[continued from previous message]   
      
   >Of course not. Especially when you are afraid to read and understand what the   
   >Word of God really says so that you can discuss things intelligently even if   
   >you chose not to follow it. Ghandi was such a person. Agrippa in the days of   
   >Paul was like that as well.   
      
   Not at all.   I've read the Bible in its entirety, as I've probably   
   told you before, even taking notes as I went.  But unlike you, I've   
   read what *scholars say* about the Bible as well.   
      
   >Act 26:28 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a   
   >Christian.   
   >   
   >Act 26:29 And Paul said, I would to God, that not only thou, but also all   
   >that hear me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except   
   >these bonds.   
      
   So?   
      
   >> > Scripture also speaks from the perspective of the Romans who found no   
   fault   
   >> > in him. No sedition, nothing. Also verified from Roman history which many   
   >> > try to discredit so as to destroy the truth for an anti-Jesus narrative.   
   >>   
   >> The Romans knew what a Messiah was supposed to do. They decided to   
   >> nip it in the bud before things got worse.   
   >   
   >Nope. Although there was one local ruler In Judea that was of that mindset,   
   >and killed every child and baby under the age of 2 for miles around for fear   
   >he would lose his rulership. And went down in history noted for that deed.   
      
   You're talking about Herod the Great.  It would've been characteristic   
   of him to do something like that, but he probably never did, for a   
   variety of reasons.   
      
   >> > > > You also learned these things when you were young, So what’s with   
   these   
   >> > > > lies?   
   >> > >   
   >> > > Look, liar, you know it's stupid to place too much historical weight   
   >> > > on the legends and stories in the gospels, and yet you continue to do   
   >> > > it. Why is that?   
   >> >   
   >> > Liar? What did I lie about?   
   >>   
   >> You lied by acting as if other people accept the Bible as being   
   >> authoritative, which isn't true, as you must surely know by now.   
   >   
   >I know, as well as you, that many people believe that whether they be   
   >Christian or not.   
   >And that does not make me a liar. I also know that you, just like the well   
   >known atheists leaders, who were given enough time to die on a deathbed   
   >realized their mistake yet most felt they fully deserved the end result as   
   >described in the Bible and few very few humbled themselves before God and   
   >sought His Mercy.   
      
   So if you're not a liar, I have to ask, Why the lie?  And didn't you   
   post a video about atheists on their deathbeds that was debunked by   
   several atheists here in alt.atheism?   
      
   >> > I have also mentioned here, many, many times that I have personal   
   knowledge   
   >> > and understandings of God, even if they are limited greatly due to the   
   fact   
   >> > that I have had a personal experiential relationship with Him and thereby   
   >> > know the reality of who He is, and that HE exists. Which you very well   
   know   
   >> > and choose to mock on a personal basis, so as to excuse your choice to   
   >> > disbelieve and follow the lead of your god, Lucifer. Even though you do   
   not   
   >> > know him, yet the thoughts he implants in your head and deceives you with,   
   >> > you chose to speak.   
   >>   
   >> Thoughts being implanted into heads is craziness.   
   >   
   >Then you accept the thinking that you are crazed?   
   >This is why the bible said one should control the thoughts before acting.   
      
   Umm... no, I don't believe in thoughts being implanted.  That's you   
   that believes that!   
   [...]   
   >> > > You realize that you're replying to Andrew with this last screed and   
   >> > > not me, right? And feel free to remove alt.religion.christian if   
   >> > > alt.atheism messages are bothering you.   
   >> >   
   >> > Your ignorances belong amongst yourselves, as many there insist. Yet you   
   all   
   >> > insist of posting to arc which is not related to aa. I have been posting   
   >> > lately with my replies marked for followups to aa, so as not to cross post   
   >> > in   
   >> > an effort to wean you off from crossposting.   
   >>   
   >> I didn't add a.r.c. I only post to theist newsgroups when they post   
   >> to alt.atheism.   
   >   
   >You knew this thread originated there, and bear/sharing the blame for not   
   >trimming the NG’s/   
      
   I don't trim them, because I believe people should be able to see the   
   reactions to what they see posted in their own newsgroups.   
      
   >> > I do not know if Andrew originated the cross post of not. And he really   
   >> > shouldn’t.. Paul the apostle is a good example of that, as he debated   
   >> > those   
   >> > who were against God in their own temples and places of discourse. He did   
   >> > not   
   >> > drag them to a place of worship to God, or to a temple of God, to argue   
   and   
   >> > debate. He only stopped doing that, depending of the location when those   
   he   
   >> > debated could no longer reasonably debate and sought to kill him because   
   of   
   >> > his testimony, works of God, and as a result of his teachings drew many   
   away   
   >> > from their false gods and saw their income decreasing. Meaning the meat   
   >> > markets that sold meat that was offered as a sacrifice to their gods, the   
   >> > lack of sales of their images of their false gods as well as their charms,   
   >> > incenses, etc.   
   >>   
   >> And you don't think Paul was doing theology when he preached his   
   >> sermons?   
   >   
   >Nope. In those days it was called and was a full part of philosophy, and he   
   >was well trained in that by one of the masters of that day. Yet he taught   
   >Jesus Christ an him crucified, and made a point about speaking and teaching   
   >clear and plainly with simple words, and allowing the power of God to be made   
   >manifest so that people would believe in God and not Paul and his words. IOW   
   >he humbled himself before men and God so that the Glory of God might shine   
   >through.   
      
   Once you begin to ask why anyone should be concerned about Christ   
   crucified, you're down the rabbit hole into theology.   
      
   >> > If the christians did not enter your NG’s at any time, your group would   
   >> > close down within a year for there would be nothing for you all to talk   
   >> > about. ;)   
   >>   
   >> Wherever there's intelligent opinions around, there will be things to   
   >> talk about. But I thought you were complaining about atheists posting   
   >> in your newsgroups, not making a plea for the inclusion of theist   
   >> posts in alt.atheism.   
   >   
   >Obviously you did not understand. Especially the concept of the thought.   
      
   What's so difficult about the "concept of thought"?  Or are you lying   
   again?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)