On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:45:02 +0100, Muggles wrote:

On 5/13/2016 12:15 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:12:10 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.

So, it's a total accident?

It billions of accidents and the right one winning. Why do you think the less upright versions of humans from the past died out in favour of us?

--
Advice given to RAF pilots during WWII:
"When a prang seems inevitable, endeavour to strike the softest, cheapest object in the vicinity as slowly and gently as possible."

On Fri, 13 May 2016 19:01:36 +0100, Muggles wrote:

On 5/13/2016 12:56 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:45, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:15 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:12:10 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.


Who taught you that?

Ah, I've found your problem. You were taught religion so it's true. The rest of us decide what is true based on evidence and facts. Go speak to a ****ing archaeologist because I don't have time to talk to ignorant fools like you.

--
If our service isn't up to your standards, please lower your standards.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:19:08 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 13/05/2016 18:04, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:52:04 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 11:44, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:


I don't think any individual religion has everything correct, but I do
think many religions make an attempt to acknowledge that there is a
greater power involved in our existence, which, in turn, acknowledges
that mankind is not equivalent to being a god.

I don't see any evidence of the existence of a "greater power."


IMO, there is too much evidence that it took intelligence to create
everything we see around us.

It depends upon what you mean by "everything we see around us." If
you're talking about the organisms that live and have lived on the
Earth, their existence doesn't require a "greater power." The universe
itself doesn't require a "greater power." Neither of these require any
sort of "creator" either.

The existence of a deity or deities is highly improbable, and is not
required to explain anything we can observe. When something is this
improbable, it's not worth expending any time and energy on.

If you want to know what I believe - I believe in human beings. We've
had a long, hard climb up, with many setbacks, but I think we will
eventually leave our cradle and spread into the rest of the solar system
and perhaps farther than that.

BTW, a lot of those setbacks have been caused by religion and religious
people. It's time we outgrew all of that.

Religion is dying out in America: Just 18% of people 60 and younger
attend church and less than 50% believe in God

Read mo
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz48RCIF82z


Excellent news.

Yup, people are wising up to reality.

In the UK, yes. But I didn't think America was wise enough.

--
When you're having a really bad day and it seems like people are trying to **** you off, remember it takes 42 muscles to frown and only 4 to extend your middle finger.

On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?

You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html
--
Bod

On 5/13/2016 1:03 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:45:02 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 12:15 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:12:10 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.

So, it's a total accident?

It billions of accidents and the right one winning. Why do you think
the less upright versions of humans from the past died out in favour of us?


There is no proof that humans descended from anything besides humans.

--
Maggie

On Fri, 13 May 2016 19:06:05 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?

You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html

She'll call science a form of religion in a minute....

--
If quizzes are quizzical, what are tests?

On 13/05/2016 18:54, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:39 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:17, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:35 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 9:35 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/12/2016 10:27 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 16:24, Muggles wrote:

So the Bible doesn't know then.

The Bible is text - it doesn't "know" anything. It only
contains the
information the writers put there.

So as I originally said, they are just unprovable stories.

Q: Do you think that someone who loves someone else would show the
person they love patience?

Non sequitor.


It's a valid question. If you agree that a loving person shows
patience, then you've contradicted your statement that the Bible
text is
just 'unprovable stories'.


I didn't say that, the OP did.

I didn't say you did. You could have still answered the simple
question. Your response was noted as avoidance.

I don't know whether your hypothetical person would show patience or
not, and I don't see how that would make any of the stories in the bible
provable.

The Sermon on the Mount.


Hmm! Here's the Adultery waffle from that sermon:

Adultery
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[e]
28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already
committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes
you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to
lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into
hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and
throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than
for your whole body to go into hell.

Sorry, but..... a big LOL.

You do realize that the text is a moral teaching - not literal, right?

Ok, explain what all that means!

--
Bod

On 5/13/2016 1:05 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 19:01:36 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 12:56 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:45, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:15 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:12:10 +0100, Muggles

wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.


Who taught you that?


Ah, I've found your problem. You were taught religion so it's true.

Wrong. I wasn't taught religion at all. I studied the Bible, though,
and during the process challenged many people who thought they were
teachers of the Bible, and made many of them angry because I didn't just
accept what they were telling me to believe.

The rest of us decide what is true based on evidence and facts.

Who qualifies as "the rest of us"??

Go
speak to a ****ing archaeologist because I don't have time to talk to
ignorant fools like you.


Anger is an indication of an inability to deal with frustration on the
topic at hand.

--
Maggie

On 5/13/2016 1:06 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?


You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html

Why does it work?? Is it just an accident?

--
Maggie

On 13/05/2016 19:01, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:56 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:45, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:15 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:12:10 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.


Who taught you that?

It's well documented in many science books/ Documentaries etc.

--
Bod

On 5/13/2016 1:13 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:54, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:39 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:17, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:35 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 9:35 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/12/2016 10:27 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 16:24, Muggles wrote:

So the Bible doesn't know then.

The Bible is text - it doesn't "know" anything. It only
contains the
information the writers put there.

So as I originally said, they are just unprovable stories.

Q: Do you think that someone who loves someone else would show the
person they love patience?

Non sequitor.


It's a valid question. If you agree that a loving person shows
patience, then you've contradicted your statement that the Bible
text is
just 'unprovable stories'.


I didn't say that, the OP did.

I didn't say you did. You could have still answered the simple
question. Your response was noted as avoidance.

I don't know whether your hypothetical person would show patience or
not, and I don't see how that would make any of the stories in the
bible
provable.

The Sermon on the Mount.


Hmm! Here's the Adultery waffle from that sermon:

Adultery
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[e]
28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already
committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes
you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to
lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into
hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and
throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than
for your whole body to go into hell.

Sorry, but..... a big LOL.


You do realize that the text is a moral teaching - not literal, right?


Ok, explain what all that means!


Adultery begins in the heart of a person. It's better to reject it with
extreme prejudice than to allow adultery to live out in someone's life
and end up having to suffer the consequences.

--
Maggie

On 5/13/2016 1:18 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:01, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:56 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:45, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:15 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:12:10 +0100, Muggles

wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.


Who taught you that?

It's well documented in many science books/ Documentaries etc.


OK So, you actually believe what other people have told you to believe,
then?

--
Maggie

On 13/05/2016 19:06, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:19:08 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 13/05/2016 18:04, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:52:04 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 11:44, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:


I don't think any individual religion has everything correct, but
I do
think many religions make an attempt to acknowledge that there is a
greater power involved in our existence, which, in turn, acknowledges
that mankind is not equivalent to being a god.

I don't see any evidence of the existence of a "greater power."


IMO, there is too much evidence that it took intelligence to create
everything we see around us.

It depends upon what you mean by "everything we see around us." If
you're talking about the organisms that live and have lived on the
Earth, their existence doesn't require a "greater power." The universe
itself doesn't require a "greater power." Neither of these require any
sort of "creator" either.

The existence of a deity or deities is highly improbable, and is not
required to explain anything we can observe. When something is this
improbable, it's not worth expending any time and energy on.

If you want to know what I believe - I believe in human beings. We've
had a long, hard climb up, with many setbacks, but I think we will
eventually leave our cradle and spread into the rest of the solar
system
and perhaps farther than that.

BTW, a lot of those setbacks have been caused by religion and
religious
people. It's time we outgrew all of that.

Religion is dying out in America: Just 18% of people 60 and younger
attend church and less than 50% believe in God

Read mo
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz48RCIF82z



Excellent news.

Yup, people are wising up to reality.

In the UK, yes. But I didn't think America was wise enough.

They are slowly coming to their senses.
Religion is dying out in the civilised western parts of the world.
One day it will disappear altogether.

--
Bod

On Fri, 13 May 2016 09:47:06 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 6:22 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:32 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:35:59 -0400, Stormin Mormon
Not saying most Mormons are not "good people" - a lot would make "good
christians" if they got their theology sorted out.


And, we believe much the same, but back at you. After
the death of Christ, there wasn't a proper succession
plan. The church fell into apostacy. It was only with
the restoration that the true church of Christ was
back on Earth. The Bible only churches may be sincere,
but without authority. Those who don't have continuing
revelation and don't have the Spirit wander in darkness.
How are vyou different, in that respect, from the nEW aPOSTOLIC
cHURCH?

Which of you has the "real" continuing
revelation/proper succession?


And, that question has been asked for centuries. The
Catholics insist thier Pope is the true successor,
the Vicar of Christ. The Protestants insist that
Rome has lost its way. The more recent Mormons gently
declare to the world that all the other churches have
lost their way. And the Jehovas Witness church also
clearly teaches that they are the ones with the truth.

============================
https://www.lds.org/topics/joseph-smith?lang=eng
As a young boy in 1820, Joseph Smith wanted to know
which church was true. As he searched the Bible for
help, he read that he should ask of God. Acting on
this counsel, Joseph went into the woods near his
home and prayed. Suddenly, a light shone above him
and Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him.
When Joseph asked which church he should join, the
Savior told him to join none of the churches then
in existence because they were teaching incorrect
doctrines. Through this experience and many others
that followed, the Lord chose Joseph to be His
prophet and to restore the gospel of Jesus Christ
and His Church to the earth.
=============================



The Church, which is the body of Christ, doesn't need a Pope or a Joseph
Smith because Jesus himself told us that he left a comforter, the Holy
Spirit, to teach us all things, and to lead us in the path we're
supposed to go.

That's what the bible says.
Amen.

My ancestors were persecuted by both the Catholics, and the
protestants (the Lutherans, and the Reformers)
I am niether Catholic nor Protestant.
My theological bent is Anabaptist.

http://home.mennonitechurch.ca/cof/summary

http://www.mennonitebrethren.ca/reso...elation-of-God

Now, I'd like to see ANY Atheist lay out their beliefs is such a
reasoned and disciplined manner.

Not saying the Mennonites have everything right ------ After all, we
are still all "fallen man"

Bod writes:
Thunderbird/45.0

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.

Bod - I don't know if you noticed, but muggles never answers
a question with anything other than a different question. Pointless
to attempt to debate anything with it.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 11:09:47 -0400, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 5/7/2016 10:48 PM, My 2 Cents wrote:
That is essentially a battery holder. Four rechargeable AA batteries
will give you close to 5V to charge your devices through the built-in
USB socket.

only two AA batteries... so it must boost the voltage up?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mraqng4303Y


That would be my guess. My LG flip phone (with
USB Micro socket) charges okay with the DT
charger, and a cable which I purchased at DT.
No guessingn required. Cell phones run on Lithium Polymer cells with
a 3.7 volt output, so if 2 1.5 volt +/- dry cells ( 3 volts, +/-) can
charge it, there IS a voltage boosting circuit involved.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 09:38:24 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/12/2016 5:44 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:


I don't think any individual religion has everything correct, but I do
think many religions make an attempt to acknowledge that there is a
greater power involved in our existence, which, in turn, acknowledges
that mankind is not equivalent to being a god.


I don't see any evidence of the existence of a "greater power."

Perhaps, you need to think about what it means?

No, I think I've got the concept.



IMO, there is too much evidence that it took intelligence to create
everything we see around us.

It depends upon what you mean by "everything we see around us." If
you're talking about the organisms that live and have lived on the
Earth, their existence doesn't require a "greater power." The universe
itself doesn't require a "greater power." Neither of these require any
sort of "creator" either.

How do you know?

Because there are plenty of mechanisms that explain "Life, the
Universe, and Everything" without having to resort to the
supernatural.
I would like you to list a few of them to enlighten us all.
Please provide links to "proof" of these concepts.

Anything you believe that has no "proof" that can stand full
scientific scrutiny is only a "religion", and is on the same level or
below "supernatural"


We are all waiting.
Let us have it with both barrels.

On 13/05/2016 19:14, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:06 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?


You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html

Why does it work?? Is it just an accident?

Basically yes.

--
Bod

On Fri, 13 May 2016 10:26:09 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:

writes:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 08:01:32 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:


Both Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have written extensively
on this topic. What they have written is far more eloquent than anything
I can write here. I would suggest that you seek out some of their works
and read them.


Niether of your "idols" have ever successfully debated a christion
theologan or creation scientist.

Idols? No, I don't worship anything, you have me confused with Maggie.

I actually _have_ seen Dawkins and Hitchens debate theologians and
"creation scientists" (what an oxymoron). It was hysterical. The Godly
got trounced, and in some cases weren't even aware of it.


Please provide dates and locations of these debates and who theyn
debated with, as well as the rationale you use to determine who won.



Hitchens and Dawkins are so far above your intellectual level that I'm
not surprised that you completely misunderstood or misinterpreted what
they said. Morlocks to your Eloi.


Is it surprising That I misunderstand what they say, when THEY don't
understand???

They have no facts to fall back on.

I don't think that you would recognize them as such if they were
tattooed on your forehead.


Can you provide ONE shred of evidence that they are correct?
One "real" FACT?
I'll accept the word of an agnostic expert in whatever scientific
discipline you believe those two to be expert in. It doesn't have to
be the word of one I'd "theologically" agree with.

Explain ONE truth that can be proven that goes against the basic
tenants of Christianity ( and you better be able to explain what those
"wrong" tenaents of Christianity are) - and let's make it a bit more
difficult. "there is no God" has not been proven, nor can it be - so
let's not start with that one. OK?

Fair enough? You bring it on.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 10:39:35 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:

writes:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 10:24:40 -0500, Muggles
wrote:


The Bible is text - it doesn't "know" anything. It only contains the
information the writers put there.
The bible was not written as a definitive history of the word - it
never pretended to contain a chronolagical timeline.

Maybe when you get to Heaven you can look up James Ussher and explain
this to him.

So this Catholic priest is god???
He was a man TRYING to make the bible what it wasn't' and make it say
what it didn't.

He was wrong. That doesn't make the Bible wrong.

Just like everyone who tried to make the aztec calendar a "doomsday"
prediction., and all the "haley-bops" and others who try to predict
the end of the world.

On 13/05/2016 19:20, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:13 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:54, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:39 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:17, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:35 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 9:35 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/12/2016 10:27 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 16:24, Muggles wrote:

So the Bible doesn't know then.

The Bible is text - it doesn't "know" anything. It only
contains the
information the writers put there.

So as I originally said, they are just unprovable stories.

Q: Do you think that someone who loves someone else would show the
person they love patience?

Non sequitor.


It's a valid question. If you agree that a loving person shows
patience, then you've contradicted your statement that the Bible
text is
just 'unprovable stories'.


I didn't say that, the OP did.

I didn't say you did. You could have still answered the simple
question. Your response was noted as avoidance.

I don't know whether your hypothetical person would show patience or
not, and I don't see how that would make any of the stories in the
bible
provable.

The Sermon on the Mount.


Hmm! Here's the Adultery waffle from that sermon:

Adultery
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[e]
28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already
committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes
you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to
lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into
hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and
throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than
for your whole body to go into hell.

Sorry, but..... a big LOL.


You do realize that the text is a moral teaching - not literal, right?


Ok, explain what all that means!


Adultery begins in the heart of a person. It's better to reject it with
extreme prejudice than to allow adultery to live out in someone's life
and end up having to suffer the consequences.

It's the brain that controls lust/attraction/libido/love and all of the
other senses. The heart is just to pump the blood to the body and the
brain. The body is just a very clever machine that has evolved from
lesser forms. Archeologists can show you the development of how the
human body and brain has evolved from primitive forms over millions of
years. The first humans had totally different shaped heads and much
hairier bodys and more muscley etc.

--
Bod

On 13/05/2016 19:22, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:18 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:01, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:56 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:45, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:15 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:12:10 +0100, Muggles

wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.


Who taught you that?

It's well documented in many science books/ Documentaries etc.


OK So, you actually believe what other people have told you to believe,
then?

What scientists have proved and documented, yes.

--
Bod

On 13/05/2016 19:27, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Bod writes:
Thunderbird/45.0

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.

Bod - I don't know if you noticed, but muggles never answers
a question with anything other than a different question. Pointless
to attempt to debate anything with it.

Oh yes, I've noticed. Sad isn't it!

--
Bod

On Fri, 13 May 2016 11:16:39 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/12/2016 11:39 PM, wrote:


The bible was not written as a definitive history of the word - it
never pretended to contain a chronolagical timeline.


I've heard people describe the bible as being akin to a series of
stories and letters written to family members. The family members
understand the stories because it's about their family!

I haven't seen anything to indicate that the bibles were anything like
this close to the original source.

Much of the original bible was written down when the Israelites were
captives and was designed to collect together legends and myths to give
them a sense of identity even though everything else had been stripped
from them.

They had a purpose in mind, and they picked, chose, and edited to serve
that purpose.

Even if you stipulate that they were being totally honest, there
were still very long periods of time between when events were supposed
to have originally happened and when they were written down. I think it
would be a mistake to assume that they indeed were being totally honest,
because their purpose could well have overridden that. (That and the
fact that we don't know how they originally presented these stories, It
might well have been seen as entertainment only and not based on
reality.)

The new bible isn't really any better. We don't have any eyewitness
testimony, and the various authors don't even agree with each
other.
New bible??
I assume you mean the new testament - and when it comes to ancient
writings there is NO OTHER collection of writings from that period
that can stand up to historic scrutiny as well or better than the
collective books of the new testament. There are differences in the
different "books" and "letters" in the collection because they were
written by different people, who saw it from pifferent perspectives -
but there are no serious dissagreements, contrary to the assertion of
many so-called "schollars"

If you dissagree - bring on the proof.

On 13/05/2016 19:37, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:14, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:06 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple
bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?


You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html

Why does it work?? Is it just an accident?

Basically yes.

Adding to that, it is a series of coincidences, many accidents if you
like. Gases formed from a mixture of elements clashing with each other
and so on.

--
Bod

On 5/13/2016 1:25 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 09:47:06 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 6:22 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:32 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:35:59 -0400, Stormin Mormon
Not saying most Mormons are not "good people" - a lot would make "good
christians" if they got their theology sorted out.


And, we believe much the same, but back at you. After
the death of Christ, there wasn't a proper succession
plan. The church fell into apostacy. It was only with
the restoration that the true church of Christ was
back on Earth. The Bible only churches may be sincere,
but without authority. Those who don't have continuing
revelation and don't have the Spirit wander in darkness.
How are vyou different, in that respect, from the nEW aPOSTOLIC
cHURCH?

Which of you has the "real" continuing
revelation/proper succession?


And, that question has been asked for centuries. The
Catholics insist thier Pope is the true successor,
the Vicar of Christ. The Protestants insist that
Rome has lost its way. The more recent Mormons gently
declare to the world that all the other churches have
lost their way. And the Jehovas Witness church also
clearly teaches that they are the ones with the truth.

============================
https://www.lds.org/topics/joseph-smith?lang=eng
As a young boy in 1820, Joseph Smith wanted to know
which church was true. As he searched the Bible for
help, he read that he should ask of God. Acting on
this counsel, Joseph went into the woods near his
home and prayed. Suddenly, a light shone above him
and Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him.
When Joseph asked which church he should join, the
Savior told him to join none of the churches then
in existence because they were teaching incorrect
doctrines. Through this experience and many others
that followed, the Lord chose Joseph to be His
prophet and to restore the gospel of Jesus Christ
and His Church to the earth.
=============================



The Church, which is the body of Christ, doesn't need a Pope or a Joseph
Smith because Jesus himself told us that he left a comforter, the Holy
Spirit, to teach us all things, and to lead us in the path we're
supposed to go.

That's what the bible says.

Amen.

My ancestors were persecuted by both the Catholics, and the
protestants (the Lutherans, and the Reformers)
I am niether Catholic nor Protestant.
My theological bent is Anabaptist.

http://home.mennonitechurch.ca/cof/summary

http://www.mennonitebrethren.ca/reso...elation-of-God

Now, I'd like to see ANY Atheist lay out their beliefs is such a
reasoned and disciplined manner.

Not saying the Mennonites have everything right ------ After all, we
are still all "fallen man"


I can't see anything I disagree with... although, I didn't read the
entire second link you posted.

I consider myself to be non-denominational.

--
Maggie

On 5/13/2016 1:27 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Bod writes:
Thunderbird/45.0

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.

Bod - I don't know if you noticed, but muggles never answers
a question with anything other than a different question. Pointless
to attempt to debate anything with it.


You're wrong. I asked a valid question in response to a statement.

--
Maggie

On 5/13/2016 1:37 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:14, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:06 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple
bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?


You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html

Why does it work?? Is it just an accident?

Basically yes.


OK, so you just have faith it all accidentally worked out is what you're
admitting to.

--
Maggie

On Fri, 13 May 2016 12:09:08 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:



No, their argument was that homosexuality was a sin, and people who had
AIDS were thus sinners and somehow deserved what they got.



According to Christian theology we are ALL sinners, and we ALL desrve
to die for thiose sins - but by the GRACE of God, through the death of
Christ in our place,we are no longer subject to that death penalty for
our sins.

The price has been paid if we "sign on" and accept. Kinda like a
"class action suit"

Homosexuals "may" deserve what they got, but that doesn't mean they
have to suffer for it.
"Natural Law" may dictate that - The bible doesn't.

On 5/13/2016 1:48 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:20, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:13 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:54, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:39 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:17, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:35 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 9:35 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/12/2016 10:27 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 16:24, Muggles wrote:

So the Bible doesn't know then.

The Bible is text - it doesn't "know" anything. It only
contains the
information the writers put there.

So as I originally said, they are just unprovable stories.

Q: Do you think that someone who loves someone else would show
the
person they love patience?

Non sequitor.


It's a valid question. If you agree that a loving person shows
patience, then you've contradicted your statement that the Bible
text is
just 'unprovable stories'.


I didn't say that, the OP did.

I didn't say you did. You could have still answered the simple
question. Your response was noted as avoidance.

I don't know whether your hypothetical person would show patience or
not, and I don't see how that would make any of the stories in the
bible
provable.

The Sermon on the Mount.


Hmm! Here's the Adultery waffle from that sermon:

Adultery
27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit
adultery.’[e]
28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has
already
committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes
you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for
you to
lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into
hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and
throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than
for your whole body to go into hell.

Sorry, but..... a big LOL.


You do realize that the text is a moral teaching - not literal, right?


Ok, explain what all that means!


Adultery begins in the heart of a person. It's better to reject it with
extreme prejudice than to allow adultery to live out in someone's life
and end up having to suffer the consequences.

It's the brain that controls lust/attraction/libido/love and all of the
other senses. The heart is just to pump the blood to the body and the
brain. The body is just a very clever machine that has evolved from
lesser forms. Archeologists can show you the development of how the
human body and brain has evolved from primitive forms over millions of
years. The first humans had totally different shaped heads and much
hairier bodys and more muscley etc.


There is no proof that humans descended from anything but other humans,
so what you're saying is you believe what other people have taught and
told you to believe. How is that not faith?

--
Maggie

On 5/13/2016 1:50 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:22, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:18 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:01, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:56 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:45, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:15 PM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:12:10 +0100, Muggles

wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?

4 million years of trial and error.


So, it's a total accident?

No, it is *billions* of years of evolution.

Who taught you that?

It's well documented in many science books/ Documentaries etc.

OK So, you actually believe what other people have told you to believe,
then?

What scientists have proved and documented, yes.

How have scientists proven how everything was created?

--
Maggie

On 5/13/2016 1:55 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:37, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:14, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:06 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple
bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?


You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html

Why does it work?? Is it just an accident?

Basically yes.

Adding to that, it is a series of coincidences, many accidents if you
like. Gases formed from a mixture of elements clashing with each other
and so on.


With that reasoning you're also saying that you're existence is an accident.

--
Maggie

On Fri, 13 May 2016 16:34:04 GMT, (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

Muggles writes:
On 5/13/2016 10:51 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Muggles writes:
On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

Because there are plenty of mechanisms that explain "Life, the
Universe, and Everything" without having to resort to the
supernatural.

OK. Can you explain Creation?

Can you?


I lean heavily towards the intelligent design description of Creation -
that it took an intelligent being - God - to initiate the 'beginning'.
The Bible describes it in terms of days, evenings and mornings, and what
order things were created. It doesn't describe how long those days,
evenings or mornings lasted in any time increments that we live by in
modern times, either, so there is nothing in the biblical description of
creation that denotes how long ago creation took place.

Your turn.

There is no act of creation; a given universe starts as a singularity,
explodes, expands, heat death, contracts back to a singularity and wash, rinse, repeat
ad inifinitum.
And that is more scientifically proveable, or eaven reasonable??
Any scientific proof????

Proof that stands up to peer review in the greater scientific
community?????

Bring it on.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:26 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:

"Mr Macaw" writes:


All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever, because it's easier for her little brain.

I'm sure that she's actually a very nice lady, if you avoid talking to
her about her beliefs.

I don't think I'm going to spend much more time trying to have a
discussion with her though.
I've long since given up having a discussion with Macaw.
The concept of discussion is foreign to him.

On 13/05/2016 20:01, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:37 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:14, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:06 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple
bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?


You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html

Why does it work?? Is it just an accident?

Basically yes.


OK, so you just have faith it all accidentally worked out is what you're
admitting to.

I don't do faith, I do scientific proof and there is stacks of evidence
to support the science of evolution.

"Human evolution. Human evolution is the lengthy process of change by
which people originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence
shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people
originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of
approximately six million years"

http://humanorigins.si.edu/education...uman-evolution

Just look at how different our very early ancestors skulls looked like
in the link.



--
Bod

On 5/13/2016 2:27 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 20:01, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:37 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 19:14, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 1:06 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:46, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 12:22 PM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 18:12, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:28 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:09:08 +0100, Bud Frede

wrote:

Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 8:38 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

You can just shrug your shoulders and blame everything on
something as
nebulous as "human nature,"

Human nature is not nebulous.

Point to it. Hold it in your hand.

All very good points, and more than I can be bothered wasting my
time
with religious folk. She will keep her head stuck in the sand
forever,
because it's easier for her little brain.

Can you explain why our bodies work?


The answer can be found in evolution. Life started as a simple
bacterial
amoebas.


Why do amoebas exist? Where did they evolve from?


You will find the answer in science. It's basically to do with
elements
and chemicals reacting and creating new elements etc.
Similar to how Oxygen was created.

How Earth Got its Oxygen

http://www.livescience.com/5515-earth-oxygen.html

Why does it work?? Is it just an accident?

Basically yes.


OK, so you just have faith it all accidentally worked out is what you're
admitting to.

I don't do faith, I do scientific proof and there is stacks of evidence
to support the science of evolution.

"Human evolution. Human evolution is the lengthy process of change by
which people originated from apelike ancestors. Scientific evidence
shows that the physical and behavioral traits shared by all people
originated from apelike ancestors and evolved over a period of
approximately six million years"

http://humanorigins.si.edu/education...uman-evolution

Just look at how different our very early ancestors skulls looked like
in the link.



It takes a lot of faith to believe humans originated from apes.

--
Maggie

On 5/13/2016 12:23 PM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

Much of my enjoyment of life comes from my continued education. I love
learning new things. I'm sorry that you don't share that.

hmmm What makes you think I don't share that?

You keep retreating to your bible and you refused my reference to
authors whose work might teach you something.

I'd suggest you start with "The Selfish Gene." It's quite fascinating.

However, you really don't sound like you want to learn anything that
isn't in your bible, so I doubt you'll take my suggestion.


Didn't take time for that one to go around
and come around. Didn't I hear those words
earlier today? I guess life gets even with
even the kindest of people.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On Fri, 13 May 2016 20:34:12 +0100, Stormin Mormon wrote:

On 5/13/2016 12:23 PM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

Much of my enjoyment of life comes from my continued education. I love
learning new things. I'm sorry that you don't share that.

hmmm What makes you think I don't share that?

You keep retreating to your bible and you refused my reference to
authors whose work might teach you something.

I'd suggest you start with "The Selfish Gene." It's quite fascinating.

However, you really don't sound like you want to learn anything that
isn't in your bible, so I doubt you'll take my suggestion.


Didn't take time for that one to go around
and come around. Didn't I hear those words
earlier today? I guess life gets even with
even the kindest of people.

What the **** are you wittering on about now?

--
When a clock is hungry, it goes back four seconds.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:09:47 +0100, Muggles wrote:

On 5/13/2016 11:23 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
I was referring to my observations about the way people lived, the
things they thought about, etc. Their belief in the supernatural didn't
really interest me.

For not being interested, you're having a pretty good discussion about a
topic you're not interested in! ;-)

What we're all interested in is how in the 21st century people can still be as stupid and gullible as you.

Much of my enjoyment of life comes from my continued education. I love
learning new things. I'm sorry that you don't share that.

hmmm What makes you think I don't share that?

You keep retreating to your bible and you refused my reference to
authors whose work might teach you something.

Retreating to the bible?? Not really. I've using it as a reference for
any explanations or answers to questions about God.

Thanks for admitting your argument has no substance. Everything you're saying is based on one book? Oh dear.

I'd suggest you start with "The Selfish Gene." It's quite fascinating.

However, you really don't sound like you want to learn anything that
isn't in your bible, so I doubt you'll take my suggestion.

Passive aggressive challenges really don't inspire me to act upon them.

He asked you to read a different book. Is that too difficult for you?

--
Q: What do you call the space between Pamela Anderson's breasts?
A: Silicon Valley.

On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:51:01 +0100, Muggles wrote:

On 5/13/2016 12:35 PM, Bud Frede wrote:
Muggles writes:

On 5/13/2016 11:23 AM, Bud Frede wrote:

I'd suggest you start with "The Selfish Gene." It's quite fascinating.

However, you really don't sound like you want to learn anything that
isn't in your bible, so I doubt you'll take my suggestion.


Passive aggressive challenges really don't inspire me to act upon them.

Tar-Baby


Ad homs only show you've lost your argument.

Or he's fed up of talking to a brick wall.

--
A man goes into a library and asks for a book on suicide.
The librarian says, "**** off, you won't bring it back!"