On 14/07/2024 12:01 pm, Vincent Maycock wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 09:00:22 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> On 14/07/2024 4:10 am, Vincent Maycock wrote:
>>> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 10:02:27 -0400, "Scout"
> <snip uncommented text>
>>>> Would you refuse to allow police officers to help people even if that meant
>>>> they might suffer from that aid?
>>>
>>> As long as there's a net reduction in suffering, no. You keep
>>> ignoring the fact that I'm not saying *all* suffering should be
>>> removed (although any suffering is a problem for an omnipotent
>>> omnibenevolent god of the Christian sort -- but that's irrelevant to
>>> this discussion because you don't believe in that sort of god) -- only
>>> that *some* suffering serves no purpose and should not be allowed by
>>> an even moderately powerful and caring entity that exists out there.
>>
>> You can't make that call. You are not that omnipotent, Vincent.
>
> It's a call that can be made without any omnipotence being needed.
>
>> Which begs the question?
>>
>> What depth of egocentric delusion would a human being have by placing
>> themselves in the position of majestic magistrate over all of creation?
>
> It's delusional for you to claim that someone criticizing your god is
> necessarily placing themselves in the position of majestic magistrate
> over all of creation. Are you sure you shouldn't be in some kind of
> cult where questioning the Leader is forbidden?
>
>> 1 Cor 4:5  Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come,
>> who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will
>> make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have
>> praise of God.
>
> How long do you plan on waiting for this to happen?
>
>> There is more than you, Vincent.
>>
>> Believe it, it is the truth.
>
> I agree that there's more than me. What I don't understand is why you
> think I'm claiming anything else. Straw man, perhaps?

Tell me, who and what does this person think he is, Vincent?

>>> "only
>>> that *some* suffering serves no purpose and should not be allowed by
>>> an even moderately powerful and caring entity that exists out there.

Who is this omnipotent human being consumed by his all-knowing
self-importance? Who made him the measurer of the length, breadth, and
depth of the meaning of purpose?

In the Name of Jesus

--
God is God in all His Being. All the glory is His, for He is all glory.

Jesus is the everlasting Father, Jesus is God, Jesus is the Lord. John
10:30  I and Father are one. If you can't see that the Lord Jesus is the
everlasting Father you are not born again and can't see the Kingdom of God.

Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

Jeremiah 10:23 O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it
is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.

Psalms 53:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt
are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that
hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory."

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything."

"What makes the bible the truth? The resonance (voice, the Person) of
God. When you find Him you have found the author."

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul, and mind. An abomination. Therefore,
sin is not what you do; it is what you are."

"Compromise will condemn you."

"There are no sinners in Christ Jesus."

"My sons are born of Me. In them is no darkness at all."

"You can't learn righteousness. Haven't you had enough time already to
know that?"

"The way of truth is the testimony of life."

"I merely speak the truth, what is revealed to me, and the cards fall
where God intends."

"Nothing that is produced is produced without first being faith."

"You can only find proof of God through faith because that is how we all
live, by faith."

"It is not what you do that matters, it is how you treat Me."

"Keep going forward. Forget about the past. Lift up your head, look
ahead."

"You cannot be free and free indeed with guilt in your heart."

"Priority is everything."

"The truth doesn't need evidence, it is evidence."

"There is no greater possession a man has than his own will, to squander
it or to place it where it truly belongs."

"An atheist is a fool who thinks truth is found in living a lie."

"Saying "prove it" [as a foundation] is merely an ignorant straw man, to
an ignorant straw man."

"Wait, rest, be still, and know."

"No man can wash his own hands!!!"

"I find this in the Christianity religions: 'Nobody's perfect' they say,
and they use that as an excuse not to do what is perfect."

"The Atheist: "They don't believe and put their faith in a Creator (the
obvious). So no evidence or proof is to be found."

"The world is the way it is because God can't compromise who He is."

"Man is not the centre of being."

"Man is incompatible with the natural world because of his sinful nature."

"And then the Lord said, "I see everything."

"Man has no greater idol than his own will."

"Where is God hiding? He isn't."

"If you don't keep all the scriptures, you can't keep any of them."

"You can't prove anything because everything depends on a person's
willingness to believe."

"Atheists are ultimately trying to be pointlessness, meaninglessness,
and purposelessness in their point, meaning, and purpose."

"The last day of creation will be the last day of time. God is always
full of hope."

"The veil of the temple was rent in twain, not to have a book pass
through it so that a sinner could play God."

"A phylactery does not a heart for God make. Not back then, and not today."

"No one in heaven is better (or higher) than what makes it heaven. Such
is the love of God."

"The definition of an atheist: A man full of bluster and bullshit
pretending he is the meaning of life."

"Free will is not power; it is the choice that I allow; that choice is
still according to my power," says the Lord.

What does a fool do? A fool looks for a "nothing" in a "something" in
order to explain the existence of existence.

"Unless you do all because He is who He is, all your religion is in vain."

"Every man is subject to God; He judges every man, and He is reality.
 What a gift in a fallen world!"

"Love MUST be a choice or it is nothing but a law!"

"Why were all men born sinners? So that God could reveal Himself, so
that we would behold the glory of God, and that we should bring forth
the glory of God"

"God does not and will not arbitrate for any man to love Him! If God
isn't everything to you, He is nothing to you where the rubber meets the
road."

"It is the unforgivable sin not to love God with all your heart, soul,
and mind. What do you have that is lasting? It is not so much being
punished; it is what you are left with."

"Love isn't worth anything without first a free will choice for God to
birth it in a man."

"The point of salvation: desperation. Anything less than that is
self-righteousness."

"A sinner is not a believer in God; a sinner is a believer in sin."

"A piece of dirt is not the promised land; that is only a reflection.
The promised land is knowing Me, says the Lord."

"It is all about God or it is all about idolatry."

"The Lord Jesus is coming soon. He has always come soon."

"There is no revolving door of self-worship in a son of God's life!"

"There is no such thing as random!"

"You can't truly love without it being with all your heart."

"No one can see God without their whole heart. Unless you can see God,
you know nothing."

"You can't learn God, God has to reveal Himself to you."

"No sinner is sinless in any way."

"Only God is life; only the Kingdom of God of His "Nature" is life."

"What you believe is just a leaning on your own understanding; faith is
a leaning on the one you have chosen to trust."

"Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
news:XnsB1AE882DBAE79629555@185.151.15.160...
> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in news:v6u880
> $3ld90$2@dont-email.me:
>
>>
>>
>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:XnsB1AD801F11A5C629555@185.151.15.190...
>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
> news:v6rhmu
>>> $332su$6@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:XnsB1ACD302F7884629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>> In the Name of Jesus <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:v6pr59$2knpf$4@dont-email.me:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/07/2024 8:43 am, Baxter wrote:
>>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:v6pi30 $2knpg$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/07/2024 3:37 am, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Huh?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What I posted above was satire.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Bible is just contradictory
>>>>>>>>> and nonsensical gobbledy-gook invented
>>>>>>>>> by illiterate goat herders to explain
>>>>>>>>> what they didn't know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus wrote:
>>>>>>>> You don't get it, Mitchell.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You use the bible (e.g., your nonsensical gobbledy-gook) as your
>>>>>>>> argument and reference for your truth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are the greatest bible believing, non-bible believing,
> atheist
>>> I
>>>>>>>> know. :-).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Baxter wrote:
>>>>>>> Michaelmclean, what YOU don't get is he's using YOUR "inerrant"
>>>>>>> source against you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know what he is up to, Baxter; I've known Mitchell for years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But you haven't understood what was said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know, you think you understand everything about me (join the
> club),
>>>>>> but you don't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can't use what you call a fallacy as the argument of truth.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Truth isn't the issue when the
>>>>> Bible clearly contradicts itself. The
>>>>> fact you cannot explain the contradictions
>>>>> is your problem, not mine.
>>>>
>>>> The explanation seems easy enough to me... it was written by humans.
>>>>
>>>> After all, you can have 20 people witness the same event.. and each
>>> will
>>>> recall it slightly differently, even contradict each other.
>>>> Is the flaw in what occurred.. or the witnesses?
>>>>
>>>> All you've shown is that the humans who wrote the Bible were human.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Never said otherwise.........
>>
>> And yet you demand Godlike perfection.
>>
>>
>
> I am not demanding anything, just
> pointing out the errors and contradictions
> in YOUR "Holy" text.

Wow? You're now claiming I wrote the Bible?

Tell me, when did humanity become perfect?

I mean it's not like God wrote the bible, humans, imperfect humans, did.

I don't even have a horse in the race and even I can see the stupidity of
your assertion.

"C_V" <c_v@invalid.net> wrote in message
news:v6ul75$3nfff$13@dont-email.me...
> On 7/13/2024 12:28 PM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> I am not demanding anything, just
>> pointing out the errors and contradictions
>> in YOUR "Holy" text.
>
> Without proof of course.

I'm just wondering why Rudy thinks that humans became perfect.

One look in the mirror should resolve him of that notion... or simply
reading the imperfections he comes up with as being "common sense"

"Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
news:XnsB1AE890713A14629555@185.151.15.160...
> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
> news:v6u881$3ld90$4@dont-email.me:
>
>>
>>
>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:XnsB1AD80BA53851629555@185.151.15.190...
>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>> news:v6rhmv$332su$7@dont-email.me:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:XnsB1ACD38BC1AB7629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>> In the Name of Jesus <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:v6pi30 $2knpg$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/07/2024 3:37 am, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:v6onj4
>>>>>>> $2g188$8@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AB7F2475B95629555@185.151.15.160...
>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:v6m78d$1v0jr$8@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AA828AE711629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> news:v6jl2l $1ebn2$20@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1A9D7EAF3E86629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sam <samt@samt.invalid> wrote in news:lf3kckFcicnU1
>>>>>>>>>>> @mid.individual.net:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:37:20 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, if we all walked in truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LOL! That is quite the babbling signature you have. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems to say, "Hate people that do not believe as I do!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That IS what the Bible requires..............
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Death to Followers of Other Religions
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Exodus 22:19)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill Nonbelievers
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill Followers of Other Religions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:7-12)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean the bible written by PEOPLE?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "God's Holy Word"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Divinely Inspired"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Holy Writ"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So written by people.. possibly even delusional people, and
>>>>>>>>>> that's suppose to be accepted blindly and without question?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What about when the Bible contradicts itself.. how are we
>>>>>>>>>> suppose
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> take that if we can't accept that the authors are flawed human
>>>>> beings
>>>>>>>>>> and thus the Bible is imperfect?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Take that up with Pastor Hartung, he
>>>>>>>>> runs away every time I ask him these sorts
>>>>>>>>> of questions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm taking it up with YOU.. you're the one claiming the Bible
>>>>>>>> has to
>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> blindly obeyed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Huh?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What I posted above was satire.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Bible is just contradictory
>>>>>>> and nonsensical gobbledy-gook invented
>>>>>>> by illiterate goat herders to explain
>>>>>>> what they didn't know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't get it, Mitchell.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You use the bible (e.g., your nonsensical gobbledy-gook) as your
>>>>>> argument and reference for your truth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are the greatest bible believing, non-bible believing, atheist
>>>>>> I know. :-).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The first step toward atheism
>>>>> is actually READING the Bible.
>>>>
>>>> Ok, I'll bite.. How does reading the bible establish that Gods do
>>>> not, can not, and have never existed....
>>>>
>>>> I mean I can see where you might have doubts, and become agnostic..
>>>> but to flip to the total denial seems unfounded.... After all, what
>>>> would an ant make of us? What makes you think an intelligence as
>>>> much above us as we are above an ant simply could not exist?
>>>>
>>>> So let me try your own argument. Prove that God doesn't exist.
>>>
>>>
>>> The demand for proof of a negative:
>>> always the sign of a failed argument.
>>
>> If you cant prove God doesn't exist, then God could exist without your
>> knowledge.
>
>
> "Could exist"?

Sure. Could exist. Is the concept more than you can handle?

> If your faith had any facts
> behind it you wouldn't need faith.

You don't even know my faith, and clearly don't even know what faith means.

After all, I could point out how error ridden your faith in Democrats is..
but that doesn't mean you won't continue to have faith in the lies they tell
you.

"Skeeter" <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote in message
news:6692d5c1$0$954$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com...
> In article <XnsB1AE890713A14629555@185.151.15.160>, noemail@aol.com
> says...
>>
>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> news:v6u881$3ld90$4@dont-email.me:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> > news:XnsB1AD80BA53851629555@185.151.15.190...
>> >> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> >> news:v6rhmv$332su$7@dont-email.me:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >>> news:XnsB1ACD38BC1AB7629555@185.151.15.190...
>> >>>> In the Name of Jesus <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in
>> >>>> news:v6pi30 $2knpg$1@dont-email.me:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On 12/07/2024 3:37 am, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> >>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> >>>> news:v6onj4
>> >>>>>> $2g188$8@dont-email.me:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>>>> news:XnsB1AB7F2475B95629555@185.151.15.160...
>> >>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> >>>>>>>> news:v6m78d$1v0jr$8@dont-email.me:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AA828AE711629555@185.151.15.190...
>> >>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> >>>>>>>>>> news:v6jl2l $1ebn2$20@dont-email.me:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1A9D7EAF3E86629555@185.151.15.190...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sam <samt@samt.invalid> wrote in news:lf3kckFcicnU1
>> >>>>>>>>>> @mid.individual.net:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:37:20 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, if we all walked in truth.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> LOL! That is quite the babbling signature you have. It
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> seems to say, "Hate people that do not believe as I do!"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> That IS what the Bible requires..............
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Death to Followers of Other Religions
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> (Exodus 22:19)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kill Nonbelievers
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kill Followers of Other Religions.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:7-12)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> You mean the bible written by PEOPLE?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> "God's Holy Word"
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> "Divinely Inspired"
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> "Holy Writ"
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> So written by people.. possibly even delusional people, and
>> >>>>>>>>> that's suppose to be accepted blindly and without question?
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> What about when the Bible contradicts itself.. how are we
>> >>>>>>>>> suppose
>> >>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> take that if we can't accept that the authors are flawed human
>> >>>> beings
>> >>>>>>>>> and thus the Bible is imperfect?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Take that up with Pastor Hartung, he
>> >>>>>>>> runs away every time I ask him these sorts
>> >>>>>>>> of questions.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I'm taking it up with YOU.. you're the one claiming the Bible
>> >>>>>>> has to
>> >>>> be
>> >>>>>>> blindly obeyed.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Huh?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> What I posted above was satire.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The Bible is just contradictory
>> >>>>>> and nonsensical gobbledy-gook invented
>> >>>>>> by illiterate goat herders to explain
>> >>>>>> what they didn't know.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> You don't get it, Mitchell.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> You use the bible (e.g., your nonsensical gobbledy-gook) as your
>> >>>>> argument and reference for your truth.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> You are the greatest bible believing, non-bible believing, atheist
>> >>>>> I know. :-).
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The first step toward atheism
>> >>>> is actually READING the Bible.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ok, I'll bite.. How does reading the bible establish that Gods do
>> >>> not, can not, and have never existed....
>> >>>
>> >>> I mean I can see where you might have doubts, and become agnostic..
>> >>> but to flip to the total denial seems unfounded.... After all, what
>> >>> would an ant make of us? What makes you think an intelligence as
>> >>> much above us as we are above an ant simply could not exist?
>> >>>
>> >>> So let me try your own argument. Prove that God doesn't exist.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The demand for proof of a negative:
>> >> always the sign of a failed argument.
>> >
>> > If you cant prove God doesn't exist, then God could exist without your
>> > knowledge.
>>
>>
>> "Could exist"?
>>
>> If your faith had any facts
>> behind it you wouldn't need faith.
>
> Nice spin from what he said.

"Skeeter" <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote in message
news:6692d584$0$970$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com...
> In article <v6u881$3ld90$4@dont-email.me>,
> me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>>
>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:XnsB1AD80BA53851629555@185.151.15.190...
>> > "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> > news:v6rhmv$332su$7@dont-email.me:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:XnsB1ACD38BC1AB7629555@185.151.15.190...
>> >>> In the Name of Jesus <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in
>> >>> news:v6pi30 $2knpg$1@dont-email.me:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On 12/07/2024 3:37 am, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> >>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> >>> news:v6onj4
>> >>>>> $2g188$8@dont-email.me:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>>> news:XnsB1AB7F2475B95629555@185.151.15.160...
>> >>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> >>>>>>> news:v6m78d$1v0jr$8@dont-email.me:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AA828AE711629555@185.151.15.190...
>> >>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>> >>>>>>>>> news:v6jl2l $1ebn2$20@dont-email.me:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1A9D7EAF3E86629555@185.151.15.190...
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sam <samt@samt.invalid> wrote in news:lf3kckFcicnU1
>> >>>>>>>>> @mid.individual.net:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:37:20 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, if we all walked in truth.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> LOL! That is quite the babbling signature you have. It seems
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to say, "Hate people that do not believe as I do!"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> That IS what the Bible requires..............
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Death to Followers of Other Religions
>> >>>>>>>>>>> (Exodus 22:19)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kill Nonbelievers
>> >>>>>>>>>>> (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
>> >>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kill Followers of Other Religions.
>> >>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:7-12)
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> You mean the bible written by PEOPLE?
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> "God's Holy Word"
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> "Divinely Inspired"
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> "Holy Writ"
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> So written by people.. possibly even delusional people, and
>> >>>>>>>> that's suppose to be accepted blindly and without question?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> What about when the Bible contradicts itself.. how are we
>> >>>>>>>> suppose
>> >>> to
>> >>>>>>>> take that if we can't accept that the authors are flawed human
>> >>> beings
>> >>>>>>>> and thus the Bible is imperfect?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Take that up with Pastor Hartung, he
>> >>>>>>> runs away every time I ask him these sorts
>> >>>>>>> of questions.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I'm taking it up with YOU.. you're the one claiming the Bible has
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>> be
>> >>>>>> blindly obeyed.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Huh?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> What I posted above was satire.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The Bible is just contradictory
>> >>>>> and nonsensical gobbledy-gook invented
>> >>>>> by illiterate goat herders to explain
>> >>>>> what they didn't know.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> You don't get it, Mitchell.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> You use the bible (e.g., your nonsensical gobbledy-gook) as your
>> >>>> argument and reference for your truth.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> You are the greatest bible believing, non-bible believing, atheist I
>> >>>> know. :-).
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> The first step toward atheism
>> >>> is actually READING the Bible.
>> >>
>> >> Ok, I'll bite.. How does reading the bible establish that Gods do not,
>> >> can not, and have never existed....
>> >>
>> >> I mean I can see where you might have doubts, and become agnostic..
>> >> but to flip to the total denial seems unfounded.... After all, what
>> >> would an ant make of us? What makes you think an intelligence as much
>> >> above us as we are above an ant simply could not exist?
>> >>
>> >> So let me try your own argument. Prove that God doesn't exist.
>> >
>> >
>> > The demand for proof of a negative:
>> > always the sign of a failed argument.
>>
>> If you cant prove God doesn't exist, then God could exist without your
>> knowledge.
>>
>> I mean you are the one claiming that there is no possibility of a Godlike
>> being.... So where is your proof?
>>
> Even the smartest of the smart will admit they really don't know.

I'm just waiting for Rudy to provide the proof of the claim he made... as he
demands proof of a claim I didn't make.

"In the Name of Jesus" <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in message
news:v6v1aq$3o8a5$4@dont-email.me...
> On 14/07/2024 5:29 am, Skeeter wrote:
>> In article <v6u881$3ld90$4@dont-email.me>,
>> me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>>>
>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:XnsB1AD80BA53851629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>> news:v6rhmv$332su$7@dont-email.me:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:XnsB1ACD38BC1AB7629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:v6pi30 $2knpg$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12/07/2024 3:37 am, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>>> news:v6onj4
>>>>>>>> $2g188$8@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AB7F2475B95629555@185.151.15.160...
>>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:v6m78d$1v0jr$8@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AA828AE711629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:v6jl2l $1ebn2$20@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1A9D7EAF3E86629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sam <samt@samt.invalid> wrote in news:lf3kckFcicnU1
>>>>>>>>>>>> @mid.individual.net:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:37:20 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, if we all walked in truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LOL! That is quite the babbling signature you have. It seems
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to say, "Hate people that do not believe as I do!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That IS what the Bible requires..............
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Death to Followers of Other Religions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Exodus 22:19)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill Nonbelievers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill Followers of Other Religions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:7-12)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean the bible written by PEOPLE?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "God's Holy Word"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Divinely Inspired"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Holy Writ"
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So written by people.. possibly even delusional people, and
>>>>>>>>>>> that's suppose to be accepted blindly and without question?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What about when the Bible contradicts itself.. how are we
>>>>>>>>>>> suppose
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> take that if we can't accept that the authors are flawed human
>>>>>> beings
>>>>>>>>>>> and thus the Bible is imperfect?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Take that up with Pastor Hartung, he
>>>>>>>>>> runs away every time I ask him these sorts
>>>>>>>>>> of questions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm taking it up with YOU.. you're the one claiming the Bible has
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> blindly obeyed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Huh?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What I posted above was satire.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Bible is just contradictory
>>>>>>>> and nonsensical gobbledy-gook invented
>>>>>>>> by illiterate goat herders to explain
>>>>>>>> what they didn't know.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You don't get it, Mitchell.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You use the bible (e.g., your nonsensical gobbledy-gook) as your
>>>>>>> argument and reference for your truth.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are the greatest bible believing, non-bible believing, atheist I
>>>>>>> know. :-).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first step toward atheism
>>>>>> is actually READING the Bible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, I'll bite.. How does reading the bible establish that Gods do not,
>>>>> can not, and have never existed....
>>>>>
>>>>> I mean I can see where you might have doubts, and become agnostic..
>>>>> but to flip to the total denial seems unfounded.... After all, what
>>>>> would an ant make of us? What makes you think an intelligence as much
>>>>> above us as we are above an ant simply could not exist?
>>>>>
>>>>> So let me try your own argument. Prove that God doesn't exist.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The demand for proof of a negative:
>>>> always the sign of a failed argument.
>>>
>>> If you cant prove God doesn't exist, then God could exist without your
>>> knowledge.
>>>
>>> I mean you are the one claiming that there is no possibility of a
>>> Godlike
>>> being.... So where is your proof?
>>>
>> Even the smartest of the smart will admit they really don't know.
>
> If you go to the dumbest of the dumb, they got there sooner. Go figure.
> :-).

"Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
news:XnsB1AED0660435D629555@185.151.15.190...
> Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote in
> news:6692d584$0$970$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com:
>
>> In article <v6u881$3ld90$4@dont-email.me>,
>> me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>>>
>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:XnsB1AD80BA53851629555@185.151.15.190...
>>> > "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>> > news:v6rhmv$332su$7@dont-email.me:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> >> news:XnsB1ACD38BC1AB7629555@185.151.15.190...
>>> >>> In the Name of Jesus <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in
>>> >>> news:v6pi30 $2knpg$1@dont-email.me:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> On 12/07/2024 3:37 am, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>> >>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>> >>> news:v6onj4
>>> >>>>> $2g188$8@dont-email.me:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> >>>>>> news:XnsB1AB7F2475B95629555@185.151.15.160...
>>> >>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>> >>>>>>> news:v6m78d$1v0jr$8@dont-email.me:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> >>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AA828AE711629555@185.151.15.190...
>>> >>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote
>>> >>>>>>>>> in news:v6jl2l $1ebn2$20@dont-email.me:
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> >>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1A9D7EAF3E86629555@185.151.15.190...
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sam <samt@samt.invalid> wrote in news:lf3kckFcicnU1
>>> >>>>>>>>> @mid.individual.net:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:37:20 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, if we all walked in truth.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> LOL! That is quite the babbling signature you have. It
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> seems to say, "Hate people that do not believe as I do!"
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> That IS what the Bible requires..............
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Death to Followers of Other Religions
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> (Exodus 22:19)
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kill Nonbelievers
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Kill Followers of Other Religions.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:7-12)
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> You mean the bible written by PEOPLE?
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> "God's Holy Word"
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> "Divinely Inspired"
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> "Holy Writ"
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> So written by people.. possibly even delusional people, and
>>> >>>>>>>> that's suppose to be accepted blindly and without question?
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> What about when the Bible contradicts itself.. how are we
>>> >>>>>>>> suppose
>>> >>> to
>>> >>>>>>>> take that if we can't accept that the authors are flawed
>>> >>>>>>>> human
>>> >>> beings
>>> >>>>>>>> and thus the Bible is imperfect?
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Take that up with Pastor Hartung, he
>>> >>>>>>> runs away every time I ask him these sorts
>>> >>>>>>> of questions.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> I'm taking it up with YOU.. you're the one claiming the Bible
>>> >>>>>> has to
>>> >>> be
>>> >>>>>> blindly obeyed.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Huh?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> What I posted above was satire.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> The Bible is just contradictory
>>> >>>>> and nonsensical gobbledy-gook invented
>>> >>>>> by illiterate goat herders to explain
>>> >>>>> what they didn't know.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> You don't get it, Mitchell.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> You use the bible (e.g., your nonsensical gobbledy-gook) as your
>>> >>>> argument and reference for your truth.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> You are the greatest bible believing, non-bible believing,
>>> >>>> atheist I know. :-).
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The first step toward atheism
>>> >>> is actually READING the Bible.
>>> >>
>>> >> Ok, I'll bite.. How does reading the bible establish that Gods do
>>> >> not, can not, and have never existed....
>>> >>
>>> >> I mean I can see where you might have doubts, and become
>>> >> agnostic.. but to flip to the total denial seems unfounded....
>>> >> After all, what would an ant make of us? What makes you think an
>>> >> intelligence as much above us as we are above an ant simply could
>>> >> not exist?
>>> >>
>>> >> So let me try your own argument. Prove that God doesn't exist.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > The demand for proof of a negative:
>>> > always the sign of a failed argument.
>>>
>>> If you cant prove God doesn't exist, then God could exist without
>>> your knowledge.
>>>
>>> I mean you are the one claiming that there is no possibility of a
>>> Godlike being.... So where is your proof?
>>>
>> Even the smartest of the smart will admit they really don't know.
>>
>
>
> "You just have to have faith".

"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e1o59j1j74tifbqs1j806mg3tgs2e2uo9f@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 13:30:49 -0600, Skeeter
> <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <v6u88b$3ld90$16@dont-email.me>,
>>me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>>>
>>> "Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:fos29jd7698j1l9quut3kve4vfj2oviom8@4ax.com...
>>> > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 11:28:47 -0400, "Scout"
>>> > <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> >>news:q0709j5rrn8aj7t2d2s44stoo8p2pjj7b0@4ax.com...
>>> >>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 13:18:58 -0400, "Scout"
>>> >>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> >>>>news:rq109jtkr3flolmv3n7luc2cugdmfc3vt6@4ax.com...
>>> >>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:13:14 -0400, "Scout"
>>> >>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> >>>>>>news:h28u8j98e8hm2gq7c61djiqbdeqvb0mbs9@4ax.com...
>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 10:08:56 -0400, "Scout"
>>> >>>>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> <snip>
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>Seems like it. It's just a different faith.. I mean they even
>>> >>>>>>>>have
>>> >>>>>>>>their
>>> >>>>>>>>own
>>> >>>>>>>>churches. So either they are lying about their lack of faith or
>>> >>>>>>>>they
>>> >>>>>>>>are
>>> >>>>>>>>committing tax evasion and should go to jail.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Even the hardened Kevrob atheist admitted he leaves the door
>>> >>>>>>>>> ever
>>> >>>>>>>>> so
>>> >>>>>>>>> slightly open, which was honest.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>True, you have to give him that. I tend to be more of an
>>> >>>>>>>>agnostic
>>> >>>>>>>>type
>>> >>>>>>>>of
>>> >>>>>>>>person. I would acknowledge the possibility of one or more
>>> >>>>>>>>entities
>>> >>>>>>>>which
>>> >>>>>>>>would be god like, but currently we have no true evidence of
>>> >>>>>>>>such
>>> >>>>>>>>being(s).
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> We don't currently have any true evidence of the existence of
>>> >>>>>>> pink
>>> >>>>>>> garden unicorns. Are you agnostic about their existence?
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>Yep. If you believe in them and it makes you happy, and doesn't
>>> >>>>>>harm
>>> >>>>>>anyone
>>> >>>>>>else. Go for it.
>>> >>>>>>After all, in all the Universe there well could be something we
>>> >>>>>>might
>>> >>>>>>call
>>> >>>>>>a
>>> >>>>>>pink garden unicorn.. or there could not.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>With up to 2 trillion galaxies in the universe that we know of or
>>> >>>>>>suspect,
>>> >>>>>>and each galaxy having about 100 Billion stars be galaxy, and if
>>> >>>>>>we
>>> >>>>>>assume
>>> >>>>>>1.6 planets per star.. and then if we assume only 0.1% of those
>>> >>>>>>are
>>> >>>>>>habitable, and only 0.1% of those are inhabited.. That leaves a
>>> >>>>>>LOT of
>>> >>>>>>room
>>> >>>>>>for a pink garden unicorn to exist or not.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> What about the Keebler Elves? Could *they* be lurking in a tree
>>> >>>>> near
>>> >>>>> you?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>Lame evasion.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> How so?
>>> >>
>>> >>Because your line of questioning as already failed.
>>> >
>>> > Okay. Let's just say for the sake of argument that that part of my
>>> > questioning failed. How do you deal with my *next* question, about
>>> > the Keebler Elves? Or was it just a lame evasion on your part?
>>>
>>> Easy, you've already failed and there is no reason to continue this
>>> stupidity deeper down the rabbit hole.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>He's always spinning away or insulting.
>
> Scout was trying to put the right spin on his failure to disprove the
> existence of the Keebler Elves.

Where do I have an obligation to prove something doesn't exist?

Particularly to you.

> And generally, I don't insult people

Then you should shut up. Your ignorance and stupidity is insulting to normal
people.

> unless they insult me first, unless you consider being candid to be
> insulting.

And when I was candid with you, you felt that my used of facts was somehow
insulting?

"Skeeter" <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote in message
news:6692d676$0$973$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com...
> In article <v6u88b$3ld90$17@dont-email.me>,
> me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>>
>> "In the Name of Jesus" <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in message
>> news:v6sd9j$3764m$5@dont-email.me...
>> > On 13/07/2024 1:28 am, Scout wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:q0709j5rrn8aj7t2d2s44stoo8p2pjj7b0@4ax.com...
>> >>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 13:18:58 -0400, "Scout"
>> >>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>>> news:rq109jtkr3flolmv3n7luc2cugdmfc3vt6@4ax.com...
>> >>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:13:14 -0400, "Scout"
>> >>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> "Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>>>>> news:h28u8j98e8hm2gq7c61djiqbdeqvb0mbs9@4ax.com...
>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 10:08:56 -0400, "Scout"
>> >>>>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> <snip>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Seems like it. It's just a different faith.. I mean they even
>> >>>>>>>> have
>> >>>>>>>> their
>> >>>>>>>> own
>> >>>>>>>> churches. So either they are lying about their lack of faith or
>> >>>>>>>> they are
>> >>>>>>>> committing tax evasion and should go to jail.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Even the hardened Kevrob atheist admitted he leaves the door
>> >>>>>>>>> ever
>> >>>>>>>>> so
>> >>>>>>>>> slightly open, which was honest.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> True, you have to give him that. I tend to be more of an
>> >>>>>>>> agnostic
>> >>>>>>>> type
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>> person. I would acknowledge the possibility of one or more
>> >>>>>>>> entities
>> >>>>>>>> which
>> >>>>>>>> would be god like, but currently we have no true evidence of
>> >>>>>>>> such
>> >>>>>>>> being(s).
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> We don't currently have any true evidence of the existence of
>> >>>>>>> pink
>> >>>>>>> garden unicorns. Are you agnostic about their existence?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Yep. If you believe in them and it makes you happy, and doesn't
>> >>>>>> harm
>> >>>>>> anyone
>> >>>>>> else. Go for it.
>> >>>>>> After all, in all the Universe there well could be something we
>> >>>>>> might
>> >>>>>> call
>> >>>>>> a
>> >>>>>> pink garden unicorn.. or there could not.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> With up to 2 trillion galaxies in the universe that we know of or
>> >>>>>> suspect,
>> >>>>>> and each galaxy having about 100 Billion stars be galaxy, and if
>> >>>>>> we
>> >>>>>> assume
>> >>>>>> 1.6 planets per star.. and then if we assume only 0.1% of those
>> >>>>>> are
>> >>>>>> habitable, and only 0.1% of those are inhabited.. That leaves a
>> >>>>>> LOT
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>> room
>> >>>>>> for a pink garden unicorn to exist or not.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> What about the Keebler Elves? Could *they* be lurking in a tree
>> >>>>> near
>> >>>>> you?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Lame evasion.
>> >>>
>> >>> How so?
>> >>
>> >> Because your line of questioning as already failed.
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>> However, if our thoughts about the size of the Universe is
>> >>>>>>>> anywhere
>> >>>>>>>> close
>> >>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> being true, and the time that the Universe is thought to have
>> >>>>>>>> existed..
>> >>>>>>>> there could be entities that are as far above us, as we are
>> >>>>>>>> above
>> >>>>>>>> ants.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Is it possible, in your opinion, to rule out the existence of
>> >>>>>>> certain
>> >>>>>>> *types* of gods?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Depends on what type you're talking about.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> For example we know there can be no omnipotent omni-
>> >>>>>>> benevolent god of the Christian sort out there
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Depends are you talking true omnipotence or something so far in
>> >>>>>> advance of
>> >>>>>> our civilization at the point of contact to appear so?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Either one.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Then I would put it that a civilization advanced enough to easily
>> >>>> travel
>> >>>> between the stars would appear damn near omnipotent to the people
>> >>>> 2000
>> >>>> years
>> >>>> ago.
>> >>>
>> >>> True. What's your point?
>> >>
>> >> That you just agreed with me, thus establishing my point made that you
>> >> can't possibly know what you asserted you did above.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>>>> Further, from my readings God is not omni-benevolent, in fact in
>> >>>>>> some
>> >>>>>> ways
>> >>>>>> God seems quite selfish, particularly when it comes worship.
>> >>>>>> See Exodus 20:3-5/6 depending on which version you use.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Of course that is somewhat contradicted by claims there are no
>> >>>>>> other
>> >>>>>> Gods
>> >>>>>> while at the same time declaring there shall be no Gods before
>> >>>>>> him.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> So, yea, there is a lot of wiggle room there. I certainly know of
>> >>>>>> no
>> >>>>>> claim
>> >>>>>> of omnipotence or omni-benevolence from the Biblical God.
>> >>>>>> I mean he destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for a rather petty reason
>> >>>>>> by a
>> >>>>>> few
>> >>>>>> of
>> >>>>>> the people who lived there. Hardly seems omni-benevolent to me.
>> >>>>>> I mean consider endless eternal damnation for limited and very
>> >>>>>> finite
>> >>>>>> offenses... Does that sound like being omni-benevolent?
>> >>>>>> Yes, the Bible is full of such contradictions within itself and
>> >>>>>> within
>> >>>>>> religions teachings of it.
>> >>>>>> Now perhaps in God's view his is both.. but from ours, not so
>> >>>>>> much.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Note:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zf626yc/revision/1
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So you're saying if the Christian god exists, he must be evil?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Would depend on your point of view, wouldn't it?
>> >>>
>> >>> What would prevent God from sharing this rather important information
>> >>> with us about human suffering from his point of view?
>> >>
>> >> Lack of understanding? Knowledge you would never understand it at your
>> >> age of development.
>> >>
>> >> I mean do you explain to a 9 month old baby why you are going to stab
>> >> them with a sharp object, or do you do so because you know it's for
>> >> the
>> >> good of the baby?
>> >>
>> >> I mean you could try to explain it.. but realizing it's futile to do
>> >> so,
>> >> who would bother?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>> Even benevolence can seem like utter cruelty to the ill informed and
>> >>>> visa
>> >>>> verse.
>> >>>
>> >>> So is this the "best of all possible worlds," in your view?
>> >>
>> >> Hardly, but it could be better than it might have been otherwise.. See
>> >> above about the baby receiving a shot.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>>> I
>> >>>>> wouldn't quarrel with that -- but since Christians are generally
>> >>>>> unwilling to agree with a statement like that, I generally phrase
>> >>>>> it
>> >>>>> as "the Christian god does not exist."
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Well, first we would have to establish exactly what the term
>> >>>> "Christian
>> >>>> god"
>> >>>> means and exactly how that is supported. In a discussion like that
>> >>>> precise
>> >>>> and specific meaning would need to be determined and supported. Not
>> >>>> just
>> >>>> from the view of the people saying it but also what they can support
>> >>>> as
>> >>>> being directly referenced. I mean it's nice to say God is
>> >>>> omnipotent,
>> >>>> but
>> >>>> did God ever state that and to what if any limits, either inherent
>> >>>> or
>> >>>> self
>> >>>> imposed.
>> >>>
>> >>> At the very least, the Bible portrays God as being really powerful;
>> >>
>> >> Agreed and given the civilization at the time, that wouldn't be that
>> >> hard
>> >> to do. Heck we could probably do at least some of that today if we
>> >> wanted
>> >> to.
>> >>
>> >>> so
>> >>> we don't necessarily have to even mention the idea of omnipotence
>> >>
>> >> Well since we are the ones that asserted omnipotence... it would be
>> >> our
>> >> error.
>> >>
>> >>> when investigating all the suffering around us and asking why God
>> >>> would allow it, if he existed.
>> >>
>> >> Reference the baby above. Do you crawl on your hands and knees because
>> >> otherwise you might have to suffer learning to walk?
>> >> Do you refuse to swim because you might suffer some learning how to do
>> >> so?
>> >>
>> >> Nope, if you had your way, we could neither feed ourselves, move
>> >> ourselves or even care for ourselves.. the "benevolent god" would have
>> >> to
>> >> care and provide for us every moment of every day, and prevent us from
>> >> doing or seeking anything else.
>> >>
>> >> No, suffering is sometimes necessary to growth. To suggest none should
>> >> exist is to deny growth, change, advancement.... which hardly sounds
>> >> like
>> >> something a benevolent God would do.
>> >>
>> >> Really? You need to try to think these things through for yourself..
>> >> as
>> >> it is you're just looking like a fool.
>> >
>> > Vincent has a strong tendency to tweak, twist, and distort in order to
>> > try
>> > and shift what he believes into an edifice of fact, reality, and truth.
>> >
>> > There is plain old common sense in your replies. It is actually
>> > refreshing. Skeeter's replies are quite often similar.
>> >
>> > Personally, I am not bothered if a person is atheist, agnostic, or
>> > religious; in all cases every day common sense, logic, and truth is
>> > most
>> > welcome.
>>
>> Yep, free will means we can have different beliefs. The ONLY thing I tend
>> to
>> look for is your ability to support your beliefs even if only because you
>> believe in it by faith... and if that's the case, allow others to do the
>> same. If you're going to demand proof of their beliefs then you should be
>> willing to do the same for yours.
>> Indeed, I just had a thought.. maybe, it's not so much what about what
>> your
>> faith is, than it is about you having faith. Interesting notion. I will
>> have to think on that.
>>
>>
>> In short, generally, don't ask for what you wouldn't provide.
>>
>> I have had several people tell me that I am a deeply spiritual person,
>> because I've at least given the matter serious thought.
>> Perhaps, that's all that is really needed...
>> To have a faith, to think about it, to question it, to challenge it.. to
>> accept it.
>> I don't know, maybe I never will, but I do hope there is more...
>>
>
> Religion is for people who are afraid of going to hell, spirituality is
> for people who have already been there.

"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mfe59j1gp311o8cngqcgqhtrriv25ka3un@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 10:02:27 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:mvs29jd9tp0uh0dkkmssam0s4d4v3mk9nn@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 11:29:18 -0400, "Scout"
>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:3hr09jhr1nob645n6c0qv68fmi915e42k2@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:17:14 -0700, "Andrew"
>>>>> <andrew.321.remov@usa.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Vincent Maycock" wrote in message
>>>>>>news:q0709j5rrn8aj7t2d2s44stoo8p2pjj7b0@4ax.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At the very least, the Bible portrays God as being really powerful;
>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>> we don't necessarily have to even mention the idea of omnipotence
>>>>>>> when investigating all the suffering around us and asking why God
>>>>>>> would allow it, if he existed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The suffering, sorrow, pain and death in this realm are all temporary.
>>>>>
>>>>> What are they doing here at all, temporary or not?
>>>>
>>>>Necessary to growth, development and self dependency.
>>>
>>> Some forms of suffering are. Others most definitely are not.
>>
>>Are they?
>>
>>> Would
>>> you support the abolishment of hospitals and police officers so we can
>>> have more suffering leading to growth, development, and
>>> self-dependency?
>>
>>Would you refuse to allow us to operate because it would increase their
>>suffering?
>
> Let's say that someone is suffering intensely and they really need a
> surgery to ease their pain. Would you refuse to operate on them so
> that they experience growth, development and self dependency that you
> claim all suffering bestows on us?

They are already undergoing intense suffering... so what would be the point
to prolonging it?

You grasp the words being used.. but the meaning still eludes you.

>>Would you refuse to allow police officers to help people even if that
>>meant
>>they might suffer from that aid?
>
> As long as there's a net reduction in suffering, yes.

For what period of time? Should they shoot someone subjecting them to
intense pain and even death because they were attempting some transitory
pain by raping someone?

Seems to me as if that would increase the net suffering.. but should the
innocent pay the price in suffering because they haven't suffered enough for
you to take action?

> You keep
> ignoring the fact that I'm not saying *all* suffering should be
> removed

At which point there is no growth, advancement, or achievement. They would
reside safe, secure and utterly dependent upon you for every moment of every
day to do everything necessary to prevent them any suffering. They would be
born a helpless baby and die just as helpless.

"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:56c69j5ju9q7nct2ukjam6co2u8phkr836@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 09:00:22 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>>On 14/07/2024 4:10 am, Vincent Maycock wrote:
>>> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 10:02:27 -0400, "Scout"
> <snip uncommented text>
>>>> Would you refuse to allow police officers to help people even if that
>>>> meant
>>>> they might suffer from that aid?
>>>
>>> As long as there's a net reduction in suffering, no. You keep
>>> ignoring the fact that I'm not saying *all* suffering should be
>>> removed (although any suffering is a problem for an omnipotent
>>> omnibenevolent god of the Christian sort -- but that's irrelevant to
>>> this discussion because you don't believe in that sort of god) -- only
>>> that *some* suffering serves no purpose and should not be allowed by
>>> an even moderately powerful and caring entity that exists out there.
>>
>>You can't make that call. You are not that omnipotent, Vincent.
>
> It's a call that can be made without any omnipotence being needed.

If words could cause suffering.. you would prevent language?
If movement could cause suffering.. are they rendered immobile?
If knowledge could cause suffering.. are they rendered idiots?
If words could cause suffering.. are they rendered mute?

Please explain how a lack of suffering would cause any sort of self
advancement, rather than total and utter dependency upon you.

"Skeeter" <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote in message
news:6692d73f$0$951$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com...
> In article <7gh59j5a93tslel0fehnvnpvrk0f1hlobe@4ax.com>,
> twang@the.noodle says...
>>
>> Scout wrote:
>>
>> > Looking back on my life and the suffering I did.. much of it helped me
>> > become the better person I am today. Even the suffering that seemed
>> > unnecessary, helped me to learn to accept, understand and deal with
>> > suffering without being crushed by it. Which allowed me to learn from
>> > other
>> > suffering that might have crushed me without what prior suffering
>> > taught me.
>> > So no, to think you know enough to decide what suffering should or
>> > shouldn't
>> > be allowed, is to deny people the capacity to learn from such suffering
>> > so
>> > they could stand up under suffering that may come later than you need
>> > to
>> > stand up under it.
>>
>> IOW, suffering is necessary because it teaches us how to
>> cope with suffering.
>>
>>
>> > Once again, you are attempting to play God, without even attempting to
>> > consider the consequences of your actions. You would make a very poor
>> > God.
>>
>> IOW, using one's natural faculties is playing God, so
>> being fat drunk & stupid is the best way to go thru life.
>
> Huh?

Rudy being rudy?

C_V wrote:
> That's why it is difficult to knock his paid accounts out
>
>
wrong, the news admins all know you're a whining little
netkkkop bitch, so they all ignore you

GUFFAW!

Scout wrote:
> "Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 10:02:27 -0400, "Scout"
> >>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 11:29:18 -0400, "Scout"
> >>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:17:14 -0700, "Andrew"
> >>>>> <andrew.321.remov@usa.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>"Vincent Maycock" wrote in message
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> At the very least, the Bible portrays God as being really powerful;
> >>>>>>> so
> >>>>>>> we don't necessarily have to even mention the idea of omnipotence
> >>>>>>> when investigating all the suffering around us and asking why God
> >>>>>>> would allow it, if he existed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The suffering, sorrow, pain and death in this realm are all temporary.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What are they doing here at all, temporary or not?
> >>>>
> >>>>Necessary to growth, development and self dependency.
> >>>
> >>> Some forms of suffering are. Others most definitely are not.
> >>
> >>Are they?
> >>
> >>> Would
> >>> you support the abolishment of hospitals and police officers so we can
> >>> have more suffering leading to growth, development, and
> >>> self-dependency?
> >>
> >>Would you refuse to allow us to operate because it would increase their
> >>suffering?
> >
> > Let's say that someone is suffering intensely and they really need a
> > surgery to ease their pain. Would you refuse to operate on them so
> > that they experience growth, development and self dependency that you
> > claim all suffering bestows on us?
>
> They are already undergoing intense suffering... so what would be the point
> to prolonging it?
>
> You grasp the words being used.. but the meaning still eludes you.
>
> >>Would you refuse to allow police officers to help people even if that
> >>meant
> >>they might suffer from that aid?
> >
> > As long as there's a net reduction in suffering, yes.
>
> For what period of time? Should they shoot someone subjecting them to
> intense pain and even death because they were attempting some transitory
> pain by raping someone?
>
> Seems to me as if that would increase the net suffering.. but should the
> innocent pay the price in suffering because they haven't suffered enough for
> you to take action?
>
> > You keep
> > ignoring the fact that I'm not saying *all* suffering should be
> > removed
>
> At which point there is no growth, advancement, or achievement. They would
> reside safe, secure and utterly dependent upon you for every moment of every
> day to do everything necessary to prevent them any suffering. They would be
> born a helpless baby and die just as helpless.

This one struggles greatly to do abstract thinking.

On 7/15/2024 11:51 AM, % wrote:
> C_V wrote:
>> That's why it is difficult to knock his paid accounts out
>>
> >
> wrong, the news admins all know you're a whining little
> netkkkop bitch, so they all ignore you
>

Gnat season ends this fall chief, enjoy it while you can.

_____
/#####\
/#######\ ~9~
|#######| ~9~
|#######|
~~\v/~~ ~9~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(_)

C_V wrote:
> On 7/15/2024 11:51 AM, % wrote:
>> C_V wrote:
>>> That's why it is difficult to knock his paid accounts out
>>>
>>  >
>> wrong, the news admins all know you're a whining little
>> netkkkop bitch, so they all ignore you
>>
>
> Gnat season ends this fall chief, enjoy it while you can.
>
>
>          _____
>         /#####\
>        /#######\   ~9~
>        |#######|          ~9~
>        |#######|
>         ~~\v/~~      ~9~
>            |
>            |
>            |
>            |
>            |
>            |
>            |
>            |
>           (_)
>
>
>
http://tinyurl.com/peescent

On 15/07/2024 10:38 pm, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "In the Name of Jesus" <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in message
> news:v6v1aq$3o8a5$4@dont-email.me...
>> On 14/07/2024 5:29 am, Skeeter wrote:
>>> In article <v6u881$3ld90$4@dont-email.me>,
>>> me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>>>>
>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:XnsB1AD80BA53851629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:v6rhmv$332su$7@dont-email.me:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:XnsB1ACD38BC1AB7629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:v6pi30 $2knpg$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/07/2024 3:37 am, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:v6onj4
>>>>>>>>> $2g188$8@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AB7F2475B95629555@185.151.15.160...
>>>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> news:v6m78d$1v0jr$8@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1AA828AE711629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:v6jl2l $1ebn2$20@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Mitchell Holman" <noemail@aol.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:XnsB1A9D7EAF3E86629555@185.151.15.190...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sam <samt@samt.invalid> wrote in news:lf3kckFcicnU1
>>>>>>>>>>>>> @mid.individual.net:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:37:20 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, if we all walked in truth.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the Name of Jesus
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LOL! That is quite the babbling signature you have. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to say, "Hate people that do not believe as I do!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>       That IS what the Bible requires..............
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Death to Followers of Other Religions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Exodus 22:19)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill Nonbelievers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kill Followers of Other Religions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Deuteronomy 13:7-12)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You mean the bible written by PEOPLE?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     "God's Holy Word"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     "Divinely Inspired"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     "Holy Writ"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So written by people.. possibly even delusional people, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> that's suppose to be accepted blindly and without question?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What about when the Bible contradicts itself.. how are we
>>>>>>>>>>>> suppose
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> take that if we can't accept that the authors are flawed human
>>>>>>> beings
>>>>>>>>>>>> and thus the Bible is imperfect?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>      Take that up with Pastor Hartung, he
>>>>>>>>>>> runs away every time I ask him these sorts
>>>>>>>>>>> of questions.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm taking it up with YOU.. you're the one claiming the Bible has
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>>> blindly obeyed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>        Huh?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>        What I posted above was satire.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>        The Bible is just contradictory
>>>>>>>>> and nonsensical gobbledy-gook invented
>>>>>>>>> by illiterate goat herders to explain
>>>>>>>>> what they didn't know.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You don't get it, Mitchell.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You use the bible (e.g., your nonsensical gobbledy-gook) as your
>>>>>>>> argument and reference for your truth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are the greatest bible believing, non-bible believing,
>>>>>>>> atheist I
>>>>>>>> know. :-).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      The first step toward atheism
>>>>>>> is actually READING the Bible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, I'll bite.. How does reading the bible establish that Gods do
>>>>>> not,
>>>>>> can not, and have never existed....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I mean I can see where you might have doubts, and become agnostic..
>>>>>> but to flip to the total denial seems unfounded.... After all, what
>>>>>> would an ant make of us? What makes you think an intelligence as much
>>>>>> above us as we are above an ant simply could not exist?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So let me try your own argument. Prove that God doesn't exist.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     The demand for proof of a negative:
>>>>> always the sign of a failed argument.
>>>>
>>>> If you cant prove God doesn't exist, then God could exist without your
>>>> knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> I mean you are the one claiming that there is no possibility of a
>>>> Godlike
>>>> being.... So where is your proof?
>>>>
>>> Even the smartest of the smart will admit they really don't know.
>>
>> If you go to the dumbest of the dumb, they got there sooner. Go
>> figure. :-).
>
> Now, now.. there is always a possibility that there is someone dumber
> than Rudy.. though who that could be remains a mystery..

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:23:10 -0400, "Scout"
<me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:mfe59j1gp311o8cngqcgqhtrriv25ka3un@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 10:02:27 -0400, "Scout"
>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:mvs29jd9tp0uh0dkkmssam0s4d4v3mk9nn@4ax.com...
>>>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 11:29:18 -0400, "Scout"
>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:3hr09jhr1nob645n6c0qv68fmi915e42k2@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 15:17:14 -0700, "Andrew"
>>>>>> <andrew.321.remov@usa.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Vincent Maycock" wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:q0709j5rrn8aj7t2d2s44stoo8p2pjj7b0@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the very least, the Bible portrays God as being really powerful;
>>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>>> we don't necessarily have to even mention the idea of omnipotence
>>>>>>>> when investigating all the suffering around us and asking why God
>>>>>>>> would allow it, if he existed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The suffering, sorrow, pain and death in this realm are all temporary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What are they doing here at all, temporary or not?
>>>>>
>>>>>Necessary to growth, development and self dependency.
>>>>
>>>> Some forms of suffering are. Others most definitely are not.
>>>
>>>Are they?
>>>
>>>> Would
>>>> you support the abolishment of hospitals and police officers so we can
>>>> have more suffering leading to growth, development, and
>>>> self-dependency?
>>>
>>>Would you refuse to allow us to operate because it would increase their
>>>suffering?
>>
>> Let's say that someone is suffering intensely and they really need a
>> surgery to ease their pain. Would you refuse to operate on them so
>> that they experience growth, development and self dependency that you
>> claim all suffering bestows on us?
>
>They are already undergoing intense suffering... so what would be the point
>to prolonging it?

So that they can have more growth, development, and self-dependency,
just like you keep saying.

>You grasp the words being used.. but the meaning still eludes you.
>
>>>Would you refuse to allow police officers to help people even if that
>>>meant
>>>they might suffer from that aid?
>>
>> As long as there's a net reduction in suffering, yes.
>
>For what period of time? Should they shoot someone subjecting them to
>intense pain and even death because they were attempting some transitory
>pain by raping someone?
>
>Seems to me as if that would increase the net suffering.. but should the
>innocent pay the price in suffering because they haven't suffered enough for
>you to take action?

That should've been "As long as there's a net reduction in suffering,
no" --- **not yes*** (as in "no, I would not refuse to allow police
officers to help someone if that meant suffering would be necessary,
as long as there's a net reduction in suffering")

See if that doesn't help you figure out what was going on here.

>> You keep
>> ignoring the fact that I'm not saying *all* suffering should be
>> removed
>
>At which point there is no growth, advancement, or achievement. They would
>reside safe, secure and utterly dependent upon you for every moment of every
>day to do everything necessary to prevent them any suffering. They would be
>born a helpless baby and die just as helpless.

Better get that baseball bat ready for the people you know -- gotta
make them suffer, or else they would helpless!

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:10:45 -0400, "Scout"
<me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:e1o59j1j74tifbqs1j806mg3tgs2e2uo9f@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 13:30:49 -0600, Skeeter
>> <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <v6u88b$3ld90$16@dont-email.me>,
>>>me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>>>>
>>>> "Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:fos29jd7698j1l9quut3kve4vfj2oviom8@4ax.com...
>>>> > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 11:28:47 -0400, "Scout"
>>>> > <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> >>news:q0709j5rrn8aj7t2d2s44stoo8p2pjj7b0@4ax.com...
>>>> >>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 13:18:58 -0400, "Scout"
>>>> >>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> >>>>news:rq109jtkr3flolmv3n7luc2cugdmfc3vt6@4ax.com...
>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:13:14 -0400, "Scout"
>>>> >>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> >>>>>>news:h28u8j98e8hm2gq7c61djiqbdeqvb0mbs9@4ax.com...
>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 10:08:56 -0400, "Scout"
>>>> >>>>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> <snip>
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>Seems like it. It's just a different faith.. I mean they even
>>>> >>>>>>>>have
>>>> >>>>>>>>their
>>>> >>>>>>>>own
>>>> >>>>>>>>churches. So either they are lying about their lack of faith or
>>>> >>>>>>>>they
>>>> >>>>>>>>are
>>>> >>>>>>>>committing tax evasion and should go to jail.
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>> Even the hardened Kevrob atheist admitted he leaves the door
>>>> >>>>>>>>> ever
>>>> >>>>>>>>> so
>>>> >>>>>>>>> slightly open, which was honest.
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>True, you have to give him that. I tend to be more of an
>>>> >>>>>>>>agnostic
>>>> >>>>>>>>type
>>>> >>>>>>>>of
>>>> >>>>>>>>person. I would acknowledge the possibility of one or more
>>>> >>>>>>>>entities
>>>> >>>>>>>>which
>>>> >>>>>>>>would be god like, but currently we have no true evidence of
>>>> >>>>>>>>such
>>>> >>>>>>>>being(s).
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> We don't currently have any true evidence of the existence of
>>>> >>>>>>> pink
>>>> >>>>>>> garden unicorns. Are you agnostic about their existence?
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>Yep. If you believe in them and it makes you happy, and doesn't
>>>> >>>>>>harm
>>>> >>>>>>anyone
>>>> >>>>>>else. Go for it.
>>>> >>>>>>After all, in all the Universe there well could be something we
>>>> >>>>>>might
>>>> >>>>>>call
>>>> >>>>>>a
>>>> >>>>>>pink garden unicorn.. or there could not.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>With up to 2 trillion galaxies in the universe that we know of or
>>>> >>>>>>suspect,
>>>> >>>>>>and each galaxy having about 100 Billion stars be galaxy, and if
>>>> >>>>>>we
>>>> >>>>>>assume
>>>> >>>>>>1.6 planets per star.. and then if we assume only 0.1% of those
>>>> >>>>>>are
>>>> >>>>>>habitable, and only 0.1% of those are inhabited.. That leaves a
>>>> >>>>>>LOT of
>>>> >>>>>>room
>>>> >>>>>>for a pink garden unicorn to exist or not.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> What about the Keebler Elves? Could *they* be lurking in a tree
>>>> >>>>> near
>>>> >>>>> you?
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>Lame evasion.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> How so?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Because your line of questioning as already failed.
>>>> >
>>>> > Okay. Let's just say for the sake of argument that that part of my
>>>> > questioning failed. How do you deal with my *next* question, about
>>>> > the Keebler Elves? Or was it just a lame evasion on your part?
>>>>
>>>> Easy, you've already failed and there is no reason to continue this
>>>> stupidity deeper down the rabbit hole.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>He's always spinning away or insulting.
>>
>> Scout was trying to put the right spin on his failure to disprove the
>> existence of the Keebler Elves.
>
>Where do I have an obligation to prove something doesn't exist?

Where do you have an obligation to prove that something *does* exist?
It's your life, you tell me.

>Particularly to you.

What's that supposed to mean?

>> And generally, I don't insult people
>
>Then you should shut up. Your ignorance and stupidity is insulting to normal
>people.

Oh, shut the fuck up, asshole.

>> unless they insult me first, unless you consider being candid to be
>> insulting.
>
>And when I was candid with you, you felt that my used of facts was somehow
>insulting?

Saying someone is acting like a fool is an insult, despite how you
decide to justify it to yourself. Same with using the word "lame."
I'm sure there are other examples, especially given what you just
wrote up there about my supposed "ignorance and stupidity."

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:26:43 -0400, "Scout"
<me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:

>
>
>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:56c69j5ju9q7nct2ukjam6co2u8phkr836@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 09:00:22 +1000, In the Name of Jesus
>> <michaelmclean2021@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 14/07/2024 4:10 am, Vincent Maycock wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 10:02:27 -0400, "Scout"
>> <snip uncommented text>
>>>>> Would you refuse to allow police officers to help people even if that
>>>>> meant
>>>>> they might suffer from that aid?
>>>>
>>>> As long as there's a net reduction in suffering, no. You keep
>>>> ignoring the fact that I'm not saying *all* suffering should be
>>>> removed (although any suffering is a problem for an omnipotent
>>>> omnibenevolent god of the Christian sort -- but that's irrelevant to
>>>> this discussion because you don't believe in that sort of god) -- only
>>>> that *some* suffering serves no purpose and should not be allowed by
>>>> an even moderately powerful and caring entity that exists out there.
>>>
>>>You can't make that call. You are not that omnipotent, Vincent.
>>
>> It's a call that can be made without any omnipotence being needed.
>
>If words could cause suffering.. you would prevent language?
>If movement could cause suffering.. are they rendered immobile?
>If knowledge could cause suffering.. are they rendered idiots?
>If words could cause suffering.. are they rendered mute?

If there were a way to stop or even reduce any suffering caused by
those things, you would oppose such a way, given that you believe all
suffering is necessary?

>Please explain how a lack of suffering would cause any sort of self
>advancement,

Remember, I didn't say *all* suffering must be removed, if someone is
powerful and caring enough to do so. Just *some.* The rest is
arguably helpful or even necessary.

> rather than total and utter dependency upon you.

Before this near trolling on your part goes any further, do we agree
that if Christians claim God is all-loving and all-powerful, they are
wrong?

In article <d0ib9j1l8kfj9oohsbpd2f4lsphhbpcic2@4ax.com>,
maycock@gmail.com says...
>
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:10:45 -0400, "Scout"
> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:e1o59j1j74tifbqs1j806mg3tgs2e2uo9f@4ax.com...
> >> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 13:30:49 -0600, Skeeter
> >> <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>In article <v6u88b$3ld90$16@dont-email.me>,
> >>>me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
> >>>>
> >>>> "Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:fos29jd7698j1l9quut3kve4vfj2oviom8@4ax.com...
> >>>> > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 11:28:47 -0400, "Scout"
> >>>> > <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> >>news:q0709j5rrn8aj7t2d2s44stoo8p2pjj7b0@4ax.com...
> >>>> >>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 13:18:58 -0400, "Scout"
> >>>> >>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> >>>>news:rq109jtkr3flolmv3n7luc2cugdmfc3vt6@4ax.com...
> >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:13:14 -0400, "Scout"
> >>>> >>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> >>>>>>news:h28u8j98e8hm2gq7c61djiqbdeqvb0mbs9@4ax.com...
> >>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 10:08:56 -0400, "Scout"
> >>>> >>>>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>> <snip>
> >>>> >>>>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>>>Seems like it. It's just a different faith.. I mean they even
> >>>> >>>>>>>>have
> >>>> >>>>>>>>their
> >>>> >>>>>>>>own
> >>>> >>>>>>>>churches. So either they are lying about their lack of faith or
> >>>> >>>>>>>>they
> >>>> >>>>>>>>are
> >>>> >>>>>>>>committing tax evasion and should go to jail.
> >>>> >>>>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Even the hardened Kevrob atheist admitted he leaves the door
> >>>> >>>>>>>>> ever
> >>>> >>>>>>>>> so
> >>>> >>>>>>>>> slightly open, which was honest.
> >>>> >>>>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>>>True, you have to give him that. I tend to be more of an
> >>>> >>>>>>>>agnostic
> >>>> >>>>>>>>type
> >>>> >>>>>>>>of
> >>>> >>>>>>>>person. I would acknowledge the possibility of one or more
> >>>> >>>>>>>>entities
> >>>> >>>>>>>>which
> >>>> >>>>>>>>would be god like, but currently we have no true evidence of
> >>>> >>>>>>>>such
> >>>> >>>>>>>>being(s).
> >>>> >>>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>> We don't currently have any true evidence of the existence of
> >>>> >>>>>>> pink
> >>>> >>>>>>> garden unicorns. Are you agnostic about their existence?
> >>>> >>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>Yep. If you believe in them and it makes you happy, and doesn't
> >>>> >>>>>>harm
> >>>> >>>>>>anyone
> >>>> >>>>>>else. Go for it.
> >>>> >>>>>>After all, in all the Universe there well could be something we
> >>>> >>>>>>might
> >>>> >>>>>>call
> >>>> >>>>>>a
> >>>> >>>>>>pink garden unicorn.. or there could not.
> >>>> >>>>>>
> >>>> >>>>>>With up to 2 trillion galaxies in the universe that we know of or
> >>>> >>>>>>suspect,
> >>>> >>>>>>and each galaxy having about 100 Billion stars be galaxy, and if
> >>>> >>>>>>we
> >>>> >>>>>>assume
> >>>> >>>>>>1.6 planets per star.. and then if we assume only 0.1% of those
> >>>> >>>>>>are
> >>>> >>>>>>habitable, and only 0.1% of those are inhabited.. That leaves a
> >>>> >>>>>>LOT of
> >>>> >>>>>>room
> >>>> >>>>>>for a pink garden unicorn to exist or not.
> >>>> >>>>>
> >>>> >>>>> What about the Keebler Elves? Could *they* be lurking in a tree
> >>>> >>>>> near
> >>>> >>>>> you?
> >>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>>Lame evasion.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> How so?
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>Because your line of questioning as already failed.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Okay. Let's just say for the sake of argument that that part of my
> >>>> > questioning failed. How do you deal with my *next* question, about
> >>>> > the Keebler Elves? Or was it just a lame evasion on your part?
> >>>>
> >>>> Easy, you've already failed and there is no reason to continue this
> >>>> stupidity deeper down the rabbit hole.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>He's always spinning away or insulting.
> >>
> >> Scout was trying to put the right spin on his failure to disprove the
> >> existence of the Keebler Elves.
> >
> >Where do I have an obligation to prove something doesn't exist?
>
> Where do you have an obligation to prove that something *does* exist?
> It's your life, you tell me.
>
> >Particularly to you.
>
> What's that supposed to mean?
>
> >> And generally, I don't insult people
> >
> >Then you should shut up. Your ignorance and stupidity is insulting to normal
> >people.
>
> Oh, shut the fuck up, asshole.
>
> >> unless they insult me first, unless you consider being candid to be
> >> insulting.
> >
> >And when I was candid with you, you felt that my used of facts was somehow
> >insulting?
>
> Saying someone is acting like a fool is an insult, despite how you
> decide to justify it to yourself. Same with using the word "lame."
> I'm sure there are other examples, especially given what you just
> wrote up there about my supposed "ignorance and stupidity."

You're pretty sensitive. Liberal?

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 19:23:39 -0600, Skeeter
<skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:

>In article <d0ib9j1l8kfj9oohsbpd2f4lsphhbpcic2@4ax.com>,
>maycock@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:10:45 -0400, "Scout"
>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:e1o59j1j74tifbqs1j806mg3tgs2e2uo9f@4ax.com...
>> >> On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 13:30:49 -0600, Skeeter
>> >> <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>In article <v6u88b$3ld90$16@dont-email.me>,
>> >>>me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>>> news:fos29jd7698j1l9quut3kve4vfj2oviom8@4ax.com...
>> >>>> > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 11:28:47 -0400, "Scout"
>> >>>> > <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>>> >>news:q0709j5rrn8aj7t2d2s44stoo8p2pjj7b0@4ax.com...
>> >>>> >>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 13:18:58 -0400, "Scout"
>> >>>> >>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>>> >>>>news:rq109jtkr3flolmv3n7luc2cugdmfc3vt6@4ax.com...
>> >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 09:13:14 -0400, "Scout"
>> >>>> >>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>"Vincent Maycock" <maycock@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>>> >>>>>>news:h28u8j98e8hm2gq7c61djiqbdeqvb0mbs9@4ax.com...
>> >>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2024 10:08:56 -0400, "Scout"
>> >>>> >>>>>>> <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>> <snip>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>Seems like it. It's just a different faith.. I mean they even
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>have
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>their
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>own
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>churches. So either they are lying about their lack of faith or
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>they
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>are
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>committing tax evasion and should go to jail.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Even the hardened Kevrob atheist admitted he leaves the door
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> ever
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> so
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> slightly open, which was honest.
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>True, you have to give him that. I tend to be more of an
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>agnostic
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>type
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>of
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>person. I would acknowledge the possibility of one or more
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>entities
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>which
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>would be god like, but currently we have no true evidence of
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>such
>> >>>> >>>>>>>>being(s).
>> >>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>> We don't currently have any true evidence of the existence of
>> >>>> >>>>>>> pink
>> >>>> >>>>>>> garden unicorns. Are you agnostic about their existence?
>> >>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>Yep. If you believe in them and it makes you happy, and doesn't
>> >>>> >>>>>>harm
>> >>>> >>>>>>anyone
>> >>>> >>>>>>else. Go for it.
>> >>>> >>>>>>After all, in all the Universe there well could be something we
>> >>>> >>>>>>might
>> >>>> >>>>>>call
>> >>>> >>>>>>a
>> >>>> >>>>>>pink garden unicorn.. or there could not.
>> >>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>>>With up to 2 trillion galaxies in the universe that we know of or
>> >>>> >>>>>>suspect,
>> >>>> >>>>>>and each galaxy having about 100 Billion stars be galaxy, and if
>> >>>> >>>>>>we
>> >>>> >>>>>>assume
>> >>>> >>>>>>1.6 planets per star.. and then if we assume only 0.1% of those
>> >>>> >>>>>>are
>> >>>> >>>>>>habitable, and only 0.1% of those are inhabited.. That leaves a
>> >>>> >>>>>>LOT of
>> >>>> >>>>>>room
>> >>>> >>>>>>for a pink garden unicorn to exist or not.
>> >>>> >>>>>
>> >>>> >>>>> What about the Keebler Elves? Could *they* be lurking in a tree
>> >>>> >>>>> near
>> >>>> >>>>> you?
>> >>>> >>>>
>> >>>> >>>>Lame evasion.
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> How so?
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >>Because your line of questioning as already failed.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Okay. Let's just say for the sake of argument that that part of my
>> >>>> > questioning failed. How do you deal with my *next* question, about
>> >>>> > the Keebler Elves? Or was it just a lame evasion on your part?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Easy, you've already failed and there is no reason to continue this
>> >>>> stupidity deeper down the rabbit hole.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>He's always spinning away or insulting.
>> >>
>> >> Scout was trying to put the right spin on his failure to disprove the
>> >> existence of the Keebler Elves.
>> >
>> >Where do I have an obligation to prove something doesn't exist?
>>
>> Where do you have an obligation to prove that something *does* exist?
>> It's your life, you tell me.
>>
>> >Particularly to you.
>>
>> What's that supposed to mean?
>>
>> >> And generally, I don't insult people
>> >
>> >Then you should shut up. Your ignorance and stupidity is insulting to normal
>> >people.
>>
>> Oh, shut the fuck up, asshole.
>>
>> >> unless they insult me first, unless you consider being candid to be
>> >> insulting.
>> >
>> >And when I was candid with you, you felt that my used of facts was somehow
>> >insulting?
>>
>> Saying someone is acting like a fool is an insult, despite how you
>> decide to justify it to yourself. Same with using the word "lame."
>> I'm sure there are other examples, especially given what you just
>> wrote up there about my supposed "ignorance and stupidity."
>
>You're pretty sensitive.

"Vincent Maycock" wrote in message news:j0ib9jhik2kn8lkd2dfebkkha8dq0kjodk@4ax.com...
> do we agree that if Christians claim God is
> all-loving and all-powerful, they are wrong?

No. The Bible explains why evil had to be
is temporarily permitted.

"Andrew" <andrew.321.remov@usa.net> wrote in
news:5UulO.183015$mMba.5586@fx06.ams4:

> "Vincent Maycock" wrote in message
> news:j0ib9jhik2kn8lkd2dfebkkha8dq0kjodk@4ax.com...
>
>> do we agree that if Christians claim God is
>> all-loving and all-powerful, they are wrong?
>
> No. The Bible explains why evil had to be
> is temporarily permitted.
>
The real Trinity: God the Father, God the Son, God the Devil.

In the Christian religion(s) Satan/Devil has all the characteristics of a
major god.