, hope, self-fulfilling prophecies,
mind-body medicine...what did I leave out...

I thought God was all powerful and perfect. Well this place
(Earth) is a disaster. I am not impressed with his work if that is the
case. I tried to talk to God, but he won't answer me back. He must not
like me.

Well, the bible says He gave us free will, right? As far as your "no reply", it
may be that you're not listening in the right way or in the right frame of mind.
Hey, it's plausible anyway.

All I have to say to a theist is prove it. They will freeze
up...naturally because even they know their beliefs are totally irrational.
They will often come back with "Prove he doesn't exist". The burden of
proof lies in the theist lap. They should convince me he is real, not scare
me into believing he is real with the "threat" of Hell after death. I
believe when you die, you die. No heaven or hell. Just nothing. It will
feel the way you felt before you were born.

I don't know how you can say to such a certain degree. It seems congruent with
common sense and observation, but common sense and observation may not be
equipped to give us any thorough understanding of mortality. Many perspectives
can be taken, and they all make sense to those who take them. For instance,
who's to say that there's nothing to the idea of reincarnation? Who's to say
we're not just the eyes of the universe winking open and shut as we watch
ourselves through the ages? Is the concept of personal identity inherently
misleading? If our identities are functions of our brief, local experience of
the universe, what are the implications? Alternately, if there is a more basic,
essential identity, would that not live in each locus of experience manifested
throughout the universe? ...food for thought anyway.

I can accept that. Theist
can't. So they decided to make up a nice place for good people and a bad
place for bad people. Sounds like this was made up a long time ago to keep
people in line and give them hope that "when I die, I will go to heaven."
Without religion, people would see no reason to live here. Anarchy would
happen.

Perhaps "civilized" culture (where the food is under lock and key) breeds
heirarchy and injustice and suppresses true tribal democracy. If you've toiled
under oppression your whole life while a privileged few commit atrocities with
impunity (as the system enables), divine justice is an understandably welcome
concept. "Keeping the masses in line" sounds to me like an attempt to save a
society whose social bonds were dissolved by and insidious atmosphere of control
and personal entitlement (the dangerous combination which seems to me to be at
the heart of the agricultural revolution which spawned the need for
"salvationist" religions. You see, indigenous cultures (still being extinguished
by civilization's zealous expansion) ascribe to "animistic" religions focused on
the interdependent harmony of life, rather than a way to cope with our current
disequilibruim. If you contest that the alternative is anarchy, I submit the
opinion that heirarchical governmental systems create the suffering which
"salvationist" religions medicate.

Heaven, sounds nice...lets go there and prove it once and for all...oh,
thats right. How convienient. We can't go there alive and there is no
scientific reason to believe in its existence anyway. Heaven is not real.
Period.

Well, who's to say unequivocally that it's not? Or maybe it's all a matter of
perspective. It seems real enough as a metaphor for creating a utopian society.
But then, utopianism seems inherently divisive, as it rejects compromise in
favor of the One Right Way which seems to cause so many conflicts.

God, sounds like an interesting person...I would like to meet him
now...oh, thats right. How convienient. He doesn't talk back and science
has yet to find his radio frequency. Either God doesn't care about us or he
doesn't exist.
Begging for opinions please.

Maybe we *are God in the sense that we're indistinguishably connected to every
perticle in the known universe. Maybe we're trying to playing God all over this
planet. Or maybe, just *maybe, there *is a real God out there who entrusted us
with this fine planet... which will cease to be when Christ returns to send the
non-Christian 2/3 of the planet straight to hell or purgatory along with all of
the Christian sects who happened to be wrong (oops) any any within the *right
faith who weren't quite able to follow all of the rules. Oh yeah, I forgot to
include any sentient beings inhabiting any of the other trillion planets
throughout the universe.Gee, hell sounds like the place to be to meet new
people.
Crossing my fingers,
John
.

User: "Vitruvian"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	05 Mar 2004 12:07:58 AM

Pastor Dave <nospam*-*pastordave38@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<h58f40d0413lvld0ldg2pmua6e9776pnsi@4ax.com>...

On 4 Mar 2004 13:08:58 -0800,
vitruvian@globalfrequency.org (Vitruvian) spake thusly:

No, God never spoke to me at all. Christians are the only ones who
ever told me that the Bible is the final authority.

His word tells you He wrote inspired it.

Circular reasoning. The Koran says the same thing; do you believe it?

Belief isn't relevant. What it says, compared to what
he claims, is.

Please cite the passage(s) that unequivocally say that the current
version of the Bible (all the books currently collated, none of the
apocrypha) is the final authority, as opposed to a vaguely worded
"word and law".
And then again, how is belief not relevant? Even if there is such a
clear statement within the text itself, what is the reason for
believing it, as opposed to similar claims made by other documents? At
some point, one's reading of any scripture is going to intersect with
one's personal experience, whether worldly or spiritual in nature, and
that will lead to some conclusions about the validity of the text.
Billy Goat's conclusions differ from yours, but that doesn't
necessarily mean he's done a poor job of interpreting the text.

You haven't read very carefully, if you're quoting
those passages. Under the New Covenant, we preach the
word to them. If they don't accept it, we leave their
home, etc..

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am
not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till
heaven and earth pass, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from
the law, till all be fulfilled."

Fulfilled is the key word. He did that.

Have heaven and earth passed? This can just as easily be read as
saying that not one jot of the existing law shall pass until
everything is fulfilled at judgement, as per the Revelation of John.

No, it was the natural result of their actions, just
like if a drug addict who has AIDS gets pregnant, the
child will probably have AIDS.

Let's see what the Bible actually says.

Genesis 3:16

"*I* will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing..."

"I" means God. It's not a natural result. It's something God says *He*
will do. The words of the Bible are right there in front of me, and
you are contradicting it. So, I can either believe what you say, or I
can believe what the Bible says. Hmmm. Tough decision. Are you the
final authority, or is the Bible the final authority?

And women have pain during child birth. All you've
done, is prove the Bible correct.

And you're incorrect in stating that it's a natural result as opposed to
God's specific will, according to your own holy book.

I didn't say it either.

I'll just repeat this section here, then, shall I? This was in
reference to Adam and Eve's sin and punishment being passed down to
all future generations, IIRC:

No, it was the natural result of their actions, just
like if a drug addict who has AIDS gets pregnant, the
child will probably have AIDS.

Did too, didn't you?

Once again, you remain willingly ignorant. What state
were they in, before that happened? A state of
condemnation. So if God prevents them from seeing, He
has not changed their state. He has kept it the same.

First of all, that still constitutes *blinding* them. Billy Goat never
claimed to they were previously in a state of grace, just that they
(and he) were seeking to know God. Therefore, their previous state is
irrelevant to the accuracy of Billy Goat's reading of the text. You
are trying to shift the grounds of the debate, arguing against a
position your opponent has in fact never taken.
Furthermore, what about people *starting off* in a state of
condemnation (which is actually true of everyone in your doctrine,
right?) makes it alright (or make sense) to actively prevent them from
changing that state? When you have people who are more than willing
to seek out a god's laws and wishes, and that god willfully *prevents*
them from knowing them, following them, and being saved, it kind of
leaves the impression that that god *wants* those people damned. This
is a far cry from the loving God that wants us all to believe in Him
and be saved that is presented elsewhere. You're not a Calvinist, by
any chance, are you, with all the predestination and strictly limited
number of Elect?
.

User: "Billy Goat"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	04 Mar 2004 06:25:46 PM

Pastor Dave <nospam*-*pastordave38@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<72je40lnlvar9nb0qehh7d603u6hdhjcmv@4ax.com>...

On 3 Mar 2004 19:40:41 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam*-*pastordave38@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<dt9a401tdtkd6f8lm4d0objm5unt51enia@4ax.com>...

On 2 Mar 2004 11:13:34 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Why doesn't God Himself endorse the Bible as the final authority? If
God wants people to trust the Bible as the final authority, He should
say so.

He did. You don't believe Him.

No, God never spoke to me at all. Christians are the only ones who
ever told me that the Bible is the final authority.

His word tells you He wrote inspired it.

So I should believe every book that claims to be the word of God?

You based your opinion on what people were doing, so
don't claim it's common sense that made you conclude
that. Common sense ignores what people do and learns
what God says about what they're doing, when
considering what that faith says.

So when the Bible told me to kill a friend of mine, and all the
Christians around me told me *not* to kill, they were wrong?

The Bible didn't tell you to do that, so your argument
is senseless.

Let's see what the Bible actually says.

Exodus 22:18
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."

"Suffer" means tolerate or allow. See? If I don't kill my friend, I'm
letting her live, which is forbidden by the Bible.

You're doing what my Christian teachers always did. They'd tell me to
follow the Bible, but whenever I tried to do it, they denied what the
Bible said. I shouldn't have expected anything different from you.

Do you think you can trick me? The words of the Bible are right in
front of me. The Bible text is still there, and it does not change.

You haven't read very carefully, if you're quoting
those passages. Under the New Covenant, we preach the
word to them. If they don't accept it, we leave their
home, etc..

Let's see what the Bible actually says.
Matthew 5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one
tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.
5:19
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and
shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of
heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be
called great in the kingdom of heaven.
So you see, under the New Covenant, the law has not changed. Once
again you contradict the Bible.

The Bible only said that Adam and Eve fell. It was God's idea to carry
the consequences over to all of their descendants. Genesis 3:16-19

No, it was the natural result of their actions, just
like if a drug addict who has AIDS gets pregnant, the
child will probably have AIDS.

And women have pain during child birth.

And Genesis 3:16 says God is the one who makes it happen. It is not a
natural result of their actions. You were wrong, and you contradicted
the Bible.

All you've
done, is prove the Bible correct.

I was not trying to prove the Bible wrong.

The Bible told me that God blinds people to Him when He wants them
damned.

No, it doesn't.

Yes, it does. That's what the Bible tells me. Are you contradicting
the Bible? Isaiah 44:12-18, John 12:40. If I see somthing in the
Bible, I'm not going to pretend I don't see it.

It says He kept them in the state they were already in.
Learn the difference.

Let's see what the Bible actually says.

Isaiah 44:18:

"They know not, nor do they discern; *for* He has shut their eyes..."

"For" means because. Everything from Isaiah 44:9 up to this point is
described as a *result* of the blindness. Isaiah 44:18 specifies that
God is the one who shut their eyes, *causing* the blindness. I refuse
to pretend the Bible doesn't say what it says. Why are you trying to
make me deny the words of the Bible?

I thought the rule was to pay attention to no Christian teachings
outside the Bible. Yet here you are, a Christian, trying to teach me.
Do you think you're an exception to the rule?

They did not discern. He keeps them from discerning.
He kept them in the state they were already in.

Then how did they reach that state in the first place?
--Billy
.

User: "Navigator"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	22 Feb 2004 06:18:39 PM

Pastor Dave wrote:

On 21 Feb 2004 15:03:33 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<dkqe30h7lrgjegmv4ucq3rnc49vkcnt7a7@4ax.com>...

On 20 Feb 2004 09:47:21 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message news:<17g630p111rfq8o2d9svfkmvahr6tqmape@4ax.com>...

On 17 Feb 2004 21:02:47 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

"Chris Devol" <xyz@defghijk.lmn> wrote in message news:<4JxYb.8166$WW3.1510@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

Anybody can be directly taught by God. But why would He teach those who
don't want such knowledge?

Saul/Paul was vehemently anti-Christ, and he didn't want such
knowledge. But the Bible says that didn't prevent Jesus from knocking
him off his horse and showing him the light. I don't go around killing
Christians, like Saul did. If God can teach Saul against his will, God
can surely do the same for me. (Or is God waiting for me to become
more evil first?)

Has it occurred to you that He is teaching you now?

Yes, it has. But since the things I'm learning now contradict
Christian teachings, the possibility that God is teaching me those
things opens up a whole new can of worms.

And what is wrong with that? Does something
contradicting Christian teachings mean that the
something that contradicts Christian teachings is
right? That's not a logical approach.

You are the one who suggested that God might be teaching me now. Why
would God teach me things that are not right? It's a pretty disturbing
thought, and it haunted me for years during my adolescence among a
Christian community.

You assume it's God. I said God MAY BE teaching you
now. If He is, that does not mean that anything you
want to type is Godly. God does not contradict
Himself.

And btw, what do you mean by, "Christian teachings"? I
don't go by "Christian teachings". I go by what the
Bible says.

In general, Christians teach what the Bible says. At least they think
they do.

So maybe a Christian teacher just thinks he is teaching
you properly. So why assume he is? Why not go to the
Bible that he claims to be teaching from and see for
yourself? Be a Berean. Acts 17:10-12.

Maybe. In fact, I wasn't sure whether I should have said
"Christian teachings" or "the Bible", because every Christian thinks
they get their teachings from the Bible.

To be honest, my specific "religious experience" contradicted what the
Bible says, but agreed with what Christians *say* the Bible says. It's
confusing.

And irrelevant. You clearly admit that you relied on
people to tell you what the Bible says, instead of
seeing what it says for yourself. And yet, I know that
you were also taught to open, read and study the Bible.

In fact, I have had an experience which I have trouble dismissing as
anything other than contact with God. Yet, the experience seemed to
indicate that Christianity is false. I could give you the details, but
I usually don't bother bringing it up here, because it was a
subjective experience and therefore easily dismissed by people who
wouldn't like its implications.

Read 2 Corinthians 11:12-15.

Hey, *you're* the one who suggested that God is teaching me. Now that
you don't like the teachings, you're changing your mind. I can
understand that.

If you are claiming to have a teaching from God, that
does not make it so. I refer back to Scripture and
find out for myself.

Atheists are very fond of posing themselves as "neutral, open-minded
seekers of truth" while simultaneously expressing intolerant hatred of
the very idea of a God who is personal and who holds them to account for
their thoughts, words, and deeds.

Well, it doesn't look like a true idea. And since I can only believe
things that look true, I can't believe that idea.

Why doesn't it look like a true idea?

For the same reasons just about any religion fails to look true. As
the saying goes, when you understand why you doubt other religions,
you will understand why I doubt yours.

And yet, I do not doubt other religious solely on the
basis of faith, but also of logic.

Exactly. I doubt Christianity on the basis of logic. In fact, doesn't
the Bible say that God's ways are not *meant* to make sense to human
minds?

Carnal minds.

Meaning earthly, or human. Do you have some other kind? Please
demonstrate it.
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 04:43:10 AM

On 17 Feb 2004 21:02:47 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

What persuades each person is different, since it is a
personal matter and God reaches us on a personal level.
For me, it was a recognition of what I really was. I
wasn't a good person, as people like to think of
themselves (and I did also). I was a vile, wretched
sinner and I came to the realization that God could and
would forgive me and change me, if only I would accept
what He did for me 2,000 years ago. I did that and He
did change me. It still took me years to stop fighting
Him, but He is always working on me and has never
forsaken me.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
"One cannot be exposed to the law and order of the
universe without concluding that there must be design
and purpose behind it all... The better we understand
the intracacies of the universe and all it harbors,
the more reason we have found to marvel at the inherent
design upon which it is based... To be forced to
believe only one conclusion --- that everything in the
universe happened by chance --- would violate the very
objectivity of science itself... What random process
could produce the brains of man or the system of the
human eye? They (evolutionists) challenge science to
prove the existence of God. But must we really light
a candle to see the Sun? ... They say they cannot
visualize a designer. Well, can a physicist visualize
an electron? ...What strange rationale makes some
physicists accept the inconceivable electron as real
while refusing to accept the reality of a Designer on
the ground that they cannot conceive Him?"
- Dennis R. Petersen, Unlocking the Mysteries
of Creation, Vol 1
-----= 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: "Robibnikoff"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 07:52:33 AM

In article <p8g630hl1302j9qo55tmph9v7c5l58t0e3@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave says...

On 17 Feb 2004 21:02:47 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

Funny, but I don't need an imaginary friend to be a good person.
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 09:31:43 AM

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:52:33 GMT, Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

In article <p8g630hl1302j9qo55tmph9v7c5l58t0e3@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave says...

On 17 Feb 2004 21:02:47 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

Funny, but I don't need an imaginary friend to be a good person.

You may think you're a good person, but your actions
here say otherwise. You ridicule the faith of others.
Did you think that made you a good person? Trust me,
you would fail a simple "good person" test.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
"Paleontologists are traditionally famous (or infamous)
for reconstructing whole animals from the debris of
death. Mostly they cheat. ...If any event in life's
history resembles man's creation myths, it is this
sudden diversification of marine life when
multicellular organisms took over as the dominant
actors in ecology and evolution. Baffling (and
embarrassing) to Darwin, this event still dazzles us
and stands as a major biological revolution on a par
with the invention of self-replication
and the origin of the eukaryotic cell." (Bengtson,
Stefan, "The Solution to a Jigsaw Puzzle," Nature, vol.
345 (June 28, 1990), pp. 765-766)
-----= 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: "Ineedmoney"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	24 Feb 2004 04:35:52 PM

"Pastor Dave" <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message
news:1917301hso9nbg5ovhn2al1eq7ntv6tr7p@4ax.com...

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:52:33 GMT, Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

In article <p8g630hl1302j9qo55tmph9v7c5l58t0e3@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave

says...

On 17 Feb 2004 21:02:47 -0800,

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

Funny, but I don't need an imaginary friend to be a good person.

And you lie about science, what a great person you are.,
Ed
.

User: "Robibnikoff"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 11:20:15 AM

In article <1917301hso9nbg5ovhn2al1eq7ntv6tr7p@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave says...

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:52:33 GMT, Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

snip

Funny, but I don't need an imaginary friend to be a good person.

You may think you're a good person, but your actions
here say otherwise. You ridicule the faith of others.

And you harass people that don't believe as you do. Does that make YOU a good
person? Hardly.

Did you think that made you a good person?

Because I can think for myself and don't need to rely on mythology to make my
decisions for me? Absolutely.
Trust me,

you would fail a simple "good person" test.

Trust me, I don't give a ***** what you think of me.
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 02:35:28 PM

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:20:15 GMT, Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

In article <1917301hso9nbg5ovhn2al1eq7ntv6tr7p@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave says...

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:52:33 GMT, Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

snip

Funny, but I don't need an imaginary friend to be a good person.

You may think you're a good person, but your actions
here say otherwise. You ridicule the faith of others.

And you harass people that don't believe as you do. Does that make YOU a good
person? Hardly.

How is it harassment to be in a Christian newsgroup and
stand up for Christ? I am not the atheist entering
into a Christian newsgroup to ridicule the faith of
others.

Did you think that made you a good person?

Because I can think for myself and don't need to rely on mythology to make my
decisions for me? Absolutely.

Trust me,

you would fail a simple "good person" test.

Trust me, I don't give a ***** what you think of me.

You just failed, right there. You broke newsgroup
etiquette.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
Part of the message of salvation, is the Creation.
Believing in the Creator. When Paul preached to
those worshipping nature and said... "turn from
these vanities unto the living God, which made
heaven and earth and the sea and all things that
are therein:" - Acts 14:15 Paul believed it too.
-----= 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: "Robibnikoff"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 03:02:19 PM

In article <14j730hkm4bju98bp48grcgtsob8t5ed46@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave says...

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:20:15 GMT, Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

In article <1917301hso9nbg5ovhn2al1eq7ntv6tr7p@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave says...

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:52:33 GMT, Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

snip

Funny, but I don't need an imaginary friend to be a good person.

You may think you're a good person, but your actions
here say otherwise. You ridicule the faith of others.

And you harass people that don't believe as you do. Does that make YOU a good
person? Hardly.

How is it harassment to be in a Christian newsgroup and
stand up for Christ? I am not the atheist entering
into a Christian newsgroup to ridicule the faith of
others.

And I'm an atheist reading this post in alt.atheism. I did not venture into
your newsgroup, wherever you may be.

Did you think that made you a good person?

Because I can think for myself and don't need to rely on mythology to make my
decisions for me? Absolutely.

Trust me,

you would fail a simple "good person" test.

Trust me, I don't give a ***** what you think of me.

You just failed, right there. You broke newsgroup
etiquette.

Which newsgroup would that be, deary? Yours?
Sorry, but I still don't give a ***** what you think of me. Deal with it.
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 05:54:49 AM

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

So you aren't perfect. Nobody is. Why does it take the
story of some creator of the universe killing itself for three days
to make a difference? Perhaps it's the idea of perfection itself,
and killing it, somehow, in your mind, that makes you realize it's
okay or human to be imperfect? Are there any humans in your
life that actually expect you to be perfect? If so, who are they?
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 09:30:32 AM

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:54:49 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

So you aren't perfect. Nobody is. Why does it take the
story of some creator of the universe killing itself for three days
to make a difference?

That isn't an accurate assessment. As for your point,
the fact is, that man is not able to change himself
from being a sinner. You may like to think of yourself
as a good person, but you would fail the test.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
If the solar system was brought about by an accidental
collision, then the appearance of organic life on this
planet was also an accident and the whole evolution of
man was an accident too. If so, then all our thought
processes are mere accidents - the accidental
by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds
for the materialists' and astronomers' as well as for
anyone else's. But if their thoughts - i.e., of
materialism and astronomy - are merely accidental
by-products, why should we believe them to be true?
I see no reason for believing that one accident
should be able to give a correct account of all
the other accidents. - C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock
-----= 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: "Robibnikoff"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 11:21:35 AM

In article <q61730tjkq3vr6i7vnoltshosj212hf6nd@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave says...
snip

That isn't an accurate assessment. As for your point,
the fact is, that man is not able to change himself
from being a sinner.

Personal opinion.
You may like to think of yourself

as a good person, but you would fail the test.

Trust me, no one gives a ***** about your personal opinions.
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo & EAC Spellcaster
#1557
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	18 Feb 2004 02:33:18 PM

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 17:21:35 GMT, Robibnikoff
<nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

In article <q61730tjkq3vr6i7vnoltshosj212hf6nd@4ax.com>, Pastor Dave says...
snip

That isn't an accurate assessment. As for your point,
the fact is, that man is not able to change himself
from being a sinner.

Personal opinion.

Name one.

You may like to think of yourself

as a good person, but you would fail the test.

Trust me, no one gives a ***** about your personal opinions.

Scared?

Of what?

The test. Don't play dumb. It suits you.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
In the beginning, God created...
And He did it in six days and said He did it in six
days (Exodus 20:11). Jesus believed that and
referenced it, in Matthew 19:3-8 and in other places.
The original Hebrew word for "day" ("yom"), is never
used to mean anything but a literal day in the Bible,
when a numerical adjective is present ("second, third,
etc.). Are we to believe that this is somehow the
one exception?
-----= 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: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	21 Feb 2004 10:26:22 AM

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Sin means simply, "to miss the mark". Name one person
who has changed themselves to be able to never "miss
the mark".

Even the famous TV evilangelists miss the mark from time to
time, right Dave? There was the case of Jimmy Swaggart caught
with a hooker, and then there's Jim Baker and Tammy Faye, and
the list goes on and on...
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	22 Feb 2004 09:31:08 AM

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:26:22 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Sin means simply, "to miss the mark". Name one person
who has changed themselves to be able to never "miss
the mark".

Even the famous TV evilangelists miss the mark from time to
time, right Dave?

That's right.

There was the case of Jimmy Swaggart caught
with a hooker, and then there's Jim Baker and Tammy Faye, and
the list goes on and on...

"For the love of money is the root of all evil:..."
- 1 Timothy 6:10
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
"Paleontologists have paid an enormous price for
Darwin's argument. We fancy ourselves as the only true
students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored
account of evolution by natural selection we view our
data as so bad that we almost never see the very
process we profess to study. ...The history of most
fossil species includes tow features particularly
inconsistent with gradualism: 1. Stasis. Most species
exhibit no directional change during their tenure on
earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much
the same as when they disappear; morphological change I
usually limited and directionless. 2. Sudden
appearance. In any local area, a species does not
arise gradually by the steady transformation of its
ancestors; it appears all at once and 'fully formed.'"
(Gould, Stephen J. The Panda's Thumb, 1980, p. 181-182)
-----= 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: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	21 Feb 2004 10:21:46 AM

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Robibnikoff <nospam@newsranger.com> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave says...

That isn't an accurate assessment. As for your point,
the fact is, that man is not able to change himself
from being a sinner.

Personal opinion.

Name one.

Are you one of those porno-loving pastors who likes to look
at naked bodies and feels ever-guilty about it?
Shame shame, Pastor Dave...
I saw a bit on TV the other night that said over 50% of pastors like
to look at porno and feel guilty about it, but they can't seem to stop
themselves.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	19 Feb 2004 11:17:38 AM

Pastor Dave wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

So you aren't perfect. Nobody is. Why does it take the
story of some creator of the universe killing itself for three days
to make a difference?

I realize nobody's perfect, whatever "perfect" means. I don't
know anybody who thinks they're perfect, so why do people
need to pretend that some perfect god died to forgive people
for being imperfect? I don't get it.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	21 Feb 2004 08:29:37 AM

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 17:17:38 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

So you aren't perfect. Nobody is. Why does it take the
story of some creator of the universe killing itself for three days
to make a difference?

Because sin demands judgment.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
-----= 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: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	21 Feb 2004 09:07:22 AM

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

So you aren't perfect. Nobody is. Why does it take the
story of some creator of the universe killing itself for three days
to make a difference?

Because sin demands judgment.

Don't you mean bloodshed, according to the Bible? First it was
animal blood sprinkled around, and then finally a human sacrifice
to God to get rid of all the blood sprinkling. The priests were
obviously tired of it by then anyway, and would rather take money
instead of having to worry about running a butcher shop at the temple.
Jesus wafers and wine are easier to deal with than stinky animals
being dragged into the temple to be butchered, don't you think?
Isaiah 1:10-14
"Hear the word of the LORD ,
you rulers of Sodom;
listen to the law of our God,
you people of Gomorrah!
"The multitude of your sacrifices-
what are they to me?" says the LORD .
"I have more than enough of burnt offerings,
of rams and the fat of fattened animals;
I have no pleasure
in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.
When you come to appear before me,
who has asked this of you,
this trampling of my courts?
Stop bringing meaningless offerings!
Your incense is detestable to me.
New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations-
I cannot bear your evil assemblies.
Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts
my soul hates.
They have become a burden to me;
I am weary of bearing them."
Is this YHWH actually speaking, or someone pretending to
be him?
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "Pastor Dave"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	22 Feb 2004 09:32:02 AM

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 15:07:22 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

(Billy Goat) spake thusly:

Well, what persuaded you? Surely you're not asking atheists to accept
anything less than what persuaded you?

So you aren't perfect. Nobody is. Why does it take the
story of some creator of the universe killing itself for three days
to make a difference?

Because sin demands judgment.

Don't you mean bloodshed, according to the Bible?

You asked. I answered.

Jesus wafers and wine are easier to deal with than stinky animals
being dragged into the temple to be butchered, don't you think?

I don't believe in transubstantiation.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
"The real mark of someone who wants to know the Truth
is not that they expect others to prove it to them,
but that they seek after it themselves." - Chayil
-----= 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: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	22 Feb 2004 11:32:11 AM

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave wrote in alt.atheism

So you aren't perfect. Nobody is. Why does it take the
story of some creator of the universe killing itself for three days
to make a difference?

Because sin demands judgment.

Don't you mean bloodshed, according to the Bible?

You asked. I answered.

Wasn't Jesus supposed to be a blood sacrifice, and it was his
blood that took away sins? That's why people like Mel Gibson
want to make him as bloody as possible, right? And it's why you
hear Christians saying "I'm covered in the blood of Jesus," right?

Jesus wafers and wine are easier to deal with than stinky animals
being dragged into the temple to be butchered, don't you think?

I don't believe in transubstantiation.

Either do I. Do you still eat symbolic Jesus wafers and sip symbolic
Jesus blood these days?
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "Elroy Willis"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	23 Feb 2004 11:47:50 AM

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in alt.atheism

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Pastor Dave <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> spake thusly:

Because sin demands judgment.

Don't you mean bloodshed, according to the Bible?

You asked. I answered.

Is the above accurate, according to both Protestantism and
Catholicism? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
.

User: "Anti-Septic"
Title: Re: Logic, Reason, & God (Was: No evidence of God yet...)	17 Feb 2004 08:11:21 PM

Chris Devol wrote:
[snip]

Atheists are very fond of posing themselves as "neutral,
open-minded seekers of truth" while simultaneously
expressing intolerant hatred of the very idea of a God
who is personal and who holds them to account for their
thoughts, words, and deeds. This hatred they try to disguise
as "lack of evidence" in order to appear to be reasonable...

[snip]

Atheists desiring more respect should consider coming out of
the closet and simply admitting that they hate God, rather
than hiding behind the false mask of "lack of evidence".

[snip]
It's curious that you seem to think you can know what
all atheists think _and_ believe, even when this runs
contrary to what they themselves tell you. When "God"
taught you, did He transfer His omnipotence to you? I
find it extremely arrogant to claim that all atheists
hate God, but are just looking for an excuse to deny,
and/or "express hatred for the very idea of God". The
vast majority of atheists I know don't express hatred
towards any gods because they simply don't believe in
them. Why "hate" something that you don't believe in?
Christians don't like being stereotyped, and, this is
understandably so. Why do so with atheists, when they
vary in personalities and beliefs as often as you do?
You see it as arrogant for atheists to question God's
existence without seeing evidence, but feel it's fine
and dandy to question whether an atheist disbelieves?
.