On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
On 2022-02-04 1:15 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ⚧ wrote:Am I the only trans person who is still on Usenet?
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
i used to be a transient but i moved on
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
On 2/4/22 8:19 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 1:15 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ⚧ wrote:Am I the only trans person who is still on Usenet?
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake %
impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
i used to be a transient but i moved on
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
Tons of trans
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
On 2022-02-04 1:15 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ? wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
i used to be a transient but i moved on
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
"%" wrote in message news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com... >>I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here in >Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
On 2/4/22 8:19 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 1:15 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ? wrote:Am I the only trans person who is still on Usenet?
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
i used to be a transient but i moved on
"%"Â wrote in message news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here
in Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
On 2/4/22 8:55 PM, David wrote:
"%" wrote in message news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com... >>
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here
in Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
Do you live there?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tulsa,+OK,+USA/@36.1525297,-96.1582101,10z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x87b692b8ddd12e8f:0xe76910c81bd96af7!8m2!3d36.1539816!4d-95.992775?hl=en
On 2/4/22 8:55 PM, David wrote:
"%"Â wrote in message news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com... >>
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here
in Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
Do you live there?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tulsa,+OK,+USA/@36.1525297,-96.1582101,10z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x87b692b8ddd12e8f:0xe76910c81bd96af7!8m2!3d36.1539816!4d-95.992775?hl=en
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Tons of trans
people have succesfully transitioned.
Horseshit. Nobody has EVER successfully 'transed'. DNA never lies.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-04 1:46 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ⚧ wrote:Then ask them to drop a letter at <science@danwin1210.me>. If they are
On 2/4/22 8:19 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 1:15 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ⚧ wrote:Am I the only trans person who is still on Usenet?
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake %
impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly
banned: http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
i used to be a transient but i moved on
no
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:46:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 8:19 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 1:15 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ? wrote:Am I the only trans person who is still on Usenet?
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
i used to be a transient but i moved on
No, because you are NOT a 'trans person'. No such animal exists.
However, LOTS of delusional people are on Usenet, though not all
deluded about their sexual identity like you.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender >affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Tons of trans
people have succesfully transitioned.
Horseshit. Nobody has EVER successfully 'transed'. DNA never lies.
DNA isn't your personality - it doesn't matter when it comes to being a
man or a woman.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
Tons of trans
people have succesfully transitioned.
Horseshit. Nobody has EVER successfully 'transed'. DNA never lies.
DNA isn't your personality - it doesn't matter when it comes to being a
man or a woman.
DNA is your sexual identity and it cannot be changed. It DETERMINES
whether you become a man or a woman. Personality is superficial and
has jack shit do do with it
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific
FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Scientific (she/her) ⚧ <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 8:55 PM, David wrote:
"%"Â wrote in message news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here >>> in Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
Do you live there?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tulsa,+OK,+USA/@36.1525297,-96.1582101,10z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x87b692b8ddd12e8f:0xe76910c81bd96af7!8m2!3d36.1539816!4d-95.992775?hl=en
I’m fine with things and the neighbors talking. I might find a sandwich shop or a newspaper on the way.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
It doesn't mean that you're cis, non-binary or trans. It's fine, and you >should, in fact, figure it out before you even think about
transitioning. You will learn more about yourself in 6 months doing 101% >reversible stuff than wasting 50 years in front of your CRT.
Tons of trans
people have succesfully transitioned.
Horseshit. Nobody has EVER successfully 'transed'. DNA never lies.
DNA isn't your personality - it doesn't matter when it comes to being a
man or a woman.
DNA is your sexual identity and it cannot be changed. It DETERMINES
whether you become a man or a woman. Personality is superficial and
has jack shit do do with it
As long as you aren't a criminal, I don't see how being trans would be >harmful to anyone but themselves if they make decisions recklessly.
Hormones are not toys - they are serious substances changing the way
your body works. Your gender therapist *will* tell you that and if you
are whining to get them, then you won't get them because you aren't
mature enough to make this kind of decisions.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific
FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo
- you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
more transphobic you can get than that?
On 2022-02-04 1:15 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ⚧ wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
i used to be a transient but i moved on
Scientific (she/her) ⚧ <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 8:55 PM, David wrote:
"%"Â wrote in message news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here >>> in Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
Do you live there?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tulsa,+OK,+USA/@36.1525297,-96.1582101,10z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x87b692b8ddd12e8f:0xe76910c81bd96af7!8m2!3d36.1539816!4d-95.992775?hl=en
I’m fine with things and the neighbors talking. I might find a sandwich shop or a newspaper on the way.
On 2/4/22 8:19 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 1:15 p.m., Scientific (she/her) ⚧ wrote:Am I the only trans person who is still on Usenet?
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". Tons of trans
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake %
impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
people have succesfully transitioned.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
i used to be a transient but i moved on
On 2/5/2022 8:53 AM, canoleenie wrote:
Scientific (she/her) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:don't chew the used condoms you find this time
On 2/4/22 8:55 PM, David wrote:
"%" wrote in message news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here >>>> in Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
Do you live there?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tulsa,+OK,+USA/@36.1525297,-96.1582101,10z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x87b692b8ddd12e8f:0xe76910c81bd96af7!8m2!3d36.1539816!4d-95.992775?hl=en
I’m fine with things and the neighbors talking. I might find a sandwich
shop or a newspaper on the way.
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
It doesn't mean that you're cis, non-binary or trans. It's fine, and you
should, in fact, figure it out before you even think about
transitioning. You will learn more about yourself in 6 months doing 101%
reversible stuff than wasting 50 years in front of your CRT.
Nobody should even THINK about 'transitioning' because, to put it
bluntly, it's physically impossible.
Tons of trans
people have succesfully transitioned.
Horseshit. Nobody has EVER successfully 'transed'. DNA never lies.
DNA isn't your personality - it doesn't matter when it comes to being a >>>> man or a woman.
DNA is your sexual identity and it cannot be changed. It DETERMINES
whether you become a man or a woman. Personality is superficial and
has jack shit do do with it
As long as you aren't a criminal, I don't see how being trans would be
harmful to anyone but themselves if they make decisions recklessly.
Hormones are not toys - they are serious substances changing the way
your body works. Your gender therapist *will* tell you that and if you
are whining to get them, then you won't get them because you aren't
mature enough to make this kind of decisions.
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being
harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific
FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo
- you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
It doesn't mean that you're cis, non-binary or trans. It's fine, and you
should, in fact, figure it out before you even think about
transitioning. You will learn more about yourself in 6 months doing 101%
reversible stuff than wasting 50 years in front of your CRT.
Nobody should even THINK about 'transitioning' because, to put it
bluntly, it's physically impossible.
Tons of trans
people have succesfully transitioned.
Horseshit. Nobody has EVER successfully 'transed'. DNA never lies.
DNA isn't your personality - it doesn't matter when it comes to being a >>>> man or a woman.
DNA is your sexual identity and it cannot be changed. It DETERMINES
whether you become a man or a woman. Personality is superficial and
has jack shit do do with it
As long as you aren't a criminal, I don't see how being trans would be
harmful to anyone but themselves if they make decisions recklessly.
Hormones are not toys - they are serious substances changing the way
your body works. Your gender therapist *will* tell you that and if you
are whining to get them, then you won't get them because you aren't
mature enough to make this kind of decisions.
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being
harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific
FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo
- you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being
harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Yes, it is possible.
It is also a social possibility with changes like
your name, clothing, make-up, voice training. It's not an all-or-nothing >journey - for example, I chose to change my name, clothing, voice and
left out makeup.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific
FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo
- you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
Well, it matters, when you want to have children, in medicine and in
sports. College swimmer Lia Thomas has been getting a lot of shit simply >because she is a trans woman.
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off >>>> and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how >>> more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or
taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:57:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being
harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Yes, it is possible.
No, it is absolutely impossible, as a DNA test will show.
It is also a social possibility with changes like
your name, clothing, make-up, voice training. It's not an all-or-nothing
journey - for example, I chose to change my name, clothing, voice and
left out makeup.
And at the end of all that, you still won't find a man you can fool
into thinking you're a woman.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific >>>>> FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo >>>> - you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
Well, it matters, when you want to have children, in medicine and in
sports. College swimmer Lia Thomas has been getting a lot of shit simply
because she is a trans woman.
If this horseshit continues, that's the end of women's sports. There
will only be unisex sports and the males will always win.
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you >>>>> will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off >>>>> and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how >>>> more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or
taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting
something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your
body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
You take female hormones, don't you? You're obviously fucked up. QED
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender. >>>
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change >>>>>> that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and >>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
It doesn't mean that you're cis, non-binary or trans. It's fine, and you >>>> should, in fact, figure it out before you even think about
transitioning. You will learn more about yourself in 6 months doing 101% >>>> reversible stuff than wasting 50 years in front of your CRT.
Nobody should even THINK about 'transitioning' because, to put it
bluntly, it's physically impossible.
Well, it is possible to some degree. For example, estrogen grows your
breasts, makes your skin smaller, and surgery changes your genitalia or
body characteristics. Be sure, though - some of these changes are
irreversible.
Those changes are, as I've said before, merely superficial/cosmetic.
You're still the same sex you were born as. You may become a more
convincing female impersonator as a result of these changes but that's
all you'll ever be.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender. >>>>
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change >>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>
good idea
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and >>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
It doesn't mean that you're cis, non-binary or trans. It's fine, and you >>>>> should, in fact, figure it out before you even think about
transitioning. You will learn more about yourself in 6 months doing 101% >>>>> reversible stuff than wasting 50 years in front of your CRT.
Nobody should even THINK about 'transitioning' because, to put it
bluntly, it's physically impossible.
Well, it is possible to some degree. For example, estrogen grows your
breasts, makes your skin smaller, and surgery changes your genitalia or
body characteristics. Be sure, though - some of these changes are
irreversible.
Those changes are, as I've said before, merely superficial/cosmetic.
You're still the same sex you were born as. You may become a more
convincing female impersonator as a result of these changes but that's
all you'll ever be.
Well, I like the effects of transgender HRT.
"%" wrote in messageI get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here in >Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:57:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being
harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Yes, it is possible.
No, it is absolutely impossible, as a DNA test will show.
It is also a social possibility with changes like
your name, clothing, make-up, voice training. It's not an all-or-nothing >>> journey - for example, I chose to change my name, clothing, voice and
left out makeup.
And at the end of all that, you still won't find a man you can fool
into thinking you're a woman.
I don't need to fool anyone that I'm a woman, I'm just one.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>>>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific >>>>>> FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo >>>>> - you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
Well, it matters, when you want to have children, in medicine and in
sports. College swimmer Lia Thomas has been getting a lot of shit simply >>> because she is a trans woman.
If this horseshit continues, that's the end of women's sports. There
will only be unisex sports and the males will always win.
Well, only the people who are best suited, regardless of their sex,
should be able to compete.
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you >>>>>> will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off >>>>>> and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how >>>>> more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting >>>> off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or
taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting
something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your
body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that
risky as you think according to currently existing research.
"%" wrote in message
news:JoWdnTYtS_hUGWD8nZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here
in Tulsa at 11th & Yale.
On 2022-02-04 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
I get big sometimes and I recently learned to yell extremely loud, here in >>>Tulsa at 11th & Yale.On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?he is the fake %
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>Why? We don't block any of your delusional shite or report it.
A bad case of Tourette syndrome? Don't try it at 12th & Ferguson.
I got an adjustment in my meds so it may help with that.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender. >>>>>
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
It doesn't mean that you're cis, non-binary or trans. It's fine, and you >>>>>> should, in fact, figure it out before you even think about
transitioning. You will learn more about yourself in 6 months doing 101% >>>>>> reversible stuff than wasting 50 years in front of your CRT.
Nobody should even THINK about 'transitioning' because, to put it
bluntly, it's physically impossible.
Well, it is possible to some degree. For example, estrogen grows your
breasts, makes your skin smaller, and surgery changes your genitalia or >>>> body characteristics. Be sure, though - some of these changes are
irreversible.
Those changes are, as I've said before, merely superficial/cosmetic.
You're still the same sex you were born as. You may become a more
convincing female impersonator as a result of these changes but that's
all you'll ever be.
Well, I like the effects of transgender HRT.
Well, it's not turning you into a woman so whatever you're paying for
it is totally wasted.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to >legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to >>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term >>>> is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to >>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term >>>> is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to >> legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to >>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term >>>>>> is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to >>>> legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
On 12/02/2022 6:46 pm, El Kabong wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the EnglishOn Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to >>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to >>>> legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
Knock yourself out, El Bullshit, it ain't gonna last.
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 6:46 pm, El Kabong wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the EnglishOn Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't anyOn 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to >>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>> legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
Knock yourself out, El Bullshit, it ain't gonna last.
IOW, you lack the faith needed to pull off a bona fide
christly miracle, so you have to dodge that one.
With some faith you could move mountains, but you can't
even morph up a tiny little X chromasome.
Some might even come to doubt your christness.
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to >> >>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >> >>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term >> >>>> is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to >> >> legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to >>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term >>>>>>> is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to >>>>> legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
clappy nigra church.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to >>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>> legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning >>>>>>>>>>>>> their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains >>>>>>>>>>>>>> unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of >>>>>>>>>>> youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but >>>>>>>>> only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which >>>>>>>> will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect >>>>>>>>>> us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this >>>>>>>>> term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo
paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he >>>>>>> is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 6:46 pm, El Kabong wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning >>>>>>>>>>>> their gender.
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EnglishOn Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will >>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own
sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains >>>>>>>>>>>>> unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of >>>>>>>>>> youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only >>>>>>>> to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect >>>>>>>>> us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this >>>>>>>> term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm >>>>>> to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
Knock yourself out, El Bullshit, it ain't gonna last.
IOW, you lack the faith needed to pull off a bona fide
christly miracle, so you have to dodge that one.
With some faith you could move mountains, but you can't
even morph up a tiny little X chromasome.
Some might even come to doubt your christness.
"Michael Christ" wrote in message news:su80c0$h70$2@dont-email.me...
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
Knock yourself out, El Bullshit, it ain't gonna last.
IOW, you lack the faith needed to pull off a bona fide
christly miracle, so you have to dodge that one.
With some faith you could move mountains, but you can't
even morph up a tiny little X chromasome.
Some might even come to doubt your christness.
Tick tock.
I take a med case with me in my pocket for wrong interactions. I hope this >helps.
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>> mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>> its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>> its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>>>>
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>> its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and
tried to change the topic.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The >evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this >suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
Are we clear?
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and
tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote: >>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and
tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion.
You talk heap shit.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote: >>>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind
would want to live in.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and
tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion.
You talk heap shit.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote: >>>>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him >>>>>> to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind
would want to live in.
like he has a choice
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and
tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion.
You talk heap shit.
this is good now you've changed the topic on your original topic change
and the original topic a topic and two topic changes in one thread ,
yea , i talk heap alright but lets look at you ,
according to you everything has to have a dick and ,
you can't retain a thought long enough to make a second reply to it and
i talk heap , you got a lot to learn about heap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPKBOBYzb28&t=17s
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and
tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion.
You talk heap shit.
it doesn't matter why you said it , you said it ,
and then you denied you said it now you're explaining why you said it
https://i.etsystatic.com/24967786/r/il/43146c/2790792660/il_1588xN.2790792660_lkjf.jpg
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me...
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him >>>>>>> to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind
would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it,
why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:07:46 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic
And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and
tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion.
You talk heap shit.
it doesn't matter why you said it , you said it ,
and then you denied you said it now you're explaining why you said it
https://i.etsystatic.com/24967786/r/il/43146c/2790792660/il_1588xN.2790792660_lkjf.jpg
You're confused. You should be a 'transgender'. Does it really take
two replies to one post to get your scrambled brain together?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If >>>>>> we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to >>>>>> thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good >>from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Are WE clear?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-12 4:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:07:46 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>> its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion.
You talk heap shit.
it doesn't matter why you said it , you said it ,
and then you denied you said it now you're explaining why you said it
https://i.etsystatic.com/24967786/r/il/43146c/2790792660/il_1588xN.2790792660_lkjf.jpg
You're confused. You should be a 'transgender'. Does it really take
two replies to one post to get your scrambled brain together?
you're off topic
On 2022-02-12 4:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him >>>>>>>> to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind
would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it,
why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
no one said he's not
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere >>>>>>> in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because >>>>>>> we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>> mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good >>>from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:59 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:39 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:54:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>> its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion.
You talk heap shit.
this is good now you've changed the topic on your original topic change >>>> and the original topic a topic and two topic changes in one thread ,
yea , i talk heap alright but lets look at you ,
according to you everything has to have a dick and ,
you can't retain a thought long enough to make a second reply to it and >>>> i talk heap , you got a lot to learn about heap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPKBOBYzb28&t=17s
That sounds like doubleplus shit, even by your standards.
you said heap so i heeped
You heap without anyone needing to tell you to.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him >>>>>>>>> to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind >>>>> would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it,
why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
no one said he's not
And why would they lock someone up in a 'head injury place'? Because
it's a nuthouse and they need to protect the public.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:57:35 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:07:46 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>> its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion.
You talk heap shit.
it doesn't matter why you said it , you said it ,
and then you denied you said it now you're explaining why you said it
https://i.etsystatic.com/24967786/r/il/43146c/2790792660/il_1588xN.2790792660_lkjf.jpg
You're confused. You should be a 'transgender'. Does it really take
two replies to one post to get your scrambled brain together?
you're off topic
Nothing could be more ON topic on alt.trangendered.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>>>>
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The >>>> evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this >>>> suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
approach.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God
create something like that?
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
On 2022-02-12 6:17 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally?
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him >>>>>>>>>> to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind >>>>>> would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it,
why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
no one said he's not
And why would they lock someone up in a 'head injury place'? Because
it's a nuthouse and they need to protect the public.
it's also to keep people out
On 2022-02-12 6:22 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to >>>>>> happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The >>>>> evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this >>>>> suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven. >>>> And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
approach.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good >>>> >from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a >>>>> wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God
create something like that?
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human >>>>> sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human >>>>> sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just >>>> about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
did your google break
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we >>>>>>>>> will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to >>>>>> happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The >>>>> evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this >>>>> suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven. >>>> And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in
heaven either.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good >>>> >from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a >>>>> wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human >>>>> sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human >>>>> sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just >>>> about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:30:40 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:16 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:59 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:39 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:54:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion. >>>>>>>
You talk heap shit.
this is good now you've changed the topic on your original topic change >>>>>> and the original topic a topic and two topic changes in one thread , >>>>>> yea , i talk heap alright but lets look at you ,
according to you everything has to have a dick and ,
you can't retain a thought long enough to make a second reply to it and >>>>>> i talk heap , you got a lot to learn about heap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPKBOBYzb28&t=17s
That sounds like doubleplus shit, even by your standards.
you said heap so i heeped
You heap without anyone needing to tell you to.
yea , so
A LOT of heap.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:31:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:16 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:57:35 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:07:46 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some >>>>>>>> horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion. >>>>>>>
You talk heap shit.
it doesn't matter why you said it , you said it ,
and then you denied you said it now you're explaining why you said it >>>>>>
https://i.etsystatic.com/24967786/r/il/43146c/2790792660/il_1588xN.2790792660_lkjf.jpg
You're confused. You should be a 'transgender'. Does it really take >>>>> two replies to one post to get your scrambled brain together?
you're off topic
Nothing could be more ON topic on alt.trangendered.
you're going more places than that and you're still off topic
How is it off topic, heapmonger?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:33:21 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:17 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him >>>>>>>>>>> to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind >>>>>>> would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it,
why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
no one said he's not
And why would they lock someone up in a 'head injury place'? Because
it's a nuthouse and they need to protect the public.
it's also to keep people out
Why would anyone try to get IN to a fucking nuthouse???
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all >>>>>>>> have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to >>>>>>> happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The >>>>>> evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this >>>>>> suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven. >>>>> And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
wants, wherever He wants.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would GodOn the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good >>>>> >from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a >>>>>> wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God. >>>
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as
well as bad things.
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human >>>>>> sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human >>>>>> sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just >>>>> about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to >>>>>>>> happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The >>>>>>> evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this >>>>>>> suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven. >>>>>> And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission. >>>>
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would GodOn the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good >>>>>> >from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a >>>>>>> wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God. >>>>
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He choosesTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human >>>>>>> sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human >>>>>>> sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God. >>>>
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just >>>>>> about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:33:21 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:17 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once?
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
why should he , you don't
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind >>>>>>>> would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it, >>>>>> why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
no one said he's not
And why would they lock someone up in a 'head injury place'? Because
it's a nuthouse and they need to protect the public.
it's also to keep people out
Why would anyone try to get IN to a fucking nuthouse???
to murder people inside that may have murdered people outside
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:31:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:16 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:57:35 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:07:46 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion. >>>>>>>>
You talk heap shit.
it doesn't matter why you said it , you said it ,
and then you denied you said it now you're explaining why you said it >>>>>>>
https://i.etsystatic.com/24967786/r/il/43146c/2790792660/il_1588xN.2790792660_lkjf.jpg
You're confused. You should be a 'transgender'. Does it really take >>>>>> two replies to one post to get your scrambled brain together?
you're off topic
Nothing could be more ON topic on alt.trangendered.
you're going more places than that and you're still off topic
How is it off topic, heapmonger?
if i answer that i'll have to go off topic
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:30:40 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:16 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:59 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:39 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:54:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion. >>>>>>>>
You talk heap shit.
this is good now you've changed the topic on your original topic change >>>>>>> and the original topic a topic and two topic changes in one thread , >>>>>>> yea , i talk heap alright but lets look at you ,
according to you everything has to have a dick and ,
you can't retain a thought long enough to make a second reply to it and >>>>>>> i talk heap , you got a lot to learn about heap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPKBOBYzb28&t=17s
That sounds like doubleplus shit, even by your standards.
you said heap so i heeped
You heap without anyone needing to tell you to.
yea , so
A LOT of heap.
a lot of you off topic
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 07:34:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:30:40 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:16 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:59 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 4:39 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:54:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may
That's "He" not "he" infidel.
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take >>>>>>>>>> its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion. >>>>>>>>>
You talk heap shit.
this is good now you've changed the topic on your original topic change
and the original topic a topic and two topic changes in one thread , >>>>>>>> yea , i talk heap alright but lets look at you ,
according to you everything has to have a dick and ,
you can't retain a thought long enough to make a second reply to it and
i talk heap , you got a lot to learn about heap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPKBOBYzb28&t=17s
That sounds like doubleplus shit, even by your standards.
you said heap so i heeped
You heap without anyone needing to tell you to.
yea , so
A LOT of heap.
a lot of you off topic
Never once.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 11:20 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 07:34:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:30:40 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:16 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:59 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 4:39 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:54:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:That's "He" not "he" infidel.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>
You talk heap shit.
this is good now you've changed the topic on your original topic change
and the original topic a topic and two topic changes in one thread , >>>>>>>>> yea , i talk heap alright but lets look at you ,
according to you everything has to have a dick and ,
you can't retain a thought long enough to make a second reply to it and
i talk heap , you got a lot to learn about heap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPKBOBYzb28&t=17s
That sounds like doubleplus shit, even by your standards.
you said heap so i heeped
You heap without anyone needing to tell you to.
yea , so
A LOT of heap.
a lot of you off topic
Never once.
you already lost that game
On 2022-02-13 11:23 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 07:36:49 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:33:21 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:17 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 4:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:why should he , you don't
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind >>>>>>>>>> would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it, >>>>>>>> why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
no one said he's not
And why would they lock someone up in a 'head injury place'? Because >>>>>> it's a nuthouse and they need to protect the public.
it's also to keep people out
Why would anyone try to get IN to a fucking nuthouse???
to murder people inside that may have murdered people outside
How many of these 'head injury' cases have actually murdered people
outside? Is David one of them?
is your google broken
On 2022-02-13 11:21 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 07:35:53 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:31:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:16 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:57:35 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 4:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:07:46 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:24:16 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:19 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:19:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:14 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:31:45 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:29 p.m., KWills wrote:And who changed the topic to catching? Fake %!
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 10:20:08 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 9:56 a.m., KWills wrote:That's "He" not "he" infidel.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
here he goes again catching any come what may >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and if you point out that he catches come he changes the topic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
it was what you were talking about i was on topic ,
and you've done everything but stick to the topic ,
duck n dodge kwills
I never mentioned catching, you were the one who brought it up and >>>>>>>>>>>> tried to change the topic.
here's a quote of you not saying what you said
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That's after someone else introduced theology into the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>
You talk heap shit.
it doesn't matter why you said it , you said it ,
and then you denied you said it now you're explaining why you said it >>>>>>>>>
https://i.etsystatic.com/24967786/r/il/43146c/2790792660/il_1588xN.2790792660_lkjf.jpg
You're confused. You should be a 'transgender'. Does it really take >>>>>>>> two replies to one post to get your scrambled brain together?
you're off topic
Nothing could be more ON topic on alt.trangendered.
you're going more places than that and you're still off topic
How is it off topic, heapmonger?
if i answer that i'll have to go off topic
In other words, you have no answer. As expected.
you're off topic
On 2022-02-13 12:09 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:39:56 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 11:23 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 07:36:49 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:33:21 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 6:17 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 4:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:why should he , you don't
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me try to go farther than that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind
would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it, >>>>>>>>>> why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
no one said he's not
And why would they lock someone up in a 'head injury place'? Because >>>>>>>> it's a nuthouse and they need to protect the public.
it's also to keep people out
Why would anyone try to get IN to a fucking nuthouse???
to murder people inside that may have murdered people outside
How many of these 'head injury' cases have actually murdered people
outside? Is David one of them?
is your google broken
Your claim, your substantiation, sunshine.
you asked the question you go get the answer , moonlight
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:39:56 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 11:23 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 07:36:49 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 5:47 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 18:33:21 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 6:17 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:56:29 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 4:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 16:09:09 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:21:32 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 3:20 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 13:21:07 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 1:15 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:42:04 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 12:32 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:13:45 -0600, "David" <dd@davidd.info> wrote:why should he , you don't
Can you TRY to follow a fucking thread for once? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"aaa" wrote in message news:su8spn$7qk$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
can you recommend a good insurance company locally? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He should because it's annoying and he's mental and I'm telling him
to. And I do follow the threads.
you're expecting a little much from ,
a guy that lives in a head injury place
Head injury place? Loonybin more like.
no , it's not that , in fact it's pretty nice and ,
likely more than you could afford
It's exactly that and it's in Tulsa which nobody in their right mind
would want to live in.
like he has a choice
If it's that hard to afford the place he's in and he can afford it, >>>>>>>>> why doesn't he go elsewhere? Because he's locked up!
no one said he's not
And why would they lock someone up in a 'head injury place'? Because >>>>>>> it's a nuthouse and they need to protect the public.
it's also to keep people out
Why would anyone try to get IN to a fucking nuthouse???
to murder people inside that may have murdered people outside
How many of these 'head injury' cases have actually murdered people
outside? Is David one of them?
is your google broken
Your claim, your substantiation, sunshine.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because I
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved >>>>>>>>>>> of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own >>>>>>>>>> mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to >>>>>>>>> happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven. >>>>>>> And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission. >>>>>
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>> heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would GodOn the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good >>>>>>> >from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a >>>>>>>> wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God. >>>>>
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>> no to exercise that clout.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human >>>>>>>> sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human >>>>>>>> sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God. >>>>>
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just >>>>>>> about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong
<twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?You can successfully transition from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other, but only to
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned".On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there aren't any
good ideaYou are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
'transgender' people who have successfully >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why >>>>>>>>>>>>> we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe >>>>>>>>>>>>> this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have >>>>>>>>>>>> approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is >>>>>>>>>>> why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for >>>>>>>>>>> our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything >>>>>>>>>> bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly >>>>>>>>> true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same >>>>>>>>> as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in >>>>>>>> heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine
permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>>> heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be
anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is >>>>>>>> just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing
without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of >>>>>>>>> human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of >>>>>>>>> human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to >>>>>>> God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>> no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted >>>>>>>> by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to >>>>>>>>>> happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven. >>>>>>>> And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission. >>>>>>
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>>> heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a >>>>>>>>> wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>> no to exercise that clout.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human >>>>>>>>> sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human >>>>>>>>> sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God. >>>>>>
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just >>>>>>>> about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:54:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:57:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being
harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Yes, it is possible.
No, it is absolutely impossible, as a DNA test will show.
It is also a social possibility with changes like
your name, clothing, make-up, voice training. It's not an all-or-nothing >>>> journey - for example, I chose to change my name, clothing, voice and
left out makeup.
And at the end of all that, you still won't find a man you can fool
into thinking you're a woman.
I don't need to fool anyone that I'm a woman, I'm just one.
Don't be absurd. Of course you're not. You're a man - a delusional
one, but still a man. Women don't got dicks!
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific >>>>>>> FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo >>>>>> - you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
Well, it matters, when you want to have children, in medicine and in
sports. College swimmer Lia Thomas has been getting a lot of shit simply >>>> because she is a trans woman.
If this horseshit continues, that's the end of women's sports. There
will only be unisex sports and the males will always win.
Well, only the people who are best suited, regardless of their sex,
should be able to compete.
And that will almost always be males, except for faggy stuff like
figure skating and possibly gymnastics.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingestingYou're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The >>>>>>> reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you >>>>>>> will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off >>>>>>> and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how >>>>>> more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting >>>>> off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or
taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose. >>>
something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your
body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that
risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't
possibly be good.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to >>>>>>>>>>> happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission. >>>>>>>
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>>>> heaven either.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is >>>> no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things asOn the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a >>>>>>>>>> wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>>> no to exercise that clout.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human >>>>>>>>>> sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God. >>>>>>>
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong
<twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lingo paradigm to
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?You can successfully transition from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other, but only to
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call transition "gender
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned".On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there aren't any
good ideaYou are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
'transgender' people who have successfully >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
affirmation". Language is constantly changing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have >>>>>>>>>>>>> approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is >>>>>>>>>>>> why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for >>>>>>>>>>>> our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything >>>>>>>>>>> bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly >>>>>>>>>> true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same >>>>>>>>>> as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in >>>>>>>>> heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine
permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>>>> heaven either.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is >>>> no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things asOn the other the hand, your assumption that there can be
anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is >>>>>>>>> just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing
without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of >>>>>>>>>> human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of >>>>>>>>>> human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to >>>>>>>> God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>>> no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted >>>>>>>>> by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
did you see where i defeated the kwills
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong
<twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?You can successfully transition from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other, but only to
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call transition "gender
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned".On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transed'.
good ideaYou are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
affirmation". Language is constantly changing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have >>>>>>>>>>>>> approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is >>>>>>>>>>>> why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for >>>>>>>>>>>> our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything >>>>>>>>>>> bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly >>>>>>>>>> true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in >>>>>>>>> heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine
permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the >>>>>>>> same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>
happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is >>>> no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things asOn the other the hand, your assumption that there can be
anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is >>>>>>>>> just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing
without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone
to do good without believing good in the first place?
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of >>>>>>>>>> human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result >>>>>>>>>> of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back >>>>>>>> to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>>> no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for
everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted >>>>>>>>> by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on >>>>>>>> it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El KabongLet me try to go farther than that.
<twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative effects >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of it.On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned".On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good ideaYou are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have >>>>>>>>>>>>>> approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible >>>>>>>>>>>>> for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything >>>>>>>>>>>> bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly >>>>>>>>>>> true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in >>>>>>>>>> heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine
permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the >>>>>>>>> same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>>
happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means
there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is >>>>>>>>>> just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing
without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone
to do good without believing good in the first place?
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence >>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result >>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back >>>>>>>>> to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He
chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for
everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted >>>>>>>>>> by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's >>>>>>> good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious. >>>>
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 13:30:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El KabongLet me try to go farther than that.
<twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lingo paradigm to
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly changing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative effects >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of it.
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned".On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transed'.
good ideaYou are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have >>>>>>>>>>>>>> approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for >>>>>>>>>>>>> our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything >>>>>>>>>>>> bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly >>>>>>>>>>> true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same >>>>>>>>>>> as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in >>>>>>>>>> heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine
permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>>>>> heaven either.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>>
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is >>>>> no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is >>>>>>>>>> just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing
without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of >>>>>>>>>>> human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of >>>>>>>>>>> human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to >>>>>>>>> God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>>>> no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>>>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted >>>>>>>>>> by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious. >>>>
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
did you see where i defeated the kwills
Nobody saw it because it didn't happen. And you're off-topic...again!
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org>
wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org>
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
(he/him) ?
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific
(he/him) ?<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific
Scientific (he/him) ?<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000,
Scientific (he/him) ?<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000,
Scientific (he/him) ?<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000,
(he/him) ? wrote:<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote:
On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific
shit out of fake % impersonator.Please block messages and report the
because there aren't anyYou are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™
successfully 'transed'.'transgender' people who have
to appropriate the English"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts
TransHub, call transition "genderlanguage in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian
changing and nobody will changeaffirmation". Language is constantly
effects of it.that, with all positive and negative
their own sublanguages and
https://www.transhub.org.au/
Subcultures such as yours have always had
usage remains unchanged.this is a good example. Mainstream English
is questioning their gender.For example, an "egg" is a trans person who
neo-word.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans'
garnered about 1.5% of youth.
Trans community is a subculture that has
you have ever
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of
the other, but only tosuccessfully 'transed' from one sex to the other.
You can successfully transition from one sex to
changes which willsome degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic
impersonator of themake you either more or less convicing as an
and don't expect usopposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes.
They are free to make up words which they want.
As long as your freaks use them among yourselves
"transgenderist" because Inormal people to adopt your newspeak.
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a
their lingo paradigm todidn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit.
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into
In the end, he islegitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense.
going to matter.going to get old and all of this bullshit is not
does interfere
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Let me try to go farther than that.
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God
anything becausein the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish
right way, wewe don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the
why we all have towill have God's support, and we will succeed. This is
believe this is howthank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I
have approvedGod interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not
Nature takeof. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets
is why we allits course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It
for our ownhave to thank God for everything good and be responsible
anything bad tomistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow
perfectly true. Thehappen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and
same as thisevidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the
in heaven.suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be
permission.And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine
the same
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by
happen inpermission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to
there isheaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means
anything goodno bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. therefore, there is no bad thing left.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be
is just afrom letting nature taking its course without God involved
without God.wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing
to do good without believing good in the first place?
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone
of human
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence
of humansin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result
to God.sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back
chooses
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He
everyone,no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for
discounted by justand God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been
goodabout every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's
on it.for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
did you see where i defeated the kwills
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>> approach.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission. >>>>>>>>
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>>>>> heaven either.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>>
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is >>>>> no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>>>> no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>>>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious. >>>>
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >faithful.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
On 2022-02-13 2:42 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 13:30:51 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly changing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative effects >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of it.
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned".On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have successfully >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transed'.
good ideaYou are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything >>>>>>>>>>>>> bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly >>>>>>>>>>>> true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same >>>>>>>>>>>> as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in >>>>>>>>>>> heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine
permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>>>>>> heaven either.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>>>
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is >>>>>> no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is >>>>>>>>>>> just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to >>>> do good without believing good in the first place?
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have aTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of >>>>>>>>>>>> human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of >>>>>>>>>>>> human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to >>>>>>>>>> God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>>>>> no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>>>>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted >>>>>>>>>>> by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious. >>>>>
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
did you see where i defeated the kwills
Nobody saw it because it didn't happen. And you're off-topic...again!
this guy saw it and says so at the end
--did you see where i defeated the kwills
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
On 2/11/22 19:05, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:54:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:57:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being >>>>>> harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Yes, it is possible.
No, it is absolutely impossible, as a DNA test will show.
It is also a social possibility with changes like
your name, clothing, make-up, voice training. It's not an all-or-nothing >>>>> journey - for example, I chose to change my name, clothing, voice and >>>>> left out makeup.
And at the end of all that, you still won't find a man you can fool
into thinking you're a woman.
I don't need to fool anyone that I'm a woman, I'm just one.
Don't be absurd. Of course you're not. You're a man - a delusional
one, but still a man. Women don't got dicks!
Unless they're trans women.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>>>>>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific >>>>>>>> FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo >>>>>>> - you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
Well, it matters, when you want to have children, in medicine and in >>>>> sports. College swimmer Lia Thomas has been getting a lot of shit simply >>>>> because she is a trans woman.
If this horseshit continues, that's the end of women's sports. There
will only be unisex sports and the males will always win.
Well, only the people who are best suited, regardless of their sex,
should be able to compete.
And that will almost always be males, except for faggy stuff like
figure skating and possibly gymnastics.
Figure skating and women's gymnastics is one of exceptions where women
have it better.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingestingYou're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The >>>>>>>> reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you >>>>>>>> will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off >>>>>>>> and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting >>>>>> off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that >>>>>> don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or >>>>> taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose. >>>>
something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your
body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that
risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't
possibly be good.
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 21:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/11/22 19:05, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:54:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:57:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being >>>>>>> harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Yes, it is possible.
No, it is absolutely impossible, as a DNA test will show.
It is also a social possibility with changes like
your name, clothing, make-up, voice training. It's not an all-or-nothing >>>>>> journey - for example, I chose to change my name, clothing, voice and >>>>>> left out makeup.
And at the end of all that, you still won't find a man you can fool
into thinking you're a woman.
I don't need to fool anyone that I'm a woman, I'm just one.
Don't be absurd. Of course you're not. You're a man - a delusional
one, but still a man. Women don't got dicks!
Unless they're trans women.
No such creatures exist in reality.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific >>>>>>>>> FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo
- you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
Well, it matters, when you want to have children, in medicine and in >>>>>> sports. College swimmer Lia Thomas has been getting a lot of shit simply >>>>>> because she is a trans woman.
If this horseshit continues, that's the end of women's sports. There >>>>> will only be unisex sports and the males will always win.
Well, only the people who are best suited, regardless of their sex,
should be able to compete.
And that will almost always be males, except for faggy stuff like
figure skating and possibly gymnastics.
Figure skating and women's gymnastics is one of exceptions where women
have it better.
Precisely. And that may be all.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingestingYou're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The >>>>>>>>> reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you >>>>>>>>> will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting >>>>>>> off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that >>>>>>> don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or >>>>>> taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose. >>>>>
something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your
body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that >>>> risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't
possibly be good.
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that
we don't even know about yet.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in >>>>>>>> heaven either.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same >>>>>>>>>> permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>>>
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is >>>>>> no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to >>>> do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have aTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>>>>> no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone, >>>>>>>> and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious. >>>>>
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
When Jesus said that only God isWhere did He say that exactly?
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it. >>>>>>>>>
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have ever
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it.On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned".On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good ideaYou are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow
anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and
perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be >>>>>>>>>>> in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine
permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to >>>>>>>>> be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to
happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means
there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved >>>>>>>>>>> is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone
to do good without believing good in the first place?
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all withTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence >>>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result >>>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back >>>>>>>>>> to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for
everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>
great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been
discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's >>>>>>>> good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have ever
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it.On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and
perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be >>>>>>>>>>>> in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>> permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it >>>>>>>>>> to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means
there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved >>>>>>>>>>>> is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about >>>>>>>>> that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>> well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for
someone to do good without believing good in the first place?
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with >>>>>>> greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by >>>>>>>>>>>>> God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence >>>>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more thanAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been
discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means
it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
On 2022-02-13 5:21 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:i wasn't looking for easier
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have ever
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it.On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make
superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be >>>>>>>>>>>>> in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it >>>>>>>>>>> to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed >>>>>>>>>> bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means >>>>>>>> there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>>
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved >>>>>>>>>>>>> is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would >>>>>>>>>>> God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about >>>>>>>>>> that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>>> well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for
someone to do good without believing good in the first place?
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with >>>>>>>> greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the
consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan:Â He doesn't
interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more thanAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means >>>>>>>>>> it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) >>>>>>>>> the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I
can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR >>>>>>> fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
On 2022-02-13 18:37, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have ever
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it.On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and
perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be >>>>>>>>>>>> in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>> permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it >>>>>>>>>> to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
    God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means
there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption. God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved >>>>>>>>>>>> is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about >>>>>>>>> that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>> well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for
someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with >>>>>>> greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by >>>>>>>>>>>>> God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence >>>>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more thanAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been
discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means
it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 5:41 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 18:37, KWills wrote:ya hear me
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have ever
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it.On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make
superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be >>>>>>>>>>>>> in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it >>>>>>>>>>> to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed >>>>>>>>>> bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
    God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means >>>>>>>> there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>>
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption. God is like the
sun, and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the
sun, there can't be the darkness of the night.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved >>>>>>>>>>>>> is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would >>>>>>>>>>> God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about >>>>>>>>>> that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>>> well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for
someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do >>>>> good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving >>>> his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with >>>>>>>> greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by >>>>>>>>>>>>>> God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the
consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan:Â He doesn't
interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere. >>>>
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more thanAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means >>>>>>>>>> it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) >>>>>>>>> the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I
can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR >>>>>>> fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-13 20:19, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 5:21 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:i wasn't looking for easier
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of you have ever
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other.
You can successfully transition from one sex >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive.They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it >>>>>>>>>>>> to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God
allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all >>>>>>>> about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means >>>>>>>>> there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' >>>>>>>> means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things
good. therefore, there is no bad thing left.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about >>>>>>>>>>> that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good
things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How >>>>>>>>> can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for
someone to do good without believing good in the first place?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the
consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan:Â He doesn't
interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to >>>>>>>>>> be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all
with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more thanAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means >>>>>>>>>>> it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>> (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I
can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR >>>>>>>> fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Sorry for the poor choice of word. I meant better actually.
On 2022-02-13 20:20, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 5:41 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 18:37, KWills wrote:ya hear me
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of you have ever
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other.
You can successfully transition from one sex >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the other, but only to
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive.They are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it >>>>>>>>>>>> to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God
allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all >>>>>>>> about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether
it's applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
    God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means >>>>>>>>> there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' >>>>>>>> means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption. God is like the
sun, and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is
the sun, there can't be the darkness of the night.
On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about >>>>>>>>>>> that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good
things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How >>>>>>>>> can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for
someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do >>>>>> good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering byBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the
consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan:Â He doesn't
interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to >>>>>>>>>> be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all
with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere. >>>>>
giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After >>>> that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more thanAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means >>>>>>>>>>> it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>> (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I
can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR >>>>>>>> fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Sure. What's up?
On 2022-02-13 6:39 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 20:19, % wrote:it's ok , forget it , my point was / is / i just wanted to do it
On 2022-02-13 5:21 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:i wasn't looking for easier
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimize it.
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of you have ever
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other.
You can successfully transition from one sex >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the other, but only to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive.They are free to make up words which they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want.
As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands >>>>>>>>>>>>> off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted >>>>>>>>>>>>> it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God >>>>>>>>>>>> allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all >>>>>>>>> about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means >>>>>>>>>> there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' >>>>>>>>> means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things
good. therefore, there is no bad thing left.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt >>>>>>>>>>>> about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good >>>>>>>>>>> things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. >>>>>>>>>> How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for
someone to do good without believing good in the first place?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet >>>>>>>>>>>>> He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan:Â He doesn't
interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out >>>>>>>>>>> to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all >>>>>>>>>> with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We >>>>>>>>> see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than >>>>>>>>>> religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means >>>>>>>>>>>> it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>>> (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I >>>>>>>>>> can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR >>>>>>>>> fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Sorry for the poor choice of word. I meant better actually.
On 2022-02-13 6:44 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 20:20, % wrote:oh , i thought we were saying ways to say understand me
On 2022-02-13 5:41 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 18:37, KWills wrote:ya hear me
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimize it.
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of you have ever
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other.
You can successfully transition from one sex >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the other, but only to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive.They are free to make up words which they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want.
As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands >>>>>>>>>>>>> off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted >>>>>>>>>>>>> it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God >>>>>>>>>>>> allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all >>>>>>>>> about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether
it's applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
    God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means >>>>>>>>>> there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' >>>>>>>>> means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption. God is like the
sun, and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is
the sun, there can't be the darkness of the night.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt >>>>>>>>>>>> about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good >>>>>>>>>>> things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. >>>>>>>>>> How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for
someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants
to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet >>>>>>>>>>>>> He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan:Â He doesn't
interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out >>>>>>>>>>> to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all >>>>>>>>>> with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We >>>>>>>>> see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not
interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by
giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After >>>>> that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than >>>>>>>>>> religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means >>>>>>>>>>>> it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>>> (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I >>>>>>>>>> can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR >>>>>>>>> fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Sure. What's up?
On 2022-02-13 21:30, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 6:39 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 20:19, % wrote:it's ok , forget it , my point was / is / i just wanted to do it
On 2022-02-13 5:21 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:i wasn't looking for easier
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimize it.
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of you have ever
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For example, an "egg" is a trans person >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the shit out of fake % >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other.
You can successfully transition from one sex >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the other, but only to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They are free to make up words which they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want.
As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the sameThat doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it to be.
permission. That is just a logical impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God >>>>>>>>>>>>> allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things >>>>>>>>>>>>> to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all >>>>>>>>>> about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence >>>>>>>>>>> means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' >>>>>>>>>> means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things >>>>>>>>> good. therefore, there is no bad thing left.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt >>>>>>>>>>>>> about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good >>>>>>>>>>>> things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. >>>>>>>>>>> How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for >>>>>>>>> someone to do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet >>>>>>>>>>>>>> He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned >>>>>>>>>>>>> for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan:Â He doesn't
interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out >>>>>>>>>>>> to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all >>>>>>>>>>> with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must >>>>>>>>>>> have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. >>>>>>>>>> We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than >>>>>>>>>>> religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means >>>>>>>>>>>>> it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was >>>>>>>>>> YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>>>> (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I >>>>>>>>>>> can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Sorry for the poor choice of word. I meant better actually.
And my point is about the living Church and the living Christ.
:-)
On 2022-02-13 21:31, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 6:44 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 20:20, % wrote:oh , i thought we were saying ways to say understand me
On 2022-02-13 5:41 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 18:37, KWills wrote:ya hear me
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimize it.
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of you have ever
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For example, an "egg" is a trans person >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the shit out of fake % >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other.
You can successfully transition from one sex >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the other, but only to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long past >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They are free to make up words which they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want.
As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the sameThat doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it to be.
permission. That is just a logical impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God >>>>>>>>>>>>> allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things >>>>>>>>>>>>> to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all >>>>>>>>>> about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is >>>>>> reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether
it's applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
    God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence >>>>>>>>>>> means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' >>>>>>>>>> means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption. God is like the
sun, and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is
the sun, there can't be the darkness of the night.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt >>>>>>>>>>>>> about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good >>>>>>>>>>>> things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. >>>>>>>>>>> How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for >>>>>>>>> someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants >>>>>>>> to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth.Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet >>>>>>>>>>>>>> He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned >>>>>>>>>>>>> for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan:Â He doesn't
interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out >>>>>>>>>>>> to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all >>>>>>>>>>> with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must >>>>>>>>>>> have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. >>>>>>>>>> We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not
interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by >>>>>>> giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function. >>>>>>
After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than >>>>>>>>>>> religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means >>>>>>>>>>>>> it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was >>>>>>>>>> YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>>>> (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I >>>>>>>>>>> can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
Sure. What's up?
OK.
:-)
On 2022-02-13 7:54 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 21:30, % wrote:what about him
On 2022-02-13 6:39 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 20:19, % wrote:it's ok , forget it , my point was / is / i just wanted to do it
On 2022-02-13 5:21 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:i wasn't looking for easier
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> divine permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:Let me try to go farther than that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yep, vanity.
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimize it.
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other.
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For example, an "egg" is a trans person >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> report the shit out of fake % >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transphobic'®™ because there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You can successfully transition from one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sex to the other, but only to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> past 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They are free to make up words which they >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want.
As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the sameThat doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it to be.
permission. That is just a logical impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God >>>>>>>>>>>>>> allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's >>>>>>>>>>> all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence >>>>>>>>>>>> means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' >>>>>>>>>>> means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things >>>>>>>>>> good. therefore, there is no bad thing left.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good >>>>>>>>>>>>> things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. >>>>>>>>>>>> How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for >>>>>>>>>> someone to do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't >>>>>>>>>>>>> interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out >>>>>>>>>>>>> to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all >>>>>>>>>>>> with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must >>>>>>>>>>>> have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. >>>>>>>>>>> We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which >>>>>>>>>>>>>> means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be >>>>>>>>>>>>> religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than >>>>>>>>>>>> religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was >>>>>>>>>>> YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>>>>> (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I >>>>>>>>>>>> can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Sorry for the poor choice of word. I meant better actually.
And my point is about the living Church and the living Christ.
:-)
On 2022-02-13 22:02, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 7:54 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 21:30, % wrote:what about him
On 2022-02-13 6:39 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 20:19, % wrote:it's ok , forget it , my point was / is / i just wanted to do it
On 2022-02-13 5:21 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:i wasn't looking for easier
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> divine permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:Let me try to go farther than that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yep, vanity.
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimize it.On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other.
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For example, an "egg" is a trans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> report the shit out of fake % >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
NOBODY on Usenet is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transphobic'®™ because there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You can successfully transition from one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sex to the other, but only to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> past 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They are free to make up words which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they want.
As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bad by the sameThat doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanted it to be.
permission. That is just a logical impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's >>>>>>>>>>>> all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence >>>>>>>>>>>>> means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what >>>>>>>>>>>> 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things >>>>>>>>>>> good. therefore, there is no bad thing left.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good >>>>>>>>>>>>>> things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. >>>>>>>>>>>>> How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for >>>>>>>>>>> someone to do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>> interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns >>>>>>>>>>>>>> out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all >>>>>>>>>>>>> with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must >>>>>>>>>>>>> have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. >>>>>>>>>>>> We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than >>>>>>>>>>>>> religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was >>>>>>>>>>>> YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I >>>>>>>>>>>>> can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Sorry for the poor choice of word. I meant better actually.
And my point is about the living Church and the living Christ.
:-)
He is our Lord, the center of our life. We live our life for him and him alone.
On 2022-02-13 8:13 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 22:02, % wrote:oh that , yea i know
On 2022-02-13 7:54 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 21:30, % wrote:what about him
On 2022-02-13 6:39 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 20:19, % wrote:it's ok , forget it , my point was / is / i just wanted to do it
On 2022-02-13 5:21 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:i wasn't looking for easier
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaaJust because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> divine permission.
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:Let me try to go farther than that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Michael Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Christ
<jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yep, vanity.
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Old and still male after all the 'gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dysphoria' therapy, female >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hormones, surgery (if any) etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Of course, his plan is to get people to buy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into their lingo paradigm to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legitimize it.On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There is no 'trans' subcommunity since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> none of you have ever >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed' from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other.
Trans community is a subculture that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'trans' neo-word. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For example, an "egg" is a trans >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> person who is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always had their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> English usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> constantly changing and nobody will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> negative effects of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> report the shit out of fake % >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOBODY on Usenet is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transphobic'®™ because there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Transed" is a transphobic way to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> say "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attempts to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dismiss your 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You can successfully transition from one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sex to the other, but only to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some degree.
No, you can't. You can make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> superficial/cosmetic changes which will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make you either more or less convicing as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an impersonator of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite sex, but nothing fundamental >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't want surgery, but now we're long >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> past 20th century and this term >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is considered offensive. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They are free to make up words which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they want.
As long as your freaks use them among >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yourselves and don't expect us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
However, here is the irony with all this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. In the end, he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to get old and all of this bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not going to matter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What a total waste of money. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accomplish. I believe this is how >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hands off
approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bad by the sameThat doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanted it to be.
permission. That is just a logical impossibility. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allowed bad
things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's >>>>>>>>>>>>> all about
faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence >>>>>>>>>>>>>> means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what >>>>>>>>>>>>> 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things >>>>>>>>>>>> good. therefore, there is no bad thing left.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can be anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would God
create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things as
well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve >>>>>>>>>>>>>> good. How can
anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for >>>>>>>>>>>> someone to do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. >>>>>>>>>>>>> We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
So be it.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was >>>>>>>>>>>>> YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Sorry for the poor choice of word. I meant better actually.
And my point is about the living Church and the living Christ.
:-)
He is our Lord, the center of our life. We live our life for him and
him alone.
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Don't forget to look under the couch cushions too.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
MX is real, but he's a fake christ.
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have ever
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it.On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and
perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be >>>>>>>>>>>> in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>> permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to >>>>>>>>>> be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means
there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved >>>>>>>>>>>> is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone >>>>> to do good without believing good in the first place?
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with >>>>>>> greatTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence >>>>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result >>>>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back >>>>>>>>>>> to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more thanAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been
discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's >>>>>>>>> good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
On 2022-02-13 4:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 21:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/11/22 19:05, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:54:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:57:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being >>>>>>>> harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Yes, it is possible.
No, it is absolutely impossible, as a DNA test will show.
It is also a social possibility with changes like
your name, clothing, make-up, voice training. It's not an all-or-nothing
journey - for example, I chose to change my name, clothing, voice and >>>>>>> left out makeup.
And at the end of all that, you still won't find a man you can fool >>>>>> into thinking you're a woman.
I don't need to fool anyone that I'm a woman, I'm just one.
Don't be absurd. Of course you're not. You're a man - a delusional
one, but still a man. Women don't got dicks!
Unless they're trans women.
No such creatures exist in reality.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned:
http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific >>>>>>>>>> FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo
- you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and >>>>>>>> biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
Well, it matters, when you want to have children, in medicine and in >>>>>>> sports. College swimmer Lia Thomas has been getting a lot of shit simply
because she is a trans woman.
If this horseshit continues, that's the end of women's sports. There >>>>>> will only be unisex sports and the males will always win.
Well, only the people who are best suited, regardless of their sex,
should be able to compete.
And that will almost always be males, except for faggy stuff like
figure skating and possibly gymnastics.
Figure skating and women's gymnastics is one of exceptions where women
have it better.
Precisely. And that may be all.
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The >>>>>>>>>> reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting >>>>>>>> off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that >>>>>>>> don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or >>>>>>> taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting >>>>>> something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your >>>>>> body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that >>>>> risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't
possibly be good.
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that
we don't even know about yet.
it made you nuts
On 2022-02-13 18:37, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>>>>
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's >applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is >>>>>>> no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to >>>>> do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>>>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses >>>>>>>>>> no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious. >>>>>>Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good >>>>>>>>> for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 17:01, % wrote:
On 2022-02-13 2:18 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:30, % wrote:i was in church all morning
On 2022-02-13 12:46 p.m., aaa wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:did you see where i defeated the kwills
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa
<jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ?There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have ever
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neo-word.
For example, an "egg" is a trans person who >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is questioning their gender. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Subcultures such as yours have always had >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their own sublanguages and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is a good example. Mainstream English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usage remains unchanged. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some websites, like the Australian >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TransHub, call transition "gender >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> affirmation". Language is constantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing and nobody will change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, with all positive and negative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effects of it.On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific (he/him) ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to appropriate the English >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> language in the same way we dismiss your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' delusions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"Transed" is a transphobic way to say >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transitioned". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (he/him) ? wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please block messages and report the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit out of fake % impersonator. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because there aren't any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'transgender' people who have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully 'transed'. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transphobic on Usenet. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Trans community is a subculture that has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> garnered about 1.5% of youth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be >>>>>>>>>>>>> in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine >>>>>>>>>>>> permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by >>>>>>>>>>>> the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to >>>>>>>>>>> be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to >>>>>>>>>> happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
  God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means >>>>>>>> there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>>
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved >>>>>>>>>>>>> is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing >>>>>>>>>>>> without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone >>>>>> to do good without believing good in the first place?
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with >>>>>>>> greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back >>>>>>>>>>>> to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of humanAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He >>>>>>>>>>> chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for >>>>>>>>>> everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more thanAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been >>>>>>>>>>>>> discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's >>>>>>>>>> good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>
religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 08:36, KWills wrote:
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to
understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to >understand justice?
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>>>
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to >>>>>>> do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do >>>>>> good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving >>>>> his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of humanAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere. >>>>>
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After >>>> that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's
inability to embrace it.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:36, KWills wrote:
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's >>>> applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to
understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from
justice handed out on Earth.
Heaven?
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>>>>
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on
Earth!
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun, >>>> there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>>>>> well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do >>>>>>> good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only
God is good?
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving >>>>>> his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere. >>>>>>
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After >>>>> that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 00:16:33 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Don't forget to look under the couch cushions too.
I did and I found a £1 coin! Thanks!
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
MX is real, but he's a fake christ.
That may be his real name, who knows?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:41:51 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 18:37, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 15:59, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 14:46:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 13:28, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:40:31 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 07:49, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:57:55 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 20:22, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 19:34:39 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-12 17:25, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 15:28:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 14:30, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:41:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 11:56, KWills wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:17:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-12 09:01, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:46:36 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>Let me try to go farther than that.
wrote:
Michael Christ <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 10:38 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 09:40:07 +1100, Michael Christ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jesusisthelordofall@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 12/02/2022 4:47 am, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:52:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, his plan is to get people to buy into their lingo paradigm to
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:51:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can successfully transition from one sex to the other, but only to
On 2/5/22 10:34 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:44:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/5/22 7:37 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Feb 2022 16:18:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example, an "egg" is a trans person who is questioning their gender.
On 2/4/22 9:56 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 20:15:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?Subcultures such as yours have always had their own sublanguages and
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2/4/22 7:42 PM, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:32:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Transed" is a transphobic way to say "transitioned".
On 2/4/22 6:22 PM, % wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-02-04 11:11 a.m., Scientific (he/him) ? wrote:
Please block messages and report the shit out of fake % impersonator.
good idea >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are one of few people who aren't transphobic on Usenet.
NOBODY on Usenet is 'transphobic'®™ because there aren't any
'transgender' people who have successfully 'transed'.
No, it is not. We dismiss your attempts to appropriate the English
language in the same way we dismiss your 'transgender' delusions.
Some websites, like the Australian TransHub, call transition "gender
affirmation". Language is constantly changing and nobody will change
that, with all positive and negative effects of it.
https://www.transhub.org.au/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
this is a good example. Mainstream English usage remains unchanged.
No, it isn't. Another meaningless 'trans' neo-word.
Trans community is a subculture that has garnered about 1.5% of youth.
There is no 'trans' subcommunity since none of you have ever
successfully 'transed' from one sex to the other. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
some degree.
No, you can't. You can make superficial/cosmetic changes which will
make you either more or less convicing as an impersonator of the
opposite sex, but nothing fundamental changes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, back in 90s I would have myself a "transgenderist" because IThey are free to make up words which they want. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As long as your freaks use them among yourselves and don't expect us
normal people to adopt your newspeak. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
didn't want surgery, but now we're long past 20th century and this term
is considered offensive.
We don't use it so we don't give a shit. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
legitimize it.
However, here is the irony with all this nonsense. In the end, he is
going to get old and all of this bullshit is not going to matter.
Old and still male after all the 'gender dysphoria' therapy, female
hormones, surgery (if any) etc.
What a total waste of money.
Yep, vanity.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think God does not interfere in the wrong way, but God does interfere
in the right way. We, as human beings, can't do anything without God. If
we pursue things in the wrong way, we can't accomplish anything because
we don't have God's support. If we pursue things in the right way, we
will have God's support, and we will succeed. This is why we all have to
thank God for anything we are able to accomplish. I believe this is how
God interferes.
I'm not sure that's the way it works. Human beings have achieved some
horrendous things which I'm pretty sure God would not have approved
of. The way I see it, having created the world, He lets Nature take
its course, come what may.
That has nothing to do with what I was talking about. It is why we all
have to thank God for everything good and be responsible for our own
mistakes ultimately.
What you were suggesting was that God doesn't allow anything bad to
happen. That is obviously untrue.
On the contrary, that is obviously, absolutely, and perfectly true. The
evidence of that is heaven. Otherwise, heaven would be the same as this
suffering earth. That is unthinkable.
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood.
Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be. >>>>>>>>>>
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to
understand?
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>>
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would
they?
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>>> well as bad things.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything good
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence.
Whatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that? >>>>>>>>>
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the
commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to >>>>>> do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do >>>>> good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving >>>> his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great >>>>>>>> wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's >>>>>>>>>>>>>> permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of humanAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>>
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere. >>>>
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious. >>>>>>>Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my
understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
That sounds like an atheist position.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:36, KWills wrote:
We have to deal with what's on earth not what is or will be in heaven.Just because bad thing happens doesn't mean it has divine permission.
And what happens on earth is often doubleplusungood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It doesn't NEED divine permission because God takes a hands off >>>>>>>>>>>>> approach.
If there is no permission, you can't assume it is allowed. >>>>>>>>>>>>
If it had divine permission, heaven would be equally bad by the same
permission. That is just a logical impossibility.
That doesn't follow. God created Heaven the way He wanted it to be.
God's law is equal to all. It's called justice. If God allowed bad >>>>>>>>>>>> things to happen on earth, God wouldn't forbid bad things to happen in
heaven either.
Why ever not?
Because it's logic.
Not at all. Besides, logic has no place in theology, it's all about >>>>>>>>> faith.
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's >>>> applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to
understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from
justice handed out on Earth. Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to Heaven?
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>>>>
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on
Earth!
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun, >>>> there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
The rule is that no one can be good or doing the good thing without God.On the other the hand, your assumption that there can be anything goodWhatever can be is what it is. Both good and bad. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
from letting nature taking its course without God involved is just a
wishful thinking without the slightest evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you trying to say that man is inherently evil? Why would God >>>>>>>>>>>>> create something like that?
Without God, man is always evil. Can there be any doubt about that?
Yes, there can. People who don't believe in Him do good things as >>>>>>>>>>> well as bad things.
Since God is good, to disbelieve God is to disbelieve good. How can >>>>>>>>>> anyone do good when he disbelieves good?
By taking advantage of God's unwilingness to interfere in the >>>>>>>>> commission of good things.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do >>>>>>> good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only
God is good?
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving >>>>>> his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He >>>>>>>>>>> lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere. >>>>>>
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After >>>>> that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 10:16 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
you never said what you are ... idgit
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is >>>>>> reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's >>>>> applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to
understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to >>> understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from
justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means! >>>>>>>>>
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on
Earth!
Pure speculation.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun, >>>>> there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do >>>>>>>> good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After >>>>>> that it was all hands off.That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving >>>>>>> his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function. >>>>>>I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with greatBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be. >>>>>>>>>>>
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere. >>>>>>>
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
On 2022-02-14 6:31 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwills
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
nope
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
On 2022-02-14 6:36 a.m., KWills wrote:
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
i just believe him i don't need everything proved to me
On 2022-02-14 6:38 a.m., KWills wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
believe in me or not , i don't care
On 2022-02-14 6:39 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 00:16:33 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Don't forget to look under the couch cushions too.
I did and I found a £1 coin! Thanks!
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
MX is real, but he's a fake christ.
That may be his real name, who knows?
i know
On 2022-02-14 10:22 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
no
On 2022-02-14 6:39 a.m., KWills wrote:
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The >>>>>>>>>>>> reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and youYou call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with. >>>>>>>>>>>
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that >>>>>>>>>> don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or >>>>>>>>> taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting >>>>>>>> something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your >>>>>>>> body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that >>>>>>> risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't
possibly be good.
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that
we don't even know about yet.
it made you nuts
How could it have, heapboi?
is your google broken
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:09:56 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 10:16 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
you never said what you are ... idgit
Nobody aksed me, idgit.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:09:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:31 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
<circumcised>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwills
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
nope
I wasn't aksing you, idgit.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:10:50 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:36 a.m., KWills wrote:
When Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the >>>>>>>>>>> claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be >>>>>>>>>> responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact. >>>>>>>>> Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
i just believe him i don't need everything proved to me
That's because you're gullible. I demand proof.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:11:25 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
how many kinds are there
Two: feeble and very feeble.
Off-topic, btw.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:08:55 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:39 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 00:16:33 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Don't forget to look under the couch cushions too.
I did and I found a £1 coin! Thanks!
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
MX is real, but he's a fake christ.
That may be his real name, who knows?
i know
So is it or isn't it?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:21 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 10:22 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
no
What the fuck would you know about it, heapboi?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:53 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:39 a.m., KWills wrote:
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The >>>>>>>>>>>>> reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and youYou call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with. >>>>>>>>>>>>
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that >>>>>>>>>>> don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or >>>>>>>>>> taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting >>>>>>>>> something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your >>>>>>>>> body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that
risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't >>>>>>> possibly be good.
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that >>>>> we don't even know about yet.
it made you nuts
How could it have, heapboi?
is your google broken
Dunno, heapboi...what about yours?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 11:21 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:09:56 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 10:16 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
you never said what you are ... idgit
Nobody aksed me, idgit.
do you have to be asked before you say anything you on command idgit
On 2022-02-14 12:04 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:11:25 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
how many kinds are there
Two: feeble and very feeble.
Off-topic, btw.
my question was about the topic so on topic , idg ,
there's also less than feeble and non feeble
On 2022-02-14 11:22 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:09:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:31 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
<circumcised>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwills
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
nope
I wasn't aksing you, idgit.
who cares what you were doing , nope is nope , hammer head
On 2022-02-14 11:30 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:10:50 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:36 a.m., KWills wrote:
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
i just believe him i don't need everything proved to me
That's because you're gullible. I demand proof.
that choice of the idgits
On 2022-02-14 12:05 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:02 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:38 a.m., KWills wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
believe in me or not , i don't care
Everyone believes you are a fake %.
introduce me to everyone and i'll explain to him the difference
On 2022-02-14 12:06 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:53 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:39 a.m., KWills wrote:
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. TheYou call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or
taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting >>>>>>>>>> something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your >>>>>>>>>> body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that
risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't >>>>>>>> possibly be good.
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that >>>>>> we don't even know about yet.
it made you nuts
How could it have, heapboi?
is your google broken
Dunno, heapboi...what about yours?
off topic
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:14:57 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 11:21 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:09:56 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 10:16 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
you never said what you are ... idgit
Nobody aksed me, idgit.
do you have to be asked before you say anything you on command idgit
I have all kinds of answers to all kinds of questions, idgit. How the
fuck am I supposed to know which answer to give if nobody aksed?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:16:33 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 11:30 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:10:50 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:36 a.m., KWills wrote:
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
i just believe him i don't need everything proved to me
That's because you're gullible. I demand proof.
that choice of the idgits
That makes even less sense than usual, idgit. Try again.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:15:49 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 11:22 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:09:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:31 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
<circumcised>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwills
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
nope
I wasn't aksing you, idgit.
who cares what you were doing , nope is nope , hammer head
Only an idgit would reply nope without even being aksed.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:19:57 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:05 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:02 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:38 a.m., KWills wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
believe in me or not , i don't care
Everyone believes you are a fake %.
introduce me to everyone and i'll explain to him the difference
That would take forever, idgit.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:18:42 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 11:31 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:08:55 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:39 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 00:16:33 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:Don't forget to look under the couch cushions too.
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>
I did and I found a £1 coin! Thanks!
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
MX is real, but he's a fake christ.
That may be his real name, who knows?
i know
So is it or isn't it?
ask him it's his name
Why? I'm aksing you.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:20:25 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:06 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:53 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:39 a.m., KWills wrote:
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't >>>>>>>>> possibly be good.How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. TheYou call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or
taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting >>>>>>>>>>> something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your >>>>>>>>>>> body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that
risky as you think according to currently existing research. >>>>>>>>>
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that >>>>>>> we don't even know about yet.
it made you nuts
How could it have, heapboi?
is your google broken
Dunno, heapboi...what about yours?
off topic
Because you brought it up.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 12:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:16:33 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 11:30 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:10:50 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:36 a.m., KWills wrote:
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
i just believe him i don't need everything proved to me
That's because you're gullible. I demand proof.
that choice of the idgits
That makes even less sense than usual, idgit. Try again.
who cares what it makes
On 2022-02-14 12:41 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:15:49 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 11:22 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:09:11 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:31 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
<circumcised>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwills
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
nope
I wasn't aksing you, idgit.
who cares what you were doing , nope is nope , hammer head
Only an idgit would reply nope without even being aksed.
who cares what an idgit would do idgit
On 2022-02-14 12:43 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:19:06 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:04 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:21 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 10:22 a.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:Lol. There's an understatement.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
no
What the fuck would you know about it, heapboi?
oh i know
You know jack shit.
leave your wife out of it
On 2022-02-14 12:46 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:20:25 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:06 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:53 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:39 a.m., KWills wrote:
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't >>>>>>>>>> possibly be good.How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. TheYou call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting
off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that
don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or
taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting >>>>>>>>>>>> something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your >>>>>>>>>>>> body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that
risky as you think according to currently existing research. >>>>>>>>>>
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that >>>>>>>> we don't even know about yet.
it made you nuts
How could it have, heapboi?
is your google broken
Dunno, heapboi...what about yours?
off topic
Because you brought it up.
no i didn't
On 2022-02-14 12:44 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:19:57 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:05 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:12:02 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 6:38 a.m., KWills wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
believe in me or not , i don't care
Everyone believes you are a fake %.
introduce me to everyone and i'll explain to him the difference
That would take forever, idgit.
then don't say what everyone does freakin idgit
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is >>>>>>> reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's >>>>>> applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to
understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to >>>> understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from
justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
anyone give a shit?
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would >>>>> they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
The sun will always shine.God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun, >>>>>> there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day. >>>>
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do >>>>>>>>> good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After >>>>>>> that it was all hands off.That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by givingBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see >>>>>>>>>>> the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function. >>>>>>>
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is >>>>>>>> reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's >>>>>>> applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to
understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to >>>>> understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from
justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would >>>>>> they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
The sun will always shine.God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun, >>>>>>> there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day. >>>>>
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your >responsibility to verify.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After >>>>>>>> that it was all hands off.Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a >>>>>>>>>>>>> perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function. >>>>>>>>
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>>>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:02:10 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 7:23 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
pee on old glory
On 2022-02-14 7:29 p.m., KWills wrote:
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim >>>> of yours with a cite.It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus. >>>>
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
ok i admit you're not real i made you up ,
it was a stupid bet but someone said ,
i couldn't make and idgit and there you are , idgit
On 2022-02-14 7:30 p.m., KWills wrote:
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
you did that's for sure
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:29:05 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 7:23 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
pee on old glory
Changing the topic again, heapboi?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:02:10 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere.
Lol. There's an understatement.
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above.
It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is >>>>>>>>> reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's >>>>>>>> applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to >>>>>>> understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to >>>>>> understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from
justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good. >>>>>>>>>>>> therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would >>>>>>> they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on >>>>> Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
The sun will always shine.God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun, >>>>>>>> there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day. >>>>>>
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where
the evil lies.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only >>>>> God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
It's only a make believe.You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. AfterBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone.
I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. He
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function. >>>>>>>>>
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence. >>>>>>
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the >>>>>>>>>> faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's >>>>>> inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view.
It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge >>>>>> people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claimIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus. >>>
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
To Jesus Christ, yes.
On 2022-02-14 21:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:02:10 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:Lol. There's an understatement.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each >individual.
On 2022-02-14 7:50 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:29:05 -0700, % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 7:23 p.m., KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsNow back it up or admit you made it up.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
pee on old glory
Changing the topic again, heapboi?
nope , just showing my non belief , idgit
On 2022-02-14 21:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is >>>>>>>>>> reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to >>>>>>>> understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from
justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that?
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment.
And it works by different rules than Earth.Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life. >>
God's law is always the same to everyone.
God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would >>>>>>>> they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on >>>>>> Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
The sun will always shine.God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day. >>>>>>>
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where
the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only >>>>>> God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's only a make believe.You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. AfterI have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function. >>>>>>>>>>
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence. >>>>>>>
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's >>>>>>> inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
That's called willful ignorance.
That sounds like an atheist position.Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus.
That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge >>>>>>> people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's >>>>> why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules".
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim >>>> of yours with a cite.It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus. >>>>
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:19:32 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:02:10 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:One what? A God?
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:Lol. There's an understatement.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each
individual.
There isn't one.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:15:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>
I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is >>>>>>>>>>> reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that?
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to >>>>>>>>> understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from >>>>>>> justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people >>>>> in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that?
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment.
Without complaining?
And it works by different rules than Earth.Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life. >>>
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants
wherever He wants...or not at all.
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would >>>>>>>>> they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on >>>>>>> Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
Didn't last long, did it?
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where
the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone to
do good without believing good in the first place?
Perhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only >>>>>>> God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your >>>> responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
It's only a make believe.You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. AfterI have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function. >>>>>>>>>>>
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence. >>>>>>>>
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious.
Not sure what that even means.
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's >>>>>>>> inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not >>>>>>> there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
That sounds like an atheist position.Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view.So be it.That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Why?
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge >>>>>>>> people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's >>>>>> why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice >>>> to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules".
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim >>>>> of yours with a cite.It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus. >>>>>
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs >>>> to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
On 2022-02-15 09:19, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:19:32 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:02:10 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:One what? A God?
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:Lol. There's an understatement.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one.
You must be psychic.
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each
individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
On 2022-02-15 09:18, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:15:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to >>>>>>>>>> understand?I'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is >>>>>>>>>>>> reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth.
Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it's
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that? >>>>>>>>>>
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from >>>>>>>> justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people >>>>>> in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that?
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment.
Without complaining?
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for
their crime.
And it works by different rules than Earth.Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would >>>>>> anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life. >>>>
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants
wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally
applied to all.
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would >>>>>>>>>> they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on >>>>>>>> Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on >>>>>> Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
Didn't last long, did it?
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where
the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only >>>>>>>> God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your >>>>> responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh? >>>> Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
It's only a make believe.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence. >>>>>>>>>
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
Not sure what that even means.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's >>>>>>>>> inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not >>>>>>>> there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
That sounds like an atheist position.Why?Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>So be it.It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge >>>>>>>>> people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's >>>>>>> why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved >>>>>> them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God >>>>> doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice >>>>> to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules".
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing
to do with God.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim >>>>>> of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs >>>>> to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:14:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:19, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:19:32 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:02:10 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:One what? A God?
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>You must be psychic.
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:Lol. There's an understatement.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each
individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:13:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:18, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:15:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to >>>>>>>>>>> understand?Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it'sI'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth. >>>>>>>>>>>>
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that? >>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from >>>>>>>>> justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people >>>>>>> in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that?
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment.
Without complaining?
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for
their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them?
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would >>>>>>> anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants
wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally
applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He
wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>>
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on >>>>>>>>> Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on >>>>>>> Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
Didn't last long, did it?
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where
the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna
attitude is that?
That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only >>>>>>>>> God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your >>>>>> responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh? >>>>> Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact >>>> less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it
remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
It's only a make believe.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence. >>>>>>>>>>
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion.
What is YOUR reality?
Not sure what that even means.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's >>>>>>>>>> inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not >>>>>>>>> there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
That sounds like an atheist position.Why?Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge >>>>>>>>>> people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's >>>>>>>> why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved >>>>>>> them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God >>>>>> doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice >>>>>> to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them >>>>> He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules".
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing
to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to
God being good?
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is
good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim >>>>>>> of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs >>>>>> to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a
cite for a simple assertion.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God?
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
On 2022-02-15 11:43, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:14:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:19, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:19:32 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:02:10 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:One what? A God?
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>You must be psychic.
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:Lol. There's an understatement.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each
individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
On 2022-02-15 11:42, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:13:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:18, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:15:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to >>>>>>>>>>>> understand?Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it'sI'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that? >>>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from >>>>>>>>>> justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people >>>>>>>> in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that?
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment.
Without complaining?
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for
their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them?
Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one can
stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even
stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would >>>>>>>> anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants
wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally
applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He
wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
You don't know that. That is only your presumption.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, would
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on >>>>>>>>>> Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on >>>>>>>> Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
Didn't last long, did it?
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where >>>>>> the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna
attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only >>>>>>>>>> God is good?That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is.
That's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your >>>>>>> responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh? >>>>>> Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact >>>>> less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it
remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
It's only a make believe.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeBecause the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion.
What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
Not sure what that even means.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's >>>>>>>>>>> inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not >>>>>>>>>> there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
That sounds like an atheist position.Why?Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge >>>>>>>>>>> people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's >>>>>>>>> why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved >>>>>>>> them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God >>>>>>> doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice >>>>>>> to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them >>>>>> He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules".
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing
to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to
God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime
must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no
consequences.
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim >>>>>>>> of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs >>>>>>> to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or >>>>>> admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a
cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsIt wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 12:11:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:42, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:13:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:18, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:15:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult to >>>>>>>>>>>>> understand?Are you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it'sI'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from >>>>>>>>>>> justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people >>>>>>>>> in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that?
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment.
Without complaining?
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for
their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them?
Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one can
stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even
stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end
up in Hell.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would >>>>>>>>> anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants
wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally
applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He
wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Didn't last long, did it?If He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldYou don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do on
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on >>>>>>>>> Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good. >>>>>
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar
sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where >>>>>>> the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna
attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said onlyThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour.
Then it's only an illogical behavior.
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an >>>>>>>>> unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your >>>>>>>> responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've >>>>>>> proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh? >>>>>>> Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact >>>>>> less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it
remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
It's only a make believe.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God'sAnd God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence. >>>>>>>>>>>>
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion.
What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look.
Not sure what that even means.Are we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion.
Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have no
theological view.
You've just been spouting them.
It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's good
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then?
The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too.
Of course, because it is in everyone's heart.
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual's
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not >>>>>>>>>>> there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That sounds like an atheist position.Why?Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved >>>>>>>>> them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God >>>>>>>> doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them >>>>>>> He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules".
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing >>>> to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to
God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime
must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no
consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple
concept?
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now back it up or admit you made it up.
No, it's the teaching of Jesus.
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or >>>>>>> admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a
cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 12:12:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:43, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:14:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:19, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:19:32 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:02:10 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:30, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:55:45 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:40 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:38, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 20:26:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-13 16:00, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 11:22:32 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 20:59:56 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:One what? A God?
On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 12:06:47 -0800, El Kabong <twang@the.noodle>You must be psychic.
wrote:
KWills <compue1f@gmail.com> wrote:
El Kabong <twang@the.noodle> wrote:Lol. There's an understatement.
Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere?
You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each >>>>>> individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsNo, it's the teaching of Jesus.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
On 2022-02-15 13:37, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 12:11:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:42, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:13:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:18, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:15:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult toAre you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it'sI'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from >>>>>>>>>>>> justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people >>>>>>>>>> in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that?
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
You are the one playing with the ignorant word salad in your head.
It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment.
Without complaining?
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for
their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them?
Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one can
stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even
stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end
up in Hell.
That is not possible. Repented sinner would never commit crime to fall
in hell. The crime is the evidence of the sinner's unrepentance.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would >>>>>>>>>> anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants >>>>>> wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally
applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He
wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
Didn't last long, did it?Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do onIf He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldYou don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on >>>>>>>>>> Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good. >>>>>>
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar
sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing >comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where >>>>>>>> the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna
attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it.
I don't benefit from evil.
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said onlyThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>>Then it's only an illogical behavior.That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an >>>>>>>>>> unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've >>>>>>>> proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh? >>>>>>>> Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact >>>>>>> less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other >>>>> hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it
remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?
More blind denial and willful ignorance.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion.
What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look.
That's only an illusion.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual'sOf course, because it is in everyone's heart.Not sure what that even means.The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's goodExactly what theological view are you talking about? I have noAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
theological view.
You've just been spouting them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not >>>>>>>>>>>> there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.That sounds like an atheist position.Why?Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion.
It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard. >>>>>>>>>>>>
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved >>>>>>>>>> them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God >>>>>>>>> doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them >>>>>>>> He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules".
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing >>>>> to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to
God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime
must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no
consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple
concept?
They are not the same thing.
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.No, it's the teaching of Jesus.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theWhen Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly?
I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or >>>>>>>> admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a
cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
Not true.
On 2022-02-15 13:38, KWills wrote:
One what? A God?You must be psychic.Lol. There's an understatement.Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each >>>>>>> individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you want me to prove?
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:14:11 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:38, KWills wrote:
One what? A God?You must be psychic.Lol. There's an understatement.Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate.
You already have.
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each >>>>>>>> individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you want me to prove?
I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do
whatever the fuck they want.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningdid you see where i defeated the kwillsNo, it's the teaching of Jesus.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theI don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
You are connected to Christianity, though?
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:12:57 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:37, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 12:11:00 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:42, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:13:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:18, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:15:17 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:29, KWills wrote:It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 20:00:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:29, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:52:52 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:22, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:21:02 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
How God applies God's law is up to Him. Is that too difficult toAre you saying that God's law is conditional depending on whether it'sI'm talking about the logic I have shown in the above. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's flawed.
Why?
Because what God allows or ignores is entirely up to God. What is
reserved for Heaven may not be appropriate for Earth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
applied to heaven or earth? Where is the justice in that? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
understand?
Nothing difficult to understand. It's called justice. Is it difficult to
understand justice?
Justice for those who have graduated to Heaven is different from >>>>>>>>>>>>> justice handed out on Earth.
Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that? >>>>>>>
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
You are the one playing with the ignorant word salad in your head.
The word salad was your creation not mine.
Without complaining?It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment. >>>>>>>
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for >>>>>> their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them?
Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one can >>>> stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even
stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end
up in Hell.
That is not possible. Repented sinner would never commit crime to fall
in hell. The crime is the evidence of the sinner's unrepentance.
The repentance comes after the crime, but perhaps too late to get His forgiveness.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would >>>>>>>>>>> anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants >>>>>>> wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally
applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He
wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
Didn't last long, did it?Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do onIf He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldYou don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left.
And yet lots of bad things abound.
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on >>>>>>>>>>> Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good. >>>>>>>
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar
sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing
comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth
(Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where >>>>>>>>> the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna
attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it.
I don't benefit from evil.
It's another word for 'victim'.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you >>>>>>> obviously can't.Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said onlyThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>Then it's only an illogical behavior.That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an >>>>>>>>>>> unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've >>>>>>>>> proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact >>>>>>>> less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do. >>>>>>>
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other >>>>>> hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it
remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?
More blind denial and willful ignorance.
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion.
What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look.
That's only an illusion.
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might
say.
That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual'sOf course, because it is in everyone's heart.Not sure what that even means.The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's goodExactly what theological view are you talking about? I have noAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
theological view.
You've just been spouting them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except in the hearts of those who don't embrace it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not >>>>>>>>>>>>> there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance.
Again regardless, it's not there.
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.That sounds like an atheist position.It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Why?Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view.
I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved >>>>>>>>>>> them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God >>>>>>>>>> doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them >>>>>>>>> He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules".
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing >>>>>> to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to >>>>> God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime
must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no
consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple
concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.No, it's the teaching of Jesus.I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) theI don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or >>>>>>>>> admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a
cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
Not true.
Absolutely is true. QED.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-15 17:19, KWills wrote:
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that? >>>>>>>>
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
You are the one playing with the ignorant word salad in your head.
The word salad was your creation not mine.
It's only word salad to the clueless.
Without complaining?It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment. >>>>>>>>
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for >>>>>>> their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them?
Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one can >>>>> stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even >>>>> stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end
up in Hell.
That is not possible. Repented sinner would never commit crime to fall
in hell. The crime is the evidence of the sinner's unrepentance.
The repentance comes after the crime, but perhaps too late to get His
forgiveness.
Repentance is never the easy way out for any crime. True repentance is
based on the complete commitment to pay for the crime fully.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to
Heaven?
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life.
And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would >>>>>>>>>>>> anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants >>>>>>>> wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally >>>>>>> applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He >>>>>> wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
That's more of your imagination.
Didn't last long, did it?Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do onIf He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldYou don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And yet lots of bad things abound.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good. >>>>>>>>
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar
sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing
comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth
(Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists.
Sin is only an illusion. It never existed.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where >>>>>>>>>> the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna >>>>>> attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it.
I don't benefit from evil.
It's another word for 'victim'.
No difference to me.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you >>>>>>>> obviously can't.Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said onlyThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Then it's only an illogical behavior.That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an >>>>>>>>>>>> unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've >>>>>>>>>> proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do. >>>>>>>>
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other >>>>>>> hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it >>>>>> remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?
More blind denial and willful ignorance.
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up.
I can't be responsible for your willful ignorance.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeTo be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout.
You don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion. >>>>>> What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look.
That's only an illusion.
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might
say.
No.
Again regardless, it's not there.That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual'sExcept in the hearts of those who don't embrace it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, because it is in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Not sure what that even means.The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's goodExactly what theological view are you talking about? I have noAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
theological view.
You've just been spouting them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness.
Regardless, it's not there.
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
You are the one showing your ignorance.
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.That sounds like an atheist position.It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Why?It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules". >>>>>>>>
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing >>>>>>> to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to >>>>>> God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime >>>>> must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no
consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple
concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
There is a difference.
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.No, it's the teaching of Jesus.I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or >>>>>>>>>> admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a >>>>>> cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
Not true.
Absolutely is true. QED.
Empty claim.
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningThat's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus.I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart. >>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
On 2022-02-15 17:20, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:14:11 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:38, KWills wrote:
You already have.One what? A God?You must be psychic.Lol. There's an understatement.Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is there?
Do you know why God doesn't interfere? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate. >>>>>>>>>>>>
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each >>>>>>>>> individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you want me to prove?
I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each
individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do
whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead.
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningThat's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus.I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:57:48 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:20, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:14:11 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:38, KWills wrote:
You already have.One what? A God?You must be psychic.Is there?Lol. There's an understatement. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do you know why God doesn't interfere? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each >>>>>>>>>> individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you want me to prove?
I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each
individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do
whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead.
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:56:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:19, KWills wrote:
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that? >>>>>>>>>
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
You are the one playing with the ignorant word salad in your head.
The word salad was your creation not mine.
It's only word salad to the clueless.
It's word salad written BY the clueless.
Without complaining?It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment. >>>>>>>>>
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for >>>>>>>> their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them?
Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one can >>>>>> stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even >>>>>> stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end >>>>> up in Hell.
That is not possible. Repented sinner would never commit crime to fall >>>> in hell. The crime is the evidence of the sinner's unrepentance.
The repentance comes after the crime, but perhaps too late to get His
forgiveness.
Repentance is never the easy way out for any crime. True repentance is
based on the complete commitment to pay for the crime fully.
How would someone do that if they're already in Hell?
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Heaven?And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants >>>>>>>>> wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally >>>>>>>> applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He >>>>>>> wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
That's more of your imagination.
You have a better definition?
Didn't last long, did it?Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do onIf He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldYou don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And yet lots of bad things abound.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good. >>>>>>>>>
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar >>>>> sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing >>>> comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth
(Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists.
Sin is only an illusion. It never existed.
Sin is all around us. It exists and it's REAL.
God is like the sun,
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night.
And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where >>>>>>>>>>> the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna >>>>>>> attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it.
I don't benefit from evil.
It's another word for 'victim'.
No difference to me.
Well then, if you're the victim of evil, you'll see it.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you >>>>>>>>> obviously can't.Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said onlyThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Then it's only an illogical behavior.That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an >>>>>>>>>>>>> unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've >>>>>>>>>>> proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do. >>>>>>>>>
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other >>>>>>>> hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it >>>>>>> remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?
More blind denial and willful ignorance.
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up.
I can't be responsible for your willful ignorance.
I can't be responsible for you making shit up and then refusing to
validate it with a cite.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeYou don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion. >>>>>>> What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look.
That's only an illusion.
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might
say.
No.
Wake up and smell the coffee, as they say.
Again regardless, it's not there.Regardless, it's not there.That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual'sExcept in the hearts of those who don't embrace it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, because it is in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Not sure what that even means.The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's goodExactly what theological view are you talking about? I have noAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
theological view.
You've just been spouting them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
You are the one showing your ignorance.
Projection noted.
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?God hates atheists. I would too if I were Him.It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.Why?It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is a theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That's
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules". >>>>>>>>>
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing >>>>>>>> to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to >>>>>>> God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime >>>>>> must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no
consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple
concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
There is a difference.
Of course there is. Love includes attributes other than forgiveness.
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.No, it's the teaching of Jesus.I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or >>>>>>>>>>> admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a >>>>>>> cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
Not true.
Absolutely is true. QED.
Empty claim.
On your part. And still no cite.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningThat's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus.I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
On 2022-02-15 22:03, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:56:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:19, KWills wrote:
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that? >>>>>>>>>>
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
You are the one playing with the ignorant word salad in your head.
The word salad was your creation not mine.
It's only word salad to the clueless.
It's word salad written BY the clueless.
Only the clueless would call it word salad.
Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one can >>>>>>> stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even >>>>>>> stand before God let alone asking for anything.Without complaining?It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment. >>>>>>>>>>
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for >>>>>>>>> their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them? >>>>>>>
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end >>>>>> up in Hell.
That is not possible. Repented sinner would never commit crime to fall >>>>> in hell. The crime is the evidence of the sinner's unrepentance.
The repentance comes after the crime, but perhaps too late to get His
forgiveness.
Repentance is never the easy way out for any crime. True repentance is
based on the complete commitment to pay for the crime fully.
How would someone do that if they're already in Hell?
It's called paying for the crime committed.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Heaven?And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants >>>>>>>>>> wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally >>>>>>>>> applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He >>>>>>>> wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
That's more of your imagination.
You have a better definition?
It has nothing to do with omnipotence. It's about justice.
Didn't last long, did it?Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do onIf He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldYou don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And yet lots of bad things abound.God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants.
Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They have nothing to do with God.
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good. >>>>>>>>>>
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar >>>>>> sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing >>>>> comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth
(Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists.
Sin is only an illusion. It never existed.
Sin is all around us. It exists and it's REAL.
Only because people are deceived.
God is like the sun,And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where
the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna >>>>>>>> attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it.
I don't benefit from evil.
It's another word for 'victim'.
No difference to me.
Well then, if you're the victim of evil, you'll see it.
That has nothing to do with your previous point about "benefiting from
evil".
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you >>>>>>>>>> obviously can't.Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said onlyThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Then it's only an illogical behavior.That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've >>>>>>>>>>>> proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do. >>>>>>>>>>
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other >>>>>>>>> hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it >>>>>>>> remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?
More blind denial and willful ignorance.
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up.
I can't be responsible for your willful ignorance.
I can't be responsible for you making shit up and then refusing to
validate it with a cite.
The fact isn't any shit to make up.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town.
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeYou don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion. >>>>>>>> What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look.
That's only an illusion.
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might
say.
No.
Wake up and smell the coffee, as they say.
That's exactly what you should do.
Again regardless, it's not there.Regardless, it's not there.That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual'sExcept in the hearts of those who don't embrace it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, because it is in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Not sure what that even means.The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's goodExactly what theological view are you talking about? I have noAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
theological view.
You've just been spouting them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
You are the one showing your ignorance.
Projection noted.
Just pointing out the fact.
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?God loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That'sGod hates atheists. I would too if I were Him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.Why?It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on myThat is a theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He?
That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. God
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules". >>>>>>>>>>
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing
to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to >>>>>>>> God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime >>>>>>> must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no
consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple
concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
There is a difference.
Of course there is. Love includes attributes other than forgiveness.
I'm glad I made my point.
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.No, it's the teaching of Jesus.I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When and where?
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or >>>>>>>>>>>> admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a >>>>>>>> cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
Not true.
Absolutely is true. QED.
Empty claim.
On your part. And still no cite.
Not my problem or responsibility.
On 2022-02-15 22:04, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:57:48 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:20, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:14:11 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:38, KWills wrote:
You already have.One what? A God?You must be psychic.Is there?Lol. There's an understatement. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do you know why God doesn't interfere? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen.
Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each >>>>>>>>>>> individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you want me to prove?
I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each
individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do
whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead.
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it?
It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my
personal experience in following Jesus.
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:22:57 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 22:03, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:56:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:19, KWills wrote:
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that? >>>>>>>>>>>
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
You are the one playing with the ignorant word salad in your head.
The word salad was your creation not mine.
It's only word salad to the clueless.
It's word salad written BY the clueless.
Only the clueless would call it word salad.
Only the clueless would 'write' such a word salad.
Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one canWithout complaining?It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment. >>>>>>>>>>>
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for >>>>>>>>>> their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them? >>>>>>>>
stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even >>>>>>>> stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end >>>>>>> up in Hell.
That is not possible. Repented sinner would never commit crime to fall >>>>>> in hell. The crime is the evidence of the sinner's unrepentance.
The repentance comes after the crime, but perhaps too late to get His >>>>> forgiveness.
Repentance is never the easy way out for any crime. True repentance is >>>> based on the complete commitment to pay for the crime fully.
How would someone do that if they're already in Hell?
It's called paying for the crime committed.
For eternity. So much for God's love and forgiveness, then.
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Heaven?And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants >>>>>>>>>>> wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally >>>>>>>>>> applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He >>>>>>>>> wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
That's more of your imagination.
You have a better definition?
It has nothing to do with omnipotence. It's about justice.
When you have omnipotence, you can do whatever the fuck you like with justice. God has it.
Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do onIf He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldThey have nothing to do with God.And yet lots of bad things abound. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Of course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?
You don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules.
God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
Didn't last long, did it?
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar >>>>>>> sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing >>>>>> comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth
(Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists.
Sin is only an illusion. It never existed.
Sin is all around us. It exists and it's REAL.
Only because people are deceived.
Deceived into committing sin?
God is like the sun,And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where
the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna >>>>>>>>> attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it.
I don't benefit from evil.
It's another word for 'victim'.
No difference to me.
Well then, if you're the victim of evil, you'll see it.
That has nothing to do with your previous point about "benefiting from
evil".
Semantics, nothing more.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you >>>>>>>>>>> obviously can't.Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said onlyThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Then it's only an illogical behavior.That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've >>>>>>>>>>>>> proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do. >>>>>>>>>>>
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it >>>>>>>>> remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?
More blind denial and willful ignorance.
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up.
I can't be responsible for your willful ignorance.
I can't be responsible for you making shit up and then refusing to
validate it with a cite.
The fact isn't any shit to make up.
Foul language noted. That's a fucking sin.
And it's not a fact until you provide a biblical cite to back it up.
Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town. >>>>>>>>>>>
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.I have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeYou don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone.
That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We see
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion. >>>>>>>>> What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look.
That's only an illusion.
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might
say.
No.
Wake up and smell the coffee, as they say.
That's exactly what you should do.
You're obviously incapable or unwilling to do so.
Again regardless, it's not there.Regardless, it's not there.That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual'sExcept in the hearts of those who don't embrace it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, because it is in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Not sure what that even means.The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's goodExactly what theological view are you talking about? I have noAre we clear?
Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
theological view.
You've just been spouting them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of the
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
You are the one showing your ignorance.
Projection noted.
Just pointing out the fact.
No, just projecting your own ignorance.
Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. GodGod loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That'sGod hates atheists. I would too if I were Him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.Why?It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on myThat is a theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That sounds like an atheist position.
I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judge
people according to the human or the earthly standard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules". >>>>>>>>>>>
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing
to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to >>>>>>>>> God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime >>>>>>>> must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no >>>>>>>> consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple
concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
There is a difference.
Of course there is. Love includes attributes other than forgiveness.
I'm glad I made my point.
I'm glad I made mine.
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.When and where?No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a >>>>>>>>> cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
Not true.
Absolutely is true. QED.
Empty claim.
On your part. And still no cite.
Not my problem or responsibility.
Absolutely is, since it was your assertion.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningThat's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-16 08:11, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:24:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 22:04, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:57:48 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:20, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:14:11 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:38, KWills wrote:
You already have.One what? A God?You must be psychic.Is there?Lol. There's an understatement. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do you know why God doesn't interfere? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each
individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you want me to prove?
I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each >>>>>> individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do
whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead.
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it?
It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my
personal experience in following Jesus.
Personal anecdotes count for jack shit in theology.
Experience in life can never be denied.
On 2022-02-16 08:06, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
Aha! So you don't even go to choich?i was in church all morningThat's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:27:44 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:06, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningThat's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so?
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:57:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:11, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:24:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 22:04, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:57:48 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my
On 2022-02-15 17:20, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:14:11 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:38, KWills wrote:I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each >>>>>>> individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do
You already have.One what? A God?You must be psychic.Is there?Lol. There's an understatement. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously heal
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng?
You misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do you know why God doesn't interfere? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each
individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you want me to prove? >>>>>>>
whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead.
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it? >>>>
personal experience in following Jesus.
Personal anecdotes count for jack shit in theology.
Experience in life can never be denied.
Different people have different experiences therefore they cannot be a
basis for theology.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:57:13 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:10, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:22:57 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 22:03, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:56:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 17:19, KWills wrote:
The word salad was your creation not mine.It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
You are the one playing with the ignorant word salad in your head. >>>>>>>
It's only word salad to the clueless.
It's word salad written BY the clueless.
Only the clueless would call it word salad.
Only the clueless would 'write' such a word salad.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
The repentance comes after the crime, but perhaps too late to get His >>>>>>> forgiveness.Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one canWithout complaining?It's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for
their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them? >>>>>>>>>>
stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even
stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end >>>>>>>>> up in Hell.
That is not possible. Repented sinner would never commit crime to fall >>>>>>>> in hell. The crime is the evidence of the sinner's unrepentance. >>>>>>>
Repentance is never the easy way out for any crime. True repentance is >>>>>> based on the complete commitment to pay for the crime fully.
How would someone do that if they're already in Hell?
It's called paying for the crime committed.
For eternity. So much for God's love and forgiveness, then.
No. It's based on the justice of God's law.
Where's the justice in eternal damnation?
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Heaven?And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants
wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally >>>>>>>>>>>> applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He >>>>>>>>>>> wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
That's more of your imagination.
You have a better definition?
It has nothing to do with omnipotence. It's about justice.
When you have omnipotence, you can do whatever the fuck you like with
justice. God has it.
Allowing evil is not omnipotence. It's the exact opposite omnipotence.
Omnipotence means allowing or disallowing anything the fuck you want.
Sin is only an illusion. It never existed.God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do onIf He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldOf course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?They have nothing to do with God. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And yet lots of bad things abound. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck He
wants, wherever He wants. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible.
Omnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
Didn't last long, did it?
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar >>>>>>>>> sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing >>>>>>>> comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth >>>>>>> (Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists. >>>>>>
Sin is all around us. It exists and it's REAL.
Only because people are deceived.
Deceived into committing sin?
Yes.
So you agree it's real.
God is like the sun,And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark.
That is only the illusion on Earth.
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun.
But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's where
the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna >>>>>>>>>>> attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it.
I don't benefit from evil.
It's another word for 'victim'.
No difference to me.
Well then, if you're the victim of evil, you'll see it.
That has nothing to do with your previous point about "benefiting from >>>> evil".
Semantics, nothing more.
You are not making yourself clear.
I cannot make it any clearer.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you >>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously can't.Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said onlyThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Then it's only an illogical behavior. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic.
No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on?
That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it >>>>>>>>>>> remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?
More blind denial and willful ignorance.
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up.
I can't be responsible for your willful ignorance.
I can't be responsible for you making shit up and then refusing to
validate it with a cite.
The fact isn't any shit to make up.
Foul language noted. That's a fucking sin.
Just pointing out the fact.
There wasn't one and there won't be one until you provide a biblical
cite.
And it's not a fact until you provide a biblical cite to back it up.
Blind denial.
Blind bullshitting.
That's only an illusion.Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We seeI have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeYou don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the results every day.
I have no idea what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion. >>>>>>>>>>> What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look. >>>>>>>>
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might >>>>>>> say.
No.
Wake up and smell the coffee, as they say.
That's exactly what you should do.
You're obviously incapable or unwilling to do so.
It's the clueless that needs to wake up.
So take your own advice.
Again regardless, it's not there.Regardless, it's not there.That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual'sExcept in the hearts of those who don't embrace it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, because it is in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of theNot sure what that even means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's goodYou've just been spouting them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have noAre we clear? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
You are the one showing your ignorance.
Projection noted.
Just pointing out the fact.
No, just projecting your own ignorance.
The clueless is the real ignorant.
Are you looking in the mirror now?
I'm glad I made my point.Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. GodGod loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That'sGod hates atheists. I would too if I were Him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judgeIt's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.Why?It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on myThat is a theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That sounds like an atheist position. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
people according to the human or the earthly standard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity.
You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules". >>>>>>>>>>>>>
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing
to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to
God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime
must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no >>>>>>>>>> consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple >>>>>>>>> concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
There is a difference.
Of course there is. Love includes attributes other than forgiveness. >>>>
I'm glad I made mine.
No, you didn't.
Then neither did you.
Only because it's too basic.I have made myself clear.When and where?No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a >>>>>>>>>>> cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
Not true.
Absolutely is true. QED.
Empty claim.
On your part. And still no cite.
Not my problem or responsibility.
Absolutely is, since it was your assertion.
That only shows your ignorance. Fact is not my assertion.
Your 'fact' only becomes a 'fact' when it's validated. Until then, it remains an assertion.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-16 15:05, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:27:44 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:06, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningThat's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no?
I have answered that question.
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 16:05:18 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 15:05, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:27:44 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:06, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
i was in church all morningThat's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.
Aha! So you don't even go to choich? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual.
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ.
That would make you religious, then.
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no?
I have answered that question.
You have evaded it by saying you're a 'believer', whatever the fuck
that means.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 16:23:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 15:06, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:57:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:11, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:24:58 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 22:04, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:57:48 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my
On 2022-02-15 17:20, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:14:11 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:38, KWills wrote:I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each >>>>>>>>> individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do >>>>>>>>> whatever the fuck they want.
You already have.You must be psychic.Is there?Lol. There's an understatement. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well, MX, you're Christ. Why don't you miraculously healYou misunderstand God. God does not interfere. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
people of their gender dysphoria? A little dirt and
spittle on their penis, and *poof*!! they get new
chromasomes, new plumbing, or a whole new attitude.
What do you say? Is it moral for a christ to do good or
evil on the ng? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do you know why God doesn't interfere? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You will probably say because there isn't one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose you've got one hiding in your back pocket?
One what? A God?
Yeah, but a demigod, spirit, or even a demon would be
impressive.
I just looked in both back pockets and there's nothing like that.
Christs are already a dime a dozen. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Only one real one, though.
The one in your heart.
For those who believe in Him.
Of course.
And only for those.
That's between them and Christ. I would not speculate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, I have not.
Yes, you have.
No, I don't judge, and I don't pretend to know God's plan for each
individual.
There isn't one.
Blind denial.
Prove there is one, then.
I don't have to.
If you expect us to believe there is one, then you do.
I'm not sure what you are asking. What do you want me to prove? >>>>>>>>>
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead.
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it? >>>>>>
personal experience in following Jesus.
Personal anecdotes count for jack shit in theology.
Experience in life can never be denied.
Different people have different experiences therefore they cannot be a
basis for theology.
The spiritual experience is all the same to everyone since the spiritual
things in my signature are same to everyone.
No two people have the same spiritual experience, therefore no.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 16:22:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 15:05, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:57:13 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:10, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:22:57 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 22:03, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:56:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 17:19, KWills wrote:
The word salad was your creation not mine.Nonsense. It's the same God's law.
He can hand it out how He chooses. Do you expect Him to give people
in Hell justice?
According to the truth, absolutely.
What does that even mean?
It's justice based on truth. Is there anything wrong about that?
It's meaningless, that's what's wrong with it.
Not to me. Why is it meaningless to you?
It's just a word salad with no meaning.
That only shows your own ignorance.
No, it doesn't. It shows your meaningless wordplay.
You are the one playing with the ignorant word salad in your head. >>>>>>>>>
It's only word salad to the clueless.
It's word salad written BY the clueless.
Only the clueless would call it word salad.
Only the clueless would 'write' such a word salad.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
You are the clueless to what I said.
You are the clueless saying it.
The repentance comes after the crime, but perhaps too late to get His >>>>>>>>> forgiveness.Asking forgiveness isn't enough. One has to repent first before one canIt's why no one can complain about
God's judgment.
Tell that to the people in Hell.
They can't deny the truth, so they have to accept the judgment.
Without complaining?
There is nothing to complain since it's the rightful punishment for
their crime.
Perhaps some were seeking forgiveness which He never gave them? >>>>>>>>>>>>
stand before God asking for anything. An unrepented sinner can't even
stand before God let alone asking for anything.
Most who ask for forgiveness DO repent, knowing that. And STILL end
up in Hell.
That is not possible. Repented sinner would never commit crime to fall
in hell. The crime is the evidence of the sinner's unrepentance. >>>>>>>>>
Repentance is never the easy way out for any crime. True repentance is >>>>>>>> based on the complete commitment to pay for the crime fully.
How would someone do that if they're already in Hell?
It's called paying for the crime committed.
For eternity. So much for God's love and forgiveness, then.
No. It's based on the justice of God's law.
Where's the justice in eternal damnation?
Eternal damnation is based on the eternal forsaking and abandonment of
God. It's the result of the eternal loss of the ability to believe in
God again.
How can anyone, even God, foresee an eternal loss of the ability to
believe in Him?
Otherwise, why would anyone want to go to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Heaven?And if it was the same as Earth, as you seem to suggest, why would
Because it's God's grace and precious gift of life. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
anyone give a shit?
It isn't the same as the fallen Earth. It's the infallible heavenly life.
And it works by different rules than Earth.
God's law is always the same to everyone.
Prove it. A Supreme Being can, by definition, do whatever He wants
wherever He wants...or not at all.
It's the requirement of justice. Justice requires the law equally
applied to all.
On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If He
wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that.
That's only your imagination.
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
That's more of your imagination.
You have a better definition?
It has nothing to do with omnipotence. It's about justice.
When you have omnipotence, you can do whatever the fuck you like with >>>>> justice. God has it.
Allowing evil is not omnipotence. It's the exact opposite omnipotence.
Omnipotence means allowing or disallowing anything the fuck you want.
Evil is not an ability. Evil is the result of disability. It has nothing
to do with God's omnipotence.
And if God wanted to He could eliminate that disability and its
results. He hasn't.
Sin is only an illusion. It never existed.It's merely a blip in the history of life.God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.Because God exercises His powers in Heaven in a way He doesn't do onIf He had stopped them happening, they wouldn't have happened, wouldOf course they do. He didn't stop them happening, did He?They have nothing to do with God. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And yet lots of bad things abound. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>God is omnipotent, He can do whatever the fuck HeOmnipotence means *anything* is possible. That's what 'omni' means!
wants, wherever He wants. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Allowing bad things is not being omnipotent. Omnipotence means there is
no bad thing possible. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Since God is good, omnipotence means God has made all things good.
therefore, there is no bad thing left. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You don't know that. That is only your presumption. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
they?
That is exactly why there is no sin or evil in heaven. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Earth!
Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
Didn't last long, did it?
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident. >>>>>>>>>>>>
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar
sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing
comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth >>>>>>>>> (Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists. >>>>>>>>
Sin is all around us. It exists and it's REAL.
Only because people are deceived.
Deceived into committing sin?
Yes.
So you agree it's real.
It's the result of being deceived. It's a lie. It can't be real.
It's not only real, its effects on others are real. See under World
Wars.
I don't benefit from evil.But you can see the darkness of the night, can't you? That's whereThat is only the illusion on Earth.God is like the sun,And yet the darkness of the night inevitably follows the light of day.
and evil is like the darkness of the night. Whenever there is the sun,
there can't be the darkness of the night. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The sun will always shine.
Until you can't see it and it gets dark. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So what do YOU see when it gets dark?
It doesn't matter whether I can see the sun. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the evil lies.
It's only an illusion.
Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'?
Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna
attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it. >>>>>>>>>>
It's another word for 'victim'.
No difference to me.
Well then, if you're the victim of evil, you'll see it.
That has nothing to do with your previous point about "benefiting from >>>>>> evil".
Semantics, nothing more.
You are not making yourself clear.
I cannot make it any clearer.
I don't see your point.
Of course you don't. Because you're just trolling.
I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you?That's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a factThat's empty claim. You don't even dare to face the logic.There's nothing illogical about it. It is what it is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Then it's only an illogical behavior. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, I don't. It's fundamental human behaviour. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That is not an answer to my question. Where is the logic for someone toPerhaps there is something intrinsic in human nature that wants to do
do good without believing good in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
good?
You need to justify the logic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Speaking of empty claims, what about your claim that Jesus said only
God is good?
It's not a claim. It's fact.
In that case, provide the cite. Until you do, it remains an
unsupported claim.
I don't need to support a fact. Fact is already evident, and it's your
responsibility to verify.
You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you've
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it
remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion.
You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you. >>>>>>>>>>>
More blind denial and willful ignorance.
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up.
I can't be responsible for your willful ignorance.
I can't be responsible for you making shit up and then refusing to >>>>>>> validate it with a cite.
The fact isn't any shit to make up.
Foul language noted. That's a fucking sin.
Just pointing out the fact.
There wasn't one and there won't be one until you provide a biblical
cite.
Not my responsibility.
Absolutely yours. If I were to say God has a green face, would you
accept that as fact or aks me to prove it?
And it's not a fact until you provide a biblical cite to back it up.
Blind denial.
Blind bullshitting.
So says the blind and in denial.
So says the serial bullshitter.
That's only an illusion.Try this on an atheist and you'll be laughed out of town. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There is no perfect plan for everyone because God does not interfere.I have no idea what you are talking about. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That perfect plan is a hands off non-interference platform. We seeI have said before that God has no plan: He doesn't interfere. HeYou don't know that. You don't know what God has planned for everyone,To be clear, the bad thing in this fallen world is not by God's
permission. The bad thing is the result and the consequence of human
sin. Since sin is never by the permission of God, the result of human
sin should never be by the permission of God either.
And God does not interfere to stop sin. Why can't He?
Because the sinner doesn't want to repent his sin to turn back to God.
God clearly has more clout than some deluded sinner. Yet He chooses
no to exercise that clout. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and God does have a perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
lets Nature take its course, whatever that course turns out to be.
I believe differently. I believe God sees all and knows all with great
wisdom and love for all his creations. Therefore, God must have a
perfect plan for everyone. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the results every day. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is only your ignorance speaking. Without God interfering by giving
his support, the world wouldn't exist, and life wouldn't function.
You're talking about Creation. OK, we know He created the Earth. After
that it was all hands off.
That is only an assumption.
We see the effects all around us, so there is empirical evidence.
It's only a make believe.
It's reality. Deal with it.
Make believe is no reality.
Reality is not make believe.
It's no reality.
What you see around you pretty much is,
It's still your assumption.
It's there and it's real. Nothing to assume.
I disagree.
You're entitled to. But then, you even think evil is an illusion.
What is YOUR reality?
The spiritual reality.
There is an earthly reality all around you, if you care to look. >>>>>>>>>>
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might >>>>>>>>> say.
No.
Wake up and smell the coffee, as they say.
That's exactly what you should do.
You're obviously incapable or unwilling to do so.
It's the clueless that needs to wake up.
So take your own advice.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
Again regardless, it's not there.Regardless, it's not there.That doesn't mean it's not existent. It only shows the individual'sExcept in the hearts of those who don't embrace it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Of course, because it is in everyone's heart. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The spiritual world is also called heaven. Heaven is the home of theNot sure what that even means. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The spiritual is the home world of the religious. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It doesn't have to be religious. It's spiritual which means it's goodYou've just been spouting them. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Exactly what theological view are you talking about? I have noAre we clear? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Far from it. Your theological views have long been discounted by just
about every major religion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
for everyone.
It's based on the existence of a God so it has to be religious.
Since God rules in every aspect of our life, it's more than religious.
Is spiritual more than religious, then? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
faithful.
And yet the spiritual world exists on Earth too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
inability to embrace it.
Inability or deliberate unwillingness. In either case, it's not
there.
That's only due to one's own mistake and blindness. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Blind denial is only the evidence of one's own ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's called willful ignorance.
Perhaps, but it's still not there.
You still can only talk about your ignorance.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
You are the one showing your ignorance.
Projection noted.
Just pointing out the fact.
No, just projecting your own ignorance.
The clueless is the real ignorant.
Are you looking in the mirror now?
You should look in a mirror.
Would I see you?
I'm glad I made my point.Can you blame God for condemning them to Hell?You can't blame God for "people who don't follow God's rules". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That's your misunderstanding. God is always good and never evil. GodGod loves all his creations despite their errors and mistakes. That'sGod hates atheists. I would too if I were Him. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I'm sure God loves all people who love the truth. God doesn't judgeIt's better to have a spiritual and philosophical discussion.Why?It's still a theological view reagardless of your preference.I prefer to consider it as my spiritual view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I only have my personal spiritual view based on myThat is a theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
understanding of the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is limiting my broader spiritual and philosophical view.
So be it.
Therefore, you need to adapt to my broader spiritual view.
Or you need to adapt to my narrow theological view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because it's more relevant to the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That sounds like an atheist position. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
people according to the human or the earthly standard. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
why God is a loving God.
God condemns some people to Hell...why would He do that if He loved
them? God does not love the Devil. Why would He? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
doesn't condemn people to hell. People fall in hell by their own choice
to abandon God and God's helping hands.
People who don't follow God's rules end up in Hell. If He loved them
He wouldn't condemn them to Hell for eternity. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They condemn themselves to hell with their own actions. It has nothing
to do with God.
He could forgive them, He doesn't. Isn't forgiveness fundamental to
God being good?
Forgiveness is never unconditional. Only love is unconditional. Crime
must be paid to serve justice. It is not to be forgiven with no >>>>>>>>>>>> consequences.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple >>>>>>>>>>> concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
There is a difference.
Of course there is. Love includes attributes other than forgiveness. >>>>>>
I'm glad I made mine.
No, you didn't.
Then neither did you.
Too late. I already did.
That sounds more and more like fake %.
When and where?No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Google is your friend.
Evasion noted. Yours too. Possibly your ONLY friend.
I have made myself clear.
But without having provided a cite to back up your claim.
Only because it's too basic.
What kind of feeble excuse is that?
It's surprising you would claim not to know the basic teaching of Jesus.
It's even more surprising that you appear unable to back up this claim
of yours with a cite.
It's no claim. It's fact. I only need to present the fact. No one needs
to prove a fact that is already proven.
It's no fact. It's an assertion. Either prove it (if you can) or
admit you made it up.
Blind denial.
You made it up, didn't you?
You are still talking about your own ignorance.
No, I'm talking about your inability or unwillingness to provide a
cite for a simple assertion.
It's not my responsibility.
It certainly is. See above about being full of shit.
Not true.
Absolutely is true. QED.
Empty claim.
On your part. And still no cite.
Not my problem or responsibility.
Absolutely is, since it was your assertion.
That only shows your ignorance. Fact is not my assertion.
Your 'fact' only becomes a 'fact' when it's validated. Until then, it
remains an assertion.
More blind denial.
More factless assertion.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-16 19:01, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 16:05:18 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 15:05, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:27:44 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:06, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though?
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote:That would make you religious, then.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.i was in church all morning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
Aha! So you don't even go to choich? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To Jesus Christ, yes.
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no?
I have answered that question.
You have evaded it by saying you're a 'believer', whatever the fuck
that means.
Find a dictionary.
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:28:13 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 19:01, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 16:05:18 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 15:05, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:27:44 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 08:06, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:To Jesus Christ, yes.
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:That would make you religious, then.
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.i was in church all morning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is based
on it.
Where did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
Aha! So you don't even go to choich? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
One of the major branches of religion, then.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though.
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no?
I have answered that question.
You have evaded it by saying you're a 'believer', whatever the fuck
that means.
Find a dictionary.
More evasion.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:37:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 19:01, KWills wrote:
It's word salad written BY the clueless.
Only the clueless would call it word salad.
Only the clueless would 'write' such a word salad.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
You are the clueless to what I said.
You are the clueless saying it.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
Repentance is never the easy way out for any crime. True repentance isHow would someone do that if they're already in Hell?
based on the complete commitment to pay for the crime fully. >>>>>>>>>
It's called paying for the crime committed.
For eternity. So much for God's love and forgiveness, then.
No. It's based on the justice of God's law.
Where's the justice in eternal damnation?
Eternal damnation is based on the eternal forsaking and abandonment of >>>> God. It's the result of the eternal loss of the ability to believe in
God again.
How can anyone, even God, foresee an eternal loss of the ability to
believe in Him?
Who cares?
Classic troll line.
Evil is not an ability. Evil is the result of disability. It has nothing >>>> to do with God's omnipotence.Omnipotence means allowing or disallowing anything the fuck you want. >>>>On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If HeThat's only your imagination.
wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
That's more of your imagination.
You have a better definition?
It has nothing to do with omnipotence. It's about justice.
When you have omnipotence, you can do whatever the fuck you like with >>>>>>> justice. God has it.
Allowing evil is not omnipotence. It's the exact opposite omnipotence. >>>>>
And if God wanted to He could eliminate that disability and its
results. He hasn't.
The problem is the people. You can't blame God for that.
God created them. He can prevent them doing evil if He wants to but apparently He doesn't give a shit.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth.Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules.
Heaven is good but not because of different rules. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.
Didn't last long, did it?
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long.
It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar
sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing
comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth >>>>>>>>>>> (Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists.
Sin is only an illusion. It never existed.
Sin is all around us. It exists and it's REAL.
Only because people are deceived.
Deceived into committing sin?
Yes.
So you agree it's real.
It's the result of being deceived. It's a lie. It can't be real.
It's not only real, its effects on others are real. See under World
Wars.
It's still just a lie. By believing the lie, great evil is committed,
but the lie will always be a lie.
How can the reality of evil be a lie? Aren't two World Wars enough
evidence for you? Are you trying to say they never happened???
I don't benefit from evil.Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna
attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>
It's another word for 'victim'.
No difference to me.
Well then, if you're the victim of evil, you'll see it.
That has nothing to do with your previous point about "benefiting from >>>>>>>> evil".
Semantics, nothing more.
You are not making yourself clear.
I cannot make it any clearer.
I don't see your point.
Of course you don't. Because you're just trolling.
Just being honest.
You mean evasive, surely.
I can't be responsible for your willful ignorance.More blind denial and willful ignorance.I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you? >>>>>>>>>>>>You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you'veThat's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it
remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up. >>>>>>>>>>
I can't be responsible for you making shit up and then refusing to >>>>>>>>> validate it with a cite.
The fact isn't any shit to make up.
Foul language noted. That's a fucking sin.
Just pointing out the fact.
There wasn't one and there won't be one until you provide a biblical >>>>> cite.
Not my responsibility.
Absolutely yours. If I were to say God has a green face, would you
accept that as fact or aks me to prove it?
That is obviously untrue. Everybody knows that. I don't need to ask you
anything.
It's every bit as true as your unproven assertion. Feel free to prove otherwise.
And it's not a fact until you provide a biblical cite to back it up. >>>>>>Blind denial.
Blind bullshitting.
So says the blind and in denial.
So says the serial bullshitter.
I made my point.
A bullshit point.
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might >>>>>>>>>>> say.
No.
Wake up and smell the coffee, as they say.
That's exactly what you should do.
You're obviously incapable or unwilling to do so.
It's the clueless that needs to wake up.
So take your own advice.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
You are still the clueless.
So claims the clueless troll. Oh the irony!
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it.
It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
You are the one showing your ignorance.
Projection noted.
Just pointing out the fact.
No, just projecting your own ignorance.
The clueless is the real ignorant.
Are you looking in the mirror now?
You should look in a mirror.
Would I see you?
You will see the clueless.
What the fuck would you be doing in my mirror??????
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple >>>>>>>>>>>>> concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
There is a difference.
Of course there is. Love includes attributes other than forgiveness.
I'm glad I made my point.
I'm glad I made mine.
No, you didn't.
Then neither did you.
Too late. I already did.
That sounds more and more like fake %.
I'm glad I made my point.
I'm glad you 'think' you did, but you didn't.
Empty claim.
On your part. And still no cite.
Not my problem or responsibility.
Absolutely is, since it was your assertion.
That only shows your ignorance. Fact is not my assertion.
Your 'fact' only becomes a 'fact' when it's validated. Until then, it >>>>> remains an assertion.
More blind denial.
More factless assertion.
More blind denial.
More evasion. Either prove it or STFU.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:38:19 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 19:01, KWills wrote:
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it?I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each
individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do >>>>>>>>>>> whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead. >>>>>>>>>
It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my >>>>>>>> personal experience in following Jesus.
Personal anecdotes count for jack shit in theology.
Experience in life can never be denied.
Different people have different experiences therefore they cannot be a >>>>> basis for theology.
The spiritual experience is all the same to everyone since the spiritual >>>> things in my signature are same to everyone.
No two people have the same spiritual experience, therefore no.
Love is all the same to everyone.
No, it is experienced differently by everone.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-17 08:54, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:28:13 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 19:01, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 16:05:18 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 15:05, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:27:44 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2022-02-16 08:06, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:To Jesus Christ, yes.
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote:You are connected to Christianity, though? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:No. I have no connection with any religious organization. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:That would make you religious, then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.i was in church all morning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is basedWhere did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
on it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
Aha! So you don't even go to choich? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
One of the major branches of religion, then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no?
I have answered that question.
You have evaded it by saying you're a 'believer', whatever the fuck
that means.
Find a dictionary.
More evasion.
No evasion.
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:03:14 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 08:54, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:38:19 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 19:01, KWills wrote:
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it?I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each
individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do >>>>>>>>>>>>> whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead. >>>>>>>>>>>
It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my >>>>>>>>>> personal experience in following Jesus.
Personal anecdotes count for jack shit in theology.
Experience in life can never be denied.
Different people have different experiences therefore they cannot be a >>>>>>> basis for theology.
The spiritual experience is all the same to everyone since the spiritual >>>>>> things in my signature are same to everyone.
No two people have the same spiritual experience, therefore no.
Love is all the same to everyone.
No, it is experienced differently by everone.
Everybody's life is different, but love is all the same.
How the fuck can it be?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:20:56 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 08:54, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:37:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 19:01, KWills wrote:
It's word salad written BY the clueless.
Only the clueless would call it word salad.
Only the clueless would 'write' such a word salad.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
You are the clueless to what I said.
You are the clueless saying it.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did say so.
Repentance is never the easy way out for any crime. True repentance isHow would someone do that if they're already in Hell?
based on the complete commitment to pay for the crime fully. >>>>>>>>>>>
It's called paying for the crime committed.
For eternity. So much for God's love and forgiveness, then.
No. It's based on the justice of God's law.
Where's the justice in eternal damnation?
Eternal damnation is based on the eternal forsaking and abandonment of >>>>>> God. It's the result of the eternal loss of the ability to believe in >>>>>> God again.
How can anyone, even God, foresee an eternal loss of the ability to
believe in Him?
Who cares?
Classic troll line.
No, a perfectly logical question to a meaningless and pointless question.
No logic behind it whatsoever. Not really into this theology shit,
are you?
Evil is not an ability. Evil is the result of disability. It has nothing >>>>>> to do with God's omnipotence.Omnipotence means allowing or disallowing anything the fuck you want. >>>>>>On Earth, yes, in theory. But God can do whatever He wants. If HeThat's only your imagination.
wants to eliminate evil from Heaven He can do that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That's what omnipotence is all about.
Only according to your imagination.
That is how omnipotence is DEFINED.
That's more of your imagination.
You have a better definition?
It has nothing to do with omnipotence. It's about justice.
When you have omnipotence, you can do whatever the fuck you like with >>>>>>>>> justice. God has it.
Allowing evil is not omnipotence. It's the exact opposite omnipotence. >>>>>>>
And if God wanted to He could eliminate that disability and its
results. He hasn't.
The problem is the people. You can't blame God for that.
God created them. He can prevent them doing evil if He wants to but
apparently He doesn't give a shit.
False. You can't blame God when the sinner chooses to sin.
God could stop the sinner sinning but He chooses not to.
It's merely a blip in the history of life.It's been happening since the Garden of Eden incident. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Not according to the Bible. The Bible says God made the Earth good.God has MADE Heaven good...unlike Earth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Heaven is good but not because of different rules. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Pure speculation.
Far from it. In Heaven, we are taught that all is Good. Not so on
Earth. Same God, different rules. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Didn't last long, did it?
Actually, the fall of man didn't happen long. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The incident with the Apple was only the first of MILLIONS of similar
sinful incidents. It was NOT a one off.
I was talking about the nearly three thousand years blip. It's nothing
comparing with the eternal life in heaven.
But Heaven was, by definition, created at the same time as Earth >>>>>>>>>>>>> (Genesis). Sin will continue on Earth for as long as Heaven exists.
Sin is only an illusion. It never existed.
Sin is all around us. It exists and it's REAL.
Only because people are deceived.
Deceived into committing sin?
Yes.
So you agree it's real.
It's the result of being deceived. It's a lie. It can't be real.
It's not only real, its effects on others are real. See under World >>>>> Wars.
It's still just a lie. By believing the lie, great evil is committed,
but the lie will always be a lie.
How can the reality of evil be a lie? Aren't two World Wars enough
evidence for you? Are you trying to say they never happened???
Evil is never any reality. Evil is the destruction and the denying of
reality. Since the true reality can never denied or destroyed, the evil
destruction is only an illusion.
What a load of horseshit.
I don't benefit from evil.Darkness is an illusion? Like 'trangendering'? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Evil is only an illusion, yes.
You don't see evil in the world around you? What sort of Polyanna
attitude is that?
I see evil, and I know it's only an illusion.
It'll seem real enough when you're the beneficiary of it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's another word for 'victim'.
No difference to me.
Well then, if you're the victim of evil, you'll see it.
That has nothing to do with your previous point about "benefiting from
evil".
Semantics, nothing more.
You are not making yourself clear.
I cannot make it any clearer.
I don't see your point.
Of course you don't. Because you're just trolling.
Just being honest.
You mean evasive, surely.
No.
You surely do.
I can't be responsible for your willful ignorance.More blind denial and willful ignorance.I'm beginning to think you're full of shit. Are you? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>You can't speak for me, and I can't do your job for you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You presented it as an assertion. It becomes a fact after you'veThat's your misunderstanding. It's already a fact. I can't make a fact
proved it, which remains your responsibility. Pretty basic stuff, eh?
Why not just admit you made it up and move on? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
less than a fact. It will always be a fact no matter what I do.
It's not a fact until you confirm it by verifying it. Which you
obviously can't.
I don't need to verify it. I already know the fact. You, on the other
hand, are a different story.
Again, it's not a fact until you prove it's a fact. Until then, it
remains an unproven (possibly made up) assertion. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On your part. Making shit up and refusing to back it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>
I can't be responsible for you making shit up and then refusing to >>>>>>>>>>> validate it with a cite.
The fact isn't any shit to make up.
Foul language noted. That's a fucking sin.
Just pointing out the fact.
There wasn't one and there won't be one until you provide a biblical >>>>>>> cite.
Not my responsibility.
Absolutely yours. If I were to say God has a green face, would you
accept that as fact or aks me to prove it?
That is obviously untrue. Everybody knows that. I don't need to ask you >>>> anything.
It's every bit as true as your unproven assertion. Feel free to prove
otherwise.
Empty claim.
No more so than yours.
And it's not a fact until you provide a biblical cite to back it up. >>>>>>>>Blind denial.
Blind bullshitting.
So says the blind and in denial.
So says the serial bullshitter.
I made my point.
A bullshit point.
What's around is REAL...more real than what's in Heaven, some might
say.
No.
Wake up and smell the coffee, as they say.
That's exactly what you should do.
You're obviously incapable or unwilling to do so.
It's the clueless that needs to wake up.
So take your own advice.
So says the clueless.
Yes, you just did.
You are still the clueless.
So claims the clueless troll. Oh the irony!
You are still the clueless.
Says a troll who won't support his assertions. Ironic.
My ignorance (if any) has nothing to do with it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>It's all your ignorance speaking.
Horseshit.
That's more ignorance speaking.
On your part.
You are the one showing your ignorance.
Projection noted.
Just pointing out the fact.
No, just projecting your own ignorance.
The clueless is the real ignorant.
Are you looking in the mirror now?
You should look in a mirror.
Would I see you?
You will see the clueless.
What the fuck would you be doing in my mirror??????
You are the clueless.
I don't see you in my mirror.
Forgiveness is PART of love. Don't you understand that simple >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concept?
They are not the same thing.
One is part of the other.
There is a difference.
Of course there is. Love includes attributes other than forgiveness.
I'm glad I made my point.
I'm glad I made mine.
No, you didn't.
Then neither did you.
Too late. I already did.
That sounds more and more like fake %.
I'm glad I made my point.
I'm glad you 'think' you did, but you didn't.
Blind denial.
Blind bullshitting.
Empty claim.
On your part. And still no cite.
Not my problem or responsibility.
Absolutely is, since it was your assertion.
That only shows your ignorance. Fact is not my assertion.
Your 'fact' only becomes a 'fact' when it's validated. Until then, it >>>>>>> remains an assertion.
More blind denial.
More factless assertion.
More blind denial.
More evasion. Either prove it or STFU.
More blind denial.
More blind bullshitting.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:06:01 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 08:54, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:28:13 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 19:01, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 16:05:18 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-16 15:05, KWills wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 09:27:44 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-02-16 08:06, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 23:14:20 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 21:58, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:46:23 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-15 17:14, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 15:59:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 13:32, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 11:55:34 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 11:36, KWills wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 09:43:54 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-15 09:13, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 23:03:28 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-14 21:23, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 19:48:07 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:To Jesus Christ, yes.
On 2022-02-14 13:20, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 12:39:21 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
No. I have no connection with any religious organization.
On 2022-02-14 12:16, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:06:46 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:That would make you religious, then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-02-14 08:31, KWills wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 19:21:12 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
It's easier to worship in God's living Church. It's 24/7.i was in church all morning >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That's nice, but have you given thanks to God? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>did you see where i defeated the kwills >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No, it's the teaching of Jesus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't remember. I'm sure you can google it yourself.When Jesus said that only God is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> good, I have to believe it and make sure my thinking is basedWhere did He say that exactly? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
on it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not going to. I'd expect you to do it since you made (up?) the
claim.
It's not a claim. It's a fact you can check out yourself. I can't be
responsible for your own facts. That is beyond my ability.
It wasn't my fact. "Jesus said that only God is good" was YOUR fact.
Now back it up or admit you made it up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
Aha! So you don't even go to choich? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not religious. I'm spiritual. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
:-)
Ah, an atheist! Why didn't you say so? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Wrong. I'm a believer of Jesus Christ. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are connected to Christianity, though? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
One of the major branches of religion, then. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no?
I have answered that question.
You have evaded it by saying you're a 'believer', whatever the fuck
that means.
Find a dictionary.
More evasion.
No evasion.
Nothing but evasion. Answer the question finally.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 21:11:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ? <science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/11/22 19:05, KWills wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 15:54:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
On 2/7/22 11:37 PM, KWills wrote:
On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 20:57:00 +0000, Scientific (he/him) ?
<science@danwin1210.de> wrote:
Being 'trans' is a physical impossibility so talking about it being >>>>>>> harmful or not is absolutely pointless.
Yes, it is possible.
No, it is absolutely impossible, as a DNA test will show.
It is also a social possibility with changes like
your name, clothing, make-up, voice training. It's not an all-or-nothing >>>>>> journey - for example, I chose to change my name, clothing, voice and >>>>>> left out makeup.
And at the end of all that, you still won't find a man you can fool
into thinking you're a woman.
I don't need to fool anyone that I'm a woman, I'm just one.
Don't be absurd. Of course you're not. You're a man - a delusional
one, but still a man. Women don't got dicks!
Unless they're trans women.
No such creatures exist in reality.
Read it, but don't post because you'll probably get instantly banned: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://old.reddit.com/r/MtF
I don't read any such woke shite.
You just show how ignorant you are.
Ignorant? This from a delusional asshole who rejects the scientific >>>>>>>>> FACTS of DNA! Simply incredible!
If you believe that we say that "biological sex isn't real", then bingo
- you just gave yourself away as a TERF.
I don't care what labels you put on it, reality is reality and
biological sex is the ONLY sex that matters.
Well, it matters, when you want to have children, in medicine and in >>>>>> sports. College swimmer Lia Thomas has been getting a lot of shit simply >>>>>> because she is a trans woman.
If this horseshit continues, that's the end of women's sports. There >>>>> will only be unisex sports and the males will always win.
Well, only the people who are best suited, regardless of their sex,
should be able to compete.
And that will almost always be males, except for faggy stuff like
figure skating and possibly gymnastics.
Figure skating and women's gymnastics is one of exceptions where women
have it better.
Precisely. And that may be all.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingestingYou're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The >>>>>>>>> reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you >>>>>>>>> will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting >>>>>>> off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that >>>>>>> don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or >>>>>> taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose. >>>>>
something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your
body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that >>>> risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't
possibly be good.
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that
we don't even know about yet.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-17 12:36, KWills wrote:
I have answered that question.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no? >>>>>>>
You have evaded it by saying you're a 'believer', whatever the fuck >>>>>> that means.
Find a dictionary.
More evasion.
No evasion.
Nothing but evasion. Answer the question finally.
No evasion. Look it up.
On 2/13/22 23:43, KWills wrote:4
You're resistant to reason just like
the TERF cult is.
How ironic, coming from someone who is resistant to reality. The >>>>>>>>>> reality in your case is that you were born male, you are male and you
will alway be male. No matter how many bits (if any) you have cut off
and no matter how many hormones you poison yourself with.
You call surgery "cutting bits off" and hormone therapy "poisoning", how
more transphobic you can get than that?
How else can you effect a penectomy or a castration other than cutting >>>>>>>> off the offending items? And flooding your body with hormones that >>>>>>>> don't belong there can only be poisoning.
Hormone poisoning is very rare. If you are careful when injecting or >>>>>>> taking pills, then it is very unlikely, provided you use the right dose.
I don't mean poisoning in the sense of sudden death from ingesting >>>>>> something toxic. I mean poisoning in the sense of fucking up your >>>>>> body, which non-native hormones will inevitably do.
There is some amount of estrogen of your body, isn't it? HRT isn't that >>>>> risky as you think according to currently existing research.
Some is OK, but you're overdosing on massive amounts which can't
possibly be good.
Blood clotting is rare, but it happens.
It's relatively new, so it's probably causing other side effects that
we don't even know about yet.
Yes, we don't know, but the same can be said with COVID-19 vaccine.
Hormone therapy is evidence-based and is effective, at least short-term.
We don't know about long-term effects, but you don't even know whether
you'll live to see tomorrow.
On 2022-02-17 12:36, KWills wrote:
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it?I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each
individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead. >>>>>>>>>>>>
It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my >>>>>>>>>>> personal experience in following Jesus.
Personal anecdotes count for jack shit in theology.
Experience in life can never be denied.
Different people have different experiences therefore they cannot be a >>>>>>>> basis for theology.
The spiritual experience is all the same to everyone since the spiritual
things in my signature are same to everyone.
No two people have the same spiritual experience, therefore no.
Love is all the same to everyone.
No, it is experienced differently by everone.
Everybody's life is different, but love is all the same.
How the fuck can it be?
Because it's a simple fact.
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:19:25 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:36, KWills wrote:
I have answered that question.
Christ doesn't live in religion. Christ lives in everyone's heart.
Religion (much of it) lives in Christ, though. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So are you or are you not a Christian?
I'm a believer. I belong to God alone.
Evasion noted.
That is an honest answer. There is no evasion.
It's a dishonest answer reeking of evasion.
No.
Is too.
Empty claim.
Empty evasion.
No evasion.
Heap evasion. I'll try again: are you a Christian, yes or no? >>>>>>>>
You have evaded it by saying you're a 'believer', whatever the fuck >>>>>>> that means.
Find a dictionary.
More evasion.
No evasion.
Nothing but evasion. Answer the question finally.
No evasion. Look it up.
I know what it means and it doesn't answer my question.
Are you BLACK or something?
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:20:08 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:36, KWills wrote:
Empty claim.
On your part. And still no cite.
Not my problem or responsibility.
Absolutely is, since it was your assertion.
That only shows your ignorance. Fact is not my assertion.
Your 'fact' only becomes a 'fact' when it's validated. Until then, it
remains an assertion.
More blind denial.
More factless assertion.
More blind denial.
More evasion. Either prove it or STFU.
More blind denial.
More blind bullshitting.
More blind denial
More belligerent blind bullshitting.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:18:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:36, KWills wrote:
You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it?I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each
individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my >>>>>>>>>>>> personal experience in following Jesus.
Personal anecdotes count for jack shit in theology.
Experience in life can never be denied.
Different people have different experiences therefore they cannot be a
basis for theology.
The spiritual experience is all the same to everyone since the spiritual
things in my signature are same to everyone.
No two people have the same spiritual experience, therefore no.
Love is all the same to everyone.
No, it is experienced differently by everone.
Everybody's life is different, but love is all the same.
How the fuck can it be?
Because it's a simple fact.
Another one of your 'simple facts' with no proof whatsoever.
--
KWills
Strategic Writer, Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor.
https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3618/5747904676_1e202191d3_b.jpg
All hail the taco! http://www.taconati.org/
On 2022-02-17 17:06, KWills wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:18:33 -0500, aaa <jeo@somewhere.org> wrote:
On 2022-02-17 12:36, KWills wrote:
Love is all the same to everyone.You said it so you must have had a reason for saying it. What was it?I expect you to prove, if you can, that God does have a plan for each
individual as opposed to each individual having free will to do
whatever the fuck they want.
Not my job. I don't speak for God. You should ask God instead. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's just my personal experience. Everything I say is based on my >>>>>>>>>>>>> personal experience in following Jesus.
Personal anecdotes count for jack shit in theology.
Experience in life can never be denied.
Different people have different experiences therefore they cannot be a
basis for theology.
The spiritual experience is all the same to everyone since the spiritual
things in my signature are same to everyone.
No two people have the same spiritual experience, therefore no. >>>>>>>
No, it is experienced differently by everone.
Everybody's life is different, but love is all the same.
How the fuck can it be?
Because it's a simple fact.
Another one of your 'simple facts' with no proof whatsoever.
The fact is already the proof.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 422 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 196:27:08 |
| Calls: | 8,951 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,352 |
| Messages: | 5,992,474 |
