Finally, a bit of good news - maybe.
 

On 3/17/2014 10:30 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/17/14, 10:14 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:42:45 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 9:22 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:06:12 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/16/14, 10:48 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sunday, March 16, 2014 8:41:14 PM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/16/14, 8:59 PM, Tim wrote:

On Sunday, March 16, 2014 7:06:53 PM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:





Is the god of Phelps a different entity than, say, the god of
Noah or



the god of Lot or the god of, say, all the creeps throughout
history who



took it upon themselves to kill in the name of their god? How
about all



the genocides in history done in the name of religious beliefs,



including those in the last century? Was the god these
murderers were



satiating the same old god?



Harry, you take a simple statement , twist it around, then try
to justify it. You really shouldn't try to confuse yourself
lieke that...







No confusion here. I'm merely questioning whether the god of Phelps,

which you claim is different than "god," is in reality the same god.

Keep questioning, Harry. You may get it figured out....eventually.



I think it reasonable to assume that the god in question is the same
entity man has conjured up over the dozen or so millennia in which we
have an inkling of modern mankind's history.

Totally silly. Some believe in one God, others believe in multiple
Gods. To say it is 'the same
entity ....over the dozen so millennia' is quite stupid, eh?

You're little more than a ****ing joke, Krause.


The "evolution" of believing in many gods to the belief in a single god
is little more than the refining of a concept that some religions went
through as their acolytes paid more attention to their environment and
realized there were rational, science-based explanations for much of
what was mysterious.

Obviously, you aren't equipped intellectually to discuss these sorts of
concepts without your usual junior high school name-calling.


It is absolutely silly to think that all people believe in the same
God, or that the concept of
'God' in which they believe is the same from individual to individual.
If that were true, there
would be no differences in religions. One man believed poison Kool Aid
was the way to heaven,
another believed protesting at military funerals was his way, and
others believe dancing with snakes
is the right way to honor their God.

But then, attempting to explain something to you is futile. You're
little more than a ****ing joke,
Krause.


As previously noted, you aren't equipped intellectually to discuss these
sorts of concepts without your usual junior high school name-calling.

Oh, and belief in a single god is not necessarily belief in the same
god, although it could be. Interpretations differ. As an example, lots
of people believe in the unity of jesus and god, and that they are the
same entity. Really? The god who unleashed the great flood and killed
millions but for Noah and his family and jesus are the same? What
resulted in the change of heart? Anger management classes?

These concepts apparently are too abstract for you. Perhaps you are
better off with model airplanes.

Hey Krauseburg. You know so much about so many religions. Why don't you
just pick one and run with it?

Finally, a bit of good news - maybe.
 

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:30:01 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 10:14 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:42:45 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 9:22 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:06:12 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/16/14, 10:48 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sunday, March 16, 2014 8:41:14 PM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/16/14, 8:59 PM, Tim wrote:

On Sunday, March 16, 2014 7:06:53 PM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:





Is the god of Phelps a different entity than, say, the god of Noah or



the god of Lot or the god of, say, all the creeps throughout history who



took it upon themselves to kill in the name of their god? How about all



the genocides in history done in the name of religious beliefs,



including those in the last century? Was the god these murderers were



satiating the same old god?



Harry, you take a simple statement , twist it around, then try to justify it. You really shouldn't try to confuse yourself lieke that...







No confusion here. I'm merely questioning whether the god of Phelps,

which you claim is different than "god," is in reality the same god.

Keep questioning, Harry. You may get it figured out....eventually.



I think it reasonable to assume that the god in question is the same
entity man has conjured up over the dozen or so millennia in which we
have an inkling of modern mankind's history.

Totally silly. Some believe in one God, others believe in multiple Gods. To say it is 'the same
entity ....over the dozen so millennia' is quite stupid, eh?

You're little more than a ****ing joke, Krause.


The "evolution" of believing in many gods to the belief in a single god
is little more than the refining of a concept that some religions went
through as their acolytes paid more attention to their environment and
realized there were rational, science-based explanations for much of
what was mysterious.

Obviously, you aren't equipped intellectually to discuss these sorts of
concepts without your usual junior high school name-calling.


It is absolutely silly to think that all people believe in the same God, or that the concept of
'God' in which they believe is the same from individual to individual. If that were true, there
would be no differences in religions. One man believed poison Kool Aid was the way to heaven,
another believed protesting at military funerals was his way, and others believe dancing with snakes
is the right way to honor their God.

But then, attempting to explain something to you is futile. You're little more than a ****ing joke,
Krause.


As previously noted, you aren't equipped intellectually to discuss these
sorts of concepts without your usual junior high school name-calling.

Oh, and belief in a single god is not necessarily belief in the same
god, although it could be. Interpretations differ.

Looks like you finally get it. So impugning Tim's beliefs by displaying actions of Phelps is pretty
stupid.

But then again, you are a joke.

Finally, a bit of good news - maybe.
 

On 3/17/14, 11:44 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:30:01 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 10:14 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:42:45 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 9:22 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:06:12 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/16/14, 10:48 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sunday, March 16, 2014 8:41:14 PM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/16/14, 8:59 PM, Tim wrote:

On Sunday, March 16, 2014 7:06:53 PM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:





Is the god of Phelps a different entity than, say, the god of Noah or



the god of Lot or the god of, say, all the creeps throughout history who



took it upon themselves to kill in the name of their god? How about all



the genocides in history done in the name of religious beliefs,



including those in the last century? Was the god these murderers were



satiating the same old god?



Harry, you take a simple statement , twist it around, then try to justify it. You really shouldn't try to confuse yourself lieke that...







No confusion here. I'm merely questioning whether the god of Phelps,

which you claim is different than "god," is in reality the same god.

Keep questioning, Harry. You may get it figured out....eventually.



I think it reasonable to assume that the god in question is the same
entity man has conjured up over the dozen or so millennia in which we
have an inkling of modern mankind's history.

Totally silly. Some believe in one God, others believe in multiple Gods. To say it is 'the same
entity ....over the dozen so millennia' is quite stupid, eh?

You're little more than a ****ing joke, Krause.


The "evolution" of believing in many gods to the belief in a single god
is little more than the refining of a concept that some religions went
through as their acolytes paid more attention to their environment and
realized there were rational, science-based explanations for much of
what was mysterious.

Obviously, you aren't equipped intellectually to discuss these sorts of
concepts without your usual junior high school name-calling.


It is absolutely silly to think that all people believe in the same God, or that the concept of
'God' in which they believe is the same from individual to individual. If that were true, there
would be no differences in religions. One man believed poison Kool Aid was the way to heaven,
another believed protesting at military funerals was his way, and others believe dancing with snakes
is the right way to honor their God.

But then, attempting to explain something to you is futile. You're little more than a ****ing joke,
Krause.


As previously noted, you aren't equipped intellectually to discuss these
sorts of concepts without your usual junior high school name-calling.

Oh, and belief in a single god is not necessarily belief in the same
god, although it could be. Interpretations differ.

Looks like you finally get it. So impugning Tim's beliefs by displaying actions of Phelps is pretty
stupid.

But then again, you are a joke.



I don't see how posing a question attacks Tim's beliefs. It's simply my
posit that man's concepts of god pretty much follow the same path and
are pretty much the same, and have evolved as man has uncovered many of
the mysteries of the natural world. God seems to be the concept many
invoke when, among many issues, they don't (yet) understand their world.

Both the old and new testaments discuss Sodom and Gomorrah, for example,
and how god destroyed them, and just everything alive in them, including
small and presumably innocent children. The same god who was
transmogrified into the much kinder jesus? Did god evolve or did man's
concept of god evolve?

These are fairly deep questions, John, and so I can understand why you
can't deal with them. Model airplanes are much more your speed.

Finally, a bit of good news - maybe.
 

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:56:00 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

These are fairly deep questions, John, and so I can understand why you
can't deal with them. Model airplanes are much more your speed.

===

So how are the feds doing with that fraudulent conveyance
investigation? That is much more *your* speed.

Finally, a bit of good news - maybe.
 

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:56:00 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 11:44 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:30:01 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 10:14 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:42:45 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 9:22 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:06:12 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/16/14, 10:48 PM, Tim wrote:
On Sunday, March 16, 2014 8:41:14 PM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/16/14, 8:59 PM, Tim wrote:

On Sunday, March 16, 2014 7:06:53 PM UTC-5, F*O*A*D wrote:





Is the god of Phelps a different entity than, say, the god of Noah or



the god of Lot or the god of, say, all the creeps throughout history who



took it upon themselves to kill in the name of their god? How about all



the genocides in history done in the name of religious beliefs,



including those in the last century? Was the god these murderers were



satiating the same old god?



Harry, you take a simple statement , twist it around, then try to justify it. You really shouldn't try to confuse yourself lieke that...







No confusion here. I'm merely questioning whether the god of Phelps,

which you claim is different than "god," is in reality the same god.

Keep questioning, Harry. You may get it figured out....eventually.



I think it reasonable to assume that the god in question is the same
entity man has conjured up over the dozen or so millennia in which we
have an inkling of modern mankind's history.

Totally silly. Some believe in one God, others believe in multiple Gods. To say it is 'the same
entity ....over the dozen so millennia' is quite stupid, eh?

You're little more than a ****ing joke, Krause.


The "evolution" of believing in many gods to the belief in a single god
is little more than the refining of a concept that some religions went
through as their acolytes paid more attention to their environment and
realized there were rational, science-based explanations for much of
what was mysterious.

Obviously, you aren't equipped intellectually to discuss these sorts of
concepts without your usual junior high school name-calling.


It is absolutely silly to think that all people believe in the same God, or that the concept of
'God' in which they believe is the same from individual to individual. If that were true, there
would be no differences in religions. One man believed poison Kool Aid was the way to heaven,
another believed protesting at military funerals was his way, and others believe dancing with snakes
is the right way to honor their God.

But then, attempting to explain something to you is futile. You're little more than a ****ing joke,
Krause.


As previously noted, you aren't equipped intellectually to discuss these
sorts of concepts without your usual junior high school name-calling.

Oh, and belief in a single god is not necessarily belief in the same
god, although it could be. Interpretations differ.

Looks like you finally get it. So impugning Tim's beliefs by displaying actions of Phelps is pretty
stupid.

But then again, you are a joke.



I don't see how posing a question attacks Tim's beliefs. It's simply my
posit that man's concepts of god pretty much follow the same path and
are pretty much the same, and have evolved as man has uncovered many of
the mysteries of the natural world. God seems to be the concept many
invoke when, among many issues, they don't (yet) understand their world.

Both the old and new testaments discuss Sodom and Gomorrah, for example,
and how god destroyed them, and just everything alive in them, including
small and presumably innocent children. The same god who was
transmogrified into the much kinder jesus? Did god evolve or did man's
concept of god evolve?

These are fairly deep questions, John, and so I can understand why you
can't deal with them. Model airplanes are much more your speed.

Why do you continuously lie about your possessions, your photography, your travels, etc, etc.?

Now, I just posed a question. Did it attack you in any way?

I'll understand if you're not able to answer them. Fake owl pictures are much more your speed.

Finally, a bit of good news - maybe.
 

On 3/17/14, 6:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:56:00 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:



I don't see how posing a question attacks Tim's beliefs. It's simply my
posit that man's concepts of god pretty much follow the same path and
are pretty much the same, and have evolved as man has uncovered many of
the mysteries of the natural world. God seems to be the concept many
invoke when, among many issues, they don't (yet) understand their world.

Both the old and new testaments discuss Sodom and Gomorrah, for example,
and how god destroyed them, and just everything alive in them, including
small and presumably innocent children. The same god who was
transmogrified into the much kinder jesus? Did god evolve or did man's
concept of god evolve?

These are fairly deep questions, John, and so I can understand why you
can't deal with them. Model airplanes are much more your speed.

Why do you continuously lie about your possessions, your photography, your travels, etc, etc.?

Now, I just posed a question. Did it attack you in any way?

I'll understand if you're not able to answer them. Fake owl pictures are much more your speed.


Whoosh.

I don't know what Tim's beliefs are in whether the god of old is the
god of new. I simply posited that I thought that god of modern times is
pretty much the same as god of ancient times, and that as man learned
more about his natural world, his concepts of god and nature became more
cerebral and, shall we say, civilized.

Thus, my question, did god evolve or did man's concept of god evolve?

I understand that could be an intellectually dangerous question. My
feeling is that god is the same god, no matter where one might be on the
space-time continuum and that, theologically speaking, the ancient
Egyptian worship of a stone god is really no different than modern man's
worship of a god who apparently only exists in the spiritual world.

Note that I am not questioning the existence of god or the belief in
god. I am simply discussing the nature of god, and whether man's
perception of god has changed.

Apparently you are not equipped to engage in such a discussion without
making your usual snide comments.

Finally, a bit of good news - maybe.
 

On 3/17/2014 6:41 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/17/14, 6:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:56:00 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:



I don't see how posing a question attacks Tim's beliefs. It's simply my
posit that man's concepts of god pretty much follow the same path and
are pretty much the same, and have evolved as man has uncovered many of
the mysteries of the natural world. God seems to be the concept many
invoke when, among many issues, they don't (yet) understand their world.

Both the old and new testaments discuss Sodom and Gomorrah, for example,
and how god destroyed them, and just everything alive in them, including
small and presumably innocent children. The same god who was
transmogrified into the much kinder jesus? Did god evolve or did man's
concept of god evolve?

These are fairly deep questions, John, and so I can understand why you
can't deal with them. Model airplanes are much more your speed.

Why do you continuously lie about your possessions, your photography,
your travels, etc, etc.?

Now, I just posed a question. Did it attack you in any way?

I'll understand if you're not able to answer them. Fake owl pictures
are much more your speed.


Whoosh.

I don't know what Tim's beliefs are in whether the god of old is the
god of new. I simply posited that I thought that god of modern times is
pretty much the same as god of ancient times, and that as man learned
more about his natural world, his concepts of god and nature became more
cerebral and, shall we say, civilized.

Thus, my question, did god evolve or did man's concept of god evolve?

I understand that could be an intellectually dangerous question. My
feeling is that god is the same god, no matter where one might be on the
space-time continuum and that, theologically speaking, the ancient
Egyptian worship of a stone god is really no different than modern man's
worship of a god who apparently only exists in the spiritual world.

Note that I am not questioning the existence of god or the belief in
god. I am simply discussing the nature of god, and whether man's
perception of god has changed.

Apparently you are not equipped to engage in such a discussion without
making your usual snide comments.





John is smart enough not to engage in your insanity. You should feel
fortunate that one or two folks here take you seriously enough to engage
you.

Finally, a bit of good news - maybe.
 

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:41:46 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 6:13 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:56:00 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:



I don't see how posing a question attacks Tim's beliefs. It's simply my
posit that man's concepts of god pretty much follow the same path and
are pretty much the same, and have evolved as man has uncovered many of
the mysteries of the natural world. God seems to be the concept many
invoke when, among many issues, they don't (yet) understand their world.

Both the old and new testaments discuss Sodom and Gomorrah, for example,
and how god destroyed them, and just everything alive in them, including
small and presumably innocent children. The same god who was
transmogrified into the much kinder jesus? Did god evolve or did man's
concept of god evolve?

These are fairly deep questions, John, and so I can understand why you
can't deal with them. Model airplanes are much more your speed.

Why do you continuously lie about your possessions, your photography, your travels, etc, etc.?

Now, I just posed a question. Did it attack you in any way?

I'll understand if you're not able to answer them. Fake owl pictures are much more your speed.


Whoosh.

I don't know what Tim's beliefs are in whether the god of old is the
god of new. I simply posited that I thought that god of modern times is
pretty much the same as god of ancient times, and that as man learned
more about his natural world, his concepts of god and nature became more
cerebral and, shall we say, civilized.

Thus, my question, did god evolve or did man's concept of god evolve?

I understand that could be an intellectually dangerous question. My
feeling is that god is the same god, no matter where one might be on the
space-time continuum and that, theologically speaking, the ancient
Egyptian worship of a stone god is really no different than modern man's
worship of a god who apparently only exists in the spiritual world.

Note that I am not questioning the existence of god or the belief in
god. I am simply discussing the nature of god, and whether man's
perception of god has changed.

Apparently you are not equipped to engage in such a discussion without
making your usual snide comments.

You consider yourself worthy of a thoughtful discussion. I don't consider you worth picking up in a
doggie poop bag.

I am glad to see that you believe '...that god is the same god...'. I respect your belief in God,
even if you don't capitalize as appropriate. But then, spelling and punctuation have never been your
strong point.