From: BuddyThunder on
Free Lunch wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote
> in alt.atheism:
>
>> On Jul 4, 8:42?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote
>>> in alt.atheism:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jul 4, 3:03?am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote:
>>>>> Alex W. wrote:
>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:9fadb87c-6364-49eb-9ca6-c8fd555f6cd3(a)a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>> On Jul 3, 6:05?am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:f807e4d0-b40f-4cb8-bb4c-12f00021898d(a)34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>> Well, the scriptures say that the wicked would be more miserable in
>>>>>>> the presence of God than with the devils in hell.
>>>>>>> ===========
>>>>>>> In other words, since we are all sinful by definition, the smart choice is
>>>>>>> to aim for hell in the first place. ?Nice morality ....
>>>>>> No, the smart choice is to repent of sins. ?However, atheists claim
>>>>>> that nothing they do is sin, so they are not going to repent.
>>>>> Which to me indicates you have no idea what sin, or repentance, is.
>>>>>> ==========
>>>>>> Sin is a social construct. ?It exists irrespective of the god(s) worshipped
>>>>>> ... or not, as the case may be.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>> Sin is wilful disobedience of God. ?Repentance is confessing and
>>>> forsaking sin.
>>> As far as we can tell, God is a human invention. God never told us to do
>>> anything. Sin, therefore, is also a human invention.- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>> So once an atheist enters into sin, there is no turning back from
>> it. I guess that was why Josef Stalin killed 12 million people.
>
> God is still a human invention. Clearly the fear of God does not stop
> you from lying in almost every post.
>
> I will not respond to you for a while, you have become far too nasty in
> your discussions here.

When silly goes nasty. Delusions make for strange values I guess.
From: The Natural Philosopher on
hhyapster(a)gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> I would have thought that the heaven where all are controlled is more
> totalitarian than any system on earth? I dread to know the condition
> of those choose to be there when they are not free to speak, to do
> things they want, etc.
> There are always price to pay, in any system, or heaven. As the saying
> goes: Nothing comes free.

It has been said hat cothlicism is but one step away from ommunism.

Both adhere to a father figure who will tell them what to do and how to
act, and dish out rewards for good behaviour: I one case its the State,
in the other its God.

This is hardly surprsing, given that Christianity was DESIGNED by the
Romands to BE the second arm of the State.
From: Steve O on


"rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message
news:58898c9c-aad4-4d16-8b51-5ee0f0b2a835(a)a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 4, 9:29�am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote:
>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:2491245c-d5d7-4548-a60c-460baa59d9b4(a)z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> >> Sin is what you think it is.
>>
>> > I think sin is wilful disobedience to God.
>> > Robert B. Winn
>>
>> In that case, I've never committed a sin.
>> God has never personally told me to do anything, so how is it possible
>> for
>> me to disobey him?
>>
> Well, Joesf Stalin said something very similar when he killed 12
> million people. Atheists justify anything they do by saying there is
> no God.
> Robert B. Winn

I don't think you are following the point here.
I didn't say that there is no God, I said that God has never personally
asked me to do or not do anything and it would therefore be impossible for
me to wilfully disobey him if I have never once received an order or request
from him.
So do you agree that I am sinless, by your definition of sin?

--
Steve O
a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter)
B.A.A.W.A.
Convicted by Earthquack,
Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence


From: Steve O on


"rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message
news:03bf56d3-b444-4a0c-998b-880bcd9a17d9(a)l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 4, 9:35�am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote:
>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message
>> news:2efb0043-fcce-424b-9881->
>>

>>
>> God has never commanded me to do anything at any time.
>> I've never even met the guy.
>> Therefore, I have never disobeyed him.
>> As it is your belief that sin is when someone disobeys God, then I have
>> never sinned.
>> So does that mean I get to go to heaven?
>>
>> --
>> Steve O
>
> No, atheists like you and Josef Stalin do not accept the atonement of
> Christ for your sins.

You have already claimed that I have committed no sin, because by your
definition, sin is the wilful disobedience of God
I have never wilfully disobeyed God because I have never once received any
command, request or instruction from him.
If I have never sinned, then I have no sins to atone for, therefore you are
wrong.

> Therefore you have to pay the penalty for them
> yourself.

What sins?
How can I pay a penalty for sins I have never committed?

You haven't really thought this one out, have you?
You are either going to have to disagree that your definition of sin is
wrong, or I have never committed a sin.
Which one is it?

--
Steve O
a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter)
B.A.A.W.A.
Convicted by Earthquack,
Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence




From: Steve O on


"rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message
news:82172b99-aef0-45bd-b941-e2b2fdb67d4d(a)z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 4, 3:36 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>> rbwinn wrote:
>> > On Jul 4, 12:07 am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote:
>> >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message
>>
>> >>news:b5ef084b-b578-47aa-b9bf-1285e1588579(a)27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >>> On Jul 3, 4:15�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >>>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 03:44:40 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com>
>> >>>> wrote
>> >>>> in alt.atheism:

>> What would you pay for it? I could whip one up for you. I'd make it with
>> Judas' image, he gets such a bad rap for someone who was utterly vital
>> to the doctrine.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>
> Utterly vital? How was Judas Iscariot utterly vital?
> Robert B. Winn

Are you being deliberately dumb?
No Judas- no crucifixion, no crucifixion - no sacrifice-, no sacrifice- no
redemption from sin.
I don't subscribe to your silly belief system but at least I could work that
one out.

--
Steve O
a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter)
B.A.A.W.A.
Convicted by Earthquack,
Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence