Arguments with Theists to April 97


These are mostly from posts to atheist newsgroups. Some are email.

From randallg@telemark.net Sat Nov 23 13:19:17 1996
Newsgroups: misc.invest.stocks,misc.invest,misc.invest.misc,misc.invest.canada,alt.society.conservatism,alt.politics.usa.constitution,alt.politics.misc,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.revisionism,alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.usa,alt.conspiracy,talk.politic
Subject: Re: list of jewish powerlords

In article <848444530.16288@dejanews.com>, ourhero@ftcnet.com says...
>
>In article ,
>    Huy Vu  wrote:
>> 
>> So where does that leave you? A disgruntled, frustrated man of
>> of no consequence. Now, why don't you go out there and get a good
>> job at the bank and earn some honest dollars for a change.
>
>Although the reply of our little yellow friend was intended to be derogatory, 
>it does hold some truth - I totally agree with the concept of doing rather than
>only talking - and even more so - doing something constructive.  

Yet all you can do is whine about a mythical Jewish conspiracy.

>It is critical
>that all racially conscious Aryans not only be aware and complain but in addition
>to do something about it

Yes. Why don't you all get together in a hidden military compound 
somewhere and store up huge caches of arms and munitions so you can 
take over the government by force? Perhaps you could start by blowing
up some government buildings full of innocent civilians on a 
working day. Oh, I forgot, you're already doing that.

> - and more over to have the ability to subsist on 
>a level worthy of the Aryan race.   

What, you can't afford Budweiser?

>Aside from spending time with my writings
>I do activily pursue a career and pray to fate that I will never tire of 
>striving to succeed both financially and spiritually.  

Too bad your twisted fears and prejudices are going to keep you 
on the bottom of the heap. Your face is stuck in the shit of all
those who are better than you, and will remain there forever.

>I think that I disklike
>Aryans who sit on a couch all day and complain when they are too lazy to act.

Why? Isn't that normal behaviour for nazis?

>It is of course a stereotype that all nazis today are beer drinking trailer park
>inhabitants.  

For good reason. You are nothing but a bunch of lazy stupid ignorant 
white trash, who abandon reason, intelligence and knowledge in
favour of fear, guilt, superstition, prejudice and lies.

>We desperatly need economic power as well so I am all for nazis
>becoming doctors, lawyers, scientists etc..  

Then you are destined to remain very frustrated. You people are far
too ignorant and stupid to succeed in this way. Education has a way
of selecting for intelligence. No, for you only force can possibly
get you the power you so desperately crave. And you know it.

>anything less is unworthy of an Aryan life form.

Then you are all unworthy, because none of you are capable of
achieving this. Hitler killed himself when he was cornered 
like a rat in a sewer. Why don't you just accept your failure 
and kill yourselves like Hitler did, before you hurt more 
innocent people, and therefore live up to your god's example?



randall g =%^)>


From randallg@telemark.net Fri Nov 29 19:47:57 1996 Newsgroups: tnn.religion.catholic,talk.religion.misc,talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.slack,alt.religion.christian,alt.recovery.catholicism,alt.illuminati,alt.fan.art-bell,alt.conspiracy,alt.christnet,alt.blasphemy,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.atheism Subject: Re: Prayer request In article <329F8CB3.44F1@mail.idt.net>, bluce19@mail.idt.net says... > >I would like to make a prayer request from this Catholic community. > My sister Patrica was diagnosed with a tumor on her lung. She smoked >cigarettes profuesely; being unable to quit after countless attempts. > At present, the Doctors won't know until Monday or Tuesday how life >thretening the tumor has become. > I ask for your prayers in the hope my sister's life may be prolonged Look, over here in alt.atheism, we don't think God is going to know what we're we're praying for without enough details. You see, we don't think God is omniscient. How the fuck will God know who we're praying for if you don't even give her full name???? Better include her weight, skin colour, approximate location, hospital name, doctor's name, exact condition and estimated date of death too. Wouldn't want God to be confused.
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Dec 06 17:29:22 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.athiesm,alt.christnet.atheism,alt.recovery.catholicism,alt.recovery.religion Subject: Re: Cold Christian Comfort In article <32A99AB1.7FD0@netspace.net.au>, kingdave@netspace.net.au says... > >I have prayed to God >about this and I asked him for forgiveness for my intentions. I hope He told you not to behave like an asshole ever again. >If there are any Christians out there who are saddened by the loss of >Darklady's brother and feel some sympathy for her, please pray for her ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Who asked you, asshole? What's your fairy tale gonna do? Have you any idea how obnoxious this is? >I don't care what you guys think Could it be more obvious? >it is important that what the waiter did will not >go unnoticed and he gets my full support JEEZUS FUCKING CHRIST !!!! Why can't you just shut the fuck up? Every time you open your cakehole you make it worse. You, sir, are an insensitive, unempathetic moron and an asshole to boot. You fundies really are sociopaths aren't you. You simply don't feel empathy for others. This is clear by your constant whining and proselytizing in the face of obvious disgust, from someone who needs human support and sympathy at a time of great personal tragedy. That's why you can't understand how an atheist could possibly be moral - because you know if you were an atheist, without fear of eternal torture, you would be a monster. You know you'd go around raping and killing, because you know that's what you REALLY want to do. That's why you bastards are always asking us why we don't. Your fucking goddamned fairy tale sky monster isn't going to be opening anyone's heart. Darklady lives a plane of human compassion that assholes like you can only dream about. I take it back; all you dream about is dying and spending eternity gazing adoringly up at your deathcult leader Jesus "Extra Nail Holes" Christ, with His live wounds dripping blood on your face. Washed in the blood of the lamb for eternity. So you and all your fucking asshole god-bumholers can get together and congratulate the jerkface waiter all you want. You have exposed yourself as an insensitive, uncaring fuckwad who doesn't deserve the precious gift of being a sentient inhabitant of the universe that you are so obviously squandering away. >I welcome comments from everyone. You're a masochist too are you. It suits, so was Jesus "Pincushion" Christ. You are way beyond the point where apologizing will make you look any better. Your only hope now is to renounce your brainwashing and become an atheist. I won't be holding my breath. So just fuck off and never come back. Don't write back and tell me how much you love me. You make me want to puke my guts out. =%^(3) ~=*%$#& Ralf. randall g =%^)> "learning from Stix" mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me down, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Dec 06 18:16:56 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.athiesm,alt.christnet.atheism,alt.recovery.catholicism,alt.recovery.religion Subject: Re: Cold Christian Comfort In article <32A99AB1.7FD0@netspace.net.au>, kingdave@netspace.net.au says... [ more bullshit christian hypocrisy ] >I welcome comments from everyone. > >David Just noticed your email address is "kingdave". Styling ourselves rather highly aren't we? Who do you mean, ancient Hebrew conqueror, or recently sacrificed Messiah? Bet you'd love to be a Jim Jones or David Koresh. Run your own personality cult. Think about it! Everybody around you agreeing with you, praising you, worshipping you. You'd get to have your own harem of women and girls of all ages. And if you don't stockpile a huge arsenal of illegal military weapons, no-one will try to stop you. There are lots of Christian sheep around who want nothing more than to debase in front of a powerful charismatic figure. They are trained to do it from birth. Yep, the High Priesthood of Christianity can make themselves into Gods. Jesus "Follow Me To My Death" Christ led a little cult, you know. He had a good time while it lasted. Screwed the local whores and nobody wrote it down, though it's harder to get away with that today. Hope your posts to alt.atheism are earning you lots of martyr points with Jesus "Make Believe Buddy" Christ. Did you lick your lips while reading this, King David? randall g =%^)> "trying to out-do Stix" mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Dec 11 20:05:53 1996 Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.blasphemy,alt.athiesm Subject: Re: A simple challenge In article <58luaj$gbj@ionews.ionet.net>, shpc@ionet.net says... >What would you say if I said that I, A Roman Catholic (whichis >christian for some of my christian bretheren who may not know or >believe this) have my faith AND my logic curicuits turned on too. I'd >wager that I have no more assumptions (that is to say "take it on >faith") in my belief structure than you have. Care to try me? OK, you can start by defending the Catholic church's position on birth control. Later, we'll proceed to celibacy of the priesthood, and the ban on women in the clergy. My initial position: The religious ban on birth control on the part of the Catholic church is both illogical and greatly harmful. Go for it. If you cannot or do not wish to do this, then please explain why you call yourself a Catholic. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Thu Dec 12 19:01:03 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet.philosophy,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian Subject: Re: What Hell is like In article <32AE0E8B.C18@present-truth.org>, webservant@present-truth.org says... > >The following link will shed a great deal of light on this hot subject: > >http://www.present-truth.org/beliefs/dead/dead.html > >God Bless. Fired up the ole browser and had a quick look just for kicks. This sect claims that Hell isn't eternal! Here's an interesting and *unusual* quote: " Is God a Torturer? If God tortured His enemies in a fiery horror chamber throughout eternity, He would be more vicious and heartless than men have ever been in the worst of war attrocities. " Phyew, that's a relief... randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
At 10:26 PM 12/15/96 -0400, you wrote: >I just want to tell you that I LOVE YOU... Bullshit. You don't even know me. Your pseudo-love can only be a delusion. >But more importantly that Jesus Christ, the One who died so that we >could have life, LOVES YOU!!! A 2000 year old corpse does not love anyone. > "Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you >rest." Matthew 11:28 (N.I.V.) "Now go, attack the Amakelites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them: put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camel and donkeys." - 1 Sam 15:3 > "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." Romans >3:23 (N.I.V.) "Happy is he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." -Psalms 137:8-9 > "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and >the door will be opened for you. Matthew 7:7 (N.I.V.) "Put every man his sword on his side, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion and every man his neighbor." Ex 32:27 > THIS IS TRUTH......... This is a fairy tale. > THIS IS SOLUTION..... To the problem of "sin" which was invented by the Christian masters so they could shame you into buying their "cure". Looks like you've paid the price. > "Whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be >saved" Romans 10:10 (N.I.V.) "Thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of seed: neither shall there come upon thee a garment of two kinds of stuff mingled together." Lev 19:19 > Please call or write anytime:(201)328-xxxx or (201) 584-xxxx ask >for Darin or Kevin... No thanks, you sound like a couple of retards. >WE LOVE YOU..... Maybe you should stick to loving each other.
At 02:58 PM 12/16/96 -0800, you wrote: >For this reason, since the day we heard about you, Heard about me? How? I'm curious as hell - why are you picking on me? >we have not stopped >praying for you and asking God to fill you with knowledge of His will >through all spiritual wisdom and understanding. > > Colossians 1:9 Wow! What an honour! That makes about 25 people all wasting their time praying for my soul! Hey, if you know some other mindless fundies who like to pray all day and night, give them my name too - I'm going for a record. We're having a little contest over on alt.atheism... If it's any help, I suggest you stop praying for me long enough to eat, shit and sleep occasionally. I won't mind. But I insist on at least 16 hours a day! Anything less and you might let me and Jesus down! And if Make Believe Buddy up there in the sky decides to give me the big Holy Lobotomy, I'll be sure to get back to you so we can all bleat like sheep together.
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Dec 18 16:20:27 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Cold Christian Comfort At 08:38 PM 12/18/96 GMT, bry@mnsinc.com (Brian Carling) wrote: > >I am not taking sides in this, Apparently that's not the case... >but I hope someone takes you to task for you >rude, abusive behavior, and complains to your Internet Service Provider. Why don't you? You're the first to complain. My sysadmin's email address is randallg@telemark.net. >Hopefully they will discipline you. ??? For what? What laws have I broken? >Your parents obviously never did, you smug, nasty-mouthed little boy! BWAAAHAAA HAA HAA HAA! ROTFLMAO! Sure got you didn't I? >I have my own ideas that are not part of any religion or group, and will >remain unknown to you. Sounds good to me. I couldn't care less. >I am not laying "God" on you or any other idea. You should try: I could use a good laugh today. >You should learn how to show a little bit of respect to your fellow-man >and quit running your mouth like a lunatic. I show a great deal of respect to those who deserve it. Apparently you are unaware of the circumstances here. I won't bother filling you in. >On 7 Dec 1996 01:25:06 GMT, you inscribed eloquently: Eloquent it was indeed! randall g =%^)> When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me down, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me
From randallg@telemark.net Sat Dec 21 13:32:38 1996 Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian,sci.skeptic,alt.atheism,talk.philosophy.humanism,talk.religion.misc Subject: Re: Carl Sagan is dead In article <32bae268.140937@News.IslandNet.com>, mul@Islandnet.comTips says... > > Carl Sagan is dead and will be revered by thinking man for >ever more. He was a great scientist, a great thinker and a great >teacher. He took us beyond God into the higher levels of this >fascinating universe . > It is not because he was a great thinker or teacher, >however, that we will best remember him, but because he was the >epitome of courage. > He was a man who faced life as it is and not as we might >like it to be Even when faced with debilitating illness, he still >faced the world squarely and never allowed himself the luxury of >escapist fantasies. He held firm to the helm of truth and never >cowered behind the skirt of a fancied deity, and for this he will be >remembered and honored by all who respect internal honesty. > May his dust invigorate the universe and his memory guide us >all.. > > Andy I wonder how long it will be before the bleaters start claiming he had a deathbed conversion to Christianity. We have lost a great man. I urge everyone to read his last work: "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Dec 22 19:13:59 1996 Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian,sci.skeptic,alt.atheism,talk.philosophy.humanism,talk.religion.misc Subject: Re: Carl Sagan is dead In article <59i558$sci@news.goodnet.com>, saved@heaven.edu says... >randallg@telemark.net (randall g) wrote: >>I wonder how long it will be before the bleaters start claiming he had a >>deathbed conversion to Christianity. > >>We have lost a great man. I urge everyone to read his last work: > >>"The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark" >Yeah, he was such a great man, 3 wives, 5 kids, 2 divorces, and 3 >ditched kids. He left a wife and two kids for a lover, real >upstanding guy. His first wife divorced him after having two kids >because he put his precious career and fantasies about life on other >planets before the reality of his marriage and his so called >commitment to them. Shaved Shithead, you really are a pathetic loser aren't you? Nobody leads a life that a judgemental fundie like you would find perfect. Hell, a lot of your religious brethren have more fucked up lives than that. You have no idea what his personal circumstances were. Even if he was an asshole in real life, which I seriously doubt, the well deserved praises are for his many real accomplishments. So have you read "the Demon-Haunted World" yet? Didn't think so. Not that you're capable of learning anything. Keep wallowing in ignorance, you mindless fuckwad. At least you provide some amusement for us. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Dec 22 20:27:30 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism Subject: Re: Carl Sagan dead at 62 - from AANEWS In article <59hpc8$pnc@news.goodnet.com>, saved@heaven.edu says... > >Margie Wait wrote: > >> ASTRONOMER CARL SAGAN DEAD AT 62 > >> Carl Sagan, the gifted story teller, author and astronomer who brought >>science into the lives of millions of people, died early today at age 62 >>following a two year battle with bone marrow disease. He had been >>hospitalized for pneumonia at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center >>in Seattle, where he had undergone a marrow-transplant procedure in April >>of last year. >And I bet he is regretting every minute of his distinguished career as >we speak, for it lead him away from the saving knowledge of Jesus >Christ. He is regretting nothing. He lived a rich and full life and had a multitude of accomplishments to look back on before the end. >All atheists will die someday, where will you end up? Same place as Carl Sagan and you, fuckhead. Except we won't have spent our lives on our knees, begging an imaginary fairy tale monster to not torture us for eternity. My one regret as an atheist is that I can't condemn assholes like you to a horrible fate after you die. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Dec 25 18:21:35 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism.moderated Subject: Re: atheists are superstitious and inconsistant >Michael Falconer wrote: > But I meet many many atheists in the course of my life who >are not consistant with their professed worldview. Many even >celebrate christmas and even put up christmas trees. How logically >inconsistant and hypocritical can you get??? My girlfriend and I always have a tree, a live one. It's a tradition for us, and one that is harmless and actually enjoyable, and therefore beneficial. We decorate the shit out of it, and hang all kinds of lights, baubles and other trinkets from its branches. Not only does it look real cool, especially at night when it's dark, but it fills the place with the scent of pine and casts coloured light about the room. Also it reminds us of the time when we were children and Christmas meant the time when we would receive a huge pile of great presents. Who wouldn't have good memories of Christmas after a childhood of that happening every year? Now of course we don't want to be hypocrites, so you won't find any religious decorations in the place, like little models of baby Jesus in the manger surrounded by animals and wise men, or an angel on the top of the tree, or paintings of Mother Mary on the mantlepiece with little candles underneath, or any other variations of Jesus Christs or crucifixes or gods with flowing beards or angels or haloes or any of that other Christian stuff. Then we and our friends can get together and stare at it while getting blasted and listening to cool music. We give no thought to Christianity or paganist religious beliefs, except when we discuss the topic for intellectual stimulation. If it wasn't such a hassle, I wouldn't mind having a great decoration like that in my home all year long. But it's only easily available when the Christians celebrate the hypothetical birth of their hypothetical Lord and hypothetical Saviour. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Dec 25 18:27:54 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Your Invited! In article <59iq0k$29bm@usenetp1.news.prodigy.com>, VXZM04A@prodigy.com says... > >Hi... > >I refuse to be taken in again by false allegations! > >This is a time of year for celebration, the coming of our Lord. Ahhh ahhhh ahhhhh AAAAHhHHhHh AHAAAHAHHAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAH >The end is closer than you think dear one, are you ready?! OHHHH GODDDD OH GOD OH GOD Oh God Oh God Oh God Oh God Oh God oh god o god o god o god o god o god that was good How was it for you my lovely daughter? > BriceW >Man of God! randall g
From randallg@telemark.net Sat Dec 28 11:11:58 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet.evangelical,alt.christnet.philosophy,alt.christnet.theology,alt.religion.christian,talk.atheism Subject: Re: Jesus Christ the philosopher In article , realistic@seanet.com says... > >Dear readers: > >This is the time of year. I find much joy in Christmas. >Is it possible to consider The Christ just in the light of his >philosophical contribution to humankind? >Some questions come to mind. > >What do you think the philosophy of Jesus is trying to teach the world? The philosophy of Jesus isn't trying to do anything. Why are you anthropomorphizing it? Presumably you mean the self-proclaimed followers of the philosophy of Jesus. It's hard to say. Most of these people aren't trying to teach the world anything. They just try to live, like everyone else. The philosophy of Jesus was a primitive sort of communism, coupled with obvious and already accepted principles of basic honesty and restraint. Christians currently pay lip service to some of this, but are, in the end, about as moral as everybody else. >Why has this philosophy been so popular? The main reason, is that a Roman emperor (Constantine?) switched the Roman empire's state religion from Roman paganism to Christianity all at once. He had murdered several of his relatives, and his current religion, Mithraism, would not forgive him for this sin. Christianity would. Bingo. The Roman empire was the direct ancestor of Western civilization. This act, coupled with Christianity's central tenet of prosyletization, by force if necessary, has led to its current position as the most powerful of all the world's religions. Most Christians today are unaware of its origins. The religion is now presented as a "feel-good" kind of thing, so Christians are not easily led away. It is also a more modern religion than many of its competitors. The whole shtick about orginal sin, the sacrifice of God Himself for us, thereby earning us a spot in Heaven, is brilliant. IMO Paul, the inventor of Christianity, was a genius religion engineer. >I hope that these questions make a better Christmas for you. It distracted me for a few minutes. That's OK. >Joy to the world, wouldnít that be nice.(no exclamation point) I guess. Depends what you mean. A worldwide Christian theocracy? >rich randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Dec 29 18:03:30 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.atheism Subject: Re: Misunderstanding about Christianity In article <5a6f7o$9eo@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>, patsysadina@worldnet.att.net says... > >I don't understand a premise of Christianity. Ok, So Jesus/Christ is >extremely significent in the Christian sectors of religion, correct? >Christ plays a huge role in the practice or CHRISTian religions,correct? >Yet if the CHRISTians follow what they know to be the teachings of Christ >and believe so greatly in him, then why don't they believe in what he >did...Judiasm? (I am not a Jew but am taking an outside view from another >religious stand point.) In addition, if I am correct, Jesus was sent >from God and if Jesus was sent from God wouldn't he know the most about >God, and therefor if Jesus knows the most about God wouldn't Jesus's way >of praying to God (Judiasm) be the one to acknoledge? That is if you >believe Jesus is all he is said to be in the Christian religions. Please >feel free to post responses from any perspective. Thank You Jesus is quoted in the bible as saying something like "the law remains, not one jot or tittle shall be changed". Elsewhere he said things about being there for the Jews and not the gentiles. The Jews would have expected this from their Messiah. However, when Paul invented Christianity decades later, he knew that observing the bizarre Jewish law was something that would never fly with anyone else, and he wanted to start a great, worldwide religion. So, being the genius religion engineer that he was, he changed that part and made Christianity significantly easier to observe, in terms of laws and rules about everyday life. This is, of course, one of the many impossible contradictions you need to accept in order to believe in Christianity. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Dec 31 11:59:58 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Misunderstanding about Christianity In article <852002570.13805@dejanews.com>, semper@erols.com says... > >In article <5a6f7o$9eo@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>, > Barbara Sacks wrote: >> >> I don't understand a premise of Christianity. Ok, So Jesus/Christ is >> extremely significent in the Christian sectors of religion, correct? >> Christ plays a huge role in the practice or CHRISTian religions,correct? >> Yet if the CHRISTians follow what they know to be the teachings of Christ >> and believe so greatly in him, then why don't they believe in what he >> did...Judiasm? (I am not a Jew but am taking an outside view from another >> religious stand point.) In addition, if I am correct, Jesus was sent >> from God and if Jesus was sent from God wouldn't he know the most about >> God, and therefor if Jesus knows the most about God wouldn't Jesus's way >> of praying to God (Judiasm) be the one to acknoledge? That is if you >> believe Jesus is all he is said to be in the Christian religions. Please >> feel free to post responses from any perspective. Thank You > Barbara, > Let me see if I can clear up a few things, since you don't know much about >Christianity, She knows enough to wonder why Christianity is such a different religion than Judaism, when Jesus was a practicing Jew and said he did not intend to change the religion. >or our Lord, Jesus, who, yes, was born of the Jews--but He was, >and IS both the Son of God, plus is God, as well, being the second member of the >Holy Trinity. God is 3 persons, yet remains ONE God. Typical obfuscated bullshit. None of this makes any sense. >Jesus Christ does not >just play 'a huge role' in our beliefs, He is the 'Chief Cornerstone' of >everything--the Word of God, through which God created the the whole material >world. Thanks to Paul, who invented Christianity long after Jesus died. >We follow Jesus, the Person, who taught us to love one >another--something almost everybody has extreme trouble in doing!!! He taught other things too, and not all of it makes good sense. The teachings of Jesus were a primitive sort of Communism, coupled with some banal observations on morality and restraint. >The Law of >God was originally given to the Jewish people, giving the exact requirements of >God for a person to be perfect in everything--thought, word and deed. If a >person did not keep the ENTIRE law, as written, then that person was not perfect >in God's eyes--he was a sinner, in need of a Savior. No, he simply was guilty of breaking the law, and must therefore suffer the prescribed punishment. The OT does not make it clear that any kind of saviour is necessary. Hell, it doesn't even talk about an afterlife. >God sent Jesus, His son, >to be that Savior--Jesus was the only one who could "fullfill" God's law by >never commiting one single transgression of the law. There are descriptions in the NT of Jesus behaving in a less than exemplary fashion. >Therefore, in God's eyes, >Jesus qualified to be the PERFECT sacrifice, to win mankinds salvation, and be >restored to fellowship with God, This is the theory... >{Who cut mankind off when man committed sins >against God}---God's standard is 'PERFECTION or nothing', and mankind almost got >nothing!!! This God is one sick puppy. >The Jews rejected Jesus, because they wanted a 'Warrior' Messiah, to >come and save them from the Romans---Jesus came preaching and teaching of God's >love, mercy, and forgiveness. That's not what they wanted to hear. That's because they had been promised a Messiah, not a Saviour. There's nothing in the OT indicating the need for God to come to earth and die as a sacrifice for human sins. Paul invented the whole "saviour" idea much later. >The >Jews pray to God only--we pray to God, but in Jesus's name. After all, God sent >Jesus for us to FOLLOW, we Gentiles, and believing Jews. The era of the LAW, >that the Jews lived under, is gone, and the era of "GRACE", because of Jesus, is >now in effect. Now, when we transgress, or sin, we go to Jesus, and ask His >forgiveness, and so on. So you think the Jews really are praying to the same God as you Christians? Where does a good religious Jew go after death? >Maybe you think God is a harsh task master, requiring >only perfect behavior, and thoughts, of His creatures. That would be quite the understatement. >Well, if mankind had not >willfully sinned, in the first place, he never would have inherited the >sin-nature, We inherit the nature that is passed to us by our genes and our upbringing. There is no such thing as Original Sin. >{sin is NOT committed by accident!!} because of his spiritual death >when he committed that first sin; so 'being a good person', and not sinning, >would NOT >have been a problem----it is NOW, because of that sin nature. The damage has >already been done, by mankind, to himself--Jesus came to rescue mankind, because >God told mankind that the wages of his sin was death!!{He told mankind that he >would die, BEFORE mankind committed A sin, yet mankind chose not to believe >God} Both Spiritual and >physical death. Bleat bleat bleat ... Baaah baaah baaah ... >Hey, if people don't like it, they should take it all up with >Almighty God--after all, it's His Universe!!! I wish I could, but the bastard doesn't exist. >Hope I helped somewhat. Ciao!! You probably did, but not in the way you hope... randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Dec 31 18:55:28 1996 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Jesus Christ the philosopher In article <852054043.28279@dejanews.com>, semper@erols.com says... > >In article <5aanbl$stb$3@grissom.powerup.com.au>, > rmottare@powerup.com.au (Raymot) wrote: >> >> wpenrose@interaccess.com (William R. Penrose) says: >> >In article <32C67E41.31C2@sonic.net> Len writes: >> > >> >>In case you didn't know Jesus, the Christ, as a FRUITCAKE, and a >> >>CRACKPOT, and >> >>STUPID, >> >> >On a hot summer afternoon, I'd sooner split a six-pack with Christ. People >> >who talk in capital letters are not usually happy with themselves and not >> >generally fun to be with. >> > >> >Bill >> >> Maybe. Only Jesus could turn the six-pack into a dozen >> kegs and as many packets of salt 'n vinegar chips as could feed >> a multitude. Even then, he'd say "Do you have a beer? Give it >> to a man who has none. Give him also your crisps. >> Then you'd get into a benign conversation about whether the >> woman at the next table had nice legs or not. First he'd slap >> you down for adultery, and add a few words about grinding and >> gnashing of teeth. You'd say "Sure, but hey, I like her legs-- >> that's just my opinion", to which he would humourlessly retort, >> "He who is not for me is against me." >> Then you'd have to cop all the women coming up and wiping his >> feet with their hair. Hypocrisy! >> Not to mention his jokes. "Did you hear the one about the prodigal >> son?..." Sense of humour? How many times was Jesus noted as >> having a good belly laugh in the gospels. (Or anywhere else for >> that matter). >> So to placate him, you'd offer to pay for the next round, take out >> a fifty, and get a lecture about rich men and camels. >> BTW, don't invite your sister to this pub session, for Jesus will >> say, "He who does not hate his family cannot be a disciple of >> mine". >> >> No thanks! Now Paul, by contrast -- take him along with a few >> mates, get him a bit pissed and you'll have a riot! >> John I would avoid -- he was more your dope fiend/ acid head type. >> >> Raymot > Gentlemen {and I use that term loosely} > First off, God not only created human beings, and this world, You have good evidence for this, right? I thought not. >He is also the one to thank because you DO have a sense of humor Really? How? When? Does it say this in the Bible somewhere? >{and I use THAT term lightly}. In your opinion. I thought it was hilarious. >No one gets a bigger kick out of things that are genuinely funny, and >cute, than God--not to mention Jesus, The God of the Bible has no sense of humour whatever. You're making this up as you go along. (Though if He did have a sense of humour, He probably wouldn't like anything stronger than Family Circus). >who happens to be God's "chip off the old block". The technical term is "bastard". >Unfortunalely, human beings have a tendancy to over do, and get extreme >about everything--including using that sense of humor God gave them. Horrors! Shame! It's the dreaded "extreme use of sense of humour"! I forget, which Commandment is it that prohibits this? >Laughing >in scorn at others, making fun of others, and laughing at things they know full >well are NOT funny--generally corrupting their sense of humor, at the expense of >those they like to mock, and make fun of. What's wrong with mocking religion? Who gets hurt? We're not laughing at a real person in real misfortune. >Pretty picture of the human race, wouldn't you say?? There are much, much worse things going on than tasteless jokes. >I'm going to just love seeing you have to face Jesus, and >appologize for the things you even said in just these couple of letters!! Talk >about funny---"He who laughs last, laughs best" I think is the phrase. It always comes down to this. "My God's gonna kick your ass, and I'm gonna love watching it". You pathetic ghoul. Bet you're looking forward to hearing the screams of the damned in Hell piped all over Heaven as elevator music. >And, guess who'll have that last laugh?? Looks like it's me, unless someone laughs at what I wrote. >Too funny!!! Ciao..... Your bit was almost as funny as the exchange you were complaining about. Though you've got a ways to go if you want to be as sanctimoniously hilarious as Boatwright or Saved Soul. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
At 12:04 AM 1/1/97 -0800, you wrote: >I read your information, and have a couple of questions. I am certainly >not judging your beliefs. I am a spiritual person, and so of course my >beliefs do differ from yours, but thats ok. Fine. All humans are spiritual, to some degree, including myself. The source (or influence) of this spirituality is a matter of debate. I am personally convinced there is nothing supernatural involved. >We all have our own beliefs >even those in a certain religion (if they dare express their opinion) >My question is this: > >Do you believe in life on other planets, other galaxies etc.? There is no evidence for or against the existance of life elsewhere, so I do not have a firm belief one way or the other. However, my understanding of the processes of life here on Earth leads me to suspect that life elsewhere is probable, if only because the universe is so staggeringly huge that even very unlikely events will happen occasionally. All we can do to investigate this is listen to the radio waves arriving from outer space and look for an intelligent signal. None has yet been found. All this tells us is that there seems to be no technological civilization within a few hundred light years of us, at this particular time in the universe's history. This is such a tiny portion of the universe space and time span that we cannot really decide whether life exists elsewhere based on this. Unless a signal is found, of course. >Based on reason, science, knowledge and logic, how do you explain >spirits, ghosts (these are not the same) As a skeptic, I am aware that there is literally *no* reproducible evidence for ghosts or spirits. Until some reproducible evidence shows up, I will assume that they do not exist, and that those who think they are in contact with them are deluded, or frauds. >subconsciousness, I'm no expert, but those who research it have got a good grasp. There is a lot of research these days in cognition and consciousness. >and how we ever got here. This is easier than explaining ghosts, spirits and the subconscious. The evidence for the evolution of humans from more primitive life is all around and forms the basis of evolutionary theory. It is an undisputable fact that we (humans) have evolved from earlier, more primitive life and that we recently (a few millions of years ago) share common ancestry with the apes. Evolutionary theory attempts to explain how this process happens. >I have a hard time understanding that through evolution >we were absolutly nothing, and then here we are. Although evolutionary theory does not attempt to explain the origins of life, it explains very well the gradual changes and improvements in species from very early, primitive forms, to the extremely complicated forms such as the primates, which includes humans. Evolutionary theory has nothing to say about how the *first* life arose, just how it has developed since. The origin of life is called "abiogenesis" and is the subject of much scientific research and speculation. A number of plausible theories have been proposed. I believe that this problem will be solved, eventually. Given the right mix of initial conditions - minerals and chemicals in the oceans, composition of the atmosphere, electromagnetic energy such as lightning, and a few hundred million years, it is perfectly plausible to me that organic, self-replicating molecules could form. Under certain conditions, it may even be inevitable. >I also have a >difficult time understanding how I evolved from ..... whatever it may >have been that we truely evolved from. There is no simple answer to this question. Nobody understands it really well although the "broad strokes" are pretty clear. Living with unanswered questions is part of accepting reality, and infinitely better than making the answers up. The honest "I don't know yet, but this is what we have found out so far, and this is where what we have found out suggests we investigate, and perhaps one day we'll know" is far more satisfactory than a dogmatic and unsupportable "Krishna did it" or the equally unsupportable "Allah did it" or the equally unsupportable "God did it". One thing you should realize is that if the theory of evolution were not essentially correct, then much of modern agriculture, petroleum geology and medical science would simply not work. >That is another discussion that >I am curious about. >As I said, I am not judging you, I am just curious and like to learn >others opnions. Well, you've got mine. I highly recommend that you spend some time looking at the talk.origins website - specifically the Frequently Asked Questions http://earth.ics.uci.edu:8080/ When you get there, click "Browse the Archive". This site is a very good summary of the "state of the art" in scientific knowledge regarding evolution, abiogenesis and related fields, along with the standard refutations of the Creationist arguments. >Thanks >Di Hope this helps in your search. Feel free to correspond again, if you wish. >Also, since you don't believe in God, I must also believe you don't >believe in Satan either. Is this correct? Err, yes. I am an atheist, so I do not believe in the existance of any gods at all. This definately includes the Satan figure from the Christian mythology. Name any other god you want - I won't believe in it either :) Take care,
At 08:54 AM 1/2/97 -0800, you wrote: >Randall, >Thanks for answering my questions. Your opinions are interesting. One >question I still have is your belief in spirituality. Please explain >this to me a little more. You said your convinced theres nothing >supernatural involved. Yes. Spirituality, to me, is an emotional state (probably more than one). I see no evidence that any supernatural forces are involved. For instance, drugs can have a profound affect on a person's spiritual feelings, as can many other kinds of external stimuli. The problem with assuming a supernatural component is that there is no evidence at all that can help to describe it, or even narrow it down. That's why there are so many different and contradictory religions practiced by so many different, but spiritual, people. Practically everyone tends to attribute their spiritual emotions to the god or gods they were raised to believe in. This, to me, says that the religion is taught. My personal favourite religion, Wicca, is profoundly spiritual. Much more so than Christianity. Many Wiccans are actually atheists and see their "gods" as metaphors for the interconnectedness of the earth and all its life. I'm not Wiccan by any means, but this comes closest to the way I feel. I just don't think there's any magic, infinite or intelligent force field. >Do you then try to live your live in love? Is >this what you mean by you believe in Spirituality? When I consciously try to live my life in a particular way (which isn't often - living is most of the time an instinctive thing), I try to live by my ethical code, which is based on humanistic principles and reason. I don't know what you mean by "live your life in love" which is one of the problems with spirituality - it's hard to define. As far as love is concerned, I of course want as much as I can get, and because of the nature of love, that requires giving a lot of it as well. This is a good thing, and I think I understand this, but, like many (most?) people, am not particularly good at it... I am talking here about personal love that exists between individuals who know each other well. If you're refering to the Christian-style "brotherly love to all fellow man" I don't think that really exists, or that even the greatest saints had any more of that than I do. It always bugs me when a Christian says to me on the net "I love you". No you don't, you don't even know me. You are diluting the word love into something meaningless. I'd much rather hear "I respect your rights to life liberty and happiness and will help you defend them". That is how I feel about the 5.8 billions humans I don't personally know. I couldn't say I love them all. No, properly reasoned ethics provides a healthier and more helpful approach to living in a world with so many strangers. And having a positive, kind and helpful disposition makes one attractive to others, and encourages others to respond in kind. This is all a good thing, and worth striving for. I don't need an ancient book of fables to tell me this. And I *certainly* don't need the threat of eternal torture to persuade me. >I live my life in >love and light. But of course believe in many many things you do not. You sound like a marvelous person, Diana. >But these are our choices...Thank goodness we have the right to our >choices... Yes, though the religious right would like to do something about mine. >Have a wonderful day. >Diana I will, today and always.
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Jan 01 23:37:04 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Jesus Christ the philosopher In article <852087362.7074@dejanews.com>, semper@erols.com says... > >In article <32d6502d.514728868@news.borg.com>, > humbug@bah.com (Threadbane) wrote: >> >> realistic@seanet.com (Richard F. Hall) > wrote >> >> [... >> >What do you think the philosophy of Jesus is trying to teach the world? >> >> Turn everybody into xians. >> >> >Why has this philosophy been so popular? >> >> Sales and marketing in the private sector, force and propaganda in the >> political. > Humbug, > First off, Jesus was NOT a philosipher By the usual definition, and if he existed, he probably was. Not a very good one though. >--He was, and IS God's Son. Errr, yeah, of course, hey why don't you point the gun the other way... >You know >absolutely nothing of Him, or what He tausght us, or even WHY He came here, in >the first place. I've read the Bible so I know as much as you do. >"HE" is so popular--not any philosophy. Au contraire, all anyone knows about him are the words ascribed to him. It's his alleged words in your paper idol that are worshipped. >He is loved, and >revered, and followed, and we look to HIM for the Salvation we know we ALL need, >and trust HIM--not some half-baked philosophy. A 2000 year old dead guy? And you wonder why we think you're insane? >Philosophy is what natural >mankind tries to devise to help himself out of the mess he is in. Weirdest definition I've seen. People usually use their own skills and determination to get themselves out of messes. >Sorry--for >you, that you think you dislike Him so much, Why do you think that if I don't believe your god exists, I must dislike or hate it? >becauses He's such a wonderful >person, God, and Savior. Hey, glad it works for you. Don't worry about me. >Ciao.... OH, and Good Luck--you'll need it!!! Hey, the standard Christian "torture for eternity" threat again! Quelle surprise! randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Jan 03 17:44:42 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Pleased for him, but also disgusted. In article <32ccb862.2617395@news.ozemail.com.au>, stix@ozemail.com.au says... > > >Greetings folks. :) > >A long-time friend of mine got married last Saturday, 28/12/96, and though >I wasn't part of the bridal party (whew!) I was invited to both the >ceremony and the reception. [ snip rest of story - read it in the original post ] >Stix Interesting story, Stix. I've got a similar one, except I WAS in the bridal party. Several years ago my best friend got married on the other side of the country (a long way here in Canada). I flew out to be his best man. He is of Mennonite background but is an atheist now. His bride was from an fine upstanding old Catholic family in the area, so she and her mother had persuaded the local priest to put on the whole High Mass, which the Catholics never do for a mixed wedding. She is an atheist too, by the way. However they're both atheists by reason of apathy more than anything. You know the type, they just don't care religion or gods. She just really wanted the high mass, more for tradition and familial reasons than anything else. So here I was at this hour long Catholic high mass, right at the front, kneeling (up-down-up-down-up-down) in front of the priest and the altar. It was really weird, but the whole time, I was just laughing to myself, watching all this pointless mumbo jumbo going on. It was actually kind of interesting. I am proud of myself that I managed to look dignified the entire time, without laughing out loud or anything. The one thing I wouldn't do was bow my head or close my eyes. The best part was when Communion happened. The entire bride's side of the church gets up to file past the priest and eat a piece of Jesus, and the whole groom's side just sits there (none of them were Catholic). The groom and myself didn't partake either, of course. I think that quite bothered some of the Catholics who were present! Ha ha ha! They went through the whole vow process too, probably knowing full well that they wouldn't be keeping some of them. (They've recently had their first child - who will probably never see the inside of a Catholic church...) Are they hypocrites? I don't think so, because they were just mouthing the words to keep some people happy. They don't believe in God, so they're not worried about any longterm consequences. So they fooled the priest - who cares? It's like someone putting a gun to your head and forcing you to admit you love Jesus. I'd sure do it, it's only words, who really cares? Only people who think their immortal soul is at stake. It's different degrees of the same concept. There was no intention to deceive for gain, or to someone else's detriment. PS I've been to other religious ceremonies, and I usually do what you do - sit at the back and leave if any sermonizing happens. PSS I know how you feel about all the tortured Jesus's staring in agony from the walls. Gruesome. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
At 01:12 AM 1/4/97 -0800, you wrote: >I found your Sight By Using My Name Randall *****. Hi Randall! I've had a couple other of emails from Randall's. It's fun. I'd like to note here that you have a weird way of capitalizing various words in the middle of your sentences. Why is that? >I have never E-Mailed >anyone other than my close friends. Well, don't get into the habit. It can be a waste of time. >I'm one of those Stupid Southerners >Whose Friends and Neighbors and Everyone I Know have always been raised >as a Christian Hey, no reason to stereotype yourself right off the bat. I'll stereotype you once I've seen some of your opinions, don't worry ;-) >Although... I have Not Always Lived The Life I should -I'm >Considered Normal as far as I Know. Very interesting Brian... What sort of things have you done that may get you considered "abnormal" according to those around you? Bear in mind that I don't know you, anything about you, or anything about the place where you live. As a non-Christian I have ethics that are a lot more "humanistic" than those you are probably familiar with. I don't consider anything bad unless it hurts others in some way. >I'm Not what we consider around here a >Holy Roller,But It Really Bothered Me When You > Expressed Your >Thoughts About Christians. I have no idea what you have read - I've written a lot of shit in those web pages. It would help if you specified which thoughts you took the most exception to, and why, so I could address your concerns directly. >It Sounds Like You Have really Put a lot of >thought into the way you want to believe and how you feel about >Christians. Thank you for realizing that. I've had people email me and tell me I know nothing of Christianity. Hell, I was a standard, believing Christian for the first half of my life. And since I became an atheist I have actually learned far more about the Christian faith, its theology, and its origins, than I did when I was within the organization. When you are a believer, it is so easy to ignore huge parts of Christian history and its implications. >It is very unlike me to respond to a page of any type. Hey, like I said, don't waste too much time on it... >My first Thoughts were that someone has tryed to "Hit You Over The Head >with the Bible or some Christian Has Disapointed You at sometime. Not really. I was raised from birth in the faith, in a church which didn't stress evangelicalism, so it was all pretty boring, actually. What convinced me that Christianity is bunk, was simply an inquiring mind and a technical education. >Please Consider this: > >Is it Possible that Christians are Right? No. I used to think it was, but there are some major reasons that indicate Christians are probably not right. I won't list them all here - you say you've read some of my web pages. The major Christian points are: - a very very powerful all loving god created the universe and us - we were created sinful by nature so god had to send himself to earth as a sacrificial human on our behalf Frankly, this is absurd and impossible. There are other explanations for our existence which make much more sense. >If they are Right And a person is not Saved and does not Believe in Jesus >Christ That He Would Burn In Hell? Well, if the Christians are right, your statement above would be correct, according to the more popular Christian sects. Remember that there are, of course, some significant portions of Christianity which do not believe in an eternal hell for sinners. This argument is called "Pascal's Wager" and is named after the philosopher who first posed it, over 200 years ago. Pascal was a brilliant mathematician and philosopher, but he made several mistakes with this argument. The main one is that there are more than one possible gods. It is likely that if you believe in the wrong one, you will go to that religion's hell. There are so many different possible gods that the option "atheist - believed in no gods" looks like it'll get more favour than "believed in the wrong god". Most gods are jealous gods. I can observe the beliefs of all kinds of different Christian sects (and other religions) and compare them. You cannot, because you are ensnared within one of them. >I Hope you have a good Life. I do, thanks very much. I sincerely hope you do too. >I hope That My Writing didn't Make You Feel >any worse toward Christianty. Not at all. You have reminded me that there are some Christians who are not obnoxiosly self-righteous and sanctimonious. I can't stand that, and I appreciate your attitude. >Randall *****
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Jan 05 16:45:54 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Physicists admit only God could have created the universe! In article <5am8ff$no5$1@info1.fnal.gov>, cinar@D0SB15.FNAL.GOV says... > >"John P. Boatwright" writes an unusual bs: > >[in addition to his usual bs] > >>(By the way isn't it odd how the earth tilts each year giving a >> summer and winter time. I thought that from the gyroscopic >> effect it's pretty hard to cyclicly move something like the >> mass of a spinning earth against it's axis. What force is it >> that causes the yearly tilt?) > >Hahahahahaha!! Idiot! And possibly: "What a giveaway!" This is such an incredibly moronic and stupid statement, from someone who is supposed to have some technical knowledge, that I am now wondering if Boatwright is an elaborate troll. If so, he's one of the best ever. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Jan 07 23:28:25 1997 Newsgroups: talk.atheism,alt.atheism Subject: Re: Prove God's existence In article <5at6ei$krg@newstoo.ericsson.se>, eeinma@eei.ericsson.se says... > >stix@ozemail.com.au (Stix) writes: >>Rebecca J. Ross posted the following to alt.atheism, >> >>>God Bless you, >> >>In the name of Rebecca, I hereby call the holy spirit a lying servant of >>satan. > >In case anyone doesn't follow that, Stix just committed the one sin >defined in the Big Book of Magic Spells as eternally unforgivable >[Matthew 12:31,32 Luke 12:10]. Preachers can quit trying to save >him or bless him now. The regulars here are all irredeemable. > >No souls to save here, it's all over, we're damned, >move along there please, move along to christnet. Yes, and just in case I haven't done this publicly yet: I hereby declare that the Holy Spirit is a lying, deceiving servant of Satan. Furthermore, the Holy Spirit is a homosexual abomination who regularly buggers Jesus, while Jehovah watches. I will be happy to utter this blasphemy again anytime, in the name of any Christian who declares he will pray to God on my behalf. >----- >Niall randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Thu Jan 09 22:11:09 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism.moderated Subject: Re: Dance and Christian religion In article <32d3606e.4932602@hamburg.netsurf.de>, andreas.keller@hamburg.netsurf.de says... > >Some christian groups seem to believe that dancing is sinful. > >1. Which churches teach that dancing is a sin? Around here the Mennonites are well known for this. Q. Why don't the Mennonites believe in pre-marital sex? A. Because it leads to dancing. I heard this one from a Mennonite. They're not supposed to drink either. Other than that they are fine people, not evangelistic, after having been persecuted for centuries by other Christians because they are pacifists. They settled in remote parts of Canada and Paraguay after getting booted out of Germany and Russia. Many Calvinist-oriented churches disavow fun of all kinds, not just dancing, but drinking, games, colourful clothing and so on. Oddly enough, I grew up in a Calvinist church (Christian Reformed) which had no specific prohibitions on these. However they sure didn't have much fun either. >3. I am doing African dance as a hobby. I noticed that mostly >women are doing this. I am one of very few males with this hobby. Sounds like something I should try... randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Jan 10 18:56:40 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: 19. Pregnant woman shoots her fetus. In article <5b352j$lii$10@news.sas.ab.ca>, sunnyday@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca says... > > A violent person can be holding a SHOTGUN to the fetus of a pregnant > woman,BLOW THE HELL OUT OF IT AND STILL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANYTHING!! > Blow the fetus and the belly of a woman right out, and still not be > charged with anything ! Fuck this has got to be the stupidest thing I have ever seen posted here. Not even Jy or Shaved Shithead would say something as utterly moronic as this. In case you're serious, do you really think you could shoot out the belly of a woman, pregnant or otherwise, and not be charged with a crime? What planet are you from? In this part of the world you can't even point a gun at someone without committing a crime. > Because abortion is LEGAL. What does it matter what instrument is used? > What does it matter if it is a surgical knife or a SHOTGUN ? Abortion > is abortion. Right ? That is why this case is important. My understanding is that abortions are performed at the direct request of the pregnant woman. I'm pretty sure that forced abortion, via shotgun or other means, is not legal.
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Jan 10 23:22:27 1997 Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,alt.fan.publius,sci.skeptic,alt.religion Subject: Re: Stix Gets Mad Too Much In article <5b46s6$goi@whitecliff.sierra.net>, says... > >Aaron Dodd (acd@cyllene.uwa.edu.au) wrote: >: Jy (mccoy@sierra.net) wrote: >: : Have you noticed that Stix is getting too violent in his messages? > >: I have noticed that he can get quite animated when he's confronted by >: abject stupidity (eg you). > >: : If you >: : are in agreement with me, let's petition him to tone it down. > >: Why? Are his responses intimidating you? > >Not intimidating. More like, you know, let's mellow it down somewhat. >It's not like it's the end of world, here. We don't want to get >melodramatic, you know. Melodramatic? You are one of the famous net kooks. You've been posting nonsense to alt.atheism for so long you have become a legend. It has become a tradition to censor your name and "Ne'er utter it again" for Christ's sake. You deserve what you get you stupid fuck. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Jan 14 07:36:32 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.christnet,talk.philosophy.misc,talk.atheism,talk.origins,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.religion.christian Subject: Re: Gladys, The Basics for a Newbie Please In article <32D9AB51.2E8C@flash.net>, rwalbin@flash.net says... > >gladys wrote: >> >(snip) >> >> "Either the universe was created, or it was not created. The rational >> akeptic will never be able to know for a certainty which side of the >> proposition should be upheld. Therefore, he should construct a moral >> code which is consistent with both views. To do otherwise is >> irrational. To hold any scripture or writing as a guide in your >> investigations of the universe is irrational, for the universe is the >> universe, A=A, and whatever the writer of a scripture observed which >> would be of value in the construction of a moral code is also plainly >> visible to the rational skeptic." > >(snip) > >> With Love, >> >> Gladys >----------------------------------------------------------- > > I have been reading your posts in this newsgroup, "alt.atheism", with >great interest all day. I started with your post "FAQ:Corrections >Proposed", dated 1/3/97, and finished with "Gladys Invites Del Once >Again". This is my first time to read posts from this newsgroup and it >appears that your ideas have generated a lot of heated debate. You seem >to be a very intelligent lady and I would love to learn more about your >philosophical beliefs. Oh... My... God... > I have not had the pleasure of reading any of your material prior to >the post dated 1/3/97, and forgive me if I am asking you to repeat >yourself; but I would like to read more on your thoughts concerning "a >moral code which is consistent with -both- views that the universe was >either created or not created". That IS her thought. She leaps directly from this false dichotomy into fullblown and entirely unsupported theism, with a female creator god named "Talula" who just wants everybody to have sex all the time. She's a crackpot. > I personally agree that we currently do not have enough knowledge, and >maybe never will have, to know absolutely for sure if there is a God who >created the universe or not. This leaves us with the problem of how do >we live our lives with this uncertainty. What code of conduct should we >embrace that gives us the best chance to at once please God, (if He/She >exists), and enjoy the wholesome pleasures of this temporal life without >harming our fellow man? This is the whole stupid crux. What you do is simply ignore the existence of this hypothetical god. You put it well - "enjoy the wholesome pleasures of this temporal life without harming our fellow man". What possible creator god would have a problem with that? > I have a totally open mind regarding this issue in particular, along >with your many other philosophical beliefs in general. Although I am an >engineer, I am not particularly interested in "vector space" or any >other mathematical theories which purport to prove or disprove anyone's >creation theories. I want to know what -you- think, Gladys, based on >your own special background, training, and unique perspectives. > > I reserve the right, of course, to disagree with your beliefs, and >debate them in open forum if I have anything worthwhile to say; but I >promise that I'll never flame you or anybody else who posts to this >newsgroup just because I don't agree with your logic or opinions. People's opinions are disagreed upon all the time, but you will find that whatever Gladys uses for logic is nothing like what everyone else uses for logic, and that's what gets people frustrated. You will find that she ignores practically everything anyone says to her, except when she picks a single phrase or thought to expound upon (while ignoring all else). She has demonstrated all the logical fallacies as well as plain dishonesty. >You >have much to share with us and I, for one, am very anxious to learn more >about your interesting theories. All I can say is, wow. How many religions have sucked you in so far? randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Thu Jan 16 09:21:40 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Morality is Convention - Debunk -Debunked In article <32DC7715.4BCC@earthlink.net>, jfacts@earthlink.net says... >>bbeckcom@mail.utexas.edu (Brian Augustus Beckcom) sez: >> I can't show you Z. Nor can you show me Z. But to call something moral >> implies something else is immoral. But to say morality is relative >> destroys this possibility. >> Unless you use the classical equivocation 'moral to A, not moral to B', >> in which case, 'moral' has *no* meaning at all. Hitler was moral, Dahmer >> was moral, etc.... > >Was Moses moral? Was Joshua moral? What was >the practical difference between Hitler and >those two prophets of God? I think the biggest *practical* difference was that they were probably responsible for fewer deaths of innocents, mostly because their technology was primitive, and there weren't tens of millions of people already living in the promised land. That's not really a *moral* difference though... randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Thu Jan 16 22:06:43 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.christnet,talk.philosophy.misc,talk.atheism,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.religion.christian Subject: Re: Gladys, The Basics for a Newbie Please In article <32DD6A75.47DD@flash.net>, rwalbin@flash.net posted to alt.atheism: > >Richard: > Randall, one of the concerns I have about any creator God is >motivation: why did He create this universe -- for His own voyuristic >fun and circumspect enjoyment (like a lab experiment) with no >interaction at all; or to create beings (human) who have the >intellectual capacity to contemplate God's existence and "worship" His >greatness; or to be involved in human lives on a personal basis through >some form of "spiritual" communication; or what? I don't know if this >"hypothetical" creator god wants us to enjoy life, or instead, struggle >to achieve spiritual and moral maturity perhaps. The question for me >is, can we discover, using the tools He has given us (logic, >mathematics, science, intuition, history, etc.) what His motivation was >and what He wants from us (if He exists)? One can speculate endlessly on what an assumed creator god's motivations may be. We see a lot of that around here. However everything depends on unprovable assumptions, so theists usually just pick a few assumptions that they feel comfortable with out of thin air and go nuts with it. For instance, if we assume that the creator has some sort of affinity, or "love" for its creation, various reasoning (well founded or no) can be applied to come up with all kinds of attributes that this god must therefore have. But it's all just smoke and mirrors - none of these assumptions have any evidence for them, it's all just wishful thinking. It seems to me that any being that powerful would be foolish to give his creations minds and reason, carefully disguise its existence from all rational investigation, and then get pissed when we all don't mindlessly pick a religion and become drooling idiots. But who knows? Another equally valid assumption is that the creator is a fool. >Richard: > There may be bits and pieces of -all- religions that contain elements >of the "cosmic truths" I am searching for. I have studied many >religious beliefs for a very long time and have discarded most of their >teachings. Indeed, I have been "sucked in" by the persuasive arguments >of many religious proponents during my lifetime. I have read some bits >and pieces of Gladys' posts which I like, and agree with. I continue, >however, to keep my mind and my options open. Hmm. Perhaps your utter lack of results is evidence in itself. A lack of evidence is evidence for a lack. Apparently you lack the mindless faith attributes that characterize the usual strong theists we see around here. Because of this, I'm afraid your search will probably be endless. (Unless perhaps you want to buy Gladys' Talula creator. I have no idea where she got this from, it's not part of any existing myths I've heard of, and as far as I know, Gladys has never explained how she knows about Talula.) I urge you to consider atheism in your search. Stick around here for a while and you will see very good arguments that morality and spirituality are not necessarily the result of supernatural beings or events. In fact, there are very good materialistic explanations and theories which have the remarkable distinction of fitting the facts. Most theists are simply too immature to face reality without a big make believe daddy in the sky taking care of them, and telling them how to behave. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Jan 17 17:30:01 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.christnet,talk.philosophy.misc,talk.atheism,talk.origins,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.religion.christian Subject: Re: Gladys, The Basics for a Newbie Please In article <32dda099.67024087@news.insync.net>, fireweaver@insync.net says... > >On 14 Jan 1997 15:27:27 GMT >randallg@telemark.net (randall g) >as message <5bg8kv$c321@news.bctel.net> >-- posted from: alt.atheism: > >[snipp} >>| >>|That IS her thought. She leaps directly from this false dichotomy into >>|fullblown and entirely unsupported theism, with a female creator god named >>|"Talula" who just wants everybody to have sex all the time. She's a crackpot. > >I can think of far worse bases for theistic beliefs. I wonder what the church >services would be like. :-) > >Erikc -- firewevr@insync.net Frankly, if I was forced at gunpoint to pick a religion, I'd email Gladys first. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Jan 17 17:34:46 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.christnet,talk.philosophy.misc,talk.atheism,talk.origins,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.religion.christian Subject: Re: Gladys, The Basics for a Newbie Please In article <32DEC2CF.1669@dragontree.com>, mary@dragontree.com says... >> randall g said: >> >>That IS her thought. She leaps directly from this false dichotomy into >>fullblown and entirely unsupported theism, > >Sounded like Pascal's Wager to me. Updated, of course. > >Sounds like she's keeping her head when all about are losing theirs, in a suspicious >amount of ad hominem. Apparently you haven't read any of her actual posts. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Jan 17 17:56:54 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Richard is cool In article <32de721a.0@galaxy.3-cities.com>, geo@3-cities.com says... > >I have spoken to Richard Albin a few times over the course of the past >couple of days and it is apparent that I misjudged his intentions. He >is a sincere fellow and exhibits the patience of Job in dealing with >me and some of the other cast members of alt.atheism. > >I can't speak for the others Richard, but I feel you are a welcome >member to this ng. I only wish that there were more of you amongst >the faith you represent. > >Geo I agree completely, and I'd like to point out to all the jerks - Bloatwright, Shaved Shit-hed, Jy, Jahnooo boop boop dee doo, and many many others (you know who you are), that you get the respect you deserve. You could all learn something from the reasonable and intelligent seekers. But you're all masochists, playing some mindless and apparantly endless game to earn more martyr points to guarantee your spot in your respective mythical heavens. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Jan 19 23:13:35 1997 Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.humanism,alt.atheism,talk.atheism,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: Carl Sagan, R.I.P. In article <32DED6C6.7CE@flash.net>, rwalbin@flash.net says... >I want to -believe- that there is a loving and understand >God who forgives Sagan for his heresy and has taken Sagan's mighty >spirit, his powerful soul, to His bosem in heaven. I do not have the >intellectual courage, as Sagan did, to share his belief that there is no >God. I want to believe that somehow, somewhere, Sagan's spirit lives >on. Richard, I really respect your feelings on this matter, as I share most of them myself. Carl Sagan has been a great inspiration to me. I just have to point out that standard Christian doctrine says that Carl Sagan's spirit is now in Hell, being tortured for eternity, due to his lack of acceptance of Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Saviour during his earthly existence. Somewhat over 80% of Americans believe this, sick as it sounds. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Thu Jan 23 22:54:15 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.philosophy.objectivism Subject: Re: HOW IDIOTIC CAN YOU GET, STIX? In article <32e70b5a.14925319@news.ozemail.com.au>, stix@ozemail.com.au says... > >Jahnu das posted the following to alt.atheism, > >>Anyone here will be able to confirm that Stix has never, ever posted a >>logical argument on the usenet. > >Let's ask the other folks. Folks? Is it what Jesper says true? Does >everyone confirm that I have "never, ever" posted a logical argument? While I have read dozens, if not hundreds of logical arguments penned by Stix in over a year, I have yet to see a single bit of logic employed by Jahnu in any fashion. Jahnu is exactly the same as the stupidest of the xtian fundies, engaging in repetition, logical fallacies of all kinds, ignoring evidence, outright lying and becoming increasingly irrational, shrill and downright obnoxious over time. His posts such as this one demonstrate a remarkable degree of projection, where everything he accuses Stix of (all lies) applies perfectly to himself. I think, if diagnosed, he would be found extremely delusional if not certifiably insane. If he was a little more "cute" like Publius or My, he could strive for net.loon or even net.kook status, but as it is, he's simply a net.asshole. One data point. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Jan 24 19:40:57 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.philosophy.objectivism Subject: Re: HOW IDIOTIC CAN YOU GET, STIX? In article <32e99001.19279981@news.wineasy.se>, jahnu@wineasy.se says... > >I do realize that it must be funny for uninitiated folks to see a bunch >of bald headed weirdos blissfully bouncing down the street. Err yes, of course, that's a perfectly natural reaction. >What you should actually be wondering, though, is, what it is that >makes people behave like that? Weakness of mind. Alienation. Desire to escape other problems. Desire for unqualified acceptance by a group, any group. A need to rebel against parental or other authority. A desperate need for easy answers to life's tough problems. I'm sure others can come up with more... These are, of course, the same things that the Campus Crusades for Christ prey upon at the beginning of every school year. No difference. Krishnas and fundies are the inevitable result - the only difference is who gets to them first. >When I saw the Hare Krishnas first time in Copenhagen like that, I >thought to myself, "these guys can't be for real." You were right, of course. They were mindless zombies, and now you are one of them. >But they were, and here I am. Which dysfunction is your excuse? >>Celibacy is best, the gross exchange of bodily fluids is so biologic >>as to be sickening. > >It is actually sickening.. when you get enough of it. It's strange >about sex, isn't it? If you have enough of it you get sick of it, and >if you don't have it you also get sick of it. I lived 5 years in >celibacy before I got married. I really do wonder why those 5 years >were the happiest years I ever experienced in my life. Could it be >that Krishna is right, when He says that you will never find >satisfaction in sense gratification? The sickest and most twisted individuals in history had severe sexual dysfunctional problems. Religions of all kinds attempt to take this most basic, and joyful, of all human activities, and twist it into a guilt ridden, disgusting thing. No wonder so many religious people are so fucked in the head. >You would love it. We have so much fun you wouldn't believe it. >Unfortunately you won't do it. Ya, I'd love to spend my days in airports begging for spare change. >Haven't met them yet. You know, I'm not in alt.atheism anymore. I'm >posting this from talk.origins. I have to admit it is a little boring >here. Ain't nobody here responding to my texts. Maybe they have >sufficient brain here to know when they are defeated. They are more intellectual/scientific in talk.origins than in talk.atheism. They have probably immediately recognized you for the insane raver that you are and simply don't bother with you. They have better things to do. The xtian creationists have a lot more of substance to say than you do, and they represent a much more immediate danger to individual freedoms in the West. At least the ICR pays lip service to science and evidence, and try to attack evolution and cosmology with some semblance of logic, lame as it is. You smurf chanters aren't even in the running. No, all you can hope for in your extreme delusion is insults, and you'll get a lot more of that here in alt.atheism than talk.origins. Sometimes we enjoy it. Othertimes you'll be ignored. Depends on our mood. Welcome back, net.asshole. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
At 01:25 AM 1/27/97 -0800, you wrote: >Helping folks out is better than confrontation. Sure! Problem is, lots of people are way beyond help and simply exist as obnoxious jerks. >With just a little help, >an evolutionist or an atheist can accept Jesus Christ as saviour. You call this help? It sounds like obnoxious proseletyzation to me. Let me tell you something - no amount of "help" will persuade me that there is any truth to the Christian religion. Only *evidence* can do that. Do you know what that is? The xtian fundamentalist attempt to link evolution and atheism, or to deny the *fact* that evolution has and does occur, is nothing but stupid slogan-shouting by people who are simply too willfully ignorant to understand the reality around them, and have a desperate need to subvert the state apparatus to evangelize to everyone else. I do not have blind faith, and never will. I have grown up and no longer believe in fairy tales. The "help" you offer sounds more like a brainwashing attempt to me. Sorry, not interested. Come back when you have something substantial to offer. >They >really dont believe the things they are saying. That's an awfully arrogant claim. Have you no humility? I think your paper idol has things to say about that. I really don't believe what I say? What a stupid thing to say. My opinion of Christian thought drops yet another notch. >Their statements rest on >the fact that they believe that people can't know their hearts. What the hell does this have to do with anything? Who are you to judge whether I know my heart or not? Or whether I think other people can know theirs? You are one of those ignorant fools who is so incredibly brainwashed that you can't see beyond the Bible you have strapped to your face. You also think Christianity is all about "knowing your heart". No it isn't, if the Bible is any guide. It's a bloody, primitive, intolerant religion invented by a tiny tribe of desert wanderer's several thousand years ago, which culminated in a loser hippy preacher in Judea who made banal and obvious observations about morality and restraint, much like a hundred other religions have done before and since. This "know your heart" and "God is love" shit was invented much later, and is culminating today in a xtian religion which bears little resemblence to the one Paul invented several decades after Jesus Christ died, and is perpetuated today by brainwashed morons who know nothing of their own religion's origins and history.
At 07:48 AM 1/28/97 +0000, you wrote: >god is in your backyard > I live in a condo. There's no backyard, but I went and looked in the lane, and there was nothing there but a bum rummaging through the dumpster. God sure likes to be humble!
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Jan 28 19:33:30 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Brainwashing and Jahnu's Krishna Cult I ran accross an interesting web page that discusses brainwashing and coercive techniques, typically used by religious (and other) cults. Here's an excerpt: The Hare Krishnas, operating in every airport, use what I call SHOCK AND CONFUSION techniques to distract the left brain and communicate directly with the right brain. While waiting for a plane, I once watched one operate for over an hour. He had a technique of almost jumping in front of someone. Initially, his voice was loud then dropped as he made his pitch to take a book and contribute money to the cause. Usually, when people are shocked, they immediately withdraw. In this case they were shocked by the strange appearance, sudden materialization and loud voice of the Hare Krishna devotee. In other words, the people went into an alpha state for security because they didn't want to confront the reality before them. In alpha, they were highly suggestible so they responded to the suggestion of taking the book; the moment they took the book, they felt guilty and responded to the second suggestion: give money. We are all conditioned that if someone gives us something, we have to give them something in return-- in that case, it was money. While watching this hustler, I was close enough to notice that many of the people he stopped exhibited an outward sign of alpha--their eyes were actually dilated. Very interesting. It's worth a read at http://www.necronomi.com/d/satanism/brainwash.methods.html The author is a professional hypnotist, who transcribed a speech he gave to the World Congress of Professional Hypnotists Convention in Las Vegas, Nevada. Jahnu, if you see this, perhaps you could comment on Krishna conversion techniques. How were you converted? Did you attend meetings? The author of the article above discusses a lot of the techniques they use at cult conscription gatherings - it would be interesting to see how your experiences compare. One more quote: So, to begin, I want to state the most basic of all facts about brainwashing: IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF MAN, NO ONE HAS EVER BEEN BRAINWASHED AND REALIZED, OR BELIEVED, THAT HE HAD BEEN BRAINWASHED. Those who have been brainwashed will usually passionately defend their manipulators, claiming they have simply been "shown the light" . . . or have been transformed in miraculous ways. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Jan 29 22:27:04 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism.moderated Subject: Re: Jesus In article , chsenecal@unix.amherst.edu says... > >It has been said that Jesus made the following remark. >You may not believe me and probably use me spitefully and I would forgive >you, however to not believe and use spitefully that which has sent me will >not forgive you. >What can be made from this remark ? Looks to me like he was admitting he wasn't God - "I'm just telling you about God so it's OK if you ignore me, no problem. Just don't ignore the Big Guy who sent me as your prophet". >At that time he was denouncing the gods being worshipped and advised >others to abandon false gods. Perhaps he was refering to himself as a false god. >Is it possible he meant our own highest >ideals ? >Bill Maybe, if you twist it far enough, like I did above. Christians are good at that. I've learned from them. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Jan 31 17:14:01 1997 Newsgroups: alt.mythology,sci.archaeology,alt.archaeology,alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,alt.bible Subject: Re: Stix - the liar of delusions In article <32F1D963.4C09@wi.net>, stix@ozemail.com.au says... > >I love to post others names in the subject line, dont I? >Gee keep posting like this and yours can stay here too. You know, Eli-O-great babbler of cosmic delusion, you're not fooling anyone. This post originated at execpc.com which anyone can see in the Path: line. Now, which particular moron with a grudge against Stix posts from execpc.com? Let's see, could it be... !!! SATAN !!!! Nope, worse, it's that festering boil on the ass of the human species, ForeRunner Eliyah Who has apparently taken to forging posts in other people's name. You are a disgrace, Richard, as well as certifiably insane. Beneath contempt. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Feb 02 20:57:09 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.feminism,soc.men,rec.humor Subject: Re: 1st Annual Feminist Death Jump Valentines Day In article , schafer@netcom.com says... > >La Gaia Loves You. Kill Yourself. Join Your Sisters > Valetines Day at the Golden Gate Bridge > in San Francisco Midnite > > Sisters Scream for Suicide! > >Join the only true female supremacists in a selfless act of proof. >This is the ultimate cleansing of patriarchal putrid poisoning. We will >making a statement that cannot be denied. Only the morally superior have >the courage to stand up for what we are. Only women truely sacrifice! > > LEAP FOR THE LADY GODDESS > >First 500 sisters will be forever memorialized with a plaque placed in >the G-Spot room of the Womyns Resource Center in San Francisco. >Empower the Bay water. Give Emily's List a whole new meaning. > > RECAPTURE ONCE AND FOR ALL THE POWER OF DEATH > >Finally, it's time for us to take back our gifts of the power of >sisterly death. Meet us in the Battered Women's Shelter in the Sky! > >Remember midnite sharp Valentines Day at the San Francisco Golden Gate >Bridge--late comers may not be allowed to participate. Sensible shoes >optional. Pusher assistants will be provided (conservative volunteers). > > "After you, > no after you, > no no I insist - after you..." There's been a lot of complaining about this post, but I have to admit that I laughed out loud. That doesn't mean I agree with its underlying sentiment. I don't. Still, it's important to keep a sense of humour available at all times, within easy reach. Political correctness can be taken too far, and righteous indignation is never pretty. Hell, I read alt.tasteless.jokes for fun. You should have seen the commotion over there after the Dunblane killings. This is kind of like something Xona would have written, except completely opposite. It is healthy to laugh at oneself occasionally. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Mon Feb 03 21:03:43 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: WHAT SORT OF FUCKED UP MORON ARE YOU, JESPER? In article <32f5de62.6750282@news.ozemail.com.au>, stix@oz-email.com.au says... > >Jim Nichols posted the following to alt.atheism, > >>Has Stix accepted Jesus Christ as saviour? >>Maybe it is just a rumor > >To anyone who's wondering what Ol' Jimmy is babbling about, I've just >concluded a bizarre email conversation with him in which he started by >reposting one of my slams at Elipoopoo and telling me I was making a big >mistake. When I questioned him about what he meant, he went on to say that >failure to exercise restraint was a mistake. Of course I told him that I >had no intention of exercising restraint against an insane alt.atheism >invader and stated the reasons why, and he replied saying there was room >for morons to babble their psuedo-prophetic psychosis. To this I replied >incredulously, wondering what Ol' Jim was on about and received a really >sickening, preachy email about god this, jesus that, accept as saviour, >yada yada yada - the usual god-soaked drivel. Needless to say, my final >reply was along the lines of "keep your sickening fantasy the fuck out of >my face," so I guess this is Ol' Jimmy's idea of some sort of retaliation. > >Sigh. These bleaters just seem to be getting stupider. Hang on! I've just >developed a hypothesis! Mayhaps the smarter bleaters are ditching their >puerile beliefs and slipping into silent, embarrassed apostasy, leaving >only the really stupid, god-soaked dimwits to blether the drool? > >Hmm. Nahh. Scratch that. I think maybe the smarter ones are just smart >enough to shut up about their fantasy on atheist groups. :) > > >Stix >*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ >"Mysticism is a disease of the mind." >*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ I got unsolicited email from this Jim Nichols character too. I even wrote back. Then I got more and more from him, full of justifications for biblical atrocities, and lots of threats of eternal torture should I not accept Jesus. It was simply too tedious to respond to any more. This guy is very, very brainwashed. Sort of a cross between Boatwright (for stupidity) and Shadrach (for glorification of raw power). randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Mon Feb 03 21:20:11 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.feminism,soc.men,rec.humor Subject: Re: 1st Annual Feminist Death Jump Valentines Day In article , schafer@netcom.com says... >randall g (randallg@telemark.net) wrote: >: This is kind of like something Xona would have written, except completely >: opposite. > >Yeah, my stuff's funny. Xonut is about as funny as a bearded clam with >teeth. Maybe you think so. I meant opposite in point of view. As far as humour goes, you're nowhere near her league. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Feb 04 20:01:32 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Christians can't defend their position without quoting the book of lies(bible) In article <32f74ac7.5239625@news.ozemail.com.au>, stix@oz-email.com.au says... > >Heh, interestingly, according to the bible what did Satan ever >actually do that was evil? I think he possessed some pigs and Jesus had to drive him out by stampeding the the pigs into a lake, or something like that. [ .. thinks for a few seconds ... ] Oh hey, I checked www.gospelcom.net (which works very well) and searched for "possessed pigs" and found the reference in Matthew 8. Turns out some people were possessed so Jesus transfered Satan into the pigs, and then forced them to run into the lake. The last line of Matthew 8 is interesting: 34 "Then the whole town went out to meet Jesus. And when they saw him, they pleaded with him to leave their region." Guess they were pissed off when Jesus killed their herd of pigs. Sheesh. You think they'd've been grateful. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Feb 07 19:53:38 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.atheism.satire,talk.atheism Subject: Re: Question to everyone! In article <199702042050251061903@ana-dig43.apc.net>, howellfm@mail.apc.net says... > >Now for Christians: > >1. Why do you believe in God, and the Bible? Because the Bible is the True Word of God. God makes this clear throughout the Bible. Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ descended from Heaven to save Sinners such as Myself from our well-deserved Eternal Torture and then Ascended into Heaven again. How could anyone not believe this? It boggles the mind that anyone would refuse this FREE GIFT from our SAVIOUR the LoRD JEsuS ChrISt who Has through HIs WORD PROVEN that EVOLUTION is a SATANIC LIE which would remove the NEED for GOD and by His GRAce has EnsuRED our PLACE in HEAVEN should we simply BEG FOR FORGIVENESS!!! I AM SAVED!!! HALLELUJAH!! PRAISE THE LORD!!! It's all quite clear, really. >2. What would it take to make you believe that God didn't exist? There is literally nothing that could shake my faith in God. No atheistedly twisted rational arguments or "supposed" lack of evidence. I have the FAITH that is required and I am ConstANTly supported by my brethren in CHRIST and my personal friends and mentors JOHN MCCOY and JOHN BOATWRIGHT and JAHNU DAS^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H And especially !!!JIM NICHOLS!!! MY PERSONAL FAVOURITE HERO and many others. You know who you are!!! It is only through your TIRELESS efforts that my FAITH IN GOD remains INTACT. Please NEVER STOP your WOnderFUL PostS because they are ALL I HAVE to link me TO MY FAITH IN THE LITERAL biBLICAL Old TestamenT GOD OF JUSTIce and righteOUSNESS!! THANK You!! There are times when these HEATHEN ATHEISTS are GRINding Down mY WiLL to BELIEVE but YOU ARE always THERE FOR ME!! To even CONTEMPLATE the concept is blasphemy, and I WILL NOT commit blasphemy, not like these heathen atheist sinners in this newsgroup. And Not like some of the SO-CALLED "Christians" like Brandon Gorte who aren't even sure of His existance (I'll hear your screams piped up from Hell, Brandon, HA HA HA HA HA !!!). >3. If you thought that God didn't exist, would you still try and live a >moral life? Why or why not? Of course not. God is the source of all morals. Without God I would have no guidance. There would be no morals. I would be free to descend to my basest instincts and desires. I would be nothing more than an animal, living in a world full of other animals. I could exert my will upon others, I could push people around, I could take what I want, whenever I want, from anyone, I'd blow them away if they complained, no problem, there's no Hell, just take, satiate, everything I want, yes, yes, that's right, don't get in my way or you're toast, hah - I want pussy, there's some there, take it, TAKE IT!!! who cares about the screams, just got to get off, there's some more PUSSY!! TAKE IT TOO!!! HA HA HA!! WOW THIS IS GREAT!! NO GOD NO GOD NO GOD!!! Wow life with God was never this good, gotta get more, more thrills, there's someone gonna try and stop me taking pussy - hah - blew him away HA HA HA there's someone else, who cares who they are just wanna Kill BLAM!! HA HA HA HA!! And another BLAM!! HA HA HA!! WOW THIS IS GREAT!!! THIS IS ALL I EVER REALLY WANTED!!! >Thanks again, Tim Howell randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Feb 09 22:05:51 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Question to everyone! In article <19970209071300.CAA29916@ladder01.news.aol.com>, msdevane@aol.com says... > >In article <5dgsl8$e1i1@news.bctel.net>, randallg@telemark.net (randall g) >writes: > >> >>Of course not. God is the source of all morals. Without God I would have >no >>guidance. There would be no morals. I would be free to descend to my >basest >>instincts and desires. I would be nothing more than an animal, living in >a >>world full of other animals. I could exert my will upon others, I could >push >>people around, I could take what I want, whenever I want, from anyone, >I'd >>blow >>them away if they complained, no problem, there's no Hell, just take, >>satiate, >>everything I want, yes, yes, that's right, don't get in my way or you're >>toast, >>hah - I want pussy, there's some there, take it, TAKE IT!!! who cares >about >>the >>screams, just got to get off, there's some more PUSSY!! TAKE IT TOO!!! HA >HA >>HA!! WOW THIS IS GREAT!! NO GOD NO GOD NO GOD!!! Wow life with God was >never >>this good, gotta get more, more thrills, there's someone gonna try and >stop >>me >>taking pussy - hah - blew him away HA HA HA there's someone else, who >cares >>who >>they are just wanna Kill BLAM!! HA HA HA HA!! And another BLAM!! HA HA >HA!! >>WOW THIS IS GREAT!!! >> >> > >Anyone else notice anything strangley Freudian about this post. A little >too enthusiastic for my taste. > >devane I call it satire, devane. Or parody. As biting as possible. I wanted to put people into the mind of a fundie who loses God. As the writer, I sincerely hope you didn't think there was anything personal in it. I know how sick it is. My style can be twisted, but I am trying to use imagery to make a horrible point. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Mon Feb 10 17:51:52 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.origins,sci.skeptic,alt.philosophy.objectivism,sci.skeptic Subject: Re: The Soul (was: Re: More Carl Sagan) In article <32fee367.24282177@news.ozemail.com.au>, stix@oz-email.com.au says... > >Jim Muth posted the following to alt.atheism, > >>api@axiom.access.one.net (Adam Ierymenko) wrote: > >>>Question for mystics/religious people: If the soul is seperate from the body, >>>how can physical damage to the brain alter someone's emotions, memories, and >>>personality? >> >>I am not a religious person, but let's phrase the above question a >>little differently: >> >>If the scene displayed on the television screen exists separately from >>the television set, how can physical damage to the set's circuitry >>alter the appearance of the picture? > >False analogy. Ones sense of I-ness is not being transmitted from another >location and received by the brain. > >Stix Even if the analogy was any good, it doesn't help the dualist case. The picture on the television is the *direct and inevitable* result of various physical processes occuring in the television's electronics. These processes are very well understood by science and engineering - that's why it is possible to build a television set that works. No non-materialist explanations necessary. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Feb 11 21:26:58 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Phoney Christian Web Page In article <32ffccae.683565975@news2.ibm.net>, Landis.Ragon@ibm.net says... > >randallg@telemark.net (randall g) wrote: > >>In article <32fd9340.397085@netnews.worldnet.att.net>, ??toddj@amcyber.com >>says... >>> >>>On 9 Feb 1997 02:00:59 GMT, mccoy@sierra.net (John McCoy) wrote: >>> >>>>Don't be fooled, I discovered a web site that purports to be sympathetic >>>>to Biblical archeologist Ron Wyatt. But when you read it it becomes >>>>obvious that some atheists are trying to Wyatt to some absure prophecies. >>>>I have verified this site to be phoney. >>>>It is much like the fake posts that are done in my name on alt.atheism. >>Beware of phoney scams that are >>>>done to discredit Christianity. >>> >> >>>Why won't you give us the address of the site? >> >> >>YEAH MCCOY WHAT'S THE FUCKING URL???? >> >>WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOU PARANOID MORON!!!! >> >> >> >Using Altavista, found the following reference to RW that I suspect >are not very flattering to him. > > >A letter from Harold G. Coffin to David Merling regarding Ron Wyatt's >discovery of Noah's Ark. > http://www.kensco.net/~thinkle/tentmakr/WAR/Coffin-Merling.shtml - > > >(Actually there is a whole series of articles at >http://www.kensco.net/~thinkle/tentmakr/WAR) > >May-June, 1988. Number 17. RON WYATT: ARE HIS CLAIMS BONAFIDE? (Note: >This is a slightly revised form of the report that first appeared in >1988. Ron Wyatt. > http://www.fni.com/cim/reports/wyatt.txt Hey McCoy, You've been spewing unsupported shit for years; Now you have a chance to FINALLY PUT UP!!! Are these sites the ones you're talking about? Are they forged or are they written by the indicated authors? If the authors are real, are they lying? How do you know? randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Feb 11 21:51:22 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Sleeping Dogs Lie In article , karl@polympus.net says... > >This is for Athiest Religionists: >I know you are suppose to let "sleeping dogs lie" but I cant stand it. >I've got to put some Bible quote on some Athiest. Lay it on us, Jim, we've never seen any of those before. >I capitalize Athiest >out of respect because it is a RELIGION (defined as requiring alot of >faith). Thank you Jim. We really, deeply and sincerely appreciate all the effort you have gone to to understand our position. >God has a place prepared for unbelievers. You guys already know where it >is and how to spell it. It is spelled HELL and it is run by SATAN. >There is a reservation card in place with your >name on it. I got that when I called the Holy Spirit a LYING DECEIVING SERVANT OF SATAN. >(Reservation SHIELD would be better. Something nice out of >brass or iron. Card wouldnt last long). No, because HELL is a FIERY FURNACE above the kindling point of paper. It says so in the BIBLE. >I will not PROVE anything here. Au contraire, Jim, I now believe in God. Thank you and Hallelujah! >Proving is not allowed. Agreed. We will allow no proofs here. "For the fool has said in his heart, there is no God". Bible. >Proof got us to the moon. No it didn't, all that space stuff was faked. We could never have figured out how to do that, because we are such undeserving sinners. >Proof built the Western World but Proof did not bring us >Athiesm (Its more like speculation - or maybe a crap game) Atheism is POSSESSION by SATAN. >And also God >did not choose to use Proof to deal with mankind. No! He used FIRE and the SWORD! >He chose FAITH. >"The Jews require a sign and the Greeks seek after wisdom but we preach >Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock and unto the Greeks >foolishness but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ >the power of God and the wisdom of God (1 Cor 1) SAY IT BROTHER!!! AMEN!!! JEWS AND GREEKS SUCK!!! >Now I have given you enough stuff to nake a fool of me publically. Give >it your best shot and really show me how sick I am. When I'm in Hell, and you're in Heaven, for the rest of eternity, I am going to scream your name, over and over again, as I am tortured for the rest of time. You will hear it, at least occasionally, up there in Heaven. Eternity is a long time. They pipe up the screams from Hell for elevator music. You'll have fun telling your saved fundie brethren about me. "Hey, that's randall g, he told me on alt.atheism he was gonna do that!" "Ha ha ha ha!!! Who wants another drink?" >Best of Luck >Jim Nichols Lot'o'Laughs. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Feb 12 22:21:28 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Bet on your favorite a.a. psycho!!! In article <33016FEA.6020@mail.teleport.com>, salad@mail.teleport.com says... > >Brand on My Goat wrote: > >> John P. Boatwright (salad@mail.teleport.com) wrote: >> : Todd Matthew Koson wrote: > >> : > Here's a quick way to try and make some money right here on a.a. which is >> : > legal and effective!!! > >> : > I'm currently taking bets on the matter of who will self-destruct first: >> : > RICHARD MICHAEL SCHILLER; John McCoy; or Jahnu Dasa. > >> : You left out Goe. I'd say he's totalled and probably re-learning the >> : shoe tying, right about now. > >> Jealous because we left out you? Tsk-tsk. > >> Put me down for Schiller. > >Ya sure, be on a fave list. A bunch of lovelorn atheists... Boatwright, this bet is to guess which of you fundie wackos is going to CRACK - go INSANE - grab an AK47 and take out a KMart. That sort of thing. You're particularly stupid and annoying, and you deserve some recognition for that, but you don't exhibit nearly the signs of imminent mental breakdown like some of your brethren godsoaked psychos. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sat Feb 15 11:22:26 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: The ressurection and atheism In article <19970215003601.TAA11371@ladder01.news.aol.com>, eshay98942@aol.com says... > >To those who have taken the time to look at the evidence and have rejected >the liklihood of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, please refer me to your >sources (scholars, authors, researchers, books, articles etc.). Thank you >in advance for your cooperation. > > eshay98942@aol.com There aren't any. No matter how hard you look, you will not find a reliably documented resurrection from death, by Jesus Christ or anyone else. Every tale of this sort is a myth. It just doesn't happen. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sat Feb 15 23:31:25 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Christian vs. Atheist In article <3303BD09.144@bluemoon.net>, bsh1@bluemoon.net says... > >Why Can't We Chistians Convince You Atheists? It would help if your posts were formatted reasonably. I've worked on yours to make it easier to read. Actually, having perused your post, it probably wouldn't help in your case, but it would still make it easier to read. >This essay could as easily be entitled "Why Can't We Christians Convince >You Wiccans" or "Why Can't We Christians Convince You Mormons", etc. > >There are a number of reasons why you haven't (so far) been convinced >about the reality of Jesus Christ. First, you are predisposed not to believe, >no matter what the evidence. What you call a "predisposition not to believe" is a good thing. It is properly called "skepticism". Do you know what that is? However, most atheists seem to come from a religious background and were believers at one time. This skepticism did not come easily for many of us but we have realized that a skeptical attitude is the only one that works when dealing with reality. >Second, you discard our personal testimony. Of course. It's useless. Any raving psycho can make up all kinds of insane stories - how can anyone tell them apart? Are you suggesting anything ever believed or imagined by anyone is true? If not, please provide a reliable method of distinguishing the true personal testimony from the false personal testimony. >Third, you disregard the testimony of scripture. Well DUH. Do you accept the testimony of scripture of all the other religions? The Koran? The Vedas? Heiroglyphics in the pyramids? The list goes on and on. Didn't think so. They can't all be right, right? You know this which is why you don't accept any other religion's scriptures. Your huge blind spot is that you have arbitrarily accepted the absolute truth of one religion's scriptures while calling all the rest false. Do you really think this is reasonable? >Finally, in many cases, >you're simply in a state of denial. This is absolutely incorrect. You are implying that despite evidence that should convince us, we are willfully refusing to believe in your God. Utter nonsense. Provide the evidence or shut the fuck up. >Now, before you blow your stack, let >me amplify this... Why not put it in caps? You bleaters often do. >In regard to the first point, that you are predisposed not to believe, >oftentimes it is because you have had a bad experience with a church or >with a Christian. Sure, this happens. So? Realizing what hypocritical jerks many religious people are helps in the awakening process for some. >That would be like a foreigner hating all Americans >because of some boorish tourists he had me. Or, perhaps you're secretly >angry with God. I love it. You bleaters cannot comprehend that there are much, much better reasons than this. I have never heard an atheist around here express such a sentiment. Do you know what a strawman is? >More than once I've heard, "I won't believe in God >because of what He did." I haven't, and I've probably communicated with many more atheists than you ever have. I think you are lying. Prove it or shut the fuck up. >Yes, that sounds patently absurd, but that's only a short >step from "God cannot exists because of..." and you can fill the blanks >here... such as "...because of the pain and suffering in (choose one) my >life/my family/the world. If you agree it is absurd, why imply that there is any truth to it? There's no evidence for this silly theory of yours. Like I said, I am accusing you of lying. Prove it. This is a standard preacher bleat, designed to convince the wavering and already faithful. Do you do this for a living? >This issue has been covered by another essay "Why >does God allow Evil" which is highly recommended. Oh, I suppose this hypothetical essay of yours is able to solve this logical impossibility where everyone up to now has failed. Ya right. Post it please. If I find the time maybe I'll tear it apart for you. >An important note is >this: denying the existence of an authority doesn't make it go away. Try >denying a cop's right to give you a ticket. We'll come down and bail you >out of the slammer. There is no doubt that cops exist, and may enforce the law if you are caught breaking it. Your god doesn't exist so this analogy is completely flawed. Don't imply that we are worried about this being's authority. We aren't. We're atheists, and realize that a nonexistant human-created concept has no authority of any kind. >By the way, being predisposed not to believe is something Christians are >accused of all the time. I have never heard an atheist accuse a Christian of this! >Somehow you seem convinced that we just don't have >a realistic view of how things really are... This is true, but after all you do believe in fairy tales. >because if we did, your >reasoning goes, we'd never be Christian. Major strawman alert! I don't know where you got this idea. Most atheists around here are perfectly willing to grant that Christians CAN BE predisposed to believe. So YES! I'm sure we will all agree that you can be BOTH Christian AND predisposed to believe in fairy tales. >Au contraire, it is those very >things that often drew us to Christ in the first place. Which things? Being predisposed not to believe? You've lost your tangent here... >There are examples of people predisposed not to believe, like you. Thanks! That's a compliment, in case you didn't know. >Many >people think the Apollo moon missions were staged in a Hollywood studio, >and that humans never went to the moon. Other people believe they are >being watched through their own TV sets, sort of a reverse camera kind of >deal. Still others believe that the earth is flat. Go figure. Nothing said to >these people makes a difference. The really amazing thing here is that you seem to realize that all these things are a delusion! And yet you cling to a silly fantasy which makes no more sense than your examples of delusion! Absolutely amazing! >Which leads us to a conclusion to point one... No matter what the >evidence, people will choose to discard it if that is their predisposition. Err, exactly. Apparently you fall neatly into this camp. >It's important to note here, that not everyone is predisposed. OK... >C.S.Lewis is one >many people who set out to disprove Christianity, but because of his >honesty and integrity, came to a point, based on the evidence to accept >Jesus as his Lord and Savior. The reason you bleaters always bring up CS Lewis is that he is the only example of a well-known and erudite atheist to convert to Christianity. Score: Christians 1, Atheists 100000000. His arguments are very unconvincing, which is why we aren't converted to Christianity when we read his stuff. >There are many precedents of this, going >back as far as Saul of Tarsis. Name one other modern respected atheist who has converted to Christianity. The founder of Christianity doesn't count - his view was obviously biased. >Alas, it seems today, that very few people >approach this issue with honesty and integrity, and an open heart. More bullshit. You are totally prejudiced, because you think that if someone doesn't believe in the Christian God, it MUST BE TRUE that they did not "approach this issue with honesty and integrity, and an open heart". Absolute rubbish. You're either ingnorant or a lying asshole. >Point two refers to the fact that you reject the personal testimony of a >Christian as invalid, subjective, and in other ways irrelevant. Explained above. Nothing limits the imagination, and unless you are prepared to believe anything anyone ever says, you must provide the means of distinguishing true from false. Otherwise is it STUPID to take extroardinary testimony as true. You then have no choice but to believe EVERYTHING. >I'd like >to point out that personal testimony is considered as the most reliable >there is, in a court of law. Actually, with the notable exception of the OJ case, forensic evidence is given much more weight in court than personal testimony. If your DNA is all over the crime scene, no matter what people say, your ass is in jail (unless you are a multimillionaire celebrity). Even if you were right though, the law is less concerned with determining truth than science is, and there isn't any choice because very often the truth simply cannot be determined, but a judgement has to be made. Legal judgements are not "this is the truth", but "this is beyond a reasonable doubt", or "this is within the balance of probabilities". And to rip up this analogy even more, if a bunch of witnesses showed up in a court today and said they saw someone get crucified, die, get buried in a tomb, then they showed up at the tomb two days later and the dead person was now alive again and then ascended into the sky, how much credibility do you think this testimony would REALLY have in a court of law? >Sure, there is "expert testimony", but in this age, >one expert can disagree with another, on any subject. Courts don't allow >heresay (such as, "I heard that Fred did this"), however, primary >personal evidence (such as "I saw this", "I experienced this") are >allowed. It's pretty easy to disregard everybody's testimony as irrelevant, >except your own. Which is exactly what you are doing. You completely discount the personal testimony of billions people in other religions, do you not? We as rational skeptics are doing the opposite. We accept things that other people have agreed is the case. Experts who are respected for their knowledge and objectivity. Things that can be DEMONSTRATED to others. I accept what Einstein discovered about relativity. No one has managed to find a basic problem with the theory, and many have tried. That's how knowledge is accumulated. We know this process works, because it's usefulness can be demonstrated. Not by the ravings of individual loonies. Your ravings cannot be substantiated when investigated, so you are written off as a kook. Sorry if you don't like it. >But the rest of us don't consider you to be the be all and >end all of objectivity either. The major point here is that we aren't asking anyone to believe incredible personal testimony. >Point three is the fact that you discard the testimony of scripture. >Yeah, yeah. We've heard it before. You think the Bible is not authentic, >full of contradictions, etc. etc. blah blah blah. Good, I don't have to explain all this to you. >However, the Bible stands alone >after an evaluation of what it says, when compared to secular history, >geography, archeology, and its own internal evidence. No it doesn't. It's crap. You're full of shit. I thought I didn't have to explain all this to you. >There are more >conflicting histories of World War II than I care to read. You are full of even more shit. Prove it or shut the fuck up. >Yet there are >none of relevant substance within scripture. There's hundreds of them, and they're being discussed all the time around here. Ask Capella, or Del, or Wayne Delia for some examples. They are (some of) the resident experts. Haven't you read this book? >We live in a time when >revisionists are perverting the historical record (as prophesied by >George Orwell in 1948, when he wrote "1984"). Yes, right wing Neo-Nazis are trying to prove the Holocaust didn't happen. >In spite of the evidence and >recorded testimony of the Bible, you choose to disregard it, much like >people today who reject the reality of the Halocaust during World War >II. Funny you should mention that. The evidence of the Holocaust is INFINITELY better than the evidence that your Saviour-On-A-Stick was sacrificed and resurrected as a payment for our sins to pay for eternal life in paradise. >If people can be so foolish to deny the facts in less than 50 years of >their occurance, no wonder you have problems with the Bible. Nobody is denying any facts. If you actually have some facts, produce them and prove Christianity ONCE AND FOR ALL! You'll be fucking famous! >However, >consider this: The Gospels were written by eyewitnesses or >"writers/secretaries" for the eyewitnesses. They were written many decades after Jesus' alleged existence you moron. >The earliest fragments of the >Gospels have been dated within 40 years of the resurrection (or 10 years >less than the time span between World War II and now). Most of it however was written many decades after that, and not even agreed to until the 300's, by VOTE, at the Council of Nicea. The life of Jesus does NOT have the same amount or quality of evidence for it as WWII. Sorry. Also, a HUGE problem with your point, is that all this mythical writing was by LEADERS OF THE CHURCH! That's right, people who's job/life it was to spread this religion! This is a little too obviously self-serving. There aren't any OTHER sources of information to support this fantastic myth. >In spite of efforts >to wipe out Christianity by the Romans (including destruction of the >scriptures), And the subsequent adoption of Christianity as the OFFICIAL STATE RELIGION of the Roman Empire, which led to its predominance in Western civilization. >we still have thousands of sections or entire books of >scripture, from a wide geographical area, that all agree. Great. The Koran has existed unchanged since the 600's throughout the Islamic world. Your point? You seem to think that if there is some evidence that Jesus existed, and there admittedly is, this must mean he is the Fucking Son of God the Almighty. >Fourth, you may be in a state of denial. Ha ha! Good one centurion, like it, like it... >Christians understand that the Holy Spirit draws us to God. Heard it, been there, done that. >Those of us that started out as non-believers, How many is that? >now recognize that God played major role in coming to Him. Interesting, what were the other roles? >No, we weren't robots. We're all individuals! >We still had free will, just as you. God told me I'd have pizza for dinner tomorrow but I changed my mind. >But there was something inside us... Gas pains... Pflbflbft... That's better... >a kind of hunger, We needed a name to give the fucking WEATHER! GOD, THAT'S IT! >and an openness... desperate for a peer group acceptance... >so that when the time was right, >and we understood the Gospel message, we accepted Christ... We were lonely and confused, we were befriended by these nice xtians, before we knew it we were BORN AGAIN! HALLELUJAH! >and became a Christian. The logical end point of all philosophy, right? >If you deny everything, then you're not going to feel this. How about I just deny things for which there is NO EVIDENCE! >Let me hasten to add, however, that God turns away no honest seeker. I knew you wouldn't be tardy adding that. >One of the atheists on Christian Chat recently said, "I do believe in >God. I don't know which God it is, but it certainly won't be the Christian >God." This person is/was not an atheist. If he/she thinks he/she is, please refer him/her to the alt.atheism FAQ, which you have OBVIOUSLY READ before you posted this. >Here we have someone who is strongly predisposed not to believe. What are you talking about moron, this person believes in God! >They'll one day have a shopping list with the names of all the gods they can >think of... but they'll leave off Jesus Christ, because of predisposition. Oh bullshit. Jesus'd be right up there with Talula, Mohammend, Ra, Zeus, Thor, Osiris, Krishna, Vishnu, Baal and hundreds of others! >The Bible has a few things to say. Jesus said "No man comes to be except >the Father draw him." But he also said, "God loved the world so much, He >gave His Son, so that whoever believes would not perish, but have >everlasting life." We know bleater. Fuck off with your book of lies. No-one here cares what the fuck it says. >The Bible also says: "Many are called but few are chosen." Look, the Bible says a lot of vicious shit too. Oh right, those parts aren't the "real" things it has to say. >I believe the >difference between being called and being chosen has to do with our >response to the call. You can be psychotic, or not. >If you answer the call, I believe you are chosen. Call your mental infirmity a gift, if it makes you feel better. >At least, that's what happened to me. Oops. I forgot. Primary personal >evidence doesn't count. Good. Something has finally penetrated your thick skull. I'd just like to add on a personal note, that the work you and bleaters like you are doing here is a good thing. The Internet is a way that all kinds of questioning Christian kids can now tune in to an "evil" group like alt.atheism, and see firsthand how your silly fantasies disinitegrate under inspection. I'm sure you don't leave books like this lying around the house. Thanks! I am also pleased to be a part of it. Your religion is toast, god-boy! Keep up the posts! randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Feb 16 23:15:52 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Sleeping Dogs Lie In article , karl@polympus.net says... > >In article <3301F28B.177B@exec-pc.comX>, Raistlin Majere > wrote: > >>Jim Nichols wrote: >>> >>> This is for Athiest Religionists: >> >> Since there aren't any, you're just blowing smoke up your own ass. And >>spell atheist right for a change, you fucking moron. >Exactly, even a moron like me knows that you guys are liers. About what? >THERE ARENT ANY ATHEISTS (notice the spelling). How can you possibly be this stupid? >You just do this Atheist trip to get attention. Sure Jim. Fuck you're stupid. Nameless and Boatwright have nothing on you. >Whats the trouble here? It is always the same crowd. Stix, Raist and Jay. >I thought there was alot of you guys. Obviously you have ignored my response which I think was the first one posted. I've included it again at the end of this post so you can respond to it in detail. Take your time, you'll need it. >I was worried you were taking over. We are. Be very afraid. >Only 3. I guess I can relax. No, you should learn how to count. My news server has 10 responses to your original diatribe. >I guess we can call you a "vocal minority". True enough. We know atheists are not a majority. We will be soon though. >I dont want to antagonize you guys beyond belief but I spell things the >best I can. No you don't, you deliberately spell things incorrectly even after your errors have been pointed out to you. >It just doesnt look right the way you spell it. "We" didn't write the fucking English dictionary you stupid fuckwad. >But since >you arent getting much else right I guess I should admit publically that >you spell better than me. We do a lot more than that better than you. >If I want to know where Stix is all I have to do is quote the Bible and he >comes running. Stix enjoys helping stupid bleaters like you look like complete idiots, as do I. >Best of Luck >Jim Nichols Lots'O'Laughs >Spam protection enabled So you're safe, are you? Here's my response to your original diatribe, Jim: In article , karl@polympus.net says... > >This is for Athiest Religionists: >I know you are suppose to let "sleeping dogs lie" but I cant stand it. >I've got to put some Bible quote on some Athiest. Lay it on us, Jim, we've never seen any of those before. >I capitalize Athiest >out of respect because it is a RELIGION (defined as requiring alot of >faith). Thank you Jim. We really, deeply and sincerely appreciate all the effort you have gone to to understand our position. >God has a place prepared for unbelievers. You guys already know where it >is and how to spell it. It is spelled HELL and it is run by SATAN. >There is a reservation card in place with your >name on it. I got that when I called the Holy Spirit a LYING DECEIVING SERVANT OF SATAN. >(Reservation SHIELD would be better. Something nice out of >brass or iron. Card wouldnt last long). No, because HELL is a FIERY FURNACE above the kindling point of paper. It says so in the BIBLE. >I will not PROVE anything here. Au contraire, Jim, I now believe in God. Thank you and Hallelujah! >Proving is not allowed. Agreed. We will allow no proofs here. "For the fool has said in his heart, there is no God". Bible. >Proof got us to the moon. No it didn't, all that space stuff was faked. We could never have figured out how to do that, because we are such undeserving sinners. >Proof built the Western World but Proof did not bring us >Athiesm (Its more like speculation - or maybe a crap game) Atheism is POSSESSION by SATAN. >And also God >did not choose to use Proof to deal with mankind. No! He used FIRE and the SWORD! >He chose FAITH. >"The Jews require a sign and the Greeks seek after wisdom but we preach >Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock and unto the Greeks >foolishness but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ >the power of God and the wisdom of God (1 Cor 1) SAY IT BROTHER!!! AMEN!!! JEWS AND GREEKS SUCK!!! >Now I have given you enough stuff to nake a fool of me publically. Give >it your best shot and really show me how sick I am. When I'm in Hell, and you're in Heaven, for the rest of eternity, I am going to scream your name, over and over again, as I am tortured for the rest of time. You will hear it, at least occasionally, up there in Heaven. Eternity is a long time. They pipe up the screams from Hell for elevator music. You'll have fun telling your saved fundie brethren about me. "Hey, that's randall g, he told me on alt.atheism he was gonna do that!" "Ha ha ha ha!!! Who wants another drink?" >Best of Luck >Jim Nichols Lot'o'Laughs. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Feb 16 23:41:24 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,soc.culture.african.american,alt.christnet,alt.religion.christian,alt.feminism,alt.current-events.usa,alt.politics.libertarian Subject: Re: Do Males Rule in Heaven In article <856123633.26114@dejanews.com>, xona@cyberjunkie.com says... > >Is Heaven a place where men and woman are equal? No, women are the slaves of men in Heaven as on Earth. Heaven is completely consistent with Old Testament doctrine. >Where do children and old folk fit in? Err, we just keep them out of the way where no one can see them. >Are their Black, White, Red, and Brown areas of heaven? No, we only let the Whites in. >xona randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Mon Feb 17 22:01:29 1997 Newsgroups: talk.atheism,alt.atheism Subject: Re: Kirby converts to atheism In article <33078086.2675@earthlink.net>, kirby@earthlink.net says... > >Jim Nichols wrote: > >Jim Nichols, every post you write lowers my opinion of you. For your >own benefit, I suggest that you stop posting before you become >associated with SS, Jy, Bloatwad, Jahnoooo, and the like. > >Cheers, >Peter Too late Peter, Jim is firmly ensconced as a prominent alt.atheism looney psycho fundy. He's blown past some of them - Batshit for example has nothing on this guy. In fact, he's my personal favourite looney psycho fundie. IMO he is doing more damage to Christianity than any of the others, at this time. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Mon Feb 17 22:41:23 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Let's be Friends! In article <1997Feb17.153615.155324@forest>, atolin@forest.drew.edu says... > > Sometimes atheists post and they are very condenscending to the many peaceful > and kind Christians who write here. In general you can expect to get the treatment you deserve. Believe it or not, practically all Christians around here carry around an air of self righteousness, even while pretending they are humble because Jesus said they should be. >As far as I'm concerned, bashing >Christians will only support the belief of the the xians on here >that if you are not Christian you lack a >basic moralistic or ethical code. Frankly, my experience is that most Christians around here show up with this belief, talk or argue for a bit, and then leave with this belief intact. Nothing we say shifts it I'm afraid. And the ones that hang around get worse and worse over time. >Insulting the intelligence of >Christians is not going to gain atheists any respect, and they have >nothing to gain from hurting someone else's feelings or finding fault with >their beliefs system. Some of them really are very stupid. This on its own is simply a handicap, but I'm refering to the ones who come here and spout the same tired refuted bullshit over and over, and never EVER listen to a thing that is said to them. They're the ones who receive, and deserve, the abuse. >Then it's just that much easier for Christians to >say, "well, they are incapable of treating their fellow man with love >because Jesus hasn't helped them." They are taught to say things like this from birth. Their conditioning is very strong and usually lasts a lifetime. What we do makes little difference. >Well, the non-christians I knew who >were humble and sweet and lived moral lives were the ones who influenced >me the most and convinced me that you don't have to be a deist to be a >good person. Maybe there's some hope for you... >However, the arrogant, patronizing, and thoroughly obnoxious >athiests who mock my beliefs in a supreme being just make me think, that >person needs to realize that there is a universal moral code. AHA! Here you show your biases. There is no universal moral code. Frankly, presupposing that there is can be considered obnoxious around here. And if you believe in what appears to be a silly fairy tale, and shove it into the faces of intelligent, self-professed atheists in their own newsgroup, you risk being mocked. Get used to it. In any event, here's a test you can perform to see just how obnoxious we are. There's a guy named Stix here, who's like the resident pit bull. He has raised Christian-bashing to an art form, and many of us are in awe of his command of vitriol. He's the one all the poor bashed xtians point at when they feel the need to publicize their martyrdom. Address a post to him, or reply to one of his. Be reasonable. See what happens. >Then I fall into a judgemental and self-righteous mindset. Trained from birth... >When Christianity is >a destructive force, as, unfortunately it has historically been when used >to support despicable ideologies, then combatting those particular >destructive beliefs (e.g.-the Bible says blacks are inferior or that gays >should die) should and must be done ardently and forcefully. Can't accuse us of slacking in that department. >However, a lot of Christians are just loving, moral, virtuous people who >don't hurt anyone and should just be allowed to have whatever views they >need to make it through life. These are the well adjusted ones who don't spend their lonely miserable lives here on alt.atheism trying to convert the heathens. We are like a bug lamp to those types, and many of them exhibit mental problems of varying degrees. >I'm not slamming the validity of >Christianity-although I admit that it has been distorted and destructive, >I do think the teachings of Christ, when followed correctly are >constructive. I think his teachings contain an awful lot of crap, much of which causes cognitive dissonance in people, resulting in lots of hypocrisy. Give all your possessions to the poor! Jesus was very clear on that point. >So why try to take their beliefs from them? What do you gain? Actually, I love helping to break down people's theistic beliefs. We *all* gain a saner world with saner people who have more respect for others. The humanistic view is the only one that makes sense, in a world with so many different people. >Just say, hey, I don't believe the same thing. Let's just be >friends. That would work with very few of the Christians around here. >Most Christians I know are fine with that and then we talk >about something else...but what we share in common and what helps us to >get along is most often a love of our fellow man. Most Christians I've come into contact with may pay lip service to this "love for all fellow men" concept, but are actually pretty ordinary folks. >All of this self-righteous crap probably pissed you off, but I felt like >writing it. Good. You have the right. >I used to slam xians and freak out about their beliefs, but >then I realized that the most important thing is to care for other people. > whatever path you use to get there, buddhism, xianity, etc, fine, >whatever. I agree. I now respect the beliefs of all the raving psycho fundies ;-) >Read the end of Anna Karenina, Tolstoy sums it up pretty good there. I started to read Dr Zhivago once, but got bogged down after about 50 pages. Is Tolstoy any better? >-Alexandra > randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
At 02:35 PM 3/5/97 -0800, you wrote: >Why do you think you are antheist? I don't just think this, I know it because the definition of atheism is lacking belief in any gods. I don't believe in any gods. QED. >There really is no such think >because >we all believe in something or someone supernatural. Well, gods and the supernatural aren't exactly the same thing, but you are wrong. At least 10% of North Americans do not believe in anything supernatural and will say so when asked. Please don't tell me what I do or do not believe, because frankly I know much more about what I believe than you do. >What is your >belief on that? That you have it wrong :) >I have been a staunch Conservative with Libertarian >view points. Maybe we could talk about our political views sometime. >Till then, I'll be talking to you. Well, I'm probably not a staunch Conservative (not sure what you mean by that). Freedom of individuals, markets, thoughts and personal responsibility guide my political views.
At 02:23 PM 3/17/97 -0500, you wrote: >Randall, (anyone call you Randy?) Just my little brother (I prefer Randall...) >I've poked around your web site a little, and it's >obvious that you really put a lot of work into it and >take your subject seriously. > >I also read a couple of the exchanges you've had with >"theists" whose first (or at most second) tactic is >profanity and name calling. Since that sort of thing >is the last resort of the intellectually bankrupt, you >must really have hit a nerve with those guys. > >Actually, though, you approach the subject of atheism >with, pardon the expression, almost a missionary zeal. The main difference between me and missionaries is that I don't go looking for people to convert. All the exchanges you read were with theists coming to the atheist newsgroups, or emailing me directly. However I am intense about the subject, this is true. >Any particular reason for that? I don't see atheism >as a much of a solution for anything, unless you feel >that religion, per se, is evil in and of itself. You're correct, atheism isn't *anything*, it's the lack of belief in a particular thing that some other people believe in. At this time in human development, I think religion has outlived any usefulness it ever may have had, and now exists merely as a parasite on our minds, causing more harm than good. I am actively working against it, and against the religious zealots' constant attempts to subvert the laws of my society and force their particular religion on me. A religion I personally find very distasteful. >I also noticed you have a "standard response to asshole >Christians." Are you saying that all Christians are >assholes, or that the standard response meant only for >those Christians that are, and the other Christians >should disregard it? I don't normally get that vitriolic unless I am faced with an asshole. I do not consider all Christians to be assholes, just the ones who demonstrate that they are one. For instance, this would not include yourself. >At the end of your posted email exchange with an "idiot >theist" you ask if anyone else is up to a battle of wits. Well he was an idiot, so it's somewhat of a hollow victory. I was just having fun at his expense, childish, I know... >If by "battle of wits" you mean trading pot shots and >insults, you win by default, but if you want to debate >the pros and cons of atheism vs. the alternative, why not? >It's been a long time since I've done anything like this >and I find it a good intellectual exercise. > >I was going to offer you the "opening shot," but I realized >that your website serves as that and I'd only be asking you >to repeat yourself, which would not be fair since you've >already put lots of time into writing this stuff down. > >I'll start by asking you about your own definition of the >word "sin." How would you characterize a good, working, >non-religious definition of sin, one that an atheist might >feel comfortable agreeing with? My definition of sin: "A concept invented by religions to describe the particular things that a particular religion or sect claims is forbidden by their deity or deities." I claim sin does not exist except as a concept within the minds of theists. In other words, one man's sin is another man's belly laugh...
From rforsyth@tblg.com Fri Mar 21 18:39:24 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Atheist's Attempts = Binary Zero! In article <5gseid$kev@nntp.seflin.org>, d009872c@dc.seflin.org says... > >Gary Gnu (gmg@ari.net.spamthis) wrote: >: In article <5gk3hk$kdt@nntp.seflin.org>, >: Sam Lopez wrote: >: >: Capella (capella@airmail.net) wrote: >: > >: >: : It is also fun to watch you guys scramble to try to come up with some >: >: : "jumping through hoops" explanation for each one >: > >: >It is also fun to watch Capella Coyote jump into irrationality and angry >: >reaction as his hoops have scrambled his brains into binary code...full >: >of atheistic "zeroes!" > >: Its even more fun to watch Sammy piss all over himself because he's a >: bleater without a clue. He doesn't even know how to lie for god like the >: others do. Stick around Sammy, maybe you'll learn. > >Gary "New" Guru of the few, >Yeah...I've already learned a lot from you atheists...you guys do the >very same things you accuse others of, only more shamelessly since you >don't have a God to be accountable to...in your minds! By the way, is >that Pampers you're wearing or Luvs? Fuck are you ever a creep and an asshole. I guess you're learning from the John P. Boatwright school of effective evangelism. By the way, Aaron Bassett posed a question for you in this very thread which you have characteristically chosen to ignore. I've repeated it again for you just in case your news server never got it (which I seriously doubt): tell me which of the following is true, if any at all: Allah created the universe.....The Koran is the story (Islam) Shiva created the universe.....Mahabharata is the story (Hinduism) Spirits created the universe...Our ancestors tell the story (Indians) God created the universe.......The bible is the story (Christianity) Pink Turtles created the universe..Told by a friend at a party (drunkenness) Now, which one of these is valid? If one is valid, then all others must be invalid. Or none are valid at all. For the world cannot be created more than once by different entities if it was not destroyed first. The Koran can't be the story of creation if the bible is. What makes you so sure that your Christian idea of the universe is better than all the other religions? Wheres your evidence to disprove the validity of other religions? Just try it. I know your going to wimp out on this one. He was right too. You did wimp out. OK Sam, you're a huge loudmouth Christian missionary out to convert the heathen. Go for it now if you have any self respect. I think you haven't got it in you - there's no possible answer to this challenge and you will ignore it again just like you ignore everything else that poses any sort of problem for your infantile fairy tale. Just like your mentor Boatwright. I think neither of you believe the shit you bleat, you're just having fun antagonizing people. > +**************************************************+ > * "There are only two ways to live your life. * > * One is as though nothing is a miracle. * > * The other is as though everything is a miracle." * > * - Albert Einstein - * > +**************************************************+ Not only are you an asshole but you deliberately and constantly misrepresent Einstein's views with this quote - you obviously intend people to think that Einstein was a theist, when there's all kinds of other quotes where he unambiguously states the opposite. You're so full of shit you stink to the heavens. According to some Christian sects you're headed to Hell for your lying. >Samuel Lopez De Victoria >d009872c@dcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us > >m m ii a m m ii >mm mm ii a a mm mm ii >m m m m ii a a a m m m m ii >m m m ii a a a a m m m ii Miami? So what? Who the fuck cares? Crime capital of the world. randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Sat Mar 22 19:51:56 1997 Newsgroups: alt.bible,alt.atheism Subject: Re: Atheists canít defend their position without resorting to blasphemy or profanity. In article <3332dc8f.24501111@news.futuris.net>, Bruce@noemail.com says... > >Atheists canít defend their position without resorting to blasphemy or >profanity. The Holy Spirit is a lying deceiving servant of Satan, who regularly sodomizes Jesus Christ while Jehovah watches. Oh, and fuck shit piss cunt goddam motherfucking sonofabitch. You Christians are so easy to defeat in debate. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Tue Mar 25 19:54:19 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet,alt.atheism.satire Subject: Re: Why I'm not a Christian. In article , ten.pirt@thginka.evomer says... > >In article <5h2ihl$q6f$3@kirin.wwa.com>, REMOVEgmcgrew@wwa.com wrote: > >>#So because God has not manifested Himself to you in a tangable form you >>#write Him off... Hmm. Okiedokeysure. >> >>If by 'manifested himself' you mean provided no convincing evidence, yes that >>is sufficient for me personally to 'write him off'. > >C'est ton vie, ne mon. (Think I said that right...Currently failing the >class, so I wouldn't be surprised if I insulted someone's mother. ;) Yes it is, but the default position of reason is to *not* assume something exists unless there are compelling reasons to do so. You, and all other theists I've ever heard from, consistently fail to provide any reasons at all, compelling or otherwise. >>#Absurd statement. God has left a tremendous ammount of proof for us. >>#You're just not looking if you say you can't find it. To those who look, >>#they *do* find (as He promised) and to those who do search, they are >>#fulfilled in their search. >> >>Could you give an example of the 'proof'? > >If you look for it, you will find it. First no one wants me to preach, >then everyone does. If you want a preaching, just say it and I'll haul out >the Biblical stuff and go at it. Otherwise all I can say without preaching >is that God is spirtual, not physical. Evidence for Him is spiritual, not >physical. Seek Him in your heart and mind and He will appear to you. So this god of yours is just a mental experience, indistinguishable from dreams, illusions, delusions and other mental aberrations. Or is there some difference? We're not asking you to preach here, we already know all about your fairy tale. Please describe precisely how we can distinguish the effects of your god from the effects of, for instance, a severe head wound. >>#Weak evidence for there being no God. God MADE those laws. That's >>#evidence for His creation of the universe and of His supreme wisdom and >>#intelect. >> >>This logic is forming a pretty tight circle isn't it? God made the laws so >>the laws prove god. > >Ahhh ... It's only a circle from the outside. From the inside it's a nice >sphere (an infinate number of circles... for the not-so-fast). =) Having enclosed yourself in this sphere of yours, and consequently being unable to understand anything outside of it, is your choice. Don't expect us to be clamoring to join you in there. Too stuffy and claustrophobic. >># Science will never disprove God on any basis, reasoning or >>#directly, because GOD MADE SCIENCE (which is a logical stem from "God made >>#everything"). Everything that science proves will only go to prove just >>#how wise God is for creating it like that. =) >> >>Are these circular arguments an example of your proof of god? > >I've only just begun... Yes, apparently you can run your arguments in rings and rings and rings... The problem is, around here, you just look like a gullible fool. >>#>wrong if your god would just make one irrefutable appearance on earth - >>#>falsifiability. Therefore the two beliefs can be assessed for relative >>#>likelihood and, by my ctiteria, the existence of god is unlikely. >># >>#Jesus. >> >>What about him? > >"if your [G]od would just make one irrefutable appearance on earth [sic]" You are obviously assuming that this Jesus not only did appear on earth, but provided irrefutable proof that he was a god and not just another human. You prove nothing but your own gullibility. You can't reasonably disbelieve that aliens in UFOs are abducting people all the time. There's a hell of a lot more evidence for that than your saviour on a stick surviving crucifixion and burial. >>#16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that >>#whoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. >>#(John 3:16-18, KJV+=). >> >>Would any muslims now care to quote the Koran? > >Evidence to the above. Or course, trust in the Bible is always a plus for >that sort of thing, now isn't it? =) Fuck, why do we even bother? Did you know that Islam is a different religion from yours, and that in Islam calling any person a god is blasphemy? The point is, how can you reasonably reject every other religion in the world except yours? They've all got musty old books of myths. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Mar 26 12:59:24 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism.satire Subject: Re: Why I'm not a Christian. In article <01bc39e2$49ca5440$7e37369d@berrym>, berrym@microsoft.com says... >Gully Foyle wrote > >> He's not answering calls. > >Sure He is. Sometimes He doesn't answer them the way we want, but he does >answer. Just listen! Don't be such an idiot. Don't you know that most atheists, and many Christians, have never had such a personal experience, and it's not from lack of trying. >> >God is a father. >> >> This is a fantasy. > >Reality! Fantasy! >> Of course you wouldn't, you've based your entire life on the idea that >> god is a loving father. > >Exactly, because that is the image of God we received from Christ. Unfortunately you are terminally god-soaked. Too bad. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Mar 26 13:05:07 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.christian,alt.christnet,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism.satire Subject: Re: Why I'm not a Christian. In article , ten.pirt@thginka.evomer says... > >In article <5h7n70$3jm@alexander.INS.CWRU.Edu>, jxs105@po.CWRU.Edu (James >Strebler) wrote: > >>Now, who knows, maybe I'm an evil person, and the people around me >>were also evil, and weren't worthy of God's protection. Yet, I find >>it difficult to believe in my heart of hearts that EVERY child killed >>in a drunk driving accident, and every person who was stricken with >>a horrible disease were "not protected." All the jews of the holocaust >>were unworthy of life? What a horrible thing to say. You should >>be ashamed of yourself. > >Protection from faith in God does not mean bad things will not happen to >you. It means that only things that must happen will happen. I,too, have >seen people who truly believed get killed or seriously hurt. Doesn't mean >they didn't believe, just that they, for some reason, were a part of His >plan and/or their time had come for judgement. As usual, you have only the standard Christian cop-out. "We don't understand anything, it's all part of God's plan." Don't you ever have the urge to seek the answers to questions? >Salvation is free, It is not free, it requires giving up your mind. >but a deadly price was paid for it. This "deadly price", according to your mythology, consisted of an inherently immortal being spending about 9 hours nailed to a cross, followed by less than 36 hours "dead", and according to some accounts, in your mythology's "hell". After this grueling 45 hours was over, he returned to heaven to spend the rest of eternity as second-in-command. How does this compare with some victims of, say, the Spanish Inquisition, some of whom were imprisoned and tortured for literally YEARS? Of course, being heretics and all, they are now in hell for the rest of ETERNITY! Jesus Christ was mildly inconvenienced for our sins. Big fucking deal. It's not even an impressive myth. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Thu Mar 27 10:37:23 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Another religious mass suicide In article <333A8A6A.103A@airmail.net>, capella@airmail.net says... > >Early reports say 39 males were found dead in a house in San Diego. >It appears to be a mass suicide of another religious group called >The Order of the Solar Temple (unconfirmed - ABC news). > >How sad. 39 down, 4 billion to go...
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Mar 28 13:44:34 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: alt.atheism Kooks List I've decided not to join the Christians in church wailing about their Saviour being mildly inconvenienced for our sins today. Instead I've put together a list of our favourite kooks at http://www.telemark.net/~randallg/aakooks.htm Anyone with new material, changes or suggestions please post them to this thread. randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Mar 28 13:58:45 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet.sex,alt.homosexual,alt.politics.homosexuality Subject: Re: Toddy is At the Big Lies Again In article <33416703.10094885@news.ozemail.com.au>, stix@oz-email.com.au says... > >Todd C. Andrews posted the following to alt.atheism, > > > >>Or to teach that homosexual behaviour is morally equivalent to >>heterosexual behaviour. > >In what way is homosexual behaviour morally inferior to heterosexual >behaviour? I'm curious as to your reasoning. > >Stix: atheist #12 Hell, if the sex is between consenting adults, I fail to see how morality enters the issue at all. randall g =%^)> Atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Mar 28 20:21:25 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.origins,talk.atheism,sci.skeptic,alt.religion,alt.christnet Subject: Re: Atheism vs. God In article <853.7026T547T2509@abarnett.demon.co.uk>, adrian@abarnett.demon.co.uk says... > >> Berry spake thusly :- >>IG (Slim) Simpson wrote in article >><5he560$2iq$5@nntp.igs.net>... > >[snip] > >>> I don't have to accept a literally >>> true bible > >>We don't accept the symbolic parts as literal either > >Speak for yourself. There are many xtians who *do* accept the whole >thing literally. >How do you know which is which? >I get the impression that most xtians just accept the bits they like >as literal, and anything else as symbolic. > >Very handy. This is the rule they use: If it's obviously stupid, it's a metaphor. If it is physically possible, it's real. Otherwise, it's symbolic. randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Fri Mar 28 20:42:13 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.christnet,alt.religion.christian,talk.atheism,talk.religion.misc Subject: Re: IS GOD REALLY OMNIPOTENT? >apatriot (apatriot@earthlink.net) wrote: >: Just for fun: What if God does exist and at >: the same time there is no proof the human can point to? Then we're fucked bigtime. Nice god you've got there.
From randallg@telemark.net Sun Mar 30 16:20:10 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Eleven questions for atheists... > One: What experiences have different atheists had when they mentioned > that they were an atheist to different people -family, friends, > co-workers, former ministers, etc.? My experiences have mostly been positive. My friends and coworkers are almost universally a-religious and many of them are atheists. The rest are too apathetic about it to care. I live in British Columbia (most secular part of Canada) and work in computer engineering. Most theists I meet are kind, reasonable people. There's probably a lot of people in my family who would have bad reactions. AFAIK none of them are aware of my website, which is full of my own atheistic writings. > Two: What caused you to make the final decision to become an atheist? There was no final decision. I eventually realized that I was an atheist and had been for some time. It was a gradual process. > Three: Have any of you had any moments of doubt and what helped you > get over them? No. The only doubt I experienced was doubt about the religion I was raised in. > Four: The old 'no atheists in foxholes' bit is bound to come up again. > How many of you went into the service as atheists, were involved in > deadly battle and came out of the service STILL an atheist? I can't say for sure as I have never been in harms way. Personally, I think god belief wouldn't occur to me no matter what was going on. > Five: When you made the decision to become an atheist, did you feel > relief, fear, sadness, happiness? What emotion exactly? There was a lot of relief. I refused to attend church anymore at age 16. While not yet an atheist at that point, I absolutely hated going to church (we went twice every Sunday). I found it an incredibly boring waste of time and didn't like a lot of the self-righteous hypocrisy I had become aware of. Frankly, even as a child I new I had better things to do. I never missed religion. I had never had a prayer answered, nor had God ever blessed me with any personal experiences, nor had I ever been interested in fellowship with other Christians. RELIEF! Chucking out the whole religion thing was the best thing that ever happened to me. That, and sex :) > Six: What is your favorite book on atheism? Don't have a favourite book on the topic of atheism. I didn't really do any reading specifically about atheism when I lost my religion. I guess it just became really obvious to me, the more I learned about science and how the universe works. Even today I have yet to read "Atheism: the Case Against God". > Seven: Which atheist person do you most admire? I admire lots of atheists, but would probably put scientists like Einstein, Hawkings and Dawkins at the top of the list. > Eight: Do you follow a life philosophy along with being an atheist? My life philosophy is not a direct result of atheism, except to the extent that I don't adhere to any religious beliefs. Live and let live sums it up I guess. As an aside I think that the philosophy of Jesus Christ, which some atheists admire, is garbage. > Nine: Were you raised in an atheist family or did you become an atheist > on your own? I was raised in a strict Calvinist Christian family (*not* fundy). That's probably why my "conversion" to atheism took longer than a lot of other atheists around here. > Ten: How old were you when you became an atheist? Somewhere between 17 and 19, there's no exact date. > Eleven: What started you thinking of becoming an atheist? Reading science fiction as a young boy. randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Mon Mar 31 15:51:06 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: alt.atheism.list.cowards In article <33401088.2A78@upo.com>, gladys@upo.com says... > >There are two members of this list, so far... > >randallg, >Susan Mitchell > >They have never entered the arena of a single debate in whihc I was >engaged, preferring to stand on the sidelines in their butt nakeded >cowardice, hurling rocks at the warriors. That's because you're an idiot, Gladys, and I have better things to do than get caught in your endless quagmire. Frankly, you are one of the relatively boring as kooks go. Have a look at my web pages if you want an idea of my philosophy. There are arguments with far more intelligent and interesting theists than yourself. That's what I reserve my limited time for. PS I wrote your entry, not Susan. No need to direct your venom at her, though I doubt she gives any more of a shit than I do. PSS Lighten up. If you're going to act like a raving kook you will be treated like one. Even Schiller is starting to realize that. PSSS At least I gave you the opportunity to claim another victory. Of course, we all know it's just another of your lies. >And for heavens sake we should all have a daily dose of good sex! >Really people, why the hell are we so mean to each other?? Seek your >neighbor and bring her the ecstacy of your hunger for knowledge of her >soul and don't waste another minute! This is why I like your religion best, Gladys. I sincerely mean that. Beats the hell out of those repressed Judeo-Christian types :) >Man's knowledge of the origin of the universe will always >be a dichotomy, either it was created, or it was not created, and there >is no way to prove either side of the proposition. After much >discussion, virtually every participant in the debates came to an ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >agreement with this simple truth. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Good one Gladys. I guess that means they accepted all the rest of your nonsense. How do you get Talula out of that? >With Disappointment, >Gladys Oh try and get over it. randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Mon Mar 31 22:13:54 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Eleven questions for atheists... In article <5hmutr$opu$1@news.bctel.net>, randallg@telemark.net says... > >> Seven: Which atheist person do you most admire? > >I admire lots of atheists, but would probably put scientists like Einstein, >Hawkings and Dawkins at the top of the list. I'm almost embarrassed - I forgot to mention Carl Sagan. I've read many of his books and found them tremendously inspiring, and the same with his video works. They're not really about atheism specifically but you get the picture... randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@telemark.net Wed Apr 02 23:30:15 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: alt.atheism.list.cowards NOTE: This started because Gladys doesn't like being in the alt.atheism Guide to Current Kooks which you can see at: http://www.telemark.net/~randallg/aakooks.htm Gladys, this is exactly the sort of endless quagmire that I'm not interested in getting stuck in. However, just so you can claim another victory, here goes one more. In article <3341571F.10FE@upo.com>, gladys@upo.com says... > >randallg wrote: >> >> In article <33401088.2A78@upo.com>, gladys@upo.com says... >> > >> >There are two members of this list, so far... >> > >> >randallg, >> >Susan Mitchell > >You do not seem to understand that everything you write exposes the >heart of your philosophy, and that everything you write on the internet >will be archived forever, and that your children, grandchildren, and >great grandchildren, will come to the archives to learn what you were >all about. Now, let us see now what your children shall find, let us >see what will be your legacy: Yes Gladys, you are right about that. Not only do I understand it, but I am looking forward to it. I have fought a good fight against the stupid mysticism and irrationalities that KOOKS like you spew, and you *know* the world is getting more rational all the time. I am at the head of a tide of rationality and saneness that will sweep supernatural swill like yours aside. My descendents will read my words and say "Fuck Yeah!" And you, you are a *lone voice* crying out in the wilderness, just like our biggest KOOK of all Schiller Elijah-*, who will probably off himself soon hoping to catch a ride on a coment. There isn't a single person in the world who buys your shit *now*. What do you think your ravings will look like in a hundred years time? Do you think people will read your swill and say "Hey, look at this, this is just the philosophy we need to put our sick society back on track, let's all start believing in Talula the Creator who may or may not have created everything!" >> Have a look at my web pages if you want an idea of my philosophy. There are >> arguments with far more intelligent and interesting theists than yourself. >> That's what I reserve my limited time for. > >Oh, they will find your websites all right, you can be certain of that, >but they will realize that it was only your voice reflected there, for >you retained editorial control, and they will seek to know how you >handled objections to those ideas you held sacred. Well, all news articles reproduced there have not been changed. Why would I bother? I agree with what I say, DUH. And many of them *do* handle objections, point by point, to others' posts - something *you* sure haven't bothered doing very often. BTW thanks for contributing. Your message will survive longer because you're known as an early alt.atheism KOOK than it will because it has any particular philosophical merit. >> >They have never entered the arena of a single debate in which I was >> >engaged... >> >> That's because you're an idiot, Gladys, and I have better things to do > >And your children will read that you did not consider it important to >defend your ideas in an impartial arena, that you could not find the >time for courage, your time was limited to a cowardly vomiting of your >quivering ideas. An impartial arena? Guess not, this is alt.atheism which is a group for and about atheism. As a theist, you are required to provide evidence for your assertions AROUND HERE. Why don't you go to alt.i.need.another.mystical.new.age.religion.please.someone.tell.me.what.to.believe. That's what you mean by impartial, right? >Your children will then come to UseNet, to see what >manner of lies you left in your writings. Right Gladys, they will find all manner of lies in my writings. Sure. Hey, it's not like you to avoid providing evidence for your assertions. >What shall they find, randallg, what shall be your legacy? Let us see: > >> PS I wrote your entry, not Susan. No need to direct your venom at her, >> though I doubt she gives any more of a shit than I do. > >They shall find that, among other things you had an intimate knowledge >of the timing and appearance of Susan Mitchells bowel movements. Do you >love her? Are you going to marry the girl? Will she be their mother? >Should you then speak of her in these terms? That's right Gladys, we atheists have a secret email list where we keep each other informed of our bowel movements and other bodily functions on a daily basis. Did you know that Stix horked up a big green loogey this morning? Though not. Oh, and you should have seen the JPG of his morning turd, which once again, as he has often said, made more sense than you and the other KOOKS around here. If you renounce Talula, we *might* let you join us. Sounds like something you'd be really interested in. Seriously Gladys, I must admit the possibility that you have no idea what the expression "don't give a shit" means. Either that, or you are making a pathetic attempt at a cheap insult. Another Gladys gem for the eternal Dejanews to archive forever, wouldn't you agree? >Yes, your children will seek you here, they will seek the truth of the >both of you. I guess you're referring to the children Susan and I will parent, right? Is this a prophecy, or what? Fuck you're a deluded psycho aren't you. Where did you learn this stuff, a gypsy fortune teller? >What is it that you will leave for them? This is what >they will think when they read of these days in which you two >encountered the philosopher Gladys: The philosopher Gladys? Right up there with Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Galileo, Descartes, Spinoza, Hume, Kant, Darwin, Nietzsche, Sartre, Gandhi, King and others? Ooooh, I am so privileged to have the honour of debate with such a great one as yourself. >"My parents encountered a new idea, a new philosophy, and it left them >speechless, they could not deal with the issues during the period of >time when they first came into contact with these writings. Rather than >listen and learn, and prepare their answer, they decided to hurl rocks >and call names, and behave like cowards. When confronted with this, >they did nothing to defend their honor, nor our honor, nor their parents >honor. They caused our family name to be counted among the cowards of >the earth." "My parents encountered innumerable religious KOOKS on alt.atheism. Realizing very quickly, as do we now when we read their archived writings, that their ravings were totally insane, they took a few minutes out of their busy days to refute and ridicule the nonsense, thereby helping to reduce universal belief in supernatural mysticism, which has contributed to our world becoming this paradise of rationality and universal respect for the individual, now that religion and supernatural belief has declined into obscurity. "We have them, and many others like them, to thank for this." >And you, randallg, you failed to defend that sacred one, your beloved >Susan, you caused her name to be associated with your willfully >published cowardice. I don't need to defend Susan against you. Don't you know we are all having a great laugh at your expense? When are you going to figure that out? Fuck you're stupid. >Will this then be your legacy? > >Why not desist, for now, give it some time, and make ready your answer >to Gladys? OK Gladys, I will make ready my answer to you. I am on my knees, typing this as tears slide from my eyes to splash upon the keyboard, I am feeling like BriceW Man of God! as I write. My knees and legs become sore and then numb. My arms ache with the effort of typing. With great effort I raise my head above the keyboard and confront the monitor. With salty tears blinding my eyes I type my answer. >Your children will search the dates of these postings and >you will not be able to hide the fact that you so far have refused to >deal with a single issue, that you ran, that you had the moral integrity >of half congealed lime green jello. You are right. I am jello. I am jello of the limest, most half-congealed kind. Refusing to deal with a single issue, I take the .357 Magnum from my desk and carefully, deliberately load it with a single bullet. >This is evidenced by your own >words, your own writings. Realizing how jello-y I have been, grasping the magnitude of the evidence I have left behind in my own writings, I point the .357 at my head and release the safety. CLICK!! >They shall know that you sought instead to >cause pain, rather than deal honestly and openly with the issues I >raised, you sought to hurt me. I wail to the skies: "I HAVE HURT GLADYS!! I HAVE HURT GLADYS!!" Then I put the gun down and laugh. >And they will judge my writings, also, randallg, and Susan Mitchell, and >they might not agree with some of the things I write, but they shall not >know me as a coward, they shall never see the day when Gladys backed >down from a single idea. I'd never accuse you of cowardice, Gladys. You do not hesitate to sling your arrows and attack, and this signifies bravery in a warrior such as yourself, does it not? It doesn't need to have a point. However you have backed down from practically every refutation of your nonsense by ignoring it, and lying about it later. This has been documented many times. This is one reason you're a KOOK. >I observed the universe, I came to my conclusions, Got a picture of Talula? >and before I died I made damn sure that I published my philosophy Hey, this isn't a lie! >honestly and openly, Oooops. >without reservation, and when confronted by an objection, I answered >each and every one to the best of my ability. Your tenaciousness is admirable in a twisted sort of way, speaking as one who has made a little study of KOOKS, but your ability is pathetic. >I engaged in reasoned debate with the brave and intelligent members of >alt.atheism. The reasoned-ness was a little one-sided... >We had some nasty battles, and your children will read the >transcripts and make their own determination as to who dominated, and >they will know that we fought like lions, we gave no quarter. They will see a bunch of KOOKS get flambe'd by me and others. >Would you wish to be known as a cowardly disgrace to these sacred >people, these millenium warriors? I am exalted in their presense. It is >a great day in which we live. This is the dawning of the age of the >empowered individual. Each one of us has our clear voice, audible >eternally now to all creatures. Stand up and live, you two, speak up, >bring us your truth. Fear no woman, man, god, or idea. Err, that's what I'm doing. Why are you on my case? >I am somewhat worried about you at this point. That's because I'm an insane dangerous psychotic, Gladys. You see right through me, you psychic magician you. >But you threw a spear at >me, and I plucked it out, and I hurled it back, and my aim is a true. Aaaauuuuggggghhhh..... I'm fading.... last words..... Gladys is right... auugggh... here's .... aaugg .. Talula .. ... come to... fetch me.. into .... endless...... sex............ >Gladys randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Sun Apr 13 16:40:28 1997 Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.bible,alt.christnet.evangelical,alt.christnet.hypocrisy,alt.christnet.philosophy,alt.christnet.theology,alt.fan.jesus-christ,alt.messianic,alt.recovery.religion,alt.religion.christian,alt.atheism Subject: Re: I hava a bone to pick with you athiest In article <3350FC28.F76@HiWAAY.net>, dnelson@HiWAAY.net posted to alt.atheism: > >it seems every time i turn around, i am hearing about something dealing >with Jesus is getting banned all because you get offended, or you feel >like we are pushing our religon on you. So cut it out, then. >the latest is the deal >concerning the ten commandments being posted up in the courtrooms. if >this offends you, then don't read it. I'd feel really good in that courtroom, if my case was going on, and the judge somehow found out I was an atheist. The job of the justice system is not to enforce the 10 commandments from Christian mythology, it is to enforce the *law* which is a very different thing. Bet if you were in an Islamic country, and were arrested for, say, shoplifting (even if you weren't guilty), you'd feel really good if the Quranic law was posted on the wall of the courtroom. >if someone tries to tell you about >Jesus, and you feel as if they are pushing Jesus on you, just tell them >you've heard it all before, and you wish not to hear about it anymore. We tell that to you godsoaked bleaters all the time, but do you shut up? Noooooooo. >it is that easy. Really? Let's find out. You are pushing Jesus on us, we've heard it all before, and we wish not to hear about it anymore. I expect you to never post your bleats to alt.atheism ever again. >this is america. you have the right to worship who you >wish if you choose to worship anything at all. we cannot force Jesus on >you. you rejecting Him is your own condemnation. but i do not see why >you have to go around saying we are constantly offending you, and then >taking the subject to court. Because you are trying to use government money and resources to force a particular religious belief on the public at large. This is expressly forbidden by the Constitution. Which words in the above paragraph do you not understand? >like when yall had prayer banned from >school. when yall did this, you took the prayers from millions of >children away from our Father, thus you have declared war. you will not >win! Great, if you know you are going to win, stop whining. Just sit there quietly with a smug self-righteous smirk on your face. >if us talking about Jesus offends you, then don't listen. Mostly it amuses me... >if the ten commandments offend you, then don't read them. OK. The first 4 are stupid and useless, and the other 6 are way too vague to use as a decision tool in most situations. >you know i get >offended everyday probably 20 times more than you. I'm not surprised. You probably get offended by most television commercials. I get the impression you are often in a state of suppressed anger. Doesn't sound good for your brain. >everyone seems to be >saying god damn this and god damn that. and i constantly am hear someone >yelling out "Jesus Christ" when something bad happens or when they are >not even talking about Him in the first place. they are constantly using >the Lord's name in vain. This is hardly a new practice, nor is it caused because the government is supposed to be secular. Try and relax though, keep reminding yourself these people will all be tortured for eternity. >everytime i hear this i get offended as do many >other followers of Jesus our King. you do not see us complaining or >taking that to court. instead we choose not to listen instead. What individuals do on is not an issue, nor is there much restriction on it. For instance, you have the right to post your inane bleats to alt.atheism. If the govermnent wants to use money and resources to publicly blaspheme God to the public at large, I would be amused, but I would also support any effort to have it stopped. Government should remain *silent* on religious issues. >i have >thrown my t.v. away and all of my rock n roll music. i can't stand to >hear it so i do away with the problem. i don't go crying to the courts >about it. Bully for you. Go live in a shack in backwoods Montana. >now in the time before our King's return it is not against the >law for abortion, as it should not be. that is your own decision, not >ours. so you will be the one punished, not us. Good. Why can't all the rest of you whining bleaters let God punish us after we die, rather than try to enact His rules and His punishments on His behalf here in the real world? Whether we choose to be afraid of your sky monster, or not, is our right and our decision. >We as >christians do not have the right to stop you or stand in your way. Darn tootin. Sadly, many of you think you not only have the right to do so, but the *duty.* >we do >however have the right to rebuke you and treat you as the tax collecters >if you do not change your ways and repent. Hey, you said above you'd fuck off if we asked you to. >true we often if not always >over rebuke you, but that is because we care for your soul. Most of you fundy bleaters would love to see us burn in Hell. >whether or >not you believe it, there is a Heaven and a hell. Prove it. >you say prove it. let >me ask you a question, if i were to walk on water, or make the blind to >see or the deaf to hear or the crippled to walk, this still does not >prove there is a God. If you were able to demonstrate any of these things, you could collect Randi's prize and become rich. But you are correct, this would have no apparent connection to the existance of an omnipotent universal creator god. >it does prove that something unexplainable has >happened though. Your point? Bear in mind that none of this *has* happened. >as for me i do not need a miracle to believe. You don't need *anything* to believe. This is called "gullible," or being "brainwashed." >i have >faith and that is all i need. Sadly, this appears to be so. Another potential mind wasted. >seeing that i have faith, it if it is my >Father's will for me to do these things than so be it. if not then so be >it. This sounds suspiciously like what a psycho killer might say, trying to justify his horrible crimes. >there is no way to prove ourselves until Jesus our King proves it >for us. Well isn't that conveeeeeeenient. >this He will do. for all men haved sinned and all men have >willingly sinned. Fuck off. There's no such thing as sin, and most people live good, honest lives regardless of their religious beliefs. >for this reason Jesus will die a second time along >with His choosen one, for a sacrifice for His people. What a horrid, ghastly myth. Why don't you Christians try to add a little life-affirmation to your death cult? >they will be left >on the streets for three and a half days for all to see. they will say >"now let us see your King rise from the dead" after three an a half days >They will rise up on their feet for all of the world to see. then all >will know that Jesus is King. this will be the day that our King will >conquer the entire world. this will happen during this generation, mark >my words!!! Not bad, I'll give that a 7 on the drooling rant and rave scale. >I am a warrior of my King Jesus. You're a looney. >I hold up my shield of Faith to protect >His people. I hold my double edged sword with both hands prepared for >battle. Behold, it is sharpened and polished for the slaughter. Do you mind if I ask you not to take this sword out in public? Thanks. >I have >pulled it from it's sheath and it will not return there until I have >acclomplished all that is my Father's will for me to accomplish. I point >it to the Heavens and give thanks to my Father and then I thrust it into >the earth and let out my battle cry. Why not get a couple of AK47's - that will be *much* more effective than your sword when God finally commands you to slaughter the heathens. >My Father has told me that the >earth and all in it belongs to Jesus my King. He has told me to go and >take from satan, and give it to whom it rightfully belongs. So this I >will do. Err, look, if you ever point that weapon at me, please give me a chance to repent and convert to your religion, OK? No need to kill me... >My words and my prayers will acomplish this. Phew, you sounded a little *too* serious with all that sword and battle talk. Anyway, if I tell you I've heard it all before, will you please fuck off? >Mark my words. I >am like David as he goes to fight the giant. No delusions of grandeur here. >Everyone laughs at him >until the giant is slayed. We'll be laughing at you till the day you die, Jeremy. >As he done, I will take on the entire world. Just you and God against the world, eh Jeremy? How epic. >The world is like the Giant, and I am like David. I stand boldly before >the world with my sling. They laugh at me, but I am not moved. When it >is all said and done, then I will be the one laughing. In your dreams, you pathetic little man. >This is my faith. >My faith and my Father standing behind me is all I need. Prepare to >meet your doom. The world as we know it will not continue in the >direction it is going. ALL the governments and kings and presidents of >this world WILL YIELD to my King Jesus or be destoyed!!! You are the great warrior for Christ? You are God's anointed to cleanse the earth of heretics? You are going to spearhead the second coming? Perhaps you are actually Jesus Christ Himself finally returned! Think about it. >In the name of Jesus our King, I, Jeremy Joseph Nelson do declare this. Wow. That's weird. You are insane and bordering on being a danger to the public. Please seek help. randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Sun Apr 13 22:37:17 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: I hava a bone to pick with you athiest In article <335283F0.5250@student.uq.edu.au>, s036614@student.uq.edu.au says... > >randallg wrote: > >> Wow. That's weird. >> You are insane and bordering on being a danger to the public. >> Please seek help. > >Well you're not helping him much, you cruel bully. Don't you have any >compassion? What, you think I'm in a position to help these freaks? You think they're going to listen to a word I or anyone else say? You think I should humour his public delusions? This guy wants to chop up heretics with a broadsword, he publicly posts a long rambling rant about wanting to make war against and kill his opponents, *up close and personal with lethal weapons,* and you want to humour him? Fuck that. People like this are mentally unstable and dangerous, and only by exposing their putrid fester to the light of day, *early*, can we remain safe from them. >Robert Davidson randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Mon Apr 14 15:25:08 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Limitations of forgiveness In article <891.7043T1209T1298@SPAMabarnett.demon.co.uk>, adrian@SPAMabarnett.demon.co.uk says... > >For instance, if Hitler came before God and *truly* repented of everything >he had done, would God forgive him and let him into heaven? God and Jesus would both be overwhelmed with happiness if Hitler repented. All God wants is to be with *every one* of his creations in paradise forever. It will be a joyous day in heaven when Hitler shows up at the Pearly Gates. >And if He did let Adolf in, what explanation would He give to all the >souls of Hitler's victims that were there already? None of them are in Heaven. They were all dirty Jew Christ-killers and are all roasting in Hell. randall g =%^)> atheist #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Tue Apr 15 14:25:34 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: Limitations of forgiveness In article <01bc4947$4ddbfe20$d78693cf@michaela>, kestrel9@worldnet.att.net says... > >> >And if He did let Adolf in, what explanation would He give to all the >> >souls of Hitler's victims that were there already? >> >> None of them are in Heaven. >> >> They were all dirty Jew Christ-killers and are all roasting in Hell. > >Not all of Hitler's victims were Jews. Gypsies, Homosexuals, and >descendants of Jews were sent to concentration camps. There >were probably others, but I am not an expert on Nazi history. >Many Christians were sent to concentration camps (some were >genetically related to Jews). In addition, many Americans died >in combat. In any case, you are sick. I know all this. My comments were actually the exact opposite of what I personally think. Just trying to emphasize the sickness of fundy thought. (Am I getting a little too realistic ... ?) randall g =%^)> mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Wed Apr 16 13:08:31 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.atheism.satire Subject: Re: JESUS APPEARED TO ME! In article <5j2viu$7kt$1@fddinewz.oit.unc.edu>, dcoyne@email.unc.edu says... > >Todd Matthew Koson (tmkoson@umich.edu) wrote: >: David A Wilson (dwilson@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu) wrote: >: : I have seen the RISEN LORD JESUS CHRIST! The LORD comes to my backyard >: : and SPEAKS to me to tell ALL of his message! >: : WOE to those who do not seek his message. > >: : Send a donation of $2000 (cash only please) for Jesus' MESSAGE to: >: : David Wilson >: : 117 Willow Dr. >: : Covington, LA 70433 > >: That's not what Jesus told me! Send me $1500 and I will tell you what he >: told me. After all - you GOTTA hear his message!! > >Shoot, I'll tell you what he told *me* for a mere $1000. >NOBODY beats my prices! Jeeezuss' messages at prices SO LOW >you'll think I've gone INSANE!! Due to an overstock at our suppliers we are temporarily able to offer the INCREDIBLE price of $899.95 per Jesus message! But WAIT! That's not all! If you act now, for every two Jesus messages you purchase, we will throw in a third FOR FREE! That's a cost of under $600 per message! WHILE THEY LAST! YOU WON'T SEE A DEAL LIKE THIS AGAIN! Plus we'll throw in for FREE a bonus set of Ginsu steak knives and a Popeil Pocket Fisherman! Just for ordering from us! HURRY! [ Payment by FirstVirtual or CyberCash only. ] randall g =%^)> #320
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Thu Apr 17 11:05:06 1997 Newsgroups: alt.christnet,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.atheism Subject: Re: I hava a bone to pick with you athiest [ mind if I jump in? I've got a spare moment ... ] In article <3354caba.97389659@news.totcon.com>, ixoye@totcon.com.spamfilter says... > >On Tue, 15 Apr 1997 14:33:34 GMT, stix@ozemail.com.au (Stix) wrote: > > >> "Jesus was a useless carpenter-wannabe-bleater who hallucinated and >> babbled, and was eventually killed for his useless canting. He whined like >>a pussy while on the cross, the holy spirit is a lying servant of satan, >>and your god-thingumy takes it in the face." >> >> >>"In the name of the Usenet poster, Samaritan, I hereby declare that the >>Holy Spirit is a lying servant of Satan." Goes double for me... >Stix, Stix, Stix, Bleater, bleater, bleater, >I'll be watching you from the side of the Great White Throne, and >although I'd like to say I will laugh at your tears, I will not. Deluded moron. You're seriously out of touch with reality aren't you. You're really pissing off Odin with all this Christian crap. >I'd like to avoid hearing YOUR whines for mercy. You'd love it, liar. But you'll be dead. Not standing next to your sky monster's throne in his mythical lair. >Always remember; goats bleat too. You think of yourself as a goat? Naw, goats are way more intelligent than sheep. You're a bleating sheep, bleater. The shoe fits perfectly. >And yes, God takes it in the face. Cool. Why don't you put up pictures of that in your buildings of bleating. >He takes your filth and rot full force. Take that, evil mythical sky beast! <BIFF> That's for the crusades! <WHAM> That's for the Inquisition! <BOOF> That's for all the baby killing in your sick book! >He died for it. If you mean Jesus, he died because he was a minor rabble rouser and pissed off the authorities. Then he whined like a pussy when they pinned him to a stick and left him to dry in the sun. >Stix, is there anything YOU would die for? I'm not Stix, but aside from self defense of himself and his loved ones, I doubt it. >You really don't have anyhing to live for, do you? You're the deluded psycho who wants to make up more things for people to die for. Us hedonists have plenty to live for. It's all there is. Unfortunately deluded moronic bleaters like you think life is so awful you just can't wait to die. And you want the rest of us to share your misery. >When the scabs fall from your eyes, Scabs? Hilarious. There's a whole universe out there and you have completely locked and bolted your mind shut. >I hope you're still a resident of THIS world. As opposed to some mythical place of eternal torture, right? No you don't liar, you can't wait to hear our screams, but you're just a deluded psycho moron and none of your stupid fantasy crap is real. >Stix, you will eventually bow down to the Lord of Hosts, and all the >lonely trailertrash talk in your paltry arsenal will be to no avail. Your puny desert god will wither and die when Stix and I tear into it. Your Holy Spirit is a lying servant of Satan! Take that, YWHW, it's payback time! randall g =%^)> #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Fri Apr 18 11:50:10 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism Subject: Re: If You Were Dying... In article <5j6ucp$d1l@nntp.seflin.org>, d009872c@dc.seflin.org says... > >Question to atheists... > >If you were dying, which would you pick? > >a) to be treated in a hospital with all atheist staff? >b) to be treated in a hospital totally staffed by nuns? Hmm. Do nuns give head? randall g =%^)>
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Fri Apr 18 12:55:07 1997 Newsgroups: alt.christnet,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.atheism Subject: Re: I hava a bone to pick with you athiest In article <335649ee.22750044@news.totcon.com>, ixoye@totcon.com.spamfilter says... > >On 17 Apr 1997 17:46:37 GMT, randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net (randallg) >wrote: > >>>> "Jesus was a useless carpenter-wannabe-bleater who hallucinated and >>>> babbled, and was eventually killed for his useless canting. He whined like >>>>a pussy while on the cross, the holy spirit is a lying servant of satan, >>>>and your god-thingumy takes it in the face." >>>> >>>>"In the name of the Usenet poster, Samaritan, I hereby declare that the >>>>Holy Spirit is a lying servant of Satan." >> >>Goes double for me... >> >>>Stix, Stix, Stix, >> >>Bleater, bleater, bleater, >Brayer, Brayer, Brayer, Good one centurion, like it, like it... >>>I'll be watching you from the side of the Great White Throne, and >>>although I'd like to say I will laugh at your tears, I will not. >> >>Deluded moron. You're seriously out of touch with reality aren't you. > >You forgot your question mark, Searcher. Oooooh! Grammar/spelling/punctuation flames! 1-0 for you! >>You're really pissing off Odin with all this Christian crap. Well? What are you going to say to Odin when you stand trembling and whining in front of His Throne of Judgement? Prepare for the worst, heathen. >>>I'd like to avoid hearing YOUR whines for mercy. >> >>You'd love it, liar. But you'll be dead. Not standing next to your sky >>monster's throne in his mythical lair. > >Liar?? You called me a liar. I'm telling Mom. OK, if you insist, I will accept that you don't want to hear my eternal screams in Hell. This is unusual for rabid fundies. Are you sure you don't want to hear just a *little* screaming of tortured heathens? Maybe your god will take pity on me after a few hundred trillion years, and let up for the remainder of eternity. >Sky monster?? Who said anything about a sky monster?? Sorry, I thought we were talking about the Christian god. He lives in the sky and destroys people and things on earth based on his unpredictable whims. The Bible explains this at great length and in great detail. Capella posts a new gem every day - check it out. >>>Always remember; goats bleat too. >> >>You think of yourself as a goat? Naw, goats are way more intelligent than >>sheep. You're a bleating sheep, bleater. The shoe fits perfectly. > >No, Jackass, I think of YOU as a goat. Oh. Still makes no sense though. In what way am I like a goat? Besides being way more intelligent than sheep, that is. Somehow I don't think you meant this as a compliment. >>>And yes, God takes it in the face. >> >>Cool. Why don't you put up pictures of that in your buildings of bleating. > >Buildings? The Church, you mean? That's not a building. No, I mean churches. They're all over the fucking place and lots of them have pictures from your myths, like your saviour-on-a-stick being tortured to death. I think some facial come-shots would add a little life-affirmation to your sick death cult. Did you really not understand that simple sentence? >>>He takes your filth and rot full force. >> >>Take that, evil mythical sky beast! > >Again, there's that reference to a topic I never addressed. Fine. I'm talking about the Christian God as revealed by the Bible. What are *you* talking about? >><BIFF> That's for the crusades! >><WHAM> That's for the Inquisition! >><BOOF> That's for all the baby killing in your sick book! He's lying there bleeding on the floor. Aren't you going to do anything? Aren't you a WARRIOR FOR CHRIST like the psycho who started this thread? I'm sharpening up Mr Warrior's big shiny broadsword and your god is going to get slit up a treat. >>>He died for it. >> >>If you mean Jesus, he died because he was a minor rabble rouser and pissed off >>the authorities. Then he whined like a pussy when they pinned him to a stick >>and left him to dry in the sun. > >How're You going to die? Oh yeah, and how many times? Don't know. Once at most. Maybe never, depending on the state of medical technology. What does that have to do with anything? You're rambling. >>>Stix, is there anything YOU would die for? >> >>I'm not Stix, but aside from self defense of himself and his loved ones, I >>doubt it. > >Then don't speak for him. Fine, you didn't get the point so I'll be more clear. There is nothing *I* would die for besides self defense of myself and my loved ones. Got a problem with that? >>>You really don't have anyhing to live for, do you? >> >>You're the deluded psycho who wants to make up more things for people to die >>for. Us hedonists have plenty to live for. It's all there is. > >That would be "We hedonists." Aaauuugh! Got me with another grammar flame! 2-0 for you! >Did I make up something? I wasn't aware. When you asked if there was anything Stix would die for, you were implying that there is something he *should* be willing to die for. Obviously this something has to do with your myth and is consequently made up by yourself or the inventors of your myth. If that's not what you meant, what *did* you mean by that? I'll repeat it for your convenience (with my name so I am obviously speaking for myself): >>>Goat, is there anything YOU would die for? >>Unfortunately deluded moronic bleaters like you think life is so awful you >>just can't wait to die. And you want the rest of us to share your misery. > >To live is Christ Huh? That makes no sense at all. Looks suspiciously like a bleat. >and to die is gain. Why not off yourself then? Oh right, the Christian masters were smart enough to make suicide a sin, so all the miserable serfs and slaves wouldn't take a shortcut to eternal paradise thus avoiding more decades of misery (and cheap labour/cannon fodder for the kings and priests). >>>When the scabs fall from your eyes, >> >>Scabs? Hilarious. There's a whole universe out there and you have completely >>locked and bolted your mind shut. > >I'm a Ph.D. PhD in what: god-babbling? life experience? Anyone can get one of those by mail order. If not, let's see how well this PhD of yours works. Do you believe an omnipotent universe-spanning pan-dimensional being created the entire universe including the original mating pair of humans from dust 6000 years ago, put them in a garden with a magic fruit tree, who were then convinced by a talking snake to eat from the tree, consequently damning themselves and their descendents forever to an eternity of torture, so this omnipotent universe-spanning pan-dimensional being had to send a piece of himself to earth to be tortured to death for this unforgiveable sin, on behalf of every human who ever did or will live, but only those who simply believe this absurd fable with zero evidence are eligible to be forgiven and everyone else remains damned to an eternity of torture? >What are you, a high school sophomore? Nope. But enough about me. >>>I hope you're still a resident of THIS world. >> >>As opposed to some mythical place of eternal torture, right? > >Wrong, as opposed to Hell, Goat. Sorry again, I keep mistaking you for a Christian. In the Christian myths Hell is a place of eternal torture. What is *your* Hell supposed to be? >>No you don't liar, you can't wait to hear our screams, but you're just a >>deluded psycho moron and none of your stupid fantasy crap is real. > >Yes I do, Seeker. Stop calling me Seeker. Stick with Goat. >Are you going to grow up to be a textbook editor? >They misquote others all the time, too. Once again, sorry for thinking you were an evil hate-filled psycho fundy. You *sounded* just like them. We get them all the time around here. >>>Stix, you will eventually bow down to the Lord of Hosts, and all the >>>lonely trailertrash talk in your paltry arsenal will be to no avail. >> >>Your puny desert god will wither and die when Stix and I tear into it. > >Desert god? Who mentioned a desert god? Are you a Christian or not? Where do you think the tiny Hebrew tribe lived when they invented their precious god? >>Your Holy Spirit is a lying servant of Satan! > >Who exists, although God does not, right? You're the one who thinks Satan exists; your mythology would fall apart without him - he's as important as Jesus. Don't mistake me for a theist. I was just having fun committing the ultimate unforgivable Christian blasphemy. Wanna see me to do it again? My eternal soul is already damned and there's nothing I can do about it. >>Take that, YWHW, it's payback time! > >Oh, you DO know His name then. Of course. Do you think I'm not familiar with your myth? >Payback for what? Millenia of human misery caused by his fanatical followers. (I realized later I spelled his name wrong - should be YHWH - you didn't even notice!) PS I've left in a couple of grammar/spelling/punctuation errors so you can score yourself some more points. randall g =%^)> #320 mailto:randallg@telemark.net http://www.telemark.net/~randallg When You let me fall, grew my own wings, now I'm as tall as the sky When You let me drown, grew gills and fins, now I'm as deep as the sea When You let me die, my spirit's free, there's nothing challenging me - James (a band from England, not my name)
From randallg@NOSPAMtelemark.net Sat Apr 19 15:49:08 1997 Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.atheism.satire Subject: Re: Some Questions on God In article <01bc4ab0$ba8c7d00$5c0e0792@default>, tew653s@nic.smsu.edu says... > >Hi, I'm a little new to this whole internet and news thing, so bear with >me. I'm using my friend's account while he's out getting groceries. Welcome to the Internet, Will. >I was reading some of the messages in this news gruop and I saw a lot of >them mentioned someone named God and someone named Jesus. I guess I should >watch the news more often, but, who are these people? God and Jesus are a pair of infinitely powerful, infinitely knowledgeable universe spanning beings who are deeply and intimately concerned about your sex life. God created Life, the Universe and Everything 6000 years ago. At that time He created the first pair of humans and put them in a garden with a magic fruit tree. A talking snake convinced them to eat the fruit so God had to damn them and all their descendents forever to an eternity of agonizing torture. However He wanted to save the most gullible of the humans so He sent Jesus to earth to be killed. Anybody who believes this actually happened gets to avoid the eternal agonizing torture and live with God and Jesus forever while having an orgasm that lasts for the rest of eternity. Clear? The last time either of them appeared on earth was almost 2000 years ago. That's why they don't often make the papers. >And how are their names pronounced? God is pronounced "make-believe-sky-monster" and Jesus is pronounced "whining-pussy-on-a-stick". >Also, what is an atheist, and should that be >capitalized? An atheist is someone who has suffered severe cerebral malfunction and is mad at God and Jesus for some reason and consequently hates them. In order to hurt God as much as possible, the atheist will deny His existence although he *really* believes in Him deep down. Only Christians are allowed to capitalize Atheist. >Everyone here seems to know what their talking about, even though there >seems to be some dissagreement over the details. There is very little disagreement. Both atheists and Christians acknowledge the existence, power, righteousness and morality of the Christian God. >I hope my questions >aren't too dumb. Not at all. >Thanks, >Will randall g =%^)>