When Kooks Collide (Was: Christianity is pure mythology (The Decline of Astrology and The Christian Cult) #1)

[e***@no.spam]

snip

Any chance of not quoting like Kettler? Jesus H. Buttfucking
Christ on a crutch, it's impossible for anyone else to follow.

It's a symptom of kookiness. I doubt she has the skill to
post in a rational manor.

[e***@no.spam]

The pagan Magi were star gazers, and the first to witness to Jesus.

What shred of evidence do you have to support those claims?

[e***@no.spam]

Yours in Christ,
Sam Carson

So, Sam, how long have you been fucking this Christ
guy?

[Jos Flachs]

Post by e***@no.spam

Yours in Christ,
Sam Carson

So, Sam, how long have you been fucking this Christ
guy?

I hope he's wearing a condom. You never know who else has been there.

[S. J. Carson]

'plonk'

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
'plonk'

The moron even quotes his plonk.

[Phoenix]

Post by S. J. Carson
'plonk'

You're killfiling thin air?

[S. J. Carson]

Post by Phoenix

Post by S. J. Carson
'plonk'

You're killfiling thin air?

In future, I will reply, only, to messages that show SOME interest, in
the subject being 'discussed'.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
In future, I will reply, only, to messages that show SOME
interest, in the subject being 'discussed'.

Run away little boy.

[e***@no.spam]

Brownie points for the quote marks there. Just going by your
previous poasts, the 'discussion' is a mere pulpit pounding on
YOUR part. I'm going, now, to make popcorn, for everyone.

While, you are, up. Please get, me, a diet, coke. Thank, you.

[e***@no.spam]

Which god would that be, and how is a rational person to
distingusih between all the competeing versions?

Even the Bible says there is more than one god. Too bad these
brain-fucked xtians don't actually read their own book.

[e***@no.spam]

They do not tell Herod of the star, but of the star's significance.

Moron, do you even read the book?

2:7 Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men,
enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared.

Sounds like somebody told Herod. So run along, Carson, you need
to spend more time on your homework and less on Onanism; it's
affecting your ability to see the words.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

They do not tell Herod of the star, but of the star's significance.

Moron, do you even read the book?

It is not necessary, to be insulting. The greatest 'scholar', of the
Bible, knows nothing, unless he reads with Faith.

Post by e***@no.spam
2:7 Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men,
enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared.
Sounds like somebody told Herod.

This is foolishness. The text says that Herod asked a question, but
who are you, or who am I, to say whether, or not, he really did not
know the answer?

So run along, Carson, you need

Post by e***@no.spam
to spend more time on your homework and less on Onanism; it's
affecting your ability to see the words.

If you had read, and understood, the Bible, you would know, what the
sin of Onan was, instead of showing ignorance of the meaning of the
text. You may be guided to the truth, if you read one of many, good,
Evangelical commentaries.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[Dr. Flonkenstein]

Being tired of lurking, on Sat, 06 Dec 2003 20:15:10 +0000, S. J. Carson

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

They do not tell Herod of the star, but of the star's significance.

Moron, do you even read the book?

It is not necessary, to be insulting. The greatest 'scholar', of the
Bible, knows nothing, unless he reads with Faith.

Post by e***@no.spam
2:7 Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, enquired of
them diligently what time the star appeared.
Sounds like somebody told Herod.

This is foolishness. The text says that Herod asked a question, but who
are you, or who am I, to say whether, or not, he really did not know the
answer?
So run along, Carson, you need

Post by e***@no.spam
to spend more time on your homework and less on Onanism; it's affecting
your ability to see the words.

If you had read, and understood, the Bible, you would know, what the sin
of Onan was, instead of showing ignorance of the meaning of the text. You
may be guided to the truth, if you read one of many, good, Evangelical
commentaries.

Who is Onan, and why should I care?

[e***@no.spam]

Post by Dr. Flonkenstein
Who is Onan, and why should I care?

He was smote for not doing a good job of fucking
his brother's widow.

[Dr. Flonkenstein]

Post by Dr. Flonkenstein
Who is Onan, and why should I care?

He was smote for not doing a good job of fucking his brother's widow.

The widow that was called Ms. Fist ???

[S. J. Carson]

Once more, I say 'plonk'.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
Once more, I say 'plonk'.

Posting "threats" now, child?

[Phoenix]

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by S. J. Carson
Once more, I say 'plonk'.

Posting "threats" now, child?

Maybe he thinks saying so is supposed to do something.

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam
Moron, do you even read the book?

It is not necessary, to be insulting. The greatest 'scholar', of the
Bible, knows nothing, unless he reads with Faith.

Evasion noted.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam
Moron, do you even read the book?

It is not necessary, to be insulting. The greatest 'scholar', of the
Bible, knows nothing, unless he reads with Faith.

Evasion noted.

Where have I 'evaded' anything? I have replied, honestly, to all
posts, except those, that are obviously frivolous. 'Humour' is sinful,
only when it aims to harm.

Please, be aware, that I am addressing my replies, to you, and others,
to 'alt.astrology', since I read that forum, as well as this one, and
prefer to keep frivolity out of 'alt.religion.CHRISTIAN', as far as
possible.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam
Evasion noted.

Where have I 'evaded' anything? I have replied, honestly, to all
posts, except those, that are obviously frivolous. 'Humour' is sinful,
only when it aims to harm.

You've been evading constantly by invoking "Faith" everytime
you are unable to answer. That's evasion.

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
If you had read, and understood, the Bible, you would know, what the
sin of Onan was,

I know what Onan sin was. The word "onanism" while derived from
Onan is not really about Onan's sin.

Post by S. J. Carson
instead of showing ignorance of the meaning of the text. You
may be guided to the truth, if you read one of many, good,
Evangelical commentaries.

Why? You said the bible was written by your god. If that's true,
why should I trust someone else's word?

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by S. J. Carson
If you had read, and understood, the Bible, you would know, what the
sin of Onan was,

I know what Onan sin was. The word "onanism" while derived from
Onan is not really about Onan's sin.

When challenged, you claim to 'know', yet provide no evidence that you
know, while demanding, like a whited sepulchre, that I provide
'proof', of things I have already demonstrated to be TRUE.

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by S. J. Carson
instead of showing ignorance of the meaning of the text. You
may be guided to the truth, if you read one of many, good,
Evangelical commentaries.

Why? You said the bible was written by your god. If that's true,
why should I trust someone else's word?

No commentary is to be trusted, except when it elucidates, and does
not contradict, the Word. Moreover, if you are not willing to learn,
from a commentary, why do you ask me questions, that you could answer,
as easily, by reading for yourself?

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
When challenged, you claim to 'know', yet provide no evidence that you
know, while demanding, like a whited sepulchre, that I provide
'proof', of things I have already demonstrated to be TRUE.

Moron, I was simply saying that you've been masturbating. Get it,
putz? While you are at it go take an introductory writting class and
learn how to contract a sentence.

[Bob Officer]

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 20:15:10 GMT, in alt.astrology, "S. J. Carson"

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

They do not tell Herod of the star, but of the star's significance.

Moron, do you even read the book?

It is not necessary, to be insulting. The greatest 'scholar', of the
Bible, knows nothing, unless he reads with Faith.

Some of the worlds most well known sociopaths had "faith" in what they
believed and read in that book.

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam
2:7 Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men,
enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared.
Sounds like somebody told Herod.

This is foolishness. The text says that Herod asked a question, but
who are you, or who am I, to say whether, or not, he really did not
know the answer?

Matthew wasn't there, and it reads as if it is a seconds or third hand
account. Matthew never ever writes as if he was there.

Not much of a testimony is it?

Today such an account would be labeled as a urban legend.

Post by S. J. Carson
So run along, Carson, you need

Post by e***@no.spam
to spend more time on your homework and less on Onanism; it's
affecting your ability to see the words.

If you had read, and understood, the Bible, you would know, what the
sin of Onan was, instead of showing ignorance of the meaning of the
text. You may be guided to the truth, if you read one of many, good,
Evangelical commentaries.

Yes, Onan refused to commit an act adultery, and in so doing refused to
give his dead brother an heir upon his dead brother's wife.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by Bob Officer
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 20:15:10 GMT, in alt.astrology, "S. J. Carson"

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

They do not tell Herod of the star, but of the star's significance.

Moron, do you even read the book?

It is not necessary, to be insulting. The greatest 'scholar', of the
Bible, knows nothing, unless he reads with Faith.

Some of the worlds most well known sociopaths had "faith" in what they
believed and read in that book.

Of course, 'the demons also believe, and tremble.'

Post by Bob Officer

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam
2:7 Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men,
enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared.
Sounds like somebody told Herod.

This is foolishness. The text says that Herod asked a question, but
who are you, or who am I, to say whether, or not, he really did not
know the answer?

Matthew wasn't there, and it reads as if it is a seconds or third hand
account. Matthew never ever writes as if he was there.
Not much of a testimony is it?
Today such an account would be labeled as a urban legend.

Matthew's 'informant', was the omnipotent God. Are you suggesting,
that God has a bad memory, for events?

Post by Bob Officer

Post by S. J. Carson
So run along, Carson, you need

Post by e***@no.spam
to spend more time on your homework and less on Onanism; it's
affecting your ability to see the words.

If you had read, and understood, the Bible, you would know, what the
sin of Onan was, instead of showing ignorance of the meaning of the
text. You may be guided to the truth, if you read one of many, good,
Evangelical commentaries.

Yes, Onan refused to commit an act adultery, and in so doing refused to
give his dead brother an heir upon his dead brother's wife.

There was no 'adultery'. Onan's sin, was that he misused marital
relations, to avoid procreation. The meaning is clear, yet even our
language demonstrates, how fallible it is, by using the name of Onan,
to label a different kind of sin! If even language is thus fallible,
how are 'ideas', expressed in language, such as the ideas of
'science', to be considered 'reliable'?

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
There was no 'adultery'. Onan's sin, was that he misused marital
relations, to avoid procreation.

Wrong. Onan's sin was that he disobeyed orders.

[Bob Officer]

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by S. J. Carson
There was no 'adultery'. Onan's sin, was that he misused marital
relations, to avoid procreation.

Wrong. Onan's sin was that he disobeyed orders.

The 'orders' contained a contradiction to law.

[Bob Officer]

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 18:03:54 GMT, in alt.astrology, "S. J. Carson"

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by Bob Officer
On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 20:15:10 GMT, in alt.astrology, "S. J. Carson"

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

They do not tell Herod of the star, but of the star's significance.

Moron, do you even read the book?

It is not necessary, to be insulting. The greatest 'scholar', of the
Bible, knows nothing, unless he reads with Faith.

Some of the worlds most well known sociopaths had "faith" in what they
believed and read in that book.

Of course, 'the demons also believe, and tremble.'

What demons? Like your imaginary god?

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by Bob Officer

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam
2:7 Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men,
enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared.
Sounds like somebody told Herod.

This is foolishness. The text says that Herod asked a question, but
who are you, or who am I, to say whether, or not, he really did not
know the answer?

Matthew wasn't there, and it reads as if it is a seconds or third hand
account. Matthew never ever writes as if he was there.
Not much of a testimony is it?
Today such an account would be labeled as a urban legend.

Matthew's 'informant', was the omnipotent God. Are you suggesting,
that God has a bad memory, for events?

But that is a false claim, Matthew never claims to have talked to 'God.'

I suggest this recounting was made up out of whole cloth. Fabricated.

A fable to control the slaves and masses.

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by Bob Officer

Post by S. J. Carson
So run along, Carson, you need

Post by e***@no.spam
to spend more time on your homework and less on Onanism; it's
affecting your ability to see the words.

If you had read, and understood, the Bible, you would know, what the
sin of Onan was, instead of showing ignorance of the meaning of the
text. You may be guided to the truth, if you read one of many, good,
Evangelical commentaries.

Yes, Onan refused to commit an act adultery, and in so doing refused to
give his dead brother an heir upon his dead brother's wife.

There was no 'adultery'. Onan's sin, was that he misused marital
relations, to avoid procreation. The meaning is clear, yet even our
language demonstrates, how fallible it is, by using the name of Onan,
to label a different kind of sin! If even language is thus fallible,
how are 'ideas', expressed in language, such as the ideas of
'science', to be considered 'reliable'?

You forget the woman Onan refused to impregnate wasn't his wife. It was his
dead brother's wife. If it wasn't Onan's wife, and it was someone else's
wife then the act was adultery.

The word of God can not contain errors or contradictions
The Biblical Law commanded Onan to commit adultery.
The Bible states thou shall not commit adultery.
adultery is a sin.
Ergo the Bible contains a contradiction.
Contradictions are Errors.
The Bible contains Errors.
Therefore the Bible isn't the word of God.

What part of that don't you understand?

Or is ok to sleep with another man's wife if you intend impregnate her?

[e***@no.spam]

Post by Bob Officer
You forget the woman Onan refused to impregnate wasn't his wife.
It was his dead brother's wife. If it wasn't Onan's wife, and it
was someone else's wife then the act was adultery.
The word of God can not contain errors or contradictions
The Biblical Law commanded Onan to commit adultery.
The Bible states thou shall not commit adultery.
adultery is a sin.
Ergo the Bible contains a contradiction.
Contradictions are Errors.
The Bible contains Errors.
Therefore the Bible isn't the word of God.
What part of that don't you understand?

He can't, even, understand, how to use, commas. Do, you, expect him
to, get, logic?

Post by Bob Officer
Or is ok to sleep with another man's wife if you intend impregnate her?

Remember how this spoiled brat of a god taunted Lot's wife?

[e***@no.spam]

It is, of course, a matter of fallible speculation, since the Bible
does not tell us why knowledge of the star was not recorded, by human
writers

Most like this is because Matthew and friends weren't around for the
"birth" and made the shit up like a bunch of used car salesmen.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

It is, of course, a matter of fallible speculation, since the Bible
does not tell us why knowledge of the star was not recorded, by human
writers

Most like this is because Matthew and friends weren't around for the
"birth" and made the shit up like a bunch of used car salesmen.

You believe, I am sure, many things, without even the evidence of your
own fallible eyes, yet you do not believe the plain, obvious Word of
God. Could any more evidence be needed, that this is a matter, to be
apprehended, not by weak, human reasoning, but by Faith alone?

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
You believe, I am sure, many things, without even the evidence
of your own fallible eyes, yet you do not believe the plain,
obvious Word of God.

The "plain, obvious Word of God" is neither plain nor obvious.
All I see is a bunch of humans claiming it is written by a god.
But this god doesn't appear to be too bright and is certainly not
worthy of praise.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by S. J. Carson
You believe, I am sure, many things, without even the evidence
of your own fallible eyes, yet you do not believe the plain,
obvious Word of God.

The "plain, obvious Word of God" is neither plain nor obvious.
All I see is a bunch of humans claiming it is written by a god.
But this god doesn't appear to be too bright and is certainly not
worthy of praise.

I will be returning to these forums later today, but I will not reply
to posts, that are plainly 'frivolous', in their intention. An
'astrology', or 'science', forum would be a better place for nonsense!

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
I will be returning to these forums later today

So?

[e***@no.spam]

What is 'historical' evidence, compared to the facts contained
in the Word of God?

It is evidence; the "Word of God" is not. In fact the Bible can
hardly be considered reliable with all the contradictions and the
history of its creation. Oh, that's right, you have no idea how
it was created because you don't believe in history.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

What is 'historical' evidence, compared to the facts contained
in the Word of God?

It is evidence; the "Word of God" is not. In fact the Bible can
hardly be considered reliable with all the contradictions and the
history of its creation. Oh, that's right, you have no idea how
it was created because you don't believe in history.

Why do you prefer the fallible evidence, of mere, human witnesses, to
teh evidence of God Himself, who created all men, including all merely
human, fallible, witnesses, from mere dust?

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
Why do you prefer the fallible evidence, of mere, human
witnesses, to teh evidence of God Himself,

You still have not shown that this god exists nor have you shown
that this "word" is the word of this god. All you have shown so
far is your addiction to your religious beliefs.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by S. J. Carson
Why do you prefer the fallible evidence, of mere, human
witnesses, to teh evidence of God Himself,

You still have not shown that this god exists nor have you shown
that this "word" is the word of this god. All you have shown so
far is your addiction to your religious beliefs.

It is not the fault, of the sower, if the ground is stony.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

It is true, that there is an apparent discrepancy, between the two
genealogies.

In other words the Bible *is* fallible but you can't fact up
to that reality. You probably don't want to hear about Jesus'
sex life either. (Hint: Mary Magdalene made Peter jealous)

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

It is true, that there is an apparent discrepancy, between the two
genealogies.

In other words the Bible *is* fallible but you can't fact up
to that reality.

You have, dishonestly, deleted my explanation of the probable facts,
in order to claim, falsely, that I did not provide an explanation.

I 'snip' the blasphemies.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
You have, dishonestly, deleted my explanation of the probable facts,

Bullshit, your post is still on the spool for anybody to read.

[e***@no.spam]

Mr Wollmann, thank you for your reply. I have run out of
time, today, but will attempt to answer your statements, and
questions, tomorrow.

Moron, you don't need to post to say you won't post until later. We'll
figure it out without your pathetic "help".

--
http://www.smbtech.com/ed/

[e***@no.spam]

I am attempting, not to defend, but to explain, and elucidate.

Bullshit, you are attempting to obscure explaination are to
require blind faith. Besides, for you to elucidate anything on
christianity you'd have to have a much better (and open minded)
understanding of it than you've been able to show here. Hint:
being a froathing fundie isn't elucidation.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

I am attempting, not to defend, but to explain, and elucidate.

Bullshit, you are attempting to obscure explaination are to
require blind faith.

Faith is not blind, but unbelief, is.

'snip'

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
Faith is not blind, but unbelief, is.

You are truly fucked in the head, Carson. Faith is simply belief
inspite of the facts.

So tell my why this god is so insecure that she requires belief
and worship? Wouldn't an all powerful god be beyond such human
behavior?

[JTEM]

Post by e***@no.spam
You are truly fucked in the head, Carson. Faith is simply
belief inspite of the facts.

Yes, he is fucked in the head, but that's no reason to turn yourself
into the enemy. That is to say, there is no reason for you to
subjectively define other people.

Meaning: "Faith" can (and very often is) simply believing when
there are no facts.

[John Henry]

You! Yes, YOU, (***@no.spam)! Behind the alt.usenet.kooks sheds!
Stand still, laddie!

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by S. J. Carson
Faith is not blind, but unbelief, is.

You are truly fucked in the head, Carson. Faith is simply belief
inspite of the facts.

I would respectfully disagree with your wording here. Faith is belief, not
in spite of the facts (as there are no facts disproving the existence of
God), but in spite of a *lack* of facts or evidence.

Post by e***@no.spam
So tell my why this god is so insecure that she requires belief
and worship? Wouldn't an all powerful god be beyond such human
behavior?

"Most 'gods' have the manners and morals of a four-year-old child." -
Robert Heinlein with another stunningly accurate assessment.

[e***@no.spam]

Post by John Henry
"Most 'gods' have the manners and morals of a four-year-old child." -
Robert Heinlein with another stunningly accurate assessment.

I think he over estimated the age of the child a couple of years.

[Hypatia Kosh]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

I am attempting, not to defend, but to explain, and elucidate.

Bullshit, you are attempting to obscure explaination are to
require blind faith.

Faith is not blind, but unbelief, is.
'snip'

War is peace.

Evil is good.

God is love.

Shall I keep going?

-Hypatia Kosh

--
Let tyrants shake their iron rod
And slav'ry clank her galling chains
We fear them not; we trust in God
New England's God forever reigns.

Chester, William Billings circa 1777

1783: Massachusetts SJC Outlaws Slavery
2003: Massachusetts SJC Legalizes Gay Marriage

[e***@no.spam]

[Looks like Carson wants a kook award. He's trying the stupid
Followup-To trick now]

The eyes, and reason, are fallible, It is only with Faith that
we cease to be blind.

Do you sell used cars?

[e***@no.spam]

I will not even read the continuation of a message, which begins in
this offensive style.

Fuckin' typical of the stupid fundie mentality. Does the work
"fuck" make you break out or something? It's just a word and has
no power unless you are fucking stupid enough to give it some.

But perhaps you refuse to read the post not because it uses the
word "fuck" but because you are afraid you might actually learn
something that shakes your "Faith"? It's not like christianity is
unshakable. Hell, it isn't even the most popular religtion in the
world. But its followers certainly have the typical "my god is
better than your god" crap along with the "you just have to take
my word for it and have faith" scam.

Does being xtian make you feel special? Do you get a warm fuzzy
feeling to "know" that you are right and the majority of mankind
is "wrong"?

[S. J. Carson]

Does anybody 'here' know how to report the threatening, abusive
language of this person?

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
Does anybody 'here' know how to report the threatening,

Somebody made a threat? Where?

Post by S. J. Carson
abusive language of this person?

This is fuckin' Usenet. If you are offended by the fuckin'
language, leave, i.e. get the fuck out, hypocrite.

[e***@no.spam]

After only four days here, I realize, already, that there are many
private vendettas being conducted,

Translation: too many people are willing to criticize your beliefs
so you want to run away.

[Dan Baldwin]

Post by e***@no.spam

After only four days here, I realize, already, that there are many
private vendettas being conducted,

Translation: too many people are willing to criticize your beliefs
so you want to run away.

Maybe he can hang out with Fucknozzle Junior?

[e***@no.spam]

Post by Dan Baldwin

Post by e***@no.spam
Translation: too many people are willing to criticize your beliefs
so you want to run away.

Maybe he can hang out with Fucknozzle Junior?

The hindu vs. xtian wars?

[Dan Baldwin]

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by Dan Baldwin

Post by e***@no.spam
Translation: too many people are willing to criticize your beliefs
so you want to run away.

Maybe he can hang out with Fucknozzle Junior?

The hindu vs. xtian wars?

sunday SUNDAY S U N D A Y

We take a god soaked comma abuser and a ROT-13 obsessed Hindu control
freak and lock them into a 30 square foot pit of no holds barred,
adrenaline pounding theological INSANITY! Its the Christian Coward
versus the Dickhead Dalit in a race to see who can avoid getting their
ass kicked harder by the spectators. Will the follow-up fuckhead fool
the .sig delimiting dipshit or will the Jesus junkie get sucked down
into the vortex left behind when AUK gets Nozzified?

Find out sunday SUNDAY S U N D A Y as two goofy-assed primitive
superstitions lock horns in a battle of BIBLICAL proportions to
determine once and for all who's invisible man in the sky is the
fiercest fucker in the firmament.

Miss this one and complaints are gonna be SNET!

[Cujo]

Post by Dan Baldwin

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by Dan Baldwin

Post by e***@no.spam
Translation: too many people are willing to criticize your beliefs
so you want to run away.

Maybe he can hang out with Fucknozzle Junior?

The hindu vs. xtian wars?

sunday SUNDAY S U N D A Y
We take a god soaked comma abuser and a ROT-13 obsessed Hindu control
freak and lock them into a 30 square foot pit of no holds barred,
adrenaline pounding theological INSANITY! Its the Christian Coward
versus the Dickhead Dalit in a race to see who can avoid getting their
ass kicked harder by the spectators. Will the follow-up fuckhead fool
the .sig delimiting dipshit or will the Jesus junkie get sucked down
into the vortex left behind when AUK gets Nozzified?
Find out sunday SUNDAY S U N D A Y as two goofy-assed primitive
superstitions lock horns in a battle of BIBLICAL proportions to
determine once and for all who's invisible man in the sky is the
fiercest fucker in the firmament.
Miss this one and complaints are gonna be SNET!

I take it there will be no Funny Cars? I was soooo looking forward to
getting Big John Mazmanian's autograph.

Dammit!

[e***@no.spam]

Post by Dan Baldwin
sunday SUNDAY S U N D A Y
We take a god soaked comma abuser and a ROT-13 obsessed Hindu control
freak and lock them into a 30 square foot pit of no holds barred,
adrenaline pounding theological INSANITY! Its the Christian Coward
versus the Dickhead Dalit in a race to see who can avoid getting their
ass kicked harder by the spectators. Will the follow-up fuckhead fool
the .sig delimiting dipshit or will the Jesus junkie get sucked down
into the vortex left behind when AUK gets Nozzified?
Find out sunday SUNDAY S U N D A Y as two goofy-assed primitive
superstitions lock horns in a battle of BIBLICAL proportions to
determine once and for all who's invisible man in the sky is the
fiercest fucker in the firmament.
Miss this one and complaints are gonna be SNET!

You better drive up the Conejo Grade and bring me a new keyboard
right now!!!

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

After only four days here, I realize, already, that there are many
private vendettas being conducted,

Translation: too many people are willing to criticize your beliefs
so you want to run away.

I wii not run away from your 'posts', which are futile, and
insignificant.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

After only four days here, I realize, already, that there are
many private vendettas being conducted,

Translation: too many people are willing to criticize your beliefs
so you want to run away.

I wii not run away from your 'posts',

Then why did you say you would? For that matter if my posts are
not wanted in alt.religion.christian as you have claimed, why do
you keep trying to set follow ups there?

You must be a very frustrated little bigot, Carson. Too bad you
and your ilk are able to do so much evil in the world.

[Hypatia Kosh]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

After only four days here, I realize, already, that there are many
private vendettas being conducted,

Translation: too many people are willing to criticize your beliefs
so you want to run away.

I wii not run away from your 'posts', which are futile, and
insignificant.

Nope. Only your thrashing about here.

-Hypatia Kosh

--
Let tyrants shake their iron rod
And slav'ry clank her galling chains
We fear them not; we trust in God
New England's God forever reigns.

Chester, William Billings circa 1777

1783: Massachusetts SJC Outlaws Slavery
2003: Massachusetts SJC Legalizes Gay Marriage

[e***@no.spam]

This is what your 'science' claims,

It is the same science (sans quotes) that is the
basis of that computer you are typing your xtian
whines on. Science is based on reality; religion
is more like an addictive drug.

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

This is what your 'science' claims,

It is the same science (sans quotes) that is the
basis of that computer you are typing your xtian
whines on. Science is based on reality; religion
is more like an addictive drug.

Man, by God's grace, is able to make 'tools', of which the computer is
an example, but 'tools' can be judged by whether, or not, they work,
unlike 'science', which is mere, fallible speculation.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson
Man, by God's grace, is able to make 'tools', of which the
computer is an example, but 'tools' can be judged by whether,
or not, they work, unlike 'science', which is mere, fallible
speculation.

Don't you get dizzy when you argue in circles like that? And
don't you think your "Followup-To' header game is a wee bit
childish?

[e***@no.spam]

[kooky Followup-To lame trick thwarted again]

The proper names, of things, are those used, in the Word of God.
Clearly, mere, human language is not enough.

This god's proper name isn't God, moron.

But we still know that the bible has
self-contradictions and therefore its text is not to be trusted.

You say so, but you offer no proof, of contradictions, or anything
else.

Ok, how did Judas die? How many animals on the Ark?

There are a *lot* more. Are you smart enough to find them? Or
perhaps fear is what keeps you from looking.

[e***@no.spam]

God did teach your class,

He sure was funny looking.

[e***@no.spam]

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

[Elroy Willis]

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

And why is suicide an unforgivable sin?

Jesus effectively committed suicide, if indeed his mission was to
come to earth and die at the hands of humans. It was like a suicide
bomber mission, so when does martyrdom become less than suicide?

[S. J. Carson]

Post by Elroy Willis

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

And why is suicide an unforgivable sin?

You would agree, perhaps, though it seems that nothing can be
'assumed' of the 'writers' here, that murder is a sin, yet the
murderer has time to repent. The man who murders himself does not have
time to repent, and, therefore, cannot be redeemed.

Post by Elroy Willis
Jesus effectively committed suicide,

Foolishness! What weapon did He use, in your false, 'eristic',
'reasoning'?


if indeed his mission was to

Post by Elroy Willis
come to earth and die at the hands of humans.

If you had read the summary of Christian doctrine, which I have had to
send twice, possibly because of interference, you would KNOW the
significance, of the saving Work of Christ.

It was like a suicide

Post by Elroy Willis
bomber mission, so when does martyrdom become less than suicide?

You are confusing martyrdom, which is a witnessing to the truth, with
Truth Himself.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[Jos Flachs]

On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 04:37:01 GMT, "S. J. Carson"

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by Elroy Willis

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

And why is suicide an unforgivable sin?

You would agree, perhaps, though it seems that nothing can be
'assumed' of the 'writers' here, that murder is a sin, yet the
murderer has time to repent. The man who murders himself does not have
time to repent, and, therefore, cannot be redeemed.

Kindly explain what exactly a sin is.

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by Elroy Willis
Jesus effectively committed suicide,

Foolishness! What weapon did He use, in your false, 'eristic',
'reasoning'?

Sorry, he wilfully had himself killed. He had someone else do the
dirty work for him.

Does a man who is slowly dying of cancer and refuses all medication
commit suicide?

Post by S. J. Carson
if indeed his mission was to

Post by Elroy Willis
come to earth and die at the hands of humans.

If you had read the summary of Christian doctrine, which I have had to
send twice, possibly because of interference, you would KNOW the
significance, of the saving Work of Christ.

Not according to some of the gospels. They claim faith is more
important than good works. Which one is correct? Faith? Or good works?

Post by S. J. Carson
It was like a suicide

Post by Elroy Willis
bomber mission, so when does martyrdom become less than suicide?

You are confusing martyrdom, which is a witnessing to the truth, with
Truth Himself.

Yeah, the truth is a 50 cent boxcutter knife...

[JTEM]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by Elroy Willis
Jesus effectively committed suicide,

Foolishness!

It's actually pretty accurate.

Post by S. J. Carson
What weapon did He use, in your false, 'eristic',
'reasoning'?

Jesus chose a course of action that, according to Christians,
he knew & understood would result in a painful death. What's
more, given the power to raise the dead & turn water into
wine (amongst other miracles), it seems unlikely that he couldn't
have shaped events in order to produce a different outcome.

If you knew for a fact that, if you visited my city, I would kill you,
it would be suicidal for you to visit my city. If you had the power
to alter events so that a visit to my city would not result in your
death -- and you refused -- your suicidal intentions would be clear
and unmistakable.

Post by S. J. Carson
if indeed his mission was to

Post by Elroy Willis
come to earth and die at the hands of humans.

If you had read the summary of Christian doctrine, which I have had to
send twice, possibly because of interference, you would KNOW the
significance, of the saving Work of Christ.
It was like a suicide

Post by Elroy Willis
bomber mission, so when does martyrdom become less than suicide?

You are confusing martyrdom, which is a witnessing to the truth, with
Truth Himself.
--
S. J. Carson
To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

Frankly, I do not understand, what point you are trying to make.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

Frankly, I do not understand, what point you are trying to make.

It's a simple question. Are you too simple to figure it
out?

[S. J. Carson]

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

I have answered this question, O ye of little faith, in the very post,
to which you have added your reply.

--
S. J. Carson

To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen
Romans ch xvi, v 27

[e***@no.spam]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam
How else did Judas die?

I have answered this question

Bullshit. You didn't know the answer so you just waved your hands
and dismissed it.

Try again.

[Gary Duncan]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

I have answered this question, O ye of little faith, in the very post,
to which you have added your reply.

It does not appear that you are in the upper half of the IQ
scale, Mr. Carson. You have certainly missed the irony that
your lack of knowledge shows the world.

BTW, the list of newsgroups you have been posting too cause me
to roll around the room laughing. Some christian you are.

[Jos Flachs]

On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 04:36:55 GMT, "S. J. Carson"

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

I have answered this question, O ye of little faith, in the very post,
to which you have added your reply.

Would you mind changing the 'ye of little faith' into 'ye of no faith
whatsoever'? Thanks!

[Dan Baldwin]

Post by S. J. Carson

Post by e***@no.spam

Judas, despairing, committed the unforgiveable sin of suicide,
by hanging himself.

How else did Judas die?

I have answered this question, O ye of little faith, in the very post,

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You do realize that most rational people would take the above as a
compliment, don't you?
--
Dan Baldwin, unethical *by design*

"I have always thought that the reason Dinosaurs were so big is because
of the dramatic difference in gravitational strength between that time
period and now" -Edmo the paleontologist

"Christ was just an enlightened person, not unlike me." -Edmo the humble


Hail the un-alive

[e***@no.spam]

There are sins of thought, and of word, as well as of deed.

Ah, so this god of your doesn't allow thinking either. He must
be quite insecure.

[e***@no.spam]

Please refrain from 'posting' foul, abusive messages!

Please go fuck yourself and your god in a pile of rancid
dog vomit covered with shit. Thank you very much!

[Phoenix]

Post by e***@no.spam

Please refrain from 'posting' foul, abusive messages!

Please go fuck yourself and your god in a pile of rancid
dog vomit covered with shit. Thank you very much!

Hmm, looks like he and Tommie of alt.test have something in common.
This might call for a Fuckhead cascade.

[Cujo]

Post by Phoenix

Post by e***@no.spam

Please refrain from 'posting' foul, abusive messages!

Please go fuck yourself and your god in a pile of rancid
dog vomit covered with shit. Thank you very much!

Hmm, looks like he and Tommie of alt.test have something in common.
This might call for a Fuckhead cascade.

Fjuckhead!1!

[e***@no.spam]

The King James Bible is, merely, the most accurate,

Bull-fucking-shit! The King James Bible is riddled
with translation errors.

Gawd, you're stupid.

[e***@no.spam]

I no longer open the 'websites', which people here offer,
because it is my experience, that, often, the contents are
offensive.

So you aren't mature enough to trust yourself with seeing
offensive contents? You xtians sure have a need for censorship.

[Wally Anglesea™]

Post by e***@no.spam

I no longer open the 'websites', which people here offer,
because it is my experience, that, often, the contents are
offensive.

So you aren't mature enough to trust yourself with seeing
offensive contents? You xtians sure have a need for censorship.

SJ Carson *doesn't* represent Christians, Christianity or anything
related.

I've found most Christians (of various persuasions), Muslims I've met,
and Buddhists, as well as the odd Hindu to be quite tolerant,
intelligent, and pleasant. It's only the bigoted and willfully
ignorant that are annoying, and need censorship.


Just thought I'd make the distinction.
--
Maj. General, Fanatic Legions.
Commander of Southern Hemisphere Forces.

Find out about Australia's most dangerous Doomsday Cult:
http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/pebble.htm

[e***@no.spam]

Post by Wally Anglesea™
SJ Carson *doesn't* represent Christians, Christianity or anything
related.

No, but he thinks he does.

Post by Wally Anglesea™
I've found most Christians (of various persuasions), Muslims
I've met, and Buddhists, as well as the odd Hindu to be quite
tolerant, intelligent, and pleasant. It's only the bigoted and
willfully ignorant that are annoying, and need censorship.

True.

[Jim Phillips]

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by Wally Anglesea™
SJ Carson *doesn't* represent Christians, Christianity or anything
related.

No, but he thinks he does.

I'm uncomfortable when anyone claims that someone is or isn't a true
Christian--too many atrocities have been committed following such thoughts.
Think of them as a minority sect of Christianity.

Post by e***@no.spam

Post by Wally Anglesea™
I've found most Christians (of various persuasions), Muslims
I've met, and Buddhists, as well as the odd Hindu to be quite
tolerant, intelligent, and pleasant. It's only the bigoted and
willfully ignorant that are annoying, and need censorship.

True.

I can certainly agree with that, except for the censorship part.

--
Jim Phillips, jphillip at bcpl dot net
"It's like I've always said: you can get more with a kind word and a 2-by-4
than you can with just a kind word." -- Marcus Cole

[e***@no.spam]

I have said before, quite clearly, that I will not reply to
statements, or questions, that are couched in foul language.

So you are a fucking liar. We already know that.

[e***@no.spam]

See how easy it is, for you to change mere, human words! Yet you
prefer mere, human, changeable words, as an authority, to the
unchangeable Word of God!

If those words are unchangeable, why have they changed? For that
matter why do you insist on being so ignorant of the basis and
history of your own religion?

[e***@no.spam]

My, aren't you full of excuses.

The Truth, is not an 'excuse'.

The claim of "Truth" is quite the excuse and you are contantly
using it to avoid the issues.

[e***@no.spam]

Only God has the power, to restore what 'nature's
laws' destroy.

Ah, so it's magic. Why didn't you say so?

[Dan Baldwin]

Post by e***@no.spam

Only God has the power, to restore what 'nature's
laws' destroy.

Ah, so it's magic. Why didn't you say so?

<Simpsons>
Any time you notice something like that, a wizard did it.
</Simpsons>
--
Dan Baldwin, unethical *by design*

"I have always thought that the reason Dinosaurs were so big is because
of the dramatic difference in gravitational strength between that time
period and now" -Edmo the paleontologist

"Christ was just an enlightened person, not unlike me." -Edmo the humble


Hail the un-alive

[e***@no.spam]

Post by Dan Baldwin
<Simpsons>
Any time you notice something like that, a wizard did it.
</Simpsons>

Was it Tom Riddle?

[e***@no.spam]

'delete'

What the fuck is that supposed to mean? Are you wanting
to delete the post? If so, as usual you are a failure.

[e***@no.spam]

And no doubt 'science' will 'lose' them again, as 'science' has 'lost'
so many other, vain theories.

And, no, doubt, 'xtians', will 'lose' it, when someone, says, fuck.

[e***@no.spam]

I read, with my mind open to learn the truth.

An obvious lie.

Is there anybody, among the mutiplying gorgon heads, of my opponents,
who is capable of discussion, instead of slander, or libel?

Truth is neither slander nor libel. You have already said you
do not have a open mind and that you are unwilling to consider
anything that contradicts your religious fantasies. Therefore,
there is no slander or libel. Obviously what you are looking
for is people that will agree with your lies, distortions, and
unwillingness to face up to reality. It's quite sad actually.

[e***@no.spam]

Thre is no question, of 'a religion', but, simply, of truth, and
falsehood.

And yet you continue to claim "truth" yet have provided nothing
to support your claim. Meanwhile there has been plenty of
evidence presented from your own religious tome that shows your
claims to be quite false. So far you just look like one of the
many frauds that post their scams on Usenet. I see no reason to
believe in your scam just because it has been going on a lot
longer.