### Apollo BBS Archive - July 18, 1987

    *=* Journey to a SIG *=*

    *=* $tatus Club Bulletin Board entered *=*

    Message: 1561
    Author: $ Mike Howerton
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Books
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 05:36:40

    Well, I went shopping for books today.
    I picked up a new  one from Piers Anthony and a couple old
    ones that I had read but wanted in hard back.
    I got a copy of the original  Dracula.  (Supposed to be great to read
    in a  dark house when you are home alone).
    I also picked up this wierd little paperback called 'The Long Walk' by
    this guy called Richard Bachman.
    Anyone ever hear of him????

    Message: 1562
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Mike Howerton
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 09:16:55

    Ha - who are you kidding?? You know thats Stephen King!!

    Message: 1563
    Author: $ Robert Simpson
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: Piers Anthony
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 14:16:19

    "Out Of Phaze" the 4th book of the "Apprentice Adept" trilogy (!) is out in
    hardback as of April of this year,
    "Weilding a Red Sword" the 4th book in the series of "Incarnations of
    Immortality" is in hardback, and will be out in paperback in September, if I
    recall...
    "Being a Green Mother" the 5th and last book in the "Incarnations of
    Immortality" will be out in hardback (I think) in September.

    Anyone read David Eddings?  His most recent work is his new five-set series
    entitled "The Mallorean".  It picks up right where his last five-set series
    "The Belgariad" left off.  The first book is out in hardback entitled,
    "Guardians of the West."

                       Robert

    Message: 1564
    Author: $ Mark Adkins
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Robert Simpson
    Date: 07/19/87  Time: 01:37:26

    Want to buy the first hardcover edition (it's British) of Edding's "Castle
    of Wizardry"...cheap? Somebody gave it to me as a gift a while back, and I
    just don't feel interested in reading it.

    *=* Journey to a SIG *=*

    *=* Late Night Bulletin Board entered *=*

    Message: 1117
    Author: $ Mark Adkins
    Category: Yawn...
    Subject: ROD
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 03:26:30

    Rod is trying to brainwash me into becoming a communist dupe. His
    interrogation techniques are most effective. Right
    now, I am being forced to look at pictures of Michael James, who, by his own
    admission, may not exist. I don't know how much more I can take before I
    start spouting propaganda...

    Message: 1118
    Author: $ Dean McCarron
    Category: Yawn...
    Subject: Movies. . .
    Date: 07/19/87  Time: 00:00:59

    Well, I was kinda leaning towards Snow White (aren't we all, says
    Letterman. . .)  This might be a little too graphic though: as I pointed out
    in a letter to Traci, Prince Charming kisses Snow White while she is
    sleeping and WITHOUT her consent.  Shame, shame, on Prince Charming.

    (Yawn) Sorry I'm not on more, but now that I actually (well, not actually,
    but kind of) work now, I get pretty tired.

    Dean

    Message: 1119
    Author: $ Zak Woodruff
    Category: Chit-Chat
    Subject: last
    Date: 07/19/87  Time: 01:08:20

    No need to apologize, Dean.  We understand how it is.  Go get 'em.

    *=* Journey to a SIG *=*

    *=* Bulletin Board entered *=*

    Message: 45172
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Cliff
    Date: 07/17/87  Time: 13:07:56

      I am doing nothing more than what the Xtians do to those who don't believe
    as they do.  Groups of them lay in wait for people to harp on. I have been
    verbally attacked man a time.  In fact, these so called people come to your
    door to spread thier beliefs.
    Cliff, I am just trying to help those less fortunate, really!
      As you know, I am a sharing person and when I find a good thing I like to
    spread it around.  You and Jim are in error and I'd like to see you guys
    come out of it with a more advanced belief.
      Between, Adkins, Lippard, Petrisko, and others we are just trying to help.
    It is like 'mind' over superstition, so to speak.
    It is like we are on the Star Ship Enterprize and we are exploring this
    planet and we find you guys and we are going against the rules of the
    non-interference directive and helping anyway, probably because we are, like
    you, trapped on the same planet, in your silent, dark well of ignorance.
    (and apathy)
      We love you, really do, so lay that bible down and go find a good science
    book, curl up with Sandy and get nude.
      We pray for your heathen souls even though we suspect they will burn
    everlastingly because that is the kind of people we are, dude!
                                    Love/Hate
                                    Rod

    Message: 45173
    Author: Billi Idyll
    Category: My Dinner with...
    Subject: Tom Leykis and God
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 06:22:49

            God had excused himself (something about using the little demi-god's
    room) when Tom Leykis walked into the resturaunt.  I waved to him and
    invited him over to the table.  "Sit down, Tom."
            Tom took one of the table's empty seats and looked over the massive
    spread of food clustered around God's half of the table.  "That's an
    OUTRAGEOUS amount of food."
            I smiled at the atheist.  "I'm having dinner with God, and that's
    what he ordered.
            Leykis laughed and shifted over to that chair.  "God doesn't exist,
    Billi.  He won't be coming back."
            I nearly choked when the God returned to the table.  "Hi, Tom, I'm
    God."
            Leykis grinned.  "Sure you are.  Prove it."
            "OK," God said.  He reached into the back pocket of his flowing robe
    and produced a greenish piece of plastic.  "See, Tom, it says Member since
    year 1."
            "Unbelieveable!" Tom stared at the deity as he sat down.  "Wanna do
    a Talk show?"
            God thought for a half second.  "OK, but only if I can be on
    Dial-a-date."
            Tom sighed regretfully.  "Sorry, your standards are too high for
    Phoenix."
            God smiled.  "Guess again.  After 2,000 years, I'm not going to be
    that picky."

    Message: 45174
    Author: Billi Idyll
    Category: My Dinner with...
    Subject: God and Tom Leykis
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 06:36:24

            "So, tell me, God," Tom intoned as if setting a trap, "What do you
    think of the close minded, bigoted Ministers who preach intolerance in your
    name?"
            God pondered for a second, though I had the feeling he knew the
    answer and merely sought the best example he could for it.  "I think they're
    all close-minded bigots.  They have forgotten that before they became
    ministers or scholars, I made them MEN and WOMEN.  Heavens, I let them
    evolve up from primates..."
            "You admit EVOLUTION exists?" Tom exploded.
            God nodded.  "Sure."  God rested a hand on Tom's right arm.  "Don't
    you think, if I'd wanted to, I would have done a better job?  I mean, look
    at it.  Detached earlobes and attached earlobes, for example, are a detail I
    would have fixed if I'd just constructed men from whole cloth."
            I cleared my throat.  "What would you have done with the earlobe
    thing?"
            God smiled.  "I'd have restructured the ear totally.  No lobes and a
    point on each ear."  God lowered his voice.  "I'm a great fan of Star Trek."
            "No!" Tom and I exclaimed in hushed whispers.
            "Shhhh," God cautioned us as Jim White walked into the resturaunt.
    "He's got not sense of humor."
            I agreed.  "We should something about that."
            God nodded in agreement.  He got a twinkle in his eye and looked at
    the vast spread on the table.  "Let's stick him with our bill."

    Message: 45175
    Author: $ Alan Hamilton
    Category: Question?
    Subject: Sandy SYSOP
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 07:41:30

        In regards to sex and your job, in your current job, don't you have a
    more than professional relationship with the boss?

         /
     /  *  /  Alan
    *     *

    Message: 45176
    Author: $ Alan Hamilton
    Category: Religion
    Subject: [R|G]od
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 07:59:39

      Why am I not supporting my "brothers?"  Well, both my older and younger
    brothers are Mormons, so naturally I don't support them.  (Yes, I'm
    deliberately misunderstanding you.  I detest that use of the word
    "brother.")  Anyway, I made the objection that I did for the same reason I
    correct misstatements about the Mormon church.  Sure, I don't belong anymore
    and have no real reason to support them, but I don't like lies or erroneous
    deductions, even if they further a cause that I favor.
       You seem to fault me for not supporting my "brother" (BLEAH!) atheists.
    Being an atheist, I have my own private moral code, and I will support or
    attack whatever I please.  So there.  Nyah!  I won't conform to an atheist
    code of ethics any more than I will conform to a Christian one.  I might,
    just to spite you, push the Christian point of view and why you should have
    faith in our eternal Saviour, Jesus Christ.  Or I might argue for the Jews.
    Or maybe even the pagans.  In any case, I won't accecpt some guilt trip for
    failing to further the Cause.  In my opinion, most skeptics are rather
    obnoxious and insulting, and I would rather not be that sort of skeptic.

         /
     /  *  /  Alan
    *     *

    P.S.  My parents are quite Christian, and they aren't real pleased with they
    way I turned out.

    Message: 45177
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Alan
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 12:51:28

    Good message and now I understand more, thanks for the enlightenment.
    There is NO guilt trip at all.
    It is simply that we atheists have the power to help speed up evolution a
    wee bit and if we do then we can look for rewards.  No, not money, just a
    more sane world, that's all.
      Imagine that religion was dead, that no one had that need anymore.  Even
    if there was a god it wouldn't matter.  What matters is that people stop
    fighting about their petty differences and get on with working together to
    construct a good world.
      I appreciate your answer and can see where you are coming from, better,
    thanks for the message.
                                    Rod

    Message: 45178
    Author: $ Rod Williams
    Category: My Dinner with...
    Subject: Satan
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 13:07:56

    Satan sat down, slipped me an envelope containing $20,000 and ordered a
    shrimp coctail and a 'coke'.
      "Thanks", I said, "will I be getting the same every week", I asked.
       "If my boss okay's the project", said the Dark One.
      "Yer Boss", "I thought yo were the Boss of Darkness, I squealed.
      "Nah", He whines, "Never has been that way, from my very first
    rememberences I was under His thumb, doing His bidding"
      "Very interesting", says I, "Are you saying that you spend your life doing
    evil, but this evil has to be approved by a Higher Authority".
      "Evil", what are you talking about", pipes Satan, "Hell, I reformed long
    ago, almost 1200 of you years, I saw the error of my ways, it wasn't hard
    for The Creator to convince me, He can do miraclulous things, anything at
    all, anything, so He reformed me, saw that he almost made a mistake"
      "But, you are blamed for ALL evil, what's the deal", I inquired?

      "Easy, dude, that's simply, it is the human creations choice of reading
    material, they have been reading (and worshipping) the same volumn for 2000
    years, what do you expect, it's never been updated, how could they find out
    any new advancement?", pipes Satan.
      "Then why the $10,000?", I ask.
      "It's for Jim White, now he can afford a life", Satan laughs.
    I almost choke on my raw oyster, but it manages to slide down anyway, I take
    a gulp of my Pepsi then with a terrible laugh I spray it half way across the
    room.

    Message: 45179
    Author: $ Apro Poet
    Category: In search of
    Subject: Life
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 15:40:50

      Perhaps it is in this respect that language differs most
    sharply from other biologic systems for communication.
    Ambiguity seems to be an essential, indispensable element
    for the transfer of information from one place to another by
    words, where matters of real importance are concerned.  It
    is often necessary, for meaning to come through, that there
    be an almost vague sense of strangeness and askewness.
    Speechless animals and cells cannot do this.  The
    specifically locked-on antigen at the surface of a
    lymphocyte does not send the cell off in search of something
    totally different; when a bee is tracking sugar by polarized
    light, observing the sun as though consulting his watch, he
    does not veer away to discover an unimaginable marvel of a
    flower.  Only the human mind is designed to work in this
    way, programmed to drift away in the presence of locked-on
    information, straying from each point in a hunt for a
    better, different point.
      If it were not for the capacity for ambiguity, for the
    sensing of strangeness, that words in all languages provide,
    we would have no way of recognizing the layers of
    counterpoint in meaning, and we might be spending all our
    time sitting on stone fences, staring into the sun.  To be
    sure, we would always have had some everyday use to make of
    the alphabet, and we might have reached the same capacity

    Message: 45180
    Author: $ Apro Poet
    Category: In search of
    Subject: Life
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 15:42:34

    for small talk, but it is unlikely that we would have been
    able to evolve from words to Bach.  The great thing about
    human language is that it prevents us from sticking to the
    matter at hand.

    Message: 45181
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Rod..(Again)
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 17:55:23

            I am not part of a Christian GROUP "harping" on you or anyone.  I am
    just finding out why you are so rude to Christians...  So Rude in fact, that
    you have chased members away from this board.  You are educated enough that
    you can express your ideals with out the PROFANITY factor, so why don't you
    drop the insults...and post your "facts".   Or don't you have any?

    ClifFORD

    Message: 45182
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Alan on the Boss
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 17:56:17

            But SANDY is the "BOSS"....

    ClifFORD

    Message: 45183
    Author: $ Jim Lippard
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Jim White/KHEP
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 18:31:35

    Today in your debate with Dennis McKinsey you argued that "perfect does not
    equal sinlessness".  I would agree that they are not coextensive, but
    perfect quite clearly entails sinlessness by any reasonable definition of
    "perfect".  "Perfection" is being without flaw, and clearly the Christian
    notion of sin is that of a flaw.  Therefore I think you have not at all
    resolved the contradiction that the Bible both says all men have sinned and
    that some men of history have been perfect.
       Since you are saying that sinlessness is not entailed by the term
    "perfect", you must be using some nonintuitive definition of the word.  What
    do you mean by the word "perfect", and why do you think that your definition
    is the one intended by the Bible in its descriptions of Noah and Job?

    Message: 45184
    Author: $ James White
    Category: Answer!
    Subject: Lippard on Last
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 20:26:18

    I did not bring home my Hebrew lexical sources, but I will attempt to do so
    tomorrow so that I can provide you with the particular word used for
    "perfect" and its usage elsewhere in Scripture.  I know that there are
    Hebrew terms for "holy" (which would be the particular idea of "without
    sin") and without flaw, and obviously those words are not used of Job nor
    Noah.  Noah sinned - we are told as much.  Job eventually admitted his sin
    (somewhere around chapter 38 or so) and both offered sacrifices - why offer
    sacrifices if you are sinless?  I have to wonder.  By the way, Jim, what is
    your comment on McKinsey's unwillingness to admit that Jesus and Paul did
    NOT disagree on the wording of the 6th Commandment?

    Message: 45185
    Author: $ James White
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Lippard 2
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 20:28:02

    I posted a letter last week relevant to Jim Lippard's book
    "Fundamentalism is Nonsense."  I now take the time to begin
    posting criticisms of his work.
         First, some basics should be put forward.  Jim's book
    utilizes ultra-liberal bibilical "sholarship" as its very
    basis.  People like G.A. Wells (a professor of German) is
    hardly middle of the road, that's for sure!  Neither is
    Dibelius!  Indeed, one term that could never be used of Jim's
    selection of sources and materials is "unbiased."  Also im-
    portant to notice is the fact that the viewpoints expressed by
    these men reflects the 19th century German rationalism that
    has been discredited and out of date for nearly a century in
    Biblical studies.  These men came up with theories and then
    ignored facts to maintain them.  An example would be Jim's
    comments on page 5 ("Accurate copying is also irrelevant to
    the fact that there were established doctrines about Jesus
    developed early in the first century to which the New Testament
    writers conformed.") and on page 31 ("Use of this information
    results in dating the earliest of these letters between 80
    and 90 CE...most of the rest between 90 and 110 CE...with
    2 Peter around 130 CE.")  There are many problems with these
    theories.  First, they are based on the assumption that the
    documents themselves are lying about who wrote them.  Second,
    the statement that the New Testament writers conformed to...

    Message: 45186
    Author: $ James White
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Lippard3
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 20:29:00

    preexisting doctrines is backwards - the doctrines were formed
    by the New Testament writers, not vice-versa.  It is pure
    speclation to say anything else.  Also, the most devastating
    evidence comes  in the form of raw data - every decade brings
    earlier and earlier evidence of the early dating of the NT
    documents.  Indeed, a controversy continues to brew (which
    most liberal scholars avoid like the plague) about 7Q5, a
    fragment seemingly from the gospel of Mark, found in Cave 7
    at Qumran.  This would push the date of Mark to before 60 AD.
    The liberal datings would, of course, fall apart in such a
    climate, so they simply avoid the issue as much as possible.
    Paul's letters date no later than 65 (F.F. Bruce puts Galatians
    at 48) and they represent an extremely high level of theological
    development (Philippians 2:5-11; 1 Cor. 15:1-12; Colossians 1;
    Ephesians - all of it).  John A. T. Robinson toward the end of
    his life argued that all of the NT books were written before
    AD 70, and someone as "unconservative" as C.H. Dodd has admitted
    that there simply is no reason whatsoever to say that any of the
    books of the New Testament were written later.  Only pre-
    suppositions make anyone say anything else.
         Having said that, I will try (though it would be more
    organized to do it otherwise) to address topics in the order
    they are presented in the book.

    Message: 45187
    Author: $ James White
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Lippard4
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 20:30:04

         On page 6 of "Fundamentalism is Nonsense" under the sub-
    title "Death of Adam" we encounter the following:  "In Genesis
    2:17, God says that if Adam or Eve eat from the tree of the
    knowledge of good and evil, he or she would die that day.
    Although Adam and Eve both ate the fruit in Genesis 3:6, Genesis
    5:5 says that Adam did not die until he was 930 years old."
        Here was have a classic example of not allowing the Bible
    to speak for itself.  I would hope that Jim would not argue
    that the Bible clearly presents the death that Adam suffered
    as being a separation from God - a spiritual downfall (as Adam's
    actions in the story of the Fall clearly show).  The death
    he died that day (spiritual) led eventually to the physical
    death he died 900+ years later.  The above supposed problem
    assumes at its core the proposition that death in the Bible
    only refers to physical death, an unwarranted belief indeed.
         On the same page (6) we encounter the ages old question of
    whom Cain married.  Jim says, "If God did not create further
    humans, then he effectively required sin."  Not so, friend.
    There was no law against marrying one's sister when there were
    a grand total of less than 20 people around anyway.  Then Jim
    says that if God did create other humans, then they would not
    be guilty of original sin.  But since God's decree of original
    sin was a judicial one, why would this be so?  Maybe you should
    look more into the doctrine of original sin.

    Message: 45188
    Author: $ James White
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Lippard5
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 20:30:58

        And finally (on this point) Jim says that if God did not
    create other humans, where did the multiple races come from?
    As he states, "...but multiple races are certainly significant
    changes and demonstrate some form of evolution."  No, it dem-
    onstrates some form of natural selection, a mechanism I am
    very familiar with and fully endorse as being highly compatible
    with the creation model.  Natural selection does NOT equal
    evolution.
        In another area that is related somewhat to science, on page
    7 of FIN Jim states relevant to the flood narrative, "There are
    approximately 1.12 million species of animals and .5 million
    species of plants on the planet..."  The problem here of course
    is that Jim is placing modern definitions of "species" on a
    book written thousands of years ago, which is hardly correct.
    The term "kind" does not equal species, and I have no problem
    with the idea of "speciation" in its strictest sense.  You have
    Great Danes and you have Collies and etc. and etc. and each can
    mate with the other.  A dog is a dog.  At any rate, each
    according to its "kind" does not mean that there were 1.12
    million pairs of animals on the ark.  Such is unreasonable.

    Message: 45189
    Author: $ Ann Oudin
    Category: Religion
    Subject: James White/please
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 21:20:32

    PLEASE, James, go to the Christian SIG. board.!!!! --- ANN

    Message: 45190
    Author: $ James White
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: Ann
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 21:56:28

    Given that these posts are about Jim Lippard's book, and Jim Lippard is an
    atheist, and Jim Lippard is not allowed in the Christian SIG board, why
    would I bother?

    James>>>

    Message: 45191
    Author: $ James White
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Lippard6
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 21:57:19

    **Note - I have not intention of entering into debate on each
    and every post I am writing on Jim's book.  I am doing this
    primarily for the interest of those who would like to see some
    kind of reply to Jim's information, and I am also doing it for
    Jim's benefit.  I imagine he would like some input from the
    "enemy" camp as he is re-writing his work this summer.

         On page 7 of FIN Jim says, "According to Genesis 11:26,
    Abram's father, Terah, was 70 years old at Abram's birth."
    He then goes on to show how this is contradictory with Gen.
    12:4 and Gen. 11:32.  The problem is, Gen. 11:26 does NOT
    say that Terah was 70 years old when Abram was born - it says
    he was seventy years old when "he became the father of Abram,
    Nahor, and Haran."  Now, obviously, these guys weren't tri-
    plets!  Therefore, it is only speculation to say that Abram
    was the first to be born of the three (especially in light of
    two factors - first, Haran died first of the three (Gen.
    11:28) and second, Abram's being listed first is probably
    due to his prominence, not due to his order of birth).
    Therefore, the supposed "contradiction" is easily explained.

    Message: 45192
    Author: $ James White
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Lippard7
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 21:58:16

         On page 7 in FIN we have the assertion that the fact that
    Isaac was Abram's "only-begotten" son is in contradiction with
    the fact that Abraham also had Ishmael by Hagar.  This kind of
    thing has always amazed me, as it assumes that the writer could
    not remember from one moment to the next what in the world he
    was writing about.  Anyway, the answer again lies in the usage
    of the term "only-begotten."  It does not refer to the idea of
    only one son - it refers to the special position enjoyed by that
    son.  Two terms are used in this way - only begotten (GR: mono-
    genes) and firstborn (GR: prototokos).  NEITHER have a primarily
    temporal aspect to them as used in the NT.  The Hebrew term used
    in Genesis (and the term used in Hebrews) does not exclude other
    children - it rather points to the uniqueness of the position of
    the child in question.  Isaac was the son of promise, and in that
    sense was Abraham's "only-begotten" son.  Errors of this kind
    could be avoided by taking some classes in Hebraisms and
    backgrounds, etc., something that Jim as well as others such
    as Dennis McKinsey know precious little about.  Indeed, McKinsey
    will not even allow the cultural backgrounds to enter the
    discussion, a sad fact indeed.

    Message: 45193
    Author: $ Apollo SYSOP
    Category: Religion
    Subject: Ann on Jim White
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 22:19:08

            Ann, Jim Lippard is not a member of the CHRistian SIG, so James
    White needed to use the PUBlic board...   OK?

    ClifFORD

    Message: 45194
    Author: Daniel Sloan
    Category: Hard/Software
    Subject: RUNTIME
    Date: 07/18/87  Time: 22:54:28

    I'M IN DESPERATE NEED OF AN APPLE II SERIES VERSION OF RUNTIME.*
              THANKS,
                     DANIEL SLOAN

    Message: 45195
    Author: $ David Burkhart
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: James White
    Date: 07/19/87  Time: 00:39:41

    Thanks for going to the effort to answer Jim Lippard's points.
    It puts you way ahead of people like Sue Joan who say "We don't have to
    refute his silly arguements."

    Message: 45196
    Author: $ David Burkhart
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: For James White
    Date: 07/19/87  Time: 00:52:29

    Creationism Versus Evolution
    As taught in Texas Public Schools
    (From the Satiricon:Creationism Bashed)

    Adam and Eve, and Cain and Abel
    Were sitting around the dinner table
    When little abel began to grouse:
    "Why don't we ever go to grandma's house?"

            Little did Abel know
            That he had no grandmother, even though
            Subsequent people, like me and you
            Would have not one grandmother, but two

                    So Eve and Adam had to explain
                    The facts of life to Abel and Cain;
                    Eve, putting Abel in his crib
                    Told how she'd come from Adam's rib.

    Then Adam told the boys his story:
    How he'd been made in a blaze of glory,
    And then how eve had been created
    And how, on their first date, they'd mated.

    Message: 45197
    Author: $ David Burkhart
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: more
    Date: 07/19/87  Time: 00:53:09

            "That's how you boys were born," he said,
            "So now before you go to bed
            "You know it takes both man and wife
            "To join to make new human life."

                    "If that's the case it's pretty plain
                    "We'll both need girl-friends," muttered Cain,
                    "But until Eve again gives birth
                    "We two are the only kids on earth!"

    So Eve told Adam: "Let's try, and maybe
    "We can create a human baby.
    "Then Cain and Abel can do the rest
    "Even though it'll be incest!"

            A girl was born.  Thanks to a brother
            She soon became the second mother.
            Then further births follow apace
            As they begat the human race.

    Message: 45198
    Author: $ David Burkhart
    Category: Chit Chat
    Subject: last
    Date: 07/19/87  Time: 00:53:41

                    Yes, that's the story of creation
                    Accepted without hesitation
                    'Til Darwin claimed we came from apes
                    Who evolved to our present shapes.

               Did Adam or Orang-utan
               Father the race of modern man?
               The chances are we'll never know --
               It happened many years ago.

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