Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Dr. Emmanuel Wu)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: to Paul DuBois
Message-ID: <890@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Apr-85 10:42:28 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.890
Posted: Thu Apr 11 10:42:28 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Apr-85 03:22:26 EST
References: <869@uwmacc.UUCP>
Organization: STRONGARM COLLECTION AGENCY:  We have no slogan
Lines: 28
Xref: watmath net.religion:6623 net.religion.christian:613

> It wasn't expired on my machine.
> 
> Your presumptions were clear.  You had to have had some idea about
> what talking to God meant in order to write your article.  And your
> belief system doesn't foster notions of a diety.  Hence the irony.

Double irony.  It is your very presumptions about religious experiences
actually BEING instances of "talking to god" that were the original
subject.  Assume god.  Assume it's talking to you. ...

> And what's this volunteering stuff?  Did I say that?

I thought you had joined the fair Gary Samuelson and the lovely "charles"
Wingate in vowing never to speak or listen to me again, openminded foe
of atheism that you are.  (It seems Paul Dubuc has wittingly or unwittingly
joined their ranks, since I have not heard a reply from him lately in our
discussion on my "Logic" article---by the way, while it lasted, it was
the ONLY discussion on the topic to stick to the issues and not stray into
"I don't like 'your' definition of religion" nonsense)

> Pshaw.  Presumptions explained above.

> Answered above.

Isn't that always the case with you?  :-)
-- 
Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen.
					Rich Rosen    pyuxd!rlr