### Apollo BBS Archive - September 14, 1990

    Public & Free Bulletin Board command:$C

    Message: 69559
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff / Syrup
    Date: 09/13/90  Time: 23:25:54

       Sorry that you find my post to be so unbelievable, but all that you need
    to do is call one of the pharmacies in town to verify my claim. In fact, the
    bottle bears a disclaimer on the bottle that the contents are not a product,
    nor licensed by, the Coca-Cola company.

    Message: 69560
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff / Feathers Gold
    Date: 09/13/90  Time: 23:27:09

       That was what I was asking, so I was on the right track.

    Message: 69561
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Rod / Bible
    Date: 09/13/90  Time: 23:39:13

       Rod, knowing you, I don't doubt at all your gleeful claim of defacing
    God's word. It just proves all the more that you are not a real atheist. If
    you were a true atheist, you would disregard the Bible altogether, and move
    on to what most sincere atheists would regard as more important things. But
    you, rather, seek a vengeful glee in doing everything you can to offend this
    God you claim does not exist, demanding at every turn for God to do
    something about it. In my mind, this would be utter foolishness to someone
    who is convinced that there is not a God. You are more a hateful agnostic,
    who, through his actions, confirms his belief in a 'god,' although whoever
    that 'god' is, he hates 'his' guts for one reason or another.
       In short, I believe the conversation was between myself and Ann, and
    anyone else who has anything CONSTRUCTIVE to add to the discussion. If you
    sincerely want to be the 'true' atheist you want everyone to think you are,
    then why don't you just sit back and ignore my posts, or any posts for that
    matter that deal with God. [That is, unless you have anything to say other
    than your desire to smear human waste in God's face, your Bible defacing
    project, and other such jolly exploits.] The only people you're impressing
    are the other 'hateful agnostics' on this board, not anyone who has anything
    pertinent to say on the existence [or non-existence] of God.

    Message: 69562
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Ann (Pts. 2 and 3)
    Date: 09/13/90  Time: 23:53:01

       Ann, I'm sorry that I did not get the chance to reply to your other two
    posts as I did to your first. For some reason (probably my own
    fumble-fingers), I didn't even know that you had written a continuation of
    the first post. I have them buffered, and will read and respond to them
    offline.
       I also respect you, Ann, just as you have respect for me. It is certainly
    nice to know that we are really reading each other's posts, and not simply
    looking for a key phrase or 'bite' to twist and throw back at each other (as
    some delight in doing). I also, am not trying to convert you. It's something
    that is not mine to do. For me to think that I could would be denying the
    sovereignty of God. Only He can enlighten. I merely present the truth as I
    read it, believe it, and defend it. If I become an instrument through which
    God imparts saving faith, then 'soli Deo gloria!' But if I don't, I'm not
    about to bash someone over the head until they 'submit.'
       I think we have somewhat of a common ground, as you once were a
    churchgoer and studier of Scripture, and I'm sure that you've retained some,
    if not quite a bit, of what you read and learned. It would be my earnest
    prayer that you would not disregard the Bible as a record of who Jesus was
    (and is) and what he did (and does). Jesus was not a cross-builder, he was
    not forced by God against his will to become the Messiah, he did not have
    sex with Mary Magdalene as a child, nor was he any of the things he was made
    out to be in Scorcese's film. The beginning of the film states that it is
    based on a fictional work, whereas the Bible is widely accepted to be a
    record of fact, kept remarkably intact (99%) for over 1900 years.

    Message: 69563
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 00:05:34

    Re: What happened to Satan

       Although I know it does not matter one whit whether I give you an answer
    or not, I'm going to give one to you anyhow. Isaiah 14.12-15.

       Yes, the Bible is a 'need to know' book. But it depends upon whether you
    desire to know what God has revealed to man concerning Himself, or whether
    you desire to try and obtain the mind of God, knowing each and every one of
    His thoughts. The former you can obtain through the Bible, while the latter
    you cannot. You cannot know everything there possibly is to know about God
    because, you silly man, you are not God. (Thank God!)

    Message: 69564
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger / Scholarship
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 00:07:11

       I'll take the authority of Scripture over authority OVER Scripture every
    single day. I'll take Luther, you can have Tillich as well as Erasmus.

    Message: 69565
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger / Li'l Christs
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 00:08:57

       There is only one Christ. We are only man and not God, and thus cannot be
    or become Christ. We are told by Christ Himself to follow Him, not BE Him.

    Message: 69566
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Ann / Your Questions
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 00:10:47

       Are very good and honest questions, and it is my sincere desire to reply
    to them as soon as possible. I noticed you have a seven part post to me also
    and I have my buffer open and ready to capture! *grin*

    Message: 69567
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Ann on the Seven
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 00:16:32

       Ann, as I was downloading your posts, I was briefly reading each one as
    it came down the line, and I see a lot of sincere questions, questions that
    demand sincere answers. And I plan to offer you as many sincere answers as I
    can. I've already read quite a few questions of yours that I wish I could
    answer right here and now - and were it not for the fact that I have to get
    up early for work tomorrow, I would. But trust me, I will reply to them as
    soon as I can (and my earliest opportunity to do so will be early tomorrow
    evening...I'll even try to track down some computer paper and print your
    posts down so I can review them while I'm at work, to give me a little bit
    of a head start in composing answers. Hang in there, and bear with me!

    Sincerely,
    Me.

    Message: 69568
    Author: $ Daryl Westfall
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Rod
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 00:35:43

       Rod, trust that I am not going to go to the effort of answering Ann's
    questions merely so you can chime in with your hatred and disregard. Ann,
    unlike you, is sincere in her search for answers. She, unlike you,
    recognizes Jesus, although she is not certain on exactly who He is. And she,
    unlike you, respects other people's opinions, and not only when they agree
    with her own.
       If you dread my posts, as you claim you do, then I'm surprised that you
    don't simply [S]kip over them. You know the [S]kip command, don't you? It is
    displayed as an option before EVERY single message. Even if you do a
    non-stop read, there is always the  key. Certainly you have been a user
    on Apollo long enough to know these basic commands. Nay, I know better. You
    feign that you dread my posts, but if you did, you would not be so eager to
    read them, distort them, and mock them. No, Rod, you love them and you know
    it. Not on the basis that I present my sincere beliefs, but that I'm a
    Christian 'sheep' that you can billy-club over the head with your prejudice.
       This, Rod, is why I intend to reply to Ann's posts in MAIL, as I should
    have in the first place. I guess I am pretty stupid, to open myself up again
    and again to the pseudo-atheist court jester of Apollo.
       And if I have offended anyone by this post (including you, Rod), I'm
    sorry that your feelings have been hurt, but I am not sorry for what I've
    said. Christ said that we should turn the other cheek (and God knows you've
    responded by smashing both of them over and over again, Rod.) But He also
    told us to defend our faith, yes, even die for it if we have to. Our weapons
    are not guns, but the word of God and Faith. Enjoy the dead airtime, Rod.

    Message: 69569
    Author: $ Steve MacGregor
    Category: In search of
    Subject: Lost dog
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 01:37:28

      Three legs, blind in left eye, missing right ear, tail broken, recently
    neutered.  Answers to "Lucky".

              We all live in a   ____nhnn________   yellow subroutine

    Message: 69570
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Steve/grains
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 01:58:03

    According to "Reading the Numbers," they both have  480 grains.  The author
    says that when the 5,760 grain troy pound was considered by many medieval
    Europeans to be too small for everyday use, they added four troy size (480
    grain) ounces to get a sixteen ounce pound of 7,000 grains.  Hmmm...that
    doesn't work out.  Oh, wait...The Romans adopted the Egyptian pound, called
    libra pondo (lb.) and divided it into twelve parts of 437 grains each,
    calling each part an uncia (which means twelfth part).  The use of this 12
    ounce pound spread to Europe, where the ounce was enlarged to 480 grains and
    the pound was named a troy pound in honor of the thriving French medieval
    trading town of Troye

    Message: 69571
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Steve/puzzles
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 02:01:27

    I have no idea about "Moishe."  Is that the famous Israeli?

    Mozart's 37th...hmmm...Absolutely no idea.  Mozart?

    Message: 69572
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Steve/compass
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 02:05:59

    Well, I haven't used too many compasses (the last time I *saw* a compass was
    in Weblos (sp?) so I bungled the question.  I asked it because I read that
    magnetic north was situated right around Prince Edward Island (still should
    be) and hence it would point due south, but magnetic "north."  I understand
    our local declination is around 12.5 degrees east, though this information
    was published around 1985.  I think the declination needs to be adjusted
    about 1/15 of a degree each year.

    Message: 69573
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Steve/aspirin
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 02:13:03

    I don't use aspirin.  The point illustrates economic issues, not consumer
    issues.  Their prices are monopolistic.  They don't have to "drive everyone
    else out of business" in order to be monopolistic.  The point is not how
    much Bayer charges, not how effective their product is and not whether $8.99
    is going to break anyone.  The point is that capitalism doesn't work the way
    free-market purists claim it does, that capitalism doesn't force reasonable
    prices (and by reasonable I mean related to the costs of capital and
    production) and that capital doesn't rush in like the cavalry to make prices
    competitive again just because someone charges unreasonable prices.  The
    example is trivial.  The point is not.  Got a problem with that?  Take an
    aspirin and shut up.

    Message: 69574
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger/language
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 02:15:46

    I just don't think "piles of bricks" exist until we define the concept using
    words.  So in my opinion, the problem is fictitious.

    Message: 69575
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 02:26:03

    I don't think we have any way of knowing which explanations are closer to
    the truth.  I think Ptolemy's *description* of the universe was not as
    accurate a representation of the observable facts as Copernicus'
    heliocentric view is.  That says nothing about their explanations.  I can't
    really address their explanations, because the only thing left is their
    representations (at least, that's all most of us know without delving into
    the history of those particular theories).  What I'm talking about is
    something quite different.  We've been oscillating between wave and particle
    theories of light for quite some time now, but the formulae representing
    experimental laws have been passed from each theory to the next like an
    Olympic torch.
    What has come of explanations of gravity in terms of forces acting at a
    distance or of distortions in the "fabric of space-time"?  Nothing.  These
    explanations are not only confusing, they are painful!  What has been useful
    are the descriptions of motions, not the explanation of the underlying
    reality behind these motions.

    Message: 69576
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Melissa
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 02:29:57

    Oh, alright. Sorry!  You win!!

    Message: 69577
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Roger/ASN.1
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 02:41:14

    I haven't the foggiest.  If I understand you correctly, the problem is one
    of distinguishing between definition by synonym, and definition in use.  We
    can easily set up a table defining symbols tautologously through the use of
    synonyms; that's what normal language dictionaries do.  But when the same
    symbols can mean different things to different people at different times,
    when furthermore, sentences using these symbols suffer the same type of
    semantic ambiguity, we must determine the meaning of the symbols and
    sentences *in use*.  There is no general algorithm which allows identical
    symbols to be differentiated when they are identical and used identically in
    identical sentences.  Consider the sentence "All matter has mass."  Now I
    might simply be defining one concept in terms of the other.  In this case,
    the sentence is true purely as a formal consequence of the meaning of the
    symbols, and is an analytic statement which is always true regardless of the
    facts of experience.  On the other hand, I might say "All matter has mass"
    intending to assert that any solid, liquid or gas behaves in a defined
    manner under defined circumstances, which is an empirical statement which
    must be validated by the facts of experience, and which can also be refuted
    by observing a solid, liquid, or gas which does *not* behave in the
    proscribed manner.  As isolated sentences, there is nothing to differentiate
    them; the symbols are identical and are arranged identically.  There is also
    no contextual clue which would allow the determination to be made.  The
    problem is one of judging intent, and the only solution in such a case is to
    read minds.  The problem then, is to design a language so that words cannot
    be used this way.

    Message: 69578
    Author: $ Jeff Beck
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Daryl/syrup
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 02:44:00

    Well then, I was right; it is *not* Coca-Cola syrup being called "coca-cola"
    syrup.  It is something else.

    Yes, you were on the right track with the puzzle.  Sorry! You win!

    Message: 69579
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Daryl
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 03:48:22

    Wow, what a post from you.  Opps but you're wrong again.  I consider the
    bible that I have a research tool so that I can look at the funny stuff you
    send our way.  I had to, as you put it so well, deface it in order to make
    it seem more real or at least make it a bit funnier.  I've even done that to
    your posts.  I stayed awake for hours one evening using my Search & Replace
    function to alter your posts.

    When I finished and re-read your posts I had such a good laff that my tummy
    became sore.  This is the truth.  You can well imagine what words of your
    posts I replace most often and with what.

    By the way, if you want to have a private discussion with Ann then take it
    to mail but by placing them on the Main Board your are inviting comment from
    a Public Forum.

    You had a few good puns in your post to me and I appreciate that.  You do
    have a sense of humor.

    You can feel avenged when God and/or Jesus judges me because you just know
    in your heart that I will receive double the punishment that every other
    non-believer gets.  So cheer up, I'll get it in the end.

                                            Rod

    Message: 69581
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jeff/lode
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 04:00:11

    What constitutes magnetic north.  Is it a big mother load of iron from a
    meteor or something.  And if it is then I can see it shifting from its own
    weight.  It must be awfully strong in order to affect metal from so far
    away.

    Mail to John Cummings
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 04:01:06

    The next post was written off-line so capture it in your buffer and
    reply at your leisure.
                                    Rod

    Mail to John Cummings
    Date: 09/14/90  Time: 04:01:55

    Speaking of 9 volts of determinable electricity in the human body in my
    previous post I failed to add a thought I had pertaining to the discussion.

    Five or so years ago I had a Motorola Portable Telephone with a
    touch-tone, membrane key pad.  It was also an intercom.  Anyway this
    radio/telephone with its Ni-Cad battery pack operated on 1 and a half watts
    of energy.  And it worked anywhere in the Phoenix valley that an FM
    transmitter would reach including some places in Paradise Valley and Falcon
    Field in east Mesa because that was pretty much a straight shot at the tower
    on South Mountain.

    But what I am saying is that 1 1/2 Watts could allow remote and clear voice
    transmission over long distances.  I don't know what amount of wattage the
    average body contains and I'm sure it varies but even so humans use what
    they have to transmit distress signals, happiness and contentment level
    signals and perhaps even specific messages.  But we humans for the most
    part, because it isn't a taught subject in general quarters, have not or
    have forgotten how to interpret the signals in total.  Simple messages can
    easily be felt from those we are close to but get around a stranger and
    many problems are present.

    A person has to be very flexible and super aware in order to correctly
    identify electrical signals from total strangers unless circumstances
    dictate a quick meeting of the minds.

    These apparent minute electrical signals that each animal generate and
    expound throughout thier environment are being received by others of all
    varieties and species.  Whether they can be interpreted or not is quite
    another matter altogether.  Usually they can't be or I should say they
    aren't by the persona on their outer shell.  But deep within lies a chamber
    of mind that all senses lead to.

    This is the main source of thought and even though it hears and under-
    stands many things of itself it doesn't mean that everyone will comprehend
    in their conscience mind.  Some of us are allowing ourselves to be
    distracted by our hobby, belief system, or delving deeper and deeper into
    books when the answers take modern thought based on what we have previously
    learned and are now learning.  I am specifically talking about Bibles.

    One book says that everything was created by one entity.  Some believe
    this theory.  If this were so then how is that belief germane to living?  It
    isn't.  If it were so then why would IT want any sort of recognition?  It
    wouldn't or shouldn't unless it was suffering from megamania.

    If it were true that we were created then this creator hopefully would
    want to see what it 'made' have a good time.  I know I want those my wife
    and I made to have a good time.  I would not want and would feel embarrassed
    by any of them trying to worship me or Jasmine.  I know what each of little
    ones want and they do not have to pray to me.  I know what each of them need
    and it doesn't include great pain and suffering like so many children and
    adults experience on a continual basis.

    All life is equal everywhere in the universe and the lifeforms you see
    around you are, in effect, more closely, proximity wise, related to you and
    I than something 100 million light years away.  Therefore we all should
    treat each other as close relatives, brother and sister and yonder gender in
    order to have a good world.  That would be what a god would like to see, at
    least a good god or shoud I say a fun god.  But Noooooooooo, we gotta have
    some monster who's knee deep into S & M and worse.

    We gotta, according to the many, have a god that not only wants but needs
    worship as well.  One that likes deep dark, bloody and cruel soap operas for
    amusement, I assume.

    Oh, he says, LOOK, I have made a good world with good people, I have
    succeeded at something nice.  Instead of:  What a shitpot, people killing
    all sorts of the beautiful things I made including each other.  What a pity,
    perhaps I'll just recycle the shit into something more pleasant.  Oh lookie,
    there goes another of my creation going through a windshield and being
    decapitated.  Oh, there's a widow lady with three children and they are
    undernourished and hungry and the cuppard is bare.  Too bad, they should
    have prayed to me harder.

    We're all god in that our potential, given the sum of eternity is unlimited
    and once, perhaps, we free ourselves from the fleshy body and from the pull
    of this planet then perhaps we can live free.  Because it is too much to
    ask that mankind wake up and realize that it is actually more fun to have
    fun that to not have fun.  And it's also cheaper.

    One basic problem that we in this country and others around the world are
    experiencing is our basic system of operation.  Take the U.S. for example,
    we started out quite a while ago with capitalist ideas.  Nothing wrong in
    that especially not at first but the deterioration of a system is based upon
    its weaknesses or limitations.  We are forced by our laws to continue
    playing this system as well as we can.  It is gung ho to every capitalist
    and it is to the point now where the system is no longer practical or
    helpful to play.
                                    Rod

Content of this site is © Mark Firestone or whomever wrote it. All rights reserved.