Catholics & Catholicism

Question:

All scripture quoted from the New American Bible. Matthew 5:19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 7:15-20 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Just so, every good tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them. Romans 16:17  I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who create dissensions and obstacles, in opposition to the teaching that you learned; avoid them. Colossian 2:6,8 So, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, walk in him, See to it that no one captivate you with an empty, seductive philosophy according to human tradition, according to the elemental powers of the world and not according to Christ. 1 Timothy 6:3-5 Whoever teaches something different and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the religious teaching is conceited, understanding nothing, and has a morbid disposition for arguments and verbal disputes. From these come envy, rivalry, insults, evil suspicions, and mutual friction among people with corrupted minds, who are deprived of the truth, supposing religion to be a means of gain. 2 Timothy 3:13 But wicked people and charlatans will go from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived. 2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity,  will accumulate teachers and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths. 2 Peter 2:1-5 There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them, bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their licentious ways, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled. In their greed they will exploit you with fabrications, but from of old their condemnation has not been idle and their destruction does not sleep. For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but condemned them to the chains of Tartarus and handed them over to be kept for judgment; and if he did not spare the ancient world, even though he preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, together with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the godless world. 2 Peter 2:12-19 But these people, like irrational animals born by nature for capture and destruction, revile things that they do not understand, and in their destruction they will also be destroyed, suffering wrong  as payment for wrongdoing. Thinking daytime revelry a delight, they are stains and defilements as they revel in their deceits while carousing with you. Their eyes are full of adultery and insatiable for sin. They seduce unstable people, and their hearts are trained in greed. Accursed children! Abandoning the straight road, they have gone astray, following the road of Balaam, the son of Bosor, who loved payment for wrongdoing, but he received a rebuke for his own crime: a mute beast spoke with a human voice and restrained the prophet’s madness. These people are waterless springs and mists driven by a gale; for them the gloom of darkness has been reserved. For, talking empty bombast, they seduce with licentious desires of the flesh those who have barely escaped from people who live in error. They promise them freedom, though they themselves are slaves of corruption, for a person is a slave of whatever overcomes him. 1 John 4:1-6 Beloved, do not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh be longs to God, and every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus  does not belong to God. This is the spirit of the antichrist that, as you heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world. You belong to God, children, and you have conquered them, for the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. They belong to the world; accordingly, their teaching belongs to the world, and the world listens to them.We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.

Response:

What’s the point of posting this? Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t… -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

What’s the point of posting this? Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t… -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

The same could be said of Christians and the posts of Ed Brunelle. What’s the point of posting atheistic posts to Christian groups other than to start flame wars?.. -EdW

Response:

What’s the point of posting this? Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t… -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free! ..

And we certainly don’t care what you (or as you would spell it –  yuo ) say. Who exactly is your God? Look at the subject line and it tells you why it Adamj

Response:

What’s the point of posting this? Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t… The same could be said of Christians and the posts of Ed Brunelle. What’s the point of posting atheistic posts to Christian groups other than to start flame wars?.. -EdW

I don’t think I’ve read any of EdBrunelle’s posts, but I have certainly noticed the subject titles. I, despite my atheism, frequent Christian NG’s simply because I like to debate, and its no fun being around people who believe exactly as you do. I would hardly classify myself as a troll, and if you don’t want to hear what some of us have to say, or answer our questions, then don’t read/respond to our posts. Peace. -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

What’s the point of posting this? Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t… And we certainly don’t care what you (or as you would spell it – yuo ) say.

You cared enough to respond. As for the "yuo", it was a typo; don’t be pretentious. Who exactly is your God?

I don’t have a god. And I won’t until such a being’s existence is proven. Even then, one would have to show that this god actually cares about the affairs and lives of individual humans. Perhaps then, I would have a god. Look at the subject line and it tells you why it Adamj

I think my post was pretty self-explanatory. The original poster was attempting to repute EdBrunelle with passages from Scripture. But since atheists, and I’m assuming Ed’s an atheist (or at least a non-Christian), he would not recognize the validity of Scripture, and the argument is therefore moot. -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

I don’t think I’ve read any of EdBrunelle’s posts, but I have certainly noticed the subject titles. I, despite my atheism, frequent Christian NG’s simply because I like to debate, and its no fun being around people who believe exactly as you do. I would hardly classify myself as a troll, and if you don’t want to hear what some of us have to say, or answer our questions, then don’t read/respond to our posts. Peace. -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

You have problems with my post, while it is okay for Ed Brunelle to post many, many, many posts of the this type only with an opposing viewpoint? Believe as I do? And what pray tell do you think I believe? That I am a Catholic who believes in the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit?  The scriptures I posted were all about false teachings and those who try to lead the faithful astray…..in response to all of the stuff Ed Brunelle has been posting, yet you seem to have no problems with his posts. And I have posted one thing….he has posted hundreds. I have every right to post in response to other posts…..just as you have been able to do. You stated" and if you don’t want to hear what some of us have to say, or answer our questions, then don’t read/respond to our posts. "  It works both ways. You also stated "Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t…" This does not lead to serious debate. For you said "I, despite my atheism, frequent Christian NG’s simply because I like to debate" Your response was inflammatory than anything else. Granted my subject line was meant to grab attention, just as Ed Brunelle’s have been. But my 1 post upset and for that I am sorry. I guess his posts " Jesus the misguided Jew…..Mary a whore" and countless others are okay. You also stated "its no fun being around  people who believe exactly as you do" Would that be Catholics? Christians? Well then you are in the wrong NG. Pax. EdW

Response:

I think my post was pretty self-explanatory. The original poster was attempting to repute EdBrunelle with passages from Scripture. But since atheists, and I’m assuming Ed’s an atheist (or at least a non-Christian), he would not recognize the validity of Scripture, and the argument is therefore moot. -PeopleEater

The orginal poster was trying to repute EdBrunelle with passages from Scripture, huh? Well Ed sure seems to know his scripture pretty well or at least think he knows it since he has been inundating this newsgroup with his sensless interpretations for the past few weeks. EdBrunelle’s lack of recognition for the validity of Scripture makes the argument moot?!?!? Because Ed does not believe makes everyone else wrong?!??! Atheists do not deny God’s existence because they really do not feel He exist, but because they DO NOT want God to exist. Atheists do not want God to exist because God does not approve of their sinful actions which they recieve pleasure from. So atheists say God does not exist to deceive others into thinking they have the freedom to sin. Who are atheists? Atheists are miscreants who admit that they are too dumb and awry to acknowledge the obvious veracity of God’s existence. They fulminate those who maintain more rectitude and admit the existence of God. Atheists have a very limited scope of knowledge since they only accept things which they can see with their dim eyes which need glasses, unless it points to God in what they perceive to be a direct way. They  accept only what their obtuse nose can smell, and what their insensitive hears can detect. Or they must be able to feel it, before they can accept it. Other people such as genuine Christians realize that other beings and objects exist even though none of their faculties can physically and directly in a personal way sense them. Thus their broader scope of the universe bolsters their addition of knowledge. There once were two congenitally blind men. There was, however one difference. One man from his youth was diligent to learn from other people who could see. They taught the blind man the way the sun looked, when it was dark or light in places, and taught him many other wondrous sights about God’s creation. The other man however, being supercilious toward others who could see, used his logic and reason to "debunk" the existence of things he couldn’t sense. In his eyes, the mere existence of things he couldn’t feel, smell, nor hear were undoubtedly notional. By using logic and reasoning he conjectured that people who said such things exist, were the ones who were blind. Thus he repressed any evidence that anyone tried to place in his mind that the existence of things he couldn’t  see were factual. He challenged them to, "Prove to me that the moon, sun and stars exist." They told him that none of the plants he could feel would exist were it not for the light from the sun. He didn’t see that as proof and when they were at a lost to how to prove to him that the sun existed, he mocked them and called them superstitious and imaginary believers. "Since you cannot prove to me that the sun exist, then the sun most definitely does not exist", he asserted. Which of these blind men had more sense? Do you think the blind man who rejected any proof that things he couldn’t sense were notional, was justified in his actions? Of course not. Besides with all our bare senses we cannot perceive a lot of things. Scientists and atheists know this very well because they use powerful microscopes to see things they otherwise could not see. Scientists even admit that many things may exist that they no nothing of. I wonder whether God is One of "these". Well, this blind man who rejected the existence of things he couldn’t sense is just like an atheist. Atheists are no more justified in their deception than this blind man. In fact, they are even less justified because the non-existence of God would translate into the non-existence of EVERYTHING. God is the Creator of atheists. Just because Christians maybe at a lost to how to prove the existence of God to an ATHEIST other than saying God created all things, doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. Right now, you atheist prove to me God doesn’t exist. Prove also to a blind man who is unwillingly to accept the fact that the sun exists, that the sun exist. You are at a total lost TOO! One thing about atheistic scientists is that they are using all their advance technological equipment to probe space and to send out powerful signals hoping to find any trace of intelligent life on other planets. Most already have the propensity that there are other rational creatures somewhere other than just humankind. What is the logic bolstering this? This disposition is absent of any kind of proof, yet atheistic scientists are willing to believe it. On the contrary, atheistic scientists do not and will not even develop the propensity that angels and demons exist. Angels and demons are indeed rational beings too, and their existence has been manifested. From the beginning of humankind history, angels and demons have been mentioned. Yet scientists call this superstition and notional, but their assertion that intelligent creatures never claimed to be seen, heard or anyway detected, probably exist, defines true superstition and scientific mendacity. If someone merely informed scientists that some intelligent life was found, they would believe that lie before they believe God exist. Even if atheists saw God, they nevertheless would say God does not exist, because their diabolical premise for saying God does not exist, does not revolve around the notion that they really do not believe God exist, but around their pernicious hatred toward Him. Atheistic scientists believe intelligent beings outer space exist without factual evidence, but in the overwhelming illumination of the existence of God, they reject it.

Response:

I don’t think I’ve read any of EdBrunelle’s posts, but I have certainly noticed the subject titles. I, despite my atheism, frequent Christian NG’s simply because I like to debate, and its no fun being around people who believe exactly as you do. I would hardly classify myself as a troll, and if you don’t want to hear what some of us have to say, or answer our questions, then don’t read/respond to our posts. Peace. You have problems with my post,

No, I have no problem with your post; only your *logic*. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – while it is okay for Ed Brunelle to post many, many, many posts of the this type only with an opposing viewpoint? Believe as I do? And what pray tell do you think I believe? That I am a Catholic who believes in the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit?  The scriptures I posted were all about false teachings and those who try to lead the faithful astray…..in response to all of the stuff Ed Brunelle has been posting, yet you seem to have no problems with his posts. And I have posted one thing….he has posted hundreds. I have every right to post in response to other posts…..just as you have been able to do.

I was not attacking your right to post whatever you wish, nor your faith, nor your attempt to defend your faith. You admit that EdBrunelle has posted arguments that refute your beliefs, clearly indicating he does not hold the same beliefs as you, correct? Now, the source of your beliefs, is primarily the NT, as well as the OT and the traditions of the Catholic Church. However, since we’ve established that EdBrunelle does not recognize the validity of said documents and teachings, there is no point in attempting to refute his arguments with quotes from the Bible. An atheist will not care what the Bible says. If you really want to defeat our arguments, then use logic, not quotes from a book we don’t agree with. You stated" and if you don’t want to hear what some of us have to say, or answer our questions, then don’t read/respond to our posts. "  It works both ways.

Again, this was dealing with the logic of your argument. If you wish to discuss Christianity itself, I’ll be more than happy to. You also stated "Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t…" This does not lead to serious debate.

Well, you have a point there. I was simply pointing out that its going to take more than stating your personal beliefsto get us to have faith. For you said "I, despite my atheism, frequent Christian NG’s simply because I like to debate" Your response was inflammatory than anything else.

I assure you, trolling is not my intention. Granted my subject line was meant to grab attention, just as Ed Brunelle’s have been. But my 1 post upset and for that I am sorry. I guess his posts " Jesus the misguided Jew…..Mary a whore" and countless others are okay.

I don’t read his posts, and if he did indeed say that, than I am truly shocked. You also stated "its no fun being around  people who believe exactly as you do" Would that be Catholics? Christians? Well then you are in the wrong NG.

No, the wrong NG for me would be alt.atheism or something like that. Peace. -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t think I’ve read any of EdBrunelle’s posts, but I have certainly noticed the subject titles. I, despite my atheism, frequent Christian NG’s simply because I like to debate, and its no fun being around people who believe exactly as you do. I would hardly classify myself as a troll, and if you don’t want to hear what some of us have to say, or answer our questions, then don’t read/respond to our posts. Peace. You have problems with my post, No, I have no problem with your post; only your *logic*. while it is okay for Ed Brunelle to post many, many, many posts of the this type only with an opposing viewpoint? Believe as I do? And what pray tell do you think I believe? That I am a Catholic who believes in the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit?  The scriptures I posted were all about false teachings and those who try to lead the faithful astray…..in response to all of the stuff Ed Brunelle has been posting, yet you seem to have no problems with his posts. And I have posted one thing….he has posted hundreds. I have every right to post in response to other posts…..just as you have been able to do. I was not attacking your right to post whatever you wish, nor your faith, nor your attempt to defend your faith. You admit that EdBrunelle has posted arguments that refute your beliefs, clearly indicating he does not hold the same beliefs as you, correct? Now, the source of your beliefs, is primarily the NT, as well as the OT and the traditions of the Catholic Church. However, since we’ve established that EdBrunelle does not recognize the validity of said documents and teachings, there is no point in attempting to refute his arguments with quotes from the Bible. An atheist will not care what the Bible says. If you really want to defeat our arguments, then use logic, not quotes from a book we don’t agree with. You stated" and if you don’t want to hear what some of us have to say, or answer our questions, then don’t read/respond to our posts. "  It works both ways. Again, this was dealing with the logic of your argument. If you wish to discuss Christianity itself, I’ll be more than happy to. You also stated "Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t…" This does not lead to serious debate. Well, you have a point there. I was simply pointing out that its going to take more than stating your personal beliefsto get us to have faith. For you said "I, despite my atheism, frequent Christian NG’s simply because I like to debate" Your response was inflammatory than anything else. I assure you, trolling is not my intention. Granted my subject line was meant to grab attention, just as Ed Brunelle’s have been. But my 1 post upset and for that I am sorry. I guess his posts " Jesus the misguided Jew…..Mary a whore" and countless others are okay. I don’t read his posts, and if he did indeed say that, than I am truly shocked. You also stated "its no fun being around  people who believe exactly as you do" Would that be Catholics? Christians? Well then you are in the wrong NG. No, the wrong NG for me would be alt.atheism or something like that. Peace. -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Okay….I think I understand what you are saying now. Ed Brunelle has in fact been inundating this NG with post that include the subjects I listed and more even mor inflammatory than that. I understand that you don’t agree with the logic of my post and I respect that  opinion. I was not trying to make Ed Brunelle "understand", "believe", or recognize the validity of any of the sciptures  listed. I was only trying to prove a point of how sensless his posts are. He puts the most inflamtory subject line he can think of and then goes on to bash all Catholic/Christian beliefs. It hardly makes one want to engage in serious debate with him. And he is welcome to post his opinion, but after the huge amount he has posted, it appears he wants more to start "flame wars" than to talk seriously. Pax, EdW

Response:

The orginal poster was trying to repute EdBrunelle with passages from Scripture, huh? Well Ed sure seems to know his scripture pretty well or at least think he knows it since he has been inundating this newsgroup with his sensless interpretations for the past few weeks.

In order to refute Scripture, one must know it. As an ex-Catholic, I was confused and dismayed the first time I read the enmtire Bible. I’d say I know it pretty well now, though… EdBrunelle’s lack of recognition for the validity of Scripture makes the argument moot?!?!? Because Ed does not believe makes everyone else wrong?!??!

No, I was saying that since EdBrunelle does not recognize Scripture, you will accomplish nothing by repeating it to him. You are assuming that the Bible is entirely true, and that everyone else believes it is. If that were the case, quoting the Bible in response to any argument would be relevent. However, I would not be stopped from doing/saying something if someone told me "Jesus said not to do/say that"… Atheists do not deny God’s existence because they really do not feel He exist, but because they DO NOT want God to exist.

Wrong on both counts. An atheist is simply a person who demands concrete evidence before he chooses to believe any in god/religion. Atheists do not want God to exist because God does not approve of their sinful actions which they recieve pleasure from. So atheists say God does not exist to deceive others into thinking they have the freedom to sin.

Wrong. Christians are among the most sinful people I know. I know more Wiccans who live their lives according to Christ’s tenants than Christians. I know for a fact that I behave more morally and socially responsibly now that I’m an atheist than I did when I was still a believer. Who are atheists? Atheists are miscreants who admit that they are too dumb and awry to acknowledge the obvious veracity of God’s existence.

Interesting choice of words. Regardless, you’re making generalizations and stereotypes. By this statement, I am assuming that you think you know everything there is to know since anyone who disagrees with you is a "miscreant" and "too dumb and awry" to believe as you do. Does this statement also apply to those of other religions as well? They fulminate those who maintain more rectitude and admit the existence of God. Atheists have a very limited scope of knowledge since they only accept things which they can see with their dim eyes which need glasses, unless it points to God in what they perceive to be a direct way.

So atheists base their beliefs on observation, hypothesis and theory? Sounds good to me; after all, what else are you to base your beliefs and life on? They accept only what their obtuse nose can smell, and what their insensitive hears can detect. Or they must be able to feel it, before they can accept it. Other people such as genuine Christians realize that other beings and objects exist even though none of their faculties can physically and directly in a personal way sense them.

Yet you are incapable of proving it without accepting it as true beforehand…. Thus their broader scope of the universe bolsters their addition of knowledge.

Really? I believe it was science that gave us a broader scope of the universe, not religion. It was science that showed us that we are neither the center of all motion, nor even of the universe. Science showed us that their were objects and light that even our eyes could not detect (black holes, x-rays, gamma, etc.). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – There once were two congenitally blind men. There was, however one difference. One man from his youth was diligent to learn from other people who could see. They taught the blind man the way the sun looked, when it was dark or light in places, and taught him many other wondrous sights about God’s creation. The other man however, being supercilious toward others who could see, used his logic and reason to "debunk" the existence of things he couldn’t sense. In his eyes, the mere existence of things he couldn’t feel, smell, nor hear were undoubtedly notional. By using logic and reasoning he conjectured that people who said such things exist, were the ones who were blind.

Interesting theory… was he able to prove it? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thus he repressed any evidence that anyone tried to place in his mind that the existence of things he couldn’t  see were factual. He challenged them to, "Prove to me that the moon, sun and stars exist." They told him that none of the plants he could feel would exist were it not for the light from the sun. He didn’t see that as proof and when they were at a lost to how to prove to him that the sun existed, he mocked them and called them superstitious and imaginary believers. "Since you cannot prove to me that the sun exist, then the sun most definitely does not exist", he asserted.

Ask him where the heat and light came from then? It is not enough to debunk a perfectly good scientific theory. One must provide a better, more factual one in its place. Which of these blind men had more sense? Do you think the blind man who rejected any proof that things he couldn’t sense were notional, was justified in his actions? Of course not.

You gave me a flawed straw man argument. Besides with all our bare senses we cannot perceive a lot of things. Scientists and atheists know this very well because they use powerful microscopes to see things they otherwise could not see. Scientists even admit that many things may exist that they no nothing of.

Lol… for example? I wonder whether God is One of "these".

I’m sure there is an incredibly powerful being out there, or more likely, lots of powerful beings out there. But we have not detected any, nor have the followers of thousands of the world’s religions been able to prove anything like what they worship exists. Well, this blind man who rejected the existence of things he couldn’t sense is just like an atheist. Atheists are no more justified in their deception than this blind man.

So what are you trying to prove? the existence of your god? These same arguments could be used to justify a muslim’s or a pagan’s faith. In fact, they are even less justified because the non-existence of God would translate into the non-existence of EVERYTHING.

Explain please. You are making a ridiculous leap of faith: Because *we* exist, therefore an omnipotent, omniscient being must also exist. I don’t see the connection. God is the Creator of atheists. Just because Christians maybe at a lost to how to prove the existence of God to an ATHEIST other than saying God created all things, doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. Right now, you atheist prove to me God doesn’t exist.

I don’t have to. The burden of proof lies on you, and *you* must prove your assertions. It would be like me saying "prove to me I didn’t kick my dog this morning". Prove also to a blind man who is unwillingly to accept the fact that the sun exists, that the sun exist. You are at a total lost TOO!

I am? Blind people are able to detect light and heat. I would have him look upward into the sky at the general direction of the sun. He would feel the heat and detect the bright light. I would then bring him under a tree or into a building, where it is cooler and darker (and incidently, cannot be penetrated by the heat and visible light the sun gives off). I would then ask him to explain this occurence in his own words. One thing about atheistic scientists is that they are using all their advance technological equipment to probe space and to send out powerful signals hoping to find any trace of intelligent life on other planets. Most already have the propensity that there are other rational creatures somewhere other than just humankind.

But you yourself keep saying that a "god" exists. Just because we haven’t discovered any other ones doesn’t mean its impossible. The universe is huge, and if its possible for life to start on this planet, its possible other planets with similar condition exist. What is the logic bolstering this? This disposition is absent of any kind of proof, yet atheistic scientists are willing to believe it. On the contrary, atheistic scientists do not and will not even develop the propensity that angels and demons exist.

There is no rational evidence or logic for the existence of these beings. They are, by definition, the agents of dieities; the existence of which is doubtful and unlikely. Angels and demons are indeed rational beings too, and their existence has been manifested. From the beginning of humankind history, angels and demons have been mentioned.

So have djinns, spirits, abomidable sowmen, ghouls, ghosts goblins, tree sprites, sea monsters, dragons, etc. Yet scientists call this superstition and notional, but their assertion that intelligent creatures never claimed to be seen, heard or anyway detected, probably exist, defines true superstition and scientific mendacity. If someone merely informed scientists that some intelligent life was found, they would believe that lie before they believe God exist.

They would believe it if the person who claimed such a thing provided rational, concrete, testable evidence for it. Plenty of people claim that they have encountered aliens; some even claim abduction by them. Yet scientists do not believe or test these assewrtions, because the person cannot provide any evidence. even if atheists saw God, they nevertheless would say God does not exist, because their diabolical premise for saying God does not exist, does not revolve around the notion that they really do not believe God exist, but around their pernicious hatred toward Him.

If I sw him, then I would *probably* believe. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Atheistic scientists

… read more »

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Okay….I think I understand what you are saying now. Ed Brunelle has in fact been inundating this NG with post that include the subjects I listed and more even mor inflammatory than that. I understand that you don’t agree with the logic of my post and I respect that  opinion. I was not trying to make Ed Brunelle "understand", "believe", or recognize the validity of any of the sciptures  listed. I was only trying to prove a point of how sensless his posts are. He puts the most inflamtory subject line he can think of and then goes on to bash all Catholic/Christian beliefs. It hardly makes one want to engage in serious debate with him. And he is welcome to post his opinion, but after the huge amount he has posted, it appears he wants more to start "flame wars" than to talk seriously. Pax, EdW

Ok. Then I apologize for any misunderstanding caused by myself. It simply seemed to me that your post would be better suited for other Christians, not Ed. As for his inflammatory posts, both Atheists and Christians have a tendency to do so. I for one, prefer rational discussion and debate, since Ed’s posts will most likely foster a belief that atheists are troublemakers. Peace. -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Okay….I think I understand what you are saying now. Ed Brunelle has in fact been inundating this NG with post that include the subjects I listed and more even mor inflammatory than that. I understand that you don’t agree with the logic of my post and I respect that  opinion. I was not trying to make Ed Brunelle "understand", "believe", or recognize the validity of any of the sciptures  listed. I was only trying to prove a point of how sensless his posts are. He puts the most inflamtory subject line he can think of and then goes on to bash all Catholic/Christian beliefs. It hardly makes one want to engage in serious debate with him. And he is welcome to post his opinion, but after the huge amount he has posted, it appears he wants more to start "flame wars" than to talk seriously. Pax, EdW Ok. Then I apologize for any misunderstanding caused by myself. It simply seemed to me that your post would be better suited for other Christians, not Ed. As for his inflammatory posts, both Atheists and Christians have a tendency to do so. I for one, prefer rational discussion and debate, since Ed’s posts will most likely foster a belief that atheists are troublemakers. Peace. -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

I might consider lowering my hostil sounding attitude.  As far as my comments on Mary, Jesus’ mother…. I will continue to refer you to Matthew 1:19. It was Joseph’s idea that Mary had sexual relations with another man.  it was Joseph that had considered divorcing her. It was Joseph that wanted to hide her from "PUBLIIC Disgrace. It was Joseph that first thought that Mary was an adulteress.  I only extend the scripture of your own bible and what *IT* says. From now on I will use the word "adulteress’ rather then "whore". I hope that that makes everyone a litttle happier.  And…. I know the bible very well. I do not need any discussion from people who are intrenched in it.  Their minds are made up. I am, however,  always willing to discuss the bible text with those who still have questions about whether or not the bible should be believed and, if not, why not. Edward Brunelle: "Blind Faith Is The Child of Ignorance!" No News Group Replies Required… Please Reply By E-Mail To: http://hometown.aol.com/edbrunelle/

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – What’s the point of posting this? Any non-Christian is not going to care what *yuor* god said… I certainly don’t… -PeopleEater * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free! The same could be said of Christians and the posts of Ed Brunelle. What’s the point of posting atheistic posts to Christian groups other than to start flame wars?.. -EdW

Wouldn’t you wonder that EdB might have a Saul of Tarsus complex? — Ad Jesum per Mariam, Carlque "To have fallen into any of those open traps of error and exaggeration which fashion after fashion and sect after sect set along the historic path of Christendom – that would indeed have been simple.  It is always simple to fall; there are an infinity of angles at which one falls, only one at which one stands." (G. K. Chesterton – Orthodoxy) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

this might be a little late for me to respond to this, but i am going to do it anyway. i am 17 and a christian (baptist), and am looking into becoming a catholic. however, i do not feel that, as christians, we should get irate at atheists (just said that since people eater is an atheist or people of any other religion, because they are expressing their opinions and beliefs.  jesus taught to love both your friends and enemies, and even though atheists believe differently than us, we shouldn’t let their expressing themsleves get to us. it doesn’t get to me at least.  i have friends of many religions (different denominations of christianity, judaism, islam, hinduism, taoism, buddhism, and wicca), and even atheists and agnostics.  we don’t let our religious beliefs ruin or come between our friendships. me and my atheist friend actually have friendly "debates" sometimes, and i don’t even like to call them debates.  i feel that i am being enlightened with what she believes, and am becoming a wiser person.  if it makes you upset that atheists and people of other religions are posting on this group, look at it this way: if your faith in God is strong enough, you shouldn’t question it by getting irate and going into mad typing fits about saying how they are wrong and making what they believe look bad.  christianity is a loving religion, and i a lot of christians tend to overlook the fact that when they are "struck", they should turn the other cheek.  when we were taught to spread the word of Jesus Christ, we need to do it as he would, spread it, not force it. when you feel insulted by a post, just let it go, or if if you feel you should, make a comment. but be proactive, rather than making the situation worse.  i just felt that i needed to post this because i thought a lot of posts were redundant and too much fighting.  of course there will be disagreements, but there always are. nothing’s perfect, but you might as well do your best to keep it good rather than become upset over a post. anywho, this is just how i feel about this matter, and my opinion only. you may agree or disagree.  i would like feedback, but as people eater said, logical, or raving, but please no ranting. thanks,         nick http://nicknook.cjb.net

Response:

I think my post was pretty self-explanatory. The original poster was attempting to repute EdBrunelle with passages from Scripture. But since atheists, and I’m assuming Ed’s an atheist (or at least a non-Christian), he would not recognize the validity of Scripture, and the argument is therefore moot.

I think I deduce from this that you are unfamiliar with Ed’s posts, as you would not make this mistake if you had read his posts. Perhaps if you’re sufficiently bored sometime, you might look thru some of his posts – then you’ll see why Scripture is not only relevant to them, it is absolutely central to them (by his own choice). You might even find the reading worthwhile, as he is addressing how to disprove fundy protestantism…

Response:

Atheists do not deny God’s existence because they really do not feel He exist, but because they DO NOT want God to exist. Atheists do not want God to exist because God does not approve of their sinful actions which they recieve pleasure from. So atheists say God does not exist to deceive others into thinking they have the freedom to sin. Who are atheists? Atheists are miscreants who admit that they are too dumb and awry to acknowledge the obvious veracity of God’s existence. They fulminate those who maintain more rectitude and admit the existence of

God. Hm. Can you prove that any of this is more than just a way to say how much better you think you are, than the atheists you’re insulting ?

Response:

Really? I believe it was science that gave us a broader scope of the universe, not religion. It was science that showed us that we are neither the center of all motion, nor even of the universe. Science showed us that their were objects and light that even our eyes could not detect (black holes, x-rays, gamma, etc.).

Not being the center of all motion was known long before the modern division of science into "science" and "religion" was popularized – is this not so ?

Response:

Bible says. If you really want to defeat our arguments, then use logic, not quotes from a book we don’t agree with.

I think you overgeneralize here, and I assume it arises from ignorance of Ed Brunelle’s posts. His arguments are all about that book – you may not be interested in it, but then (I assume) you’d naturally then be uninterested in the entire topic of debate involved in his posts. What I’m trying, perhaps poorly, to say, is I think you misattribute the nature of your arguments to him.

Response:

From now on I will use the word "adulteress’ rather then "whore". I hope that that makes everyone a litttle happier.  And…. I know the

bible I have to say, when you call Mary a "whore", I can only assume you’re trying to be sarcastic, or trying to express hatred. If you routinely call people that engage in premarital sex as "whores", my natural guess it that you are expressing hatred and/or self-righteousness, as that is certainly not the common meaning of that word… Unless you are in fact referring to an argument that Mary was a prostitute – which I doubt… So I think it would make your case appear to be more serious if you used a word that was actually applicable, instead of one that a politician would choose (ie, one that is not applicable, but is likely to engage the emotions of the listeners). I do not need any discussion from people who are intrenched in it.  Their

minds "entrenched" are made up. I am, however,  always willing to discuss the bible text with those who still have questions about whether or not the bible should be believed and, if not, why not.

I’m interested in this subject myself. But I’m not so interested in the fundie arguments, and the few posts of yours which I’ve read appeared to be entrenched in fundie assumptions – they tend to bore me more than interest me…

Response: