Feed on Posts or Comments 26 November 2014

Christianity Admin on 17 Jan 2007 07:41 am

Are Christians idiots?

I realize that this sounds like a intentionally provocative question, but instead of being provoked, let’s look at the dictionary definition of the word “idiot”:

    Id-i-ot: an utterly foolish or senseless person.

Using that definition as our guide, can we find evidence to support a link between belief in the Christian God and idiocy?

The first piece of evidence would have to be the story of Noah’s flood. In the Bible’s book of Genesis, chapter 6, we find this:

The LORD saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. So the LORD said, “I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth – men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air – for I am grieved that I have made them.”

In Christian mythology, God is supposed to be all-knowing and all-loving. Yet, in this passage, an all-knowing God is somehow surprised by his own creation, and an all-loving God decides that mass extermination of all humans and animals is the only solution to the problem.

What can we say about people who worship an heinous, horrific God like this? Is it ever appropriate to worship a being who senselessy murders millions? Are Christians utterly foolish to “worship” an absurd “god”?

The second piece of evidence would be the fact that God’s mass-murdering tendencies are not limited to this single event. For example, in Exodus, Chapter 12, God kills the first born children and livestock of the Egyptians. To quote the Bible: “At midnight the LORD struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up during the night, and there was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead.” Are Christians utterly foolish to worship a God who would kill thousands of innocent children?

The third piece of evidence would be the Christian tendency to ignore the obvious. In the book of John, chapter 12, Jesus says, “I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.” This is a simple, straightforward statement by Jesus. It is not taken “out of context.” Its sentiment is echoed many times by Jesus throughout the Gospels:

  • If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer. [Matthew 21:21]

  • If you ask anything in my name, I will do it. [John 14:14]

  • Ask, and it will be given you. [Matthew 7:7]

  • Nothing will be impossible to you. [Matthew 17:20]

  • Believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. [Mark 11:24]

Yet these verses are obviously, provably, undeniably false. If they were true, we could pray to God to heal amputees, and the amputated limbs would spontaneously regenerate.

Are Christians utterly foolish to worship Jesus, who is supposedly one-third of a perfect, all-powerful, all-knowing being, when it is obvious that what he is saying is wrong?

A fourth piece of evidence can be seen in the Christian belief in the power of prayer. True Christians pray to God throughout the day for dozens of trivial things. They will pray to God that they arrive at appointments on time. They will pray to God to help find lost keys. They will pray to God for a raise at work, or for help with conceiving a child. Christians completely endorse this kind of thinking:

    “What are you praying for today? Is someone you love sick? Are you having problems with your spouse? Are you or your spouse suffering from an illness or an addiction? Are you hoping for a job transfer, or a positive result on a pregnancy test? Are you anxious about starting a new career? Having financial trouble? Don’t give up. God is faithful. Trust Him, in the little things and in the big. He cares, and He is there. Don’t lose hope. A miracle of your very own could be right around the corner.” – Christianity.com

When one of these trivial prayers is “answered”, Christians praise God and give thanks for their “blessings”. They will do that despite the fact that, according to UNICEF, 10 million children die of starvation on planet earth every year. In other words, Christians believe that their God is so cool that he will help them find their lost car keys. At the same time, they completely ignore the fact that their God is so horrific that he lets millions of children starve to death. Are Christians utterly foolish to believe in a superstition that is so obviously ridiculous?

What other examples can you think of? Please leave them in the comments below. Or, if you are a Christian, please explain these four examples in a more favorable light.

105 Responses to “Are Christians idiots?”

  1. on 17 Jan 2007 at 1:03 pm 1.Thomas Fahy said …

    The Burden of Reason

    To see the world as it is. I am of the conviction that this is the aim of reason. Reason, by virtue of its requisite suspension of faith, engenders consensus among those that would employ it. That is, reason enables men to assess the world with standardized utilities; utilities capable of neutralizing disparities that arise throughout the course of arguments. What are these utilities enabled by reason? They are logic and rationality.

    These are the utilities of a sovereign mind (a reasoning mind) that alone are capable of determining what is true. In argumentation theory, ‘reason’ is understood not only as the ability to employ logic and rationality in the service of an argument, but also as the very basis of an argument; the cause of the argument. Hence, the common usage of ‘reason’ in everyday speech: “That was the reason for my argument.” Reason, then, must make appeals to logic and rationality throughout the course of an argument; reason assumes an effect, but must consult logic and rationality in order to determine the cause.

    WWGHA’s recent post, “Are Christians Idiots?” raises many salient points that reveal the failure of Christian dogma to concord with the tenets of argumentation theory, and consequently, the failure to honor the burden of reason, which may be understood as the defense of effects by demonstrating the provability of their cause. Instead, Christian dogma historically proscribes causal relationships, effectively censuring logic and rationality. This is the method whereby which the Christian scholar has excised reason from debates relating to the inherent efficacy of faith.

    The reasoning mind, utilizing logic, will approach the WWGHA post in the following way: It will perceive the content of the post dispassionately; implicitly understood is the fact that the author has brought to bear upon the post a logic-argument of his own, one that may or may not match the reader’s. That logic-argument resulted in the following premise-by-implication (evidenced from the content): Christians are idiots. The author rationalized this premise by the evidentiary method, illustrating effects by demonstrating the provability of their cause. The author, in this sense, honors the burden of reason. Because the author has honored the burden of reason, facilitating reason with evidence, the reader can respect the logic with which the original premise was rationalized. This is the hallmark of intellectual honesty in scholarship of any sort.

    Logic, employed by a reasoning mind, simply asks that the burden of reason be honored. In the WWGHA post, the author lends the following as an example in order to defend his premise that there is much in Christian dogma that may be described as senseless and foolish: Genesis, Chapter 6: “The LORD saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time…etc.” The author’s example illustrates the sometime excesses of the Old Testament. It also serves to illustrate the benightedness of Christian scholarship, its difference to faith and its pogromatic excision of reason from debate. That is, Genesis and its scholars do not appeal to sovereign minds that would ask that a statement be examined in the light of causality, that the world may be perceived as it is rather than through a veil of myth. I believe it is the author’s claim that it is foolish to proscribe reason at the expense of the true. The true being an understanding of the world as it is: reason obviates faith.

    Perhaps one of the most important objectives of logic via the reasoning mind is this obviation of faith, as reason alone is capable of furnishing all of humankind with a language that is intent upon discovering what is true. Reason does not, contrary to popular opinion, rape life of mystery and man’s capacity for agape. Rather, it enhances humankind’s capacity to study the world and the universe of which it is a component in a dispassionate and humble way—faith, not reason, is delimiting. Logic makes plain the criteria that humankind must appraise if it is to endure as a race without undue abridgements of personal freedoms. And argumentation, facilitated by language, is the tool that we all have at our disposal to reach a consensus about the moral imperatives of humankind on earth. Reason is the fruit of consciousness. And by forgoing consciousness by championing a faith born of a suspended intellect, would result in the effective condemnation of reason. The WWGHA posts are indeed engendering debate and I feel fortunate to have the opportunity to participate. Reason is indeed my aim, my cause, for it exacts its own reward: peace; it offers humankind the tools with which to see the world as it is, not as it wishes it were. Reason sublimates the differences that arise among men of many faiths. But those faiths are doomed to destroy one another that forgo reason.

    Thomas Fahy

  2. on 17 Jan 2007 at 3:00 pm 2.Loi P said …

    Hooray Fahy!
    Here’s my view on it- Christians aren’t the idiots, it’s their “God” that is.

  3. on 17 Jan 2007 at 3:47 pm 3.Thomas Fahy said …

    Thank you, dear Loi P. Correction: In the fifth paragraph, “difference to faith” should read defference to faith.”

  4. on 17 Jan 2007 at 6:31 pm 4.Sam said …

    You left something out. In example 1, the flood never happened as described in the Bible. There is ample evidence to prove this. The story is a lie, yet Christians still worship their lying mass murderer.

    How idiotic is that?

  5. on 17 Jan 2007 at 7:45 pm 5.Loi P said …

    Hey Fahy, I don’t know if you’ll read this but do you have a blog or something of the like for me to read?
    I have another question- Do you write for a living? If you don’t, what do you do for a living?
    Thank you in advance.

  6. on 17 Jan 2007 at 8:25 pm 6.Thomas Fahy said …

    Loi P: Here is my Blog Address: http://www.arcadiafinancial.biz/blog. I actually trade stocks and currencies for a living, but writing is my first passion. I look forward to hearing from you.

  7. on 18 Jan 2007 at 3:53 pm 7.Loi P said …

    Erms…your blog isn’t showing up on my computer. What’s it’s title (so that I can look it up on google)?

  8. on 18 Jan 2007 at 3:59 pm 8.Loi P said …

    Forget it, I found your blog. Thanks Fahy.

  9. on 18 Jan 2007 at 4:03 pm 9.Thomas Fahy said …

    Hi, Loi P: Click on my name associated with any given post on WWGHA and you will be redirected to my Blog. If you have trouble, here is a link:

    “Arcadia Financial Blog”

  10. on 19 Jan 2007 at 7:07 am 10.Michael said …

    May I start by saying that you guys are stuck on the details and can not see the picture, or maybe you can not see the forest because of a tree?

    Here is the reason for me saying this:

    God and religion was supose to represent good, love, creativity and all the good parts of you. And what are you doing? Because someone wrote something you do not aprove with, in a book called bible, you can not see the rest of the story?
    Now, if you say you do not believe in God, and God represents everything I mentioned above, maybe you do not believe in yourself either. Why am I saying this? Because if you are kind with someone, if you love someone (I am sure you love your parents), if you are creative, that means God is inside you too. Actually your soul is a part of God.

    Now I will try to answer the main question “why won’t god heal amputees”. The answer is because they do not believe in it. Not in God, in themselves being cured.

  11. on 19 Jan 2007 at 8:43 am 11.Mushinronjya said …

    Michael says:
    “Now, if you say you do not believe in God, and God represents everything I mentioned above, maybe you do not believe in yourself either.”

    The problem here is your “if”. The word “god” does *not* represent goodness. It has represented conformity and violence all throughout history. It represents bigotry and hatred for others; which leads to violence and hurting. It is a word that separates people, that stops relationships sometimes before they even begin.

    So although it might seem nice to think that the word “god” represents goodness and love, it fails to do this. It can only offer pain and suffering to our species.

    Your soul and your god do not exist.
    Our species is better off without those beliefs.

    Your answer for why gods won’t heal amputees is pretty lame. You’re basically saying that no amputees at all have ever believed in a god and prayed for their limb back. Even if that was a requirement for a god to heal someone, you’re a fool for assuming something that.

  12. on 28 Jan 2007 at 3:20 pm 12.enfant said …

    I believe you start with a false premise. It is is true in the bible, in John 10:30 it says God is Love. however God is not just a one faceted being. Over and over in the bible, it refers to God as jealous, vengeful, and, get this, Pefect.

    when you take you dog to the vet to get shots, and it looks up at you with its big eyes and pleads with you “why are you doing this” it doesn’t understand that shots are nessesary. we are the dog. there is no way we can understand God’s purpose, our reasoning is incomplete to His.

    You have this idea of God skipping arund in daisies with his children happy and singing:) That is not Him.

    Because of darkness we can appreciated life. When i got the cast off my leg again and coul walk again, i had never appreciated it so much. I woiuld never appreciated life without accepting jesus into my life and leaving death.

    oh, and god answers all prayer. But he can choose to say NO

  13. on 29 Jan 2007 at 11:22 pm 13.Mushinronjya said …

    “when you take you dog to the vet to get shots, and it looks up at you with its big eyes and pleads with you “why are you doing this” it doesn’t understand that shots are nessesary. we are the dog. there is no way we can understand God’s purpose, our reasoning is incomplete to His.”

    Sorry buddy, but you can’t argue by analogy. That is fallacious.
    First off, the dog knows we exist, and that we are in control.
    We don’t a god exists and it is in control.
    Therefore, your analogy fails because it has to assume many things to begin with.

    “You have this idea of God skipping arund in daisies with his children happy and singing:) That is not Him.”

    Since this god is supposed to “love everyone”, and clearly doesn’t show it, you’re right!

    “Because of darkness we can appreciated life. When i got the cast off my leg again and coul walk again, i had never appreciated it so much. I woiuld never appreciated life without accepting jesus into my life and leaving death.”

    It’s true that as we are hindered in life, we appreciate it more. But that has little to do with a god existing.

    “oh, and god answers all prayer.”

    No, it doesn’t answer any.

  14. on 04 Feb 2007 at 4:39 pm 14.kahuna553 said …

    Hey Mushy, do you ever proof read what you write? Most of it is nonsensical, poor grammar, horrendous spelling. If you really want to represent a point of view you need to brush up on your all of these elements. Remember the author of this page is looking for intelligent and logical people to comment.

  15. on 04 Feb 2007 at 5:15 pm 15.Mushinronjya said …

    “Hey Mushy, do you ever proof read what you write? Most of it is nonsensical, poor grammar, horrendous spelling.”

    Um, I never put in bad grammar, and I always spell correctly. I rarely have to bother proof reading, because I do it right the first time.

    If you’re speaking about other people’s quotes “”, it’s me quoting them exactly. If they have bad grammar, I did not fix it.

    Please get a clue. Quotes should be obvious.

    I can’t believe you would say such a thing to me, of all people. I’m the master of spelling and grammar.
    Freakin butthead.

  16. on 04 Feb 2007 at 7:00 pm 16.mattstarrs said …

    Oh My God!!!!!!
    I am laughing so hard it hurts!!!

    I can’t believe you wrote:
    “Um, I never put in bad grammar, and I always spell correctly. I rarely have to bother proof reading, because I do it right the first time.”
    and you actually began the sentence with “Um”!

    And then to follow it up with:
    “I can’t believe you would say such a thing to me, of all people. I’m the master of spelling and grammar.”

    You are a flamin’ Megalomaniac!

    So let me help you see the light, Oh God of Grammar . . .

    “Freakin Butthead” should have read “Freakin’ Butthead”.

    Two posts ago you wrote:
    “We don’t a god exists and it is in control.”
    I assume that you meant “We don’t disbelieve that a god exists and it is in control.”

    No Mushy doesn’t proof read, because anything that requires an association with the word “proof” is more than he can bear!

  17. on 04 Feb 2007 at 7:54 pm 17.Mushinronjya said …

    ““Freakin Butthead” should have read “Freakin’ Butthead”.”

    It’s slang, and thus being so, can be spelled capped with a ‘ or not, it’s really not relevant.

    You’re an idiot.

    “Two posts ago you wrote:
    “We don’t a god exists and it is in control.”
    I assume that you meant “We don’t disbelieve that a god exists and it is in control.””

    I am 98% accurate. There is a 2% time I am not, when I’m rushing. Once in awhile people skip a word when they say it in their head.

    In any case, the person’s post was about people I’ve quoted “” that spell things incorrectly. He obviously didn’t understand that, and I corrected him.

    You are just sounding like a little 2 year old by even trying to confront me on this, son.

    People with imaginary friend mentality like yours are so childish.

  18. on 04 Feb 2007 at 8:19 pm 18.mattstarrs said …

    What’s with all the “son” or “kid” references? I have already told you that I am older than you.

    Do you think that you can cast a shadow over me by insinuating that I am too young to have valid points?

    I do admit my good looks make me of a more youthful appearance.

    Is it only me that can see the disparity between the statement:
    “I am 98% accurate. There is a 2% time I am not, when I’m rushing. Once in awhile people skip a word when they say it in their head.”
    and the statement:
    “Um, I never put in bad grammar, and I always spell correctly. . . I do it right the first time.”

    What a LAUGH!

    And where do you get off saying:
    “In any case, the person’s post was about people I’ve quoted “” that spell things incorrectly. He obviously didn’t understand that, and I corrected him.”

    Because I just checked kahuna553′s post, and that is definitely not what kahuna553 was saying.

    So who did say that . . . hmmm . . . where is that post . . . Oh look! It’s another one of Mushy’s false assertions that he is now trying to ascribe to someone else. Not the first time we have seen that, is it Mushy! Here it is:
    “If you’re speaking about other people’s quotes “”, it’s me quoting them exactly. If they have bad grammar, I did not fix it.”

    You seem to have missed the fact that kahuna553 did not confirm this assumption.

    You also overlooked the element that kahuna553 criticised you on about your posts being “Nonsensical”. I don’t blame you for not opposing him on that point. There’s no way you could squirm out of that one.

    If I was going to argue any point with kahuna553 it would be the statement that:
    “. . . the author of this page is looking for intelligent and logical people to comment.”

    That is arguable because the author allows you to continue. You could go into a rant about freedom of speech at this point, but the fact is “intelligent” and “logical” have been sacrificed and that altar, and it seems like it has been to the detriment of this site.

  19. on 04 Feb 2007 at 10:14 pm 19.Mushinronjya said …

    “What’s with all the “son” or “kid” references? I have already told you that I am older than you.”

    That’s pretty sad. Someone that has imaginary friends, and is older than me. Weren’t you supposed to give them up when you were a kid? I, however, never had any.

    “Do you think that you can cast a shadow over me by insinuating that I am too young to have valid points?”

    You just “sound” too young.

    “Because I just checked kahuna553’s post, and that is definitely not what kahuna553 was saying”

    I bet you are kahuna.
    The original claim was on my spelling and grammar, which is better than most. So it’s kind of ridiculous that the claim was ever made to begin with.

    You, however, will do anything to attack an atheist, since you have nothing to back up your theistic religion in this atheistic forum.

    matts..
    if you really are older than me in age, which I seriously doubt, then I feel sorry for you. You have imaginary friends, you don’t respect logic and reasoning because you don’t even feel they are necessary, and you throw tantrums.

    You are far from a noticeable intelligent person. And it’s all because you allowed this theistic dribble that you found out about to sink into your brain, without testing the information to begin with. You are now damned, for the rest of your life, unless you muster up the brain power necessary, to defend the indefensible. I do not envy your position, at all.

  20. on 05 Feb 2007 at 1:12 am 20.kahuna553 said …

    Wow, I didn’t think that I would cause such controversy. It was just a comment to help Mushy sound a little intelligent as he rages against God. Mushy, your arguments about Christian Faith are nonsensical. If a person wants to argue a point (pro or con) then that person should be well rounded on the subject and not just one sided, that is what makes good debate. You say that a person “can’t argue by analogy” what a ridiculous statement. Analogy is great for debate. Here, let me give you one; Atheists say that there is no God because they can’t see Him, hear Him, or touch Him. But I say Mushy, “You can’t see your brain but you still believe you have one.” Great analogy, wouldn’t you say?

  21. on 05 Feb 2007 at 4:21 am 21.mattstarrs said …

    Wow. Where do I begin? Or should the question be “why do I begin”?

    “I bet you are kahuna.”

    Wrong again goofball!

    I love this confession of “Ageism”. You have already shown so many other bigotted tendencies we shouldn’t be surprised.

    You said:
    “You just “sound” too young.”
    You are 31, I am 41 and I know people half your age with three times the intelligence! I don’t expect that by the time you are my age you will be any wiser because you are closed to all things that are not in harmony with your precarious worldview.

    Oh, and this was rich coming from you:
    “and you throw tantrums.”

    Isn’t that something I said about you on several occasions? Difference is that I reproduced several of your tantrums to make the point.

    And how about this one from the god of grammar . . .
    “You are far from a noticeable intelligent person.”

    That one really cracked me up!

    And whatever gave you the idea that I accepted Christianity “without testing the information to begin with.” Certainly nothing I said suggested that, and this statement is far from the truth. Are you just making things up again Mushy? Of course you are.

    Oh, look! It’s Mushy back peddling!!!
    First he says that his spelling and grammar is always perfect, then he has to eat humble pie and admit he is in fact less than perfect and settles for 98%. Of course a quick review of Mushy’s writing demonstrates that this is still a huge stretch so he tries for “above average” – perhaps even 51%???:
    “The original claim was on my spelling and grammar, which is better than most.”

    I don’t know Mushy. I think we need to put you in a room of pre-school kids if we want you to be above average.

    Seriously though, I must stop laughing long enough to comment on this:
    “Weren’t you supposed to give them up when you were a kid? I, however, never had any.”

    I too never had any theistic beliefs when I was a kid. I never really heard the Gospel in any great detail until I was about 19. As I already pointed out, I have encountered an overwhelming preponderence of evidence since I first believed. Not that any one on it’s own ought be offered as conclusive, but the weight of literally thousands of evidences has brought me to the position I hold today.

    None of those evidences were simply things I was told.

    Can you say the same about the things you believe?

  22. on 05 Feb 2007 at 5:08 am 22.mattstarrs said …

    Oh man.I am still laughing!

    The god of grammar said:
    “You are far from a noticeable intelligent person.”

    And of course, there couldn’t be more than one person that thinks your ridiculous, so you say:
    “I bet you are kahuna.”

    Wrong again Einstien!

    And then there’s the way you keep edging closer to a realistic appraisal of your writing skills. You go from:

    “Um, I never put in bad grammar, and I always spell correctly. . . I do it right the first time”

    to:

    “I am 98% accurate. There is a 2% time I am not”

    to:

    “my spelling and grammar, which is better than most.”

    At this rate it won’t be too long until you get to the truth and admit that your writing skills really are as bad as Kahuna and I have been trying to tell you.

    This whole bigotry thing of yours is getting tired. I challenged your Ageist discrimination with:
    “Do you think that . . . I am too young to have valid points?”

    To which you responded:

    “You just “sound” too young.”

    Which is essentially a confession that you believe that a persons age determines their ability to contribute a valid point in a debate. Problem with that is that we could find millions of people less than half of your age (you’re 31, right?) that are way more articulate, intelligent and insightful than you.

    And you probably ought to chat with a shrink about this one:
    “That’s pretty sad. Someone that has imaginary friends, and is older than me. Weren’t you supposed to give them up when you were a kid? I, however, never had any.

    That helps us understand your inability to think outside the box of your fixed position, no matter how nonsensical you need to be to cling to it.

    You have serious issues with your ability to process information. Might have some connection with the absence of normal childhood play patterns involving healthy doses of imagination.

  23. on 05 Feb 2007 at 9:43 am 23.Mushinronjya said …

    “Wow, I didn’t think that I would cause such controversy. It was just a comment to help Mushy sound a little intelligent as he rages against God. ”

    Listen, Matts, you’re not fooling anyone by logging in as another person.

    “You say that a person “can’t argue by analogy” what a ridiculous statement. Analogy is great for debate.”

    No, you cannot argue by analogy in a debate.
    You made an assertion, matts, and you didn’t back it up.

    “Here, let me give you one; Atheists say that there is no God because they can’t see Him, hear Him, or touch Him. But I say Mushy, “You can’t see your brain but you still believe you have one.” Great analogy, wouldn’t you say?”

    No, that is not a good analogy, Matts.
    We can see our brains just fine.
    We know they exist.
    Not the same for a deity.
    False analogy.

    When you give evidence for a god, you need to do so, matts. You can’t refer to something off-topic and hope to think you’re providing something.

  24. on 05 Feb 2007 at 9:43 am 24.Mushinronjya said …

    “You are 31, I am 41 and I know people half your age with three times the intelligence!”

    So it takes intelligence to have imaginary friends, as you do?

  25. on 05 Feb 2007 at 12:57 pm 25.kahuna553 said …

    Mushy, Mushy, Mushy, debate should never be reduced to name calling. Name calling starts when a person runs out of intelligent things to say! As for Matt being kahuna553 you are dead wrong. You sound like the Pharisees when they said that Jesus was Beelzebub. You know “The Devil” They said that Jesus was the devil casting the devil out of the young man who was possessed. (Matthew 9:33-34) The Pharisees were trying to make Jesus out to be two entities’ at the same time. You see Mushy I am one person and Matt is another therefore we can’t be the same person.

  26. on 05 Feb 2007 at 1:00 pm 26.Mushinronjya said …

    “I, however, never had any.“

    That helps us understand your inability to think outside the box of your fixed position, no matter how nonsensical you need to be to cling to it.”

    So you admit you have an imaginary friend?

    Because not having imaginary friends is a good thing.
    It’s great to have an imagination, but when you start to allow your imagination to replace an accurate interpretation of reality, then you have problems.

    That’s where you stand now.
    You have allowed your imagination to take over your idea of reality, and you think that somehow that is a virtue. It is not. This is you wanting to be “dreamy” and thinking you’re getting somewhere, thinking you’re being “inventive” and an “explorer”. You’re not. Think without believing, until you have evidence. This is what you need to learn, matts.

  27. on 05 Feb 2007 at 1:25 pm 27.Mushinronjya said …

    “Mushy, Mushy, Mushy, debate should never be reduced to name calling.”

    It isn’t reduced, matts, I use it in addition.
    It has to do with my intolerance for ignorance.
    I realize it’s not necessary, for the conversation, but it’s habit whenever I speak with individuals who don’t think very much at all, at a continued basis.

    In any case, don’t waste posts focusing on how someone comes across. Reply with content of what was addressed.

  28. on 05 Feb 2007 at 2:03 pm 28.kahuna553 said …

    Mushy, what do I have to do to convince you that I am not Matt?

  29. on 05 Feb 2007 at 2:27 pm 29.Mushinronjya said …

    “Mushy, what do I have to do to convince you that I am not Matt?”

    Don’t sound as ignorant as him?

  30. on 05 Feb 2007 at 5:05 pm 30.mattstarrs said …

    Dear intellectually incapacitated Mushy . . .

    Look at the times that I have posted, and then look at the times Kahuna has posted. If we are one and the same person we never sleep more than 4 or 5 hours.

    I am in Australia and I would guess that Kahuna is in the USA. Thats why between us we are posting all over the clock.

    If your analytical skills were a liitle sharper . . . say as good as my 12 year old daughter . . . you could have worked that out. The evidence was right before you but you failed to notice it! No wonder you’re an atheist.

    Further evidence would be our completely different writing styles. Just because we agree that you are nonsensical and belligerent.

    Now to a serious issue about the way your debate is undermined by your character.

    You say:
    “In any case, don’t waste posts focusing on how someone comes across. Reply with content of what was addressed.”

    What would you do if a Presidential Candidate had the policies you liked, but a track record of lying, cheating, bullying and falsifying evidence to support their policies? Would you vote for them?

    Or how about if they just came across completely inept. Would you have confidence in them? Would you look to them as a credible source of information?

    Of course not. Even if they were telling you the policies you wanted to hear, you can’t trust them that the policies are workable or that the incumbent even really believes that they are the best policies.

    Character is everything.

    You tell me not to point out your inconsistencies, but these are the foundation of your policies!

    You tell Kahuna:”In any case, don’t waste posts focusing on how someone comes across. Reply with content of what was addressed.”

    But Kahuna was doing you a favour, you are just too dumb to realise it.

    If you want to debate prove yourself a worthy advocate. So far all you have been good for is overwhelming evidence for theists to prove that intelligence is not a prerequisite for atheism.

    You haven’t introduced one single original argument to the debate. All you do is say “No” to the things you disagree with without any substantial justification.

    No wonder you are active on a site that is devoted to attacking christianity. You get spoon fed by the site webmaster, but just like you, he offers nothing new, only criticisms of christianity and the Bible.

    Haven’t you ever noticed that atheism even defines itself by what it is not? And what is that? Not a theist! Without theism you would have nothing to talk about. No original thought ever dwelt between your ears!

    And what happens when these atheist criticisms are shown to be lacking? Obscenities. Back peddling. Name calling. Smearing. Lying. Hiding posts you have placed on other sites. False accusations of your opponents. A complete and comprehensive display of bad character.

    As expected.

    Bad character.

  31. on 05 Feb 2007 at 8:19 pm 31.Mushinronjya said …

    “say as good as my 12 year old daughter”

    There is a young, 12 year old girl that listens to you say that it’s good to have imaginary friends? To not pursue reality? To give up logic? I feel sorry for her.

    “No wonder you’re an atheist.”

    I’m an atheist because there is no objective evidence for any deity. Atheism comes from using logic to its obvious extension. Something you give up and don’t promote to your daughter. You are harming yourself, your daughter, and all of mankind.

    You need to learn the importance of evidence.

    “What would you do if a Presidential Candidate had the policies you liked, but a track record of lying, cheating, bullying and falsifying evidence to support their policies? Would you vote for them?”

    False analogy. I don’t lie, cheat, or give false evidence

    “Of course not. Even if they were telling you the policies you wanted to hear, you can’t trust them that the policies are workable or that the incumbent even really believes that they are the best policies.”

    We are in a debate, we aren’t running for office. False analogy.
    In a debate, if you decide to interpret someone negatively, that’s your prerogative. However, that doesn’t invalidate the content they brought to the table. If you choose to invalidate it, that’s your irrational decision.

    “Character is everything”

    If that was so, we wouldn’t need debates.
    We could just “judge” who was right by how someone presented themselves.
    That’s not the way it works.

    “But Kahuna was doing you a favour, you are just too dumb to realise it.”

    I’m not the one with invisible friends, saying we should believe in stuff just because we can imagine it. I use logic, sir.

    “You haven’t introduced one single original argument to the debate. All you do is say “No” to the things you disagree with without any substantial justification.”

    I’m not the one with the positive assertions. You are. You say that there is a god, yet you have no evidence. Until you present such, then the skeptic position prevails. Hands down.

    “Without theism you would have nothing to talk about.”

    Without the ignorant widespread theism, we wouldn’t have the word atheism at all – you’re correct. It’s because that people have imaginary friends that we must find a way to label those that aren’t as gullible.

    Without theism, who knows how much further along, technology-wise, we would be today. Maybe we would have had the Internet by 1600. Who knows? I do know less killings, less violence would have gone on without theism. Theism hurts mankind. Big time.

    “he offers nothing new, only criticisms of christianity and the Bible.”

    That’s because there is nothing “new” about the buybull. It’s just mythology. Very old mythology.

    “Haven’t you ever noticed that atheism even defines itself by what it is not?”

    Atheism doesn’t define itself. It’s a word in our language that defines a lack of beliefs in gods.

    “And what happens when these atheist criticisms are shown to be lacking? Obscenities. Back peddling. Name calling. Smearing. Lying.”

    You get beat with all of your attempts at debating something that doesn’t exist, and then you think you can tell us that we are “lacking”? You have some balls, my friend.

    “Hiding posts you have placed on other sites.”

    You’re an idiot. That post is now viewable. I kept it secret for a short time that had nothing to do with you or anyone else. If you would read my page, you would see I’m far from someone who’s afraid to say what’s on my mind.

    You can argue until you’re blue in the face, but you still have imaginary friends to prove.

  32. on 06 Feb 2007 at 4:21 am 32.kahuna553 said …

    This is for you Mushy O god of logic… Being the intelligent person that you claim to be I hope that you will be able to understand what I am about to write.

    All the knowledge that is taught in our schools, colleges and universities has been gained through our Five Senses. It is what they call “Sense Knowledge”. Everything that you have learned has come from your senses. Sight; Touch; Smell; Hearing; Taste.

    Few of us have realized that the great body of knowledge that has been accumulated through the ages has come to us through the Five Senses. The human body has really been the laboratory for the testing and investigation of all human activities.

    Every step in the fields of Chemistry, Mechanics, Metallurgy, Medical, Mental Sciences, and the Arts has come from this one common source.

    The Five Senses, the humbled, abused, Senses, are the five servants that have been conveying knowledge of every sort and kind to the brain for it to classify, number, and file away for future use.

    It is said that Mr. Edison experimented more than three thousand times with the incandescent lamp before he arrived. Each mechanical invention no matter how small or insignificant you might think it is has gone through a series of experimentations and developments before any of them where able to be used by mankind.

    This will cause you to see the painstaking, patient research work that men have done in order to give us what we have today in the fields of Mechanics, Medicine, Science and so on. We should pay tribute to the hard working men who have given us the benefits of their labor in their respective fields.

    The Five Senses -Sight; Touch; Smell; Hearing; Taste, are parents of all this knowledge. But they are not always reliable. The senses become impaired by accident, carelessness, overwork, or dissipation, so we cannot always depend on them. They are not absolutely true. Their findings are continually being revised. They have limitations. Yet, what great ministers they have been. We should not for one moment, criticize them. But we know what their limitations are.

    They cannot know the beginning of things. They can only speculate when they arrive at the last frontier of experimentation.

    They know nothing of:
    The Reason for Creation
    The Reason and Origin of Man
    The Origin of Life
    The Origin of Motion
    The Origin of Matter
    The Origin of Force

    Standing on the edge of the last frontier of their limitations, the mind is unsatisfied. It craves knowledge, and so, unconsciously, it becomes speculative. It begins to evolve theories. Reason has no data, no absolute facts on which it can build. It can only dream and theorize.

    Dr. Darwin stood out on the last frontier of human experimentation. He had reached the very limit. The Darwinian theory of Evolution was born out of his lack of knowledge of the reason of creation, the origin of matter, of light, of motion, of gravitation. Darwin’s Sense Knowledge could not find God, so he could not believe in God. Because Sense Knowledge cannot find God, it can see the handy work of God and can see the design in creation, but it cannot find the Designer. Sense Knowledge can only take you so far, and when you can’t find answers all that are left is speculation and theory.

    There is a second kind of knowledge; it is called “Revelation Knowledge” or “Spiritual Knowledge”.

    There seems to be a lot of inconsistency in men who refuse to admit anything beyond the range of Sense Knowledge. You say Christians are idiots who mindlessly follow an imaginary God but yet you limit yourselves by attacking and criticizing things that you have no knowledge or understand of.

    What do atheists believe? Nothing!

  33. on 06 Feb 2007 at 10:20 am 33.Mushinronjya said …

    “They cannot know the beginning of things. They can only speculate when they arrive at the last frontier of experimentation.”

    I don’t know what kind of babble you’re bringing. When you copy/paste from a site, you should put in the site.

    We can know about the “beginning” of things through learning about the Universe. Don’t give such babble.

    “Standing on the edge of the last frontier of their limitations, the mind is unsatisfied. It craves knowledge, and so, unconsciously, it becomes speculative. It begins to evolve theories.”

    Yes, people want to know the answers. That’s one reason why people posit deities – because they think that it will solve their need to know.

    “The Darwinian theory of Evolution was born out of his lack of knowledge of the reason of creation, the origin of matter, of light, of motion, of gravitation.”

    Uh, evolution is a science that came about because of the evidence we ran into.

    “Darwin’s Sense Knowledge could not find God, so he could not believe in God.”

    Many people believe in a god without having evidence for one. It’s called gullibility and ignorance. It’s called having an irrational belief. To be without theism is to have a healthier worldview.

    I do not have unfounded beliefs, very good.
    Irrational beliefs are not a virtue, they are a curse.

    Yes, xians are idiots who are gullible and ignorant.

  34. on 06 Feb 2007 at 1:36 pm 34.kahuna553 said …

    Mushy, there you go with the name calling again. That seems to be your one true belief!

    “Yes, xians are idiots who are gullible and ignorant.” Yes I have nothing intelligent to say to kahuna so I’ll call him names. How sad you are. By the way Mushy, (the master of spelling) Xians is with a capital!

    You Mushy refuse to accept anything that you don’t understand. You have to see to believe, to touch, to taste, to smell, to hear. You are bound up by sense knowledge and you can’t escape.

    Evolution my man is a theory and not science. You had better go back and do a little more research. Evolution science changes every five to ten years as they study the fossil records. If you read an Evolution book from the sixties you will find it totally different from today’s books on Evolution! If I remember right, science is constant it never changes. Science experiments, collects data, documents its findings. At that point it does not change, unlike evolution which is a theory! Theory’s change as man speculates and guesses. Get over it Mushy, you are wrong and won’t admit it!

    “Revelation Knowledge” or “Spiritual Knowledge” is the only way to know God. You won’t find God in a science book; you will only find evidence of his existence which you will deny any way!

    The denial of Revelation Knowledge has been the down fall of the modern scholastic mind which owes its very existence and development to this Revelation. But you Mushy will never understand that. You are not a free thinker; you only believe what you read in a book. I don’t believe that you have ever had an original thought. You just spew out the pabulum that you are fed.

    As for me copying and pasting, I guess you can’t stand intelligence from a different point of view. I am my own man, with my own thoughts, and my own writing.

  35. on 06 Feb 2007 at 2:55 pm 35.Mushinronjya said …

    “Mushy, there you go with the name calling again. That seems to be your one true belief!

    “Yes, xians are idiots who are gullible and ignorant.””

    Yes, I suppose “idiot” was unnecessary. But gullible and ignorant are correct. They are not insults. Only “idiot” was.

    “Yes I have nothing intelligent to say to kahuna so I’ll call him names.”

    Wrong. You’re ignorant and gullible. Those aren’t names. That’s an accurate logical assessment based on the information you have provided the public here.

    “By the way Mushy, (the master of spelling) Xians is with a capital!”

    Not when I type it.

    “You Mushy refuse to accept anything that you don’t understand.”

    I understand more than you do.
    So how can you tell me I don’t understand something we’ve discussed thus far? Oh wait, you’re going to simply say that I don’t. You don’t actually point out what I’ve said, how I’ve said it, and thus then showed me how the real meaning is, thereby showing me the misunderstanding. No, you just lay a blanket down and say I “don’t understand” something. Very bad debating.

    “You are bound up by sense knowledge and you can’t escape.”

    We all are. That’s what we have to know reality from fiction. You say it like it’s a negative?

    “Evolution my man is a theory and not science.”

    No, evolution is a science that entails many theories. Evolution is a change in the gene pool of a given species over generation(s). This happens. It is reality. It is science. Again, read the book “Evolution and the myth of creationism” by Tim M. Berra.

    Please stop molesting the word “theory”.

    “Evolution science changes every five to ten years as they study the fossil records.”

    Evolution remains a science as it has overwelming evidence in support. Theories *within* science may change, as we get more data, which is more than we can ever say for religious dogma, which never changes, even though it has always shown to be unsupported and wrong.

    “If you read an Evolution book from the sixties you will find it totally different from today’s books on Evolution!”

    Because we’ve learned a lot since then, that’s why. It’s great that we’re always learning, isn’t it?

    Would you rather we go back to some ancient text we wrote ages ago, and believe in a bunch of lies? Do you *really* think some ancient book that always has the *same* answer, which can’t be verified, is more reliable than science, which always learns and grows as we continue to learn and grow?

    You’re an idiot.
    And yes, that was an insult.
    Notice I said it *after* I said something quite intelligent.

    ““Revelation Knowledge” or “Spiritual Knowledge” is the only way to know God.”

    Sounds like hogwash to me.
    So basically you’re admitting that your god is hogwash.

    “But you Mushy will never understand that. You are not a free thinker; you only believe what you read in a book.”

    Uh, isn’t that yourself?
    Don’t you follow a “book” of which you do not question?
    I question many things. I’m not a sheep like yourself.

    It’s funny, you are telling an atheist that their problem is exactly what your problem is! Well guess what, that’s not my problem, that’s your problem.. stop trying to shrug the blame for your shortcomings off onto me.

    “I am my own man, with my own thoughts, and my own writing.”

    You’re an idiot.

  36. on 06 Feb 2007 at 3:15 pm 36.mattstarrs said …

    Firstly Mushy, Congatulations on advancing your linguistic skills. Starting sentences with “Uh” instead of “Um” seems to be a step in the right direction!

    1. Evolution is a change in the gene pool of a given species over generation(s). This happens.

    Yes, but only in the cessation of old features. It cannot account for the creation of new species. Find one. Nothing new has ever been shown to be added to the DNA.

    2. Do you *really* think some ancient book that always has the *same* answer, which can’t be verified, is more reliable than science, which always learns and grows as we continue to learn and grow?.

    Think about what you just said.

    Firstly the Bible doesn’t chop and change every ten years. You are right. Scientific theories do. You are correct. But the claim that the bible can’t be verified is ridiculous. The Bible has stood up to a lot of ridicule and always ends up being proven correct. Archeology is a great place to start. They were saying only 50 years ago that Ninevah was a mythological city. Now they have uncovered it. Same with Jericho. And they found the walls pushed down into the ground! The Bible spoke of the earth being round and the planets orbiting the sun way before science had a clue. Have you ever read the Bible?

    3. Sounds like hogwash to me.
    So basically you’re admitting that your god is hogwash..

    This is typical of your arguing. You said:
    Sounds like hogwash to me.

    You said it, not Kahuna.

    Then you build on that a lie and say:
    So basically you’re admitting that your god is hogwash..

    This was your idea. You haven’t said anything that could connect Kahuna to a compliance with your rhetoric, and Kahuna certainly hasn’t.

    I think it’s time for you to get a clue Ted.

    It’s funny, you are telling an atheist that their problem is exactly what your problem is!

    This is actually what is happening with you shorty!

    You are the very thing you criticise!

  37. on 06 Feb 2007 at 5:17 pm 37.Mushinronjya said …

    “1. Evolution is a change in the gene pool of a given species over generation(s). This happens.

    Yes, but only in the cessation of old features. It cannot account for the creation of new species. Find one. Nothing new has ever been shown to be added to the DNA.”

    I really don’t know where you’re getting that kind of information. We are talking about any changes at all. That is what evolution is, what I have said above. Lots of small changes = large changes over time: hence what you consider “new species”, or just ones that are very different than what they used to be. They are small changes over time, not instantly a “new species” overnight.

    DNA can mutate. And the “addition” to DNA happens in that copying errors happen causing repetitions of sections or repetitions with mutations.

    You would know all of this, if you knew what you were talking about before you tried to talk about it in a debate.
    Please read: “Evolution and the myth of creationism”, by Tim M. Berra.

    “Firstly the Bible doesn’t chop and change every ten years. You are right.”

    Which is why it’s not accurate.
    Science does such, which is why it is more accurate.

    “But the claim that the bible can’t be verified is ridiculous”

    Really? Can we replicate someone walking on water, burning bushes talking, people coming back after being dead three days, seas parting? Can we? No? How about just a stick turning into a snake? Surely that can’t be so hard. Is it?

    “The Bible has stood up to a lot of ridicule and always ends up being proven correct.”

    I’m not sure what what rock you’ve been hiding under, or if you were off visiting another planet recently, but that couldn’t be farther from the truth. It’s actually the opposite. It’s always been proven wrong and inaccurate. It may have some real people and places referenced, but it’s largely a work of fiction. It is mythology. The bible has been tossed as accurate a long, long time ago. The only people who think otherwise are those that are brainwashed to think it’s accurate; but they have no supporting logic or argument that’s worthy of serious consideration.

    “The Bible spoke of the earth being round and the planets orbiting the sun way before science had a clue”

    Yea, that’s why it talks about a flat earth. Interesting.
    You’re on a roll here.

    “Have you ever read the Bible?”

    Apparently *your* version is quite different than what everyone else has.

    “Then you build on that a lie and say:
    So basically you’re admitting that your god is hogwash..”

    If you say something that’s not coherent, then what you have is a product of incoherency: your god.
    Simple.

    “You are the very thing you criticise!”

    You are childish. You sit there, stomping your feet, saying I’m this or I’m that. Yet, no argument you ever put forward at all points to your assertions as being accurate in depicting me. However, as we can see in this response I have to you, you are the one demolish in the debate. Yet you get right back up and continue to fight, without a weapon in your hand.

    Very entertaining.

  38. on 07 Feb 2007 at 12:57 am 38.kahuna553 said …

    Mushy, talk about childish, “You are childish.” with all the name calling and insults that you dish out, you had better look in the mirror brother. Your comments are childish, you won’t participate in intelligent debate, you just want to argue and demand that you are right and if no one agrees with you, you vilify them with insulting comments.

    I am really curious; in one of your last blogs you used the word babble to describe my entry. “I don’t know what kind of babble you’re bringing.” and “Don’t give such babble.” The word babble is derived from the word Babel or more precisely “Tower of Babel” which is found in the Old Testament of the Bible. (Genesis 11) It is in reference to a tower that was built and because of the tower the Lord confused their langue so that they could not understand each other, hence the word Babel or babble. So here is my question; why would you choose a word that has direct connection to the Bible? A book that you claim is fabricated!

    “I question many things. I’m not a sheep like yourself.” No, you don’t question many things; you only question the existence of God. Any other thought is beyond your comprehension. O yes master of grammar, your second sentence should read “I’m not a sheep like you.”

    Movies are meaningless to the blind. A noisy radio means nothing to the deaf. Deep Spiritual things mean nothing to the man of Sense Knowledge. When the body (that would be your senses) rules reason, chaos and calamity are certain. 1 Corinthians 2:14 the natural man does not accept what is taught by the Spirit of God. For him it is absurdity. He cannot come to know such teaching because it must be appraised in a Spiritual way. And 1 Corinthians 3:19 for the wisdom of this world is absurdity to God… The Lord knows how empty are the thoughts of the wise.

    Hey Mushy, I have a good book recommendation for you “The Lie – Evolution” by Ken Ham. Read it, and then maybe you will give up some of your delusional diatribes and actually be able to debate intelligently.

    Oh yea, by the way, Evolution is more than a theory, it’s also a religion, something that you hate!

  39. on 07 Feb 2007 at 1:10 am 39.kahuna553 said …

    “You’re an idiot.
    And yes, that was an insult.
    Notice I said it *after* I said something quite intelligent.”

    Is “idiot” the best you can do? Oh master of intelligence!

    Mushy, the more you write the more you expose your very limited vocabulary and your true self. You suffer from self hatred which is a psychoses found in people who believe in nothing, and hate people that do!

  40. on 07 Feb 2007 at 3:59 am 40.Mushinronjya said …

    “you won’t participate in intelligent debate, you just want to argue and demand that you are right and if no one agrees with you, you vilify them with insulting comments.”

    Oh but I do.
    I don’t demand I’m right, I use logic and reasoning.
    What do you use for your imaginary friends?
    Remember, you have them, I do not.
    I’m the skeptic who actually thinks.
    Therefore, it’s kind of funny that you assert I don’t have an intelligent debate.

    “So here is my question; why would you choose a word that has direct connection to the Bible? A book that you claim is fabricated!”

    You come across also very young.
    “Babble” has its own understood meaning. It’s called figure of speech. Much like if I said: “god damnit”, I don’t really believe in a god, but it’s a figure of speech. I would expect someone who pretends to know so much to understand this very basic thing.

    ““I question many things. I’m not a sheep like yourself.” No, you don’t question many things; you only question the existence of God. Any other thought is beyond your comprehension.”

    That was quite childish to say. It holds no foundation. Again, continued assertions without support.

    “When the body (that would be your senses) rules reason, chaos and calamity are certain”

    That makes no sense.

    “Oh yea, by the way, Evolution is more than a theory, it’s also a religion, something that you hate!”

    You’re an idiot.
    I already explained evolution to you.
    But you shrugged it off, because you want your imaginary friends to be real, and you won’t consider the fact that you’re wrong.

    “Mushy, the more you write the more you expose your very limited vocabulary and your true self. You suffer from self hatred which is a psychoses found in people who believe in nothing, and hate people that do!”

    Hey kid, your pop psychology is a joke.

    So, where is your god now?
    How many other imaginary friends do you have?
    Do you also believe in the tooth fairy?

  41. on 07 Feb 2007 at 1:54 pm 41.kahuna553 said …

    Yes I do believe in the tooth fairy, the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus. I know mommy and daddy wouldn’t lie to me.

  42. on 07 Feb 2007 at 2:16 pm 42.kahuna553 said …

    Mushy, here is what you consider debate; arguments, contradictions, name calling, poor vocabulary, poor grammar, bad spelling, and nonsensical statements! You best go back to school young man. You lack any kind of intelligence to have an intelligent conversation, you have a head full of mush, you are what they call “A Pabulum Puker” you spew your hatred everywhere!

  43. on 07 Feb 2007 at 3:11 pm 43.Mushinronjya said …

    “Yes I do believe in the tooth fairy, the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus. I know mommy and daddy wouldn’t lie to me.”

    :) hehe

    “Mushy, here is what you consider debate; arguments, contradictions, name calling, poor vocabulary, poor grammar, bad spelling, and nonsensical statements!”

    Not at all. When you make an assertion, I point out what’s wrong with it. You fail to understand this. I will give you an example I remember off the top of my head. You, if I recall correctly, asserted that evolution is a religion, that it’s not science. I have defined evolution and told you what it is. Debate backed with logic. You or someone else also asserted that, if I recall correctly, that I lack imagination and the ability to think “outside the box”, because I don’t posit a deity. I have pointed out that it is gullible and not logical to posit something we have no evidence for. Debate backed with logic.

    So you see dear sir, your assertions that I have brought nothing to the table has bit you in the arse, because your assertion is not backed up. In fact, I have just reminded you of a couple, out of many instances, where I have debated and gave logic. You might not want to accept what I have said, but I have said it nonetheless, and it makes sense to your average, reasonable normal person.

    “You lack any kind of intelligence to have an intelligent conversation”

    Are imaginary friends required to have intelligence?

    “you spew your hatred everywhere!”

    I spew my intolerance for ignorant, gullible little chumps like you, ’tis all.

  44. on 07 Feb 2007 at 4:58 pm 44.mattstarrs said …

    Ok Mushy Brained One,

    There was so many things utterly ridiculous since I was here last that you have posited. I just wonder if you can produce your evidence for just one of those things:
    “Yea, that’s why it talks about a flat earth. Interesting.”

    Where is that exactly? Just a simple reference will do.

    I don’t think it says it anywhere. In fact, I think you are either making it up or saying things you heard from some other moron and took for granted (because it supported your belief). . . again.

    “”The bible has been tossed as accurate a long, long time ago. The only people who think otherwise are those that are brainwashed to think it’s accurate; but they have no supporting logic or argument that’s worthy of serious consideration.

    That’s just plain ignorant diatribe.

    If you really believe that give me one positive example of the Bible being proven wrong. JUST ONE!

    To say that I can’t show you someone walking on water or a stick turning into a snake won’t cut it. You have to show proof, not just refer to the absence of proof.

    Tell me ONE proof that the Bible is innacurate.

    You can’t.

    You want to believe you can so you say things like:
    “The bible has been tossed as accurate a long, long time ago.”

    But once again this is just your unsupported dribble.

    You can’t even give me ONE example where the Bible has been PROVEN inaccurate.

    Your the one that is positing it’s inaccuracy – the burden of proof is on you.

    I know you won’t take the challenge. Just like you never gave any supporting evidence for your belief that “Education brings peace” despite dozens of requests. You talk dribble with “no supporting logic or argument that’s worthy of serious consideration.”

    Look, I will even make it easy for you. You say that the Bible says that the earth is flat. I accept that the earth is conclusively shown NOT to be flat (having circumnavigated it several times).

    So all you have to do to make your point is show me where the Bible says that the earth is flat. I know it definitely talks about the globe of the earth in the book of Isaiah. It’s quoting God when it says that. Here it is from the Message version. A very popular one these days:

    Isaiah 40:21 – 22 (The Message)

    21-22 Have you not been paying attention?
    Have you not been listening?
    Haven’t you heard these stories all your life?
    Don’t you understand the foundation of all things?
    God sits high above the round ball of earth.

    That was written in about 600 BC. Know anyone else that would dare to suggest the earth wasn’t flat back then?

    And you also need to brush up on your reading. It is commonly accepted that the type of evolution you described is a misnomer . . . by evolutionists!

    You said:
    “Lots of small changes = large changes over time . . . . They are small changes over time, not instantly a “new species” overnight.”

    You must be reading REALLY old science books. Don’t forget, science changes it’s mind every ten years or so, and what you are saying got tossed out LAST CENTURY!

    So anyway.

    JUST ONE PROOF . . . .

    The bible has been shown to be accurate a long, long time ago. The only people who think otherwise are those that are brainwashed to think it’s inaccurate; but they have no supporting logic or argument that’s worthy of serious consideration.

  45. on 07 Feb 2007 at 11:00 pm 45.Mushinronjya said …

    ““Yea, that’s why it talks about a flat earth. Interesting.”

    Where is that exactly? Just a simple reference will do.

    I don’t think it says it anywhere. In fact, I think you are either making it up or saying things you heard from some other moron and took for granted (because it supported your belief). . . again.”

    I don’t have beliefs on this. I’m an atheist.

    And as far as your the buybull containing flat-earth references, it’s just littered with them.
    See:
    http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm
    Guess you lose there.

    “If you really believe that give me one positive example of the Bible being proven wrong. JUST ONE!”

    Burning bushes don’t have a conscience, so they cannot talk.
    There you go.
    Guess you lose again.

    “To say that I can’t show you someone walking on water or a stick turning into a snake won’t cut it. You have to show proof, not just refer to the absence of proof.”

    I have a quote for you: “What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”.

    You just asked me to do something impossible – to disprove a negative. This goes to show your inability to understand logic and how it’s supposed to work here. I can’t give proof for something that doesn’t exist. You have to prove that a stick *can* turn into a snake. Otherwise, logic says it cannot happen, and you lose, yet again.

    Let’s see, what’s next.

    “And you also need to brush up on your reading. It is commonly accepted that the type of evolution you described is a misnomer . . . by evolutionists!”

    Um, I have defined what evolution is. It is accurate. Natural selection plays a huge role. You really need to learn about evolution before you attempt to debate it more. Please don’t bring it up anymore until you do.

    ““Lots of small changes = large changes over time . . . . They are small changes over time, not instantly a “new species” overnight.”

    You must be reading REALLY old science books. Don’t forget, science changes it’s mind every ten years or so, and what you are saying got tossed out LAST CENTURY! ”

    Um, no, it has not.
    You are an idiot that doesn’t know much about evolution.
    It’s nice that you can say something got tossed, yet you have nothing to say after that.

    Anyone can sit there like you, a total idiot, and assert that “this isn’t so and that isn’t so”. When I do it, I back it up. When you do it, you just go onto the next topic *without* backing it up.

    And that’s why I call you an idiot.

  46. on 08 Feb 2007 at 4:14 am 46.kahuna553 said …

    Bravo Matt, now you know how to debate. What you said to Mushy, (the grand master of ranting and raving) is true. I have read the Bible through several times and not once have I ever come across the words “the earth is flat.” Mushy has probably never even held a Bible let alone read one.

    Hey Mushy, the reason that Evolution is a religion is because, Evolution is a belief system about the past based on words of men who were not there, but who are trying to explain how all the evidence of the present (that is fossils, animals, and plants, etc.) originated. (Webster’s Dictionary defines religion as follows: “… cause, principle or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.” Surely this is an apt description of Evolution.) Evolution is a belief system; hence, a religion.

    Oh yea Mushy, by the way, Daniel Webster was a Born Again Christian, he must be an idiot also.

    Let me give you another example; when people visit a museum they are confronted by bits and pieces of bones and other fossils neatly arranged in glass cases. They are often accompanied by pictures representing a scientist’s impression of what the animal and the plants looked liked in their natural environment. Remember, no one dug up the picture, just the fossils. And the fossils exist in the present. You can stair at the fragments of bones all you want, but you will never see the picture the scientists have drawn. The picture is their story of their own preconceived bias, and that, ultimately, is all it can ever be.

    Evolution has never been able to show intermediate change in any species; normally what they do show is variety in a species and try to pass that off as intermediate changes. Let me give you an example. Say dogs have been extinct for 6,000 years and now in the present during an excavation in several different locations, evolution scientists (archeologists’) have unearthed in one location a Dachshund, in another a Lab and in another a Great Dane, by today’s evolutionary principles we would be led to believe that dogs were originally small like the Dachshund but through millions of years of evolution they became big like a Great Dane with the Lab thrown in as an intermediate change. You can not deny this because this is exactly what they have done. Now I know you are thinking about carbon dating to see how old the bones are, but as we all know carbon dating is not very inaccurate so don’t hit me with that BS. Chew on this for a while “Oh master of delusion.”

  47. on 08 Feb 2007 at 4:26 am 47.kahuna553 said …

    I have 3 questions to ask you Mushy:

    1. Is the reason scientific theories change because scientists don’t know everything?

    2. Will scientists ever know everything?

    3. Will scientists always continue to find new evidence?

  48. on 08 Feb 2007 at 7:32 am 48.mattstarrs said …

    Hey Mushy, why aren’t I surprised?

    You failed my challenge . . . Again and again!
    I followed your link.
    I should have known better.

    No wonder you couldn’t do what I asked and just give me a reference to where the bible says the earth is flat.

    You said:
    “And as far as your the buybull containing flat-earth references, it’s just littered with them.
    See:
    http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm
    Guess you lose there.”

    You guessed wrong. I bet you had to guess ‘cos you couldn’t understand what it was saying.

    The bible never says once that the earth is flat.

    There is nothing in the link that you put up that says otherwise either. If you think there is just cut and paste it for all to see.

    In fact half of the referred site focuses on the Book of Enoch, which is not even in the bible!

    Did you even read the material there before you linked it?

    You still haven’t done it. Where does the bible say that the earth is flat?

    You could just face the music and admit you were wrong.

    Please don’t be too discouraged by your failure. At least you have offered something besides your errant opinion for once. This is an improvement, even if it was a complete red herring!

    Now for your latest outpouring of stupidity:
    I said:
    “If you really believe that give me one positive example of the Bible being proven wrong. JUST ONE!”

    To which you responded:

    “Burning bushes don’t have a conscience, so they cannot talk.
    There you go.
    Guess you lose again.”

    Which just goes to show that what Kahuna said is probably true when he said “Mushy has probably never even held a Bible let alone read one.”

    So let me tell you exactly what the bible says about the event you are referring to:

    EXODUS 3
    2And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.

    3And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt.

    4And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I.

    Please note that the bush in the bible is not said to either talk or to have a conscience.

    Mushy you are an embarrassment.

    I am so glad that we don’t have arrogant dumbasses like you in Australia!

    Finally, I must point out that when you say:

    “Anyone can sit there like you, a total idiot, and assert that “this isn’t so and that isn’t so”. When I do it, I back it up. When you do it, you just go onto the next topic *without* backing it up.”

    You have completely turned reality inside out. You are totally guilty of what you are accusing me of, and exactly the opposite is true of how I have dealt with you.

    What you are doing, Mushy, is called lying.

    But what else can you do?

    You have been comprehensively proven to be incomprehensible, arrogant, obscene, decietful, ignorant, naive, and utterly stupid. Your language skills are of a very poor standard. Your logic is circular, mechanical and unable to be substantiated. Your character is akin to a juvenile imbecile. Your stubborn pride prevents you from disappearing despete the fact that your every post dicredits you even further.

    You have nothing to offer.

    You can prove nothing.

    This site is here to declare that God is imaginary.

    I am here saying “prove it”, and the best that you can come up with is a childish “No, you prove it!”

    So then I say that the Bible is accurate – do disprove it!

    If you are correct this should be a simple task.

    But you are not correct . . .

    and you can’t do it!

    You have already had a couple of goes and failed.

    Care to try again?

    I should warn you that some well known Christian academics came to Christ by trying to disprove the bible but found that it could not be done.

    Someone with your substandard skills can’t be blamed for coming up short.

  49. on 08 Feb 2007 at 10:03 am 49.Mushinronjya said …

    “I have read the Bible through several times and not once have I ever come across the words “the earth is flat.””

    It’s all over the bible, my friend. I posted the link, so there’s no escape.

    “Hey Mushy, the reason that Evolution is a religion is because, Evolution is a belief system about the past based on words of men who were not there, but who are trying to explain how all the evidence of the present (that is fossils, animals, and plants, etc.) originated.”

    Wrong. There are plenty of scientists who study evolution who *are* here.
    You have no idea what you’re talking about.

    “The picture is their story of their own preconceived bias, and that, ultimately, is all it can ever be”

    Based on where they found the fossil, it’s dating, its features, etc. You really have to learn how we can know what we can know through fossils first before you sit there and try to think you know what you’re talking about.
    http://www.mountainnature.com/Geology/Fossils.htm

    “Evolution has never been able to show intermediate change in any species;”

    Again, you’re an idiot. I have told you that there are changes over time, not changes “overnight” in a species. They are small changes.

    You give me nothing to chew on because you’re spewing forth nonsense since you have no idea what you’re talking about.

    And to answer your questions:
    1. we don’t know everything, that is correct.
    2. we will always be learning and obtaining new information. Whether we’ll know “everything”, who knows.. but nothing stops us from learning more, which is what science continues to do.
    3. Of course.

    You’re such an uneducated layman.

  50. on 08 Feb 2007 at 3:05 pm 50.mattstarrs said …

    Wow.I replied to Mushies Mush about 8 hours ago and it’s still not up!

    In short:
    Mushie, I followed your link and there was not a single biblical reference to the earth being flat. If you think there was just cut and paste it and we can all decide together.

    “So I guess you lose” . . . again.

    Also,
    If you actually do what Kahuna and I have both surmised that you have never done, and pick up a bible and read it, you will see that in Exodus 3 there in no allusion to a bush either speaking or having a conscience. Your the one that says a bush spoke. This was a misrepresentation (AKA LYING!) which we are coming to expect from you when you are faced with the utter stupidity of your failed position.

    “So I guess you lose” . . . again.

    Furthermore, you have charged me with some serious flaws when you said:
    “Anyone can sit there like you, a total idiot, and assert that “this isn’t so and that isn’t so”. When I do it, I back it up. When you do it, you just go onto the next topic *without* backing it up.”
    But I would challenge yourself or any other reader to review our posts and decide for themselves whether your accusation is truer of me or you. I say once again that you are the very thing you criticise.

    “So I guess you lose” . . . again.

  51. on 08 Feb 2007 at 3:07 pm 51.mattstarrs said …

    How many words do you have to limit a post to to get it up the same day? Are all of my posts being marked for moderation?

  52. on 08 Feb 2007 at 3:19 pm 52.Mushinronjya said …

    Yes, because you’re a retard that has imaginary friends.

  53. on 08 Feb 2007 at 4:29 pm 53.mattstarrs said …

    Mate, you oughta take it easy.

    When my post eventually gets up you’re gonna have a lot of humble pie to eat.

    Your flat earth reference did not contain even one single reference to a biblical text that suggests a flat earth, nor did your burning bush anecdote stand up ad the bible never says that the bush spoke.

    You are a complete idiot.

    At least read the stuff you refer us to if you want to use it to support your argument.

    And PLEASE read the bible before you assert that it is wrong.

    You lose again.

    And you still have not revealed anywhere in the bible where it says the earth is flat or a shred of inaccuracy in the bible.

    Loser!

  54. on 08 Feb 2007 at 5:16 pm 54.Mushinronjya said …

    Matts, you have nothing for me.
    Please refer to Matt 4:1-10, specifically verse 8.

    You can deny the obvious all you want, but everyone else will see the BS you attempt to pile into these comments.

    Once AGAIN: I am not the idiot with imaginary friends, that’s you. YOU believe in something that DOES NOT EXIST, and you do it for EMOTIONAL and NOT logical reasons. This makes YOU the idiot, NOT me. Do you understand?

    Learn to think, and you won’t have this problem.

    Um, if I didn’t read the bible, how did I post what I did about it? Are you freakin thick?

    You act like a 12 year old.
    And you have a kid?
    Disgusting.

  55. on 08 Feb 2007 at 7:04 pm 55.mattstarrs said …

    Wrong again Mushy.

    Jesus was obviously not having a vision or an “out of body” experience of sorts. His company was a spirit being (the devil). Why do you think no one noticed the on the pinnacle of the temple. How do you think they got to the temple pinnacle or the mountain top? They sure didn’t walk there. To say that this verse saying “the devil showed him all the kingdoms of the earth” is a declaration of the earth being flat is plain ridiculous. Obviously it was not intended that way. Pick the highest mountain you want and you can’t see too many kingdoms. To be able to see “all the kingdoms of the earth” would require a vantage point that a literal mountain could not provide even if the earth was flat. Obviously the mountain is not literal.

    You really have to twist what is being said in that text to suggest it even supports a flat earth theory. Certainly the earth is not said to be flat in that scripture.

    So try again little loser.

    If you did read the bible please explain how you screwed up your allegations against Exodus 3 so badly.

  56. on 08 Feb 2007 at 7:24 pm 56.Mushinronjya said …

    Yea, that’s the ‘ol, “that’s not what I want it to mean” cop-out.

    Very, very old.

    “Obviously the mountain is not literal.”

    Oh, yea, obvious.
    Of course.

    Not literal.
    Of course.
    Nothing should be taken literally in the buybull, right?

    Probably because it is mythology.

    “You really have to twist what is being said in that text to suggest it even supports a flat earth theory.”

    Nope.
    You are doing the twisting.

    “So try again little loser.”

    You have been adequately smacked around, again.
    You are our forum entertainment.

  57. on 08 Feb 2007 at 8:06 pm 57.mattstarrs said …

    Dear God of grammar Mushy

    “the ‘ol” should read “the ol’ ”

    Now to seriously be a critic of the bible you have to take it literally. That is to say, the literature that is poetry is poetry, the literature that is narrative is narrative, and the literature that refers to things otherworldly is referring to things “otherworldly”.

    Who are you trying to fool. So far you have a succes rate of one – yourself.

    And you still haven’t shown me a single place where the bible says that the earth is flat, or that the bible can be shown to be inaccurate.

    Lot’s of verbal diarrhoea from little big mouth, but still no proof to back up his claims.

    And when you say:
    “You are our forum entertainment. ”
    who on earth are these others you speak of?

    So far atheists and theists alike have ridiculed you for your lack of coherent thought.

  58. on 08 Feb 2007 at 8:12 pm 58.mattstarrs said …

    BTW, you haven’t explained your bawlsing up of the burning bush story yet either.

  59. on 08 Feb 2007 at 8:18 pm 59.mattstarrs said …

    You still haven’t shown me a single place where the bible says that the earth is flat, or that the bible can be shown to be inaccurate.

    Nor have you explained your bawlsing up of the burning bush story.

    You also haven’t supplied a single piece of supporting evidence for your theory that “Education brings peace”, yet you refuse to acknowledge this is your “belief”.

    You also have made a lot of assertions about evolution making small changes over a long period of time, which is a theory any credible scientists have long ago acknowledged is unworkable.

    Typical “blind follower of the blind” atheist.

  60. on 09 Feb 2007 at 12:28 am 60.kahuna553 said …

    Hey Matt, you really need to read this. These are my questions and Mushy’s answers!

    1. Is the reason scientific theories change because scientists don’t know everything?
    1. “we don’t know everything, that is correct.” Mushy, you should always start a sentence with a capital letter, Oh god of grammar.

    2. Will scientists ever know everything?
    2. “we will always be learning and obtaining new information. Whether we’ll know “everything”, who knows.. but nothing stops us from learning more, which is what science continues to do.” Again Mushy you use no capital.

    3. Will scientists always continue to find new evidence?
    3. “Of course.”

    Mushy, you have just stated in your answers that scientists can’t be sure about anything which means that scientists can’t be sure about evolution.
    That is very logical and I accept your answers as proof that evolution is a belief and not a fact. Evolution is a religion to which evolutionists are committed. Thanks Mushy!

    Hey Mushy, since you believe in evolution so strongly then I would guess that you also believe in aliens. As a matter of fact you have probably been abducted by aliens and have been anal probed!

    “You’re such an uneducated layman.” Another condescending remark from Mushy who is legend in his own mind. I noticed in your answers about scientists that you use the word “we” as if to suggest that you are a scientist. Give me a break oh delusional one. You are some computer geek who sits in a cubicle all day researching the great philosophies of Madeline Murray O’Hare. Oh that’s right, there aren’t any!

  61. on 09 Feb 2007 at 1:56 am 61.Mushinronjya said …

    matts said:

    “So far atheists and theists alike have ridiculed you for your lack of coherent thought.”

    No atheists, sorry.
    Nice try.

    “You also haven’t supplied a single piece of supporting evidence for your theory that “Education brings peace”, yet you refuse to acknowledge this is your “belief”.”

    I have explained this too many times.
    Not my fault you’re kinda stupid.

    “You also have made a lot of assertions about evolution making small changes over a long period of time, which is a theory any credible scientists have long ago acknowledged is unworkable.”

    Nope, still very active in the science today.
    Again, I cannot help you if you are this ignorant of evolution.

  62. on 09 Feb 2007 at 6:05 am 62.mattstarrs said …

    Mushed brain said:

    “No atheists, sorry.”

    But that’s ‘cos he forgot about Loi P.

    Or did he forget . . . .

  63. on 09 Feb 2007 at 6:09 am 63.mattstarrs said …

    C’mon Mushed Brain,

    Answer the questions. I will number them so we can keep track of how many you can’t answer:

    1. You still haven’t shown me a single place where the bible says that the earth is flat, or

    2. That the bible can be shown to be inaccurate.

    3. Nor have you explained your bawlsing up of the burning bush story.

    4. You also haven’t supplied a single piece of supporting evidence for your theory that “Education brings peace”, yet you refuse to acknowledge this is your “belief”.

    You do repeat incessantly that you have explained it (If you did it was way ambiguous), but that is a far cry from producing evidence. Just one little citation of research will do!

    5. You also have made a lot of assertions about evolution making small changes over a long period of time, which is a theory any credible scientists have long ago acknowledged is unworkable.

    Who in the field still believes that junk. Just one reference will do . . . if you can find one that’s not from among your mates at the Flat Earth Society. . .

    6. Typical “blind follower of the blind” atheist.

    Oh, wait a minute . . . that one was my statement . . . and I have proven that one many times.

  64. on 09 Feb 2007 at 6:19 am 64.mattstarrs said …

    Kahuna,

    we really shouldn’t pick on poor little Mushy.

    The bible does tell us that the natural man does not understand the things of God because they are spiritually discerned, therefore they are foolishness to him.

    I feel kinda mean making him look like a dummy . . over and over and over and over and over . . .

  65. on 09 Feb 2007 at 9:52 am 65.Mushinronjya said …

    matts…

    you, along with your butt buddy, are basically idiots who are incapable of debate or intellectual discourse.

    You’ve been slammed by atheists all your life, and you continue to be slammed on here.

    “I feel kinda mean making him look like a dummy . . over and over and over and over and over . . .”

    How much of an ignorant ass can you become? Do you *really* think that just saying you said something worthwhile, that therefore it is?

    “The bible does tell us that the natural man does not understand the things of God because they are spiritually discerned, therefore they are foolishness to him.”

    Who gives a f*ck what the buybull says? Of course it will say what it can to keep its disease alive.

    You have a lot to learn, but are too stupid to know that.

  66. on 09 Feb 2007 at 3:30 pm 66.mattstarrs said …

    You know Mushy, I really think that you are repressing your homosexual tendencies. You oughta deal with that instead of projecting it into arguments of unrelated matters.

    It’s bad enough you come across so stupid, illogical and ignorant, but the obscene thing just makes you look sick as well as dumb.

    As for your false assertions (I can’t believe they just never stop!) I haven’t been “slammed” by an atheist even once on this site. I reckon Loi P had the intelligence to be a challenge, but I am pretty sure your foul language drove her away.

    The sites author lacks all credibility by posting provocative junk like “Are Christians Idiots?”, and then not acknowledging from the following debate that “No, far from it. . . in fact the biggest idiot on this site is MUSHY!”

    I was just wondering . . . when did your imaginary friends tell you that you were “slamming” Kahuna or I? What do your imaginary friends look like? Do you have sex with them – you have often referred to the idea that I should have sex with Jesus – is that because you have homo-erotic fantasies that your imaginary friends fulfil for you?

    I have checked back through the posts, and I can only find one post that speaks positively of you, and it was so flowery and overblown I think he might have been trying to be sarcastic. That was a whole lot of posts ago. And he only hung around for a day or so – he took off when you got obnoxious with him!

    So who are these imaginary friends of yours that are using me and Kahuna as a “kick bag”, Oh Deluded One?

  67. on 09 Feb 2007 at 4:39 pm 67.Mushinronjya said …

    “It’s bad enough you come across so stupid, illogical and ignorant”

    I’m not the one with imaginary friends that are supposed to care about what we believe in, that would be you. When you can get over having your imaginary friends, you can join the rest of us here in reality.

  68. on 10 Feb 2007 at 2:28 am 68.kahuna553 said …

    Here are some great quotes from Grand Master Mushy! All of Mushy’s quotes will be in quotation marks.

    “Sorry buddy, but you can’t argue by analogy.” Why? You just make up your own rules to debate. Notice I said debate not argue!)

    “Um, I never put in bad grammar, and I always spell correctly. I rarely have to bother proof reading, because I do it right the first time.” (Um is bad grammar)

    “I can’t believe you would say such a thing to me, of all people. I’m the master of spelling and grammar.” (Read on Mushy and you will see how illiterate you really are)

    “Freakin butthead.” (Freaking spelled wrong, Fragmented sentence)

    “You’re an idiot.”

    “I am 98% accurate. There is a 2% time I am not, when I’m rushing. Once in awhile people skip a word when they say it in their head.” (Remember he just said up above; I always spell correctly. I rarely have to bother proof reading, because I do it right the first time.) (I’m the master of spelling and grammar.) (This is what we call contradiction)

    “People with imaginary friend mentality like yours are so childish.”(Read some of your comments to see who is really childish!)

    “The original claim was on my spelling and grammar, which is better than most. So it’s kind of ridiculous that the claim was ever made to begin with.” (So far you are batting “0”)

    “It has to do with my intolerance for ignorance.” (Except for your own)

    “Don’t sound as ignorant as him?” (You mean as ignorant as YOU)

    “If that was so, we wouldn’t need debates.” (You don’t debate, you demand that you are right and leave no room for discussion)

    “You’re an idiot.”

    “I don’t know what kind of babble you’re bringing. Don’t give such babble.” (Now that’s great grammar!)

    “Irrational beliefs are not a virtue, they are a curse.” (Belief in evolution is irrational)

    “Yes, xians are idiots who are gullible and ignorant.” (Xian’s is with a capital X and apostrophe s oh master of spelling.)

    “Yes, I suppose “idiot” was unnecessary.”

    “You’re an idiot. And yes, that was an insult.” (I thought idiot was not necessary?)

    “You’re an idiot.”

    “I question many things. I’m not a sheep like yourself.” (Incorrect grammar, it should read like you)

    “You’re an idiot.”

    “You’re an idiot.”

    “You’re an idiot.”

    “Do you also believe in the tooth fairy?” (God doesn’t believe in atheists)

    “I spew my intolerance for ignorant, gullible little chumps like you, ’tis all.” (Moronic statement)

    “And that’s why I call you an idiot.”

    “Again, you’re an idiot.”

    “You’re such an uneducated layman.” (Condescending remark, trying to make you sound educated)

    “Yes, because you’re a retard that has imaginary friends. And you have a kid? Disgusting.” (Again, fragmented sentence, the use of the word retard is really unnecessary and does a great disrespect for a segment of the world’s population that are fine respectful citizens! You Mushy have stooped to new lows!)

    “you, along with your butt buddy, are basically idiots who are incapable of debate or intellectual discourse.” (All sentences start with capital letters. This statement does expose your homosexual tendencies.)

    “Who gives a f*ck what the buybull says? Of course it will say what it can to keep its disease alive.” (Obscenity, Bible spelled wrong, I know that it was on purpose but it is still stupid)

    “You have a lot to learn, but are too stupid to know that.”

    “How much of an ignorant ass can you become?” (Ignorant ass, is there such a thing as a smart ass?)

    “You’re our forum kickbags.” (Kick Bags is two separate words Oh master speller)

    “You’re an idiot.”

    “You’re a complete idiot.” (You have used the expression; you’re an idiot or a form of 13 times on this blog page. You think that you could come up with something a little more intelligent!)

    Well Mushy, here you go, all of your wonderful illiterate misspelled poor grammar quotes. Don’t you look intelligent now?

  69. on 10 Feb 2007 at 3:30 am 69.kahuna553 said …

    Mushy said:
    “Wrong. We talked about knowing everything, not about “being sure of anything”. You’re an idiot.”

    What a stupid comment; we can’t know everything but we can be sure of everything. That’s a contradiction in any language. Now who’s the idiot?

    “Wrong. We know evolution occurs. That’s why it is science. You’re an idiot, again.”

    Mushy, did you ever here the expression “It’s not an exact science.” That pertains to evolution, it’s not exact because it is only theory and theory is not science. Let me give you a definition of the word theory; Encarta Dictionary: theory (noun) an idea of or belief about something arrived at through speculation or conjecture. I can’t say any plainer than that, that is what theory is moron!

    Kahuna said, “I noticed in your answers about scientists that you use the word “we” as if to suggest that you are a scientist.”
    Mushy said, “We all are, to some degree. I suppose, minus you. You see, again, the word science means “to know”. The word “we” was used to signify us as a species, and what we know *from* the use of science.”
    Definition of the word Scientist: Encarta Dictionary: scientist; (noun) somebody who has had a scientific training or who works in one of the sciences. I don’t see you fitting in there Mr. Mushy Scientist.

    Definition of the word Science: Encarta Dictionary: science (noun) the study of the physical world and its manifestations, especially by using systematic observation and experiment. I don’t see where the definition of science means “to know”. Mushy where did you get your education? I know, you road the little yellow bus to school. Did they make you where a helmet also?

    Mushy said, “Madeline Murray O’Hare; She did something great – helped to make our country more secular. That only benefits us all.” You are so right mushy, since they took prayer out of school in the early sixties the teen pregnancy rate is up 200%, drugs have ravaged our schools, teen suicide up over 100% teens bringing guns to school and killing other innocent people has become an everyday occurrence, and let us not forget that the GPA in our high schools has dropped dramatically to where we are now ranked 14th in the world, violence against teachers is common place etc. and all statistics show that it began to change when prayer was taken out of our public schools. We owe madeline murray o’ hare a lot. By the way Mushy, what ever happened to old madeline, oh yea she was killed by one of her own people for her money, that’s a great atheist story!. Did you know that her one son is a Born Again Christian? He renounced everything she stood for!

  70. on 10 Feb 2007 at 4:49 am 70.Mushinronjya said …

    ““Sorry buddy, but you can’t argue by analogy.” Why? You just make up your own rules to debate. Notice I said debate not argue!)”

    Are you freakin retarded? You can’t argue by analogy, because you are not addressing the topic being discussed. You can only use analogies in order to make a point clearer for someone, no other reason in a debate. However, you fluffy xians think you can use them as a foundation, which is why you’re wrong. I hope I’ve cleared this up for you, and you’ve learned something.

    ““Do you also believe in the tooth fairy?” (God doesn’t believe in atheists)”

    There you go, talking about your imaginary friend again.

    “Definition of the word Science: Encarta Dictionary: science (noun) the study of the physical world and its manifestations, especially by using systematic observation and experiment. I don’t see where the definition of science means “to know”.”


    are you really that stupid…
    oh
    my
    gawd.

    “You are so right mushy, since they took prayer out of school in the early sixties the teen pregnancy rate is up 200%, drugs have ravaged our schools, teen suicide up over 100% teens bringing guns to school and killing other innocent people has become an everyday occurrence, and let us not forget that the GPA in our high schools has dropped dramatically to where we are now ranked 14th in the world, violence against teachers is common place etc. and all statistics show that it began to change when prayer was taken out of our public schools.”

    Sorry, but you’re unable to attribute such things to “not having prayer in school”. As we can see through history, theism has led to violence. How has prayer being removed from contributed to such things? You have nothing to say about that. All you can say is: “it seems to have started about that time”. No, I’m sorry, but such things happen because of people’s actions, not because of a lack of promoted religion in the classroom. If anything, religion promotes violence, not the other way around.

    But then again, you’re not very smart, and wouldn’t know much about that kinda thing.

    You’re a complete idiot for trying to even make a relationship between school prayer and crimes.

    Many people continue to laugh at your position, that isn’t an original one.

  71. on 10 Feb 2007 at 4:53 am 71.Mushinronjya said …

    ““Wrong. We talked about knowing everything, not about “being sure of anything”. You’re an idiot.”

    What a stupid comment; we can’t know everything but we can be sure of everything. That’s a contradiction in any language. Now who’s the idiot?”

    What the hell is wrong with you?

    I never said that.
    Anything does not mean everything.
    Dude, you’re retarded.

    And Madaline had more than one son, by the way.
    Who cares what his position was?
    That doesn’t invalidate hers, you complete idiot.

  72. on 10 Feb 2007 at 8:50 pm 72.kahuna553 said …

    More intelligent “Quotes” from the Mush Man.

    “Are you freakin retarded?”

    “are you really that stupid…”

    +You’re a complete idiot for trying to even make a relationship between school prayer and crimes.” (I guess the truth really hurts)

    “What the hell is wrong with you?”

    “Dude, you’re retarded.”

    “That doesn’t invalidate hers, you complete idiot.”

    {This is what Mushy considers debate!}

    (The use of the words retard and retarded are really unnecessary and it does a great disrespect for a segment of the world’s population that are fine respectful citizens! You Mushy have stooped to new lows! But I guess that is as high as your standards go. Believing in evolution I would imagine Mushy would consider these people expendable because they don’t have enough to contribute to society like the rest of your morally corrupt group thinks.)

  73. on 10 Feb 2007 at 10:01 pm 73.Mushinronjya said …

    “+You’re a complete idiot for trying to even make a relationship between school prayer and crimes.” (I guess the truth really hurts)”

    You’re molesting the word “truth”. It doesn’t mean to “praise” something. Truth is the degree to which a statement corresponds with reality. Your statement, that we can link the lack of prayer in schools to crime we have today, is without any evidence; which means it does not correspond with reality, thus not the truth.

    You can quote all of my harsh intolerant words towards you that you like. It’s ok. You two deserve it.

    “{This is what Mushy considers debate!}”

    Nope, I already slapped you both around in a debate. I had much more than insults to give you, and you had nothing back for me except your dwellance on how I come across, or my intolerant words. This didn’t help either of you at all, and you still look like a couple of stupid xians.

    “Believing in evolution”

    It’s already been explained to you that evolution is science, but I guess you two are too stuck on Peter Pan to learn anything. Oh wait, was it a god? Which deity again? I forget. Was it the tooth fairy too?

  74. on 11 Feb 2007 at 12:26 am 74.kahuna553 said …

    Three Different Quotes from the sight (Rate it All) About Mushy’s Hero Madeline Murray O’Hare

    1. She hated Christianity and she probably hated it even more when her son became one in 1980. This poor woman had a lot of anger and just couldn’t humbler herself to God to vent it out.

    2. Yeah, I know, as an atheist myself, I am supposed to look up to her as a leader. She was no leader; she just had a big mouth. My version of atheism is speak only about it when asked. You don’t have to go advertise the fact that you are clear minded enough to realize that there is no such things as Gods, or a God.

    3. Somebody really pooped on this woman’s pop tart because she had to be one of the angriest people going. You almost never saw her with a smile or even a pleasant look on her face. The type who would come to a party just to tell people why they shouldn’t enjoy themselves. She appeared to be so miserable and filled with hatred that I kind of think she backfired on her own cause – I mean, who would want to aspire to that attitude? Truth be known, this fist-faced gargoyle probably drove more people into churches than out of them. I guess what they say is true – God CAN use everyone.

    This is what happened to this wonderful human specimen;
    She was kidnapped and murdered in September 1995, along with her son and granddaughter and $500,000.00 in gold coins were stolen from her. The bodies were found on a ranch in Texas, in 2001.

    Although he was never convicted, it is believed that David Roland Waters, a former employee and embezzler at American Atheists, Inc. (O’Hare’s group) murdered them with two accomplices. Waters died in prison in 2003.

    Nice group those American Atheists!

  75. on 11 Feb 2007 at 1:03 am 75.mattstarrs said …

    Just go to the post on “God murdering Millions” and you will see that the overall majority of humans listed as the worst ever mass murderers were all atheist!

  76. on 11 Feb 2007 at 2:26 am 76.kahuna553 said …

    Matt, that is because when you believe in nothing you will fall for anything!

  77. on 17 Sep 2008 at 1:27 pm 77.Silly Rabbits said …

    Somehow in reading about politics and religion, I came across this page. It’s interesting to stumble upon blogs and posts where readers comment so passionately; More often than not, people who seemed to have valid points in the beginning (whether they are right or not) turn themselves into idiots trying to knock others down who disagree with them. Take the 31 and 41 year olds in this post: having read their comments (I can’t believe I wasted my time but, it was somewhat entertaining) it seems highly unlikely that they are telling the truth about their ages, and could both benefit from some outdoor activity and some newfound patience. People are funny!

  78. on 18 Sep 2008 at 1:47 am 78.anonymous said …

    kahuna matt you are ignorant you completely ignored all of mushies facts and just flamed him on grammatical errors, and name calling which both of you did yourself so not only are you ignorant but your also hypocrites

  79. on 29 Sep 2008 at 10:43 pm 79.anonymous said …

    Grammar=/=intelligence that is all I have to say

  80. on 08 Dec 2008 at 8:42 pm 80.XD said …

    They are very anoying and wont let you say or believe anything but what they believe I-D-I-O-T AND THEY THINK THAT THERE SO CALLED “LOVING” GODHATES THEM AND THINKS THAT THERE EVIL!!!!! also why would God even put the “Devils” apple tree in the garden of eden in the first place LIES I hate close minded people like them they cant even accept facts like global warming and stuff like that because there so called “God” promised never to destroy the world, NEWSFLASH, lieing!!!!! they are close minded idiots no doubt about it!!

  81. on 09 Dec 2008 at 4:25 am 81.schoole rules said …

    Grammar does indeed represent the intelligence of the user. This goes for anybody, regardless of which side of the fence you sit. If one doesn’t have a grasp of the very language he/she attempts to use, aside from the intent of their message being scrambled, it makes them look more foolish than they probably are.
    I’m not talking about perfect caps and apostrophes (although that would be nice), rather simply clear ideas and correct usage of words and sentences to form a coherent message.

  82. on 19 Mar 2009 at 5:14 am 82.joe blsasphemer said …

    I think the whole existence of the Bible is fallacious since the Word of God cannot be accurately transcribed through a human, just like priests molest little boys and Christians are gloating, self-gratifying dolts. Everyone knows the Bible itself is based wholly on Sumerian folklore from 2 millenium before passed down via word of mouth. Why does Jesus remain so mysterious? Because if we really knew about this dude we’d see straight through the lies of Christianity in general. Same goes for all religion. Keeping the “trick” hidden is what keeps these people in business! LOL..

  83. on 20 Mar 2009 at 9:04 am 83.anonymous said …

    I have read about a fourth of the comments on this page and, needless to say, am morbidly amused. Why, might you ask? Well, because I see people “Of the Faith” forcing their half-thought-out lies into the minds of “unbelievers”. I am so glad that my parents weren’t as short sighted as some of you morons in forcing Christianity upon me. I only regret that your ancestors did not have enough brain capacity to recognize the obvious flaws in their beliefs before starting a series of events that tainted another human mind. It is saddening, indeed. With the numbers of people that blindly follow “religion” today, in modern society, it’s no wonder humanity is the teetering edge of it’s own absolute demise.

    PS: Do not attempt to question my intelligence, age, or ‘shortsightedness’. I will outright declare that, yes, I am young. A teenager, infact.

    PPS: I consider myself agnostic. Not atheistic, because I am not so ignorant as to outright declare a ‘higher power’ that cannot possibly exist within the realm of our universe as false. Rather, I merely bash the shortsighted arrogance of it’s pseudo-cultist followers. Yes, you dimwitted lepers, I’m talking about you.

  84. on 20 Mar 2009 at 9:33 am 84.Hermes said …

    Anonymous, welcome. I’m an agnostic as well. I’m also an atheist. The two aren’t opposed to each other. One makes a claim about knowledge (gnosis / agnosis) and the other is a statement of belief (theist / atheist).

    As an agnostic atheist, I don’t claim for a fact to know that there are no gods (agnostic), but I believe that there are none (atheist).

    More details are in the Why Won’t God Heal Amputees forum in this thread;

    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=833

  85. on 15 Nov 2009 at 2:39 am 85.Randy said …

    Short answer to simple question: Yes. Christians are idiots.

  86. on 02 Apr 2010 at 8:55 am 86.christianityiskillingtheworld said …

    Mushinronjya you are my HERO!!! i just had a one and a half hour talk with my buddy(stuck in a car ride home) about this crap… it was driving me CRAZY!!!
    I’m glad there are people in this world who use their brains and think about things and not just BELIEVE….

  87. on 07 Apr 2010 at 7:53 pm 87.UseURHead said …

    I agree, Mushinronjya speaks the truth. People need to think more, question things, and acquire evidence before taking in outlandish beliefs. Yes, I’m talking to you “Organized Religion”.

    p.s. I’m agnostic.

  88. on 26 May 2010 at 9:57 pm 88.john said …

    http://migration.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/christianity.jpg

  89. on 28 Aug 2010 at 4:11 am 89.evelsteve said …

    Of course Christians are idiots. They use faith instead of KNOWLEDGE. Case closed.

  90. on 05 Nov 2010 at 8:56 am 90.Godandreason said …

    To Fahy(the initial responder), all you did in you overly exaggerated response was analyze critical thinking. You offered no rebuttle or agreement to the post, just an overly verbose review of how to analyze a situation. I find this to be a common approach to people who cant really defend their point of view. Think for yourself and dont just defend a document that has been translated and retranslated and split into many different doctrines over the years, how can you ever prove a point in these circumstances? Faith is something you define for yourself, it is never an absolute.

  91. on 16 Dec 2010 at 4:21 pm 91.cheese said …

    I have to agree and disagree with this. What i think god and relgion is something made up by the human mind to explain the unexplanied,but, as things start to become explained then things are changed to fit. Such as (sorry if this isnt true i am using what i learned in science today), when we found out that the world was older then the bible said it was,with evidence, the bible was changed so that each day in the creation story got changed so that was one millon years

  92. on 25 Dec 2010 at 9:02 pm 92.Mike Roth said …

    Can any of you believers produce your God?

    Talking about God is not God.
    Comparing God to a parent is not God.
    Quoting from ancient books of fairy tales is not God.
    Threatening people will eternal punishment is not God.

    Producing this entity you call God, then we can evaluate it to see if it can live up to your claims.
    Otherwise you are a salesman with an empty box.

  93. on 25 Dec 2010 at 9:05 pm 93.Mike Roth said …

    Can any of you believers produce this entity you call God?

    Talking about God is not God
    Saying God lives in your heart is not God
    Comparing god to a parent is not God
    Quoting ancient books is not God

    Produce your God. Then we will evaluate it.
    Otherwise you a salesman with an empty box

  94. on 25 Dec 2010 at 9:08 pm 94.Mike Roth said …

    Correction: Otherwise, you are a salesman with an empty box.

  95. on 26 Dec 2010 at 2:26 am 95.Ben said …

    I believe and worship God. I have no need to sell you God. If you look at the proof of His existence and still do not believe then you would never believe any other proof. The Bible even speaks of those of you who would look at the proof and scoff. The fallacy of thinking we need to sell you the Creator of the universe is absurd.

    Merry Christmas!

  96. on 26 Dec 2010 at 7:09 am 96.Severin said …

    95 Ben
    “I believe and worship God.“
    “The fallacy of thinking…“

    You people all suffer the “fallacy of NOT thinking”.

    God is described as „allmighty“, „all loving“, „all knowing“, Jesus (=god!) as „savior“.

    You worship an immoral, bestial, lunatic god, ready to kill children and pregnant women, and to exterminate the whole population (including children AND all animals), for the sake of his sick need to be worshiped, and for “sins” like sodomy, adultery, worshiping idoles, working on Sabath…
    I mean, to kill people who “sinned” by fucking goats or other people wives, or by praying before some figurines made of clay is sick, but to kill thousands of children and billions of animals is sick lunacy. No right words for it!

    You worship a really sick god ready to kill his own son to satisfy himself. It is YOU, theists, who proudly talk, all the time, that god sacrificed his own son, as that you are telling us something wonderful and noble, not something extremely awful, sick, lunatic.
    Who can worship a being ready to sacrifice his son to himself?!

    You worship an inefficient god!
    He killed the whole population for NOTHING. Did he change something with the big flood? No! People continued “sinning”.
    Did something change after he “sacrificed”: his son to himself?
    NO!
    Too much sufferings and deaths for NOTHING.

    You worship a racist god!
    The “savior” missed to “save” 99.9% of human population! He never gave them CHANCE to be “saved”! He sent billions to hell just becaue he prefered to “save” only some 0.1 % of population of earth.
    Your “all loving savior” obviously HATED people in China, Americas, Europe, Africa, Australia…
    He sent billion individuals, generations and generations to hell without even INFORMING them about possibility to be saved!

    Merry Christmas!

  97. on 26 Dec 2010 at 3:25 pm 97.Anti-Theist said …

    You profess no interest in the promotion of your supernatural being toward we atheists, something I doubt anyone subscribes to; why then are you here?, attempting to aggressively rouse faultless (in respect to your existence)strangers. We would all believe in your beloved deity, regardless of past grotesque transgressions, provided credible evidence. That is not to say I would ever worship such a creature; I can believe in the existence of the pope or mother Teresa , both either evil or stupid, without worshiping them. The writers of your canon knowing that people would identify its contents as lunacy will never, regardless of your / others tantrums, make it less than a lame mythological anecdote.

  98. on 26 Dec 2010 at 3:46 pm 98.Ben said …

    I do hope you both have a wonderful Christmas. I also dearly hope and pray you will discover the wonderful Lord and Savior Jesus Christ during this time we celebrate His birth.

  99. on 26 Dec 2010 at 5:50 pm 99.Anti-Theist said …

    Merry Christmas

  100. on 27 Dec 2010 at 6:13 am 100.Hell Yeah said …

    “I also dearly hope and pray you will discover the wonderful Lord and Savior Jesus Christ during this time we celebrate His birth.”

    Keep praying. It won’t do you any good. By the way, your Jesus would have been born in the spring time, so you might want to delay your celebration until then.

  101. on 27 Dec 2010 at 6:17 am 101.Hell Yeah said …

    “If you look at the proof of His existence and still do not believe then you would never believe any other proof. The Bible even speaks of those of you who would look at the proof and scoff.”

    What proof?

    Who ever wrote the bible knew it wasn’t real and that people would question it’s validity, so of course the writers would put something like that in there to give believers a reason not to see the reality non-believers are trying to point out to them.

  102. on 01 Apr 2011 at 2:10 am 102.Frank Rizzo said …

    Look you germs, you’re all psychotic goofs. The Bible is a work of fiction by a bunch of guys working the crowd control angles over the years. No different than any other creative scam artists like the creeps in the Vatican. And the Christians love to follow along, dumb as clams, happy as puppies, clueless as deluded Christians.

    Hey buddy, you and I are going to the same place when we bite the big one…6 feet under in a box. Thats it, nothing else. No heaven, hell, pergatory, Walmart, etc. So you can push your Christian ‘truths’ and surf the Internet for other clueless rubes to scam, and in the end, we’re all blobs of protoplasm waiting to be squished. Just hoping your squishing hurts the most you creeps.

  103. on 14 Oct 2011 at 7:26 am 103.Anon said …

    Yes, they all are.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUVXEmJRGns

  104. on 24 Oct 2011 at 2:41 am 104.Epic Win said …

    lol, mushinronjiya & co are epic trolls xD

  105. on 13 Jul 2012 at 2:31 am 105.Ranz said …

    Stupid is as stupid does.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply