From: lungtt@gus.ecn.purdue.edu (Terence T. Lung)
Subject: Re: God speaks
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 22:01:51 GMT

>From: skinner@sp1.csrd.uiuc.edu (Gregg Skinner)

>Mr. Sandvik asks more questions, but still refuses to either retract
>or defend his claim that he is morally sound.  I am forced to repeat
>myself.
Did he really claim to be morally sound?  I thought he only claimed
not to be a barbaric destroyer.  In any case, it is all relative,
and I would stop picking on the guy over the point.  I doubt if
he even meant it in absolutes.  As Richard Nixon would say:

"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not  
sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."

...and English isn't Nixon's umptimillionth language.  And having
nothing new under the sun...I think Nixon is reflecting *a* gist
of James 1:19:  My dear brothers, take note of this:  Everyone should
be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry...

>Meaningful discussion cannot continue,
oh really?  was it ever meaningful to begin with?
>though, because at present there is reason to question whether
>Mr. Sandvik approaches these discussions with integrity.
Who does approach these discussions with absolute integrity?
I dare think most people *try*.  But for one data point [i.e. n=1]
I myself have a very difficult time keeping a straight face reading
some of this stuff.  Thus, I often find that I've drifted into bogosity
consciously or unconsciously.  More often I think, it is a drift 
into fecetiousness or bad sarcasm.

>>...It seems many Christians have the view that primitive 
>>barbaric tribes were atheist-oriented.
or anyone sufficiently ignorant...the ignorant are not uniquely
a subset of those considered-in-any-way-shape-or-form-Christian
you know...

>I greet with skepticism the suggestion that many Christian have this
>view.  Mr. Lung is the first I have encountered to say anything close,
        ^^^^^^^^  that could be me.  Am I Christian?  Why do you say so?
>and even he did not say much more than something about Attila the Hun
>being atheist.  
>(Mr. Lung seems to favor using individuals as
>examples, explicitly avoiding generalizations such as the one above.)
Yep.  To be fair I should also have mentioned a couple child-molesting
priests and the extra-marital-affair-clergy that confirmed me. 
Barbaric destroyers?  maybe.  were they ever Christian?  possibly.  atheist?
i dunno.  what should anyone think?  who knows?  [I would start
with 1 Cor 5...I am not proud of these examples, rather I am ashamed.]

Incidentally, I was being fecetious about Attila.  I've never been
convinced that anyone is atheist.  European propaganda called Huns the
*godless*, then German propagandists called the Russians Huns and
in turn, American propagandists [e.g. me] once called the Germans Huns
[e.g. my buddy Hans the Hun from Munchen]...
Gee.  I guess we're all godless.  NOT.  I think everyone is into one sort
of idol worship or another [often themselves].  Anybody dare to deny
worshipping something?  in a loose sense, I don't think a god has to
be a deity...maybe in a deluded sense of grandeur, but altogether...no..

Terence
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism