On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:58:31 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So you have no ****ing idea. Always the same, religion is based on maybe this maybe that jumping to conclusions with no evidence whatsoever.

Pretty much identical to atheism.

Atheism, just another faith based religious system

On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:35:55 +0100, Bod wrote:


So you have no ****ing idea. Always the same, religion is based on
maybe this maybe that jumping to conclusions with no evidence whatsoever.

The classic answer that religious people give when they are stumped is
that "god moves in mysterious ways".

--
Bod

So prove its not true.

Double dog dare you.

Gunner

On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:59:10 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

It isn't. Religious folk are stupid, and so are those who believe in global warming.

--
As are atheists. They have STRONG belief systems...based on
faith...not on truth.

Gunner

On Fri, 13 May 2016 13:10:42 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 12:44:22 +0100, Stormin Mormon wrote:

On 5/12/2016 2:30 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
And for those who get the
occasional wiff of a cigarette....
and bitch and moan...tough.


Was there any other questions?

Gunner


As with many smokers, you sure sound
inconsiderate. That may be too mild a
descriptor.

Non-smokers are the inconsiderate ones. They're taking in a millionth of what the smokers are, they need to get a grip.


And they do NOTHING to keep the tobbaco growers off welfare. I kick
in huge amounts of money providing them with an income.

Gunner

On Fri, 13 May 2016 09:50:08 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/13/2016 7:10 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 12:44:22 +0100, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 5/12/2016 2:30 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
And for those who get the
occasional wiff of a cigarette....
and bitch and moan...tough.


Was there any other questions?

Gunner



As with many smokers, you sure sound
inconsiderate. That may be too mild a
descriptor.

Non-smokers are the inconsiderate ones. They're taking in a millionth
of what the smokers are, they need to get a grip.


Do you think it would be ok with you if a non-smoker sprayed bottled
sewer gas that contained various dangerous chemicals randomly where
people would have no choice but to inhale that gas?

Why do smokers believe they have a right to poison the air other people
breath?

Depends on the levels of the sew gas and the chemicals that that non
smoker sprayed around.

If he were spewing out .005 parts per million..Id think he would not
be liable for much of anything

Gunner

On 14/05/2016 00:43, Bud Frede wrote:
writes:

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???

I guess that would be your call. Was he or wasn't he?

He was a man TRYING to make the bible what it wasn't' and make it say
what it didn't.

So far his bona fides are better than yours are, so why should I believe
you or your interpretation of the bible?


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.

Well, your new bible does get all weird and talk about the end of the
world. Personally, I think the authors ate some rye bread with a bit of
mold on it.


Drugs could explain the perceived the vision miracles etc.

Jesus 'healed using cannabis' | World news | The Guardian
www.theguardian.com › World › Science
6 Jan 2003 - Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early
proponent of ... mixture _ Although most modern people choose to smoke
or eat pot, ...



--
Bod

On Fri, 13 May 2016 22:36:01 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:47:06 +0100, 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.

Every religion disagrees with each other. The only sensible conclusion? They're ALL wrong.

Not every religion. And most religions may smile and disagree..its
only the Muslims that will try to kill you and your family

Gunner

On 14/05/2016 08:48, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:17:26 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:16, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:29:56 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 18:07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:39:33 +0100, Bod wrote:


Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner

Oh dear, you're dragging the past up again.
The UK is very tolerant of Jews and we are in no way "thugs".
I speak as I find and I've worked for many Jews in their own homes and
all were lovely kind people. A few even insisted that I stay for dinner.

--
Bod

Dragging up the past again? Oh...so you dont like it when I do
it..but you do it as a matter of course and think its ok?

Of course most Jews are nice people. As are most Catholics, Anglicans,
Methodists, Lutherens and so on and so forth. Yet you lead us to
believe they are all ****ing ******s.

Do try try to be consistant in your distain and hate, old boy.

Gunner

Why do you refer to what I've said as *hate*?

Why do you deny what youve said is anything but?

What was hateful about what I said?

Was it "I speak as I find and I've worked for many Jews in their own
homes and all were lovely kind people. A few even insisted that I stay
for dinner"

So did many Germans, prior to 1936.

Gunner

My opinion of Jews hasn't changed. The ones I meet are pleasant people.

--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 08:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:19:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:20, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:00:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

What...you are denying Liberal History??!!!

And of course you are correct. The ****ing Brits beat the Irish down
like curs and murdered or moved out millions of them, to other lands.
They sold them like slaves as well.

There were more Irish in New York City than there were in Ireland by
1895.

And here we have Brits claiming that they are just and rightious
people. Bah!! Humbug!!

India is a perfect example of their work and deeds....(spit!)


Gunner

Hmm!....and *I* get accused of being hateful :-)

You ARE hateful. While Im not a gentleman..I am however..accurate.

Accuracy is never hateful..its simply...accurate.

Gunner

Show me where I've been hateful then?

--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 08:51, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:24:49 +0100, Bod wrote:


Technically, if a person identifies with a particular societal
organization that shares a specific mindset relating to such things as
stated above, it can be classified as a religion.


So in your strange interpretation, I am an Atheist who doesn't believe
in *any* religion, but I am religious!!?....hmm!

No. I'm saying that the definition of a religion equates atheism as a
religion.

Being "religious" is a whole different practice.


So I'm not religious, but I am?

No. A "religion" is not the same thing as being "religious".

But I'm *not* religious in any way shape or form.


Snort! You are VERY much religious! And you preach your religion
long and loudly, to everyone you can force to listen.

Gunner

No, I offer my opinion. Religious people tend to get shirty when
challenged. You are no different.
I'm not attacking anyone.

Your "opinion"? You preach and spew like a medicine wagon preacher.
And you attack the very concept of religion and ALL who follow one.

You are a blind bigot of the worst sort. The Self Rightious and self
delusional sort.

Are you talking to a mirror?

--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 09:00, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:46:28 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 13/05/2016 18:36, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:39 AM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 16:37, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 9:55 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 16:45:28 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/12/2016 2:10 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 05:12, Muggles wrote:

BUT, the text doesn't address either explanation 100%. They are
the 2
possibilities that I've seen discussed that explains people living in
the land of Nod where Cain found a wife.


"Nod"! is that where the character *Noddy* comes from? ;-)


Who knows? Probably!

I thought god knew?


God knows ... but I don't!

And you know this!....how do you know god knows?
Please be specific!


IF I believe that God IS God, then it is logical that I'd believe God
knows. ;-)

So nothing specific then. As expected.

Actually...its quite specific. You are in denial again.

The Nile is a filthy river ;-)

--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 09:04, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:58:31 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So you have no ****ing idea. Always the same, religion is based on maybe this maybe that jumping to conclusions with no evidence whatsoever.

Pretty much identical to atheism.

Atheism, just another faith based religious system

Twist things how you like, but Atheists do not believe in *any* gods nor
*any* religion. You can't not believe in a religion at the same time as
believing in a religion, except in your own mind.
--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 09:05, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:35:55 +0100, Bod wrote:


So you have no ****ing idea. Always the same, religion is based on
maybe this maybe that jumping to conclusions with no evidence whatsoever.

The classic answer that religious people give when they are stumped is
that "god moves in mysterious ways".

--
Bod

So prove its not true.

Double dog dare you.

Gunner

How does one prove something that is not there?
The onus is on the person who makes the claim of something that is not
tangible to prove their claim.
Show me your solid proof of your claim.
I can show you scientific proof that we evolved from apes.
DNA does not lie, neither does actual archeological evidence.
So show me your tangible proof.

--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 09:06, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:59:10 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

It isn't. Religious folk are stupid, and so are those who believe in global warming.

--
As are atheists. They have STRONG belief systems...based on
faith...not on truth.

Gunner

Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the
medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural
texts published this month. The study suggests that Jesus and his
disciples used the drug to carry out miraculous healings.
The anointing oil used by Jesus and his disciples contained an
ingredient called kaneh-bosem which has since been identified as
cannabis extract, according to an article by Chris Bennett in the drugs
magazine, High Times, entitled Was Jesus a Stoner? The incense used by
Jesus in ceremonies also contained a cannabis extract, suggests Mr
Bennett, who quotes scholars to back his claims.

"There can be little doubt about a role for cannabis in Judaic
religion," Carl Ruck, professor of classical mythology at Boston
University said.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/200...ience.religion

--
Bod

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:06:21 +0100, Gunner Asch wrote:

On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:59:10 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

It isn't. Religious folk are stupid, and so are those who believe in global warming.

--
As are atheists. They have STRONG belief systems...based on
faith...not on truth.

Idiot. Atheists don't believe in anything, that's the definition of the ****ing word.

--
Why isn;t the apostrophe next to the L? Who ever uses the semicolon???

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:31:11 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:19:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:20, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:00:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

What...you are denying Liberal History??!!!

And of course you are correct. The ****ing Brits beat the Irish down
like curs and murdered or moved out millions of them, to other lands.
They sold them like slaves as well.

There were more Irish in New York City than there were in Ireland by
1895.

And here we have Brits claiming that they are just and rightious
people. Bah!! Humbug!!

India is a perfect example of their work and deeds....(spit!)


Gunner

Hmm!....and *I* get accused of being hateful :-)

You ARE hateful. While Im not a gentleman..I am however..accurate.

Accuracy is never hateful..its simply...accurate.

Gunner

Show me where I've been hateful then?

Merely telling a religious ****wit that there is no god can cause them to break down in tears.

--
Girl with skirt up run faster than boy with trousers down!!

Gunner Asch on Sat, 14 May 2016 01:14:10 -0700
typed in alt.survival the following:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 13:10:42 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 12:44:22 +0100, Stormin Mormon wrote:

On 5/12/2016 2:30 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
And for those who get the
occasional wiff of a cigarette....
and bitch and moan...tough.


Was there any other questions?

Gunner


As with many smokers, you sure sound
inconsiderate. That may be too mild a
descriptor.

Non-smokers are the inconsiderate ones. They're taking in a millionth of what the smokers are, they need to get a grip.


And they do NOTHING to keep the tobbaco growers off welfare. I kick
in huge amounts of money providing them with an income.

Not to mention the much more massive amount of tax revenue you're
providing.
--
pyotr filipivich
The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.
-- George Bancroft

Gunner Asch on Sat, 14 May 2016 01:00:35 -0700
typed in alt.survival the following:

God knows ... but I don't!

And you know this!....how do you know god knows?
Please be specific!


IF I believe that God IS God, then it is logical that I'd believe God
knows. ;-)

So nothing specific then. As expected.

Actually...its quite specific. You are in denial again.

He keeps asking religious people questions, and when he gets a
religious answer, it bothers him no end. Must be that their theology
doesn't match his.
--
pyotr filipivich
Monotheism, someone has said, offers two simple axioms:
1) There is a God.
2) It's not you.

Gunner Asch on Sat, 14 May 2016 01:05:15 -0700
typed in alt.survival the following:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:35:55 +0100, Bod wrote:


So you have no ****ing idea. Always the same, religion is based on
maybe this maybe that jumping to conclusions with no evidence whatsoever.

The classic answer that religious people give when they are stumped is
that "god moves in mysterious ways".

--
Bod

So prove its not true.

I wonder what sort of evidence he would consider "valid".
--
pyotr filipivich
The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.
-- George Bancroft

On 5/14/2016 2:33 AM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 20:09, Muggles wrote:
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?

How Do We Know Humans Are Primates?

"Besides similar anatomy and behavior, there is DNA evidence. It
confirms that humans are primates and that modern humans and chimpanzees
diverged from a common ancestor between 8 and 6 million years ago. There
is only about a 1.2 percent genetic difference between modern humans and
chimpanzees throughout much of their genetic code".

http://humanorigins.si.edu/education...s-are-primates



Would you like to play dueling websites?

http://www.creationtips.com/human_evolution.html

--
Maggie

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:30:25 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:48, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:17:26 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:16, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:29:56 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 18:07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:39:33 +0100, Bod wrote:


Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner

Oh dear, you're dragging the past up again.
The UK is very tolerant of Jews and we are in no way "thugs".
I speak as I find and I've worked for many Jews in their own homes and
all were lovely kind people. A few even insisted that I stay for dinner.

--
Bod

Dragging up the past again? Oh...so you dont like it when I do
it..but you do it as a matter of course and think its ok?

Of course most Jews are nice people. As are most Catholics, Anglicans,
Methodists, Lutherens and so on and so forth. Yet you lead us to
believe they are all ****ing ******s.

Do try try to be consistant in your distain and hate, old boy.

Gunner

Why do you refer to what I've said as *hate*?

Why do you deny what youve said is anything but?

What was hateful about what I said?

Was it "I speak as I find and I've worked for many Jews in their own
homes and all were lovely kind people. A few even insisted that I stay
for dinner"

So did many Germans, prior to 1936.

Gunner

My opinion of Jews hasn't changed. The ones I meet are pleasant people.

Most Jews ARE pleasant people. And your point is?

Shalom

Gunner

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:31:11 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:19:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:20, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:00:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

What...you are denying Liberal History??!!!

And of course you are correct. The ****ing Brits beat the Irish down
like curs and murdered or moved out millions of them, to other lands.
They sold them like slaves as well.

There were more Irish in New York City than there were in Ireland by
1895.

And here we have Brits claiming that they are just and rightious
people. Bah!! Humbug!!

India is a perfect example of their work and deeds....(spit!)


Gunner

Hmm!....and *I* get accused of being hateful :-)

You ARE hateful. While Im not a gentleman..I am however..accurate.

Accuracy is never hateful..its simply...accurate.

Gunner

Show me where I've been hateful then?

Denial old boy..is not a river in Egypt.

Gunner

On Sat, 14 May 2016 15:03:40 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:31:11 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:19:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:20, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:00:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

What...you are denying Liberal History??!!!

And of course you are correct. The ****ing Brits beat the Irish down
like curs and murdered or moved out millions of them, to other lands.
They sold them like slaves as well.

There were more Irish in New York City than there were in Ireland by
1895.

And here we have Brits claiming that they are just and rightious
people. Bah!! Humbug!!

India is a perfect example of their work and deeds....(spit!)


Gunner

Hmm!....and *I* get accused of being hateful :-)

You ARE hateful. While Im not a gentleman..I am however..accurate.

Accuracy is never hateful..its simply...accurate.

Gunner

Show me where I've been hateful then?

Merely telling a religious ****wit that there is no god can cause them to break down in tears.

4 bits of hate stuck together in that one sentence...and you claim I
was being inaccurate?

Snicker

Gunner

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:31:48 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:51, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:24:49 +0100, Bod wrote:


Technically, if a person identifies with a particular societal
organization that shares a specific mindset relating to such things as
stated above, it can be classified as a religion.


So in your strange interpretation, I am an Atheist who doesn't believe
in *any* religion, but I am religious!!?....hmm!

No. I'm saying that the definition of a religion equates atheism as a
religion.

Being "religious" is a whole different practice.


So I'm not religious, but I am?

No. A "religion" is not the same thing as being "religious".

But I'm *not* religious in any way shape or form.


Snort! You are VERY much religious! And you preach your religion
long and loudly, to everyone you can force to listen.

Gunner

No, I offer my opinion. Religious people tend to get shirty when
challenged. You are no different.
I'm not attacking anyone.

Your "opinion"? You preach and spew like a medicine wagon preacher.
And you attack the very concept of religion and ALL who follow one.

You are a blind bigot of the worst sort. The Self Rightious and self
delusional sort.

Are you talking to a mirror?

Do you reflect?

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:35:08 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 09:00, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:46:28 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 13/05/2016 18:36, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:39 AM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 16:37, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 9:55 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 16:45:28 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/12/2016 2:10 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 05:12, Muggles wrote:

BUT, the text doesn't address either explanation 100%. They are
the 2
possibilities that I've seen discussed that explains people living in
the land of Nod where Cain found a wife.


"Nod"! is that where the character *Noddy* comes from? ;-)


Who knows? Probably!

I thought god knew?


God knows ... but I don't!

And you know this!....how do you know god knows?
Please be specific!


IF I believe that God IS God, then it is logical that I'd believe God
knows. ;-)

So nothing specific then. As expected.

Actually...its quite specific. You are in denial again.

The Nile is a filthy river ;-)

So is the Thames

And?

On Sat, 14 May 2016 07:40:42 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Gunner Asch on Sat, 14 May 2016 01:00:35 -0700
typed in alt.survival the following:

God knows ... but I don't!

And you know this!....how do you know god knows?
Please be specific!


IF I believe that God IS God, then it is logical that I'd believe God
knows. ;-)

So nothing specific then. As expected.

Actually...its quite specific. You are in denial again.

He keeps asking religious people questions, and when he gets a
religious answer, it bothers him no end. Must be that their theology
doesn't match his.

Frankly...it appears that he is mentally ill.

Shrug

On Sat, 14 May 2016 10:10:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 09:05, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 17:35:55 +0100, Bod wrote:


So you have no ****ing idea. Always the same, religion is based on
maybe this maybe that jumping to conclusions with no evidence whatsoever.

The classic answer that religious people give when they are stumped is
that "god moves in mysterious ways".

--
Bod

So prove its not true.

Double dog dare you.

Gunner

How does one prove something that is not there?
The onus is on the person who makes the claim of something that is not
tangible to prove their claim.
Show me your solid proof of your claim.
I can show you scientific proof that we evolved from apes.
DNA does not lie, neither does actual archeological evidence.
So show me your tangible proof.

You first.

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:45:57 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 09:04, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:58:31 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So you have no ****ing idea. Always the same, religion is based on maybe this maybe that jumping to conclusions with no evidence whatsoever.

Pretty much identical to atheism.

Atheism, just another faith based religious system

Twist things how you like, but Atheists do not believe in *any* gods nor
*any* religion. You can't not believe in a religion at the same time as
believing in a religion, except in your own mind.


Now thats about as fanatical a religious concept as any Ive ever seen.

Good to see you practicing your religion

"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
...
Gunner Asch on Sat, 14 May 2016 01:14:10 -0700
typed in alt.survival the following:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 13:10:42 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 12:44:22 +0100, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 5/12/2016 2:30 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
And for those who get the
occasional wiff of a cigarette....
and bitch and moan...tough.


Was there any other questions?

Gunner


As with many smokers, you sure sound
inconsiderate. That may be too mild a
descriptor.

Non-smokers are the inconsiderate ones. They're taking in a millionth of
what the smokers are, they need to get a grip.


And they do NOTHING to keep the tobbaco growers off welfare. I kick
in huge amounts of money providing them with an income.

Not to mention the much more massive amount of tax revenue you're
providing.
--
pyotr filipivich
The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of
another.
-- George Bancroft

LOL
That is what ****ed me off enough to quit
Az did a huge tax hike on tobaco

On 14/05/2016 17:45, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:30:25 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:48, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:17:26 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:16, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:29:56 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 18:07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:39:33 +0100, Bod wrote:


Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner

Oh dear, you're dragging the past up again.
The UK is very tolerant of Jews and we are in no way "thugs".
I speak as I find and I've worked for many Jews in their own homes and
all were lovely kind people. A few even insisted that I stay for dinner.

--
Bod

Dragging up the past again? Oh...so you dont like it when I do
it..but you do it as a matter of course and think its ok?

Of course most Jews are nice people. As are most Catholics, Anglicans,
Methodists, Lutherens and so on and so forth. Yet you lead us to
believe they are all ****ing ******s.

Do try try to be consistant in your distain and hate, old boy.

Gunner

Why do you refer to what I've said as *hate*?

Why do you deny what youve said is anything but?

What was hateful about what I said?

Was it "I speak as I find and I've worked for many Jews in their own
homes and all were lovely kind people. A few even insisted that I stay
for dinner"

So did many Germans, prior to 1936.

Gunner

My opinion of Jews hasn't changed. The ones I meet are pleasant people.

Most Jews ARE pleasant people. And your point is?

Shalom

Gunner

y point is, that I don't hate anyone.

You said "Do try try to be consistant in your distain and hate, old boy".

I still want to know where I've shown hate! I did ask you this before.

--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 17:46, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:31:11 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:19:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:20, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:00:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

What...you are denying Liberal History??!!!

And of course you are correct. The ****ing Brits beat the Irish down
like curs and murdered or moved out millions of them, to other lands.
They sold them like slaves as well.

There were more Irish in New York City than there were in Ireland by
1895.

And here we have Brits claiming that they are just and rightious
people. Bah!! Humbug!!

India is a perfect example of their work and deeds....(spit!)


Gunner

Hmm!....and *I* get accused of being hateful :-)

You ARE hateful. While Im not a gentleman..I am however..accurate.

Accuracy is never hateful..its simply...accurate.

Gunner

Show me where I've been hateful then?

Denial old boy..is not a river in Egypt.

Gunner

Then you'll be able to point out this "hate", won't you!

--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 17:46, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 15:03:40 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:31:11 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:19:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:20, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:00:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

What...you are denying Liberal History??!!!

And of course you are correct. The ****ing Brits beat the Irish down
like curs and murdered or moved out millions of them, to other lands.
They sold them like slaves as well.

There were more Irish in New York City than there were in Ireland by
1895.

And here we have Brits claiming that they are just and rightious
people. Bah!! Humbug!!

India is a perfect example of their work and deeds....(spit!)


Gunner

Hmm!....and *I* get accused of being hateful :-)

You ARE hateful. While Im not a gentleman..I am however..accurate.

Accuracy is never hateful..its simply...accurate.

Gunner

Show me where I've been hateful then?

Merely telling a religious ****wit that there is no god can cause them to break down in tears.

4 bits of hate stuck together in that one sentence...and you claim I
was being inaccurate?

Snicker

Gunner

Erm! that wasn't me.

--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 17:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:35:08 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 09:00, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 18:46:28 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 13/05/2016 18:36, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 11:39 AM, Bod wrote:
On 13/05/2016 16:37, Muggles wrote:
On 5/13/2016 9:55 AM, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 16:45:28 +0100, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/12/2016 2:10 AM, Bod wrote:
On 12/05/2016 05:12, Muggles wrote:

BUT, the text doesn't address either explanation 100%. They are
the 2
possibilities that I've seen discussed that explains people living in
the land of Nod where Cain found a wife.


"Nod"! is that where the character *Noddy* comes from? ;-)


Who knows? Probably!

I thought god knew?


God knows ... but I don't!

And you know this!....how do you know god knows?
Please be specific!


IF I believe that God IS God, then it is logical that I'd believe God
knows. ;-)

So nothing specific then. As expected.

Actually...its quite specific. You are in denial again.

The Nile is a filthy river ;-)

So is the Thames

And?

Completely untrue:

Seals, whales and porpoises regularly spotted in the Thames, survey ...

www.telegraph.co.uk › News › Earth › Wildlife
20 Aug 2015 - Seals, whales and porpoises regularly spotted in the
Thames, survey ... The animals are among a wide variety of seals,
dolphins and otters that ...


--
Bod

On 14/05/2016 17:52, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:45:57 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 09:04, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:58:31 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So you have no ****ing idea. Always the same, religion is based on maybe this maybe that jumping to conclusions with no evidence whatsoever.

Pretty much identical to atheism.

Atheism, just another faith based religious system

Twist things how you like, but Atheists do not believe in *any* gods nor
*any* religion. You can't not believe in a religion at the same time as
believing in a religion, except in your own mind.


Now thats about as fanatical a religious concept as any Ive ever seen.

Good to see you practicing your religion

Er, I repeat "I do not believe in any religion"

--
Bod

On Sat, 14 May 2016 10:12:06 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 09:06, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:59:10 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

It isn't. Religious folk are stupid, and so are those who believe in global warming.

--
As are atheists. They have STRONG belief systems...based on
faith...not on truth.

Gunner

Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the
medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural
texts published this month. The study suggests that Jesus and his
disciples used the drug to carry out miraculous healings.
The anointing oil used by Jesus and his disciples contained an
ingredient called kaneh-bosem which has since been identified as
cannabis extract, according to an article by Chris Bennett in the drugs
magazine, High Times, entitled Was Jesus a Stoner? The incense used by
Jesus in ceremonies also contained a cannabis extract, suggests Mr
Bennett, who quotes scholars to back his claims.

"There can be little doubt about a role for cannabis in Judaic
religion," Carl Ruck, professor of classical mythology at Boston
University said.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/200...ience.religion


Interesting. And you posted it as a diverson for what reason?

Gunner

On Sat, 14 May 2016 15:00:30 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:06:21 +0100, Gunner Asch wrote:

On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:59:10 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

It isn't. Religious folk are stupid, and so are those who believe in global warming.

--
As are atheists. They have STRONG belief systems...based on
faith...not on truth.

Idiot. Atheists don't believe in anything, that's the definition of the ****ing word.

Buffoon! Moron! You Believe that there are NO god(s), based on ZERO
evidence. Its your religious belief. You are as fanatical about it as
a sect of snake handlers. You go on evangelical spews here on
Usenet..no different than those snake handlers.

Dolt!

Gunner

On Sat, 14 May 2016 07:40:42 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote:

Gunner Asch on Sat, 14 May 2016 01:14:10 -0700
typed in alt.survival the following:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 13:10:42 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:

On Thu, 12 May 2016 12:44:22 +0100, Stormin Mormon wrote:

On 5/12/2016 2:30 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
And for those who get the
occasional wiff of a cigarette....
and bitch and moan...tough.


Was there any other questions?

Gunner


As with many smokers, you sure sound
inconsiderate. That may be too mild a
descriptor.

Non-smokers are the inconsiderate ones. They're taking in a millionth of what the smokers are, they need to get a grip.


And they do NOTHING to keep the tobbaco growers off welfare. I kick
in huge amounts of money providing them with an income.

Not to mention the much more massive amount of tax revenue you're
providing.

Hell yes! Between 75 cents a gallon for fuel taxes and about a dollar
or more for each pack of smokes....Im getting tired of subsidizing non
smokers and electric car drivers.

--
pyotr filipivich
The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.
-- George Bancroft

On 14/05/2016 20:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 10:12:06 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 09:06, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Fri, 13 May 2016 15:59:10 +0100, "Mr Macaw" wrote:


I haven't decided which possibility I agree with.

So lots of could be's and maybe's. Nothing definitive then.

You expected differently? Why should this be any different than
Global Warming/Cooling/Change?

(VBG)

It isn't. Religious folk are stupid, and so are those who believe in global warming.

--
As are atheists. They have STRONG belief systems...based on
faith...not on truth.

Gunner

Jesus was almost certainly a cannabis user and an early proponent of the
medicinal properties of the drug, according to a study of scriptural
texts published this month. The study suggests that Jesus and his
disciples used the drug to carry out miraculous healings.
The anointing oil used by Jesus and his disciples contained an
ingredient called kaneh-bosem which has since been identified as
cannabis extract, according to an article by Chris Bennett in the drugs
magazine, High Times, entitled Was Jesus a Stoner? The incense used by
Jesus in ceremonies also contained a cannabis extract, suggests Mr
Bennett, who quotes scholars to back his claims.

"There can be little doubt about a role for cannabis in Judaic
religion," Carl Ruck, professor of classical mythology at Boston
University said.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/200...ience.religion


Interesting. And you posted it as a diverson for what reason?

Gunner

As you just said "interest".

--
Bod

On Sat, 14 May 2016 19:36:36 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 17:45, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:30:25 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:48, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:17:26 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:16, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 18:29:56 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 18:07, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:39:33 +0100, Bod wrote:


Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner

Oh dear, you're dragging the past up again.
The UK is very tolerant of Jews and we are in no way "thugs".
I speak as I find and I've worked for many Jews in their own homes and
all were lovely kind people. A few even insisted that I stay for dinner.

--
Bod

Dragging up the past again? Oh...so you dont like it when I do
it..but you do it as a matter of course and think its ok?

Of course most Jews are nice people. As are most Catholics, Anglicans,
Methodists, Lutherens and so on and so forth. Yet you lead us to
believe they are all ****ing ******s.

Do try try to be consistant in your distain and hate, old boy.

Gunner

Why do you refer to what I've said as *hate*?

Why do you deny what youve said is anything but?

What was hateful about what I said?

Was it "I speak as I find and I've worked for many Jews in their own
homes and all were lovely kind people. A few even insisted that I stay
for dinner"

So did many Germans, prior to 1936.

Gunner

My opinion of Jews hasn't changed. The ones I meet are pleasant people.

Most Jews ARE pleasant people. And your point is?

Shalom

Gunner

y point is, that I don't hate anyone.

You said "Do try try to be consistant in your distain and hate, old boy".

I still want to know where I've shown hate! I did ask you this before.

You hate and hold believers in distain and contempt. Your posts are
rife with it. You cant see it can you? Haters seldom look at
themselves.

You are a hater.

Gunner

On Sat, 14 May 2016 19:37:26 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 17:46, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2016 09:31:11 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 14/05/2016 08:49, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:19:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 12/05/2016 00:20, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 16:00:38 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 08:24:28 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Wed, 11 May 2016 14:48:14 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 12:39, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 10:32:03 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 11/05/2016 10:18, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2016 09:32:59 +0100, Bod wrote:


I wonder how many more things Einstein could have discovered if he
wasn't hampered by religion?


Einstein was driven by "How did he do it". So I have to say,
no. He probably would have just been mediocre.

"hampered by religion"? You lead an insular life.

Often times, those that say they don't believe in religion,
get caught up in religions by other names, such a secular humanism,
atheism, Liberalism, global warming (which is not science, but religoun).

Liberalism, which tells you what you can eat, what you can
wear, who you can speak with, what you can drive, yada, yada,
yada, is far more restrictive than Christianity. Hell,
Liberalism even tells you what you can think (political
correctness).

A lot of atheists are very religious people.

More dogmatically narrow minded than the most devout Jew, Muslim, or
southern Baptist Christian, by far.

Erm! I was bullied into going to church as a kid by a scarey Vicar.
Many Irish Catholics were also bullied and brainwashed to go to church.
Cross the line and you got kneecapped or tarred and feathered.
What lovely religious people.

Odd...I was raised Catholic, before I became Buddhist..and dont recall
any kneecappings or tar and feathers. Is this an English version of
some religion? Probably..afterall...you lads do do things rather
****ed up.

Gunner

Er, this was the *Irish*, *not* the English. The Irish Catholic IRA even
bombed several of our English cities causing death and carnage.
*That's* religion for you.

Thats odd..I thought the Inquistion and the Reformaton were largely
English hatred against other religions..particularly the Jews...few of
whom survived.

So you are trimming the data again eh? Typical of your lot

Gunner

So it was religious hatred then. Just as I thought.

Indeed it was. One English religion hated the Jews. The Jews of
course being very religious and not killing anyone. So its probably
the combination of English and a religion that turned it so brutal.
The Brits being well known thugs and all...shrug

Gunner
The "irish problem" was not based on "religion". It was based on
economics. The (protestant) British over-ran (catholic) Ireland and
took over the economy - relegating the Irish (who happened to be
Catholic) to the lowest economic strata. The English put down the
Irish - which of couse "got up the Irish" of the Irish - who fought
back, long and hard - to rid their country of the "English". With the
church being the social center of Irish life (next to the pub) it
became a "Catholic" thing - turning it into a "religious war"

It was not based on "religion" or "faith". It was primarily an
economic and nationalist conflict - with virtually NO "religious
tenents" involved.

What...you are denying Liberal History??!!!

And of course you are correct. The ****ing Brits beat the Irish down
like curs and murdered or moved out millions of them, to other lands.
They sold them like slaves as well.

There were more Irish in New York City than there were in Ireland by
1895.

And here we have Brits claiming that they are just and rightious
people. Bah!! Humbug!!

India is a perfect example of their work and deeds....(spit!)


Gunner

Hmm!....and *I* get accused of being hateful :-)

You ARE hateful. While Im not a gentleman..I am however..accurate.

Accuracy is never hateful..its simply...accurate.

Gunner

Show me where I've been hateful then?

Denial old boy..is not a river in Egypt.

Gunner

Then you'll be able to point out this "hate", won't you!

Your continued denial is proof positive of your mental health "issues"