Table of Contents
Letters to the Editor
Letters Policy:
Basically the only thing we have to officially say is this, "Your letter may be directed to another member of the staff, rather than I, the Editor in Chief, answering it". This is done to insure that you get the most highly qualified answer that we can possibly give.
Also, sometimes I am on vacation every week or so.
And I, the Editor in Chief, reserve the right to edit all letters posted. Sometimes the "colorful" language has to be omitted or changed which would be distinguished by italicized (parenthesis) because it it causes nice elderly church ladies thump their Bibles too hard.
And with their fragile and delicate fingers, this causes considerable pain. And since we love and respect them dearly, we choose to save them from such pain so that they can continue to bake us cookies.
Your's truly,
The Editor in Chief.
Dear Blindpeople,
Where exactly is heaven again?
I've seen many pictures of clouds (usually Cumulus type) and
"god" was "sitting" up there. Just tell me
which one "he's" sitting on top of so I can point him
out to my friends.
Also, I've got a lot of these dang dinosaur bones. Don't know
which biblical passage to quote. Could you remind me if it was
John 12:34 or Luke 20:12 that quotes "and the dinosaur layed
down his tail and professed to the masses, pick up your goblets
and drink from the water of his mercy.." or something like
that. We all agree that the dinosaurs spoke Hebrew, and were
included in "his" master plan of "creationism."
Awaiting your divine and informative lessons,
Fred F.
Our response...
Where exactly is heaven again?
Well, we know that East Heaven is in Connecticut, therefore the rest of Heaven (the west side) must reside in New York.
( ( ( ::: cough! ::: hack! ::: choke! ::: wheeeeeeeze! ::: ) ) )
I've seen many pictures of clouds (usually Cumulus type) and "god" was "sitting" up there. Just tell me which one "he's" sitting on top of so I can point him out to my friends.
We hope those pictures were of Cirrocumulus clouds rather than merely Cumulus clouds because the latter are too low for God. Obviously God is on the highest (Cirrocumulus) clouds which makes it virtually impossible to see Him from ground level (which seems to be by design).
With the advent of high-altitude heavier-than-air flight and artificial oxygen supply apparati, it seems that God would have been seen by now. But it has become apparant that He just slips behind or into the cloud when approached by flying mortals.
We're not sure why He displays this anti-social behavior, but He's God and can do whatever he wants to, we guess.
Also, I've got a lot of these dang dinosaur bones.
If they resemble a transitional fossil, get them to a Museum of Natural Science. You should be able to retire soonly and purchase your favorite professional sports team just for the heck of it.
Don't know which biblical passage to quote. Could you remind me if it was John 12:34 or Luke 20:12 that quotes "and the dinosaur layed down his tail and professed to the masses, pick up your goblets and drink from the water of his mercy.." or something like that.
Hmmmm... neither of those passages resemble what you wrote:
John 12:34 The crowd spoke up, "We have heard from the Law that the Christ will remain forever, so how can you say, 'The Son of Man must be lifted up'? Who is this 'Son of Man'?"
Luke 20:10 At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants so they would give him some of the fruit of the vineyard. But the tenants beat him and sent him away empty-handed.
But anyway, what is this "mercy" and why in the world would the masses need it?
We all agree that the
dinosaurs spoke Hebrew, and were included in "his"
master plan of "creationism."
No . . . spake they
Olde English olde chap - just like Jesus and they that hath congregateth
at that placeth and at that timeth.
This pretend language jibberish
often labeled "Hebrew" was invented by the "church"
to try and give credibility to their pack of lies. It never existed,
but made for good storytelling.
Awaiting your divine and
informative lessons,
You may want to pull
out a Snickers® bar, because it will be a while before getting
anything divine or informative from us.
Sincerely,
Editor in Chief
Fred's response...
Hey everyone,
It was fun to read your replies. You guys do have a sense of
humor. (And it is refreshing, thankfully).
Seriously though, I don't get myself too hung up on dictating
to others what is the "truth" and what is not. Noone
"knows" the truth, and I guess that's the problem.
In addition, and more importantly, our lives are much too short
and complicated; what with work, family, and other obligations.
The sad part of the matter
is that what "is" important during our short time on
this planet is there isn't as much tolerance towards each other
anymore. There are too many weapons. It is easier to pick up
a gun or a missile and simply "destroy" the party that
you may "disagree" with. Divisive religious doctrines,
for example: "If you don't believe in what I believe in,
then you are the enemy and you shall die" and words to that
effect. It's sad.
There are far too many innocent people dying today, in defense
of, and for the purpose of organized folks espousing this or
that religion.
There are too many established religions, some of which have,
historically, fought over the share of the pie of "potential"
moneys that are out there. I guess the current count is that
the muslims are winning the race, with a close second by the
christians, and then the hindus and jews.
I say, too bad for us
all that these smart and honorable men and women can not even
sit down at a table together without attacking each others religion,
morality, familial and historic backgrounds. How sad it is that
they find it easier to simply find disagreement more challenging,
albeit entertaining, than trying to find the common denominator
in us all.
Hey, just think of all the good that could be done if the killing
would stop, in the name of this or that "true god."
But, I know I am calling on already deaf and spiritually-closed
ears when I make this suggestion to be more tolerant of others.
Please prove me wrong.
And thanks again for the spirited, and funny replies! Have a
good day!
Fred
Our response...
Now you've done gone and got all serious on us. What are we supposed to do with that? I guess we'll have to pull ourselves together and try to assemble something coherent.
Actually there's not much about your letter that we disagree with, but there's a couple of points that our brains feel compelled to point out.
You said, "Seriously though, I don't get myself too hung up on dictating to others what is the "truth" and what is not." But isn't your whole letter doing just that? Read it and you'll see.
Also, you said, "Noone "knows" the truth, and I guess that's the problem." Do you see that you made a truth claim about nobody knowing truth? You have contradicted yourself. And if you meant truth as concerned with religion, the same still applies. You made a truth claim about religion saying that nobody can know it. Then how do you know this?
Our short time on this earth IS important, especially with eternal destinies at stake.
I certainly agree with not forcing someone to agree with you to the point of execution. I know that Christians have sometimes done this in the past but this was in direct contradiction as to what Jesus taught.
Also, some might enterpret the purpose of your letter as, "to simply find disagreement more challenging, allbeit entertaining, than trying to find the common denominator in us all." It appears that you are being intolerant of others' intolerance and that might just be intolerable.
And we hope this didn't offend you.
Sincerely,
Editor in Chief
The next series of letters were forwarded to us by our good friend over at FaithInEvidence. He took the skeptic's own words (hilighted in green) and turned the tables using that philosophy and attitude against said skeptic.
The exchange when nowhere, but raraly has going nowhere been so entertaining...
First letter to faith...
Hello
hope you'll be so cheerful as a xian must be, to answer me besides
I'm against xians' forgeries; let's see wheter you were really
attaining to your "moral code" or just hypocrit. I
hate deaf propagandists and fanatic delusionists. You know, each
time I write a FANATIC, they won't answer me, because you xians are just
BIASED BRAINWASHED. Soooooo,
we ATHEISTS must be "aggressive"; btw, we are "childrens
of Satan", isn't?
****** Of all these writers, only Seneca may have conceivably
had reason to refer to Jesus. But considering his personal troubles
with Nero, it is doubtful that he would have had the interest
or the time to do any work on the subject.
Uh yeah? I've readed this in another site, word-by-word; it seems
you copy each others just like your church-fathers did time ago.
The fact's
that you have no facts from your mind, but just from what others
put within it.
The MOST of what you say is fully questionable; the MOST you
quote is OUTDATED the way it has never been proved since it was
"discovered" by any "scholar" who's unbiased
by xianism ("Thallus"? Never existed.... "Phlegon"?
Uh, do you mean a 4th-class weird tales' writer, whom writings
has been desappeared just to be found only within patristic forgeries?
Mara, you say? Who's that? Please be serious.... Tacitus/Svetonius/Pliny/Josephus?
Interpolated....), let's drop the ossuaries (what would prove
that? There are lotta "jesuses" in Palestine that time;
the latest "Jacob's ossuary" has been proved a lame
forgery right today! Please be better informed; you seems anchored
to the middle age), sooooooooo, the rest of whom never wrote
about your slayer were just "retired officials, writers
of fables", and so on? Indeed, you reported just ***** 1/10*****
of the writers of that time.
but....
please, dear, tell me more about that "Marquofiae slab",
which no one talks about besides that FANATIC TAMPER of Grant
Jeffrey, a notorious "prophecy"-seller. Please tell
me more about that SCAM; I'm very curious! Tell me some TRUE
scholars' opinion about such phantomatic inscription, of which
NO ONE talks about in the world!
Marcel.
P. s.; it is written "VAlleius Paterculus", not "VElleius
Paterculus"....
Faith's response...
You wrote a pretty hard-hitting letter that takes me to task, which is oaky with me. And you seem to be quite an expert on the subject, so I would be interested to read your opinions IF they meet the following criteria:
(Note: You took me to task for "copying" others writings - which I give references for on the first page. And you said "The fact's that you have no facts from your mind, but just from what others put within it. ")
Criteria:
1A) Provide evidence that you personally reviewed all ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS which you claim are not accurately portrayed.
1B) Present the scientific reasons why you reject them as authentic.
1C) Provide evidence that you are an expert in this field (i.e., you studied the subject and graduated with passing grades from said subject and currently work in the field or teach on the university level).
2A) Provide evidence that you personally reviewed the ossuaries in question.
2B) Present the scientific reasons why you reject them as authentic.
1C) Provide evidence that you are an expert in this field (i.e., you studied the subject and graduated with passing grades from said subject and currently work in the field or teach on the university level).
Actually on the #3s - scratch the whole "studied subject and graduated thing." This would just show that you have no facts from your mind, but just from what professors put within it. " Instead, provide evidence that you learned it all on your own from personal experience only.
Yes, this would help open my eyes to the truth of all this. I truly would be convinced if you reply under the previously mentioned conditions.
And...
Thallus:
http://www.Christian-thinktank.com/jrthal.html
Mara:
http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_01_01_01_MBS.html
Tacitus:
http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_01_01_01_TC.html
Pliny:
http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_01_01_01_PL.html
Josephus:
http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_01_01_01_JOS.html
Thanks for taking the time to provide all this for me. I look forward to hearing your reply.
Sincerely,
Chuck
P.S. - you might want to run your e-mail through spell-checker before posting it with a correction as to how one may have mispelled (typo) a single word ;-)
P.P.S. - Jesus loves you.
Marcel's response...
All right, let's begin
from end.
1) as for my mispelling, I'm ITALIAN, so I'm FULLY excused (I
would ask you to try to write me back in correct italian, if
you can), and from teh other side I guess automatic translators
would output something worse than I write. You won't be excused
as for quoting a latin author and writin VE instead of VA (either
seriously of by pun).
2) all the "sources" you quote are nothing but RENOWED
CATHOLIC propaganda, not yet UNBIASED scholarship.
3) before to ask me to provide any evidences, please provide
your own.... As for instance, yet as for Josephus alone, and
I guess you didn't know it before, please bear that the only
codexes we got as for his major writings was COPIED from LOST
"ORIGINAL" documents during XI/XIV sec., not before;
Tacitus was found during XV sec by Poggio Bracciolini, a renowed
ecclesiastic forger. There's lotta literature about that; but
I guess that's something "unknown" within your ring.
3) as for the rest, have the stomach to search outside your closed
xian BIASED ring of "sources" (that doesn't mean only
you must scan for evidences also within the "devilish"
atheistic circles; just try to ear more than one bell instead
of your actual ones only); I guess you'll find LOTTA TRUE evidences.
4) as for the "esperts", I find laughful you would
require a "scholarship" for anything contrary to your
limited range of knowledge.... As far as I could find, I guess
your "scholars" could do something better with their
"diplomas", using 'em after having took a shit, on
judging from the results they reach after their "doctorating
inquiries". Xians like to bear such a sad an escamotage
each time something comes wrong unto their viewport; that's classic,
we understand you very good. That's pathetically childish.
5) uh, almost I forgot; where's you erudite SCHOLASTIC (I mean
extra-xian) literature about "Marquofiae slab"?
Hope you've got some more gods to appeal to, in order to get
rid of other "evidences". I think Jesus alone won't
be satysful.
Truth will set you free.
Faith's response...
Dear Kosmo Kramer, (His online name was Kosmo)
I'm laughing as I write this because I know it's going nowhere. I know this because I'm going to play your little game against you and you won't stand for it I'm sure. I've been at this too long to be lead around by the nose in circles.
I asked for your "evidences" that weren't from any other source, because as you put it, "The fact's that you have no facts from your mind, but just from what others put within it."
Doesn't it reason that if the facts come from my mind then they aren't really facts but biased thoughts from my mind? And if you are quoting from something you read or heard then you are the hypocrit(e) because that's what you claim that I'm doing wrong.
Which you did and you are.
You also claimed that xian sources are biased and therefore unreliable. Another leap from logic since there are many who set out to disprove christianity and convert due to the evidence. Your logic also assumes that atheist (skeptic) conclusions are unbiased simply because they reject christianity. I won't even elaborate on this one.
BTW - I prefer to be called fundy, godbot, or even better - godborg instead of xian. It sounds better, don't you think?
Anyway, until you agree that you were wrong concerning:
A) That learning from others who we perceive as trustworthy and reliable sources is not good enough.
and...
B) That because a source is of an opinion that you don't agree with means that it's biased and therefore unreliable.
If you agree that you are wrong on both of those instances, then maybe we can take a step in the direction of an "all-growed-up" conversation on the matter. But until then, here's a dose of your own medicine...
I guess I could take your word for what you've said as true, but how would I really know? You just try to speak from authority. You could be a liar or dellusional for all I know. I could read your atheist sources, but how would I know that they weren't biased the other way? How would I know that the sources aren't really your own biased lies?
I suppose you could send me a copy of your college transcripts proving that you are indeed an expert in these fields, but maybe the transcript copy would be a forgery? I would probably have to be with you in the college courses each and every day to know for sure whether you actually completed them with passing grades.
But what about your text books and professors? How could I trust them? I would have to have actually experienced all of what they talk about personally in order to know for sure that the data they presented to me would be accurate.
That means you would have to build me a time machine and take me back to see for myself what actually happened. But wait. How would I know its a real time machine? Maybe you would build a movie-type set then slip me a Mickey causing hallucinations. Just maybe.
As for your latest statements of "fact"...
I'm ITALIAN
Prove it.
all the "sources"
you quote are nothing but RENOWED CATHOLIC propaganda
Still waiting on
your proof that you are an expert yourself in this field.
please bear that the only
codexes we got as for his major writings was COPIED from LOST
"ORIGINAL" documents during XI/XIV sec., not before
How do you know this?
Where you there?
Tacitus was found during
XV sec by Poggio Bracciolini, a renowed ecclesiastic forger.
Were you with Mr
Brocolli when he found it? Did you actually see the forgery happen?
Are you the one who turned him in?
There's lotta literature
about that; but I guess that's something "unknown"
within your ring.
Is this literature
from biased skeptic/atheist authors? Or is it your own biased
literature?
Well, I've enjoyed this latest dive into nothingness. I give it an entertainment value of 8.6 on a scale to ten with 9.3 being the highest.
I can't wait for your next response. I'll have my questions locked and loaded...
Sincerely,
Clive Staples Lewis
P.S. - God still loves you and wants you to return to Him like in the prodigal son story. But He won't force you. It's your choice.
Marcel's response...
Dear Kosmo Kramer,
> I like humour,
I'm laughing as I write
this because I know it's going nowhere.
> Uh, please have faith, dear.... How can something go nowhere?
Please be more logic.
I know this because I'm going to play your little game against
you and you won't stand for it I'm sure. I've been at this too
long to be lead around by the nose in circles.
I asked for your "evidences" that weren't from any
other source, because as you put it, "The fact's that
you have no facts from your mind, but just from what others put
within it."
> please bit the brake alittle; I do not meant you are STUPID,
just that you might have absorbed so much "notions"
from the "establishment" that you cannot figure out
how to take a different road.
Doesn't it reason that
if the facts come from my mind then they aren't really facts
but biased thoughts from my mind? And if you are quoting from
something you read or heard then you are the hypocrit(e) because
that's what you claim that I'm doing wrong.
> Too cerebralish; typically xian....
Which you did and you
are.
> Ah! That's a very non-partisan questioning, uh?
You also claimed that
xian sources are biased and therefore unreliable. Another leap
from logic since there are many who set out to disprove christianity
and convert due to the evidence. Your logic also assumes that
atheist (skeptic) conclusions are unbiased simply because they
reject christianity. I won't even elaborate on this one.
> Well, I assume that when people is free to ask and find,
there's the truth; truth is it that is it, not what you want
it must be.
BTW - I prefer to be called
fundy, godbot, or even better - godborg instead of xian. It sounds
better, don't you think?
> At least, you've got humour; that's good, humour is the
only weapon against stupid actions.
Anyway, until you agree that you were wrong concerning:
A) That learning from
others who we perceive as trustworthy and reliable sources is
not good enough.
and...
B) That because a source
is of an opinion that you don't agree with means that it's biased
and therefore unreliable.
> Nope; this happens when you won't get comparating, and you
ear only one bell. Btw, just start from asking yourself whether
god really exists, or if it exists only because people think
it must exist.
If you agree that you are wrong on both of those instances, then maybe we can take a step in the direction of an "all-growed-up" conversation on the matter. But until then, here's a dose of your own medicine...
I guess I could take your
word for what you've said as true, but how would I really know?
You just try to speak from authority. You could be a liar or
dellusional for all I know. I could read your atheist sources,
but how would I know that they weren't biased the other way?
How would I know that the sources aren't really your own biased
lies?
> Dicta as in first point. The fact is that the good sense
(not common sense) after discrimination among sources (I mean
certification and comparation) leads you onto an objective conclusion.
Hold this; when I search for documentations, do you think I won't
scrutiny xians' too? Nope; I scrutiny 'em too, but I simply toggle
from them all personal and fanatic conclusions (such "dya
see? they say this, so god exist! Let's bow, guys, let's put
a dime into the offertory!". That's pathetic). Dya think
all atheists were only people playing cynic, joking, or what
else? I think that a good fringe of atheists care the good in
the world, 'cause they know the very evil is perpetrated by superstitions.
I suppose you could send
me a copy of your college transcripts proving that you are indeed
an expert in these fields, but maybe the transcript copy would
be a forgery?
> Be sure, it's a forgery; my name isn't Kosmos Kramer, but
Eusebius of Cesarea.
I would probably have to be with you in the college courses each
and every day to know for sure whether you actually completed
them with passing grades.
> Nope; after major classic instruction, I dropped varsity
2 years ago , then I entered it back right this year, but I've
got more than 15 years of autonomous inquiries besides that.
But stay sure; I'm got MANY sources, and good competence.
But what about your text
books and professors? How could I trust them? I would have to
have actually experienced all of what they talk about personally
in order to know for sure that the data they presented to me
would be accurate.
> Well, how can you trust 2000 years of conspiration holding
in slavery the world? How can you trust "churchfathers"
whose unique aim was that to bring new converts to a post-constantinian
establishment using for ANY mean (included foremostly the pious
fraud)?
That means you would have
to build me a time machine and take me back to see for myself
what actually happened.
> Well, just keep an eye to what's happening today; there's
no better proof than this.
But wait. How would I know its a real time machine? Maybe you
would build a movie-type set then slip me a Mickey causing hallucinations.
Just maybe.
As for your latest statements of "fact"...
I'm ITALIAN
Prove it.
> Well, keep on translating
NON ROMPERE IL CAZZO, CAPITO? I'm joking.
all the "sources"
you quote are nothing but RENOWED CATHOLIC propaganda
Still waiting on
your proof that you are an expert yourself in this field.
> Ah, LO there's the point! I'm talking to a brick, perhaps?
please bear that the
only codexes we got as for his major writings was COPIED from
LOST "ORIGINAL" documents during XI/XIV sec., not before
How do you know this?
Were you there?
> Nope, Lorenzo Valla got some fierce disputes with Poggiolini
about forgery, the alleged forger. It is documented, but obviously
you aren't informed.
Tacitus was found during
XV sec by Poggio Bracciolini, a renowed ecclesiastic forger.
Were you with Mr
Brocolli when he found it?
> Where you with Joshua when the sun stood still, whilst science
today says it was something very different from a miracle? I
guess this proof is much more standing than your claim for me.
Did you actually see the forgery happen? Are you the one who
turned him in?
> Have you got any Damascus way's experience recently?
There's lotta literature about that; but I guess that's something
"unknown" within your ring.
Is this literature from biased skeptic/atheist authors? Or
is it your own biased literature?
> Are you able to distinguish biased from unbiased within
your documentation? And are you able to match any unbiased scholar
within a society based upon xian methodology?
Well, I've enjoyed this latest dive into nothingness. I give it an entertainment value of 8.6 on a scale to ten with 9.3 being the highest.
I can't wait for your next response. I'll have my questions locked and loaded...
Sincerely,
Clive Staples Lewis
P.S. - God still loves
you and wants you to return to Him like in the prodigal son story.
But He won't force you. It's your choice.
> Let him lurk in wait; I'm sure he got a broken clock since
eternity. Maybe he'll turn back to the nothing whence he alleged
created the universe. My choice is to be free; that's freedom.
The rest are just words. Anything having a superior being as
warranty of existence is only a mean to drive the flock. Xianism
is just a form of social congretionalism, established since upon
a projectional symbol 2000 years ago, so the clockwork is too
much started in order to stop it; that's why you are so attached
to xianism, as any other believer to any other form of superstition.
If it falls, you would be afraid the whole world upon which you
was formatted will fall alike.
You are afraid; we don't. Because we are free both in ourselves
and each others. You, feel free only each other, in contact;
but when you rest alone, the doubt could wind within yourselves,
so you grasp to the faith. You fear the darkness, we can walk
thru night and day indifferently, without fear of anything.
Anyway, I think I was wrong about you, I have the courage to
admit it; but this doesn't mean that a society of believers doesn't
still bad. Time will show the truth; but we can't wait for it.
Look around; people is suffering very much right now, and we
know what's the cause for that.
Have peace, if you can.
B. M. C..
Faith's response...
You still haven't admitted you were wrong on the now infamous two (2) points.
Evil is anything causes a damage, a disavantage
That's YOUR opinion formed by your upbringing and unique cerebral sponge of brain chemicals.
The fact is that you are already formed since great time upon things you cannot refuse now.
You would have to live with me my whole life to know for a fact whether this statement is indeed true or not.
They formed you, and you think is too late to revisionate what you've learned.
You would have to hook my brain up to some sorta futuristic mind-reading machine to know what I think. But it could also malfunction giving a false reading. Or worse, pre-programmed to give false answers.
I'm suspecting you were aslight racist too.
Especially since I learned that certain races of people are less-evolved than I.
Well, what are the same documents I had read in order for you could state this?
This doesn't matter. All that matters is that what I say is true because my unbiased sources say it is so.
Anyway, I gladly accept your wishes as those of a human being.
Make that human animal ;-)
Cheerio my good friend/antagonist!
Sincerely,
Chuck Darwin
Marcel's response...
You still haven't admitted you were wrong on the now infamous two (2) points.
Evil is anything causes a damage, a disavantage
That's YOUR opinion formed by your upbringing and unique cerebral sponge of brain chemicals.
Well, what's YOUR opinion? That the devil causes diseases? I think he's gotta other problems to deal with right now, such fighting with Jesus....
The fact is that you are already formed since great time upon things you cannot refuse now.
You would have to live with me my whole life to know for a fact whether this statement is indeed true or not.
Well, gonna telling me you was born atheist then you repented?
They formed you, and you think is too late to revisionate what you've learned.
You would have to hook my brain up to some sorta futuristic mind-reading machine to know what I think. But it could also malfunction giving a false reading. Or worse, pre-programmed to give false answers.
Well, so, why you were appointed to say that I'm brainwashed, and I'm not allowed to say te same? What's Pilate's truth?
I'm suspecting you were aslight racist too.
Especially since I learned that certain races of people are less-evolved than I.
Whence do you come from? Perhaps from Jupiter either? But doesn't xianism use to say that we are all the same? Or better you might say tha some other "races" were just less informed? I guess inclinations don't matter.
Well, what are the same documents I had read in order for you could state this?
This doesn't matter. All that matters is that what I say is true because my unbiased sources say it is so.
Careful; sturdy convinction is half a foolishness.
Anyway, I gladly accept your wishes as those of a human being.
Make that human animal ;-)
Some animals got mindful.
All the best, Clive. Keep
in touch.
B. M. C..
P. s.; lo, "anthagonist"; that's very so xian, to have
"anthagonists"....
Faith's response...
Happy Thanksgiving.