─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 343                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:29
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: It's here!
Hello, all!!

Please find attached hereafter the HolySmoke FAQ in its current incarnation.

I have cut it into sections, so folks can find what they are looking for:

               FAQ Proper          The basic FAQ for the Echo.
               FALLACIES           Logical and argumentary fallacy list.
               CONTRADICTIONS      Biblical Contradictions List.
               SHITLIST            "Shit Happens"!
               SAMPLER             The ever notorious Echo Sampler,
                                   now reduced in size and including more
                                   modern-day HolySmokers' materials.

To find the section you need, just look at the "SUBJECT:" line for the above

As usual, I have cut these documents into sections less than 6.0 kilobytes
long, as prior experience with the FAQ has shown that this slice size -- the
old FidoNet limitation -- has the best chance of arriving everywhere, intact,
the first time.

                                 slack -- s.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 344                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:31
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 001
  │The HOLYSMOKE Frequently Asked Questions List                         │
  │Created by David Rice                                                 │▒▒
  │Current Author: Sean McCullough (Editor-in-Chief)                     │▒▒
  │ Authors/Editors: Various Heathens in Network 1:128                   │▒▒
  │                                                                      │▒▒
  │     Revised 15 Jan  1996 - Revision 666.025 by Coridon Henshaw       │▒▒
  │     Revised 14 August 1996 -- Revision 6.02 * 1.0E+23                │▒▒
  │                                                                      │▒▒
  │Compilation copyright 1996, Sean McCullough. Copyright is claimed     │▒▒
  │primarily to protect against unauthorized editing of the quotes of    │▒▒
  │others' material presented herein, pursuant to Moderatorial Rulings   │▒▒
  │regarding the HOLYSMOKE Echo.                                         │▒▒
  │                                                                      │▒▒
  │Individual quotations remain the property of their respective owners. │▒▒
  │                                                                      │▒▒
  │                                                                      │▒▒
  │Passage to non-HolySmoke participants: Please remove all mention of   │▒▒
  │ both Coridon and C.J. Henshaw's names from any such copy. You may    │▒▒
  │ leave any mention of Sean McCullough intact, however.                │▒▒
  │                                                                      │▒▒


     This product warps space and time in it's temporal and spacial location.
     Do not expose to antimatter.  Will not block gunfire.  Do not ignite.  Do
     not eat.  Definitions of words may vary.  Contents may settle during
     transfer. Slice into sections not exceeding 6 kilobytes long for best

═1: Introduction═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

The HOLYSMOKE echo exists so that off-topic religious issues from other echoes
in Fidonet may be moved to an echo where they are topical.  No one in the past
four years has yet succeeded in helping any theist think past their
brainwashing, but there's always the chance that some god-believing cash-cow
will stop denying reality, so we continue to try.

═2: Terminology════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

atheist   One who has no belief in deities.  See 3.x for details.
Atheist   Member of American Athiests, inc.
athiest   Used by theists to refer to those without morals.
agnostic  An atheist without guts.
fundi     Religous fundamentalist.  See 3.6 for details.
liberal   Anyone winning an argument with a creationist.
Hir       Gender-neutral noun, "Her + Him = Hir."
═3: Q&A════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

3.1  Q:   What is HOLYSMOKE?
     A:   HOLYSMOKE is Fidonet's only non-denominational, uncensored religion
          debate echo.  Debates such as fundies vs athists can be conducted
          here without danger of loosing your feed, like in other areas such
          as HOLY_BIBLE or any other "christian" echo.

3.2  Q:   Why was HOLYSMOKE created?
     A:   The moderator (Styx Allum) originally started the echo as a joke on
          some local fundies.  It took off from there.

3.3  Q:   What kind of behavior is alowed here?
     A:   Most anything, including flames.  One thing that will get you
          booted is modification of other people's quotes.  If somebody says
          fuck and you quote them and change 'fuck' to 'f***' or some other
          variation, you will be clobbered.  Check the rules (posted on an
          ad-hoc basis by the moderator) for more information.

3.4  Q:   Are "flames" allowed?
     A:   Flames are EXPECTED.  You will be treated with respect and courtesy
          if you extend it.  The most valuable contributors, who provide
          references to what they say, are very seldom flamed -- if you don't
          like flames, stick to posting what you know or can validate.
          Saying "Because I say so," "Because I was told so" or reading
          'PROOF' where someone wrote 'EVIDENCE' will turn you medium-rare.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 345                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:32
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 002
     A:   It, seriously, depends on how you look at it.  There are times when
          a "polite" discourse just doesn'tget the message across.  Then, the
          board between the eyes to get your attention works.  [Dan Ceppa]

.4.1 Q:   Will argument from authority get me flamed?
     A:   Depends on the authority, and if you keep all quotes in context and
          content.  Claiming that several bright people support your
          assertions therefore your assertions are true DOES NOT make it so.
          Don't quote an astronomer on issues of biology, and a biologist on
          cosmology-- which is standard Creationist tactics-- because you
          will get roasted.  Saying "Einstein believed in God (he didn't)
          therefore you should" will also get you roasted-- bright people CAN
          and DO believe silly things; just because someone is well educated
          in one field does not make hir an expert in other fields.

.4.2 Q:   Will poor spelling get flamed?
     A:   Often we see theists who mix up "Their, there, and they're," "Too,
          to, and two," "atheist" as "athiest," and "your" for "you're." They
          then in that very same message proclaim to reveal the secrets of
          God, the Universe, Life and all the Really Great Questions humans
          have pondered for a dozen millennia-- somehow a crappy speller
          telling us they know what no one else does just doesn't seem
          likely.  If one does not know the difference between "Their" and
          "they're" worth a Goat Belch, isn't it rather PRETENTIOUS for one
          to be telling us all about how much one knows about god and the

3.5  Q:   Why is the phrases "You seem bitter" and "My, you're so full of
          anger" so often used by religionists in HolySmoke?
     A:   These phrases are often used as replies to excessively abrasive
          arguments by an agnostic or atheist that has demonstrated the
          religionist's pet assertions false; the religionist resorts to
          eliciting an emotional response instead of addressing the topic at
     A:   You may be missing the point.  The people who are ridiculed (as it
          were) are not those who profess a simple belief in a creator; they
          are those who insist their beliefs are correct and we MUST ALL bow
          down before GOD before we all roast in Hell.  Then there are those
          who make ridiculous claims about the veracity of their "Book" and
          attempt to use pseudo-science to "prove" they are right.  As for
          myself, I could care less who a person worships, although I usually
          strongly disagree with their intent.  As a secular student of
          biblical times, I have learned a lot about what Christianity was
          really all about (IMHO) and what life was like in first-century
          Judah.  Personally, I feel those who take the Bible literally and
          those who follow Pauline thought should study more, and attempt to
          understand what was REALLY going on!  By far the biggest problem
          though, are those who insist I should pay to support their
          religion.  Our city supports a separate school system for
          Catholics, and the duplication of services and buildings costs
          every one of us.  There are many examples of religion being pushed
          on those who do not wish it.  We who do NOT wish to have anything
          to do with religion must suffer through innumerable disturbances
          from people who insist their religion should be in the forefront.
          THOSE are the people who are the targets of ridicule in this echo!
          [John Musselwhite]

3.6  Q:   What is a `fundi'? (Also, fundy, fundies)
     A:   FUNDIE (fun'dee) n. and adj.  (pl.  Fundies), A member of an
          American conservative religious movement that believes in biblical
          inerrancy.  This movement had its roots in the nineteenth-century
          orthodox reaction to the higher (historico- literary) criticism of
          the Bible that originated among European theologians and was
          accepted by American "modernists".  Fundamentalism owes its name to
          the "Five Fundamentals", a list of five beliefs that the
          Presbyterian General Assembly drew up in 1910 as being essential to
          the Christian faith.  Among those fundamentals was the doctrine
          of biblical inerrancy.

          Fundies (scientifically: Homo nesciens idiotus) come in two
          varieties; (about more later) but are united by the belief that
          each and every word ("jot and tittle") of the Holy Writ (at least,
          their latest authorized version) is unequivocally true.  When they
          find a text convenient to an argument, it is quotable as the
          ultimate truth.  But when confronted with an apparent
          contradiction, however rational and logical, they sail away upon
          the wings of a symbol, an analogy of hidden or recondite

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 346                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:32
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 003
          Although two separate and distinct "kinds" of fundies exist,
          (H.n.i.  var. ruralensis and H.n.i.  var.  urbanensis), they can be
          typically identified by their ubiquitous possession of a heavily
          thumped (but seldom read) Bible; an almost cataleptic and
          unquestioned adherence to dated dogma and the extraordinarily
          annoying ability of being able to interject their own personal
          version of ethics and morality into almost any subject, no matter
          how abstruse.  As a group, they are exasperatingly uni-dimensional.

          H.n.i.  var.  ruralensis can be typified as a backwoods rustic
          living among the 'possums, 'coons, 'dillos and magnolias who is
          functionally illiterate.  Though some may become transplanted to
          more municipal settings; they stubbornly adhere to old habits:
          mouth breathing, barefootedness and brainless Bible-based bleating.

          A macroevolutionary jump (although most would argue that it is
          really a regressive event) is responsible for the other variety:
          H.n.i.  var. urbanensis.  They arose from their humbler cousins in
          the deep, dark, dank backwoods but have evolved to exploit the
          trophism of bright lights, television cameras, teleprompters and
          wireless communication.  Basically, a member of this group can be
          described as a country bumpkin of the wacko-right turned religious
          zealot and usually named Billy, Jimmy, Oral or some other familiar
          sobriquet.  They drape the mantle of Christian piety around their
          shoulders (which they carefully interweave with the American
          flag), and stomping off on a witch hunt; ferret out "fellow
          travelers", "one-worlders", that archenemy of all right thinking
          people: the "secular humanist", and other assorted bogeymen.  With
          a primitive view of this world and a psychedelic view of the next,
          they harangue lost sinners (and those with the ability to think for
          themselves) in an impassioned and declamatory style to "REPENT!"
          and be born again.  Ranting and raving; and spouting smoke, fury,
          fire, brimstone and stained glass blather; they pace whatever
          stage they can usurp like a whirling dervish with a caffeine
          addiction.  The venue may change, but the song always remains the

          Usually, such narrowly unspecialized organisms as the ones cited
          above represent an evolutionary dead-end.  In these cases, though,
          it is more of a U-turn. [Marty Leipzig]

     A:   Fundy is short for a combination of two words emerging from the
          same Latin root, _fundus_ (bottom), from whence _fundare_ (to lay
          the bottom).  The English _fundament_ refers to 1. the buttocks.
          2. the anus.  Religious extremists, who do their thinking with
          these organs, practice _fundamentalism_: 1. orthodox religious
          beliefs based on a literal interpretation of the Bible.  2. Among
          some American Protestants, the movement based on this belief:
          opposed to _modernism_. [Don Martin]

3.7  Q:   "Why is everyone picking on me?"
     A:   Chances are, you deserve it.  When someone asserts wild and
          baseless claims, and then insists that others believe these claims,
          one may expect a little heat.  Some assertions that generate heat:
          "My book was written by god because it says so, and god wouldn't
          lie." "God hates such-and-such." "God loves such-and-such." "I'll
          pray for you, you stupid ignorant gibbering idiot pitiful

.7.0 Q:   "Why is everyone attacking me?  I'm only giving you the Good News"
     A:   Look.  You don't see it as being offensive, or pushing, or whatever,
          [to preach at us] but then *you* aren't the one being offended, are
          you.  Think of it in these terms: you are not the one who decides
          whether or not someone else wants to hear about your religious views.
          Indeed, the other person may have very well-formed and solid
          religious views of their own.  And your rather rude insistence on
          discussing your religion and why that other person should start
          *following* your religion is offensive.  Understand?  Its not the
          content of the message which is offensive.  Its the assumption that
          you, as a Christian, have some sort of universal permission to ram
          that message down our throats that makes us mad at you. [Jack Butler]

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 347                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:32
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 004
.7.1 Q:   Everyone is calling me a bigot because I stand for Christ!  [Oh,
          PLEASE drive those nails in harder!]

     A:   Incorrect.  Anyone who discriminates based on prejudice or other
          unreasoned foundation is labelled 'bigot'.  If blacks were known to
          be rampant killers with no sense of the value of life, you would
          not be a bigot to be afraid of them, or to point out that they need
          to be controlled.

          However, blacks are not rampant killers.  Indeed, the only
          distinguishing feature, as a group compared to whites as a group,
          is their skin pigmentation - hardly a worthy basis for fearing or
          controlling them.

          You see?  Someone who discriminates against blacks simply because
          they are black is a bigot - the discrimination is entirely

          Many Christians are shown to be bigots by the words and their
          actions.  They discriminate against gays, against people who have
          sex before marriage, against women, against scientists.  All of
          that discrimination is based on - and please make very careful note
          of this - ***nothing*** more than their personal choice to adopt a
          belief system of which such discrimination is an inherent part.

          You can't point to God.  You can't show that he exists.  There is
          asbolutley nothing in all of observed reality which even hints at
          any deity, let alone a specific deity.  The only way to adopt the
          belief in such a being is *purely* by personal choice.  You choose
          to adopt a belief of discrimination and hatred.

          Can you see now why disliking Christians, or more accurately the
          Christian dogma, is not necessarily bigotry, but rather is a sane
          and rational response to a very real threat? [Kelsey Bjarnason]

3.8  Q:   What is "Crucifixation?"
     A:   A state of mental duress, usually inside a fundamentalist Christian
          brain, that admires blood, guts, suffering, agony, drinking blood
          of God and eating His body, and usually wishes to be crucified and
          martyred hirself.  This fixation prevents those afflicted with it
          to question why Jews would crucify a heretic in the Roman fashion,
          when death by stoning was the preferred method of disposing of sons
          of Gods.

3.9  Q:   What is the "Flood Of Ignorance?"
     A:   This is a reference to the so-called global flood 'theory'
          presented by biblical literalists.

3.10 Q:   What is "One Nation Under God?"
     A:   The state of theocratic opression that fundamentalists desire to
          impose on the country in which they reside.

3.11 Q:   What is a "Creationist?"
     A:   One who believes that the earth was created in six days, exactly as
          told in the bible.  Such people always fail to notice the two
          different creation accounts contained in Genisis 1:x and 2:x.

3.12 Q:   What's this "IHS!" thing?
     A:   This can mean a great many things!  It was originally coined by a
          HolySmoke Regular to mean "In His Service!" though it is not clear
          just who "His" may be.  Usual variations may mean "I'm Happy
          Stupid!" SHIt backwards, "I'm Helping Satan!" "In Hitler's
          Service!" "I Hate Science!" "Idiot Has Spoken!" "I heat sausage!"
          "I Hate Spam!" and others far too numerous to mention. The most
          common usage in HOLYSMOKE means "BULLtIHS!" The original meaning is
          "In Hoc Signum Vincit," referring to the Christian crucifix as "By
          this sign we conquer." [OBSOLETE]

3.13 Q:   What is a "Not Real True Christian?"
     A:   When atrocities are performed by Christians in the name of God,
          their partners in religion say they were not Real True Christians.
          Some famous Not Real True Christians include Jim Bakker, Jimmy
          Swaggart, Jim Jones, Adolph Hitler, Jerry Falwell, All Catholics,
          Jeffrey Dahlmer, Mike Warnke, John "Todd" Collins, Mormons, God
          Jehovah, John Salvi, Paul Hill, Senator Exon, Timothy Mcvay, David
          Koresh and the IRA.
     A:   Any Christian who belongs to a 'false christian' sect.  For
          example, Catholics are false christians to Protestants.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 348                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:33
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 005
3.13.1Q:  Now hold on here.  You can't responsibly group those obviously
          psychotic fringe groups that claim to be of God with the true
          Christians among us.
     A:   Why not group "those obviously psychotic fringe groups" with the
          rest of the *cough, cough* "True Christians"?  You "True
          Christians" do exactly the same thing you decry above, against
          groups with which you disagree -- i.e., you characterize all gays
          and lesbians from the actions of extremist ACT UP affinity groups;
          you characterize all pro-choice people from the activities of a few
          doctors who perform late-term abortions [in emergencies]; you
          characterize all Liberals from the views of a few who are
          doctrinaire Leftists.  You and your kind demonize your opponents
          from the actions of a few of the most extreme of their kind, yet
          expect to be exempt from similar stigmatization? [Paul Boyer]

.13.2Q:  What is a "Real True Christian?"
     A:   The Christian that you happen to be talking to at this minute.

.13.3Q:  What is a cult?
     A:   Anyone who doesn't belong to the same religous group that you do.
     A:   A religon without political power.

3.14 Q:   What does "IS NOT!" mean?
     A:   This is the common reference to Christian foot-stomping arguments.
          (I.E. It's so because I say it is!)

3.15 Q:   What is the "Theory of Creation Science?"
     A:   The exact account of Genisis in the New Testiment.  However,
          biblical passages do not meet the requirements for a scientific
          theory.  See 3.x for more information on scientific theories.

     A:   "IS NOT!" Creationists refuse to provide a theory of Creationism,
          because they do not have one.  Therefore it is damn hard to teach
          it in public school, yet they still demand that it should.

3.16 Q:   What are Star Goat and Dopefish?
     A:   These made-up gods are used as a defense against 'prove God doesn't
          exist' argments made by theists.

3.17 Q:   "Pink, invisible, flying hippo?" Excuse me?
     A:   Her name is Daisy, and she leaves invisible, smell-free turds on
          the keyboards of every fundy that posts in HOLYSMOKE.  Now prove
          she doesn't!  When someone brings up the non-measurability of their
          favorite god (Jesus, Yahweh, Jehovah, Allah), others bring up Daisy
          and point out that the evidence she exists is identical to the
          evidence their god(s) exist.  See 3.16

3.18 Q:   What's an Athiest? (note spelling and case)
     A:   Christians use this word to represent people without morals;
          heathens without ethics; lawyers; baby-eaters; perverts; gays;

.18.1Q:   What's an atheist?
     A:   From Usenet's alt.atheist FAQ:

          Atheism is characterized by an absence of belief in the existence
          of God. Some atheists go further, and believe that God does not
          exist.  The former is often referred to as the "weak atheist"
          position, and the latter as "strong atheism".

          It is important to note the difference between these two positions.
          "Weak  atheism" is simple scepticism; disbelief in the existence of
          God.  "Strong atheism" is a positive belief that God does not
          exist.  Please do not fall into the trap of assuming that all
          atheists are "strong atheists".

          Some atheists believe in the non-existence of all Gods; others
          limit their atheism to specific Gods, such as the Christian God,
          rather than making flat-out denials.

          "But isn't disbelieving in God the same thing as believing he
          doesn't exist?"

          Definitely not.  Disbelief in a proposition means that one does not
          believe it to be true.  Not believing that something is true is not
          equivalent to believing that it is false; one may simply have no
          idea whether it is true or not.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 349                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:34
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 006
.18.2Q:   What is an "Agnostic?"
     A:   One who doesn't know, or give a shit, if God exist or not.

3.19 Q:   What is HOLY_BIBLE?
     A:   This echo is run by Steve Winter (no S), who has professed it to be
          THE ONLY =REAL= Christian echo on Fidonet, disregarding the dozen
          or so other Christian echoes, which aren't really, but just clever
          simulations by Satan into fooling people into believing that the
          echoes are Christian.

3.20 Q:   What is a Sheneism?
     A:   We often get Christians on the echo who claim they will shortly, in
          a few days, provide proof of their god's existence, or proof of a
          global flood, or proof that Earth is flat, or proof that evolution
          didn't and isn't occurring-- just to vanish at the appointed time,
          later showing up claiming a "hard disk crash" ate their proof (I
          hate it when that happens!).  The first time someone made this
          claim, he blamed it on Satan.  The next person this happened to
          blamed it on his god, Jesus-- so they got us coming and going, eh?

3.21 Q:   Why is evolution constantly a topic in HOLYSMOKE?
     A:   Creationists refuse to go to the EVOLUTION echo, because there are
          several more well-informed scientists there than in HOLYSMOKE.  As
          yet, no Creationist has failed to be properly corrected of their
          errors in HOLYSMOKE.  There are several highly knowledgeable people
          in HOLYSMOKE who can and do refute Creationists claims.

          EVOLUTION is also less-widly carried in the bible-belt than
          HOLYSMOKE is.

3.22 Q:   Are there any Satanists here?
     A:   No.  The best estimate of the number of Satanists in the USA is
          from 4,000 to 5,000 individuals ("Satan Wants You," by Arthur
          Lyons), so the odds of one showing up is rather slim.

3.23 Q:   Why don't you pick on Satanists like you pick on Christians and
     A:   For a couple of reasons.  First off, we only "pick on" someone who
          makes irrational and absurd claims while expecting us to believe
          them--we've yet to have a Satanist come along and do so.  Second,
          and more importantly, it is Christians who are subverting our
          secular nation through political means, not Satanists (how many
          Satanists sue the State so they may lead students in prayer?).

3.24 Q:   Why do you hate God / Jesus?
     A:   Have you stopped beating your spouse?  Do not make the mistake of
          believing that attacks on stupidity is equal to an attack on a god
          just because the person making the silly claim asserts he's
          speaking for his god.  In the three years I've read HOLYSMOKE I
          have yet to see a single person hate God or Jesus-- just those who
          claim to be these gods followers.  Many Christians commit crimes in
          the name of their gods-- we don't blame their gods: we blame the

3.25 Q:   What's this GOD$LOVE.GIF?
     A:   A child preparing to feed a bird.  If you have an Internet address,
          ask Martin Goldberg to send you a copy.

3.26 Q:   NOODLES???
     A:   I know another preacher who, along with his church, prayed that the
          LORD would help a pot of noodles last through a social dinner, not
          only did they last, not only did several take home a container full
          of noodles, but the containers always stayed full. Finally, they
          had to throw them out, after thanking the LORD of course. I have
          seen and heard of peoples lives changed dramatically for the
          better, in ways that could only be called a miracle.  The LORD
          russles the leaves if you are willing listen." [Jerry Randall]

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 350                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:34
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 007
3.27 Q:   What are the requirements for a someting to be a theory?  Is
          Creationism a theory?
     A:   I realize that you appear to have almost no scientific education at
          all but I am posting this and the next message in the hope that you
          may gain an understanding of what a scientific theory is. All of
          these are used in an attempt to explain a fact. The theory of
          evolution is used, according to these criteria, to describe the
          fact of evolution. The theory of gravity uses these criteria to
          describe the fact of gravity. When Einstein proposed a new theory
          to explain gravity apples did not hang in mid-air while waiting to
          see who was right, Einstein or Newton. The improvement or
          alteration of the theory did not have any effect on the fact of
          gravity.  So it is with the fact of evolution. Please read on and
          discover what a theory is...

          A survey of the literature on the history, philosophy and sociology
          of science reveals that there are at least four fundamental
          categories of criteria by which theories are judged:

               (1)  logical criteria
               (2)  empirical criteria
               (3)  sociological criteria
               (4)  historical criteria.

          There are four primary logical criteria for a theory. It must be:

               (1.a)     a simple, unifying idea that postulates nothing
                         unnecessary ("Occam's Razor" [see section 4 -ch])
               (1.b) logically consistent internally
               (1.c)     logically falsifiable (i.e., cases must exist in which
                         the theory could be imagined to be invalid)
               (1.d)     clearly limited by explicit stated boundary conditions
                         so that it is clear whether or not any particular data
                         are or are not relevant to the verification or
                         falsification of the theory.

          The need for these four criteria should be obvious upon reflection.
          An idea that is too complex or deals with observations piecemeal
          can have no practical explanatory value for a scientist. Theories
          must make clear patterns of things and relationships between
          things. These patterns and relationships must be internally logical
          and consistent since these are required attributes of all sound
          explanations. The explanation must be falsifiable, at least
          logically if not by actual experiment, or else tautologies or other
          logically sterile constructions might be admissible as theories.
          Finally, a theory must be limited by boundary conditions or else
          there will be criteria for determining whether or not any
          particular observation or experiments should or should not be
          explainable by the theory.  In fact, if a theory is totally
          unbounded, then it is not possible to imagine any observation that
          is irrelevant to verifying the theory.  Thus, an unbounded theory
          would not be falsifiable.  And, if a theory cannot be falsified, it
          cannot be self-corrected.  Yet self-correctability is precisely the
          characteristic that gives scientific theories their epistemological
          power:  a theory that is incorrect or incomplete can, by attempts
          to falsify it, reveal its faults or limitations and so be corrected
          or extended.

          Three empirical criteria are of primary importance as well. A
          theory must:
               (2.a)     be empirically testable itself or lead to predictions
                         or retrodictions that are testable
               (2.b)     actually make verified predictions and/or
               (2.c)     concern reproducible results
               (2.d)     provide criteria for the interpretation of data as
                         facts, artifacts, anomalies, or as irrelevant.

          The basic point is that not all data are valid for testing any
          particular theory. Some data may be interpreted as factual (that
          is, they fall within the boundary conditions specified by the
          theory and verify its predictions   or retrodictions); some may be
          artifactual (that is, the result of secondary or accidental
          influences lying outside the boundaries set for the validity of the
          theory); some are anomalous (that is, demonstrably valid within the
          bounds of the theory, but also at odds with predictions or
          retrodictions made by the theory); some are irreproducible and so,
          invalid; and some are irrelevant since they address the theory not
          at all.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 351                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:36
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 008
          Once again, the necessity of these criteria should be relatively
          self-evident. It is possible to imagine theories that are logically
          falsifiable but experimentally untestable (as when the technology
          does not exist to convert the logical test into an empirical test).
          Such a theory cannot be either verified or falsified and so is
          useless in practice to an experimental scientist. One can, at best,
          only leave such empirically untestable ideas in the scientific
          purgatory of doubt. A theory must also limit what may possibly be
          observed in the universe.  Otherwise, one would not know what to
          look for, where, how to look for it, under what conditions, or know
          whether what one saw was relevant or irrelevant to the theory. If
          everything is possible under an explanation, then no tests for it
          can exist.

          A theory must also make verified predictions and retrodictions to
          validate itself. It is possible otherwise to imagine theories that
          make predictions and retrodictions all of which are falsified. A
          theory whose predictions and retrodictions are falsified, either by
          the prior existence of relevant data or the subsequent discovery of
          relevant data, cannot be considered a valid theory. It is in need
          of correction or extension.  And, of course, a theory based upon
          irreproducible results is, in effect, invalidated by the very fact
          that the results cannot be reproduced - for either the boundary
          conditions governing the collection of the data have not been
          properly set, or the original data may have been due simply to
          coincidence rather than any mechanism proposed by the theory.

          Sociological criteria also exist for determining the validity of a
          theory.  A theory must:

               (3.a)     resolve recognized problems, paradoxes, and/or
                         anomalies irresolvable on the basis of preexisting
                         scientific theories
               (3.b)     pose a new set of scientific problems upon which
                         scientists may work
               (3.c)     posit a "paradigm" or problem-solving model by which
                         these new problems may be expected to be resolved
               (3.d)     provide definitions of concepts or operations
                         beneficial to the problem-solving abilities of other

          Once again, the need for these criteria is manifest.  An idea that
          does not resolve any recognized scientific problems cannot be
          called a scientific theory. It can have no effect upon the research
          activity of scientists.  Similarly, an explanation that does not
          pose new problems does not allow scientists to learn anything they
          were unable to learn before.  A theory therefore has no
          sociological value unless it provides a model for new or more
          efficient sorts of scientific activity. Thus, a theory must be
          stated in terms that are operationally useful to the community of
          scientists who might use the theory.  If the definitions or
          concepts upon which the theory is based are not operationally
          useful, then the explanation says nothing experimentally verifiable
          about nature. Such an explanation cannot, therefore, be scientific.

          Finally, there is a fourth set of theory criteria as well:
          historical ones.  A theory must:

               (4.a)     meet or surpass all of the criteria set by its
                         predecessors or demonstrate that any abandoned
                         criteria are artifactual
               (4.b)     be able to accrue the epistemological status acquired
                         by previous theories through their history of testing
                         or, put another way, be able to explain all of the
                         gathered under previous relevant theories in terms
                         either of fact or artifact (no anomalies allowed)
               (4.c)     be consistent with all preexisting ancillary theories
                         that already have established scientific validity.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 352                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:36
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 009
          These criteria are necessary to ensure that theories are
          correctable.  Correctability, in turn, ensures the increase in
          explanatory power of scientific theories with time, and promotes
          the consistency and integration of all scientific explanations,
          without such criteria, scientists would be free to pick and choose
          data that favor their explanations while ignoring previously
          recorded evidence and theories that falsify their own ideas.  The
          historical criteria make such unscientific procedures nearly
          impossible. The historical records of each science stand as a
          monument to the series of tests any new theory must pass to prove
          its mettle against the accumulated knowledge of nature. The longer
          a science has existed, the greater the accumulated knowledge
          concerning any particular aspect of nature.  Consequently, the more
          difficult it becomes to reformulate all of that knowledge into a
          new and consistent framework.  [Robert Root-Bernstein]

          In short ...  if you have a better theory of how the diversity
          of species came to be as they are on this planet you must fit it
          into the above (and preceding) framework. While your theory is
          being tested and evaluated the diversity of species will remain as
          they now are. The facts that are manifest under the banner of
          evolution will not go away while your theory is being developed. If
          you can come up with a theory to explain the fact of evolution that
          fits these criteria I will accept it... but _only_ if you can do so
          and not before. [Simon Ewins]

3.28 Q:   Is there a biological basis for fundamentalism?  I mean, people
          can't be this stupid without extra help.
     A:   You (and others here) may find interesting the article by Rebecca
          Lee, "The Jerusalem Syndrome" in The Atlantic Monthly (May 1995, pp
          24-38).  There are LOTS of Messiahs around, and protestants are
          particularly susceptible. All it takes for many is to visit
          Jerusalem and experience a religious overload. The authorities find
          ice middle-class Americans  wandering the surrounding hillsides,
          dressed in bedsheets. David Koresh was one such who recognized his
          own divinity in 1983 and did not get treatment for it.

          The treatment is a drug Haloperidol, "a dopamine antagonist; some
          psychiatrists hypothesize that too much dopamine can cause the mind
          to be overactive and project to excess, to translate what _is_ into
          what _might be_--an action of faith. An overabundance of dopamine,
          then may blur the differences on perceives between oneself and God.
          Haloperidol blocks some of the dopamine receptors, closes the
          gates, prevents interplay in the mind between what is seen and what
          is unseen, discourages the leap of faith. Physicians keep the
          dosage very low, however, fearing that too much of the drug might
          wipe out the religious imagination entirely."  (p 38, col a)

          Perhaps we atheists are simply hypodopaminic to the hyper-of the
          fundies. Better things for better living through chemistry . . . .

          [Now all you need to do is slip a large amount of Haloperidol into
          Washington D.C's water supply and you'll have no more fundies in

3.29 Q:   What is the Necronomicon?
     A:   [...] The Necronomicon began life as an interesting and eldritch
          bit of frippery that H. P. Lovecraft invented to liven up some of
          his stories and add the element of Things Which Man Was Not Meant
          To Know to them.  Abdul Alhazred is likewise a fiction.

          The only book bearing the name that I have seen in print was
          written in the late '70s and is a mish-mash of pseudo-Sumerian
          babble. It is not   the "real" Necronomicon, if there ever could be
          such a thing. It is merely a stupidly written and very funny bit of
          junk whose main claim to fame is the use of the title.

          Most people with any sense whatsoever realize that the Necronomicon
          is indeed a fraud and anyone purporting to have anything like a
          real copy of it is off his gyros. [Preston Simpson]

3.30 Q:   How old is the earth?  How do we know?
     A:   The most direct means for calculating the earth's age is a Pb/Pb
          isochron age, derived from samples of the earth and  meteorites.
          This involves measurement of three isotopes of lead (Pb-206,
          Pb-207, and either Pb-208 or Pb-204).  A plot is constructed of
          Pb-206/Pb-204 versus Pb-208/Pb-204.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 353                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:38
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 00A
          If the solar system formed form a common pool of matter, which was
          uniformly distributed in terms of Pb isotope ratios, then the
          initial plots for all objects from that pool of matter would fall
          on a single point.  However, amounts of Pb-206 and Pb-207 will
          change in some samples, as these isotopes are decay end-products of
          U (U-238 decays to Pb-206, and U-235 decays to Pb-207).

          If the source of the solar system was also uniformly distributed
          with respect to U isotope ratios, then this change will cause the
          data points to move away from each other, but they will always fall
          on a single line.  And from the slope of the line we can derive the
          amount of time which has passed since the pool of matter became
          separated into individual objects.

          A creationist would object to all of the "assumptions" listed
          above.  However, the test for these assumptions is the plot of the
          data itself.  The actual underlying assumption is that, if those
          requirements have not been met, there is no reason for the data to
          plot on a line.

          The resulting plot for five meteorites that contained uranium, a
          single data point for all meteorites that do not, and one for
          modern ocean sediments. It looks like this:

          Y-axis: ratio of Pb[207]/Pb[204]
          X-axis: ratio of Pb[206]/Pb[204].

       │                                                              7 │
       │                                                                │
    30 ├                                                                ┤
       │                                                                │
       │                                            6                   │
       │                                                                │
       │                                                                │
    20 ├                                                                ┤
       │                                                                │
       │                 4    5                                         │
       │                3                                               │
       │          2                                                     │
    10 ├      1                                                         ┤
       │                                                                │
       │                                                                │
       10            20            30            40            50

          Data points: (1) Iron Meteorites; (2) Beardsley; (3) Modern
          sediments and young galenas; (4) Saratov; (5) Elenovka; (6)
          Richardton; (7) Nuevo Laredo.  I can't really do it justice in
          ASCII, I recommend interested parties to get the original.
          (Dalrymple, 1986, Figure 12)

          The slope of the line in the above chart gives an age of 4.55 ˝
          0.07 billion years.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 354                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:38
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 00B
          Most of the other measurements for the age of the earth rest upon
          calculating an age for the solar system by dating objects which are
          less geologically active (such as meteorites).  Below is a table of
          radiometric ages derived from groups of meteorites:

          ═══════════════════════ ══════  ══════          ═══════════════
          Type                    Dated   Method          Age (x10^9 yr)
          ═══════════════════════ ══════  ══════          ═══════════════
          Chondrites                13    Sm-Nd           4.21  +/- 0.76
          Carbonaceous chondrites    4    Rb-Sr           4.37  +/- 0.34
          Chondrites (undist. H)    38    Rb-Sr           4.50  +/- 0.02
          Chondrites (all)          50    Rb-Sr           4.43  +/- 0.04
          H Chondrites (undist.)    17    Rb-Sr           4.52  +/- 0.04
          H Chondrites              15    Rb-Sr           4.59  +/- 0.06
          L Chondrites (rel. und.)   6    Rb-Sr           4.44  +/- 0.12
          L Chondrites               5    Rb-Sr           4.38  +/- 0.12
          LL Chondrites (undist.)   13    Rb-Sr           4.49  +/- 0.02
          LL Chondrites             10    Rb-Sr           4.46  +/- 0.06
          E Chondrites (undist.)     8    Rb-Sr           4.51  +/- 0.04
          E Chondrites               8    Rb-Sr           4.44  +/- 0.13
          Eucrites (polymict)       23    Rb-Sr           4.53  +/- 0.19
          Eucrites                  11    Rb-Sr           4.44  +/- 0.30
          Eucrites                  13    Lu-Hf           4.57  +/- 0.19
          Diogenites                 5    Rb-Sr           4.45  +/- 0.18
          Iron (+ St. Severin)       8    Re-Os           4.57  +/- 0.21
          ═══════════════════════ ══════  ══════          ═══════════════
          After Dalrymple, 1991, p.  291; duplicate studies on identical
          meteorite types omitted.)

          As shown in the table, there is excellent agreement on about 4.5
          billion years, between hundreds of different meteorites and by
          several different dating methods.

          Further, studies on individual meteorites generally give concordant
          ages by multiple radiometric means.  For example:

          ═══════════════════════ ══════  ══════          ══════════════
          Meteorite               Dated   Method          Age (x10^9 yr)
          ═══════════════════════ ══════  ══════          ══════════════
          Guarena                 w-rock  Ar-Ar           4.44  +/- 0.06
                                  13 sam  Rb-Sr           4.46  +/- 0.08
          ─────────────────────── ──────  ──────          ──────────────
          Olivenza                18 sam  Rb-Sr           4.53  +/- 0.16
                                  w-rock  Ar-Ar           4.49  +/- 0.06
          ─────────────────────── ──────  ──────          ──────────────
          Saint Severin           4 sam   Sm-Nd           4.55  +/- 0.33
                                  10 sam  Rb-Sr           4.51  +/- 0.15
                                  w-rock  Ar-Ar           4.43  +/- 0.04
          ─────────────────────── ──────  ──────          ──────────────
          Juvinas                 5 sam   Sm-Nd           4.56  +/- 0.08
                                  5 sam   Rb-Sr           4.50  +/- 0.07
          ─────────────────────── ──────  ──────          ──────────────
          Y-75011                 9 sam   Rb-Sr           4.50  +/- 0.05
                                  7 sam   Sm-Nd           4.52  +/- 0.16
          ═══════════════════════ ══════  ══════          ══════════════

          (After Dalrymple, 1991, p. 286; meteorites dated by only a single
          means omitted, duplicated methods omitted.)

          Also note that the meteorite ages (both when dated mainly by Rb-Sr
          dating in groups, and by multiple means individually) are in exact
          agreement with the solar system "model lead age" produced earlier.
          [Chris Stassen]

3.31 Q:   What is evolution?
     A:   "Evolution", to biologists, refers to that change in gene
          frequencies of populations over the generations in time that
          produces new species. Darwin called it "descent with modification":
          a painfully slow process, usually operating over hundreds of
          thousands, if not millions, of years and generations. Geological
          and paleontological additions to this definition are noted in the
          fact that over the span of geological time, organisms have
          progressed from the simple to the more complex.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 355                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:38
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 00C
          There are four commonly confused meanings of evolution, which
          should be kept quite separate and distinct: (1.) the general
          process of populational and specific (i.e., giving rise to new
          species) change, which is considered a well established scientific
          fact, (2.) inevitable "progress" from lower to higher life forms
          [though now largely discredited], (3.) the particular history of
          the "Tree of Life" and the origins of various groups, or
          phylogenies, which are interpreted from the fossil record and
          biochemical studies; and (4.) the mechanism of evolution, which
          Darwin and Wallace proposed as "natural selection", but is
          currently being investigated and modified by scientific research.
          Punctuated equilibria is an example of the latter.

          Here following are some of the major arguments and objections that
          Creationists never tire of bringing up - and some answers from the
          perspective of mainstream science:

          1. FACT, OR THEORY?
               Evolution became established as fact because it unified
               thousands of disparate observations by comparative
               anatomists, botanists, field naturalists, geologists,
               paleontologists, geneticists and biochemists.  Without the
               unifying concept of a changing world in process over eons of
               time, modern science could not and would not exist.  That
               species are related through common ancestry is supported by
               scores of interlocking research fields, each which supports
               the rest. Evolution is as well established fact as
               gravitation. As noted by S.J. Gould, apples are not going to
               stop falling in midair while scientists debate whether
               Newton's law of gravitation has been superseded by
               Einstein's theories. And species keep on changing over time,
               while we continue to search for the why and how of evolution.

               If one insists that evolution is but one interpretation of
               nature, what is the alternative? That the thousands of
               dinosaurs and species that preceded them and postdated them
               were _not_ related to each other, appeared full blown and had
               no common connections? Such a model, call it "religious" or
               call it "creation science", cannot lead to fruitful inquiry.
               It is rather an answer that stops all further questions.

               While some critics concede that new species (_Drosophilia
               sp._, for example) have been produced in the lab, they claim
               general evolution has never been experimentally demonstrated.
               By this, they mean breeding a succession of progressively
               "higher" or more complex species. But, there is no such
               theory of general evolution (i.e., a strawman), the old
               Victorian notions of "inevitable progress" as opposed to the
               simple to more complex progress noted in the fossil record,
               biologically are outmoded and well discarded.

               The time worn and oft-repeated claim that there are no
               transitional forms is demonstrably false.  The Great Karroo
               region of South Africa is a vast graveyard of mammal-like
               reptiles, a whole array of species whose anatomy was
               intermediate between reptiles and mammals. There is the
               famous _Archeopteryx_, with its feathers, teeth, claws and
               dinosauroid skeleton, a clear transition between reptiles and
               birds. And the African homonid fossils represent creatures
               with human-like dental patterns, small brains, arms longer
               than humans but shorter than modern apes, with pelves, feet
               and legs for upright walking.  Transitional fossils are
               fairly rare because, going by current theory, most species
               remain stable for long periods.  When change does occur, it
               happens in a relatively rapid (in geological terms) timespan
               and oftimes occurred in small, isolated populations. The
               fossil record has been compared to freezing a multileveled
               parking garage in time. Most cars would be found on the
               various floors, with very few on the ramps. The amount of
               time each car spends on the ramp is short when compared to
               the length of time it remains parked, yet each must have
               traveled the ramp.  Another evidence of transition is found
               in biogeographic  distribution of living species. On Pacific
               island chains, biologists have tracked populational species
               across thousands of miles, discovering intermediate forms
               from one end of the island chain to the other.  Among living
               species, there is a series of intermediate species between
               lizards and snakes, sharks and skates, and thrushes and

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 356                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:40
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FAQ PROPER: 00D
          4. EVIDENCE AND "PROOF":
               There is a very common misconception the Darwin thought he
               had "proved" by logic that species evolved.  He was, in fact,
               a much subtler thinker and philosopher of science.  "The
               change of species cannot be directly proved, and...the
               doctrine must sink or swim according as it groups and
               explains [disparate] phenomena.  It is unequivocally curious
               how few people judge it this way, which is the correct way.

          5. "HOLES" AND QUESTIONS:
               That there are "holes" and unanswered questions in
               evolutionary theory (just as there are in quantum theory) is
               incontrovertible, which is normal for healthy science. As
               noted by Huxley: "If lost in a dark forest, would you reject
               a dim, flickering lantern on the grounds the light it gave
               was imperfect?"  "I think not", mused Huxley, "I think not."

               This hoary old chestnut that evolutionary theory is built on
               the tautological pretense that "the survivors survive" was
               laid to rest long ago. Critics argue that "only the fittest
               survive" is an untestable proposition without a uniform
               definition of fitness and, therefore, meaningless as an

               But whatever the state of those archaic "catch-phrases", such
               as "survival of the fittest" and "man came from monkeys", the
               heart of Darwin's theory remains sound: overproduction of
               offspring in nature, genetic variability and a sorting
               process, which results in both long-term stability and
               episodic divergence of populations. Increasingly, new
               research is focusing on gaining a deeper understanding of
               these mechanisms of genetic variation and differential
               sorting as they occur on various levels within populations of
               the same organism.

               Some assume that research and inquiry into biology and
               zoology must lead to the formulation of fixed laws like those
               of chemistry or physics. Dissecting the anatomical structures
               of extinct creatures, working out their distribution in
               evolutionary hyperspace and reconstructing the Earth's past
               indeed meets and exceeds all the criteria of science; as
               evidenced by paleontology, geology and biostratigraphy.

          The kind of scientific illiteracy that rejects evolution as a
          "humanist religious belief" can result in serious errors in
          understanding and even the loss of human life. For example, Dr.
          L.L. Bailey of the infamous Loma Linda University (Seventh-Day
          Adventist) "school" of medicine tried to save the life "Baby Fae",
          an infant born with a severely malformed heart. He surgically
          implanted a baboon's heart, but the organ was quickly rejected and
          the child died.

          He was asked, after the debacle, why he didn't instead use a
          chimpanzee's heart instead, which would have offered a much better
          chance of success because of the chimp's closer evolutionary
          proximity and genetic fit. Dr. Bailey replied that he "didn't
          believe in evolution," and in any case, "couldn't see what it had
          to do with the practice of medicine."

          Add this to the willful distortions, out-of-context quoting, and
          bald-faced lies of those who populate El Cajon's oxymoronically
          monikered "Institute of Creation Research"; who spend their time at
          their self-described "God directed ministry" trying to inculcate
          their own particularly skewed, and narrowly sectarian, version of
          Biblically mandated (or so they say) morality, into the science
          curricula of public schools across the nation; and we can see how
          the unfortunate bastard child of hard-shell religion and fanatical
          pseudoscience is indeed homeless.

          Mainstream science has no place for "Creation Science", other than
          a prime example of a once popular belief that has been shown to be
          an intriguing mistake. With its anti-scientific documents, specious
          reasonings, supernormal occurrences and non-mechanistic processes,
          it belongs in that dustbin of outdated and useless speculations
          like it brethren "Flat-Earthism" and  Geocentrism.

          Mainstream religion also has no room at the inn for the
          hyperliteral interpretation, and concomitant internal
          contradictions and paradoxes, of scripture that the ICR crowd try
          to pawn off as "religiously-ordained".

          Certainly, "Creation Science" is nothing more that an authoritarian
          philosophy, a sham and a manifestation of supernaturalism trying,
          in vain, to somewhere find a home.

          It is not at all surprising that virtually everyone is hanging out
          "No Vacancy" signs whenever they ooze into town.  [Marty Leipzig]

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 357                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:41
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FALLACIES: 001
═4: Debate Terms═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════


Argumentum ad ignorantium means "argument from ignorance".  This fallacy
occurs whenever it is argued that something must be true simply because it has
not been proved false.  Or, equivalently, when it is argued that something must
be false because it has not been proved true.  (Note that this is not the same
as assuming that something is false until it has been proved true, a basic
scientific principle.)


"Of course the Bible is true.  Nobody can prove otherwise."

"Of course telepathy and other psychic phenomena do not exist.  Nobody has
shown any proof that they are real."

Note that this fallacy does not apply in a court of law, where one is generally
assumed innocent until proven guilty.

Also, in scientific investigation if it is known that an event would produce
certain evidence of its having occurred, the absence of such evidence can
validly be used to infer that the event did not occur.  For example:

"A flood as described in the Bible would require an enormous volume of water to
be present on the earth.  The earth does not have a tenth as much water, even
if we count that which is frozen into ice at the poles.  Therefore no such
flood occurred."


This fallacy is closely related to the argumentum ad populum.  It consists of
asserting that the more people who support or believe a proposition, the more
likely it is that that proposition is correct.


"The Bible must be true. Millions of people know that it is.  Are you trying to
tell them that they are all mistaken fools?"

"Eat shit.  Ten million flys can't be wrong."


The burden of proof is always on the person making an assertion or proposition.
Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of argumentum ad ignorantium, is
the fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who denies or
questions the assertion being made.  The source of the fallacy is the
assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise.

Short form:  Don't attempt to prove a negatives.  Unless you're an idiot.


Description: A Fallacy of Ambiguity, where the ambiguity arises from the
emphasis (accent) placed on a word or phrase.


Description: An argument from the truth of a hypothetical statement, and the
truth of the consequent to the truth of the antecedent. In the syllogism below,
P is the antecedent and Q is the consequent:

P implies Q
Q is true                  <-- Affirming the consequent
Therefore:  P is true

Example: The Bible implies god, therefore, god is true.


Description: An argument in the course of which at least one term is used in
different senses.  Also known as equivocation. There are several types of
"fallacies of ambiguity," including REIFICATION, EQUIVOCATION, AMPHIBOLY [4.7],

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 358                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:42
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FALLACIES: 002

Description: A type of Fallacy of Ambiguity where the ambiguity involved is of
an "amphibolous"  (equivocal, uncertain) nature.  Amphiboly is a syntactic
error.  The fallacy is caused by faulty sentence structure, and can result in a
meaning not intended by the author. "The department store now has pants for men
with 32 waists." (How many waists do you have?  I have only one!)


Description: A fallacy of asserting that something is right or good simply
because it is old; that is, because "that's the way it's always been."

Example: The Bible is 2000 years old!  It must be true!


Description: An argument that resorts to the threat of force to cause the
acceptance of the conclusion. Ad baculum arguments also include threats of fear
to cause acceptance.

Example: You'll go to hell if you don't follow my loving god.


Description: Fallacy of believing that money is a criterion of correctness;
that those with more money are more likely to be right.


Description: An argument that attempts to disprove the truth of what is
asserted by attacking the speaker rather than the speaker's argument.  Another
way of putting it:  Fallacy where you attack someone's character instead of
dealing with salient issues. There are two basic types of ad hominem arguments:
(1) abusive, and (2) circumstantial.


Description: A fallacy of assuming that because someone is poor he or she is
sounder or more virtuous than one who is wealthier.  This fallacy is the
opposite of the informal fallacy "argumentum ad crumenam."


Description: An argument that appeals to pity for the sake of getting a
conclusion accepted.


Description: The incorrect belief that an assertion is more likely to be true
the more often it is heard.  An "argumentum ad nauseum" is one that employs
constant repitition in asserting a truth.

Short form: an argument that is repeated so many times that you suffer nausea.


Description: A fallacy of asserting that something is more correct simply
because it is new or newer than something else.  Or that something is better
because it is newer.  This type of fallacy is the opposite of the "argumentum
ad antiquitam" fallacy.


Description: An argument that appeals to the beliefs of the multitude (i.e.,
the "populace").  Another way of putting it:  Speaker deals with passions of
audience rather than with salient issues. This fallacy is also known as "Appeal
to Tradition" Ad populum arguments often occur in (1) propaganda, (2)
demagoguery, and (3) advertising.


Description: An argument in which an authority is appealed to on matters
outside his/her field of authority.  "Ad verecundiam"  also refers to a fallacy
of simply resorting to appeals to authority.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 359                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:42
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FALLACIES: 003

Description: An argument that assumes as part of its premises the very
conclusion that is supposed to be true.  Another way of saying this is:
Fallacy of assuming at the onset of an argument the very point you are trying
to prove.  The fallacy is also sometimes referred to as "Circulus in Probando."
This Fallacy is also known by the Latin "PETITIO PRINCIPII".


The Bible is true because god said it was.  I know god is real becase the Bible
said so.


Description: Also referred to as the "black and white" fallacy, bifurcation is
the presentation of a situation or condition with only two alternatives,
whereas in fact other alternatives exist or can exist.


Description: An argument in which one assumes that a whole has a property
solely because its various parts have that property.  Composition is a type of
Fallacy of Ambiguity.


Description: If P then Q, therefore, if Q then P.


Hitler used evolution, therefore, everyone who follows evolution supports


Description: A fallacy of correlation that links events because they occur
simultaneously; one asserts that because two events occur together they are
causally related, and leaves no room for other factors that may be the cause(s)
of the events.  This fallacy is similar to the "post hoc" fallacy.


Description: An argument in which one infers the falsity of the consequent from
the truth of a hypothetical proposition, and the falsity of its antecedent.

P implies Q
Therefore:  Not-Q


Description: An argument in which one assumes that various parts have a
property solely because the whole has that same property.  Division is a type
of Fallacy of Ambiguity.


Description: An argument in which an equivocal expression is used in one sense
in one premise and in a different sense in another premise, or in the
conclusion.  Equivocal means (1) of uncertain significance; not determined, and
(2) having different meanings equally possible.  Equivocation is a type of
Fallacy of Ambiguity. The opposite of equivocation is "unovocation," in which a
word always carries the same meaning through a given context.


Description: The question asked has a presuppostion which the answerer may wish
to deny,  but which he/she would be accepting if he/she gave anything that
would count as an answer.  Any answer to the question "Why does such-and-such
happen?" presupposes that such-and-such does indeed happen.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 360                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:42
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FALLACIES: 004

Description: An analogy is a partial similarity between the like features of
two things or events on which a comparison can be made.  A false analogy
involves comparing two things that are NOT similar.  Note that the two things
may be similar in superficial ways, but not with respect to what is being


Description: An argument in which a proposition is used as a premise without
attention given to some obvious condition that would affect the proposition's
application.  This fallacy is also known as the "hasty generalization."  It is
a fallacy that takes evidence from several, possibly unrepresentative, cases to
a general rule; generalizing from few to many.  Note the relation to
statistics:  Much of statistics  concerns whether or not a sample is
representative of a larger population. The larger the sample size, the better
the representativeness.  Note also that the opposite of a hasty generalization
is a sweeping generalization.


Description: An argument that is supposed to prove one proposition but succeeds
only in proving a different one.  Ignoratio elenchi stands for "pure and simple


Description: A syllogistic argument in which a term is distributed in the
conclusion, but not in the premises.  One of the rules for a valid categorical
syllogism is that if either term is distributed in the conclusion, then it must
be distributed in the premises.  There are two types of Illicit Process:
Illicit Process of the Major Term and Illicit Process of the Minor Term.


Description: A demand for a simple answer to a complex question.


US schools are going down the drain because the school day is no longer started
with a prayer.


Description: An argument to reject a proposition because of the falsity of some
other proposition that seems to be a consequence of the first, but really is


Description: An argument in which the conclusion is not a necessary consequence
of the premises.  Another way of putting this is:  A conclusion drawn from
premises that provide no logical connection to it.


@MSGID: 1:250/820 00bea09c
Description: Same as "Begging the Question"   The argument assumes its
conclusion is true but DOES NOT SHOW it to be true.  Petitio principii has two

1.  P is true, because P is true.
2.  P is true, because A is true.   And A is true because B is true.  And B is
true because P is true.

Similar to circular reasoning.


Description: An argument from a premise of the form "A preceded B" to a
conclusion of the form "A caused B."  Simply because one event precedes another
event in time does not mean that the first event is the cause of the second
event. This argument resembles a fallacy known as a Hasty Generalization.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 361                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:43
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: FALLACIES: 005

Description: An argument of the syllogistic form in which there occur four or
more terms.  In a standard categorical syllogism there are only three terms: a
subject, a predicate, and a middle term.


Description: A fallacy when irrelevant material is introduced to the issue
being discussed, such that everyone's attention is diverted away from the
points being made, and toward a different conclusion.  It is not logically
valid to divert a chain of reasoning with extraneous points.


Description: To reify something is to convert an abstract concept into a
concrete thing. Reification is a Fallacy of Ambiguity.  Reification is also
sometimes known as a fallacy of  "hypostatization".


Description: The burden of proof is always on the person making the assertion
or proposition.  Shifting the burden of proof, a special case of "argumentum ad
ignorantium," is a fallacy of putting the burden of proof on the person who
denies or questions the assertion being made.  The source of the fallacy is the
assumption that something is true unless proven otherwise.


Description: Special pleading is a logical fallacy wherein a double standard is
employed by the person making the assertion.  Special pleading typically
happens when one insists upon less strict treatment for the argument he/she is
making than he or she would make when evaluating someone else's arguments.


Description: It is a fallacy to misrepresent someone else's position for the
purposes of more easily attacking it, then to knock down that misrepresented
position, and then to conclude that the original position has been demolished.
It is a fallacy because it fails to deal with the actual arguments that one has

Example:  Evolution says humans evolved from monkeys.


Description: Also known by the Latin term "DICTO SIMPLICITER", a Sweeping
Generalization occurs when a general rule is applied to a particular situation
in which the features of that particular situation render the rule
inapplicable.  A sweeping generalization is the opposite of a hasty


Description: Two wrongs never add up to a right; you cannot right a wrong by
applying yet another wrong.  Such a fallacy is a misplaced appeal to
consistency.  It is a fallacy because it makes no attempt to deal with the
subject under discussion.


Description: A syllogistic argument in which the middle term of a categorical
syllogism is not distributed in at least one of the premises.


Description:  This is the falacy that a Christian cannot commit any crime or
ethicly irresponsible act.  See "not true christian." [3.13]

Description: A fundi, given enough time, will debunk itself without outside
intervention.  However, the fundi is often too stupid to know that it has
debunked itself.  [Hector Plasmic never put this in words, so I did.]

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 362                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:45
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
═5: Biblical Contradiction List════════════════════════════════════════════════

  [From Shelby Sherman, Kelsey Bjarnason, Marilyn Burge, Larry Sites and
  Simon Ewins]

  God creates animals and then man - Gen 1:25-26
  God creates man and then the animals - Gen 2:18-19
  Arpachshad's son was Shelah - Gen 11:12
  Arpachshad's grandson was Shelah - Luke 3:35-36
  Noah takes 7 pairs of each type of animal onto the ark
  - Gen 7:2-3
  Noah takes one pair of animal onto the ark - Gen 6:19
  Terah's lifespan.
  According to Gen 11:26, Terah was 70 when Abraham was
  born and Abraham was 75 when he left Haran. Therefore
  he lived 70 years (ie. his age when Abraham was born)
  plus 75 years (the age of Abraham when he left Haran -
  as stated in Gen 12:4). He did not live beyond this as
  Acts 7:4 states Terah was dead when Abraham left Haran.
  So 70 + 75 = 145 years in total.  However, Gen 11:32
  states he lived 205 years.
  God promises Abraham the land of Canaan to live in -
  Gen 17:8
  God did not allow Abraham to live in the promised land
   - Acts 7:5, Heb 11:8,9,13
  Jacob's offspring in Egypt totalled 70 - Gen 46:26-27,
  Ex 1:5
  Jacob's offspring in Egypt totalled 75 - Acts 7:14
  Jacob was buried in a cave in Machpelah's field that
  was bought from Ephron the Hittite - Gen 50:13
  Jacob was buried in a tomb at Shechem bought from the
  sons of Hamor - Acts 7:15-16
  The Hebrews dwelt in Egypt for 430 years - Ex 12:40
  The Hebrews dwelt in Egypt for 400 years - Acts 7:6
  God's plague kills 24,000 - Num 25:9
  God's plague kills 23,000 - 1 Cor 10:8
  The Hebrews' journeying - Mount Hor (where Aaron dies),
  Zalmonah, Punon - Num 33:37,38,41,42
  The Hebrews' journeying - Beeroth Benejaakan, Moserah
  (where Aaron dies), Gudgodah, Jotbathah - Deut 10:6,7
  God forbids killing - Ex 20:13
  God commands killing - Ex 32:27
  Solomon's reign.
  Acts 13:16-22 numbers the years from when the Hebrews
  left Egypt to David beginning his reign  as  40
  (Wilderness) + 450 (Judges) + 40 (Saul) = 530 years.
  According to 1 Chron 29:27, David reigned 40 years, so
  Solomon became king (when David died) 530 + 40 years
  (of David's reign) = 570 years. However, 1 Kings 6:1
  states Solomon's 4th year of rule (when he began the
  Temple building) was 480 years after the Hebrews left
  Egypt, ie. he began his rule 476 years after the Hebrews
  left. Therefore there is a contradiction of (570 - 476)
  94 years.
  Saul inquired of God, but God did not answer him - 1
  Sam 28:6
  Saul died because he did not seek guidance from God - 1
  Chron 10:13,14
  Jesse had eight children - 1 Sam 16:10-13
  Jesse had seven children - 1 Chron 2:13-15
  David slays Goliath - 1 Sam 17:4,7,50
  Elhanan slays Goliath - 2 Sam 21:19

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 363                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:45
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Joram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son, Amaziah
  his son, Azariah his son, Jotham his son - 1 Chron
  Joram the father of Uzziah, and Uzziah the father of
  Jotham - Matt 1:8,9
  Asa removes the high places - 2 Chron 14:2
  Asa did not remove the high places - 1 Kings 15:11-14
  Uzzah dies at the threshing-floor of Nacon - 2 Samuel
  Uzzah dies at the threshing-floor of Chidon - 1 Chron
  David takes 1700 horsemen - 2 Sam 8:4
  David takes 7000 horsemen - 1 Chron 18:4
  David destroys 700 chariots - 2 Sam 10:18
  David destroys 7000 chariots - 1 Chron 19:18
  Satan incites David to number the people - 1 Chron 21:1
  God incites David to number the people - 2 Sam 24:1
  Joab's numbering of the army. 1,100,00 soldiers in
  Israel; 470,000 soldiers in Judah - 1 Chron 21:5
  Joab's numbering of the army.  800,000 soldiers in
  Israel; 500,000 in Judah - 2 Sam 24:9
  ISA 45:7  I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace,
  and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

  PSA 145:9  The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are
  over all his works.

  JER 13:14  And I will dash them one against another, even the fa-
  thers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor
  spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them.
  EXO 15:3  The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.
  ROM 15:33  Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.
  MAT 1:16  And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was
  born Jesus, who is called Christ.

  LUK 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be  about  thirty  years  of
  age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son
  of Heli,

  MAT 28:1  In the end of the sabbath, as it began to  dawn  toward
  the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary
  to see the sepulchre.

  MAR 16:1  And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary
  the  mother  of  James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that
  they might come and anoint him.

  JOH 20:1  The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene  early,
  when  it  was  yet  dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone
  taken away from the sepulchre.
  JOH 10:30  I [Jesus] and my Father are one.

  JOH 14:28  Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come
  again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said,
  I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
  In 2 Kings 10:30, God said that at the Jezreel massacre, Jehu
  had done "according to all that was in my heart". God was so
  pleased that he promised Jehu's sons to the forth generation to
  rule Israel (15:12). Yet Hosea opens his book by judging Jeroboam,
  Jehu's 3rd generation by saying God will avenge the blood of
  Jezreel upon hin (Hosea 1:4-5).

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 364                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:45
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  When God brought the people out of Egypt, he instructed Moses
  in proper sacrifice. (Ex 34:25-26; NU 6:13-17; 7:84-88; 15:1-14)
  Lev 7:38 confirms God commanded Moses in this. Yet Jeremiah,
  speaking for God says, "I gave your ancestors no commands about
  sacrifices when I brought them out of Egypt" (Je 7:21-23).
  How could the stars sing (Job 38:4-7) at the creation of the earth when
  Genesis 1 says stars were created after the earth?
  Taken by David             II Sam. 8.4:                 I Chr. 18.4:
                             1,700 horsemen               1,000 chariots
                             20,000 foot soldiers         7,000 horsemen
                                                          20,000 foot sldrs
  Ammonite mercenaries       II Sam. 10.6:                I Chr. 19.7:
                             20,000 + 1,000 +             32,000 chariots +
                             12,000 men                   army of king of
  Slain by David             II Sam. 24.9:                I Chr. 19.18:
                             700 charioteers +            7,000 charioteers +
                             40,000 horsemen              + 40,000 horsemen
  Census figures             II Sam. 24.9:                I Chr. 21.5:
                             Israel 800,000               Israel 1,100,000
                             Judah 500,000                Judah 470,000
  Price of threshing         II Sam. 24.24:               I Chr. 21.25:
  floor                      50 shekels                   600 shekels
  Stalls for chariot         I Kings 4.26:                II Chr. 9.25:
  horses                     40,000                       4,000
  Capacity of the 'sea'      I Kings 7.26:                II Chr. 4.5:
                             2,000 baths                  3,000 baths
  Is pi equal to 3.0000 as claimed in I Kings 7:23?
  Two different versions of the words of god in the ten commandments.
  Who carried Jesus' cross?
  Who was Jesus paternal grandfather?
  Is Jesus opposed to divorce or does he allow it?
  Did Judas hang himself or fall down and "burst asunder"?
  Acts 9:7 or 22:9?
  Matthew 27:46,50 or Luke 23:46 or John 19:30?
  Proverbs 4:7 or Ecclesiastes 1:18 or 1 Corinthians 1:19?
  Acts 2:30 or Matthew 1:18?
  Matthew 28:1 or Mark 16:1 or John 20:1?
  John 10:30 or John 14:28?
  Genesis 1:25,26 or Genesis 2:18,19?
  Genesis 7:2 or Genesis 7:8,9?
  Matthew 5:9 or Matthew 10:34?
  Matthew 5:39 or Luke 12:51?
  Matthew 26:52 or Luke 22:36?
  Luke 6:27 or John 2:15?

  a) I Kings 6:1 says that 480 years passed from the start of the Exodus to
     the start of construction on the first temple by Solomon.

  b) Gal 3:17 says that 430 years passed from the covenant with Abraham to the
     delivery of the Law to Moses.

  c) The chapters of Genesis after the flood account give the periods in years
     that passed between the births of various individuals from Noah to
     Abraham, giving a period of 390 years from the flood to the covenant with

  Thus, according to the Bible, the Flood took place 1300 years before Solomon
  began construction of the first temple.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 365                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:46
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Now ...

  a) The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 BCE by similar
     analysis in the other direction, placing the flood around 2250 BCE.

  b) The Egyptians (among others) have written records dating well back before
     2250 B.C. (the Great Pyramid was built just prior to the 26th century
     BCE), 300 years before the Biblical date for the Flood.

  c) There is no mention in any Egyptian inscriptions of a global flood
     around 2250 BCE. (You think that maybe they just didn't notice it?)
  In Luke 22:41 we have Jesus and the disciples in the garden and Jesus moves
  away from them to pray. We then get some details about the praying and how
  he sweated blood in his 'agony' from v42 to v44. In v45 Jesus returns to the
  disciples and finds that they are all sleeping.

  My question is; if they were all sleeping how did any of them know what
  Jesus said while praying and how did any of them know that he sweated blood?

  In fact, in John, Jesus does not pray and no one falls asleep. In Mark, we
  find the same (almost) as in Luke, that is, details about what Jesus said in
  his prayer related by (one of?) those that were sleeping at the time. In
  Matthew, we have a similar story with detail that no one was awake to

  Furthermore, in reading these three passages one gets the distinct feeling
  that Jesus wasn't exactly thrilled by the prospect of being sacrificed for
  the sins of mankind.

  Gen. 1:12 --- grass and herb created
  Gen. 1:21 --- fish and fowl created
  Gen. 1:25 --- beasts, cattle and creeping things created
  Gen. 1:27 --- man created


  Gen. 2:18 --- it is noted that God did not want the man to be alone
  Gen. 2:19 --- so... beasts and fowl created

  Note that in Gen. 1:25 beast are created _followed_ by v26 which says that
  god wanted to create man and in v27 he does. In 2:18 the reason given for
  creating the beasts etc is that god didn't want man to be alone so he
  created beasts.

  How can anyone possibly claim that this is not a blatant contradiction
  without giving up any appearance that they may be sane? **

  To recap...

  In Gen. 2 the _reason_ that beasts are created is because man should not be
  alone. This can only mean that man existed prior to the creation of the

  In Gen. 1 the _reason_ that man was created was because he was to have
  dominion over the beasts. This can only mean that the beasts already

  Note the use of the word 'so' in Gen. 1:27 and the word 'will' in Gen.
  2:18. These _have_ to mean that the chronology is as stated. There is no
  need to believe anything ahead of time. The language used and the statements
  made make it abundantly clear that the order is different. If anyone denies
  this then we can only have serious concerns for their mental health.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 366                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:46
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  If there is any area that one would suppose would be cohesive and accurate it
  should be in the area of the genealogy of Jesus, David and Adam. However,
  even an area of such importance is contradictory and replete with obvious,
  glaring errors.

  (*) Definite disparity. Note first is as early as Jesus' grandfather.

  (?) Most likely simply a spelling error.
  (!) Out of sync similarity.
  (1) Common to both but out of sync.
  (2) Common to both but out of sync.
  (3) Back in sync.
  (4) End of last common sync.
  (5) Start in sync to Adam.

   Matthew         Luke            I.Chronicles
   ------------    ------------    ------------
    Jesus           Jesus
    Joseph          Joseph
   *Jacob          *Heli
    Matthan        ?Matthat
    Eleazar        ?Levi
    Eliud           Melchi
    Achim           Janna
    Sadoc           Joseph
    Azor            Mattathias
   !Eliakim         Amos
    Abiud           Naum
   1Zorobabel      1Zorobabel
   2Salathiel      2Salathiel
    Jechonias       Neri
    Josias          Melchi
    Amon            Addi
    Manasses        Cosam
    Ezekias         Elmodam
    Achaz           Er
    Joatham        ?Jose
    Ozias          ?Eliezer
    Joram          ?Jorim
    Josaphat       ?Joseph
    Asa             Jonan
    Abia           !Eliakim
    Roboam          Melea
   *Solomon        *Nathan
   3David          3David          3David    (2:15)
    Jesse           Jesse           Jesse
    Obed            Obed            Obed
    Booz            Booz           ?Boaz
    Salmon          Salmon         ?Salma
    Naasson        ?Naasson        ?Nahshon
    Aminadab        Aminadab       ?Amminadab
    Aram            Aram           ?Ram
    Esrom           Esrom          ?Hezron
    Phares          Phares         ?Pharez
    Judas          ?Juda           ?Judah
   *Jacob          *Jacob          *Israel   (2:1)
    Isaac           Isaac           Isaac
   4Abraham        4Abraham         Abraham  (1:34)
                    Thara          ?Terah    (1:26)

                    Nachor         ?Nahor
                    Saruch         ?Serug
                    Ragau          ?Reu

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 367                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:46
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
                    Phalec         ?Peleg
                    Heber          ?Eber
                    Sala          4?Shelah
                    Arphaxad       5Arphaxad
                    Sem            ?Shem
                    Noe            ?Noah
                    Lamech          Lamech
                    Mathusala      ?Methuselah
                    Enoch          ?Henoch
                    Jared          ?Jered
                    Maleleel       ?Mahalaleel
                    Cainan         ?Kenan
                    Enos           ?Enosh
                    Seth           ?Sheth
                    Adam            Adam

  There is a 15 generation difference between Matthew and Luke. Matthew has
  Jesus descended from David through Solomon and Luke has it through Nathan.
  Arpachshad's son was Shelah - Gen 11:12
  Arpachshad's grandson was Shelah - Luke 3:35-36
  The Hebrews dwelt in Egypt for 430 years - Ex 12:40
  The Hebrews dwelt in Egypt for 400 years - Acts 7:6
  God's plague kills 24,000 - Num 25:9
  God's plague kills 23,000 - 1 Cor 10:8
  God forbids killing - Ex 20:13
  God commands killing - Ex 32:27
  Jesse had eight children - 1 Sam 16:10-13
  Jesse had seven children - 1 Chron 2:13-15
  David slays Goliath - 1 Sam 17:4,7,50
  Elhanan slays Goliath - 2 Sam 21:19
  The importance of wisdom - Proverbs 4:7
  The unimportance of wisdom - 1 Cor 1:19
  The joy of wisdom - Proverbs 3:13-15
  The misery of wisdom -  Ecc 1:18
  According to  Luke  2:21-39,  Jesus  is  taken  to  the Jerusalem Temple
  eight  days  after  he  is  born;  the family then go up  to  Nazareth.  In
  Matthew  2:14-23, after being born the family  flee  in  Egypt  and  stay
  there until Herod dies; even on returning,  they  avoid Judea and go up to
  Jesus began his ministry after John the Baptist is imprisoned - Mark
  Jesus began his ministry while John was free and before being imprisoned -
  John 1:28-29, 3:25-30
  Jesus baptised - John 3:22
  Jesus did not baptise - John 4:2
  No one has ascended into heaven before Jesus - John 3:13
  Elijah ascended into heaven - 2 Kings 2:11
  Peter denies Jesus before the cock crows - Luke  22:34, John 12:38
  Peter denies Jesus before the cock crows twice -  Mark 14:30, 14:72
  Simon of Cyrene carries Jesus' cross - Matthew 27:32
  Jesus carries his own cross - John 19:17,18
  Abraham was justified by faith - Rom  4:1-5
  Abraham was justified by works - James 2:22-24
  Judas dies by hanging himself - Matt 27:5-7
  Judas dies by swelling up - Acts 1:18
  Acts 9:7 states that the men with Paul stood speechless, hearing the voice
  but not seeing anyone.
  Acts 22:9 states they did not hear the voice.
  Acts 26:14 states they all fell to the ground and did hear the voice.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 368                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:47
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     

Matthew 27:5   states that Judas went out and hanged himself.

Acts 1:16-18   it states that Judas "...purchased a field with the reward of
               iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the
               midst, and all his bowels gushed out."


Matthew 1:16   And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born
               Jesus, who is called Christ.

Luke 3:23      And Jesus himself began to be  about  thirty  years  of age,
               being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son
               of Heli,


Matthew 27:46,50    And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice,
                    saying, "Eli, eli,  lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My
                    God, my God, why hast thou forsaken  me?" ...Jesus, when he
                    cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

Luke 23:46          And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said,
                    "Father,unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having
                    said thus, he gave up the ghost.

John 19:30          When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It
                    is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.


Proverbs 4:7        Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom:
                    and with all thy getting get understanding.

Ecclesiastes 1:18        For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that
                         increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

1 Corinthians 1:19  For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the
                    wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of
                    the prudent.


Acts 2:30           Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had
                    sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his
                    loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ
                    to sit on his throne;

Matthew 1:18        Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as
                    his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they
                    came together, she was found with child of the Holy

Romans 1:3               Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was
                         made of the seed of David, according to the flesh.


Matthew 28:1   In the end of the sabbath, as it began to  dawn  toward the
               first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary
               to see the sepulchre.

Mark 16:1      And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the
               mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that
               they might come and anoint him.

John 20:1      The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when
               it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone
               taken away from the sepulchre.


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 369                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:47
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     

John 10:30          I and my Father are one.

John 14:28          Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come
                    again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice,
                    because I said, I go unto the Father:
                    for my Father is greater than I.


Genesis 1:25   And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and
               cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon
               the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:26   And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our
               likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the
               sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and
               over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that
               creepeth upon the earth.

Genesis 2:18   And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be
               alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

Genesis 2:19   And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the
               field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam
               to see what he would call them:  and whatsoever Adam called
               every living creature, that was the name thereof.


Genesis 7:2    Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male
               and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the
               male and his female.

Genesis 7:8    Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls,
               and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth,

Genesis 7:9    There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and
               the female, as God had commanded Noah.


**   This argument logically flawed, in fact neither statement contains enough
     information to determine whether men or beasts were created first.  In
     principle, it is only required that God had knowledge of man's creation
     when he created the beasts, and vise-versa, in order for both statements
     to be true.  More specifically, God may have created the beasts to
     provide company for the men that he knew he would create in the future,
     or, he may have created man to have dominion over his future creations.

     If I were to make the statement:

     "Spacesuits were created so that men could fly in rockets."

     Would you be able to deduce whether the spacesuit or the rocket was
     created first?  What if I were to say:

     "Rockets were created to carry men in spacesuits into space."

     What conclusion would you reach in this case?

     Whether or not the whole story contains even a grain of truth is another
     matter. [Bill Fontes]

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 370                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:49
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
═6: A short course in comparitive religion═════════════════════════════════════

7TH DAY ADVENTIST        Shit happens on Saturdays.
AGNOSTICISM              Does shit exist?
AGNOSTICISM              I don't know whether shit happens.
AMARICANISM              I'll gladly pay through the nose for this shit.
APATHEISM                Who gives a damn about this shit.
ATHEISM                  I don't believe this shit.
ATHEISM                  There is no shit!
BAHA'I                   Shi't ha'ppe'ns
BONZAI BOZOISM           Make shit happen.. OH SHIT!!
BORN AGAIN               Shit happens but I am saved.
BUDDHISM                 If shit happens, it isn't really shit.
BUDDHISM                 When shit happens, is it really shit?
BUSH                     A thousand points of shit.
CALVINISM                If you're not saved, tough shit.
CASTRO                   We have to make this shit work somehow.
CATHOLICISM              If shit happens, I deserve it.
CATHOLICISM              Let shit happen to someone else.
CHRISTIAN SCIENTIST      If shit happens, don't worry. It will go away on
                         its own time if you pray for it.
CHRISTIAN SCIENTIST      Shit isn't real.
CONFUCIANISM             Confucious say, "shit happens".
DEJA VUISM               I've been through this shit before.
DEMOCRATISM              How can we send a man to the moon and still have all
                         this shit.
DIANETICS                You need to clear yourself of this shit.
EASTERN ORTHODOX         Rome doesn't know shit.
EPISCOPALIAN             Fecal matter occurs.
EVANGELISM               Shit happens. (Pass it on.)
EXISTENTIAL              I shit, therefore I sit.
FUNDAMENTALISM           Born-again shit.
GERTRUDE STEIN           A shit is a shit is a shit.
GORBACHEV                That shit just didn't work.
HARE KRISHNA             Shit happens rama rama ding ding.
HEDONISM                 When shit happens, enjoy it!
HINDUISM                 This shit happened before.
HOLISTIC                 There's more shit here than I figured on.
ISLAM                    If shit happens, it is the will of Allah.
ISLAM                    We make shit happen to everybody else.
JAINISM                  Shit happens but don't step in it.
JEHOVAH'S WITLESS        Do you want to buy a subscription to our shit?
JEHOVAH'S WITNESS        Knock, knock. "shit Happens."
JESUITISM                If shit happens and no one hears it, did it really
                         make a sound?
JIM JONESISM             If shit happens, drink Kool-Aid.
JUDAISM                  Why does this shit always happen to us?
LAO-TZU                  It is utterly pointless to try to explain shit.
MINIMALIST               Shit
MORMONISM                Shit happens again & again & again.
                         It's evil to say "shit."
                         Wear your magic underware and this shit won't happen
NATIVE AMERICAN          We want our shit back!
NEW AGE                  Crystal power counteracts shit.
NEW AGE                  Shit happens and it happens to smell good.
PENTACOSTALISM           Praise the shit!
PROTESTANTISM            If shit happens, you deserve it.
PROTESTANTISM            This shit won't happen if I work harder.
RASTAFARIANISM           Let's smoke this shit.
REPUBLICANISM            There's nothing like a good shit.  Flush the toilet.
RLDS                     Brigham is full of shit.
SATANISM                 Shit rules!
SCIENTOLOGY              This shit is expensive.
SECULAR HUMANISM         Shit evolves.
SHINTOISM                Everything except Japan is shit.
STOICISM                 So shit happens, Big deal. I can take it.
TAOISM                   Shit happens.
TELEVANGELISM            This shit won't happen if you donate $99.95 to me.
UNITARIAN                Shit is all basically the same.
UNITARIAN                What is this shit?
VEGETARIANISM            I don't eat that shit!
ZEN                      What is the sound of shit happening?

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 371                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:50
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 001
═7: Echo Sampler (Quotes)══════════════════════════════════════════════════════

     "In other words, you're full of shit, you *know* you're full of shit, you
     know that *we* know you're full of shit, and you simply don't have the
     backbone to come out of the full-of-shit closet." - David Worrell

     "Welcome to the lovely world of HolySmoke!  Watch out!  The sugar-coating
     you now wear will probably wear off before long.  It doesn't take very
     long, here.  We're the Comet Cleanser of religion." - Questor Thews

     "We're not here to discuss religion, we're here to be disgusted by it." -
       Gwen "Gwenny the Pooh" Todd

     "Wrong!  I'm the fucking antichrist.  Bow down slave!" - Ryan Shaw

     "If you are from an area where gays aren't bashed you wont be afraid to
     experiment if you want." - Jeff Androsac


     "It is nice to rember, when people are so foolish, one day soon every
     knee  will bow and every mouth will confess Jesus as Lord!!!" - Hampie

     "A.I.D.S. was actually a GAY disease until the gay scum community
     infected the NORMAL world!" - Dale A. Cook

     "Key words: "we want".  Instead of making demands, why not try working to
     those ends?  Preferably without shotguns." - Marty Leipzig

     "Look, Chickie. It's your Bible, your rules; YOU go to hell." - ML

     "Coming from a person who can see through a keyhole with both eyes open,
     I just consider the source." - ML

     "I think you're anti-science, anti-intellect and anti-logic. The mere
     fact that you're a Xtian to boot really does nothing other than label you
     with the type of superstition with which you feel most comfortable." - ML

     "Read up on what you rant about; perhaps then you won't come across as
     such a blightered moron.  Perhaps." - ML

     "Of course it just seems that way you to you as you dwell in that
     paranoid fetid martyred delusion you call a life. Judges and school
     administrators are there to protect the populace from the Neofascist,
     hate-mongering, right-wing, ignorance inculcating group of Fundamentalist
     liars who try to pawn off their own fallacious view of narrowly dogmatic,
     and hallucinatory, morality as science.  Against that we must be ever
     vigilant.  We cannot again allow the armies of the night, clad in their
     tawdry Bible passages and threadbare beliefs, to usurp what they can
     never attain justifiably; however they may lie, cheat or swindle." - ML

     "My name is Marty, and I too, like our illustrious author of the missive
     immediately above, am an unrepentant fundy basher. Just as some people
     feel compelled to rubberneck terrible traffic accidents, purchase police
     scanners to vicariously hear of other's misfortunes or stomp some clod's
     foot protruding into the aisle in a particularly crowded airline flight;
     I am possessed by the unrelenting desire, nay, compulsion, to help
     certain people who are consumed by the passion to make idiots of
     themselves, either personally or in international electronic fora.  When
     some "person" proudly proclaims that "man evolved from apes"; I see this
     as nothing more than a plaintive cry for self-immolation.  When they
     claim that there's "boats in dem dere hills"; again, the pitiful cry of a
     person desperate to be martyred, but without the genetic or intellectual
     horsepower to carry it out themselves.  When they spew plaintive Bible
     verses to document everything from their own particularly skewed, and
     oftimes hallucinatory, view of morality to make an attempt at
     justification of atrocities, injustices and just plain antisociality;
     they are merely whining, in their own bizarre and stridulatory manner,
     for someone to come along and humiliate them with a blizzard of fact,
     logic and reason.  And yet some would go so far to condemn my actions.  I
     see it as preforming a service to these  benighted individuals; a sort of
     an electronic version of Dr. Kevorkian." - ML

      "And you are still short one live Jesus dumbass.  What part of that don't
     you understand?" - George "the Rude One" Rudzinski

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 372                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:51
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 002
     "Fundies are dazed and confused.  Like a duck hit on the head." - GR

     "So me blowing your head off is okay?  I'm beginning to see that such a
     wound wouldn't be fatal." - GR

     "Mark 16: 15-19.  If you have the faith I have the cure." -GR

     "I advocate the murder of no one.  However, I _do_ advocate referring to
     an  abortionist doctor as an infant murdering, satan-led monster,
     masquerading as a doctor of medicine.  Reason: He is one." - "Lon S.

     "Preston, you should know that when a person is saved (born again) they
     become a new person in Christ.  New means you start from the beginning.
     As in Baby.." - David (2' 5") Cupp.

     "Take your bible banging and shove it where the sun don't shine.  It is a
     farce and totally unnecessary to a worthwhile, virtuous life, if only you
     were adult enough to know it." - Marilyn Burge

     "The fundies that come through here start out by trying to display an
     attitude of thoughtful discussion.  When they find that their mythologies
     are systematically disassembled and found to _be_ myths, coupled with the
     friction specifically designed to remove their sugar coating, the actual
     Christian under said sugar coating is exposed.  And you can guess what's
     under it.  I couldn't begin to enumerate those who specifically stated
     that they wished they could be around to watch the hurtful, educated
     HolySmoke participants `burn in 'hell.'" - Fredric Rice

     "'I am saved.' From what?  Having to think for yourself?" - FR

     "Are you just naked, or are you naked for Jesus?" -FR

     "It's rather like having Freedie Kruger babysit children.  Or asking Pee
     Wee Herman to teach human sexuality.  Or asking Jim Bakker to be
     treasurer of the United States.  Or asking Jim Jones to look over the
     refreshments." - FR

     "To believe in something without reason, that is to say, without
     reasonable grounds, is superstition, whether it is a belief that a black
     cat crossing your path will bring you bad luck, or God may pass judgement
     over your soul and send you to Hell for your evils." -Michael Gothreau

     INCEST!  HAVE A NICE DAY, LOSER BOY." - Christopher Calabrese [Christian
     family values]

     "Debunking religions based upon hot air... is why this echo exists.
     Exposing hot air, although it cannot be seen by the naked eye, is a
     simple matter of having a theist speak into a balloon.  When you pop the
     balloon,  there is no more substance than what was there before.  (Other
     than perhaps some saliva.  Some theists froth more than others.)" - Styx

     "Omnipresence precludes any "separation from the body of Christ".  One
     cannot escape omnipresence.  Therefor, your god would also have to exist
     within Satan." - SA

     "My clue, is Christ is coming, soon.  Where are you going to be, when he
     comes to take the believers, in Heaven or hell." - Marguerite Kendall

     "If I was a satanist, humanist, or an atheist, it would be no problem.
     But because I stand for Christ, I get jumped on, name called, etc.  There
     have  been posts, on satanism, and humanism.  But nothing happens, to the
     person who posts those messages.  That person gets praise heaped upon
     him.  But when I posted something on christianisty, adverse reaction
     happen." - MK

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 373                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:51
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 003
     "Faith in yourself will not help when the problem is beyond your
     control." - Steve Bedard

     "This ain't the harmony echo, dipshit." - Robert Curry

     "If the theists all shut up, the gods would be speechless." - RC

     "Funny how the gods tend to share the Political views of those who speak
      for them." - RC

     "Creation 'Science' is to science what Rap 'Music' is to music: a lot of
     noise and utterly incoherent." - David Rice

     "It is like arguing with a lump of shit.  The longer one argues with
     shit, the sillier one appears, and the shit ain't listening." - DR

     "In response to entreaties from around the world, the leadership of Iran
     has announced that it will deal with Salman Rushdie in a more Christian
     fashion.  But they have to find a place for the stake where it won't set
     an oil well on fire." - DR (It's a JOKE, bozo)

     "You're one complete pile of shit, and a bigoted one, too.  Even your god
     damnable bible says "created man in his own image".  And you have the
     audacity to say that an innocent child does not have the right to be
     saved by your god damned god?" - Dan Ceppa

     "Your English teachers only use a 23-letter alphabet?  I've heard of
     cutbacks in education, but that's rediculous!" - DC

     "I predict that you will take a breath of fresh air and actually take
     another.  Hey!!!  Why the fuck are you turning blue on me????  Well, one
     less fundy to worry about......" - DC

     "Mankind didn't progress as far as it has by saying, "God said that men
     can't fly" but by breaking those laws and flying.  What is going on
     around us now is an attempt to do just the same thing that the Romans
     used xianity for:  To keep people ignorant, ignorant as to who they
     really are and are far they can go." - DC

     "You're incapable of any rational response, so why start now?" - DC

     "Please don't apologize.  It makes me want to taunt you a second time." -
      Shelby Sherman

     "We treat fundies and apologists with appropriat counseling in this forum
     - Up the side of the head with the lug wrench of truth." - SS

     "By-the-way, Mary is still a slut and your precious Jesus is long dead
     and  rotted in the grave.  I've profaned your Savior, now what do you
     intend to do about it?" - SS

     "Damn, I asked for evidence and all I got was this lousy Josh McDowell
     T-shirt." - SS

     "Tell me, why does God need to prove himself?  He is based on belief.
     You are to believe, not to question!  God performs miracles every day." -
     Steve Lew

     "This echo is abomination.  This echo is also filled with those who will
     one day bend their knee to Jesus Christ and call him Lord, whether they
     like it or not!  And to think how much fun I'm gonna have fun watching
     you say it." - Martin Riley

     "Jesus made claims that have been proven to be wrong...  Mark 9:1,
     Matthew 16:28, Matthew 23:36, Luke 9:27, Matthew 24:21- 34, Matthew
     10:23...  all claiming foreknowledge of his return, all wrong.  Gee,
     maybe he's dead." - Simon Ewins

     "To accept as truth what the gospels (which were written after Paul's
     letters and were designed to support his ideas) say about Jesus, is to
     accept as truth what Goebbels says about Hitler.  To accept as truth what
     Paul says about himself as supported by what the author of Acts says
     about Paul, is to accept what Hitler says about himself as supported by
     what Goebbels says about Hitler as truth." - SE

     "Christianity has nothing to be proud of.  Any good that it may have done
     has been completely offset by the perpetuation of racial and religious
     hatred that it has fostered and encouraged." - SE

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 374                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:51
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 004
     "Paul only quotes Jesus twice.  Why would that be if he is basing his
     entire theology on the life and work and resurrection of Jesus?" - SE

     "God told me the Book of Mormon was true." - Conrad Knudson

     "I missed being god by one vote!" - Odin

     "Ciya is a blasphemous tool of your cunning." - Jesse Jones

     "When we believe that our individual will is the superior force in the
     cosmos we deny the harmony which creation itself seeks.  Jesus's struggle
     in Gesthemane shows us that there is a will to be served beyond our own
     self-interests. . ." - JJ

     "My my, I have the false Christian scum (and their infidel, reprobate
     brethren), the Sodomites and the general filth of FidoNet all ganging up
     on  me." - Steve Winter

     "Aids cures queers." - SW

     "I wish I was their to light the ovens." - William Stone

     "Do you imagine that sexuality began with mammals?  Cockroaches are male
     and female, as you would notice if you paid any attention to your
     congregation." - Don Martin

     "Have you any notion how very boring your constant mantra of "C.S. Lewis,
     Charles Williams, Dorothy Sayers, J.R.R. Tolkien, G.K. Chesterton" gets
     to be after a while? Nobody denies that there have been and continue to
     be brilliant people who believe in religions. Their impact, however, on
     our daily lives is a great deal less than the folks with 12-guage
     shotguns who may appear at any moment to "justly punish" a baby killer
     (and anyone  standing in the vicinity) for Christ, the Jim Bakkers who
     suck the money from the poor, the Pat Robertsons who seek to change the
     laws and other believing riff-raff who otherwise share precious little
     with the likes of C.S. Lewis, Charles Williams, Dorothy Sayers, J.R.R.
     Tolkien, G.K. Chesterton, et al." - DM

     "Who ignores the likes of Paul Hill, a committed Christian "trying to
     make a difference"?  Who ignores the various "Family" groups in Colorado
     and Oregon, busy trying to drum homosexuals out of the human race?  They
     are certainly "trying to make a difference."Who ignores the Christians in
     Kentucky who check `naughty' books out of the library and do not return
     them?  Who can deny that they are "trying to make a difference." Who
     ignores the friendly folks in Virginia, overwhelmingly Christians, who
     seek to place an admitted felon and perjurer, Oliver North, in the U.S.
     Senate where he can work his magic on all of us?  Are they not "trying to
     make a difference." Who ignores the "stealth" candidates in California,
     who work at getting elected to school boards by concealing their
     Christian agenda by evasion, silence or outright lying, so that they can
     impose that agenda on the young from a position of power.  They, too, are
     "trying to make a difference." I only wish we COULD ignore the Christians
     "trying to make a difference," but we dare not turn our backs on the vile
     bastards." - DM

     "Well for all of you who criticize Mr.  Robertson, I can say this.  Judge
     yourself before judging others.  You might make fun of us fundies now,
     but we are mobilizing spiritually, politically, and to what worries you
     the most financially.  We Christians are sick and tired of being accused
     of wrongdoing and ridiculed.  Lets face it, there are more of us than
     you.  And we intend to take back the Government that Christians founded.
     And cut off your grants that supply some of you with the money to wage
     war on us.  Organizations like the Christian Coalition scare you and
     thats good cause  We are going to put you and the evolutionist garbage
     you try to push on us on the run." - Joe Savelli

     "Okay.  I'll retract the story about the man who was arrested for praying
     in the Florida restaurant.  But only because you and others are hung up
     on it.  This should clear the way for what I really want to prove.  That
     is the Historicity of Jesus.  So, Robert, you have my retraction for what
     it's   worth.  (Not that it's a lie.)" - JS

     "Libralism and humanism IS evil.  Both are destined to fail" -JS

     "I see now why Jesus said the Jews' father is the devil.  Beware!  The
     Jew is the antichrist." - Keith Baxter / Larry Rollins / Gerald Norris /
     Jack Roberts / Frank Waring

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 375                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:52
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 005
     "If 'Jesus' does come to Earth- is it the first coming (as per Jewish
     tradition), second (Xian), or third (Mormon)?  I wonder- and I hope he
     lands feet first on ALL televangelists.  (Preying on fear sickens me!!!)"
     - Rachael Roth

     "Take that piece of paranoid drivel and, print it out, soak it in
     gasoline,   then shove it up your ass and light it.  Have a nice day,
     motherfucker." -  C. J. Henshaw

     "What you call senseless blathering is actually a very fun past time for
     those of us who like shoving lit fireworks up fundies' assholes." -
     Coridon Henshaw

     "Matt, do you suppose incest is why we have fundamentalists?" - Liz

     "EH> [...] Btw, change your initials.  they make you look canadian." -
     Martin Goldberg

     "Texas is much better than the State of the Perpetually Dead Elvis.
     Jesus, the smell is atrocious.  Did something die up there?" - MG

     "The Theory of Gravity does not address these either.  Am I to believe
     that my computer will soon head for the ceiling?" - MG

     "i read this.  It is full of nice stories, emotional bullshit, and a host
     of other devices that might fool a very stupid person.  It is not,
     however, evidence." - MG

     "See you in Hell....  (I won't be there, but I'll be able to see YOU
     there.)" - Doug Brewer

     "Welfare is cancelled, all women come home (except single women who
     obviously must support themselves somehow.) What happens?  1) A
     tremendous amount of tax money is freed up.  2) Men fill the now vacant
     positions, thus reducing or possibly eliminating unemployment.  3)
     Children have one parent home all the time; thus they are raised by their
     parents instead of daycare.  I think the advantages of this are obvious.
     In contrast, look at what we have instead...." - DB

     "You do not understand the essence of Satan, or of Satanism.  You do not
     have to worship Satan to be a Satanist.  Satanists believe that everyone
     is their own God.  You need only worship yourself, and you are practicing
     Satanism." -DB

     "First of all, innocence is subjective.  Who is truly innocent?  Just a
     question...  Second, anyone who ever died at God's hand (in the Bible)
     died  for a reason.  Third, Christians view death as a beginning, not an
     end.  So, to die (say in a city that was destroyed by God's judgement)
     wouldn't pose that big a problem for me.  There isn't that much worth
     hanging around here for, anyway." -DB

     "Modern technology is merely evidence that h. sapiens sapiens is not all
     irrevocably stupid and that progress is made in spite of our most earnest
     efforts to forestall it at times." - Preston Simpson

     "Perhaps if you actually bothered to read literature rather than burn it,
     you would have seen them." - PS

     "Christian [Miller], you are the LAST person who needs to be giving me
     advice on how I should go about living with myself.  You are a disgrace to
     your god, your religion, your species, your family, and yourself.  I find
     you to be a repugnant and worthless human being--and I write all of this
     with not a single trace of anger." - PS

     "There's no convincing a mind that is not only closed but has been
     bricked over and had steel plate welded in place over it." - PS

     "Your god seems to fear questioning, and the authority figures in your
     religion discourage questioning far more than they encourage it. Such is
     a definite sign of an oppressive and dangerous organization." - PS

     "I think you're full of shit.  I wasn't in it for gain.  I was in it
     because I believed.  I was in it because I had faith.  And when my faith
     was shaken to its foundation, nobody came to help, nobody answered my
     prayers, nothing.  Your God, if he exists, is the most callous deity to
     ever be worshipped, bar none.  And his followers exemplify this
     beautifully." - PS

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 376                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:52
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 006
     "Put THAT in your Bible and smoke it." - Stephen Green

     "I find it strangely pleasing to know my thoughts and actions cause you
     so much grief." - SG

     "The problem is that some folks are so open minded that their brains fall
     out.  Then some really bizaare ideas get stuffed into the opening, at
     which time they slam and bolt the barn door after the horse has run off,
     and never let anything else in or out.  Then they come to Holysmoke and
     start posting stuff about universal minds thinking with pilot waves and
     dead presidents rising and orgasmic saviors and denying sunlight and
     quoting winos like Hoyle and Schroeder." - "Hector Plasmic"

     "He just reinterprets whatever's at hand to fit what he wants it to say,
     carefully discarding any bits that get in the way as "parables" and then
     reinterpreting them, too.  Finally, ignore any more logical explanations
     and conflicting facts, and -- voila -- instant fundy, just add flood
     water and bake in hell to taste." - HP

     "It's laughable, really.  The fundies claim "gods exist!"  When you ask
     them if they have any evidence that gods exist, they eventually get
     around to saying "no, but you can _sense_ that gods exist."  When you ask
     them for evidence for that statement, you usually get "I just know it."
     And when you ask them how it is they "just know" you usually get "you can
     _sense_ that gods exist."" - HP

     "I'm sorry, Mikey, did you run across some evidence that xtianity is
     true?  Would you mind sharing it with us?  Or are you just full of shit
     as usual?" - HP

     "Occam's Razor cut your foot off again." -HP

     "Now go shoot yourself.  For Christ or not, it doesn't matter.  Don't
     forget to repent first." -HP

     "What an assinine, baseless assertion.  Just because Mikey has no
     evidence,  you must be intentionally refusing to believe him." -HP

     "Are you allergic to the truth or something, Mikey?" -HP

     "Fundy motto:  no sense makes sense." -HP

     "Yep.  I agree.  All bibles should be put under rocks.  Big rocks.  In
     the  ocean.  On another planet." - Brian C. Kolacy

     "Women do have a place in God's kingdom...BELOW that of men." - Jeff

     "Back to the talking snakes and Adam & Eve again, eh Jeff?  The entire
     story is pure mythology as you well know but won't admit.  It has no more
     validity than the myths about Zeus, Hercules or Mithras."  - John

     "So why don't you guys kill yourselves and get the hell outta our hair?"
     - David Worrell

     "*Anybody* [Bosnian Serbs] that makes a habit of shelling civilian
     population centers at random is *not* interested in peace.  The only way
     to make them stop is to wipe them from the face of the Earth." - DW

     "At the very least, we should sell (or "loan") the Bosnians
     [Muslims/Croats] good counter-battery radar and some MLRSes.  Everytime
     the Serbs fired anything bigger than a rocket-launched grenade, their
     position would be enveloped by thousands of bomblets.  After a while,
     they'd loose their fascination with artillery." - DW

     "So you feel that it is our *duty* to bash gays in order to prevent
     `experimentation'?  You disgust me.  Maybe we should beat the hell out of
     Christians in order to prevent people from experimenting with
     Christianity?" - DW

     "Do you take groveling lessons or does it come naturally to you?" - DW

     "I agree with you there legislating faith is like trying to legislate
     agains racism it sounds nice but it just don't work..." - Robert Rice

     "God is Powerful...NO other so-called "GOD" could stand one chance
     against My Powerful God....Bite me All you LOw-Life Non-Christians!!" -
     Jason Bridges

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 377                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:53
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 007
     "The magnetic field. Solid hydrogen is a superconductor, and Earth's
     magnetic field continues to wane -- back then it would have been many,
     many times  stronger. And so on." - Leon Brooks

     "You have no sense of humor. Typical atheist faire. Learn to live with it
     (your dark dismal world, that is, humorless, Godless, hellbound schnook)"
     - John Prewett

     "May Jesus continue to let you live.  Long enough to get your head out of
     your ass." -JP

     "This echo is going to be used to greatly spread faith in Christ.  There
     are going to be some fanatic HolySmoke anti-Christers that are going to
     be transformed into rabid Christers. - JP

     "I predict / prophecy in Jesus name that: John F. Kennedy will publicly
     reappear, amaze the world, take world power, and is in fact the "beast"
     of the Revelation." - JP

     "I'm easily amused, just give me a gun and a field full of
     fundamentalists" - Unknown

     "Well, I'm 23, though I've had people mistake me for 30. It's my aura of
     wisdom and maturity, not my receding hairline.  Really it is." - Aaron

     "No.  However, there is life before death.  It probably deserves more of
     your attention than you've been giving it." -AB

     "Show me exactly which Israelis were brought to Israel by God, as opposed
     to the local airlines.  Next." - Kelsey Bjarnasson

     "If you believe it, you don't know it.  If  you know it, you don't need
     to believe it.  Since you obviously haven't a clue one way or the other,
     why should anyone listen to what you say?" - KB

     "As another opined, isn't it odd that miracles no longer happen now that
     we have the technology to record them?" - KB

     "Okay, fine.  But how much of it is "God's truth", and how much is mere
     fairy tale or absolute bulltwaddle?  Was there really a global flood?
     No?  Then is the Bible is lying to us, or is God?  Oh, there was a global
     flood?  Then the lack of supporting evidence means that God is lying to
     us, by intentionally destroying or hiding that evidence, right?  Hello?"
     - KB

     "No shit, Sherlock. But that isn't the case, and there are plenty (too
     many) heterosexual breeders in this world that are keeping this planet
     (over)populated. What does it matter if a small percentage of the world's
     population isn't reproducing? Goat knows we don't need any more people
     breeding like rabbits in this world..." - Drew Webber

     "Remember the man arrested in the Florida restaurant? He was praying that
     his noodles would stop multiplying, but a Satan-powered JFK flew out of
     the stratosphere on a bear that couldn't catch fish and arrested him.
     MISTER Kissinger stood on a milk crate of flaming foetuses and tried to
     prove it with every opening bud, but the solid hydrogen mentioned in Luke
     16:31 destroyed his hard disk fourteen days later and erased the Culinary
     History of Aviation.  He goes on trial December 1." - Jason Rosendale

     "What your missing David, is the most bible believing Christains do not
     question God. Why does he require blood for the forgiveness of sin? What
     does it matter? It does, the bible says it, we believe it."
                                           -- Kenneth McAbee

     "Just because I am willing to debate Christianity does not mean that I am
     here to learn any truth contrary to my beliefs." - KM

     "Let me put it this way, even if I agreed with your statement that God is
     an unrepentant barbarian, he is still God. I still have the choice to
     make, either I believe in him and go to heaven, or I don't and go to
     hell.  With those two choice, I don't care if God is the most hateful
     thing ever created, I still would not want to go to hell, and I would
     still believe in him." - KM

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 378                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:53
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 008
     "She prayed and asked (*demanded* - she's a tough lady) for the life of
     this little one back.  After 15 minutes or so a crowd was gathered (you
     can picture it) and she saw some police out of the corner of her eye
     starting to approach.  But the people pressed around her so, that the
     police couldn't get through.  After a half hour or more of continuing to
     pray the baby gave a sneeze and came back to life." - Peter Sawyer

     "I have never accepted the Ideal personally that gays have any rights and
     i  never will." - Don Ward

     "I think your under a lot of "STRESS". Maybe you need an _assistant
     moderator_, one that would make this _echo_ appeal to all types of
     people. Therefore I'll make a "kind" gesture of you letting me run this
     bias _echo_ for a month or so. So I can help you achieve a respectable
     "echo", for the good of all." - DW

     "Is AIDS a plague sent by God to judge homosexuals?  "Likewise also the
     men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one
     another, men with men committing what is shameful, and recieving in
     themselves the penalty of their error which was due"Rom.1:27 You don't
     have to be a brain surgeon to figure these things out. Why is it only the
     Christians who can discern the signs of the times? Because they have the
     mind of Christ, and unbelievers have only their own." - AK-47 (Alan Kern)

     "And, BTW, if you'll read that bible you're always thumping, you'll find
     that Jesus was a liberal. He hung around with poor people and social
     outcasts, he helped the poor, he said that it's easier for a camel to go
     through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter heaven.
     But then again, you have your head so far up your ass that you don't
     notice these things." - Quentin Fai

     "I detect the pot calling the fridge black. If there's anyone who's been
     soundly disemboweled, it's you. You seem to be too stupid to notice,
     though." - QF

     "When Jesus comes again, and I believe it will be soon, there will be no
     need for Democrats, Republicans or political representatives whatsoever.
     Not only this, but the Constitution/Civil Rights Amendments and othersuch
     will be out of place as well.  For we who are his children will live
     under the rule of a true Theocracy. We will be his people, and he will be
     our God. And those who have chosen to reject God/Christ won't be around
     anymore to pester those who ARE God's chosen people (and I do not speak
     here of the Jewish nation)." - Tenna Draper

     "Loose your fuckin' quote box or I'll rip yer head off with my
     pitchfork." - Satan

     "The thoughtless are rarely wordless." - Tagline

     "I have less tolerance for pagan women because they seem to particularly
     lack respect for men and thereby depart from God even further than do
     pagan men." - Jim Staal

     "Do you now know why we don't eat pork. Its what distinguishes us from
     people like you. The flesh contains microbes that invades your brain
     cells and couses such twisting of the mind as one can see from the
     language used above. This is how the mind reacts to such desieses.  Some
     people get infected and some don't. I think David Rice and Sean
     McCullough are effected with the desiese too." - Shabeir Khan

     "now, I wash my hands of you since I have no further need nor desire to
     read the lying babblings of a twisted little fuckhead." - Karl Schneider

     "This seems to be a funny debate for a Religous Conference.  Do y'all
     need prayin' for?  Perhaps you need a demon cast out?   Hmm?" - Clayton

     "As for why you would fear homosexuals, here are some common reasons.  1.
     One is afraid of the prospect of enduring a sexual overture of a nature
     one finds repellent.  2.  One is afraid that homosexuality is a plot to
     destroy all decency and "family values".  3.  One is afraid that ones
     offspring might choose to go that way if given the option.  4.  One is
     afraid that oneself might choose to go that way if given the option.  5.
     One is afraid that giant flaming meteors might descend on one's head
     because of the behavior of one's neighbours.  6.  One is afraid that
     everyone might choose to abandon reproduction, leading to the extinction
     of the human race.  7.  One is afraid that people won't be willing choose
     one's virgin daughters over oneself when they feel like gang-raping
     somebody."- David Johnston

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 379                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:53
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 009
     "For the last time: Omnipotence does not include the ability to do the
     logically impossible." - Michael Hardly

     "I tried thinking before, and I almost fell into the same mess YOU are
     now in." - Joanna Amren

     "Clearly, anything that "demonstrably disagrees with reality" cannot be
     from God, and therefore should be discarded." - Rick Mcfarlane

     "In Jesus Christ name I bind all evil sprits off of this echo NOW." -
      Steve Wallis

     "You're a druid, and think trees are alive?" - Christian Miller

     "That would be due to your own ignorance and bigotry, and would certainly
     not be their fault.  OTOH, if I thought it would make you barf, slip, and
     fall off a ninety foot cliff, I'd kiss John Prewitt right on the lips and
     retrieve his tonsils with my tongue." - David Hilling to Christian Miller

7.5 Multi-quotes══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

     "Please show me ONE instance of a scientist especially one that
     specializes in the mechanisms of evolution that claims that evolution
     states that man descended from monkies." - Martin Goldberg

     "Maybe Creationists are descended from the same branch that
     produced monkeys rather than the one that produced the apes.

     After all, they do have a tale!" - John Musslewhite

     "She doesn't behave like a homosexual male.  She behave like a WOMAN.  The
     homosexual male behaves like a woman; not the other way around.  Besides,
     she's anotomically correct for acting like a woman." - Christian Miller

     "So a=b but b<>a?  You're so fucking stupid you don't even realize you're
     stupid." - Karl Schneider


     "If matter doesn't exist, what kills you at the bottom?" - Unknown

     "If it is not matter, then most likely it is mind" - Lee Woofenden

     "ROFL!  Lee, what's your brain made of?  Matter, perhaps?  :-)" - "Hector

     "I see that Lee's at it again...." - Dan Ceppa

     "And before you start telling us the mind doesn't come from the brain,
     would you care to remove your brain _before_ telling us?  Should be no
     problem if your mind is _not_ your brain, after all.  Just another little
     test that you, too, can perform in your own home town." - HP

     "That must be Hector's Experiment, part II, for those that are stupid
     enough to perform part one and perhaps actually survive the first
     experiment." - DC


     "Did you forget that the world is round and that I am both east and west
     of you at this very moment?" - Ryan Shaw

     "No I didn't - did you forget that the end of straight lines never meet?
     Sort of a small rule of geometry....  For a further examination" - Glen


     "I have faith.  That's all I need." - Christian Miller

     "If faith was all you needed for anything, then you could live in
     Antarctica sans clothing or food.  Do so." - Preston Simpson


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 380                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:53
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 00A

     "But Hitler did NOT decide to be a Christian.  He was a Roman Catholic
     Jew.  One cannot be a Christian and a Roman Catholic.  You have just
     eliminated faith.  Hitler made the wrong decision.  (Several in fact)." -
     Anthony Grigor-Scott

     "Remember, it's spelled "Anthony Grigor-Scott".  There's a
     hyphen between the last two names; the space, as you may know,
     is between his ears." - Robert Jackson


     "God sends no one to Hell." - Christian Miller

     "I refuse to go to hell.  What's going to happen to me?" - David Worrell

     "What do I care?  How will you stop God the Father from sending you there?
     I can see it now: A little five year old brat not wanting to go to school,
     fighting his 6ft Dad.  Yeah, you'll stop God." - CM


     "You fucking moron." - Michael "Mikey Hardly" Hardy

     "Sugar coating scrape off on the wrong side of the bed this morning,
     Mikey?  :-)" - "Hector Plasmic"


     "Damn - what bore does one use when hunting gods?  I've seen .700 elephant
     guns, so I can only assume that a god gun must be something on the order
     of a 16 inch deck gun." - David Worrell

     "Naww, use a pellet gun.  Gives the god a sporting chance, though still
     not much of one..." - Dan Ceppa (elipses in original)

     "Since we've never actually *seen* a God, we must extrapolate the
     characteristics of these gods from the evidence available to us.  The
     Christians tell us that they want to be like God, but that God is much
     more powerful than they can ever hope to be.  Christians are boneheads.
     Thus, gods must have an *incredibly* thick skull, necessitating the
     powerful ordnance referred to above." - David Worrell


     "Get thee behind me Satan." - Jerry Wilcox

     "Bend over." - Satan

     "Get thee behind me Satan." - JW

     "Getting just a little bit anxious, aren't we?" - Satan

     "Not at all. Remember, I have Jesus on my side and I fear nothing." - JW

     "One sidesaddle and one behind! The man is a walking clusterfuck!" - Don

     "Wow!  What Jesus should do is get in FRONT ...  then they can make a
     little train - Jesus, then Jerry, then Satan, all linked.   Perhaps they
     could add in their god and the archangel Michael,  too,  one at either
     end." - Sue Armstrong

     "I want to know why that murdering SOB that you worship starves innocents
     to death." - Martin Goldberg

     "Because these so called innocents do not believe in God, or, know about
     God in any way." - Jerry Wilcox


     "I take it you've never heard of having your penis pierced, then?" -
     David Worrell

     "Hell! I was three blocks away and I heard it." - J.J. Hitt


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 381                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:54
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 00B

     "I've *never* seen a camel at a salad bar." - David Roosterman

     "Count yourself among the lucky.  They've got terrible table manners.
     (Lousy conversationalists, too.)" - J.J. Hitt

     "So, J.j., what's the difference between them and fundys?" - Dan Ceppa

     "If you ask a camel a question it doesn't understand, it will at least
     say  something original like "ahrrrrooooghunnn" or "yhaaaarrwwwaaarrrrkh"
     (which very well mean something in Arabic).  Our modemvangelists will
     reply with John 3:16." - JJH


     "Well, I guess we have a fundamentally different outlook...it strikes me
     that a belief in ANY kind of "god", some powerful, "magic", creator
     being, is more reasonable than matter spontaneously coming into existence
     out of nothing..." - Mickey Haist Sr.

     "Nope; they're absolutely identical, as long as you're limiting them to

         "Where did matter come from?"
         "Oh, it just went *poof*"
         "Yeah, right."
         "Okay, where do you say it came from?"
         "God did it."
         "Oh, and where did God come from?"
         "Ummm... he just... um... went *poof*."
         "Uh huh."

     (The other alternative is to simply insist, with no logical basis, that
     God "jest is".  Fine.  Apply the same to the universe.  Guess what?
     Identical claims.  In any case, the result is the same: since we can at
     least tell the universe exists, adding deities doesn't amount to diddly.)

     Now, as soon as you add in the extra attributes of God, it moves from
     being equally ludicrous to far more so." - Kelsey Bjarnason


     "Parable of the New Soap.  Once upon a time in a far-away land far, far
     away, a young man named Joshua announced the discovery of a marvelous new
     kind of soap. People were skeptical at first, but they soon found that
     this new soap made everyone very happy because it got them so clean.
     Because it was so powerful, it got rid of dirt and stains that had been
     around for years.  In our parable, Joshua's soap is the Gospel of Jesus
     Christ." - Marguerite G. Kendall

     "It can't be; they're not comparable.  In the one case, there is a
     demonstrable positive effect of using the product [soap] - one gets clean
     and happy.  In the other case, [Jesus] there is a demonstrable *negative*
     *effect - one's brain goes to mush, and if seriously infected, one has a
     tendency to try to control society or kill people." - Kelsey Bjarnason


     "Democracy is impossible in the presence of even ONE Jesus worshipper!" -
     Sean McCullough [anarchist]

     "What the HELL is the matter with you?  Your starting to become justlike
     the christians are! Judgeing everybody else.Dammit you've really pissed
     me off.It's okay to take shots at their religion, but it's another thing
     to make character assesments and pass judgements on MILLIONS of people
     you've never met. [...] I'm disgusted with you." - Luke Clark [Pagan]


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 382                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:54
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 00C
7.75 A few short skits.════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

                      THE TALE OF ASMODEUS' CURSE

     Courtesy of Rick McFarlane, EdWeird Mills, J.J. Hitt, Al Schroeder,
                              etc. etc.



Good morning, Edweird.

 EM> Ever' now-n-then, I see mention of some mythical poster named
 EM> Asmodiddly-something-or-other.

Asmodeus.  Also known by many unsolicited and uncomplimentary nick-names.

 EM> Having linked up too late,
 EM> evidently, to  enjoy the good works of this chap, I'd be deeply
 EM> beholden to anyone who  might have a few tidbits archived, that I
 EM> might know what's being  talked about when the name comes up...

A real True Satanist (tm).  Not one of those kids that is just into weird
stuff and calls himself a Satanist - you know, the ones who give Satanism
a bad name - no, not one of them.  A real True Satanist.

J.J. called him a white punk on drugs (nasty J.J.).  He appeared to be
offended and said many evil words intended to impress All.

J.J. was unimpressed.  As was All.

Asmodeus cursed J.J.

Nothing happened.  J.J. taunted him (nasty J.J.).

Asmodeus said he was just kidding before - playing mind games with
J.J. - but now J.J.'s taunting had made him mad, so he gave J.J. a For
Real True Satanic Curse (tm), invoking many Evil Spirits (whom he knew on
a first name basis).

Nothing happened again.  Repeatedly.  Over and over again, nothing happened
to J.J (who posted a note to All every time nothing happened to hir - this
part got a bit boring).

Apparently the Evil Spirits were playing mind games with Asmodeus (nasty
Evil Spirits).

Other people began begging Asmodeus for their very own curse.  Everyone
seemed to want one.  They were much in demand.  But only J.J. was so
blessed.  Everyone else was jealous.

Then Al's dryer blew up.

                     DAVE HAMILTON AS A FRANCOPHONE:
                      (with Dr. Mratin Gledbrog)

 MG> A few years ago, my wife and I were in Lucerne, Switzerland.  We went
 MG> intot his restaurant and with my best fumbling Hoch Deutsche I asked
 MG> for a menu.  Felt pretty proud of myself too.

Once in northern Quebec I found myself in a restaurant where I knew
more French than either waitress knew English. I managed to provide
the day's entertainment by ordering an electric stove for dinner. They
didn't even have a chance to be hostile with those tears running down
their cheeks.


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 383                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:55
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 00D
                     KAREN DAVIS ON OMNIPOTENCE:
                       (with Kenneth McAbee)

 KM> No, not punished for my actions, but burn in the lake of fire forever
 KM> because they never accepted Christ and therefore did not accept his
 KM> payment for their actions. But they would not be punished because of
 KM> my actions.

 KD> Why is it that pretending to die is payment for anything when simple
 KD> forgiveness should be enough?

 KD> I don't need to die in order to forgive people. And I'm NOT
 KD> omnipotent.

                (Unlabeled passages are Worrell's)

 DW>> Would *you* like some cheese, Kenny?

 KW>    More of the same kinds of airheaded responses as is also
 KW>    common with the heathens on this Conference. Keep up the
 KW>    good work.

Is Jesus proud of you for the above remark?

 DW>> No, the Bible does that all by itself. We just like making
 DW>> you morons the butt of our jokes.

 KW>    See what I mean? More one-liners. If you ever come up with
 KW>    anything substantive that will be a genuine miracle.


Too bad you'll not be able to see what is so amusing. Someone should put this
one in the FAQ.

[And I just did!  SMcC]

     (With Jim Staal as the Fundie, and Sue Alexander as Another Heathen)

SA>      Oh, by the way, I would still like to see your evidence that we
SA> are the good guys and "they" are the bad guys.  Just having been born
SA> and raised in this country does not mean a damn in this argument.
JS> OK, here goes: 'In God We Trust' vs God-less Communism. I rest my
JS> case.



    You are one of the most ignorant fucks it has ever been my
    mispleasure to meet. You are a disgrace to whatever species
    you belong to, and it sure as hell ain't humanity.

... Jesus loves you. I think you're shit wrapped in skin.


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 384                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:57
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 00E
     (Including Your Humble FAQ Scribe And A HUGE Cast Of Characters!)

  ACT I. With John Musselwhite as "A Man With At Least Five Living Neurons"

 St> I have never seen anywhere in the HOLY SCRIPTURES that the abomination
 St> of homosexuality deserves any rights at all. However, I am not so

  What utter bullshit! You will also find that holy scriptures
  say it's an abomination to wear clothing of mixed fibres and
  that if your child talks back to you you can take him to the
  village square and stone him to death.

  I suppose that's OK with you, even if homosexuality isn't.

 St> You MUST read and obey the salvation plan found in Acts 2:38 of the

  ACTS?  Written by that charlatan of Tarsus? He sucked you guys
  in REAL good, didn't he? See what happens when you ride without
  a hat? His sunstroke started a religion!

 St> I realize that I will draw fire from many sources, but remember
 St> this...Judgement IS real and at that time EVERY knee shall bow and
 St> EVERY tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is LORD.....

  I hope you aren't wearing a cotton/polyester shirt right now or
  you're in BIG trouble with God!



... Thanks for your opinion. I hope I can get it off my shoe.


 > I realize that I will draw fire from many sources,
 > but remember this...Judgement IS real and at that
 > time EVERY knee shall bow and EVERY tongue shall
 > confess that Jesus Christ is LORD.....


What's real is real.  What's fantasy is also real (REAL FANTASY).
You must lead a REAL FANTASTIC life of fantasy, Steve.

Reality is totally unaffected by your strongest belief.
Faith has no effect on fact.  It only changes perception/expectation.
Be blissful...  Or would that be "Blissed be"? Heh.


 St>> SIN will enter heaven. I have heard so many of these animals, no
 St>> not animals, for animals know to copulate with the opposite sex
 St>> as nature teaches, but yet these wicked idiots, try their best to

Buy yourself two white mice (one male and one female) and two aquariums. Let
those two mice breed at will. Once you have at least 2 new males, put them in
the second aquarium.

Get back to us with the results.


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 385                                          Date: 08-22-96  11:59
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 00F
                          (FIGHT SCENE)

     "We're the Authors! Of course we gave ourselves the last word!"
                          -- The Medved Brothers

 > I have never seen anywhere in the HOLY SCRIPTURES that the abomination
 > of homosexuality deserves any rights at all.

To their very own Hell with your so-called "holy scriptures".

The Bible is suitable for usage as toilet paper and damn near nothing else.

 > However, I am not so foolish as
 > to not realize that this putrid sickness is never going to just
 > disappear.

It's not a disease nor is it a "putrid sickness". Your homophobic hatred and
bigotry, on the other hand, qualify in both directions.

 > I rest in my knowledge that, no matter WHAT these vile persons think or
 > believe, God IS going to judge that sickness one day SOON, and they will
 > have to depart into everlasting punishment, for NO SIN will enter
 > heaven.

Please provide faith-independent evidence of this "God" thing and this "Heaven"
thing. You may not use the Bible as evidence for ANYTHING until AFTER you do.

Or admit that neither one exists -- NOW, please.

       "In the beginning God....."  -- First Lie in the Bible, Genesis 1:1

 > I have heard so many of these animals, no not animals, for animals know
 > to copulate with the opposite sex as nature teaches, but yet these wicked
 > idiots, try their best to twist the Scripture to their own damnation!!!!

We're not TWISTING the "Scripture". We're IGNORING it.

Can you produce your "God" thing for us nasty disbelievers to observe, or is
there no reason whatsoever for us to respect your "Scripture" at all??

There CAN be no other choices here. Either your "God" thing exists in the real
world (in which case it can be produced for observation by the faithless) or it
doesn't (in which case both you AND your so-called "scriptures" are bigoted,
homophobic sacks of TIHS).

 > Yes, they are damned, UNLESS they obey the scriptures, and "Come out
 > from among them" (the sinner population).

I have never sinned. Only those who beLIEve in your "God" thing CAN sin.

 > You MUST read and obey the salvation plan found in Acts 2:38 of the New
 > Testament: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you, in the Name of
 > Jesus for the remission of your sins, and you will receive the gift of
 > the Holy Ghost".

Been there. Got no "gift of the Holy Ghost" -- and no other communication from
your so-called "God", either.

And I'm not the only one of us here who's done just that, and gotten the same
non-answer that I've gotten.

 > I realize that I will draw fire from many sources, but remember
 > this...Judgement IS real and at that time EVERY knee shall bow and EVERY
 > tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is LORD.....

Jesus, if he ever existed at all (which is doubtful), has NOT existed in any
meaningful way in the past 1900-some years.

And I'm not bowing down and submitting to some boogieman who exists only in the
psychotically deranged imaginations of those who beLIEve in it.

Nor am I permitting anyone else to do so in peace.

                 THE END (of Steve Pratt, not the FAQ)

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 386                                          Date: 08-23-96  12:00
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 010
                       (with Leonard Bernier)

Getting a little repetitive with your spamming, aren't you?    Can't you even
manage to come up with original spams any more?

LB> The fool says in his heart, "There is no God".

You disprove this by your very presence.

LB> The Bible will keep me fron sin OR sin will keep me from the Bible.


The bible will keep me from sense OR sense will keep me from the bible.


  JP>> Has an observer ever SEEN an atom ?  Or an electron ?
  MG>> Yes to both.
  JP>       Have you ever seen an atom ?

Yes.  As early as 1970 in one of my first freshman chem texts were pictures of
atoms in a palladium catalyst crystal.

If you want to argue that atoms, like god, do not exist because they are
invisible, you have far to go.  We use many other tools besides sight to gather
evidence for science.

So far, none of the most sophisticated has shown that a god of any description

                    (With Michael Hardy as A Brainless Fundy)

MH>  Inaccurate. I'm only saying that God, as creator of the human race, has
MH>  the right to judge the human race, and I trust that His judgment is
MH>  fair.

But judgement would not be required if God actually took the time
to make his creation perfect, would he?

Why would a deity create something only to damn it?  For the joy
of damnation?

MH>  I'm only saying that it is absurd to accuse
MH>  God of moral failing for judging evil.

I agree.  We should accuse God of moral failing for screwing up
the creation!  He refuses to fix his creation.  He refuses to act
like any other creator and demand 100% reliability and operation
of every created unit.  He's a *sadist*.

MH>  Free will, including the freedom to do evil, is what makes our choice
MH>  to do good meaningful.

I argue that our feelings are irrelevant.  If we create an
elevator that happens to respond to calls to go to floors and
pick up and deliver passengers, do we give it the creative
circuitry to be able to defy the good deeds we create it to do?
No!  And if the machine did go haywire and malfunctioned, we'd
fix it.

Why does God not fix the malfunctioning carbon units, Vger?

MH>  If we cannot fail, then success is meaningless.

But if we were all automatons under the direct control of God,
we'd not need to feel "success or failure".  We would just *do*.

MH>  It's like teaching a class and announcing on the first day that
MH>  everyone will get an A, no matter what.

But God can do anything.  If I were a creator or inventor, I'd
want each one of my creations/inventions that I sold to be 100%
reliable, accurate and durable.

Why would God create us, only to allow unreliability,
disobedience, inaccuracy and indurability to prevail?  Why does
he not stop such things?  It makes no sense to create something
that does not work.

Rod "why?" Swift


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 387                                          Date: 08-23-96  12:00
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 011
          (by National Lampoon, courtesy of Karl Schneider)


Go placidly amid the noise and waste, and remember what comfort there
may be in owning a piece thereof.  Avoid quiet and passive persons
unless you are in need of sleep.  Rotate your tires.  Speak glowingly of
those greater than yourself and heed well their advice even though they
be turkeys: know what to kiss, and when.  Consider that two wrongs don't
make a right, but that three do.  Wherever possible, put people on hold.
Be comforted that in the face of all aridity and disillusionment and
despite the changing fortunes of time, there's always a big fortune in
computer maintnenance.  Remember the Pueblo.  Strive at all times to
bend, fold, spindle, and mutilate.  Know yourself; if you need help,
call the FBI.  Exercise caution in your daily affairs, especially with
those persons closest to you.  That lemon on your left, for instance.  Be
assured that a walk through the ocean of most souls would scarcely get
your feet wet.  Fall not in love therefore; it will stick to your face.
Gracefully surrender the things of youth; birds, clean air, tuna,
Taiwan; and let not the sands of time get in your lunch.  Hire people
with hooks.  For a good time, call 606-4311; ask for Ken.  Take heart
amid the deepening gloom that your dog is finally getting enough cheese;
and reflect that whatever misfortune may be your lot, it could only be
worse in Milwaukee.  You are a fluke of the universe; you have no right
to be here, and whether you can hear it or not, the universe is laughing
behind your back.  Therefore make peace with your God, whatever you
concieve Him to be: Hairy Thunderer or Cosmic Muffin.  With all its
hopes, dreams, promises and urban renewal, the world continues to
deteriorate. GIVE UP.

                          (With Michael Hardy)

Like any of you care, my patience for this echo is wearing thin. So I'm
going to liven it up with a little game.

I've finally set up a twit filter, something I resisted for two years
because I tried to believe that anyone could have something
worthwhile to say once in a while. But as my patience began to wear, I
decided I'd rather spend one hour a night having interesting exchanges
than three hours a night wading through drool to get the occasional
worthwhile questions. And I observed that the bulk of the drool was
coming consistently from the same few people.

The following people make up the charter group of twits: Dan Ceppa,
David Rice, Fredric Rice, Sean McCullough, Steve Rose and David Worrell.

The game is this: I have chosen one person among the current group of
non-twitted Holy Smoke regulars. If that person sends enough drool my
way to justify being twitted, I will drop out of this echo for at least
one month, possibly longer.

No clues, though. The person in question was picked at random, with all
names in the running except for Boni Hitch and Pam Gray, who don't seem
to be in the loop. Could be anyone, other than them or the charter

This is like "You Bet Your Life," where you say the secret woid and win
$100. In this case, if the right person earns twitdom, you win at least
30 days Mickey-free. (And yes, I'll announce it if it happens.)

Go to it, twits!

[N.B.: Having found himself almost completely disconnected from HolySmoke
       after he did this, Mikey officially gave up his "little game" after
       less than one month!]


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 388                                          Date: 08-23-96  12:02
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 012
                 (Courtesy Norbert Sykes and Pantheacon)

     I just got back from San Jose, California's, 2nd annual Pantheacon,
repository for the pagan, the weird, the failed trekkies, the outcasts,
and the decidedly religiously odd.  It was fun, even just as a spectator
sport.  I brought back something you might find amusing, in a
pagan-religious sense, from a wonderful little magazine that was
anonymously put together and distributed (because it rocks the
acceptable self-image of paganism?) called The Magical Flame.  It has
no credits, no contact info, and no copyright.  Enjoy!

                    A FIELD GUIDE TO NEOPAGANDOM

     Is this the first time you've seen this many pagans together?
Well, you're in for a deflowering, young earth-worshiper, and you've
come to the right place.  However, you should realize that there are
many, many types of pagans.  We old farts just had to keep making
the rounds until we either found a group that wouldn't kick us out
or founded our own clique.  But now, progress has brought us many
different flavors to choose from.


     You just read this cool book about a religion where there's
 _goddesses_ and gods, and they meet outside, in nature, instead of
 in some scary old building, and you want to know where to sign up.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Mispronounces god/dess names, has to think a
 moment about which is widdershins and which is deosil.  Has a shiny
 new athame (rhymes with "A-frame").


     Did I ever tell you about the time I dropped with Kerry Wendell
 Thornley?  Or maybe it was Robert Anton Wilson.  I was pretty
 loaded.  Anyway, it was somebody with three names.  Or was it three
 people who had one name?

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Luxuriant gray locks, listens very intently,
 knows dish about people you've read about.


     Prize possession: one of Judi Barry's old tree spikes.
 Simultaneously believes in universal love for humanity AND returning
 the planet to a pristine, uncorrupted state.  Apt to remove clothes
 and fondle the shrubbery at a moment's notice.  Can discuss compost
 in detail.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: No meat, no fragrance, no leather, no
 eco-exploitative garments, no animal tested cosmetics, no cigarette
 smoke, no drugs, no TV, no car, no corporations, yet very tolerant.


     Book collection actually holds up the ceiling in places.  Is
 trying to learn how to speak Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, all at once.
 Does "workings" instead of "rituals."  Has a web site that all in

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Won't go anywhere without a book.  Dresses
 according to planetary coordinates, or according to what Mom finds
 on sale at Wal-Mart.


     A man's shadow crossed her altar once and she spent three
 months purifying it.  She'll have no wands in her chalice, thank
 you.  No boys allowed in her full moon club.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Tiny axes, just the right size for amputating
 a penis, are a favored symbol and often hang conveniently from her
 body parts.  When a man approaches she rolls her eyes and stops

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 389                                          Date: 08-23-96  12:02
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 013

     Oh, they're so nice.  All that warm, round, sex positive flesh
 . . . and you can actually carry on a conversation with them
 between orgasms . . . pant, drool.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Cute.  Horny.  Will recite love poetry to you
 under the full moon.  Likes to do it outdoors.  Often destitute.
 All too few of them.


     Has an entire chapter in their Book of Shadows concerned with
 spells for purifying the work place.  Doesn't mind working on
 Christmas, especially if there's overtime involved.  Quit being
 overtly pagan at work since getting canned by that closet born
 again, yet still refuses to say "Merry Christmas."

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Can assume a properly smiley work persona at
 the drop of a hat.  Constantly glances around the room anxiously
 looking for co-workers and their spies.  Non-distinctive hair, no
 conspicuous tattoos.


     At conventions, stays on the hotel floor that requires a
 special key for elevator access.  Lurks around hallway corners
 eavesdropping in order to see if name is being mentioned.
 Arrives in helicopter especially for ritual.  Never seen
 unaccompanied by beefy Amazonian bodyguards.

 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES: Always has plenty of books to autograph
 and will personally sell them to you at a slight discount from
 cover price.  When you ask them how it's going, they hand you a
 press release.  Seems vaguely afraid of anyone they don't already


     Can name seventeen different industrial bands without pausing
 to think.  Knows what a Prince Albert is.  Sleeps in black leather
 jammies.  Painted on their jacket, engraved in their flesh or boldly
 displayed as jewelry is an emblem which resembles a combination of
 a corporate logo and an arcane sigil.  If you don't know what it
 is, they'll think you're a dweeb.

 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES: Easy to picture as a bike messenger or
 alternative musician, difficult to visualize as a schoolteacher or
 research assistant, impossible to imagine as a TV anchor or bank
 president.  Personally feels that if no panicky headlines appear
 the day after you do a ritual, you screwed up.


     Won't go skyclad.  Rarely smiles, except for in a smug, knowing
 way which insinuates you are an ignorant peasant worthy of conquer.
 Secretly enjoys Rush Limbaugh and The Bell Curve.  Fascinated with
 Nazis.  Probably wouldn't hurt a fly; yet they want you to think
 they are capable of vast destruction.

 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES: Lots of black and red.  Men like goatees,
 women favor eye liner.  If you see several of them getting tanked in
 the hotel bar, it would be wise to stay far away.


     Every magickal gathering has at least one
 Crowley-in-a-past-life, along with several variants along the lines
 of Gerald Gardner, Tituba, Morgan Le Fay.  Many of them were
 abducted by aliens recently, or have had disturbing dreams rich
 with symbolism which they will tell you, in great detail.

 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES: Look for the intense gleam in eyes, the
 backpack rattling with various psychiatric medicines, the garments
 that were clearly designed and tailored in outer space.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 390                                          Date: 08-23-96  12:02
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 014

     Young and psychedelic.  Refuses to do boring Eurocentric
 rituals and prefers deities from sunny climes with many interesting
 local plants.  Can say "Ayahuasca" ten times, fast.  Never goes
 anywhere without a ritual drum.

 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES: Colors that hurt your eyes unless you've
 taken ecstasy.  Bloodshot eyes, peaceful smile, can deliver long
 quotes from Terrance McKenna.


     Is he a he?  Is she a she?  Are they a couple, or are those two
 a couple, or are all four of them a quadruple?  If the answers to
 these questions could upset or disturb you, best stay away.  If,
 however, the answers to these questions seem overly nosy and
 judgmental, you might have a real good time.

 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES: When you look at this person, does every
 sex act you've ever experienced in your life seem hopelessly
 vanilla?  If so, the congratulations -- you have found a faerie.


     Do their rituals have a script, a choreographer, a lighting
 director, an orchestra and last three hours?  It's a High
 Episcopagan!  It can memorize pages and pages of Olde Englishe, it
 has more ritual outfits than most people have socks, it considers
 its main pagan influences to be Gerald Gardner, Judy Garland, and
 Busby Berkeley.

 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES: Book of Shadows exceeds five volumes (or
 five megs of hard drive space).  Knows every note of "Carmina
 Burana."  Better not ask about that 18th century seed pearl trim on
 their ritual hat unless you've got an hour to spare.


     If it's in a book, it must be true.  If it's in an old book, it
 must be _really_ true.  If it's in an old book that was supposedly
 handed down from oral transmission from people who couldn't read,
 then it must _really_ be _way_ true.  Has hissy fits if anyone
 shows up at a circle wearing a watch, glasses, or other mechanical
 assistance.  Believes that anyone who has never sustained
 themselves from their own land, using only primitive agricultural
 methods, dare not call themselves a pagan.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Gnashes teeth when the old "Crowley ghosted
 Gardner's Books" argument comes up.  Goes around correcting
 everyone's gaelic/old norse/latin/babylonian.


     Uses animal symbolism to express nearly all opinions and
 feelings.  Charter member of PETA.  Thinks meat eaters should be
 publicly executed.  Has many, many pets.  Has a spirit animal.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Not counting the pagan his/herself, how many
 animals can you find in this picture?  if the count surpasses five
 (including critters found on tattoos, jewelry, garments and
 undies), you have found a Worshiper of Beasties.


     Analyzes everything they hear for
 sexist-racist-homophobic-imperialist-Eurocentric content without
 paying attention to what is actually being said.  Believes in
 personal liberty -- everyone has the right to be overbearing,
 dogmatic and holier-than-thou; not just the religious right.
 Incredibly boring and annoyingly righteous at the same time.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Beady, hyper alert little eyes are constantly
 in motion, waiting for someone to say or do something bad.
 Constantly has loud and attention-attracting fits when confronted
 with everyday things such as advertising and corporate franchises.
 Rudimentary sense of humor rarely activated.

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 391                                          Date: 08-23-96  12:03
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 015

     Is constantly persecuted.  You are probably persecuting her
 right now, you just don't realize it.  Became a pagan because she
 decided it was the most persecuted religion of all.  Can't enjoy
 anything because it would be selfish to have fun when so many are

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Tales of woe.  Even less of a sense of humor
 than #17.  Bristles whenever you use the words "masochism" or

19.  I AM NOT SPOCK (at the moment).

     Knows at least three filks about Cthulhu and at least forty Star
 Trek jokes.  Has found a clever way to create simple furniture from
 stacks of science fiction paperbacks.  Can name ninety different
 kinds of space ship.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Two-fisted drinking style.  many cryptic
 buttons, badges, patches and other insignia.  Too smart for their
 own good.

20.  HET-CASE.

     Insist that they aren't homophobic; they just think that
 paganism is about a god and a goddess and they do it, and what
 could be more simple than that, and it just doesn't work right if
 you try it any other way.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Signifiers of het-dom such as long, manicured
 nails and wreaths of flowers (on females _only_; the males have
 big, bushy beards instead).  Are secretly afraid gays and/or
 lesbians are dying to jump their tender hetero bones.


     Heroic and vikingly, these pagans often get into trouble with
 festival organizers due to their fondness for running around
 carrying a battle-axe in one hand and a full mead horn in the
 other.  They do throw the best parties, but if you're a wimp, you
 are expressly not invited.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Look out for the large and foreboding persons
 wearing runes, with many pounds of amber dangling from their necks.


     This is where all the people who are into paganism come, right?
 So how come they aren't buying my hand-forged Venus of Willendorf
 necklaces -- they come in silver or gold, and each one has a
 genuine cubic zirconium belly button.  Would you like a reading?
 Will that be Visa or Master Card?

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Business cards feature little embossed
 pentagrams.  Rarely leaves the dealer's room and can't believe
 there are so many jewelry sellers present.


     Can grow their own food, build their own house, sew their own
 clothes, homeschool their children and brew their own organic
 hooch.  Are looking forward to the bleak, post-apocalyptic world
 postulated by the environmentalists as they can't wait to run amok
 through the country, worshipping ancient gods, blowing up strip
 malls and rutting on the divider line of every interstate.

 DISTINGUISHING SIGNS: Resourceful, clever and very well versed in
 the U. S. Constitution.  Eats meat with visible twitches of
 pleasure.  is aware that primitive religions have nothing to do
 with crystals, Atlantis or unicorns.


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 392                                          Date: 08-23-96  12:03
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 016

       3                                                       3
       3  Definition of "fundy:"                               3
       3      Fundy is short for a combination of two words    3
       3  emerging from the same Latin root, _fundus_          3
       3  (bottom), from whence _fundare_ (to lay the bottom). 3
       3  The English _fundament_ refers to 1. the buttocks.   3
       3  2. the anus. Religious extremists, who do their      3
       3  thinking with these organs, practice                 3
       3  _fundamentalism_: 1. orthodox religious beliefs      3
       3  based on a literal interpretation of the Bible. 2.   3
       3  Among some American Protestants, the movement based  3
       3  on this belief: opposed to _modernism_.              3
       3                                                       3
       3      Around here, fundy simply means religious        3
       3  asshole.                                             3
       3                                                       3

                (with Jim Germiquet and Judith Bandsma)
                 [Unlabelled passages are Germiquet's]

 JG> and the laws and legal institutions. We are not talking about modern
 JG> day North America . We are talking of a savage land and a savage
 JG> people.
 JB> Bullshit. Women always have and always will be able to adapt to
 JB> whatever they need to...with or without men.

Well it would be pretty hard for women to continue to exist beyond
the first generation without men. :-)

And of course women will be able to adapt. For example they can use their
femininity to seduce men to fall prey to their treachery as Delilah did
to Samson , to cut off his hair.

In todays society, women use the politician to get extra powers over
men. A woman demands to rights to abort a child, the father has no
right to stop her. BUT if the woman decides to have the child, suddenly
the child is the responsibility of the man and child support is demanded.
What kind of BS is that. Rights go hand in hand with Responsibilities.
If a woman demands TOTAL rights as to the life and death of that child,
then she should also take TOTAL responsibility for it if she has it.

But no, women whine and cry , or the protest and march. They suck up to
politicians to demand superiority over the man and then hypocritically
talk about "equality". Another example in this vein, is the government
has a huge child support agency that chases after men with hundreds of
lawyers the woman does not have to pay for. Meanwhile a man has to find
a lawyer, pay the expenses of a lawyer, to fight this huge agency. And
if he can't afford a lawyer, he gets raped by the system. And now this
is not covered by "legal aid".  "equality ? NOT!"  Where is the huge
government agency to take the mans side of the issue ?
We pay taxes , but we do not get representation ! Don't talk to me of

And then of course they take away the ability for men to defend themselves
which used to be physical. SO now in order to stop the mental abuse of
a womans bitching and nagging and put downs, men can no longer give her
a backhand across the mouth. So he has to take the mental abuse until it
drives him crazy enough to get a gun and blow away the next 12 or 15
women he sees on the street before putting the gun to his own head to
get away from the monstrous injustice of a society that only cares now
about the rights of the women while not providing support and education
in dealing with these issues to the men on an equal basis that it is
supplied to the women of this society .

-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)

─ Area: Religious Debate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Msg#: 393                                          Date: 08-23-96  12:03
  From: Holysmoke Faq                                Read: Yes    Replied: No 
    To: All                                          Mark:                     
  Subj: SAMPLER: 017
Now before you get your back up, I am not saying this is "right" I agree
it is a "sick" thing to do and that you cannot "justify" it.

But women don't get charged for the abuse they dish out to men. If
a man were even to complain about it, he would be laughed at and ridiculed.
And of course if it ever does get to court , everyone assumes it is the
man who is at fault and not the poor little lady.

 JB> It might behoove you to have us simpering around with a 'poor,
 JB> pitiful, weak, little me' attitude, but don't count on it ever
 JB> happening. I may not have as much upper body strength as you have, but
 JB> I've got a brain that will show me a way to do the same things without
 JB> needing that strength.

What a joke. that is EXACTLY what you do to get your way. Especially
in courts or with cops, or with politicians! How do you think you
got all this power in the first place except with your snivelling
"poor me" crap.

 And how true is the expression. Power corrupts, and
 absolute power corrupts absolutely. Women are becoming more and more
 corrupt. It is no coincidence that as soon as women got "equal" rights
 as men the first things they started to do was "get drunk" "smoke"
 "go to male strip joints" ? The very things they complained about men

 JB> And yes, I KNOW what I can do. From survival in strange cities in
 JB> foreign countries to rural living with NO utilities.

 Oh I am quite sure you do. Ever look down to make sure you haven't
 grown a penis lately ?

 JB> Gad, but you are a puke.

Nice talk for a "lady". Oh I forgot you aren't a "lady" you are man.
And as such demand the right to be as ignorant and abusive as some men
choose to be.

                      IF ATHEISM IS A RELIGION.....
                (with Lenny Frank and Charles Creager Jr.)
                  [Unlabelled passages are Frank's]

I.e., god is specifically and clearly ruled out as an explanatory mechanism,
as indeed it is in ALL science.  Does this make mathematics or science
a "religion"?

CC>Atheism dose. I am not against human reason. I have
CC>not condemned human reason. We put some trust in human reason all
CC>the time. You made the logical error of extrapolating from the
CC>specific case to general. Saying, "because atheism relies on
CC>human reason all disciplines of human reason are atheistic" is like
CC>saying that because dogs have tails all animals with tails are
CC>dogs. Failure to mention God is not atheistic but claiming that He
CC>dose not exist is.

Blah blah blah.  if atheism, as the lack of faith in god, is a form of
religion, then is virginity, the lack of fucking, a form of sex?

Your logical error is in assuming that the absence of a particular
belief must be an affirmation of that belief.  wrong.


-!- FMail 0.94
 ! Origin: TASTELESS GARBAGE: You Eat It Every Day. (1:128/203.666)