Message for the dumb bitch-assed punk, who serves fries with that:
YOUR BRAIN is the source of all intelligence, which clearly is damaged
since you fail to realize that ALT.ATHEISM is used to the ravings of
cranks like you.

-Panama Floyd, Atl.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
EAC Martian Commander
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain

Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

Once upon a time in alt.atheism,  dear sweet Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
(nospam2@heartmdphd.com) made the light shine upon us with this:

And your proof for this claim is?

Written ? You bet --- written by fallas thousands of years ago.

Why does a god need a book written by humans and distributed by humans
and quoted from by humans,
why does 'He; need this book to prove that 'he' is an all powerful god
that created everything?

...........a few seconds of cogent thought reveals the arrant stupidity of
the whole thing

Please name some of these things. Explain why you assert that they are
inexplicable.

...

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <nospam9@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message

Yes he is dummy. from http://home.inu.net/skeptic/exist.html

      DID JESUS EVER LIVE?1

Was Jesus of Nazareth a real historical person? Today, we cannot give a
positive yes or no answer to this question. But after studying the evidence
it becomes highly plausible that, as portrayed in the New Testament gospels,
Jesus of Nazareth, hereinafter referred to as Jesus, is a myth and nothing
more. It is reasonable to speculate, however, that somewhere in the eastern
Mediterranean region of two thousand or more years ago a talented young
leader appeared preaching what was for those days a radical doctrine.
Although he in no way resembled the Jesus of the New Testament, he well
might have provided the inspiration for him, i.e., the kernel of truth out
of which grew the myth.

First, it is inconceivable that if a historical Jesus had actually founded a
world religion, Christianity, that there should be no contemporary record of
his activities. Surely one of the several important Jewish historians active
during that period would have at the very least mentioned him. But they
remained silent about him - a silence, it should be noted, which speaks
volumes. So in our search for Jesus we are restricted to the conflicting
depictions of the New Testament gospel writers who are themselves under
suspicion by modern Bible scholars2. Surely if such a person as Jesus had in
fact existed, the historians of his day would have recorded something of
his teachings, his alleged miracles, his doctrines as well as the many other
extraordinary events associated with his short life as recorded in the
gospels.

Preeminent among the Jewish historians of the first century is Philo Judaeus
of Alexandria. His dates, 30 BCE - 453, include Jesus' alleged life span.
Among his writings is a history of the Jewish people. It is still available
today. Philo was particularly interested in contemporary religious movements
and sects of which there were many. Yet he never once mentions Jesus or any
of the extraordinary events associated with him in the New Testament.

Justus of Tiberius, another contemporary Jewish historian, also wrote a
history of the Jewish people covering this period. Although the work is now
lost, we know that it was extant at least until 891 because Photius, the
Patriarch of Constantinople, read it and expressed astonishment that it
contained not one reference to Jesus (Photius' Bibliotheca, code 33)4 .

Flauvius Josephus (37-100?), an important first century Jewish historian,
wrote about Pontius Pilate in his important work, Antiquities of the Jews5.
It is unimaginable that he should not have mentioned the trial and
crucifixion of Jesus had they really occurred. It is evident that at an
early date Christians were painfully aware of this fatal omission and took
steps to correct it. Between sections two and four of chapter 3 of
Antiquities there appears a short section, appropriately titled section 3,
in which Jesus and the Christians are indeed mentioned. However, section 3
interrupts the natural flow of the text and appears to be out of place. When
section 3 is removed chapter 3 makes more sense. Section 3 is an
acknowledged interpolation6. Also, early Christian writers, such as Origen
and Tertullian, frequently referred to Josephus without once citing this
passage. They certainly would have done so had they been aware of it. Last,
but by no means least, the passage was obviously written by a Christian
which Josephus was not. It is interesting to note that in the sixteenth
century Vossius7 had a ancient manuscript of Josephus which does not contain
the passage in question.

Your denial reminds me of an alcoholic when confronted with his addiction.

No, not really.

It's not working - my health is fine.

Once upon a time in alt.atheism,  dear sweet Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
(nospam9@heartmdphd.com) made the light shine upon us with this:

I wish I could tell you that you're going to be extremely disappointed when
you die, but you won't have a live brain with which to feel disappointment.