XPost: alt.talk.creationism, alt.christnet.calvinist, alt.religion.clergy
XPost: alt.recovery.fundamentalism, alt.religion.christian.lutheran,
alt.religion.end-times.prophecies
XPost: alt.religion.christian.presbyterian, alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm
XPost: alt.atheism
From: Since_humans_read_this_I_am_spammed_too_much@spamyourself.com
old man joe schreef:
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 07:54:04 -0500, default wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 12:25:54 +0100, Erwin Moller
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Nothing else to add.
>>>
>>> Erwin Moller
>> He is a religious delusional idiot unable to think?
>
> greetings...
Heee wow! Old man Joe responding. :-)
Hi Joe,
I have a few questions for you.
I hope you, or Old man Joe, can find some time to answer them.
>
> old man joe does in fact answer a post every now and again. he even
suggests to some to
> ping him if clarification is needed. he posts to many other groups besides
these.
Why do you talk about yourself in the third person?
Wouldn't the first person make more sense?
Or are you somebody else?
I am all confused now.
It would be nice and honest to let us all know who we are dealing with:
Old man Joe or somebody else.
I checked your headers, and the original posting and this one seem to
come from the same place, so it seems you are the one and the same
computer, using Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American).
>
> the point that omj is making when he does post, which is often, is for
interested parties
> to search out the Scriptures to see if these things be so... or go search
the world of
> Evolution and see if those things be so.
But don't you consider that spam?
Old man Joe is posting a LOT to MANY newsgroups at once.
Posting en masse without dealing with all responses is typically spam.
It is a one-way traffic.
And that makes it very uninteresting for the receivers of the meassages.
This is usenet, discussiongroups. We DISCUSS.
Just posting a few holy scriptures, then piss on science, and run away
is NOT POLITE.
Can you agree to that?
I hope you would just post ONE of your ideas, and discuss/defend them.
Give it some depth.
Test your ideas.
This is all so superflicial....
Can you agree to that?
>
> however, some people are so vile that a conversation can not be had.
Simple: ignore them.
Any idiot can post here.
But using usenet as a place to post your ideas in a unidirectional
manner isn't the solution.
Rules are simple: Ignore stupid responses and namecalling, and pay
attention to more sincere responses.
In defense of the namecallers I would like to say that they probably
started out more friendly, but grew tired of creationists running away.
We see that happening all the time here.
So please have a little understanding for that.
>
> other's, like the catholic groups he posts to, are so deep into heresy and
so Scripturally
> ignorant that all one can do is feed them Bible facts if perhaps God will
grant them
> repentance.
My dear Old Man Joe: You are posting to:
alt.talk.creationism
alt.christnet.calvinist
alt.religion.clergy
alt.recovery.fundamentalism
alt.religion.christian.lutheran
alt.religion.end-times.prophecies
alt.religion.christian.presbyterian
alt.agnosticism
alt.athiesm <-- Is that for real?
alt.flame.jesus.christ
alt.atheism
Now think about that.
Do you seriously expect all the users of these groups to agree with you?
To simply swallow what you present them?
For example: Do you seriously expect people in alt.atheism to start
believing in god(s) because you post some pieces of scripture?
--> THIS ISN'T WORKING OLD MAN JOE <--
If you want to save souls or something like that, you must really reach
out more.
You must start with understanding WHY people think what they think.
Do you understand and agree to what I am saying/asking?
>
> as far as atheist groups are concerned, these are incapable in the
Scriptures since
> atheists are " without God, " turned away by God to understand the basic
tenants of
> anything in the Bible... " For the word of the cross is foolishness to
those who are
> perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. " 1 Cor.
1:18
>
No, atheists are not 'turned away by god'.
How can you turn away from something that you is not there in your mind?
Atheist have a very different approach. It would help you a lot to
understand them better. They are not idiots, you know.
> lastly, why would someone like yourself, who calls omj a " religious
delusional idiot "
> ever expect to get a reply ? i'd be sinning to cast pearls to swine and
give what is holy
> to dogs. Mt. 7:6
I guess that one is for 'default', since I cannot remember calling you
that (but possibly I did. I hate newsgroup spamming.).
So let's get to the core of this all: What is you/old man joe has to say?
And also important: To which audience?
Atheist?
Theists of the wrong conviction?
This is important.
I for example can be considered an atheist, and I don't care too much
for theist fighting each other over the interpretation of a piece of
scripture from a book I don't take seriously.
On the other hand: Religious guy from conviction X might not be too
interested in a discussion between you and me about the existance of god.
So you might want to shorten that crossposting list a little.
Do you agree Old Man Joe? Do I make sense (for an atheist that is)?
Regards,
Erwin Moller
--
"There are two ways of constructing a software design: One way is to
make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies, and the
other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious
deficiencies. The first method is far more difficult."
-- C.A.R. Hoare
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
