XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality   
   From: ingilt@yahoo.co.uk   
      
   On Fri, 29 May 2015 21:36:27 -0600, David Johnston wrote:   
      
   > On 5/22/2015 10:03 AM, mur wrote:   
   >> On Fri, 08 May 2015 22:01:33 -0600, David Johnston  wrote:   
   >> .   
   >>> On 5/8/2015 8:03 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 20:49:38 -0600, David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >>>> .   
   >>>>> On 4/29/2015 5:58 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 15:45:06 -0500, duke  wrote:   
   >>>>>> .   
   >>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:58:32 -0600, David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On 4/18/2015 7:24 AM, duke wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 10 Apr 2015 19:07:02 -0600, David Johnston    
   wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/2015 2:14 PM, duke wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:32:02 -0600, David Johnston <   
   avid@block.net> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/9/2015 5:28 AM, duke wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Too much hair splitting.  Evidence exists for the presence of   
   God - it can't be   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> denied.  One may not like it, but none the less, it stares them   
   in the face,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> hence:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> An atheist denies   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> I see that you regard consistency as too much trouble to bother   
   with.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> You see wrong.  I'm highly consistent.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Either it can't be denied, or atheists deny it.  Pick one.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> The item that nails the supposed atheist is that he rejects evidence   
   we see.   
   >>>>>>>> Yeah.  I've seen a bible too.  But Harry Potter was a more fun read.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> But not any truth at all.  Unless you think you can ride a broom stick.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>        These people can't distinguish between things we know are   
   fiction and things   
   >>>>>> no one could know are fiction.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Really?  So we can't know that there was no world wide flood that wiped   
   >>>>> out all life on land some four thousand years ago?   
   >>>>   
   >>>>       Sure we can.   
   >>>   
   >>> Then what were you referring to?   
   >>   
   >>      We can't know if Jesus was a virgin birth.   
   >   
   > Does that matter when the only indication that he was a virgin birth is   
   > a book that claims that all life on land was wiped out four thousand   
   > years ago?   
      
   We know it doesn't matter because we now know that the issue   
   of Mary's virginity was a translation error.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)