XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality   
      
   On Fri, 29 May 2015 21:36:27 -0600, David Johnston  wrote:   
   .   
   >On Fri, 22 May 2015 12:03:47 -0400, 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. We can't know if he actually   
   >>performed some or all of the miracles he's said to have performed, and more   
   that   
   >>didn't get recorded. We can't know if he rose from the dead.   
   >   
   >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?   
      
       It doesn't matter about that. Just because some things are incorrect or   
   interpretations about some things are incorrect doesn't mean everything   
   associated with it is incorrect. That's one of the easy basic starting lines   
   you   
   people can't get as "far" as...   
      
   >>We can know Harry Potter is completely fictional.   
      
       ...and so is that.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)