What is proof?  Answer:  very high probability.



   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Gillespie William
   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 8:54 PM
   Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny



   "Belief" is something one claims is true without any proof. Scientists "don't
believe something is true or not true. They demand proof that something is or is
not true. True Atheists don't believe because "believe, and belief" require
delusions, hallucinations, dreams, and all areas of self hypnosis in which even
the consideration of proof is denied as important.

   Babies are born ATheists. Its only the implantation of belief, delusions, and
the like whereby children begin to "believe" not based on proof, evidence,
facts, or the physical world...but through brainwashing, hypnosis, and constant
repetition....reinforced through threats, extortion and blackmail that if they
do not "believe" in god/Jesus...they will go to hell.

   A True Atheist concludes there is no god...because after 13.5 billion years of
cosmological history, and 10,000 years of religious history...there is no proof
of a god.

   What is a god? A god is something that can interrupt the laws of physics,
change the consequences of actions...which is another word for "magic."

   A god performs magic...and magic has never, ever been proven to exist or be
possible, not once in 13.5 billion years.

   Therefore, its very EASY to CONCLUDE there is no god ...being a NONBELIEVER is
a very natural state of of mind.

   j

   ________________________________
   From: Johnny Hawkins <divineelectric@...>
   To: "deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com" <deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com>
   Sent: Tuesday, 27 March 2012, 23:12
   Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny



   I agree with that.

   ________________________________
   From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 9:36 PM
   Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny


   "non-believer" = one who simply doesn't believe what YOU believe. The you
could be anyone. "agnostic" = lacking a particular belief, not necessarily
disbelief. "exist" = physical reality. So you need to use a different word for
"supernatural existence" which is an oxymoron. You could say just "real," since
that could apply to anything believed. A truly open-minded person would never
say lack of belief in a god is confirmable, or confirmed. It's not a matter of
logic. It is a matter of philosophy, and oh by the way also science. You gave
the proper term: "simply don't believe." That's it. Hoila. But denying is ok
too, meaning since I don't know it, I simply deny it UNTIL I am shown otherwise.

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Johnny Hawkins
   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2012 3:58 PM
   Subject: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny

   Well, I see my definitions are one problem in our communication.
   I was using agnostic referring to nonbelievers who don't state factually that
God does not exist. You call this atheist, is that right? I have no problem with
that position.
   The only thing I'm questioning is those who say His nonexistence is somehow
confirm-able. I expected believers and non-believers alike to agree on the basic
flaw of that logic.
   So what terminology would you use to distinguish those who deny from people
who simply don't believe?

   --- On Sun, 3/25/12, bestonnet_00 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

   From: bestonnet_00 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
   Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: Atheism vs. Agnosticism
   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
   Date: Sunday, March 25, 2012, 2:49 PM

   --- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, Johnny Hawkins wrote:

   >

   > Let's say that you have an incredible one percent of all the

   > knowledge in the universe. Would it be possible, in the ninety-nine

   > percent of the knowledge that you haven't yet discovered, that

   > there might be ample evidence to prove the existence of God?

   That doesn't justify believing in a god so atheism would still make perfect
sense if the 1% of your knowledge didn't contain any evidence of a
god.Statements about 99% of something based on knowledge of 1% makes "perfect"
sense? That means your definition of perfect allows for things to surpass
perfection, like statements on 98% based on 2%.

   > If I were to make an absolute statement such as, "There is no gold

   > in China," what is needed for that statement to be proven true? I

   > need absolute or total knowledge. I need to have information that

   > there is no gold in any rock, in any river, in the ground, in any

   > store, in any ring, or in any mouth (gold filling) in China. If

   > there is one speck of gold in China, then my statement is false and

   > I have no basis for it.

   Which is why non-existence is assumed when there is no evidence, thus why
atheism is the default unless proven otherwise (seems to me you don't actually
know what the terms mean, the very subject you used even indicates that).

   I'm in complete agreement with your phrasing, "non-existence is assumed." As
far as it seeming to you that I "don't actually know what the terms mean,"
that's just a terminology issue, not a weakness or strength in either of our
positions on the issue. Your use actually, very, and even imply you think quite
highly of the point.

   > To say categorically, "There is no God," is to make an absolute

   > statement.

   One doesn't have to say that to not believe in a god.My point exactly! My
first letter was an effort to say, "One doesn't have to deny God to not believe
in a god." And also that such a factual claim would require either omniscience
or assumption.

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Johnny Hawkins wrote:
> I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies and
> provision on a regular basis.

Please tell me where I can meet you to experience the same thing as you.

I am so proud of Colorado for sending police out to arrest a preacher.
The Xians just don't get it....that when you "threaten people with
suffering and torture in eternal hell if you don't accept Jesus as your
savior....."

....These xian threats are the same kind of threats of physical and
psychological harm if some jerk also says he's going to "burn your house down if
you
don't pay him some money or do what he says."

What's the difference in the kinds of blackmail, extortion, and threats they
both use? None...and Colorado police arrested this bozo Xian
preacher...because he was preaching to a "captive" audience, i.e. people
standing in line who were trying to get their driver's license and
really couldn't get away from this SOB.

A Fox News reporter made a comment...such as "Oh wow, that means that
preacher's can't go to the park when families are playing with their
children or having a picnic and preach."

Yep...that's right...no longer will the Bozo Lying Christian SOB's who excel in
blackmail, extortion, and threats get to harass people in public places
and ruin their fun their kids are having. Look at this scenario: There
are two parents, they both work very hard, so on the weekend they take
their kids to the park because they don't have a lot of money. They play catch
and tag with the kids. The kids are having a great time....then
up comes some Jerks from the local Christian insane asylum who begin
screaming and preaching to these people's children that they are GOING
TO HELL IF YOU DON'T ACCEPT JESUS!!!!!!   


Now what do the mom and dad do? Either they punch these Christian SOBs in the
mouth and make a scene in front of their children; or they just pack up their
lunch and get back in the car and drive home....their play time ruined
by some LOUD MOUTH XIAN ASSHOLE PREACHER.


There is nothing I find either rational or nice about Christianity. The more
we study how these people function, how incredibly arrogant they are,
how immoral and what a bunch of liars they are...the more they are being found
out to be nothing more than criminals out to steal your money for their
imaginary god under false pretenses, blackmail, and extortion.

I think we have quite had enough of this 2000 year old hoax. j


j




________________________________
  From: Clint <cy2600@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 1 April 2012, 9:12
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny


 
Johnny Hawkins wrote:
> I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies and
> provision on a regular basis.

Please tell me where I can meet you to experience the same thing as you.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Religion, i.e. the belief in demons, imaginary gods, religious magic, miracles,
and other such hocus pocus is the stuff of insanity. Once someone goes down the
slippery slope thinking that Jesus and such gods are real then they will believe
anything. They become vulnerable and stupid....just use the word god or Jesus in
a sentence and they will believe it. If they will believe in religion then they
will believe in any kind of BS magic...and be the worse for it.


Its over with...there is no such thing as gods, or hell, or religious magic. And
people are finally figuring this out. The church, Islam, etc. has extorted
enough money and power over the past 2000 years and they just can't do it any
long because of technology, the Internet, science, and everyone's ability to do
a little research to see if the religious liars are telling the truth or not.


And they cannot use threats of torture, blackmail and use extortion anymore to
win people to Jesus. Its over with:

I am so proud of Colorado for sending police out to arrest a preacher.
The Xians just don't get it....that when you "threaten people with
suffering and torture in eternal hell if you don't accept Jesus as your
savior....."

....These xian threats are the same kind of threats of physical and
psychological harm if some jerk also says he's going to "burn your house down if
you
don't pay him some money or do what he says."

What's the difference in the kinds of blackmail, extortion, and threats they
both use? None...and Colorado police arrested this bozo Xian
preacher...because he was preaching to a "captive" audience, i.e. people
standing in line who were trying to get their driver's license and
really couldn't get away from this SOB.

A Fox News reporter made a comment...such as "Oh wow, that means that
preacher's can't go to the park when families are playing with their
children or having a picnic and preach."

Yep...that's right...no longer will the Bozo Lying Christian SOB's who excel in
blackmail, extortion, and threats get to harass people in public places
and ruin their fun their kids are having. Look at this scenario: There
are two parents, they both work very hard, so on the weekend they take
their kids to the park because they don't have a lot of money. They play catch
and tag with the kids. The kids are having a great time....then
up comes some Jerks from the local Christian insane asylum who begin
screaming and preaching to these people's children that they are GOING
TO HELL IF YOU DON'T ACCEPT JESUS!!!!!!   


Now what do the mom and dad do? Either they punch these Christian SOBs in the
mouth and make a scene in front of their children; or they just pack up their
lunch and get back in the car and drive home....their play time ruined
by some LOUD MOUTH XIAN ASSHOLE PREACHER.


There is nothing I find either rational or nice about Christianity. The more
we study how these people function, how incredibly arrogant they are,
how immoral and what a bunch of liars they are...the more they are being found
out to be nothing more than criminals out to steal your money for their
imaginary god under false pretenses, blackmail, and extortion.

I think we have quite had enough of this 2000 year old hoax. j


j




________________________________
  From: Clint <cy2600@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 24 March 2012, 4:26
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] A little bit of religion never hurt anyone


 
praesto12 wrote:
> It depends on what one means by religion, no? If by religion one simply means
a world view then anything thinking person should have one.
>
>
> Richard

It's like watching a monkey type. It learned to spell but that is about it.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yes, its a matter of probability 100% of the time that 2 + 2 =s 4....And...


Proof is evidence showing the relationship of something claimed to be caused by
something else. For example x + 2 =s 4. Now what do you think x is?

Now what is the probability that x will equal "2" 100% of the time when one
writes the equation x + 2 =s 4?


4 is the end result, i.e. the proof, therefore, its up to the xians to figure
out what x is...but then the xians deny that x is 2. X to a xian is "god did
it." That is just completely illogical and the stuff of insanity. And it does
not work.


Christians claim there is a god who does magic tricks. OK then...just where is
the proof?


For example: Christians and moslems claim there is a god who (fill in the
blank)________________________

heals the sick
who can make you rick

make you happy
feeds the poor
wins wars

can stop the sun
cause mountains to fall
punish you when you are bad
send you to hell if you don't believe
blah, blah, blah

so...how does god heal the sick? By prayer???...which has never been shown to
heal the sick in a number of studies. Its all bogus bull crap.

praying to god has never caused a mountain to fall over, or win a war


there is no proof that the sun ever stopped for 24 hours as claimed in the
bible...none. Praying and worshipping god won't make a mountain fall down.


there is no proof of a hell, or a heaven...xians don't even know what the
address is of those imaginary places, but claim they exist. OK, where are they?


And on it goes...there is no evidence or proof of anything the religious
claim...none. Its just a belief in magic....and most often something that can
now be classified as insanity.


Atheists live longer, are more mentally sound, as they have less mental illness,
less divorces, their kids graduate from both high school and college more often,
their kids have less problems with drugs and juvenile delinquency, Atheists are
better educated, make more money, and on and on.

WHY? Because Atheism is a mind state whereby one is grounded in reality...there
is no magic god, or magic prayer one can run to solve problems. Problems are
solved by hard work, research, creativity, intelligence, and will power.


X does not equal "god did it." X is something real that either is well known,
discovered by science, or science is in the process of discovering what X is.


X does not equal god on any level. Because if god =s X...and god's actions can
be controlled or directed by human prayer, worship, singing, etc....then X
(proof of god) would be found. But When X is god, it never, ever works to prove
anything....one cannot state that X(god) + 2 =s 4.


This is the kind of crazy stuff that the xians and moslimes want us to believe
in....without any proof that X =s god.


There is nothing magical or extraordinary about Atheism...Atheism is the stuff
of life, of living, and nature, and seeing to it that one lives well. If an
Atheist is unhappy of unsuccessful, they do not run off and pray to an imaginary
god to whisper in their ear telling them what to do, or pray to god to do a
magic trick and get them out of trouble...an Atheist simply fixes that which is
making them unhappy. Its that simple.


And if they cannot fix it, as somethings are not fixable...they deal with it as
reality. One of the most tragic and sad things I've ever seen was a paralyzed
young man in a wheel chair who went to a "healing service" by a well known
preacher. For three days he prayed and prayed, other people prayed over him,
people laid their hands on him and prayed...and he "BELIEVED" that at the end of
three days he was going to walk again.


So at the end of three days...did the paralyzed man walk? Did those prayers
work...or any such prayers? You tell me what you think happened. I know the
answer. j





________________________________
  From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 31 March 2012, 17:41
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny


 
What is proof?  Answer:  very high probability.

----- Original Message -----
From: Gillespie William
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny

"Belief" is something one claims is true without any proof. Scientists "don't
believe something is true or not true. They demand proof that something is or is
not true. True Atheists don't believe because "believe, and belief" require
delusions, hallucinations, dreams, and all areas of self hypnosis in which even
the consideration of proof is denied as important.

Babies are born ATheists. Its only the implantation of belief, delusions, and
the like whereby children begin to "believe" not based on proof, evidence,
facts, or the physical world...but through brainwashing, hypnosis, and constant
repetition....reinforced through threats, extortion and blackmail that if they
do not "believe" in god/Jesus...they will go to hell.

A True Atheist concludes there is no god...because after 13.5 billion years of
cosmological history, and 10,000 years of religious history...there is no proof
of a god.

What is a god? A god is something that can interrupt the laws of physics, change
the consequences of actions...which is another word for "magic."

A god performs magic...and magic has never, ever been proven to exist or be
possible, not once in 13.5 billion years.

Therefore, its very EASY to CONCLUDE there is no god ...being a NONBELIEVER is a
very natural state of of mind.

j

________________________________
From: Johnny Hawkins <divineelectric@...>
To: "deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com" <deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 27 March 2012, 23:12
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny

I agree with that.

________________________________
From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 9:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny

"non-believer" = one who simply doesn't believe what YOU believe. The you could
be anyone. "agnostic" = lacking a particular belief, not necessarily disbelief.
"exist" = physical reality. So you need to use a different word for
"supernatural existence" which is an oxymoron. You could say just "real," since
that could apply to anything believed. A truly open-minded person would never
say lack of belief in a god is confirmable, or confirmed. It's not a matter of
logic. It is a matter of philosophy, and oh by the way also science. You gave
the proper term: "simply don't believe." That's it. Hoila. But denying is ok
too, meaning since I don't know it, I simply deny it UNTIL I am shown otherwise.

----- Original Message -----
From: Johnny Hawkins
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2012 3:58 PM
Subject: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny

Well, I see my definitions are one problem in our communication.
I was using agnostic referring to nonbelievers who don't state factually that
God does not exist. You call this atheist, is that right? I have no problem with
that position.
The only thing I'm questioning is those who say His nonexistence is somehow
confirm-able. I expected believers and non-believers alike to agree on the basic
flaw of that logic.
So what terminology would you use to distinguish those who deny from people who
simply don't believe?

--- On Sun, 3/25/12, bestonnet_00 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

From: bestonnet_00 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: Atheism vs. Agnosticism
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, March 25, 2012, 2:49 PM

--- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, Johnny Hawkins wrote:

>

> Let's say that you have an incredible one percent of all the

> knowledge in the universe. Would it be possible, in the ninety-nine

> percent of the knowledge that you haven't yet discovered, that

> there might be ample evidence to prove the existence of God?

That doesn't justify believing in a god so atheism would still make perfect
sense if the 1% of your knowledge didn't contain any evidence of a
god.Statements about 99% of something based on knowledge of 1% makes "perfect"
sense? That means your definition of perfect allows for things to surpass
perfection, like statements on 98% based on 2%.

> If I were to make an absolute statement such as, "There is no gold

> in China," what is needed for that statement to be proven true? I

> need absolute or total knowledge. I need to have information that

> there is no gold in any rock, in any river, in the ground, in any

> store, in any ring, or in any mouth (gold filling) in China. If

> there is one speck of gold in China, then my statement is false and

> I have no basis for it.

Which is why non-existence is assumed when there is no evidence, thus why
atheism is the default unless proven otherwise (seems to me you don't actually
know what the terms mean, the very subject you used even indicates that).

I'm in complete agreement with your phrasing, "non-existence is assumed." As far
as it seeming to you that I "don't actually know what the terms mean," that's
just a terminology issue, not a weakness or strength in either of our positions
on the issue. Your use actually, very, and even imply you think quite highly of
the point.

> To say categorically, "There is no God," is to make an absolute

> statement.

One doesn't have to say that to not believe in a god.My point exactly! My first
letter was an effort to say, "One doesn't have to deny God to not believe in a
god." And also that such a factual claim would require either omniscience or
assumption.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

WHERE IS THE PROOF?



________________________________
  From: Johnny Hawkins <divineelectric@...>
To: "deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com" <deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 30 March 2012, 21:05
Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny


 
Here are the questions and answers lined up for you:

1. 

Q: Why would you even think there is a god?
A: I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies and
provision on a regular basis. It's odd
to hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it.
(MY ANSWER-Just where is the proof of those miraculous healings, prophecies
etc.? Sorry, but your religious delusions and desires do not count as proof.)

2 .

Q: Do you have some other percent of knowledge that the rest of the universe is
lacking?
A: You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one of
millions.
(MY ANSWER-Where is the proof we are not alone. Where is proof that we are
conversing with millions from outer space or a god(s)?)

3.
Q: If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as this
originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?

A: That is incorrect. The quote was, "We do not know a millionth of one percent
about anything." Refer to my answer on the first question regarding my
certainty.
(MY ANSWER-Where is the proof that god presented any such knowledge to anyone at
any time? I'm waiting, tapping foot, and rolling eyes.)

You asked, I answered, you re-asked, I re-answered. But clearly this is going
nowhere.
(MY ANSWER-Its ALWAYS ABOUT PROOF...NOT WHAT YOU FEEL, OR WHAT YOUR DELUSIONS
ARE...WHERE IS THE PROOF OFA GOD, ETC.?_)
J
________________________________
From: Clint <cy2600@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism


 
Johnny Hawkins wrote:
> I understand how passionate your disbelief is. Asking me if I have something
"the rest of the universe lacks" sounds like you've dismissed any answers before
you hear them. You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one
of millions, but I can't give you something you can put under a microscope or
aim a telescope at. I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies
and provision on a regular basis. It's not so much frustrating as it is odd to
hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it. My only point was that
doubting what you can't disprove (which so many others know as fact) makes more
sense than denying it.

All I did was ask you a couple of questions. I didn't say what my
beliefs were. All of these things you supposedly experience, you believe
it is one specific thing without proof and conclude that it cannot be
something else, am I correct? So, I turn to the same two previous
questions...

Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent
of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?

If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as
this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?

> Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent
>
> of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

hAHAH HEHEHE HAHAH...It is soooooo funny to see this little, tiny, ex Nazi
carried around in a chair, with a pointy hat on, wearing a dress...telling us
what to do. Its the Monty Python Religious Spoof if you ask me.



________________________________
  From: raysny <raysny@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, 30 March 2012, 12:31
Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: The End Is Nigh!


 
Snooki's due date is 12/21/12. Could the Mayans be on to something?

--- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, "John Ryzek" <john_ryzek@...> wrote:
>
> The End Is Nigh!   This comes from the Holy Pope.   Reason being; Gay
Marriages.   These words of Wisdom from a Guy who's "In Drag" at all
> His public appearences.
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

QUOTE: "You tell me what you think happened. I know the answer.

Yes, I know it too.

Richard Dawkins decribes in his book "The God Delusion" an experiment which had
been sponsored by the Templeton Foundation and included about 1800 patients and
quite a lot of medical persons, as well as priests, monks and nuns (as praying
persons). The result showed clearly, that prayers are worth nothing. Quite the
reverse - those patients, who knew, that somebody was praying for them, showed a
statistically significant delayed recovery.
(Dawkins, Richard, The God Delusion - The Bantam Press, London, 2006.
ISBN-10: 055277331XISBN-13: 978-0552773317
Rolf****************************************************************************\
****************************************

To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
From: jjjgillespie@...
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 00:41:06 +0100
Subject: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt are REALISTIC vs. those who deny
BELIEVE IN RELIGIOUS MAGIC




























       Yes, its a matter of probability 100% of the time that 2 + 2 =s
4....And...



Proof is evidence showing the relationship of something claimed to be caused by
something else. For example x + 2 =s 4. Now what do you think x is?



Now what is the probability that x will equal "2" 100% of the time when one
writes the equation x + 2 =s 4?



4 is the end result, i.e. the proof, therefore, its up to the xians to figure
out what x is...but then the xians deny that x is 2. X to a xian is "god did
it." That is just completely illogical and the stuff of insanity. And it does
not work.



Christians claim there is a god who does magic tricks. OK then...just where is
the proof?



For example: Christians and moslems claim there is a god who (fill in the
blank)________________________



heals the sick

who can make you rick



make you happy

feeds the poor

wins wars



can stop the sun

cause mountains to fall

punish you when you are bad

send you to hell if you don't believe

blah, blah, blah



so...how does god heal the sick? By prayer???...which has never been shown to
heal the sick in a number of studies. Its all bogus bull crap.



praying to god has never caused a mountain to fall over, or win a war



there is no proof that the sun ever stopped for 24 hours as claimed in the
bible...none. Praying and worshipping god won't make a mountain fall down.



there is no proof of a hell, or a heaven...xians don't even know what the
address is of those imaginary places, but claim they exist. OK, where are they?



And on it goes...there is no evidence or proof of anything the religious
claim...none. Its just a belief in magic....and most often something that can
now be classified as insanity.



Atheists live longer, are more mentally sound, as they have less mental illness,
less divorces, their kids graduate from both high school and college more often,
their kids have less problems with drugs and juvenile delinquency, Atheists are
better educated, make more money, and on and on.



WHY? Because Atheism is a mind state whereby one is grounded in reality...there
is no magic god, or magic prayer one can run to solve problems. Problems are
solved by hard work, research, creativity, intelligence, and will power.



X does not equal "god did it." X is something real that either is well known,
discovered by science, or science is in the process of discovering what X is.



X does not equal god on any level. Because if god =s X...and god's actions can
be controlled or directed by human prayer, worship, singing, etc....then X
(proof of god) would be found. But When X is god, it never, ever works to prove
anything....one cannot state that X(god) + 2 =s 4.



This is the kind of crazy stuff that the xians and moslimes want us to believe
in....without any proof that X =s god.



There is nothing magical or extraordinary about Atheism...Atheism is the stuff
of life, of living, and nature, and seeing to it that one lives well. If an
Atheist is unhappy of unsuccessful, they do not run off and pray to an imaginary
god to whisper in their ear telling them what to do, or pray to god to do a
magic trick and get them out of trouble...an Atheist simply fixes that which is
making them unhappy. Its that simple.



And if they cannot fix it, as somethings are not fixable...they deal with it as
reality. One of the most tragic and sad things I've ever seen was a paralyzed
young man in a wheel chair who went to a "healing service" by a well known
preacher. For three days he prayed and prayed, other people prayed over him,
people laid their hands on him and prayed...and he "BELIEVED" that at the end of
three days he was going to walk again.



So at the end of three days...did the paralyzed man walk? Did those prayers
work...or any such prayers? You tell me what you think happened. I know the
answer. j



________________________________

  From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>

To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Saturday, 31 March 2012, 17:41

Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny







What is proof?  Answer:  very high probability.



----- Original Message -----

From: Gillespie William

To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 8:54 PM

Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny



"Belief" is something one claims is true without any proof. Scientists "don't
believe something is true or not true. They demand proof that something is or is
not true. True Atheists don't believe because "believe, and belief" require
delusions, hallucinations, dreams, and all areas of self hypnosis in which even
the consideration of proof is denied as important.



Babies are born ATheists. Its only the implantation of belief, delusions, and
the like whereby children begin to "believe" not based on proof, evidence,
facts, or the physical world...but through brainwashing, hypnosis, and constant
repetition....reinforced through threats, extortion and blackmail that if they
do not "believe" in god/Jesus...they will go to hell.



A True Atheist concludes there is no god...because after 13.5 billion years of
cosmological history, and 10,000 years of religious history...there is no proof
of a god.



What is a god? A god is something that can interrupt the laws of physics, change
the consequences of actions...which is another word for "magic."



A god performs magic...and magic has never, ever been proven to exist or be
possible, not once in 13.5 billion years.



Therefore, its very EASY to CONCLUDE there is no god ...being a NONBELIEVER is a
very natural state of of mind.



j



________________________________

From: Johnny Hawkins <divineelectric@...>

To: "deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com" <deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Tuesday, 27 March 2012, 23:12

Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny



I agree with that.



________________________________

From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>

To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 9:36 PM

Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny



"non-believer" = one who simply doesn't believe what YOU believe. The you could
be anyone. "agnostic" = lacking a particular belief, not necessarily disbelief.
"exist" = physical reality. So you need to use a different word for
"supernatural existence" which is an oxymoron. You could say just "real," since
that could apply to anything believed. A truly open-minded person would never
say lack of belief in a god is confirmable, or confirmed. It's not a matter of
logic. It is a matter of philosophy, and oh by the way also science. You gave
the proper term: "simply don't believe." That's it. Hoila. But denying is ok
too, meaning since I don't know it, I simply deny it UNTIL I am shown otherwise.



----- Original Message -----

From: Johnny Hawkins

To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2012 3:58 PM

Subject: [Death To Religion] Those who doubt vs. those who deny



Well, I see my definitions are one problem in our communication.

I was using agnostic referring to nonbelievers who don't state factually that
God does not exist. You call this atheist, is that right? I have no problem with
that position.

The only thing I'm questioning is those who say His nonexistence is somehow
confirm-able. I expected believers and non-believers alike to agree on the basic
flaw of that logic.

So what terminology would you use to distinguish those who deny from people who
simply don't believe?



--- On Sun, 3/25/12, bestonnet_00 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



From: bestonnet_00 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>

Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: Atheism vs. Agnosticism

To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

Date: Sunday, March 25, 2012, 2:49 PM



--- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, Johnny Hawkins wrote:



>



> Let's say that you have an incredible one percent of all the



> knowledge in the universe. Would it be possible, in the ninety-nine



> percent of the knowledge that you haven't yet discovered, that



> there might be ample evidence to prove the existence of God?



That doesn't justify believing in a god so atheism would still make perfect
sense if the 1% of your knowledge didn't contain any evidence of a
god.Statements about 99% of something based on knowledge of 1% makes "perfect"
sense? That means your definition of perfect allows for things to surpass
perfection, like statements on 98% based on 2%.



> If I were to make an absolute statement such as, "There is no gold



> in China," what is needed for that statement to be proven true? I



> need absolute or total knowledge. I need to have information that



> there is no gold in any rock, in any river, in the ground, in any



> store, in any ring, or in any mouth (gold filling) in China. If



> there is one speck of gold in China, then my statement is false and



> I have no basis for it.



Which is why non-existence is assumed when there is no evidence, thus why
atheism is the default unless proven otherwise (seems to me you don't actually
know what the terms mean, the very subject you used even indicates that).



I'm in complete agreement with your phrasing, "non-existence is assumed." As far
as it seeming to you that I "don't actually know what the terms mean," that's
just a terminology issue, not a weakness or strength in either of our positions
on the issue. Your use actually, very, and even imply you think quite highly of
the point.



> To say categorically, "There is no God," is to make an absolute



> statement.



One doesn't have to say that to not believe in a god.My point exactly! My first
letter was an effort to say, "One doesn't have to deny God to not believe in a
god." And also that such a factual claim would require either omniscience or
assumption.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"Something happened which do not understand" is hardly proof of God or gods.

--- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, Gillespie William <jjjgillespie@...>
wrote:
>
> WHERE IS THE PROOF?
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Johnny Hawkins <divineelectric@...>
> To: "deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com" <deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, 30 March 2012, 21:05
> Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny
>
>
>  
> Here are the questions and answers lined up for you:
>
> 1. 
>
> Q: Why would you even think there is a god?
> A: I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies and
> provision on a regular basis. It's odd
> to hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it.
> (MY ANSWER-Just where is the proof of those miraculous healings, prophecies
etc.? Sorry, but your religious delusions and desires do not count as proof.)
>
> 2 .
>
> Q: Do you have some other percent of knowledge that the rest of the universe
is lacking?
> A: You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one of
millions.
> (MY ANSWER-Where is the proof we are not alone. Where is proof that we are
conversing with millions from outer space or a god(s)?)
>
> 3.
> Q: If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as
this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?
>
> A: That is incorrect. The quote was, "We do not know a millionth of one
percent about anything." Refer to my answer on the first question regarding my
certainty.
> (MY ANSWER-Where is the proof that god presented any such knowledge to anyone
at any time? I'm waiting, tapping foot, and rolling eyes.)
>
> You asked, I answered, you re-asked, I re-answered. But clearly this is going
nowhere.
> (MY ANSWER-Its ALWAYS ABOUT PROOF...NOT WHAT YOU FEEL, OR WHAT YOUR DELUSIONS
ARE...WHERE IS THE PROOF OFA GOD, ETC.?_)
> J
> ________________________________
> From: Clint <cy2600@...>
> To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 3:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism
>
>
>  
> Johnny Hawkins wrote:
> > I understand how passionate your disbelief is. Asking me if I have something
"the rest of the universe lacks" sounds like you've dismissed any answers before
you hear them. You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one
of millions, but I can't give you something you can put under a microscope or
aim a telescope at. I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies
and provision on a regular basis. It's not so much frustrating as it is odd to
hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it. My only point was that
doubting what you can't disprove (which so many others know as fact) makes more
sense than denying it.
>
> All I did was ask you a couple of questions. I didn't say what my
> beliefs were. All of these things you supposedly experience, you believe
> it is one specific thing without proof and conclude that it cannot be
> something else, am I correct? So, I turn to the same two previous
> questions...
>
> Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent
> of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?
>
> If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as
> this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?
>
> > Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent
> >
> > of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

The speed with which the people in this group reword and misquote is astounding,
considering the intellectual confidence. That quote just stumps you guys over
and over. No one said you know nothing, so no I'm not included in that group,
and no one included you.
I've attempted to share the truth I know, not to claim a superior amount or
percentage. You insult, misquote, and deny another person's reality. No one is
changing positions and that's okay. It was enlightening to see which turns the
conversation took.
There has been a long chronicled history of focused scholarly debates on this. I
didn't begin writing you guys thinking we'd solve what they couldn't.

"God is going to invade this earth in force. But what is the good of
saying you are on His side then, when you see the whole natural universe
  melting away like a dream and something else — something it never
entered your head to conceive—comes crashing in; something so beautiful
to some of us, and so terrible to others, that none of us will have any
choice left?
"For this time it will be God without disguise; something so
overwhelming that it will strike either irresistible love or
irresistible horror into every creature. It will be too late then to
choose your side. There is no use saying you choose to lie down when it
has become impossible to stand up. That will not be the time for
choosing; it will be the time when we discover which side we really have
  chosen, whether we realized it before or not. Now, today, this moment,
is our chance to choose the right side. God is holding back, to give us
that chance. It will not last forever; we must take it or leave it."—
C.S.Lewis


--- On Sat, 3/31/12, Richard Godwin <meta@...> wrote:

From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, March 31, 2012, 5:40 PM
















 









       Experience produces many different perspectives, such as illusion.  An
illusion is much easier to believe if supported by a very large number of
deluded people.  This reminds me of the most notable cartoon I ever saw:  A
large herd of pigs are running in one direction together.  One pig asked the pig
next to him:  "where is everybody going"?  The answer "it must be good,
otherwise everyone wouldn't be going there."  Next frame:  a building with the
heading "slaughter house."



Johnny, if we know nothing, then obviously you, being of us, knows nothing.
Right?  If we don't know a millionth, then what do we know?  Generally people
believing in illusions are certain of them as real.



----- Original Message -----

   From: Johnny Hawkins

   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

   Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 7:05 PM

   Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny



Here are the questions and answers lined up for you:



1.



Q: Why would you even think there is a god?

   A: I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies and

   provision on a regular basis. It's odd

   to hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it.



2 .



Q: Do you have some other percent of knowledge that the rest of the universe is
lacking?

   A: You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one of
millions.



3.

   Q: If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as
this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?



A: That is incorrect. The quote was, "We do not know a millionth of one percent
about anything." Refer to my answer on the first question regarding my
certainty.



You asked, I answered, you re-asked, I re-answered. But clearly this is going
nowhere.



________________________________

   From: Clint <cy2600@...>

   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

   Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 3:32 PM

   Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism



Johnny Hawkins wrote:

   > I understand how passionate your disbelief is. Asking me if I have something
"the rest of the universe lacks" sounds like you've dismissed any answers before
you hear them. You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one
of millions, but I can't give you something you can put under a microscope or
aim a telescope at. I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies
and provision on a regular basis. It's not so much frustrating as it is odd to
hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it. My only point was that
doubting what you can't disprove (which so many others know as fact) makes more
sense than denying it.



All I did was ask you a couple of questions. I didn't say what my

   beliefs were. All of these things you supposedly experience, you believe

   it is one specific thing without proof and conclude that it cannot be

   something else, am I correct? So, I turn to the same two previous

   questions...



Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent

   of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?



If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as

   this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?



> Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent

   >

   > of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It appears this is centered on your "the truth I know."  Why do you hold that
truth?  I see no evidence or reasoning there, but only presuppositions of your
theology.  The "superior amount or percentage" is based on probability, with no
certainty.  Probability may be measured by "amount", i.e. percentage of how high
it is for belief.  High probability is called "fact," but always subject to
critical examination, tentative to further evidence.  If your belief in reality
lacks evidence and is only consonant with your theological beliefs, then yes it
is denied.  I change positions based on adequate and sufficient evidence,
reasoning from that.  I am always willing to change positions.  Evidence cannot
be completely subjective in your mind and your faith.  It must be public. 
Scholarship depends on critical examination in this way.  The Bible is not
sufficient evidence, and itself must be judged for truth based on evidence and
reasoning.


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Johnny Hawkins
   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 8:08 PM
   Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny



   The speed with which the people in this group reword and misquote is
astounding, considering the intellectual confidence. That quote just stumps you
guys over and over. No one said you know nothing, so no I'm not included in that
group, and no one included you.
   I've attempted to share the truth I know, not to claim a superior amount or
percentage. You insult, misquote, and deny another person's reality. No one is
changing positions and that's okay. It was enlightening to see which turns the
conversation took.
   There has been a long chronicled history of focused scholarly debates on this.
I didn't begin writing you guys thinking we'd solve what they couldn't.

   "God is going to invade this earth in force. But what is the good of
   saying you are on His side then, when you see the whole natural universe
   melting away like a dream and something else — something it never
   entered your head to conceive—comes crashing in; something so beautiful
   to some of us, and so terrible to others, that none of us will have any
   choice left?
   "For this time it will be God without disguise; something so
   overwhelming that it will strike either irresistible love or
   irresistible horror into every creature. It will be too late then to
   choose your side. There is no use saying you choose to lie down when it
   has become impossible to stand up. That will not be the time for
   choosing; it will be the time when we discover which side we really have
   chosen, whether we realized it before or not. Now, today, this moment,
   is our chance to choose the right side. God is holding back, to give us
   that chance. It will not last forever; we must take it or leave it."—
C.S.Lewis

   --- On Sat, 3/31/12, Richard Godwin <meta@...> wrote:

   From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
   Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny
   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
   Date: Saturday, March 31, 2012, 5:40 PM



   Experience produces many different perspectives, such as illusion. An illusion
is much easier to believe if supported by a very large number of deluded people.
This reminds me of the most notable cartoon I ever saw: A large herd of pigs are
running in one direction together. One pig asked the pig next to him: "where is
everybody going"? The answer "it must be good, otherwise everyone wouldn't be
going there." Next frame: a building with the heading "slaughter house."

   Johnny, if we know nothing, then obviously you, being of us, knows nothing.
Right? If we don't know a millionth, then what do we know? Generally people
believing in illusions are certain of them as real.

   ----- Original Message -----

   From: Johnny Hawkins

   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

   Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 7:05 PM

   Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny

   Here are the questions and answers lined up for you:

   1.

   Q: Why would you even think there is a god?

   A: I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies and

   provision on a regular basis. It's odd

   to hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it.

   2 .

   Q: Do you have some other percent of knowledge that the rest of the universe
is lacking?

   A: You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one of
millions.

   3.

   Q: If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as
this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?

   A: That is incorrect. The quote was, "We do not know a millionth of one
percent about anything." Refer to my answer on the first question regarding my
certainty.

   You asked, I answered, you re-asked, I re-answered. But clearly this is going
nowhere.

   ________________________________

   From: Clint <cy2600@...>

   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

   Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 3:32 PM

   Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism

   Johnny Hawkins wrote:

   > I understand how passionate your disbelief is. Asking me if I have something
"the rest of the universe lacks" sounds like you've dismissed any answers before
you hear them. You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one
of millions, but I can't give you something you can put under a microscope or
aim a telescope at. I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies
and provision on a regular basis. It's not so much frustrating as it is odd to
hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it. My only point was that
doubting what you can't disprove (which so many others know as fact) makes more
sense than denying it.

   All I did was ask you a couple of questions. I didn't say what my

   beliefs were. All of these things you supposedly experience, you believe

   it is one specific thing without proof and conclude that it cannot be

   something else, am I correct? So, I turn to the same two previous

   questions...

   Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent

   of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?

   If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as

   this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?

   > Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent

   >

   > of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If an Atheist is passionate about disbelief, its because Atheists know what kind
of insanity, hate, intolerance, and murder Christians are capable of...just look
at their history. j



________________________________
  From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 5 April 2012, 10:40
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny


 
It appears this is centered on your "the truth I know."  Why do you hold that
truth?  I see no evidence or reasoning there, but only presuppositions of your
theology.  The "superior amount or percentage" is based on probability, with no
certainty.  Probability may be measured by "amount", i.e. percentage of how high
it is for belief.  High probability is called "fact," but always subject to
critical examination, tentative to further evidence.  If your belief in reality
lacks evidence and is only consonant with your theological beliefs, then yes it
is denied.  I change positions based on adequate and sufficient evidence,
reasoning from that.  I am always willing to change positions.  Evidence cannot
be completely subjective in your mind and your faith.  It must be public. 
Scholarship depends on critical examination in this way.  The Bible is not
sufficient evidence, and itself must be judged for truth based on evidence and
reasoning.

----- Original Message -----
From: Johnny Hawkins
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny

The speed with which the people in this group reword and misquote is astounding,
considering the intellectual confidence. That quote just stumps you guys over
and over. No one said you know nothing, so no I'm not included in that group,
and no one included you.
I've attempted to share the truth I know, not to claim a superior amount or
percentage. You insult, misquote, and deny another person's reality. No one is
changing positions and that's okay. It was enlightening to see which turns the
conversation took.
There has been a long chronicled history of focused scholarly debates on this. I
didn't begin writing you guys thinking we'd solve what they couldn't.

"God is going to invade this earth in force. But what is the good of
saying you are on His side then, when you see the whole natural universe
melting away like a dream and something else — something it never
entered your head to conceive—comes crashing in; something so beautiful
to some of us, and so terrible to others, that none of us will have any
choice left?
"For this time it will be God without disguise; something so
overwhelming that it will strike either irresistible love or
irresistible horror into every creature. It will be too late then to
choose your side. There is no use saying you choose to lie down when it
has become impossible to stand up. That will not be the time for
choosing; it will be the time when we discover which side we really have
chosen, whether we realized it before or not. Now, today, this moment,
is our chance to choose the right side. God is holding back, to give us
that chance. It will not last forever; we must take it or leave it."—
C.S.Lewis

--- On Sat, 3/31/12, Richard Godwin <meta@...> wrote:

From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, March 31, 2012, 5:40 PM

Experience produces many different perspectives, such as illusion. An illusion
is much easier to believe if supported by a very large number of deluded people.
This reminds me of the most notable cartoon I ever saw: A large herd of pigs are
running in one direction together. One pig asked the pig next to him: "where is
everybody going"? The answer "it must be good, otherwise everyone wouldn't be
going there." Next frame: a building with the heading "slaughter house."

Johnny, if we know nothing, then obviously you, being of us, knows nothing.
Right? If we don't know a millionth, then what do we know? Generally people
believing in illusions are certain of them as real.

----- Original Message -----

From: Johnny Hawkins

To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 7:05 PM

Subject: [Death To Religion] Re: Those who doubt vs. those who deny

Here are the questions and answers lined up for you:

1.

Q: Why would you even think there is a god?

A: I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies and

provision on a regular basis. It's odd

to hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it.

2 .

Q: Do you have some other percent of knowledge that the rest of the universe is
lacking?

A: You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one of
millions.

3.

Q: If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as this
originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?

A: That is incorrect. The quote was, "We do not know a millionth of one percent
about anything." Refer to my answer on the first question regarding my
certainty.

You asked, I answered, you re-asked, I re-answered. But clearly this is going
nowhere.

________________________________

From: Clint <cy2600@...>

To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 3:32 PM

Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism

Johnny Hawkins wrote:

> I understand how passionate your disbelief is. Asking me if I have something
"the rest of the universe lacks" sounds like you've dismissed any answers before
you hear them. You know perfectly well I'm not alone. You're conversing with one
of millions, but I can't give you something you can put under a microscope or
aim a telescope at. I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies
and provision on a regular basis. It's not so much frustrating as it is odd to
hear my own reality denied by those who don't share it. My only point was that
doubting what you can't disprove (which so many others know as fact) makes more
sense than denying it.

All I did was ask you a couple of questions. I didn't say what my

beliefs were. All of these things you supposedly experience, you believe

it is one specific thing without proof and conclude that it cannot be

something else, am I correct? So, I turn to the same two previous

questions...

Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent

of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?

If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there as

this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?

> Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other percent

>

> of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Clint wrote:
> Johnny Hawkins wrote:
>> I'm privileged to experience miraculous healings, prophecies and
>> provision on a regular basis.
>
> Please tell me where I can meet you to experience the same thing as you.



Why do I have a feeling little Johnny is Preasto in a new guise? I could
be wrong though. Believe it or not I was once or twice in my life.

--- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, Clint wrote:
>
> Why do I have a feeling little Johnny is Preasto in a new guise? I
> could be wrong though. Believe it or not I was once or twice in my
> life.

I'm pretty sure you are wrong.

bestonnet_00 wrote:
> --- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, Clint wrote:
>>
>> Why do I have a feeling little Johnny is Preasto in a new guise? I
>> could be wrong though. Believe it or not I was once or twice in my
>> life.
>
> I'm pretty sure you are wrong.

I'm just messing around. Seems like Johnny has disappeared though.

The Human Beast
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201204/atheism-defeat-religi\
on-2038

Why we do what we do.

by Nigel Barber, Ph.D.

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Will atheists always be nonconformists?

Published on April 25, 2012 by Nigel Barber, Ph.D. in The Human Beast
My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious
people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of
horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an
improved standard of living.

The view that religious belief will give way to atheism is known as the
secularization thesis. The specific version that I have described is
known as the existential security hypothesis. The basic idea is that as
people become more affluent, they are less worried about lacking for
basic necessities, or dying early from violence or disease. In other
words, they are secure in their own existence. They do not feel the need
to appeal to supernatural entities to calm their fears and insecurities.

The notion that good living conditions are associated with a decline in
religious belief, importance of religion, church attendance, and so
forth, is supported by a mountain of evidence assembled by Pippa Norris
and Ronald Inglehart in their book, Sacred and Secular (1), as well as
numerous more recent works (2).

We can be as sure of the relationship between material security and
declining religious belief as we are of any other such connection in the
social sciences. That does not prevent some serious scholars, like
political scientist Eric Kaufmann (3), from making the opposite case
that religious fundamentalists will outbreed the rest of us. Yet, noisy
as they can be, such groups are tiny minorities of the global population
and they will become even more marginalized as global prosperity
increases and standards of living improve.

Moreover, as religious fundamentalists become economically integrated,
young women go to work and produce smaller families, as is currently
happening for Utah's Mormons.

The most obvious approach to estimating when the world will switch over
to being majority atheist is based on economic growth. This is logical
because economic development is the key factor responsible for
secularization. In deriving this estimate, I used the 9 most godless
countries as my touchstone (excluding Estonia as a formerly communist
country). The countries were Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark,
France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
These 9 countries averaged out at the atheist transition with exactly
half of the populations disbelieving in God according to Zuckerman's
compilation of data on disbelief in God in around 2004. Their gross
domestic product (GDP) averaged $29,822 compared to $10,855 for the
average country in the world. How long will it take before the world
economy has expanded sufficiently that the GDP of the average country
has caught up to the average for the godless countries in 2004?

Using the average global growth rate of GDP for the past 30 years, of
3.33 percent (based on International Monetary Fund data from their
website), the atheist transition would occur in 2035.

Belief in God is not the only relevant measure of religion, of course. A
person might believe in God in a fairly superficial way without religion
affecting their daily lives. One way of assessing the depth of religious
commitment is to ask survey participants whether they think that
religion is important in their daily lives as the Gallup Organization
has done in worldwide nationally-representative surveys.

If fewer than 50 percent of the population agreed that religion was
important to them, then the country has effectively crossed over to a
secular majority. The godless countries by religiosity were Spain, South
Korea, Canada, Switzerland, Uruguay, Germany, and France. At a growth
rate of 3.33 percent per year it would be 2041 before the average
country in the world would be at an equivalent level of affluence as
these godless nations.

If national wealth drives secularization, the global population will
cross an atheist threshold where the majority see religion as
unimportant in their daily lives by 2041.

Averaging across the two measures of atheism, the entire world
population would cross the atheist threshold by about 2038 (average of
2035 and 2041). Although 2038 may seem improbably fast, this requires
only a shift of approximately 1 percent per year whether in religiosity
(0.9 percent) or belief in God (1.2 percent).

Is the loss of religious belief something to fear? Contrary to the
claims of religious leaders, godless countries are highly moral nations
with an unusual level of social trust, economic equality, low crime, and
a high level of civic engagement (4). We could do with some of that.

thank you, I am going to steal this and spread it around


________________________________
  From: Clint <cy2600@...>
To:
Sent: Thursday, 21 June 2012, 16:10
Subject: [Death To Religion] The Human Beast


 
The Human Beast
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201204/atheism-defeat-religi\
on-2038

Why we do what we do.

by Nigel Barber, Ph.D.

Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Will atheists always be nonconformists?

Published on April 25, 2012 by Nigel Barber, Ph.D. in The Human Beast
My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious
people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of
horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an
improved standard of living.

The view that religious belief will give way to atheism is known as the
secularization thesis. The specific version that I have described is
known as the existential security hypothesis. The basic idea is that as
people become more affluent, they are less worried about lacking for
basic necessities, or dying early from violence or disease. In other
words, they are secure in their own existence. They do not feel the need
to appeal to supernatural entities to calm their fears and insecurities.

The notion that good living conditions are associated with a decline in
religious belief, importance of religion, church attendance, and so
forth, is supported by a mountain of evidence assembled by Pippa Norris
and Ronald Inglehart in their book, Sacred and Secular (1), as well as
numerous more recent works (2).

We can be as sure of the relationship between material security and
declining religious belief as we are of any other such connection in the
social sciences. That does not prevent some serious scholars, like
political scientist Eric Kaufmann (3), from making the opposite case
that religious fundamentalists will outbreed the rest of us. Yet, noisy
as they can be, such groups are tiny minorities of the global population
and they will become even more marginalized as global prosperity
increases and standards of living improve.

Moreover, as religious fundamentalists become economically integrated,
young women go to work and produce smaller families, as is currently
happening for Utah's Mormons.

The most obvious approach to estimating when the world will switch over
to being majority atheist is based on economic growth. This is logical
because economic development is the key factor responsible for
secularization. In deriving this estimate, I used the 9 most godless
countries as my touchstone (excluding Estonia as a formerly communist
country). The countries were Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark,
France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
These 9 countries averaged out at the atheist transition with exactly
half of the populations disbelieving in God according to Zuckerman's
compilation of data on disbelief in God in around 2004. Their gross
domestic product (GDP) averaged $29,822 compared to $10,855 for the
average country in the world. How long will it take before the world
economy has expanded sufficiently that the GDP of the average country
has caught up to the average for the godless countries in 2004?

Using the average global growth rate of GDP for the past 30 years, of
3.33 percent (based on International Monetary Fund data from their
website), the atheist transition would occur in 2035.

Belief in God is not the only relevant measure of religion, of course. A
person might believe in God in a fairly superficial way without religion
affecting their daily lives. One way of assessing the depth of religious
commitment is to ask survey participants whether they think that
religion is important in their daily lives as the Gallup Organization
has done in worldwide nationally-representative surveys.

If fewer than 50 percent of the population agreed that religion was
important to them, then the country has effectively crossed over to a
secular majority. The godless countries by religiosity were Spain, South
Korea, Canada, Switzerland, Uruguay, Germany, and France. At a growth
rate of 3.33 percent per year it would be 2041 before the average
country in the world would be at an equivalent level of affluence as
these godless nations.

If national wealth drives secularization, the global population will
cross an atheist threshold where the majority see religion as
unimportant in their daily lives by 2041.

Averaging across the two measures of atheism, the entire world
population would cross the atheist threshold by about 2038 (average of
2035 and 2041). Although 2038 may seem improbably fast, this requires
only a shift of approximately 1 percent per year whether in religiosity
(0.9 percent) or belief in God (1.2 percent).

Is the loss of religious belief something to fear? Contrary to the
claims of religious leaders, godless countries are highly moral nations
with an unusual level of social trust, economic equality, low crime, and
a high level of civic engagement (4). We could do with some of that.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ordinary people have their own world but it is a world invaded and ruled
over by ideal beings or transcendentals (God, heroes, martyrs and
saints) of which they(ordinary people) are forced to accept
indebtedness. Although nobody ask to be created(how could we?) we are
forced to believe that somehow we owe it to God for creating us, that we
are indebted to heroes, martyrs and saints for sacrificing their lives
for us, although nobody ask them to, but anyway, should we be thankful
for war and poverty that made the existence of all these "ideal beings"
possible?

-----sarda-----






--- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Godwin" <meta@...>
wrote:
>
> "the rest of the universe" believes in a god, i.e. the vast majority.
Ordinary people are not concerned with proof or philosophical
conviction.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Clint
> To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 1:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism
>
>
>
> Johnny Hawkins wrote:
> > I understand how passionate your disbelief is. Asking me if I have
something "the rest of the universe lacks" sounds like you've dismissed
any answers before you hear them. You know perfectly well I'm not alone.
You're conversing with one of millions, but I can't give you something
you can put under a microscope or aim a telescope at. I'm privileged to
experience miraculous healings, prophecies and provision on a regular
basis. It's not so much frustrating as it is odd to hear my own reality
denied by those who don't share it. My only point was that doubting what
you can't disprove (which so many others know as fact) makes more sense
than denying it.
>
> All I did was ask you a couple of questions. I didn't say what my
> beliefs were. All of these things you supposedly experience, you
believe
> it is one specific thing without proof and conclude that it cannot be
> something else, am I correct? So, I turn to the same two previous
> questions...
>
> Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other
percent
> of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?
>
> If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there
as
> this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?
>
> > Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other
percent
> >
> > of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thank you for your massage.
My pleasure to be a member of this group.
My page from Brazil for you, with pictures: 
http://www.boavontade.com/fotos/index2.php?option=com_galeriasmc&view=exibirgale\
ria&id=143&idioma=6
Regards,
 
 

Paulo César
Brasília/Brazil

De: "deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com" <deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com>
>Para: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
>Enviadas: Quinta-feira, 28 de Junho de 2012 8:23
>Assunto: [Death To Religion] Digest Number 1130
>
>There is 1 message in this issue.
>
>Topics in this digest:
>
>1a. Re: The Human Beast   
>    From: Gillespie William
>
>
>Message
>________________________________________________________________________
>1a. Re: The Human Beast
>    Posted by: "Gillespie William" jjjgillespie@... jjjgillespie
>    Date: Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:26 pm ((PDT))
>
>thank you, I am going to steal this and spread it around
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Clint <cy2600@...>
>To:
>Sent: Thursday, 21 June 2012, 16:10
>Subject: [Death To Religion] The Human Beast
>
>
> 
>The Human Beast
>http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201204/atheism-defeat-relig\
ion-2038
>
>Why we do what we do.
>
>by Nigel Barber, Ph.D.
>
>Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038
>
>Will atheists always be nonconformists?
>
>Published on April 25, 2012 by Nigel Barber, Ph.D. in The Human Beast
>My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious
>people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of
>horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an
>improved standard of living.
>
>The view that religious belief will give way to atheism is known as the
>secularization thesis. The specific version that I have described is
>known as the existential security hypothesis. The basic idea is that as
>people become more affluent, they are less worried about lacking for
>basic necessities, or dying early from violence or disease. In other
>words, they are secure in their own existence. They do not feel the need
>to appeal to supernatural entities to calm their fears and insecurities.
>
>The notion that good living conditions are associated with a decline in
>religious belief, importance of religion, church attendance, and so
>forth, is supported by a mountain of evidence assembled by Pippa Norris
>and Ronald Inglehart in their book, Sacred and Secular (1), as well as
>numerous more recent works (2).
>
>We can be as sure of the relationship between material security and
>declining religious belief as we are of any other such connection in the
>social sciences. That does not prevent some serious scholars, like
>political scientist Eric Kaufmann (3), from making the opposite case
>that religious fundamentalists will outbreed the rest of us. Yet, noisy
>as they can be, such groups are tiny minorities of the global population
>and they will become even more marginalized as global prosperity
>increases and standards of living improve.
>
>Moreover, as religious fundamentalists become economically integrated,
>young women go to work and produce smaller families, as is currently
>happening for Utah's Mormons.
>
>The most obvious approach to estimating when the world will switch over
>to being majority atheist is based on economic growth. This is logical
>because economic development is the key factor responsible for
>secularization. In deriving this estimate, I used the 9 most godless
>countries as my touchstone (excluding Estonia as a formerly communist
>country). The countries were Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark,
>France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
>These 9 countries averaged out at the atheist transition with exactly
>half of the populations disbelieving in God according to Zuckerman's
>compilation of data on disbelief in God in around 2004. Their gross
>domestic product (GDP) averaged $29,822 compared to $10,855 for the
>average country in the world. How long will it take before the world
>economy has expanded sufficiently that the GDP of the average country
>has caught up to the average for the godless countries in 2004?
>
>Using the average global growth rate of GDP for the past 30 years, of
>3.33 percent (based on International Monetary Fund data from their
>website), the atheist transition would occur in 2035.
>
>Belief in God is not the only relevant measure of religion, of course. A
>person might believe in God in a fairly superficial way without religion
>affecting their daily lives. One way of assessing the depth of religious
>commitment is to ask survey participants whether they think that
>religion is important in their daily lives as the Gallup Organization
>has done in worldwide nationally-representative surveys.
>
>If fewer than 50 percent of the population agreed that religion was
>important to them, then the country has effectively crossed over to a
>secular majority. The godless countries by religiosity were Spain, South
>Korea, Canada, Switzerland, Uruguay, Germany, and France. At a growth
>rate of 3.33 percent per year it would be 2041 before the average
>country in the world would be at an equivalent level of affluence as
>these godless nations.
>
>If national wealth drives secularization, the global population will
>cross an atheist threshold where the majority see religion as
>unimportant in their daily lives by 2041.
>
>Averaging across the two measures of atheism, the entire world
>population would cross the atheist threshold by about 2038 (average of
>2035 and 2041). Although 2038 may seem improbably fast, this requires
>only a shift of approximately 1 percent per year whether in religiosity
>(0.9 percent) or belief in God (1.2 percent).
>
>Is the loss of religious belief something to fear? Contrary to the
>claims of religious leaders, godless countries are highly moral nations
>with an unusual level of social trust, economic equality, low crime, and
>a high level of civic engagement (4). We could do with some of that.
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Messages in this topic (2)
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I saw a Motto in Sweden...of a group of Atheists.....it said:

"So, Jesus died for our sins." 

"Well, who the bloody fuck asked you to kill yourself?!"

I like that....


________________________________
  From: Sarda Karaniwan <karaniwans@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 28 June 2012, 8:42
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism


 


Ordinary people have their own world but it is a world invaded and ruled
over by ideal beings or transcendentals (God, heroes, martyrs and
saints) of which they(ordinary people) are forced to accept
indebtedness. Although nobody ask to be created(how could we?) we are
forced to believe that somehow we owe it to God for creating us, that we
are indebted to heroes, martyrs and saints for sacrificing their lives
for us, although nobody ask them to, but anyway, should we be thankful
for war and poverty that made the existence of all these "ideal beings"
possible?

-----sarda-----

--- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Godwin" <meta@...>
wrote:
>
> "the rest of the universe" believes in a god, i.e. the vast majority.
Ordinary people are not concerned with proof or philosophical
conviction.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Clint
> To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 1:32 PM
> Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism
>
>
>
> Johnny Hawkins wrote:
> > I understand how passionate your disbelief is. Asking me if I have
something "the rest of the universe lacks" sounds like you've dismissed
any answers before you hear them. You know perfectly well I'm not alone.
You're conversing with one of millions, but I can't give you something
you can put under a microscope or aim a telescope at. I'm privileged to
experience miraculous healings, prophecies and provision on a regular
basis. It's not so much frustrating as it is odd to hear my own reality
denied by those who don't share it. My only point was that doubting what
you can't disprove (which so many others know as fact) makes more sense
than denying it.
>
> All I did was ask you a couple of questions. I didn't say what my
> beliefs were. All of these things you supposedly experience, you
believe
> it is one specific thing without proof and conclude that it cannot be
> something else, am I correct? So, I turn to the same two previous
> questions...
>
> Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other
percent
> of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?
>
> If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there
as
> this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?
>
> > Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other
percent
> >
> > of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

But what are the negatives in actual practice for those "ideal beings"?  Which
is worse?---belief in non-existing beings or war and poverty?


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Sarda Karaniwan
   To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 6:42 AM
   Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism





   Ordinary people have their own world but it is a world invaded and ruled
   over by ideal beings or transcendentals (God, heroes, martyrs and
   saints) of which they(ordinary people) are forced to accept
   indebtedness. Although nobody ask to be created(how could we?) we are
   forced to believe that somehow we owe it to God for creating us, that we
   are indebted to heroes, martyrs and saints for sacrificing their lives
   for us, although nobody ask them to, but anyway, should we be thankful
   for war and poverty that made the existence of all these "ideal beings"
   possible?

   -----sarda-----

   --- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Godwin" <meta@...>
   wrote:
   >
   > "the rest of the universe" believes in a god, i.e. the vast majority.
   Ordinary people are not concerned with proof or philosophical
   conviction.
   >
   >
   >
   > ----- Original Message -----
   > From: Clint
   > To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
   > Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 1:32 PM
   > Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism
   >
   >
   >
   > Johnny Hawkins wrote:
   > > I understand how passionate your disbelief is. Asking me if I have
   something "the rest of the universe lacks" sounds like you've dismissed
   any answers before you hear them. You know perfectly well I'm not alone.
   You're conversing with one of millions, but I can't give you something
   you can put under a microscope or aim a telescope at. I'm privileged to
   experience miraculous healings, prophecies and provision on a regular
   basis. It's not so much frustrating as it is odd to hear my own reality
   denied by those who don't share it. My only point was that doubting what
   you can't disprove (which so many others know as fact) makes more sense
   than denying it.
   >
   > All I did was ask you a couple of questions. I didn't say what my
   > beliefs were. All of these things you supposedly experience, you
   believe
   > it is one specific thing without proof and conclude that it cannot be
   > something else, am I correct? So, I turn to the same two previous
   > questions...
   >
   > Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other
   percent
   > of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?
   >
   > If we only know a millionth of a millionth of the knowledge out there
   as
   > this originally started, how are you so convinced there is a god?
   >
   > > Why would you even think there is a god? Do you have some other
   percent
   > >
   > > of knowledge that the rest of the universe is lacking?
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Gillespie William wrote:
> I saw a Motto in Sweden...of a group of Atheists.....it said:
>
> "So, Jesus died for our sins."
>
> "Well, who the bloody fuck asked you to kill yourself?!"
>
> I like that....

I never understood how he willingly died for our sins when the Romans
killed him (speaking only as it relates to the joke of course). Not like
he had a choice!

I will explain Jesus' alleged suicide.


Jesus is an all knowing, all omniscient god, who as a god surely knew the
future. Or so they claim.


Jesus also knew that his preaching and rabble rousing would piss the Romans and
a lot of other Jews off.

Jesus could have escaped but he did not.

But, Jesus hung around, and waited for the Romans to arrest him.

At any time in his imaginary trial, Jesus could have said...no, I am not King of
the Jews, no I am not here to destroy the Roman empire and he would have lived.
Allegedly, he was judged by Pontius Pilate who did not want to become involved
in such shenanigans and actually washed his hands of the trial.


Thus, Jesus willingly died by "suicide by cop (i.e. Roman soldier).

Hope this  helps....

And take a note: When Jesus was dying, his last words were as an Atheist when he
said: Oh father, why did you "forget" (forsake) me...Jesus found out too late
there is no god. Oh well.



________________________________
  From: Clint <cy2600@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 30 June 2012, 17:52
Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Atheism vs. Agnosticism


 
Gillespie William wrote:
> I saw a Motto in Sweden...of a group of Atheists.....it said:
>
> "So, Jesus died for our sins."
>
> "Well, who the bloody fuck asked you to kill yourself?!"
>
> I like that....

I never understood how he willingly died for our sins when the Romans
killed him (speaking only as it relates to the joke of course). Not like
he had a choice!




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

And freedom FROM religion as well.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/643/561/418/freedom-of-religion/

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the deathtoreligion
group.

   File        : /292875_482694611763802_1182771481_n.jpg
   Uploaded by : h4rdw1r3d@... <cy2600@...>
   Description :

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/deathtoreligion/files/292875_482694611763802_11827\
71481_n.jpg

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/web/index.html
Regards,

h4rdw1r3d@... <cy2600@...>

Please sign this petition:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/434/008/366/

Why don't you explain why Broun should be off the science committee?
 
" ... the mysteries, on belief in which theology would hang the destinies of
mankind, are cunningly devised fables whose origin and growth are traceable to
the age of Ignorance, the mother of credulity."
— Edward Clodd, cited in A Biographical Dictionary of Modern Rationalists by
Joseph McCabe (1920)

On July 1, 1840, Edward Clodd was born in England. Although his parents wanted
him to become a Baptist minister, Clodd went into banking, working as secretary
of the London Joint Stock Bank from 1872-1915. An early Darwin aficionado, the
largely self-educated writer set about to make rationalism and science
accessible to the masses. In 1872, he wrote Childhood of the World. His
influential evolution manual, Story of Creation, was reprinted many times. Clodd
worked with the Rationalist Press Association, and delivered the Conway Memorial
Lecture in 1910 on "Gibbon and Christianity." His other works include Memories
(1916) and The Question: If a Man Die, Shall he Live Again?" (1917). D. 1930.



________________________________
  From: killertiel <cybercat@...>
To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, 12 October 2012, 14:49
Subject: [Death To Religion] Get Rep. Paul Broun Off The House Science Committee


 
Please sign this petition:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/434/008/366/




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Interesting article!

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/18/godless-mom-strikes-a-chord-with-parent\
s/?hpt=hp_c2

great thanks for your post
really interesting stuff


--- In deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com, "killertiel"  wrote:
>
> Interesting article!
>
>
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/18/godless-mom-strikes-a-chord-with-parent\
s/?hpt=hp_c2
>

http://www.alternet.org/belief/war-over-roses-rhode-island-vendors-refuse-busine\
ss-atheist-teenager