Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D.


 Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus > Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D.

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 8 of 9

1
 

2
 

3
 

4
 

5
 

6
 

7
 

8
 

9
 
Topic: Science > Prophecies-Of-Nostradamus
User: "Anno Domini"
Date: 21 Feb 2006 01:59:52 AM
Object: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D.
Scientific evidence proves that pre-historic man had some sort of
belief in supernatural deities:
"A growing number of anthropologists and archeo-mythologists argue
that the prevailing ideology of belief in prehistoric Europe and much
of the world was based on the worship of a single earth goddess, who
was assumed to be the fount of all life and who radiated harmony among
all living things." - Al Gore (Earth in the Balance; Ecology and the
Human Spirit)
"Much of the evidence for the existence of this primitive religion
comes from the many thousands of artifacts uncovered in ceremonial
sites. These sites are so widespread that they seem to confirm the
notion that a goddess religion was ubiquitous throughout much of the
world until the antecedents of today's religions - most of which still
have a distinctly masculine orientation - swept out of India and the
Near East, almost obliterating belief in the goddess. The last vestige
of organized goddess worship was eliminated by Christianity" - Al Gore
(Earth in the Balance; Ecology and the Human Spirit)
Yet around 600 B.C. (before the birth of Jesus) and in the name of
"science" men began to employ themselves idiotically in the futile
attempt to remove the notion of the existance of supernatural beings
from the fabric of their current culture...
"The early Greek, or Hellenic, culture marked a different approach to
science. The Ionian natural philosophers removed the gods from the
personal roles they had played in the cosmologies of Babylonia and
Egypt and sought to order the world according to philosophical
principles. Thales of Miletus (6th cent. B.C.) was one of the earliest
of these and contributed to astronomy, geometry, and cosmology. He was
followed by Anaximander, who extended Thales' ideas and proposed that
the universe is composed of four basic elements, i.e., earth, air,
fire, and water; this theory was also taught by Empedocles (5th cent.
B.C.) in Sicily."
http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=Science&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1&linktext=science
Enter Charles Darwin whom many of you think fathered the theory of
evolution. In fact, Darwin pilfered his notions from other scientists,
some who had come before him (such as his grandfather for one):
"Charles Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, was one of the leading
intellectuals of eighteenth century England, a man with a remarkable
array of interests and pursuits. Erasmus Darwin was a respected
physician, a well known poet, philosopher, botanist, and naturalist.
As a naturalist, he formulated one of the first formal theories on
evolution in Zoonomia, or, The Laws of Organic Life (1794-1796). He
also presented his evolutionary ideas in verse, in particular in the
posthumously published poem The Temple of Nature."
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/Edarwin.html
For your reading convenience, I dug up that poem. Here it is:
"Organic life beneath the shoreless waves
Was born and nurs'd in ocean's pearly caves;
First forms minute, unseen by spheric glass,
Move on the mud, or pierce the watery mass;
These, as successive generations bloom,
New powers acquire and larger limbs assume;
Whence countless groups of vegetation spring,
And breathing realms of fin and feet and wing."
- Erasmus Darwin. (The Temple of Nature, 1802)
And here, Darwins grandfather clearly (and falsely, in true false
scientific fashion) suggests that all living things "evolved" from a
common ancestor. And I admit being startled myself upon discovering
this tidbit of history since I'd previously blamed Darwin (Charles)
for single handedly corrupting science and everything good about
Biology (which is my secular profession). Professors will not tell you
this stuff. Anyhow here it is. This quote from Charles Darwins
grandfather proves that Darwin himself does not deserve all the
credit (blame) for coming up with the theory (lie) of human evolution
a.k.a... the lie concerning the "common ancestor" theory:
"Would it be too bold to imagine that, in the great length of time
since the earth began to exist, perhaps millions of ages before the
commencement of the history of mankind would it be too bold to imagine
that all warm-blooded animals have arisen from one living filament,
which the great First Cause endued with animality, with the power of
acquiring new parts, attended with new propensities, directed by
irritations, sensations, volitions and associations, and thus
possessing the faculty of continuing to improve by its own inherent
activity, and of delivering down these improvements by generation to
its posterity, world without end!" Erasmus Darwin (Zoönomia, 1794)
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Erasmus+Darwin
Did you see what he said? Independent organisms which need no God
atall.
So from grandpaw to grandson was the torch to passed in order to
attempt to remove supernatural concepts and possibilities from the
minds of men... all under the disguise of "science":
The lie began to spread (as a tool of the devil) under the name of
"science":
"Ernst Haeckel, much like Herbert Spencer, was always quotable, even
when wrong. Although best known for the famous statement "ontogeny
recapitulates phylogeny", he also coined many words commonly used by
biologists today, such as phylum, phylogeny, and ecology."
"Although trained as a physician, Haeckel abandoned his practice in
1859 after reading Darwin's Origin of Species. Always suspicious of
teleological and mystical explanation, Haeckel used the Origin as
ammunition both to attack entrenched religious dogma and to build his
own unique world view."
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/haeckel.html
On my exact birthday 95 years ago Charles Darwins "Origin of the
Species" was actually published as "On the Origin of Species by Means
of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the
Struggle for Life". So here am I, 95 years later finding myself trying
to correct al these lies as if it were my divine duty.
"First published on 24 November 1859, The Origin of Species (full
title On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the
Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life) by British
naturalist Charles Darwin is one of the pivotal works in scientific
history, and arguably the pre-eminent work in biology. In it, Darwin
makes "one long argument" for his theory that "groups" of organisms,
(which we now call populations) rather than individual organisms,
gradually evolve through the process of natural selection—a mechanism
effectively introduced to the public at large by the book. The work
presents detailed scientific evidence he had accumulated both on the
Voyage of the Beagle in the 1830s and since his return, painstakingly
laying out his theory and refuting the doctrine of "Created kinds"
underlying the theories of Creation biology which were then widely
accepted."
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/The+Origin+of+Species
Of course. Darwin fell to (pseudo) "science" and became an
X-christian. Formerly, he was a Bible quoting Christian....
"During these two years I was led to think much about religion. Whilst
on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, and I remember being
heartily laughed at by several of the officers (though themselves
orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some
point of morality." - Charles Darwin (The Autobiography of Charles
Darwin)
However, the devil has finally conceded that man will never easily
relinquish his belief in the supernatural and will never surrender his
God given rights of "faith".
And thus "science", in this modern day and time reverts to mans
earlier primordial superstitions of goddess worship in a last ditch
effort to deceive him:
"In science, a Gaia theory is a class of scientific models of the
biosphere in which life fosters and maintains suitable conditions for
itself by affecting Earth's environment. The first such theory was
created by the English atmospheric scientist James Lovelock in 1969.
He hypothesized that the living matter of the planet functioned like a
single organism and named this self-regulating living system after the
Greek goddess Gaia."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_theory_%28science%29
Lovelock was no insignificant scientists seeing that he was employed
at NASA's Jet Propulslsion Lab:

"A lifelong inventor, some of his inventions were adopted by NASA in
their program of planetary exploration. It was while working for NASA
that Lovelock developed the Gaia Hypothesis."
"James Lovelock is the author of approximately 200 scientific papers,
distributed almost equally among topics in Medicine, Biology,
Instrument Science and Geophysiology. He has filed more than 50
patents, mostly for detectors for use in chemical analysis. One of
these, the electron capture detector, was important in the development
of environmental awareness."
"For me, the personal revelation of Gaia came quite suddenly - like a
flash of enlightenment. I was in a small room on the top floor of a
building at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. It
was the autumn of 1965 ... and I was talking with a colleague, Dian
Hitchcock, about a paper we were preparing ... It was at that moment
that I glimpsed Gaia."
http://www.gaianet.fsbusiness.co.uk/gaiatheory.html
However, this is no great surprise seeing that the Bible perfectly
explains that "evolution" is not the problem, but that "devolution" is
the culprit of the latter days of civilization as we know it. The
"devolution" of mankind is simply summarized as being a state of being
of men by which they have somehow (by democic influence) lost "faith".
"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some
shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and
doctrines of devils" (1 Timothy 4:1)
comments welcome, as always
Jd A.D. 2006
Anno Domini" is Latin for "in the year of Our Lord", referring to Our
Lord Jesus Christ. That is, "AD 1996" literally means "in the 1996'th
year since the birth of the Christ." Now not all the world is
Christian, so it makes no sense for a Jew, a Moslem, a Hindu, a Witch,
a Druid, or an atheist to refer to the date as being in the year of
"their Lord" when they don't follow him. So "CE" is a more considerate
way of labeling dates in the Gregorian calendar without rubbing
non-Christian's noses in the fact that so much of the world is using a
calendar based on the alleged birth-year of the man we Christians
believe to be the Messiah.
http://www.radix.net/~dglenn/defs/ce.html

.

User: "asgard"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 11 Mar 2006 04:25:01 AM
"Wally AngleseaT" <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote in
message news:ufo412973fol0m42mg92s0497ncvfg5mga@4ax.com...

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 22:48:30 -0500, Bob LeChevalier
<lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

This is a great step forward Bob. You have in the above confessed your
belief in a supernatural being called "God" and in one called "the
devil".

But lookie here. I'm willing to bet that none of these
pseudo-scientific wannabees attack you for espousing your
non-scientific views in supernatural deities.

Why?

Simply because they never have in all the years I'bve been here.

So what does that tell you?


That I am rational and do not offend them, and you aren't and do.


There is nothing wrong with believing in a deity, IMHO. Believing in a
deity and understanding evolution and a multi billion year old
universe are not mutually exclusive.

It is to the educated.
.
User: ""

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 06:43:58 AM
In talk.atheism asgard <asgard@mybizz.com> wrote:

"Wally AngleseaT" <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote in
message news:ufo412973fol0m42mg92s0497ncvfg5mga@4ax.com...

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 22:48:30 -0500, Bob LeChevalier
<lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

This is a great step forward Bob. You have in the above confessed your
belief in a supernatural being called "God" and in one called "the
devil".

But lookie here. I'm willing to bet that none of these
pseudo-scientific wannabees attack you for espousing your
non-scientific views in supernatural deities.

Why?

Simply because they never have in all the years I'bve been here.

So what does that tell you?


That I am rational and do not offend them, and you aren't and do.


There is nothing wrong with believing in a deity, IMHO. Believing in a
deity and understanding evolution and a multi billion year old
universe are not mutually exclusive.

It is to the educated.

Not really. Nothing says that there isn't a god out there who started it all
and watches over it, etc. But there's also nothing that says there is. So
belief in a deity doesn't run counter to science, it's just not supported in
any way by science and logic either. So if someone wants to hold an
irrational belief in a deity, that doesn't prevent them from understanding
science and evolution, etc.
Now someone who believes in a deity who created the earth 6,000 years ago
DOES fly against science and IS mutually exclsive to understanding
evolution, etc.
--
Mike
-------------------------------
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop
thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do
we," George W. "Shrub" Bush Aug 5, 2004
.


User: "Wally Anglesea™"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 10 Mar 2006 03:52:33 PM
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 02:46:46 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 05:06:39 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 01:24:07 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Cary Kittrell wrote:

In article <gc3d02d7kvt9nmgjk0egmp5vrujdmvbui2@4ax.com> Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> writes:


I do. But they hate it. However, you and I simply cannot secumb to
lukewarmedness. Fence sitting is not in our nature being born of the
Spirit.


HA! "cannot secumb to lukewarmedness. Fence sitting is not in our
nature being born of the Spirit" thunders JDay ... right before
he scuttles off to set the X-No-Archive flag, to make sure
no one will hold him to his words. Any of his words.

There ought to be a special word for that kind of irony.


-- cary


Lukewarmedness has nothing to do with fence sitting, Judas Iscariot.

You're sins, like Darwin's are open and manifest to all whether I have
X-archive or not.

Darwin turned away from Jesus. What folks don't know is that the real
title of his work known as "Origin of the Species" (by those of the
monkey cult) is "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural
Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for
Life" - Charles Darwin (November 24 1859)

You racist traitor you.


And please show where Darwin meant race as you mean it, and where
Darwin was a racist.


"Of all the differences between the races of man, the colour of the
skin is the most conspicuous and one of the best marked." Charles
Darwin (Descent of Man Chapter VII - On the Races of Man)

Idjut.


Nowhere does it say or prove Darwin was a racist, you moron.

That is merely a cretinist lie.

All cretinists lie. All.


Really? Is that what you think?

It's all about evidence.

Hmmm... well that's OK with me. I'm
all for free thought as well as free speech.

But tell me, do you think a little white lie here or there is more of
a sin than the act of sodomy?

Ahhh, you want to get into relativism?
At least you admit lying is a sin.
So why do you continue in your sin?
--
Maj. General, Fanatic Legions.
Commander of Southern Hemisphere Forces.
Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 10 Mar 2006 07:44:49 PM
Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 02:46:46 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 05:06:39 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 01:24:07 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Cary Kittrell wrote:

In article <gc3d02d7kvt9nmgjk0egmp5vrujdmvbui2@4ax.com> Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> writes:


I do. But they hate it. However, you and I simply cannot secumb to
lukewarmedness. Fence sitting is not in our nature being born of the
Spirit.


HA! "cannot secumb to lukewarmedness. Fence sitting is not in our
nature being born of the Spirit" thunders JDay ... right before
he scuttles off to set the X-No-Archive flag, to make sure
no one will hold him to his words. Any of his words.

There ought to be a special word for that kind of irony.


-- cary


Lukewarmedness has nothing to do with fence sitting, Judas Iscariot.

You're sins, like Darwin's are open and manifest to all whether I have
X-archive or not.

Darwin turned away from Jesus. What folks don't know is that the real
title of his work known as "Origin of the Species" (by those of the
monkey cult) is "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural
Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for
Life" - Charles Darwin (November 24 1859)

You racist traitor you.


And please show where Darwin meant race as you mean it, and where
Darwin was a racist.


"Of all the differences between the races of man, the colour of the
skin is the most conspicuous and one of the best marked." Charles
Darwin (Descent of Man Chapter VII - On the Races of Man)

Idjut.


Nowhere does it say or prove Darwin was a racist, you moron.

That is merely a cretinist lie.

All cretinists lie. All.


Really? Is that what you think?


It's all about evidence.

Hmmm... well that's OK with me. I'm
all for free thought as well as free speech.

But tell me, do you think a little white lie here or there is more of
a sin than the act of sodomy?


Ahhh, you want to get into relativism?

At least you admit lying is a sin.

So why do you continue in your sin?

I'm not God.
Why do you continue in yours?
Look Wally bud, I'm trying to cut you some slack since you're
obviously an open minded thinker.
Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...
"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)
And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.
Jd
.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 11 Mar 2006 08:37:07 AM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)

And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.

WWJD?
Specifically, would Jesus lie to the Nazi knocking at His door asking
if He were hiding any Jews?
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 11:25:02 AM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)

And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.


WWJD?

Specifically, would Jesus lie to the Nazi knocking at His door asking
if He were hiding any Jews?

lojbab

No. He would say "I AM HE" (since he was Jewish) and they would all go
tumbling head over heels backwards.
"...Whom seek ye?" They answered him, "Jesus of Nazareth". Jesus saith
unto them, "I am he". And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with
them. As soon then as he had said unto them, "I am he", they went
backward, and fell to the ground. (John 18:4-6)
Jd

.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 01:47:53 PM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)

And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.


WWJD?

Specifically, would Jesus lie to the Nazi knocking at His door asking
if He were hiding any Jews?

lojbab


No. He would say "I AM HE" (since he was Jewish)

So He wouldn't lie.
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 05:04:40 PM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)

And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.


WWJD?

Specifically, would Jesus lie to the Nazi knocking at His door asking
if He were hiding any Jews?

lojbab


No. He would say "I AM HE" (since he was Jewish)


So He wouldn't lie.

lojbab

No. But you aren't and you would lie. You would purposely tell an
outright lie to save the life of a Jew from a Nazi knocking at your
door.
Wouldn't you?
Jd
.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 11:30:41 PM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

No. But you aren't and you would lie. You would purposely tell an
outright lie to save the life of a Jew from a Nazi knocking at your
door.

Wouldn't you?

I don't know. It is not a situation I expect to find myself in.
Probably not, since I don't have the moral certainty of a servant of
Satan that lying is always the best policy in times of personal
challenge. Besides, I learned long ago that I'm a horrible liar, so
it wouldn't work even if I thought it best.
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 15 Mar 2006 09:28:18 PM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

No. But you aren't and you would lie. You would purposely tell an
outright lie to save the life of a Jew from a Nazi knocking at your
door.

Wouldn't you?


I don't know. It is not a situation I expect to find myself in.
Probably not, since I don't have the moral certainty of a servant of
Satan that lying is always the best policy in times of personal
challenge. Besides, I learned long ago that I'm a horrible liar, so
it wouldn't work even if I thought it best.

lojbab

I didn't previously think you thought that Jews were God's choosen
people, but now I'm sure.
I'm now wondering why you hate Mr. Knight so much.
Look, I have no problem with either you or Mr. Knight expressing
yourselves.
Jd
.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 15 Mar 2006 11:16:20 PM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

No. But you aren't and you would lie. You would purposely tell an
outright lie to save the life of a Jew from a Nazi knocking at your
door.

Wouldn't you?


I don't know. It is not a situation I expect to find myself in.
Probably not, since I don't have the moral certainty of a servant of
Satan that lying is always the best policy in times of personal
challenge. Besides, I learned long ago that I'm a horrible liar, so
it wouldn't work even if I thought it best.


I didn't previously think you thought that Jews were God's choosen
people, but now I'm sure.

I'm now wondering why you hate Mr. Knight so much.

I don't.
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 16 Mar 2006 12:29:36 AM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

No. But you aren't and you would lie. You would purposely tell an
outright lie to save the life of a Jew from a Nazi knocking at your
door.

Wouldn't you?


I don't know. It is not a situation I expect to find myself in.
Probably not, since I don't have the moral certainty of a servant of
Satan that lying is always the best policy in times of personal
challenge. Besides, I learned long ago that I'm a horrible liar, so
it wouldn't work even if I thought it best.


I didn't previously think you thought that Jews were God's choosen
people, but now I'm sure.

I'm now wondering why you hate Mr. Knight so much.


I don't.

lojbab

I knew that.
Jd, Anno Domini 2006 (who cannot tell a lie either)
.







User: "Bob Officer"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 11 Mar 2006 09:19:51 PM
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 09:37:07 -0500, in alt.astrology, Bob LeChevalier
<lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)

And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.


WWJD?

Specifically, would Jesus lie to the Nazi knocking at His door asking
if He were hiding any Jews?

They wouldn't have asked, they would have already hauled him away...
searched his house, drink his wine, eaten his bread...
You forget, Jesus was a Jew.
--
Ak'toh'di
.


User: ""

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 11 Mar 2006 02:32:09 AM
Anno Domini wrote:

I'm not God.

Why do you continue in yours?

Look Wally bud, I'm trying to cut you some slack since you're
obviously an open minded thinker.

Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)

Care to provide proof other than the Bible? And much of the
world at the time thought some degree of homosexual behavior
was normal, so your logic of IF homosexuality THEN fire from
the heavens isn't true because most of the world had
homosexuality AND NOT fire from the heavens.

And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.

*cough*Godwin*cough*
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 11:25:01 AM
wrote:

Anno Domini wrote:

I'm not God.

Why do you continue in yours?

Look Wally bud, I'm trying to cut you some slack since you're
obviously an open minded thinker.

Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)


Care to provide proof other than the Bible?

Sure thing.
"The ruins of Sodom and Gomorrah have been discovered southeast of the
Dead Sea. The modern names are Bab edh-Dhra, thought to be Sodom, and
Numeira, thought to be Gomorrah. Both places were destroyed at the
same time by an enormous conflagration. The destruction debris was
about three feet thick. What brought about this awful calamity?
Startling discoveries in the cemetery at Bab edh-Dhra revealed the
cause. Archaeologists found that buildings used to bury the dead were
burned by a fire that started on the roof."
http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a007.html
Jd
.


User: "Wally Anglesea™"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 10 Mar 2006 11:43:49 PM
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:44:49 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 02:46:46 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 05:06:39 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 01:24:07 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Cary Kittrell wrote:

In article <gc3d02d7kvt9nmgjk0egmp5vrujdmvbui2@4ax.com> Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> writes:


I do. But they hate it. However, you and I simply cannot secumb to
lukewarmedness. Fence sitting is not in our nature being born of the
Spirit.


HA! "cannot secumb to lukewarmedness. Fence sitting is not in our
nature being born of the Spirit" thunders JDay ... right before
he scuttles off to set the X-No-Archive flag, to make sure
no one will hold him to his words. Any of his words.

There ought to be a special word for that kind of irony.


-- cary


Lukewarmedness has nothing to do with fence sitting, Judas Iscariot.

You're sins, like Darwin's are open and manifest to all whether I have
X-archive or not.

Darwin turned away from Jesus. What folks don't know is that the real
title of his work known as "Origin of the Species" (by those of the
monkey cult) is "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural
Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for
Life" - Charles Darwin (November 24 1859)

You racist traitor you.


And please show where Darwin meant race as you mean it, and where
Darwin was a racist.


"Of all the differences between the races of man, the colour of the
skin is the most conspicuous and one of the best marked." Charles
Darwin (Descent of Man Chapter VII - On the Races of Man)

Idjut.


Nowhere does it say or prove Darwin was a racist, you moron.

That is merely a cretinist lie.

All cretinists lie. All.


Really? Is that what you think?


It's all about evidence.

Hmmm... well that's OK with me. I'm
all for free thought as well as free speech.

But tell me, do you think a little white lie here or there is more of
a sin than the act of sodomy?


Ahhh, you want to get into relativism?

At least you admit lying is a sin.

So why do you continue in your sin?


I'm not God.

Why do you continue in yours?

Look Wally bud, I'm trying to cut you some slack since you're
obviously an open minded thinker.

Thanks.


Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)

And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.

OK, that makes sense. But to extend that to rleativism is an entire
metaphysical discussion. We cannot go from there to "it's Ok to lie
to atheists about (...... pick your subject).
--
Maj. General, Fanatic Legions.
Commander of Southern Hemisphere Forces.
Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 11:24:59 AM
Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:44:49 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 02:46:46 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 05:06:39 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Wally Anglesea™ <<wanglese@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:

On Mon, 06 Mar 2006 01:24:07 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

Cary Kittrell wrote:

In article <gc3d02d7kvt9nmgjk0egmp5vrujdmvbui2@4ax.com> Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> writes:


I do. But they hate it. However, you and I simply cannot secumb to
lukewarmedness. Fence sitting is not in our nature being born of the
Spirit.


HA! "cannot secumb to lukewarmedness. Fence sitting is not in our
nature being born of the Spirit" thunders JDay ... right before
he scuttles off to set the X-No-Archive flag, to make sure
no one will hold him to his words. Any of his words.

There ought to be a special word for that kind of irony.


-- cary


Lukewarmedness has nothing to do with fence sitting, Judas Iscariot.

You're sins, like Darwin's are open and manifest to all whether I have
X-archive or not.

Darwin turned away from Jesus. What folks don't know is that the real
title of his work known as "Origin of the Species" (by those of the
monkey cult) is "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural
Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for
Life" - Charles Darwin (November 24 1859)

You racist traitor you.


And please show where Darwin meant race as you mean it, and where
Darwin was a racist.


"Of all the differences between the races of man, the colour of the
skin is the most conspicuous and one of the best marked." Charles
Darwin (Descent of Man Chapter VII - On the Races of Man)

Idjut.


Nowhere does it say or prove Darwin was a racist, you moron.

That is merely a cretinist lie.

All cretinists lie. All.


Really? Is that what you think?


It's all about evidence.

Hmmm... well that's OK with me. I'm
all for free thought as well as free speech.

But tell me, do you think a little white lie here or there is more of
a sin than the act of sodomy?


Ahhh, you want to get into relativism?

At least you admit lying is a sin.

So why do you continue in your sin?


I'm not God.

Why do you continue in yours?

Look Wally bud, I'm trying to cut you some slack since you're
obviously an open minded thinker.


Thanks.


Fact of the matter is that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire
from heaven...

"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire
from the Lord out of heaven" (Genesis 19:24)

And it would be ok to lie to the Nazi knocking at your door asking if
you were hiding any Jews.


OK, that makes sense. But to extend that to rleativism is an entire
metaphysical discussion. We cannot go from there to "it's Ok to lie
to atheists about (...... pick your subject).

Generally speaking, my view is that a true atheist would not be
wasting his/her time here arguing with me (whom they would consider a
nut). The ones who do are X-religious folks who've turned from the
religion of their birthright and upbringing in my opinion.
Jd
.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 01:45:22 PM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

OK, that makes sense. But to extend that to rleativism is an entire
metaphysical discussion. We cannot go from there to "it's Ok to lie
to atheists about (...... pick your subject).


Generally speaking, my view is that a true atheist would not be
wasting his/her time here arguing with me (whom they would consider a
nut). The ones who do are X-religious folks who've turned from the
religion of their birthright and upbringing in my opinion.

Who also consider you a nut, so obviously time-wasting is not a
factor.
Some of us just like showing the world how foolish the nuts are.
Others like myself are interested in presenting the world a
Christianity that isn't practiced by nutcases.
(As another example, the new issue of Discover magazine has an article
on a scientist who is an evangelical Christian and a strong supporter
of modern evolutionary theory even while creationists are using her
research results to try to "disprove evolution" (when she herself says
they do no such thing).
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 05:04:38 PM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

OK, that makes sense. But to extend that to rleativism is an entire
metaphysical discussion. We cannot go from there to "it's Ok to lie
to atheists about (...... pick your subject).


Generally speaking, my view is that a true atheist would not be
wasting his/her time here arguing with me (whom they would consider a
nut). The ones who do are X-religious folks who've turned from the
religion of their birthright and upbringing in my opinion.


Who also consider you a nut, so obviously time-wasting is not a
factor.

Some of us just like showing the world how foolish the nuts are.
Others like myself are interested in presenting the world a
Christianity that isn't practiced by nutcases.

For your info, Wally and I've come to have a decent converstation so I
doubt he'd show the prejudice you do.
You hate the ethnicity of southern fundamentalists as your replies
show your prejudice.
I used the word "nut" in replying to him haveing a bit of confidence
that he wouldn't turn the tables on me like you have in your, rude,
hatefull and prejudiced fashion in butting in on our conversation.
Now what will more than likely happen is that Squirrel Man,
JudasIsCaryiot, FemiNaziCunt along with that Midjut-Injun-inBlack will
all soon weigh in with ridiculous rantings in order to drive the what
was noramal discussion between Wally and me.... into the dark abyss of
meaniglessness chaos.
Give it up guys. None of you have any literary talent anyways. Your
rantings do nothing towards enlightening the intellect of reasonable
human beings but to the contrary.... they're only self-serving
dribbles intended only to wet the palate of your demonic hosts.
Jd
.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 11:22:35 PM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

OK, that makes sense. But to extend that to rleativism is an entire
metaphysical discussion. We cannot go from there to "it's Ok to lie
to atheists about (...... pick your subject).


Generally speaking, my view is that a true atheist would not be
wasting his/her time here arguing with me (whom they would consider a
nut). The ones who do are X-religious folks who've turned from the
religion of their birthright and upbringing in my opinion.


Who also consider you a nut, so obviously time-wasting is not a
factor.

Some of us just like showing the world how foolish the nuts are.
Others like myself are interested in presenting the world a
Christianity that isn't practiced by nutcases.


For your info, Wally and I've come to have a decent converstation so I
doubt he'd show the prejudice you do.

You hate the ethnicity of southern fundamentalists as your replies
show your prejudice.

So far as I know, the "ethnicity" of most southern fundamentalists, is
generally "American". I am American. Thus if you were correct, I
would hate my own ethnicity. That is silly.

I used the word "nut" in replying to him haveing a bit of confidence
that he wouldn't turn the tables on me like you have in your, rude,
hatefull and prejudiced fashion in butting in on our conversation.

If you want a private conversation, then you should be using email.
If you post to Usenet, you are having a conversation with whomever
among the millions of readers deigns to answer you.

Now what will more than likely happen is that Squirrel Man,
JudasIsCaryiot, FemiNaziCunt along with that Midjut-Injun-inBlack will
all soon weigh in with ridiculous rantings in order to drive the what
was noramal discussion between Wally and me.... into the dark abyss of
meaniglessness chaos.

If you want a private conversation, then you should be using email.

Give it up guys. None of you have any literary talent anyways.

I never claimed to. You have no talent, period.

Your
rantings do nothing towards enlightening the intellect of reasonable
human beings but to the contrary.

Since you aren't a reasonable human being, but a subhuman racist slime
in the service of your master the Prince of Liars, you couldn't
possibly know.
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 15 Mar 2006 09:28:17 PM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

OK, that makes sense. But to extend that to rleativism is an entire
metaphysical discussion. We cannot go from there to "it's Ok to lie
to atheists about (...... pick your subject).


Generally speaking, my view is that a true atheist would not be
wasting his/her time here arguing with me (whom they would consider a
nut). The ones who do are X-religious folks who've turned from the
religion of their birthright and upbringing in my opinion.


Who also consider you a nut, so obviously time-wasting is not a
factor.

Some of us just like showing the world how foolish the nuts are.
Others like myself are interested in presenting the world a
Christianity that isn't practiced by nutcases.


For your info, Wally and I've come to have a decent converstation so I
doubt he'd show the prejudice you do.

You hate the ethnicity of southern fundamentalists as your replies
show your prejudice.


So far as I know, the "ethnicity" of most southern fundamentalists, is
generally "American". I am American. Thus if you were correct, I
would hate my own ethnicity. That is silly.

I used the word "nut" in replying to him haveing a bit of confidence
that he wouldn't turn the tables on me like you have in your, rude,
hatefull and prejudiced fashion in butting in on our conversation.


If you want a private conversation, then you should be using email.
If you post to Usenet, you are having a conversation with whomever
among the millions of readers deigns to answer you.

Now what will more than likely happen is that Squirrel Man,
JudasIsCaryiot, FemiNaziCunt along with that Midjut-Injun-inBlack will
all soon weigh in with ridiculous rantings in order to drive the what
was noramal discussion between Wally and me.... into the dark abyss of
meaniglessness chaos.


If you want a private conversation, then you should be using email.

Give it up guys. None of you have any literary talent anyways.


I never claimed to. You have no talent, period.

Your
rantings do nothing towards enlightening the intellect of reasonable
human beings but to the contrary.


Since you aren't a reasonable human being, but a subhuman racist slime
in the service of your master the Prince of Liars, you couldn't
possibly know.

lojbab

As usual, you cannot carry on a decent conversation with anyone except
liberals, perverts, and other false prophets who deny the God of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
The false jesus you promote is nothing more than a Ghandi, descended
from apes. And shut up less I post the quote where you said that your
jesus descended from an ape.
Hebrews 10:38 "Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw
back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him."
You live and walk by sight, not by faith. You have fallen to the
microscope syndrome of other men of the flesh. Shame on you.
2Corinthians 5:7 "For we walk by faith, not by sight"
And like your Lord Jeffereson who thought God wound up the clock and
then walked away, that is OK as long as you don't assume anyone would
pay any attention atall to your views since your views obviously
exclude the preaching of the Word of the living God of Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob who promised to be with each and every generation of the
blessed promised people of Israel of the Abrahamic Covenant.
As it is written:
Genesis 17:7 "And I will establish my covenant between me and thee
and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee."
Now stay tuned and you just might very well see how gentiles also
might be included into this sacred blessing.
And BTW, whether I show it or not has nothing to do with your reply,
your attitude, your cursings, your rantings, your blasphemies, your
demands that I prove the existance of God, your mockeries etc.. etc..
(some, or all of the above which are sure to follow).
Jd, timid prophet of God A.D. 2006
"Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi ("In the Year of Our Lord Jesus
Christ"), commonly shortened to Anno Domini ("In the Year of the
Lord"), abbreviated as AD or A.D., is the designation used to number
years in the Christian Era, conventionally used with the Julian and
Gregorian calendars. It defines an epoch based on the
traditionally-reckoned year of the birth of Jesus."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Domini

.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 15 Mar 2006 11:12:14 PM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Your
rantings do nothing towards enlightening the intellect of reasonable
human beings but to the contrary.


Since you aren't a reasonable human being, but a subhuman racist slime
in the service of your master the Prince of Liars, you couldn't
possibly know.


As usual, you cannot carry on a decent conversation with anyone except
liberals, perverts, and other false prophets who deny the God of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

I am in a newsgroup, not a conversation with individuals.
I can carry on a decent conversation with believers who are sane.
That excludes you.

The false jesus you promote is nothing more than a Ghandi, descended
from apes. And shut up less I post the quote where you said that your
jesus descended from an ape.

Wherein everyone will see that I said no such thing.

Hebrews 10:38 "Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw
back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him."

You live and walk by sight, not by faith.

Wrong.

As it is written:

Genesis 17:7 "And I will establish my covenant between me and thee
and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee."

Now stay tuned and you just might very well see how gentiles also
might be included into this sacred blessing.

That is a covenant, not a blessing. A covenant is a two way exchange,
a blessing is a gift without recompense. God required circumcision on
the eighth day as the exchange for His commitment.
God made a different covenant with the Gentiles.

And BTW, whether I show it or not has nothing to do with your reply,
your attitude, your cursings, your rantings, your blasphemies, your
demands that I prove the existance of God, your mockeries etc.. etc..
(some, or all of the above which are sure to follow).

Why would I care what you do or don't show?
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 16 Mar 2006 12:29:35 AM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Your
rantings do nothing towards enlightening the intellect of reasonable
human beings but to the contrary.


Since you aren't a reasonable human being, but a subhuman racist slime
in the service of your master the Prince of Liars, you couldn't
possibly know.


As usual, you cannot carry on a decent conversation with anyone except
liberals, perverts, and other false prophets who deny the God of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.


I am in a newsgroup, not a conversation with individuals.

I can carry on a decent conversation with believers who are sane.
That excludes you.

The false jesus you promote is nothing more than a Ghandi, descended
from apes. And shut up less I post the quote where you said that your
jesus descended from an ape.


Wherein everyone will see that I said no such thing.

Hebrews 10:38 "Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw
back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him."

You live and walk by sight, not by faith.


Wrong.

As it is written:

Genesis 17:7 "And I will establish my covenant between me and thee
and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee."

Now stay tuned and you just might very well see how gentiles also
might be included into this sacred blessing.


That is a covenant, not a blessing. A covenant is a two way exchange,
a blessing is a gift without recompense. God required circumcision on
the eighth day as the exchange for His commitment.

God made a different covenant with the Gentiles.

And BTW, whether I show it or not has nothing to do with your reply,
your attitude, your cursings, your rantings, your blasphemies, your
demands that I prove the existance of God, your mockeries etc.. etc..
(some, or all of the above which are sure to follow).


Why would I care what you do or don't show?

lojbab

Because you have nothing else to do but to stay up late at nights to
check for my replies while chewing on your fingernails and habitually
scratching that spot on your gleuteous maximus.
But primarily because you are wrong about the Covenant.
Romans 4:16-17 "Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace;
to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only
which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of
Abraham; who is the father of us all, (As it is written, I have made
thee a father of many nations,)"
You are wrong because your Ghandijesus is powerless to include
gentiles in the Covenant by removing the curse from upon them:
Galatans 3:13-14 "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law,
being made a curse for us: for it is written, 'Cursed is every one
that hangeth on a tree': That the blessing of Abraham might come on
the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise
of the Spirit through faith."
It's quite obvious you've been reading everything you can get your
hands on except for the Holy Bible.
awaiting your apology,
Jd, Anno Domini 2006
"Anno Domini Nostri Iesu Christi ("In the Year of Our Lord Jesus
Christ"), commonly shortened to Anno Domini ("In the Year of the
Lord"), abbreviated as AD or A.D., is the designation used to number
years in the Christian Era, conventionally used with the Julian and
Gregorian calendars. It defines an epoch based on the
traditionally-reckoned year of the birth of Jesus."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Domini
.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 16 Mar 2006 02:21:42 AM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Why would I care what you do or don't show?


Because you have nothing else to do but to stay up late at nights to
check for my replies

I have plenty else to do. I am switching between genealogical
research and a computer games, and newsgroups, and reading two books
(one in the bathroom and one in the bedroom) working suborn puzzles,
and being aware of noises from my kid who is largely immobilized with
a broken ankle and is having surgery in the morning.

while chewing on your fingernails and habitually
scratching that spot on your gleuteous maximus.

?

But primarily because you are wrong about the Covenant.

Nope.

Romans 4:16-17 "Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace;
to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only
which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of
Abraham; who is the father of us all, (As it is written, I have made
thee a father of many nations,)"

There is no evidence that Abraham was the father of "the Gentiles",
though he was presumably the father of Saul the Jew of Tarsus.

You are wrong because your Ghandijesus is powerless to include
gentiles in the Covenant by removing the curse from upon them

God can do anything He wants. But there is no evidence that He
included Gentiles in the Old Covenant.

Galatans 3:13-14 "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law,
being made a curse for us: for it is written, 'Cursed is every one
that hangeth on a tree': That the blessing of Abraham might come on
the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise
of the Spirit through faith."

Wooly-minded Pauline theology has nothing to do with reality. Paul
was the great perverter of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

It's quite obvious you've been reading everything you can get your
hands on except for the Holy Bible.

awaiting your apology,

For what?
Don't hold your breath.
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 19 Mar 2006 08:54:37 PM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Why would I care what you do or don't show?


Because you have nothing else to do but to stay up late at nights to
check for my replies


I have plenty else to do. I am switching between genealogical
research and a computer games, and newsgroups, and reading two books
(one in the bathroom and one in the bedroom) working suborn puzzles,
and being aware of noises from my kid who is largely immobilized with
a broken ankle and is having surgery in the morning.

Goodness. Hope the surgery turns out ok.
I'll let you alone for a while 'till your life returns to normal and
you get to watch some TV.
Jd
.
User: "Bob LeChevalier"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 19 Mar 2006 10:20:16 PM
Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Why would I care what you do or don't show?


Because you have nothing else to do but to stay up late at nights to
check for my replies


I have plenty else to do. I am switching between genealogical
research and a computer games, and newsgroups, and reading two books
(one in the bathroom and one in the bedroom) working suborn puzzles,

my spell-checker was apparently baffled --> sudoku

and being aware of noises from my kid who is largely immobilized with
a broken ankle and is having surgery in the morning.


Goodness. Hope the surgery turns out ok.

All fine, though the pain is severe even with drugs, and we had a trip
to the emergency room due to a possible drug reaction.
Recommendation not to break an ankle - apparently one of the more
painful breaks, especially if they have to do surgery.
lojbab
.
User: "Anno Domini"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 20 Mar 2006 08:17:09 PM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

Why would I care what you do or don't show?


Because you have nothing else to do but to stay up late at nights to
check for my replies


I have plenty else to do. I am switching between genealogical
research and a computer games, and newsgroups, and reading two books
(one in the bathroom and one in the bedroom) working suborn puzzles,

my spell-checker was apparently baffled --> sudoku

and being aware of noises from my kid who is largely immobilized with
a broken ankle and is having surgery in the morning.


Goodness. Hope the surgery turns out ok.


All fine, though the pain is severe even with drugs, and we had a trip
to the emergency room due to a possible drug reaction.

Recommendation not to break an ankle - apparently one of the more
painful breaks, especially if they have to do surgery.

lojbab

Yeah I hear ya. My sister went through all that. It's tough, I know.
The pins and all are something dreadful. Personally, I wear ankle
support on my right ankle which is weaker than my left, everytime I
have a planned hiking trip, having sprained it multiple times before.
Jd
.







User: ""

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 13 Mar 2006 04:46:26 PM
Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

You hate the ethnicity of southern fundamentalists as your replies
show your prejudice.


So far as I know, the "ethnicity" of most southern fundamentalists, is
generally "American". I am American. Thus if you were correct, I
would hate my own ethnicity. That is silly.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's a theme in Jeff's posts.
.
User: "Cary Kittrell"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 13 Mar 2006 04:49:27 PM
In article <1142289986.145014.27850@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>
writes:

Bob LeChevalier wrote:

Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote:

You hate the ethnicity of southern fundamentalists as your replies
show your prejudice.


So far as I know, the "ethnicity" of most southern fundamentalists, is
generally "American". I am American. Thus if you were correct, I
would hate my own ethnicity. That is silly.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's a theme in Jeff's posts.

And a meme in his hosts, his hosts of posts.
A particularly virulent meme at that.
-- cary
.





User: "robpar"

Title: Re: Standard Deviation of Evolution: 2006 A.D. 12 Mar 2006 02:42:15 PM
On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 17:24:59 GMT, Anno Domini <ZionsFire@att.net>
wrote:

OK, that makes sense. But to extend that to rleativism is an entire
metaphysical discussion. We cannot go from there to "it's Ok to lie
to atheists about (...... pick your subject).


Generally speaking, my view is that a true atheist would not be
wasting his/her time here arguing with me (whom they would consider a
nut). The ones who do are X-religious folks who've turned from the
religion of their birthright and upbringing in my opinion.


Generally speaking, my view is that a true christian, would follow
the command of Jesus and leave alone those that reject the christian
teaching. Instead of making a fool of himself, with people that
commonly are polite, until you become obnoxious as well as stupid.
The X-religious folks are those that saw through the scam of
religion. And reject religion because of the hatred preached by false
christians such as your self.
But hang around and serve as a reminder of why I rejected
christianity.
.






  Page 8 of 9

1
 

2
 

3
 

4
 

5
 

6
 

7
 

8
 

9
 


Related Articles