"Marc Phillips" wrote in message

Arny said:

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message


Ba-Foon you are worthless to RAO, you have nothing offer about
audio, you're still same old sorry ass wanna be loser.

I will make you my bitch.

Lovely intrapersonal skills you have there, Phillips. Which bath
house did you learn them in? Or, was it a freeway rest area?

Nope, right here on RAO, the first time I kicked your ass. But
thanks agin for revealing your true homophobic side.

Thanks Phillips for coming out on RAO.

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/2/2004 4:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/1/2004 3:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

John Chiara said:

Takes a sad ******* to attack a person for something they haven't
done. Marc didn't question the existence of Christianity, he asked why
it still exists.

It exists because millions want it to..what is hard to understand here?
..why does MTV exist?


Then the question is why do millions want it to, despite the fact that most
of
it is based upon blind faith and a series of concepts that clearly go
against
science, education, reasoning and logic? Christians are either desperate,
in
denial, or just plain stupid, IMO. It's one thing to believe in a higher
source, which I do, but it is clearly another to believe in Christianity,
which
is based on severly outdated and literally fantastic concepts. It goes
against
everything we know about the world. It is ignorance, pure and simple.

Boon







Let's not paint Christianity with too broad a brush. Not all Christians are
creationists.

The fundamentalists are, certainly.

Yes.

Once you get away from creationism, your
Christianity is becoming diluted.


I'm not sure that is true.

You're starting to think for yourself, as
opposed to blindly accepting what the Bible tells you. In other words,
you're
getting closer to the truth.


Many flavors of religion actually encourage free thought.I don't think that
makes them any less pure.

From: (Blind Joni)
Date: 12/2/2004 6:22 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

I'm speaking of context not content. Facts are facts..defended or not.

That is just double speak. The determination of fact is the issue and that
does
need to be defended if science is involved. So as Art said, facts do need to
be
defended faith just is.

A real fact only needs to be defended to reply to someone who attacks it.

Who decides what a "real fact" is?


Neither the attack or the defense changes the fact if it is a fact.

How do you know?

The fact
is.

How do you know?

..the attack and defense are conversation. See the difference?

I see your assumption. Do you?

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Marc Phillips" wrote in message

John Chiara said:

Here's another one: Supposedly Adam and Eve were the first humans on
earth. And yet when their children grew up and moved out, they got
married. Where did those other people that Cain and Abel married
come from? Why wasn't their miraculous creation chronicled in The
Holy Booke?


I would assume if you believed the story..they married brothers and
sisters.nephews and nieces..etc...since Adam was told to live more
than 900 years.

Yet after Cain kills Abel and is cast out of Eden, he complains to
God that everyone who sees him will want to kill him. Uh, at that
point in time, there are three people on the entire planet.

OK, we've got a theological expert named Marc Phillips that believes
that
if someone is not specifically mentioned in the Bible, they dont' exist.

Who is "everyone"?

All the people who were there, but not named specifically. You know,
like
the jillions of people who were killed by Noah's flood.

**Jillions? The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event,
around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly number of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.

What evidence do you provide to support this?


The people who built
the Tower of Babel. etc., etc.

**Well, the Tower of Babel was probably another legend which was blown out
of all proportion.

"Probably"? So it COULD be true?



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

From: "squig"
Date: 12/3/2004 6:52 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Marc Phillips" wrote in message

John Chiara said:

Here's another one: Supposedly Adam and Eve were the first humans on
earth. And yet when their children grew up and moved out, they got
married. Where did those other people that Cain and Abel married
come from? Why wasn't their miraculous creation chronicled in The
Holy Booke?


I would assume if you believed the story..they married brothers and
sisters.nephews and nieces..etc...since Adam was told to live more
than 900 years.

Yet after Cain kills Abel and is cast out of Eden, he complains to
God that everyone who sees him will want to kill him. Uh, at that
point in time, there are three people on the entire planet.

OK, we've got a theological expert named Marc Phillips that believes
that
if someone is not specifically mentioned in the Bible, they dont' exist.

Who is "everyone"?

All the people who were there, but not named specifically. You know,
like
the jillions of people who were killed by Noah's flood.

**Jillions? The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event,
around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly number of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.

What evidence do you provide to support this?


The people who built
the Tower of Babel. etc., etc.

**Well, the Tower of Babel was probably another legend which was blown out
of all proportion.

"Probably"? So it COULD be true?

No.



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/2/2004 4:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/1/2004 3:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

John Chiara said:

Takes a sad ******* to attack a person for something they haven't
done. Marc didn't question the existence of Christianity, he asked why
it still exists.

It exists because millions want it to..what is hard to understand here?
..why does MTV exist?


Then the question is why do millions want it to, despite the fact that
most
of
it is based upon blind faith and a series of concepts that clearly go
against
science, education, reasoning and logic? Christians are either desperate,
in
denial, or just plain stupid, IMO. It's one thing to believe in a higher
source, which I do, but it is clearly another to believe in Christianity,
which
is based on severly outdated and literally fantastic concepts. It goes
against
everything we know about the world. It is ignorance, pure and simple.

Boon







Let's not paint Christianity with too broad a brush. Not all Christians are
creationists.

The fundamentalists are, certainly.

Yes.

Once you get away from creationism, your
Christianity is becoming diluted.


I'm not sure that is true.

You're starting to think for yourself, as
opposed to blindly accepting what the Bible tells you. In other words,
you're
getting closer to the truth.


Many flavors of religion actually encourage free thought.I don't think that
makes them any less pure.

I think it makes them less pure, but not less right. Let's face it, The Truth
is going to be something that mortal men cannot understand in their current
incarnations. To think that mortal men thousands of years ago had it all
figured out is ludicrous.

Now, if you're supporting Christianity as something that should be continually
reformed and refined through the years as we learn more about the world around
us, and I think that you are, then I'm all down with that. Just know that
you'll alienate as many traditional Christians as atheists by doing so.

Boon

**Jillions? The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event,
around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly number of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the
entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.


What evidence do you provide to support this?



The people who built
the Tower of Babel. etc., etc.

**Well, the Tower of Babel was probably another legend which was blown
out
of all proportion.

"Probably"? So it COULD be true?

No

You're not sure if you're not sure?
..



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message

Arny said:

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message

Arny said:

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message


Ba-Foon you are worthless to RAO, you have nothing offer about
audio, you're still same old sorry ass wanna be loser.

I will make you my bitch.

Lovely intrapersonal skills you have there, Phillips. Which bath
house did you learn them in? Or, was it a freeway rest area?

Nope, right here on RAO, the first time I kicked your ass. But
thanks agin for revealing your true homophobic side.

Thanks Phillips for coming out on RAO.

I came out against homophobia on RAO years ago.

Really, how does your love for the phrase "I will make you my bitch" relate
to that?

Arny said:

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message

Arny said:

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message

Arny said:

"Marc Phillips" wrote in message


Ba-Foon you are worthless to RAO, you have nothing offer about
audio, you're still same old sorry ass wanna be loser.

I will make you my bitch.

Lovely intrapersonal skills you have there, Phillips. Which bath
house did you learn them in? Or, was it a freeway rest area?

Nope, right here on RAO, the first time I kicked your ass. But
thanks agin for revealing your true homophobic side.

Thanks Phillips for coming out on RAO.

I came out against homophobia on RAO years ago.

Really, how does your love for the phrase "I will make you my bitch" relate
to that?

It doesn't relate to it at all. It has nothing to do with sex. It has to do
with dominating someone, beating them with your mind. Notice how Zakhann
hasn't even replied. He pops in here every six months, says something
completely lame, and then runs away when he realizes he hasn't the mental
facilities to compete here. Therefore, he is my bitch, because I can make him
do whatever I want.

Is this like when I called you "assclown," and you overreacted to it because
you thought it was a gay thing?

Boon

"squig" said:

You obviously didn't listen very well during biology class.
The feminine period of time to give birth is limited to some 30 years.

Really? Can you be sure? Has it always been limited to that? I personally
know of someone who gave birth to 18 children. After doing a quick google, I
found a story of a woman in the 18th century who gave birth to 69 children
(67 survived infancy).

And none of them twins or triples, I assume?

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

The fundamentalists are, certainly. Once you get away from creationism, your
Christianity is becoming diluted. You're starting to think for yourself, as
opposed to blindly accepting what the Bible tells you. In other words,
you're
getting closer to the truth.


Stupid peole have plenty of trouble understanding what the Bible "tells them."
Not exactly as easy read if you worry about comprehension.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

A real fact only needs to be defended to reply to someone who attacks it.

Who decides what a "real fact" is?

Noone..we have a coversatin about it in wasy that makes the situation be
discussed workable..there is no real "truth" ..not in a way that means the same
thing to everyone.
We're human..we stuck with interpretation.

Neither the attack or the defense changes the fact if it is a fact.

How do you know?

The fact
is.

How do you know?

2+2=4..Most would consider it a fact..many can have a conversation on the
meaning of it for themselves..extrapolate to the whole world.

.the attack and defense are conversation. See the difference?

I see your assumption. Do you?

Aha!! Even your reply is conversation..ti is ALL conversation. Talking a bout
anything..thinking about anything, giving meaning to anything requires the use
of language. things happen but after that it is language.
Hear that little voice in your head..language.



John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

You did the same thing again. Why not ask what I meant instead of assuming
something? I'm flexible.

Why not say what you mean in the first place. It's counter productive
for you to oblige other posters to prompt you to rephrase each and
every post you make, up to six or seven times, until it's finally
possible to determine the meaning.


Now you have it.
Determining meaning is always in the mind of the listener..that is my point. I
said EXACTLY what I meant. I am not prompting anything..I said
something..someone feels prompted..it's all them. You are looking at an event
an assigning your own meaning..perfectly human and normal..but as you
stated..not very productive or efficient.
Kind of like having 10 witnesses tell about an accident instead of watching the
video tape. Most find much more pleasure from arguing than knowing..because
know carries a risk of being "wrong." Again ..normal and human but hardly a
timesaver.
Someone leaves a relationship for whatever reason..the other person makes that
mean tha their partner "hurt" them...REALLY???The hurt is all them..the partner
just left..no hurting..just meaning in the mind of the listener...then you haev
blame, anger, revenge.war...you get the picture. All avoidable if you realize
that YOU are responsible for the meaning...via your choices.








John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

It's strange that the Bible sometimes gives very detailed information
about insignificant things, while other relevant information isn't
there.


Perhaps...just perhaps ..these things are not really insignificant..I know many
things in my life that were "insignificant" once now are VERY
significant..depends on the context..and the listening.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

**Well, the Tower of Babel was probably another legend which was blown
out
of all proportion.

"Probably"? So it COULD be true?

No

You're not sure if you're not sure?

It doesn't matter to him.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

Mr. Middius said:

Marc Phillips said:

Let's face it, The Truth
is going to be something that mortal men cannot understand in their current
incarnations. To think that mortal men thousands of years ago had it all
figured out is ludicrous.

Absolutely.

The nature of the truth need not be beyond our comprehension. Unless
you're dismissing random chance out of hand.


Now, if you're supporting Christianity as something that should be
continually
reformed and refined through the years as we learn more about the world
around
us, and I think that you are, then I'm all down with that. Just know that
you'll alienate as many traditional Christians as atheists by doing so.

Has any religion evolved with the times to that degree? It goes against
the very fabric of religion to embrace continuous change.

That's what I thought, and that's why I was slightly surprised by Scott
Wheeler's comments. However, if another Reformation is afoot, even on a small
scale, that will help modern Christians avoid looking like such yokels.

Boon

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
**Well, the Tower of Babel was probably another legend which was
blown
out
of all proportion.

"Probably"? So it COULD be true?

No

You're not sure if you're not sure?

It doesn't matter to him.

Either that or he's just babel-ing (sic).


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
...
"squig" said:

You obviously didn't listen very well during biology class.
The feminine period of time to give birth is limited to some 30 years.

Really? Can you be sure? Has it always been limited to that? I personally
know of someone who gave birth to 18 children. After doing a quick
google, I
found a story of a woman in the 18th century who gave birth to 69
children
(67 survived infancy).

And none of them twins or triples, I assume?


I never said that (in either case). I personally believe that everyone came
from Adam and Eve. My point is that even if Eve only bore children within
the "feminine period of time to give birth", it was still entirely possible
to have quite a number of children.

--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. "

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


squig said:

The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event, around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly number of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the
entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.

What evidence do you provide to support this?

When I see a dark cloud in the sky, I think high pressure caused by
dropping temperature. What do you think -- a giant cloud of insects sent
by God? A chorus of angels farting from a celestial binge on bean dip?
An augury of an ascent by Satan's minions?


No. The flood makes a lot of sense. Just because you have never seen one nor
can you reproduce it (scientifically) doesn't mean it never happened. It
explains why people were recorded to live longer before the flood than
after, why we have found fossils from (like) animals on different
continents, why we have found fossils of animals on continents where the
animal could not have possibly lived, etc.

"squig" wrote in message
...
"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


squig said:

The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event, around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly number
of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the
entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.

What evidence do you provide to support this?

When I see a dark cloud in the sky, I think high pressure caused by
dropping temperature. What do you think -- a giant cloud of insects sent
by God? A chorus of angels farting from a celestial binge on bean dip?
An augury of an ascent by Satan's minions?


No. The flood makes a lot of sense. Just because you have never seen one
nor
can you reproduce it (scientifically) doesn't mean it never happened. It
explains why people were recorded to live longer before the flood than
after, why we have found fossils from (like) animals on different
continents, why we have found fossils of animals on continents where the
animal could not have possibly lived, etc.



Right, and I suppose that's why we have found dinosaur fossils
many millions of years old, but none from humans any older than
approximately one hundred thousand years.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"squig" wrote in message
...
"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


squig said:

The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event, around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly number
of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the
entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.

What evidence do you provide to support this?

When I see a dark cloud in the sky, I think high pressure caused by
dropping temperature. What do you think -- a giant cloud of insects
sent
by God? A chorus of angels farting from a celestial binge on bean dip?
An augury of an ascent by Satan's minions?


No. The flood makes a lot of sense. Just because you have never seen one
nor
can you reproduce it (scientifically) doesn't mean it never happened. It
explains why people were recorded to live longer before the flood than
after, why we have found fossils from (like) animals on different
continents, why we have found fossils of animals on continents where the
animal could not have possibly lived, etc.



Right, and I suppose that's why we have found dinosaur fossils
many millions of years old, but none from humans any older than
approximately one hundred thousand years.


I suppose you're going to tell me that carbon dating was used to come up
with the "many millions of years old"?

"squig" wrote in message
...
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"squig" wrote in message
...
"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


squig said:

The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event, around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly
number
of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the
entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.

What evidence do you provide to support this?

When I see a dark cloud in the sky, I think high pressure caused by
dropping temperature. What do you think -- a giant cloud of insects
sent
by God? A chorus of angels farting from a celestial binge on bean dip?
An augury of an ascent by Satan's minions?


No. The flood makes a lot of sense. Just because you have never seen
one
nor
can you reproduce it (scientifically) doesn't mean it never happened.
It
explains why people were recorded to live longer before the flood than
after, why we have found fossils from (like) animals on different
continents, why we have found fossils of animals on continents where
the
animal could not have possibly lived, etc.



Right, and I suppose that's why we have found dinosaur fossils
many millions of years old, but none from humans any older than
approximately one hundred thousand years.


I suppose you're going to tell me that carbon dating was used to come up
with the "many millions of years old"?



Right, compared to the rigors of religious
dogma,. carbon dating is mere hocus pocus.

From: "squig"
Date: 12/3/2004 4:25 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
.. .


squig said:

The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event, around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly number of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the
entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.

What evidence do you provide to support this?

When I see a dark cloud in the sky, I think high pressure caused by
dropping temperature. What do you think -- a giant cloud of insects sent
by God? A chorus of angels farting from a celestial binge on bean dip?
An augury of an ascent by Satan's minions?


No. The flood makes a lot of sense.

Actually it makes no sense whatsoever.

Just because you have never seen one nor
can you reproduce it (scientifically) doesn't mean it never happened.

Actually the complete lack of evidence in the geological record and the fact
that such a flood is physically impossible does mean it never happened.

It
explains why people were recorded to live longer before the flood than
after, why we have found fossils from (like) animals on different
continents, why we have found fossils of animals on continents where the
animal could not have possibly lived, etc.

No that makes no sense whatsoever. How does a flood cause life spans to shrink
by 90%?

From: "squig"
Date: 12/3/2004 4:55 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"squig" wrote in message
...
"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


squig said:

The alleged 'Noah's Flood' was likely a localised event, around
the area of the Euphrates River. It probably killed a goodly number
of
people (a dozen to a few hundred), but certainly didn't cover the
entrie
planet, in the way described in the Bible.

What evidence do you provide to support this?

When I see a dark cloud in the sky, I think high pressure caused by
dropping temperature. What do you think -- a giant cloud of insects
sent
by God? A chorus of angels farting from a celestial binge on bean dip?
An augury of an ascent by Satan's minions?


No. The flood makes a lot of sense. Just because you have never seen one
nor
can you reproduce it (scientifically) doesn't mean it never happened. It
explains why people were recorded to live longer before the flood than
after, why we have found fossils from (like) animals on different
continents, why we have found fossils of animals on continents where the
animal could not have possibly lived, etc.



Right, and I suppose that's why we have found dinosaur fossils
many millions of years old, but none from humans any older than
approximately one hundred thousand years.


I suppose you're going to tell me that carbon dating was used to come up
with the "many millions of years old"?

Of course not but thanks for sharing your ignorance on the use of carbon
dating.

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/3/2004 10:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/2/2004 4:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/1/2004 3:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

John Chiara said:

Takes a sad ******* to attack a person for something they haven't
done. Marc didn't question the existence of Christianity, he asked why
it still exists.

It exists because millions want it to..what is hard to understand here?
..why does MTV exist?


Then the question is why do millions want it to, despite the fact that
most
of
it is based upon blind faith and a series of concepts that clearly go
against
science, education, reasoning and logic? Christians are either
desperate,
in
denial, or just plain stupid, IMO. It's one thing to believe in a higher
source, which I do, but it is clearly another to believe in Christianity,
which
is based on severly outdated and literally fantastic concepts. It goes
against
everything we know about the world. It is ignorance, pure and simple.

Boon







Let's not paint Christianity with too broad a brush. Not all Christians
are
creationists.

The fundamentalists are, certainly.

Yes.

Once you get away from creationism, your
Christianity is becoming diluted.


I'm not sure that is true.

You're starting to think for yourself, as
opposed to blindly accepting what the Bible tells you. In other words,
you're
getting closer to the truth.


Many flavors of religion actually encourage free thought.I don't think that
makes them any less pure.

I think it makes them less pure,

How?


but not less right. Let's face it, The
Truth
is going to be something that mortal men cannot understand in their current
incarnations.

I'm not convinced of that. Not having knowledge does not mean one cannot
understand it should they find it.

To think that mortal men thousands of years ago had it all
figured out is ludicrous.

I would agree that they didn't have it all figured out. We are clearly furhter
along in that endevour. We are clearly not done. It is not clear that the
answers to the big questions will be incomprehensable.



Now, if you're supporting Christianity as something that should be
continually
reformed and refined through the years as we learn more about the world
around
us, and I think that you are, then I'm all down with that.

I am not supporting it or trying to extinguish it. I am merely observing it. I
am a strong believer in freedom of religion. IMO christianity is a very broad
term covering many different factions. Some believe things I find completely
irrational and unsupportable some do not.

Just know that
you'll alienate as many traditional Christians as atheists by doing so.

I never worry about agreeing with others when forming my opinions.

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/3/2004 3:45 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

Mr. Middius said:

Marc Phillips said:

Let's face it, The Truth
is going to be something that mortal men cannot understand in their
current
incarnations. To think that mortal men thousands of years ago had it all
figured out is ludicrous.

Absolutely.

The nature of the truth need not be beyond our comprehension. Unless
you're dismissing random chance out of hand.


Now, if you're supporting Christianity as something that should be
continually
reformed and refined through the years as we learn more about the world
around
us, and I think that you are, then I'm all down with that. Just know that
you'll alienate as many traditional Christians as atheists by doing so.

Has any religion evolved with the times to that degree? It goes against
the very fabric of religion to embrace continuous change.

That's what I thought, and that's why I was slightly surprised by Scott
Wheeler's comments.

I don't agree that it goes against the very fabric of "religion." That is too
broad a claim. I agree that it goes against the faberic of many religions.


However, if another Reformation is afoot, even on a
small
scale, that will help modern Christians avoid looking like such yokels.

The Catholic church already did this. They ate **** on Galileo and learned a
lesson from it. Change is part of their belief. The Pope speaks for god and can
make changes. Change does not inherently go against the fabric of each and
every religion. It varies from flavor to flavor. One can argue that the
Catholic church is the purest of all Christian religions. They are the
original. The rest were just splinters.

and to make sense of
and/or provide an escape from the meaningless of everyday existence.


Everyday existence is meaningless. We are supposed to assign our own meaning by
our actions, wants, etc. Then we are living.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/3/2004 10:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/2/2004 4:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/1/2004 3:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

John Chiara said:

Takes a sad ******* to attack a person for something they haven't
done. Marc didn't question the existence of Christianity, he asked why
it still exists.

It exists because millions want it to..what is hard to understand here?
..why does MTV exist?


Then the question is why do millions want it to, despite the fact that
most
of
it is based upon blind faith and a series of concepts that clearly go
against
science, education, reasoning and logic? Christians are either
desperate,
in
denial, or just plain stupid, IMO. It's one thing to believe in a
higher
source, which I do, but it is clearly another to believe in
Christianity,
which
is based on severly outdated and literally fantastic concepts. It goes
against
everything we know about the world. It is ignorance, pure and simple.

Boon







Let's not paint Christianity with too broad a brush. Not all Christians
are
creationists.

The fundamentalists are, certainly.

Yes.

Once you get away from creationism, your
Christianity is becoming diluted.


I'm not sure that is true.

You're starting to think for yourself, as
opposed to blindly accepting what the Bible tells you. In other words,
you're
getting closer to the truth.


Many flavors of religion actually encourage free thought.I don't think that
makes them any less pure.

I think it makes them less pure,

How?


but not less right. Let's face it, The
Truth
is going to be something that mortal men cannot understand in their current
incarnations.

I'm not convinced of that. Not having knowledge does not mean one cannot
understand it should they find it.

To think that mortal men thousands of years ago had it all
figured out is ludicrous.

I would agree that they didn't have it all figured out. We are clearly
furhter
along in that endevour. We are clearly not done. It is not clear that the
answers to the big questions will be incomprehensable.



Now, if you're supporting Christianity as something that should be
continually
reformed and refined through the years as we learn more about the world
around
us, and I think that you are, then I'm all down with that.

I am not supporting it or trying to extinguish it. I am merely observing it.
I
am a strong believer in freedom of religion. IMO christianity is a very broad
term covering many different factions. Some believe things I find completely
irrational and unsupportable some do not.

Just know that
you'll alienate as many traditional Christians as atheists by doing so.

I never worry about agreeing with others when forming my opinions.

All I can say is that I wish more Christians thought like you. Unfortunately
they don't.

Boon

From: (Blind Joni)
Date: 12/4/2004 1:30 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

One can argue that the
Catholic church is the purest of all Christian religions. They are the
original. The rest were just splinters.

Really????

Really.

The bible says nothing of Catholic sacraments, purgatory..mortal
and
veniel sin..etc.

I suggest you brush up on your history.

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/4/2004 3:35 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/3/2004 10:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/2/2004 4:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/1/2004 3:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

John Chiara said:

Takes a sad ******* to attack a person for something they haven't
done. Marc didn't question the existence of Christianity, he asked
why
it still exists.

It exists because millions want it to..what is hard to understand
here?
..why does MTV exist?


Then the question is why do millions want it to, despite the fact that
most
of
it is based upon blind faith and a series of concepts that clearly go
against
science, education, reasoning and logic? Christians are either
desperate,
in
denial, or just plain stupid, IMO. It's one thing to believe in a
higher
source, which I do, but it is clearly another to believe in
Christianity,
which
is based on severly outdated and literally fantastic concepts. It goes
against
everything we know about the world. It is ignorance, pure and simple.

Boon







Let's not paint Christianity with too broad a brush. Not all Christians
are
creationists.

The fundamentalists are, certainly.

Yes.

Once you get away from creationism, your
Christianity is becoming diluted.


I'm not sure that is true.

You're starting to think for yourself, as
opposed to blindly accepting what the Bible tells you. In other words,
you're
getting closer to the truth.


Many flavors of religion actually encourage free thought.I don't think
that
makes them any less pure.

I think it makes them less pure,

How?


but not less right. Let's face it, The
Truth
is going to be something that mortal men cannot understand in their current
incarnations.

I'm not convinced of that. Not having knowledge does not mean one cannot
understand it should they find it.

To think that mortal men thousands of years ago had it all
figured out is ludicrous.

I would agree that they didn't have it all figured out. We are clearly
furhter
along in that endevour. We are clearly not done. It is not clear that the
answers to the big questions will be incomprehensable.



Now, if you're supporting Christianity as something that should be
continually
reformed and refined through the years as we learn more about the world
around
us, and I think that you are, then I'm all down with that.

I am not supporting it or trying to extinguish it. I am merely observing it.
I
am a strong believer in freedom of religion. IMO christianity is a very
broad
term covering many different factions. Some believe things I find completely
irrational and unsupportable some do not.

Just know that
you'll alienate as many traditional Christians as atheists by doing so.

I never worry about agreeing with others when forming my opinions.

All I can say is that I wish more Christians thought like you.


That would be an interesting twist given that I am an atheist.

Unfortunately
they don't.


Given the popularity of creationism I'd agree that most don't think much like I
do at all.

From: Paul Dormer
Date: 12/4/2004 9:46 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

"S888Wheel" emitted :

Do you really believe anyone can be well informed and inteligent and
believe in creationism unless they feel the fear of their belief system
being
underminded? I think it is highly unlikely.

It may very well be..but how does this further any conversation about
anything.
It's a free country..we vote..we move..we tolerate..how else is it
supposed
to
work?

Religion creates division. It's a central cause of many wars and
conflicts. Why should it be tolerated?

Because religious oppression is a terrible thing.

Not always.

When was it not?

The bible says nothing of Catholic sacraments, purgatory..mortal
and
veniel sin..etc.

I suggest you brush up on your history.



Ok..help me out..lead me to some books in the Bible that tells us about these
things.

John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

John Chiara said:

Everyday existence is meaningless. We are supposed to assign our own
meaning
by
our actions, wants, etc. Then we are living.

No. We are living if our heart is pumping blood to the rest of our body.
All
the rest is touchy-feely mumbo-jumbo.

Boon

I expected you to respond that way. Our bodies functioning is
existence..takes
no talent, insight, hard work..anybody can exist. Living is in the mind where
meaning resides. Touchy feely mumbo jumbo is how we all assign meaning to our
lives. Once language is in..we have to use our minds.

So all other living beings on this planet, apart from humans, aren't really
living.

Boon

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/4/2004 3:35 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/3/2004 10:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/2/2004 4:00 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

S888Wheel said:

From: (Marc Phillips)
Date: 12/1/2004 3:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

John Chiara said:

Takes a sad ******* to attack a person for something they haven't
done. Marc didn't question the existence of Christianity, he asked
why
it still exists.

It exists because millions want it to..what is hard to understand
here?
..why does MTV exist?


Then the question is why do millions want it to, despite the fact that
most
of
it is based upon blind faith and a series of concepts that clearly go
against
science, education, reasoning and logic? Christians are either
desperate,
in
denial, or just plain stupid, IMO. It's one thing to believe in a
higher
source, which I do, but it is clearly another to believe in
Christianity,
which
is based on severly outdated and literally fantastic concepts. It
goes
against
everything we know about the world. It is ignorance, pure and simple.

Boon







Let's not paint Christianity with too broad a brush. Not all Christians
are
creationists.

The fundamentalists are, certainly.

Yes.

Once you get away from creationism, your
Christianity is becoming diluted.


I'm not sure that is true.

You're starting to think for yourself, as
opposed to blindly accepting what the Bible tells you. In other words,
you're
getting closer to the truth.


Many flavors of religion actually encourage free thought.I don't think
that
makes them any less pure.

I think it makes them less pure,

How?


but not less right. Let's face it, The
Truth
is going to be something that mortal men cannot understand in their
current
incarnations.

I'm not convinced of that. Not having knowledge does not mean one cannot
understand it should they find it.

To think that mortal men thousands of years ago had it all
figured out is ludicrous.

I would agree that they didn't have it all figured out. We are clearly
furhter
along in that endevour. We are clearly not done. It is not clear that the
answers to the big questions will be incomprehensable.



Now, if you're supporting Christianity as something that should be
continually
reformed and refined through the years as we learn more about the world
around
us, and I think that you are, then I'm all down with that.

I am not supporting it or trying to extinguish it. I am merely observing
it.
I
am a strong believer in freedom of religion. IMO christianity is a very
broad
term covering many different factions. Some believe things I find
completely
irrational and unsupportable some do not.

Just know that
you'll alienate as many traditional Christians as atheists by doing so.

I never worry about agreeing with others when forming my opinions.

All I can say is that I wish more Christians thought like you.


That would be an interesting twist given that I am an atheist.

Oh! Twist ending!

Boon

From: (Blind Joni)
Date: 12/5/2004 3:27 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


The bible says nothing of Catholic sacraments, purgatory..mortal
and
veniel sin..etc.

I suggest you brush up on your history.



Ok..help me out..lead me to some books in the Bible that tells us about these
things.


http://www.kat.gr/kat/history/Rel/Ch...atholicism.htm

I expected you to respond that way. Our bodies functioning is
existence..takes
no talent, insight, hard work..anybody can exist. Living is in the mind
where
meaning resides. Touchy feely mumbo jumbo is how we all assign meaning to
our
lives. Once language is in..we have to use our minds.

So all other living beings on this planet, apart from humans, aren't really
living.

They can't assign meaning to it the way we can..without real language there can
be no real self awareness..at least not that can be passed on. Horses don't sit
around worrying about stuff.




John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637

From: (Blind Joni)
Date: 12/5/2004 7:50 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

I expected you to respond that way. Our bodies functioning is
existence..takes
no talent, insight, hard work..anybody can exist. Living is in the mind
where
meaning resides. Touchy feely mumbo jumbo is how we all assign meaning to
our
lives. Once language is in..we have to use our minds.

So all other living beings on this planet, apart from humans, aren't really
living.

They can't assign meaning to it the way we can..without real language there
can
be no real self awareness..at least not that can be passed on. Horses don't
sit
around worrying about stuff.

One trip to the reception room of any vet's office will dispell the notion that
other animals do not sit around and worry.

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
I expected you to respond that way. Our bodies functioning is
existence..takes
no talent, insight, hard work..anybody can exist. Living is in the mind
where
meaning resides. Touchy feely mumbo jumbo is how we all assign meaning to
our
lives. Once language is in..we have to use our minds.

So all other living beings on this planet, apart from humans, aren't
really
living.

They can't assign meaning to it the way we can..without real language
there can
be no real self awareness..at least not that can be passed on. Horses
don't sit
around worrying about stuff.


Not according to Mr. Ed.

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...

Ok..help me out..lead me to some books in the Bible that tells us about
these
things.


http://www.kat.gr/kat/history/Rel/Ch...atholicism.htm


OK..that makes sense..but it is not in the bible..the doctrine of the
church
developed over many centuries and the rituals and sacraments of the
Catholic
church..in which I was raised...are just that. I don't have a problem with
the
church..but I hardly think that Peter invented the Catholic Canon as it
exists
today..or anywhere near it. Could have..I can't find it. For me all the
"presentation" of the Catholic church never brought me closer to
Christ...and I
was pretty into it.


The presentation was designed to bring you closer to the
authority of the church, not to Christ.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message
...
From: (Blind Joni)
Date: 12/5/2004 7:57 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:


Ok..help me out..lead me to some books in the Bible that tells us about
these
things.


http://www.kat.gr/kat/history/Rel/Ch...atholicism.htm


OK..that makes sense..but it is not in the bible..

"the bible?" Which bible would you be refering to?

the doctrine of the church
developed over many centuries and the rituals and sacraments of the
Catholic
church..in which I was raised...are just that. I don't have a problem with
the
church..but I hardly think that Peter invented the Catholic Canon as it
exists
today..or anywhere near it.

I'm not sure how that relates to what I said. Remeber my claim? That all
other
Christian churches were splinters and that the Catholic church was the
oldest.
That was to support my argument that if "purity" were an issue there is a
case
to be made for the Catholic church being the purist based on the fact that
it
was the original Christian church other than the old long gone christ
cults
that thrives in the first three centuries of Christianity.


That is a fallacy, it's the oldest, sure, but not the purest.
Today in the Catholic church isn't like it was in day one.