Feed on Posts or Comments 21 September 2014

Christianity Thomas on 21 Mar 2013 12:40 am

The insanity of religion – History Channel edition

Do Christians think about the things they say? The logical implications of what they say? A perfect example is presented here:

Christian radio host: ‘God guided’ History Channel to prove Obama is Satan

“I don’t believe they intentionally portrayed the Lucifer character to look like Mr. Obama,” the Christian radio host noted. “I think God guided the hand of the makeup artist and blinded the eyes of everybody on the movie set while it was being recorded, and the spiritual blinders were removed Sunday night when the program was broadcast nationally on the History Channel.”

“How many clues do we need from Heaven to understand that the man in the White House is a devil from Hell?”

If this God is so powerful, so willful and so interactive that he would “guide the hand of makeup artists” and “blind the eyes of everybody on the movie set”, then how in the world did Obama get elected? If Obama is the “devil from Hell”, how did Obama get re-elected? Isn’t God capable of guiding an election just as easily?

Christians who make statements like the ones seen in this article truly do appear to be insane.

236 Responses to “The insanity of religion – History Channel edition”

  1. on 21 Mar 2013 at 3:33 pm 1.RJ said …

    Hahaha, I read that quote somewhere else and thought the same thing. More evidence of the way christians must shut down the ‘logic’ part of their brains in order to maintain their dellusion that their god actually does stuff.

  2. on 21 Mar 2013 at 11:24 pm 2.The messenger said …

    It is a logical to assume that the statement made by the Christian is true.

    God guides us everyday by giving us signs of what is right and wrong.

    Athiest have a hard time understanding that.

    I pity them.

  3. on 22 Mar 2013 at 12:03 am 3.The messenger said …

    Thomas, thankyou for providing the credible evidence that proves once and for all that you are a certified connoisseur of inane, feeble, pointless arguments.

  4. on 22 Mar 2013 at 5:22 am 4.Xcanthean Zeno said …

    Thankyou messenger for showing how deluded you are.
    kk thx bie

  5. on 22 Mar 2013 at 11:25 am 5.The messenger said …

    4.Xcanthean Zeno, you have provided no evidence thatsupports your side of the arguement.

    Therefore,your arguement is proved to be completely pointless.

  6. on 22 Mar 2013 at 1:25 pm 6.MrQ said …

    Show me the proof that Obama is Satan. Can you? Oh, some xtian moron says so and that is good enough for you?
    The Mess states:

    It is a logical to assume that the statement made by the Christian is true.

    That’s it??? Are you a troll, or just plain stupid? WTF!!!! Xtian logic? Talk about oxyMORON…

  7. on 22 Mar 2013 at 5:27 pm 7.freddies_dead said …

    2.The messenger said …

    It is a logical to assume that the statement made by the Christian is true.

    Logical doesn’t mean what you think it means.

  8. on 22 Mar 2013 at 8:47 pm 8.The messenger said …

    Brother 6.MrQ, I provided some of this proof within comment 2, when I stated the following….

    “God guides us everyday by giving us signs of what is right and wrong.”

    Here is more proof that Obama is a devil.

    http://c.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/common-sense/2013/feb/28/sequester-lies-backfire-obama-character-assassinat/

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/341553/obama-caught-lying-about-sequester-deroy-murdock

  9. on 22 Mar 2013 at 10:47 pm 9.DPK said …

    “Logical doesn’t mean what you think it means.”

    It’s like trying to teach algebra to a dog. You can be a great teacher, but nothin’s gonna happen.

  10. on 23 Mar 2013 at 12:22 am 10.Adam said …

    Have you not heard of the antichrist? Now I’m not saying that that Obama is the antichrist but people need sit down and think about what is happening in the world today and the bible says whats going to happen. And there are some scary coincidence. Has anyone who makes out the claim that there is no God, actually read the bible?

  11. on 23 Mar 2013 at 12:36 am 11.alex said …

    “Have you not heard of the antichrist? ”

    ever heard of the antibullshit? that’s me and my detector is going hog wild. when i mouseover your name, the arrow goes to the red.

  12. on 23 Mar 2013 at 2:48 am 12.s0l0m0n said …

    “ever heard of the antibullshit? that’s me the future” inhabitants of ((((((HHHEEELLL)))))!!!

  13. on 23 Mar 2013 at 4:09 am 13.The messenger said …

    Mr. 9.DPK, l have provided much evidence that supports my claim.

    You have yet to present any information that supports your claim.

    I pray for you.

  14. on 23 Mar 2013 at 4:36 am 14.The messenger said …

    on 23 Mar 2013 at 4:34 am 282.The messenger said … Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Brother 281.alex, I pity you, and I pray for you.
    You are consumed by hate, stupidity, and arrogance.
    You do not know love or kindness.
    You are the same rabble that God wiped off the Earth in the flood.

  15. on 23 Mar 2013 at 4:38 am 15.The messenger said …

    10.Adam, keep up the Good work brother,

    God is with us.

  16. on 23 Mar 2013 at 4:47 am 16.alex said …

    hey, the bullshit meter is going off again! what gives? oh shit, it’s the s0l fuckhead. taking a break from his sheep. hey, mister, leave those sheep alone.

  17. on 23 Mar 2013 at 12:10 pm 17.The messenger said …

    Mr. 16.alex, I am not insulting you, I am simply stating your flaws.
    I pray for you.

  18. on 23 Mar 2013 at 5:13 pm 18.alex said …

    whoop, whoop. there it goes again! wtf? oh, never mind. it’s the bullshitmeister hisself, old mess. where his crusty sidekick, sheepking s0l?

  19. on 24 Mar 2013 at 3:01 am 19.Hell Yeah said …

    Here is a video of you creationists the first time you found this site. Enjoy!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fhvmg9oiWU

  20. on 24 Mar 2013 at 5:33 am 20.The messenger said …

    on 24 Mar 2013 at 5:20 am 550.The messenger said … Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Brother 547.Billy Butcher, here are some philosophers that did write about Jesus.
    Church Fathers
    The Church Fathers, an 11th-century Kievan miniature from Svyatoslav’s Miscellany
    The Church Fathers, Early Church Fathers, Christian Fathers, or Fathers of the Church were early, often influential Christian theologians, some of whom were eminent teachers and great bishops. The term is used of writers or teachers of the Church, not necessarily “saints”, and not necessarily ordained, though many are honoured as saints in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran Churches, and other Churches and groups.
    Origen Adamantius and Tertullian, often considered Church Fathers, were not canonized as saints by the Catholic Church[1][2] due to their holding views later deemed heretical.
    HideApostolic Fathers
    Main article: Apostolic Fathers
    The earliest Church Fathers, (within two generations of the Twelve Apostles of Christ) are usually called the Apostolic Fathers since tradition describes them as having been taught by the twelve. Important Apostolic Fathers include Clement of Rome,[3]Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp of Smyrna. In addition, the Didache and Shepherd of Hermas are usually placed among the writings of the Apostolic Fathers although their authors are unknown; like the works of Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp, they were first written in Koine Greek.
    Clement of Rome
    Main article: Clement of Rome
    His epistle, 1 Clement (c.96),[3] was copied and widely read in the Early Church.[4] Clement calls on the Christians of Corinth to maintain harmony and order.[3] It is the earliest Christian epistle outside the New Testament.
    Ignatius of Antioch
    Main article: Ignatius of Antioch
    Ignatius of Antioch (also known as Theophorus) (c.35-110)[5] was the third bishop or Patriarch of Antioch and a student of the Apostle John. En route to his martyrdom in Rome, Ignatius wrote a series of letters which have been preserved. Important topics addressed in these letters include ecclesiology, the sacraments, the role of bishops, and Biblical Sabbath.[6] He is the second after Clement to mention Paul’s epistles.[3]
    Polycarp of Smyrna
    Main article: Polycarp of Smyrna
    Polycarp of Smyrna (c.69–c.155) was a Christian bishop of Smyrna (now ?zmir in Turkey). It is recorded that he had been a disciple of John. The options for this John are John the son of Zebedee traditionally viewed as the author of the Gospel of John, or John the Presbyter.[7] Traditional advocates follow Eusebius in insisting that the apostolic connection of Polycarp was with John the Evangelist, and that this John, the author of the Gospel of John, was the same as the Apostle John.
    Polycarp tried and failed to persuade Anicetus, Bishop of Rome, to have the West celebrate Passover on 14 Nisan, as in the East. In c.155, the Smyrnans demanded Polycarp’s execution as a Christian, and he died a martyr. His story has it that the flames built to kill him refused to burn him and that when he was stabbed to death, so much blood issued from his body that it quenched the flames around him.[3] Polycarp is recognized as a saint in both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.
    HideGreek Fathers
    Those who wrote in Greek are called the Greek (Church) Fathers. Famous Greek Fathers include: Clement of Rome, Irenaeus of Lyons, Clement of Alexandria, Athanasius of Alexandria, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria the Cappadocian Fathers (Basil of Caesarea, Gregory Nazianzus, Peter of Sebaste, Gregory of Nyssa), Maximus the Confessor, and John of Damascus.
    Irenaeus of Lyons
    Main article: Irenaeus
    Irenaeus was bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, which is now Lyon(s), France. His writings were formative in the early development of Christian theology, and he is recognized as a saint by both the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. He was a notable early Christian apologist. He was also a disciple of Polycarp.
    His best-known book, Against Heresies (c.180) enumerated heresies and attacked them. Irenaeus wrote that the only way for Christians to retain unity was to humbly accept one doctrinal authority—episcopal councils.[3] Irenaeus proposed that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all be accepted as canonical.
    Clement of Alexandria
    Main article: Clement of Alexandria
    Clement of Alexandria (Titus Flavius Clemens) was the first member of the church of Alexandria to be more than a name, and one of its most distinguished teachers. He united Greek philosophical traditions with Christian doctrine and valued gnosis that with communion for all people could be held by common Christians. He developed a Christian Platonism.[3] Like Origen, he arose from Catechetical School of Alexandria and was well versed in pagan literature.[3]
    Origen of Alexandria
    Main article: Origen
    Origen, or Origen Adamantius (c.185–c.254) was a scholar and theologian. According to tradition, he was an Egyptian[8] who taught in Alexandria, reviving the Catechetical School where Clement had taught. The patriarch of Alexandria at first supported Origen but later expelled him for being ordained without the patriarch’s permission. He relocated to Caesarea Maritima and died there[9] after being tortured during a persecution.
    Using his knowledge of Hebrew, he produced a corrected Septuagint.[3] He wrote commentaries on all the books of the Bible.[3] In Peri Archon (First Principles), he articulated the first philosophical exposition of Christian doctrine.[3] He interpreted scripture allegorically and showed himself to be a stoic, a Neo-Pythagorean, and a Platonist.[3] Like Plotinus, he wrote that the soul passes through successive stages before incarnation as a human and after death, eventually reaching God.[3] He imagined even demons being reunited with God. For Origen, God was not Yahweh but the First Principle, and Christ, the Logos, was subordinate to him.[3] His views of a hierarchical structure in the Trinity, the temporality of matter, “the fabulous preexistence of souls”, and “the monstrous restoration which follows from it” were declared anathema in the 6th century.[10][11] Because of his heretical views, Origen is technically not a Church Father by many definitions of that term but instead may simply be referred to as an ecclesiastical writer.[1]
    Athanasius of Alexandria
    St. Athanasius, depicted with a book, an iconographic symbol of the importance of his writings.
    Main article: Athanasius of Alexandria
    Athanasius of Alexandria (c.293–2 May 373) was a theologian, Pope of Alexandria, and a noted Egyptian leader of the 4th century. He is remembered for his role in the conflict with Arianism and for his affirmation of the Trinity. At the First Council of Nicaea (325), Athanasius argued against the Arian doctrine that Christ is of a distinct substance from the Father.[3]
    Cappadocian Fathers
    Main article: Cappadocian Fathers
    The Cappadocians promoted early Christian theology and are highly respected in both Western and Eastern churches as saints. They were a 4th-century monastic family, led by Saint Macrina the Younger (324–379) to provide a central place for her brothers to study and meditate, and also to provide a peaceful shelter for their mother. Abbess Macrina fostered the education and development of three men who collectively became designated the Cappadocian Fathers: Basil the Great (330–379) who was the second oldest of Macrina’s brothers and became a bishop; Gregory of Nyssa (c.335 – after 394) who also became a bishop of the diocese associated thereafter with his name; and Peter of Sebaste (c.340 – 391) who was the youngest brother and became bishop of Sebaste.
    These scholars along with a close friend, Gregory Nazianzus, set out to demonstrate that Christians could hold their own in conversations with learned Greek-speaking intellectuals. They argued that Christian faith, while it was against many of the ideas of Plato and Aristotle (and other Greek Philosophers), it was an almost scientific and distinctive movement with the healing of the soul of man and his union with God at its center. They made major contributions to the definition of the Trinity finalized at the First Council of Constantinople in 381 and the final version of the Nicene Creed.
    Subsequent to the First Council of Nicea, Arianism did not simply disappear. The semi-Arians taught that the Son is of like substance with the Father (homoiousios), as against the outright Arians who taught that the Son was unlike the Father (heterousian). So the Son was held to be like the Father but not of the same essence as the Father. The Cappadocians worked to bring these semi-Arians back to the Orthodox cause. In their writings they made extensive use of the formula “three substances (hypostases) in one essence (homoousia)”, and thus explicitly acknowledged a distinction between the Father and the Son (a distinction that Nicea had been accused of blurring) but at the same time insisting on their essential unity.
    John Chrysostom
    Main article: John Chrysostom
    John Chrysostom (c.347–c.407), archbishop of Constantinople, is known for his eloquence in preaching and public speaking; his denunciation of abuse of authority by both ecclesiastical and political leaders, recorded sermons and writings making him the most prolific of the eastern fathers, and his ascetic sensibilities. After his death (or according to some sources, during his life) he was given the Greek epithet chrysostomos, meaning “golden mouthed”, rendered in English as Chrysostom.[12][13]
    Chrysostom is known within Christianity chiefly as a preacher and theologian, particularly in the Eastern Orthodox Church; he is the patron saint of orators in the Roman Catholic Church. Chrysostom is also noted for eight of his sermons that played a considerable part in the history of Christian antisemitism, which were extensively cited by the Nazis in their ideological campaign against the Jews.[14][15]
    Cyril of Alexandria
    Main article: Cyril of Alexandria
    Cyril of Alexandria (c.378–444) was the Bishop of Alexandria when the city was at its height of influence and power within the Roman Empire. Cyril wrote extensively and was a leading protagonist in the Christological controversies of the late 4th and early 5th centuries. He was a central figure in the First Council of Ephesus in 431, which led to the deposition of Nestorius as Archbishop of Constantinople. Cyril’s reputation within the Christian world has resulted in his titles “Pillar of Faith” and “Seal of all the Fathers”.
    Maximus the Confessor
    Main article: Maximus the Confessor
    Maximus the Confessor (also known as Maximus the Theologian and Maximus of Constantinople) (c.580–13 August 662) was a Christian monk, theologian, and scholar. In his early life, he was a civil servant and an aide to the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius. However, he gave up this life in the political sphere to enter into the monastic life.
    After moving to Carthage, Maximus studied several Neo-Platonist writers and became a prominent author. When one of his friends began espousing the Christological position known as Monothelitism, Maximus was drawn into the controversy, in which he supported the Chalcedonian position that Jesus had both a human and a divine will. Maximus is venerated in both Eastern Christianity and Western Christianity. His Christological positions eventually resulted in his torture and exile, soon after which he died. However, his theology was vindicated by the Third Council of Constantinople, and he was venerated as a saint soon after his death. His feast day is celebrated twice during the year: on 21 January and on 13 August. His title of Confessor means that he suffered for the faith, but not to the point of death, and thus is distinguished from a martyr. His Life of the Virgin is thought to be the earliest complete biography of Mary, the mother of Jesus.
    John of Damascus
    Main article: John of Damascus
    Saint John of Damascus (Arabic: ????? ??????? Yu?ann? Al Demashqi; Greek: ??????? ?????????? (Iôannês Damaskênos); Latin: Iohannes Damascenus; also known as John Damascene, ??????????/Chrysorrhoas, “streaming with gold”—i.e., “the golden speaker”) (c.676–4 December 749) was a Syrian Christian monk and priest. Born and raised in Damascus, he died at his monastery, Mar Saba, near Jerusalem.
    A polymath whose fields of interest and contribution included law, theology, philosophy, and music, before being ordained, he served as a chief administrator to the Muslim caliph of Damascus, wrote works expounding the Christian faith, and composed hymns which are still in use in Eastern Christian monasteries. The Catholic Church regards him as a Doctor of the Church, often referred to as the Doctor of the Assumption because of his writings on the Assumption of Mary.
    HideLatin Fathers
    Those fathers who wrote in Latin are called the Latin (Church) Fathers.
    Tertullian
    Main article: Tertullian
    Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus (c.160–c.225), who was converted to Christianity before 197, was a prolific writer of apologetic, theological, controversial and ascetic works.[16] He was born in Carthage, the son of a Roman centurion.
    Tertullian denounced Christian doctrines he considered heretical, but later in life adopted views that themselves came to be regarded as heretical. He wrote three books in Greek and was the first great writer of Latin Christianity, thus sometimes known as the “Father of the Latin Church”.[17] He was evidently a lawyer in Rome.[18] He is said to have introduced the Latin term “trinitas” with regard to the Divine (Trinity) to the Christian vocabulary[19] (but Theophilus of Antioch already wrote of “the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom”, which is similar but not identical to the Trinitarian wording),[20] and also probably the formula “three Persons, one Substance” as the Latin “tres Personae, una Substantia” (itself from the Koine Greek “????? ??????????, ?????????; treis Hypostases, Homoousios”), and also the terms “vetus testamentum” (Old Testament) and “novum testamentum” (New Testament).
    In his Apologeticus, he was the first Latin author who qualified Christianity as the “vera religio”, and systematically relegated the classical Roman Empire religion and other accepted cults to the position of mere “superstitions”.
    Later in life, Tertullian joined the Montanists, a heretical sect that appealed to his rigorism.[16] He used the early church’s symbol for fish—the Greek word for “fish” being ????? which is an acronym for “?????? ???????, ???? ????, ?????” (Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Saviour)—to explain the meaning of Baptism since fish are born in water. He wrote that human beings are like little fish.
    Cyprian of Carthage
    Main article: Cyprian of Carthage
    Saint Cyprian (Thascius Caecilius Cyprianus) (died September 14, 258) was bishop of Carthage and an important early Christian writer. He was born in North Africa, probably at the beginning of the 3rd century, perhaps at Carthage, where he received an excellent classical (pagan) education. After converting to Christianity, he became a bishop and eventually died a martyr at Carthage.
    Hilary of Poitiers
    Main article: Hilary of Poitiers
    Hilary of Poitiers (c.300 – c.368) was Bishop of Poitiers and is a Doctor of the Church. He was sometimes referred to as the “Hammer of the Arians” (Latin: Malleus Arianorum) and the “Athanasius of the West.” His name comes from the Greek word for happy or cheerful. His optional memorial in the Roman Catholic calendar of saints is 13 January. In the past, when this date was occupied by the Octave Day of the Epiphany, his feast day was moved to 14 January.
    Ambrose of Milan
    Main article: Ambrose of Milan
    Saint Ambrose[21] was an archbishop of Milan who became one of the most influential ecclesiastical figures of the 4th century. He is counted as one of the four original doctors of the Church.
    Jerome of Stridonium
    Main article: Jerome
    Jerome (c.347–September 30, 420) is best known as the translator of the Bible from Greek and Hebrew into Latin. He also was a Christian apologist. Jerome’s edition of the Bible, the Vulgate, is still an important text of Catholicism. He is recognised by the Roman Catholic Church as a Doctor of the Church.
    Augustine of Hippo
    Main article: Augustine of Hippo
    Augustine (13 November 354–28 August 430), Bishop of Hippo, was a philosopher and theologian. Augustine, a Latin Father and Doctor of the Church, is one of the most important figures in the development of Western Christianity. Augustine was radically influenced by Platonism.[22] He framed the concepts of original sin and just war as they are understood in the West. When Rome fell and the faith of many Christians was shaken, Augustine developed the concept of the Church as a spiritual City of God, distinct from the material City of Man.[3] Augustine’s work defined the start of the medieval worldview, an outlook that would later be firmly established by Pope Gregory the Great.[3]
    Augustine was born in present day Algeria to a Christian mother, Saint Monica. He was educated in North Africa and resisted his mother’s pleas to become Christian. He took a concubine and became a Manichean. He later converted to Christianity, became a bishop, and opposed heresies, such as Pelagianism. His works—including The Confessions, which is often called the first Western autobiography—are still read around the world. After his word work to proclaim the word of God, he is now regarded as a father saint to many institutions, and some have been named after him.
    Gregory the Great
    Main article: Gregory the Great
    Saint Gregory I the Great (c.540–12 March 604) was pope from 3 September 590 until his death. He is also known as Gregorius Dialogus (Gregory the Dialogist) in Eastern Orthodoxy because of the Dialogues he wrote. He was the first of the popes from a monastic background. Gregory is a Doctor of the Church and one of the four great Latin Fathers of the Church (the others being Ambrose, Augustine, and Jerome). Of all popes, Gregory I had the most influence on the early medieval church.[23]
    Isidore of Seville
    Main article: Isidore of Seville
    Saint Isidore of Seville (Spanish: San Isidro or San Isidoro de Sevilla, Latin: Isidorus Hispalensis) (c.560–4 April 636) was Archbishop of Seville for more than three decades and is considered, as the historian Montalembert put it in an oft-quoted phrase, “le dernier savant du monde ancien” (“the last scholar of the ancient world”). Indeed, all the later medieval history-writing of Hispania (the Iberian Peninsula, comprising modern Spain and Portugal) was based on his histories.
    At a time of disintegration of classical culture and aristocratic violence and illiteracy, he was involved in the conversion of the royal Visigothic Arians to Catholicism, both assisting his brother Leander of Seville and continuing after his brother’s death. He was influential in the inner circle of Sisebut, Visigothic king of Hispania. Like Leander, he played a prominent role in the Councils of Toledo and Seville. The Visigothic legislation which resulted from these councils is regarded by modern historians as exercising an important influence on the beginnings of representative government.
    ShowOther fathers
    ShowModern positions
    ShowPatristics
    ShowSee also
    ShowReferences
    ShowExternal links
    ShowRead in another language
    Last modified 2 days ago
    DesktopMobile
    Page by contributors like you
    Content available under CC BY-SA 3.0 | Terms of Use
    PrivacyAboutDisclaimers

    I am transferring this comment here, so that I can ensure that I will get a response.

  21. on 24 Mar 2013 at 1:33 pm 21.alex said …

    messenger, get your shit outta here. it don’t mean fuck. your cut/paste crap is just that. you haven’t uttered one single original.

    but, your shit will be ignored, just like the rest. now, why don’t you fuck with the catholics. it seems, like your own beliefs directly contradicts them.

    get it thru your head. your bullshit offer of heaven and your threat of hell is laughable. write it down (and i’m sure google will index it). when i get close to death, i will video chronicle my deathroe and stream it live. i will personally call out your bullshit god, live for all the world to see. i ain’t afraid motherfucker. you are though, sissy boy.

  22. on 24 Mar 2013 at 3:06 pm 22.The messenger said …

    21.alex, I speak from the bible. You are misguided.

    I pray for you.

  23. on 25 Mar 2013 at 4:26 pm 23.SisterChromatid said …

    22 The messenger–
    You pray for others, we’ll think for you.

    It’s time to grow up. There are no invisible beings. The ones you believe in are as mythological as the ones you don’t.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUOg5F886xw&feature=player_embedded#!

  24. on 26 Mar 2013 at 1:37 pm 24.freddies_dead said …

    20.The messenger said …

    A huge article C&P’d from Wikipedia.

    What a pointless exercise. Did you think we wouldn’t notice that the “philosophers” in your article were ALL Christians. Why would you expect them to do anything other than mention Jesus?

  25. on 26 Mar 2013 at 10:01 pm 25.The messenger said …

    23.SisterChromatid, GOD is real. Here is proof of a miricle that happend durring the last century.

    Miracle of the Sun

    Location of Fátima, Portugal
    The Miracle of the Sun (Portuguese: O Milagre do Sol) was an event on 13 October 1917 which was attended by 30,000 to 100,000 people, who were gathered near Fátima, Portugal. Several newspaper reporters were in attendance and they took testimony from many people who claimed to have witnessed extraordinary solar activity. This recorded testimony was later added to by an Italian Catholic priest and researcher in the 1940s.

    According to these reports, the event lasted approximately ten minutes.[1] The three children also reported seeing a panorama of visions, including those of Jesus, Our Lady of Sorrows, Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, and of Saint Joseph blessing the people.[2]

    The event was officially accepted as a miracle by the Roman Catholic Church on 13 October 1930. On 13 October 1951, the papal legate, Cardinal Tedeschini, told the million people gathered at Fátima that on 30 October, 31 October, 1 November, and 8 November 1950, Pope Pius XII himself witnessed the miracle of the sun from the Vatican gardens.[3]

    HideThe event

    People witnessing the event.
    The people had gathered because three young shepherd children had predicted that at high noon the Blessed Virgin Mary would appear in a field in an area of Fatima called Cova da Iria. According to many witnesses, after a period of rain, the dark clouds broke and the sun appeared as an opaque, spinning disc in the sky.[4] It was said to be significantly duller than normal, and to cast multicolored lights across the landscape, the shadows on the landscape, the people, and the surrounding clouds.[4] The sun was then reported to have careened towards the earth in a zigzag pattern,[4] frightening those who thought it a sign of the end of the world.[5] Witnesses reported that their previously wet clothes became “suddenly and completely dry, as well as the wet and muddy ground that had been previously soaked because of the rain that had been falling”.[6]

    Estimates of number present range from 30,000 to 40,000 by Avelino de Almeida, writing for the Portuguese newspaper O Século,[7] to 100,000, estimated by Dr. Joseph Garrett, professor of natural sciences at the University of Coimbra,[8] both of whom were present that day.[9]

    The event was attributed by believers to Our Lady of Fátima, a reported apparition of the Blessed Virgin Mary to the children who had made predictions of the event on 13 July 1917,[10] 19 August,[11] and 13 September.[12] The children stated that the Lady had promised them that she would on 13 October reveal her identity to them[13] and provide a miracle “so that all may believe.”[14]

    ShowDe Marchi accounts

    ShowCritical evaluation of the event

    ShowMedia

    ShowSee also

    ShowReferences

    ShowBibliography

    ShowExternal links

    ShowRead in another language

    Last modified 25 days ago

  26. on 26 Mar 2013 at 11:27 pm 26.The messenger said …

    Here are some more miricles that occurred.

    Miracles of the Saints
    This website is devoted to the extraordinary miracles of God.

    Saint Miracles

    Miracles of the Saints

    Welcome to the Miracles of the Saints website where we will explore all the extraordinary graces that God has wrought in the lives of the Saints, His beloved servants. While God reveals Himself in all the marvels of creation, His has chosen to manifest Himself and His love for humanity in very special manner in the lives of His Saints. For in the Gospel of John, Jesus said to His disciples: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else, believe because of the works themselves. Truly I say to you, whoever believes in me will do the works that I do, and will do greater ones than these, because I am going to the Father. And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son”

    So given Jesus’ promise, it is not at all surprising then that the servants of God have wrought the most remarkable miracles in the name of Jesus, such as Saints who raised the dead, miraculous cures and healings, prophecy, bilocation, stigmata, the crown of thorns, mystical knowledge, levitation and ecstatic flights, miraculous voices from heaven, gift of understanding and also speaking foriegn and ancient biblical languages, miracles with animals , Saints whose bodies remain incorrupt after death, miraculous mail deliveries, and complete fasting from food for years, to name just a few. The purpose then of this website is to reveal some of these marvelous works of God in the lives of His Saints, that those who visit here may love Him all the more. -All for the greater glory of God!

    “I will show wonders in the heavens above, and signs on the earth below” -Acts 2:19
    _______________________________

    Some of the Miracles in the lives of the Saints:
    -A more complete list is on the menu bar to the right====>

    Stigmata:
    “…My Mom [Blessed Virgin Mary] said to me: ‘Jesus, my Son, loves you very much, and wishes to give you a grace. Would you know how to become worthy of it?’
    In my misery I knew not what to answer. Then She continued: ‘I will be a Mother to you; will you show yourself a true daughter?’ And after saying this She opened her mantle and covered me with it. At that instant Jesus appeared with all His wounds open; but blood no longer issued from those wounds, but flames of fire. In an instant those flames came and touched my hands, feet and heart. I felt I was dying and should have fallen had not my Mom held me up, I remaining all the while covered with her mantle, and thus I remained for several hours. Afterwards my Mom kissed me on the forehead, then everything vanished and I found myself kneeling on the ground, but still feeling intense pain in my hands, feet and heart. I got up to go to bed and saw blood flowing from those places where I felt the pain. I covered them up as best I could and then, with the help of my guardian angel, got into bed.”
    -Click here for more of the holy Stigmata in the lives of the Saints

    Bilocation
    “Signora Concetta Bellarmini of S. Vito Lanciano declares that she was suddenly stricken with a blood infection followed by bronchial pneumonia with a very high fever. She was reduced to such a state that the doctors despaired of ever saving her. The flesh had become yellow from the infection which had spread throughout her body.

    “A relative urged her to direct her prayers to Padre Pio. She prayed to him whom she has never seen, when suddenly in full daylight a stigmatized monk appeared to her and smiling blessed her without touching her as he stood in the middle of the room. The woman asked him if his appearance signified the grace for the conversion of her children, or else the grace for her physical cure. Then Padre answered, “On Sunday morning you will be cured,” then he vanished from the room, leaving an odor of perfume which the servant girl also smelled. After this visit her flesh turned normal color, the fever ceased and on Sunday morning her health was completely restored. She went with her brother to San Giovanni Rotondo to see if Padre Pio was the one who appeared to her. When she arrived at the Monastery and saw Padre Pio in the church she turned to her brother and said, “There he is, he is the one!”
    -Click here for more of Bilocation of St Padre Pio

    Mystical Knowledge- The gift of reading into hearts
    About the year 1840 a certain man named Rochette took his son, who was sick, to the wonder-worker of Ars. His wife accompanied him; she went to confession and received Holy Communion.
    As for Rochette, he had but one concern: namely, to obtain the cure of his boy. He paid, indeed, a few visits to the church, but he kept in the neighbourhood of the holy water font. There he was when the saint, coming from behind the altar where he was hearing the confessions of priests, began to call him. He refused to budge. At that moment his wife and his son were close to the altar rails. “Is he really that much an unbeliever?” Father Vianney asked the wife. At last, at the third summons, the man decided to walk up the nave. “After all,” he thought, “the Cure d’ Ars will not eat me!” He went with Father Vianney behind the altar. There was no time to lose. “This is for both of us, Rochette,” said the Cure, and, pointing to the confessional: “Go into there,” he said.
    “Oh!” Rochette replied, “I don’t feel like it.” “Well, we shall begin here then.” replied Father Vianney.
    Incapable of offering resistance to so sudden an attack, Rochette had fallen on his knees.
    “My father,” he stammered, “..it is some time…ten years….”
    “Make it a little more.” “Twelve years then. . . .” “Still yet a little more.” replied the holy Cure.
    “Yes, since the great jubilee of 1826.”
    “Ah! there we are! One finds it by a dint of seeking.”
    Rochette then made his confession like a child. The following day saw him kneeling by the side of his wife at the altar rails. Their boy, the faithful chronicler adds, left the church of Ars without his two crutches, for which he had no further use. The father was cured of his spiritual illness, the son the physical. A double miracle!
    Click here for more of St John Vianney’s gift of reading into hearts.

    A Voice from beyond the grave- The miraculous voice of St Clelia Barbieri
    St Clelia Barbieri died of tuberculosis on July 13, 1870 when she was only 23 years old. Her last words to her religious Sisters were prophetic: “Be brave because I am going to Paradise; but I shall always remain with you, too; I shall never abandon you!” This prophecy was realized as she soon proved her presence by the sounding of her voice. The miraculous phenomenon of her voice first took place during the evening of July 13, 1871, exactly one year after Clelia’s death, while the sisters were at prayer in the chapel. The Sisters declared that:

    “Suddenly there was the sound of a high-pitched, harmonious and heavenly voice that accompanied the singing in the choir; at times it sang solo, at other times it harmonized with the choir, moving across from right to left; sometimes it passed close by the ears of one or other of the sisters. The joy which it brought filled our hearts with a happiness impossible to put into words. This wasn’t of this world. We lived that day in paradise. From time to time, one had to leave the room … The emotion that we experienced was so strong that it left you breathless until one had to call out: “Enough, dear Lord, enough!”
    And remarkably, her voice is still heard today….
    -Click here for more of a Voice from the afterlife, St Clelia Barbieri

    Prophecies in the lives of the Saints
    At the convent in Besancon, France St. Colette foretold an event that would take place in the next century. A great fire, she foretold, would burn the convent building to the ground. The nuns were horrified and pressed the Saint to tell them if the fire could be stopped. Colette shook her head sadly and told the nuns: “When the big cross out there in the cemetery falls down across the graves, they will know the fire is about to come. Let them be warned and run out of the house. But they will not be able to prevent the disaster.” The nuns who heard this prophecy from the Saint’s lips wrote the warning in the convent’s archives for their sisters of the next century.

    And so it was in 1510, that is 60 years later, the great cross fell over the graves. The nuns were terrified and began at once to take every precaution to prevent the fire that had been predicted. However, their precautionary endeavors were to no avail. The fire began and destroyed the convent the next day. It is said that perhaps God not only wanted to show that He was guiding His servant Colette and her Community throughout the ages, but also the indestructibility of the spiritual Community that Colette had built through the grace of God, since the convent was rebuilt soon afterwards, and remains even today.
    -Click here for more prophecies from the Saints…

    Levitation and Ecstatic Flights:
    St Gerard Majella was often enraptured into remarkable levitations, often being drawn away by God for some distances. It was sufficient for St Gerard Majella to think of the love of God, or to contemplate the mystery of Incarnation, to cast his eyes upon a crucifix or a picture of the Blessed Virgin, or to be in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament.

    One of the many examples would be when St Gerard, intending to spend some days at Oliveto, received hospitality at the house of an archpriest named Don Salvadore. The miracle took place on the very morning of his arrival at Oliveto. Gerard had withdrawn to his room to pray. At the dinner hour, the archpriest went himself to invite him to dinner. But to his astonishment he found the brother ravished in ecstasy and raised about three feet from the ground. Filled with amazement, he withdrew, but returning shortly after, he found him in the same state. The whole household, all witnesses to the extraordinary event, unable to sit down to dinner, awaited the guest with tears of emotion. At last he appeared, his face all inflamed. “Please do not wait for me,” he said to the archpriest. “I do not wish to inconvenience you.” To preserve the memory of this rapture, the archpriest marked on the wall of the room the height to which he had seen the Saint elevated.
    -Click here for more stories of levitation in the lives of the Saints

    Miracles of the Saints over Nature:
    Father Paul and the miraculous messenger birds
    Whenever Father Paul of Moll visited Antwerp he would call upon a certain invalid lady and her servant, Theresa. In the year 1887, he told the servant Theresa that she would know beforehand of his approaching visits. At his next visit he asked, “Well, have the little birds announced my coming?”

    As a matter of fact, on the eve of Father Paul’s visits to the lady, beautiful little birds, varying in number from two to twelve at a time, began to make their appearance in the garden, singing a joyful air which was always the same. They would also perch on the window-sill of the drawing room which looked out upon the garden, and tap upon the window panes. Although the tune of the mysterious songsters never varied, they had at each successive visit a different plumage.

    Not only did the servant, Theresa, see the birds, but also the invalid lady and her nurse. None of them could tell where the colorful birds came from any more than Theresa could. The nurse tried repeatedly to catch one of the birds, but in vain. She spoke of it to Fr. Paul and he replied, “Oh! they won’t let themselves be caught!”

    When asked about the beautiful little birds, Fr. Paul replied with a smile, “They are messengers.” Fr. Paul then warned Theresa not to speak of the birds to anyone except to an intimate friend of hers. He then warned, “If during my lifetime you spread the news abroad, the birds will never come again.”

    On the eve of Fr. Paul’s death, the birds appeared once more, but they were somewhat dejected and with drooping wings sang a melancholy song which the members of the household understood to be a presentiment of a tragic happening. Six months passed before the birds returned again, and this took place when a photograph of Fr. Paul was hung in the invalid’s drawing room. At this time they sang beautiful melodies, but it is reported that afterwards their visits were infrequent.

    As mentioned earlier, the birds appeared each time in a different plumage. Theresa, however, was able to give us a description as the birds appeared on Wednesday, September 30, 1897, a year and seven months after Fr. Paul’s death.

    “Today, at ten minutes to eleven, two little birds of incomparable beauty arrived; their plumage was blue, green and purple, their breasts and heads white, the latter with stripes of deep purple in the form of a garland.”
    -Click here to read more about the miracles of the Saints with animals

    The Crown of Thorns
    “Once I asked Rose how the thorn stigmata were made- I wanted to know whether she found them already made after ecstasy or if she could feel them developing. When I asked her that question she already had seven of them. ‘During their development,’ she said, ‘I feel them active. The impression is that of a hair being tightly pressed against the skin and boring a hole, as a gimlet would do.’ [A gimlet is a small hand tool used for drilling or boring small holes -ed.]

    “The stigmata which Rose had in the back of her head, prevented it from resting on the pillow; so she was often seen with her arm under her neck; sometimes, it was replaced by small cushions. Frequently, she would use neither; her head then was bent forward, as though she had a kink in her neck. She was seen to remain for hours in that position. While it was depressing to see her that way, she never for a moment showed the least sign of discomfort. Even when the exterior signs of the other stigmata had disappeared, if she rested on her pillow, she felt the invisible thorns penetrating deeper.
    -Click here for more on the Crown of Thorns in the lives of the Saints

    The Gift of Tongues -Being heard and understood by those of other languages
    “St Anthony of Padua, one of the chosen disciples and companions of St Francis, whom the latter called his Vicar, was preaching one day before the Pope and the Cardinals in Consistory, there were therefore present at that moment men of different countries- Greeks and Latins, French and Germans, Slavs and English and men of many other different languages and dialects.

    “And being inflamed by the Holy Spirit and inspired with apostolic eloquence, he preached and explained the word of God so effectively, devoutly, subtly, clearly and understandably that all who were assembled at that Consistory, although they spoke different languages, clearly and distinctly heard and understood everyone of his words as if he had spoken in each of their languages. Therefore they were all astounded and filled with devotion, for it seemed to them that the former miracle of the Apostles at the time of Pentecost had been renewed, when by the power of the Holy Spirit they spoke in different languages.

    “And in amazement, just like in the Acts of the Apostles they said to one another: “Is he not a Spaniard?’ How then are we all hearing him in the language of the country where we were born -we Greeks and Latins, French and Germans, Slavs and English, Lombards and other foreigners?”
    -Click here for more of the supernatural gift of speaking in Tongues

    The Eucharist alone -A complete abstinence from food for 13 years
    “On March 27, 1942 in a blaze of agony and adoring love, Alexandrina cried out to Jesus in the tabernacle of the nearby church, “Oh my Eucharistic Love, I cannot live without you! Oh Jesus, transform me into your Eucharist! Mother, my dearest Mother, I wish to be of Jesus, I wish to be entirely yours!”
    And deep within her soul she heard Jesus’ profound reply:

    “You will not take food again on earth. Your food will be my Flesh; your blood will be my Divine Blood, your life will be my Life. You receive it from me when I unite my Heart to your heart. Do not fear, my daughter. You will not be crucified any more as in the past …. And now a new trial awaits you, which will be the most painful of all. But in the end I will carry you to Heaven and the Holy Mother will accompany you.”

    Thus on March 27, 1942 Blessed Alexandrina da Costa began an absolute fast which was to last more than thirteen years until her death, her sole nourishment being Holy Communion which she received with deep devotion every morning.

    “For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.” (John 6:55-56)
    -Click here for more of The Eucharist alone; A complete fast from food in the lives of the Saints

    Miraculous Cures in the Lives of the Saints
    Another of the many miracles attributed to the intercession of St Padre Pio was one that was reported during the summer of 1919, word of which reached the general public and the newspapers, despite the efforts of Padre Benedetto and Padre Paolino. This one, witnessed by Padre Paolino, concerned one of San Giovanni Rotondo’s most unfortunate persons -a mentally and physically handicapped old man named Francesco Santarello. He was so pathetically clubfooted that he was unable to walk. Instead, he dragged himself about on his knees, supported by a pair of miniature crutches. The unfortunate little man labored up the hill to the friary Monastery each day to beg bread and soup, as he had done for years. Poor Santarello was a fixture in the community and everyone knew him. Some of the more uncharitable children of the town loved to tease the unhappy beggar, going so far at times as to knock the crutches from under his shoulders and then laugh uncontrollably as he tumbled onto the pavement.

    One day Santarello was positioned, as usual, near the door of the cloister, begging for alms. As usual, a large crowd had gathered, waiting for Padre Pio to emerge and enter the church. As Pio passed by, Santarello cried out, “Padre Pio, give me a blessing!”

    Without stopping, Pio looked at him and said, ”Throwaway your crutches!”

    Stunned, Santarello did not move. This time Padre Pio stopped and shouted, “I said, ‘Throwaway your crutches!’ ” Then, without another word, Pio entered the church to say Mass.

    In front of dozens of people, Santarello threw his crutches away, and for the first time in his life, began to walk on his deformed feet to the utter astonishment of his fellow townspeople, who but a few minutes before had seen him lurching about, as always, on his knees……..
    -Click here for more miraculous healings in the lives of the Saints

    Bodies of the Saints that remain incorrupt after death
    On December 16, 1898 while at the Elevation of the Host during Mass, St. Charbel he suffered an apoplectic stroke from which he never recovered. Eight days later, on Christmas Eve, at the age of 70, the saint died, having been a priest for 39 years. According to monastic tradition, the body was not embalmed, but was dressed in a simple cassock and was placed in the monastery chapel for 24 hours. The body was then conveyed to the monks’ burial chamber in the presence of his confreres and village folk who had braved the snow and cold to witness the interment.

    The villagers who lived in houses facing the monastery saw a great light over the tomb the night following the burial, a phenomenon that recurred for 45 nights. This apparition of light, together with the enthusiasm of the Faithful, encouraged the ecclesiastical authorities to open the tomb and transfer the remains to a grave more accessible to the villagers who wished to pray beside it.

    The tomb was subsequently opened on April 15, 1899 in the presence of the community and 10 witnesses who had been present at the burial four months earlier. They were unanimous in testifying that the water had undermined the burial ground, turning the tomb into a quagmire, and that the monk’s body was actually floating on the mud.

    When the body was cleaned it was found perfectly incorrupt, the muscles supple, with the hair of his head and beard intact. At this time it was also noticed that a serum mixed with blood seeped from the pores. They placed the body in a wooden coffin that was glassed on top, and carried it into a small monastic oratory. From then on, because of the great amount of blood seeping from the body, the clothing of the saint was changed twice weekly. News of the phenomenon prompted ever increasing numbers of visitors who for 27 years were permitted to view and touch the body.

    The phenomenon is more astounding when one considers that in 1918, following a simple autopsy, the body was exposed on the terrace during the heat of summer for three months without initiating decomposition nor drying the source of the fluid.

    When the authorities of the order petitioned Rome for the beatification, a solemn reburial was conducted. After being dressed in sacerdotal vestments and the monastic hood the body was placed in a new coffin of wood covered with zinc. Various documents were composed by physicians, a notary and superiors of the order, and were placed in a zinc tube which was placed beside the body before the coffin was sealed with the Episcopal crest. Burial was in a new tomb specially prepared in the wall of an oratory.

    During February of the Holy Year 1950, pilgrims in the chapel noticed that a watery fluid streamed from a corner of the tomb and coursed its way onto the floor of the chapel. The fluid was traced to a corner of the casket where the liquid was seen dripping through a small crack. Twenty-three years after being placed in this tomb, the body was again examined in the presence of numerous authorities and was found completely free of any trace of corruption and was perfectly flexible and lifelike.

    For 67 years the remains of the saint remained perfectly preserved and was repeatedly examined by physicians with modern training, and the conclusion of modern medicine was that the preservation was inexplicable by scientific principles, and that such preservation was contrary to the natural laws, leaving even the most skeptical to conclude that the holy remains of St. Charbel were thus supernaturally sustained and preserved from any corruption.

    -Click here for more info on the incorrupt bodies of the Saints
    Share

  27. on 29 Mar 2013 at 10:14 pm 27.MattD said …

    26.The messenger said …

    A religious site does not offer objective evidence, so it’s useless.

    One can visit a communist website to prove communism is best for everyone, or post how UFO’s must be real because a website dedicated to them shows evidence.

  28. on 30 Mar 2013 at 3:47 am 28.s0l0m0n said …

    No point ranting.
    No doubt, alex…DPK…freddies_dead..Xcanthean Zeno..MrQ….& err..sorry..The messenger
    is going to ((((HHHHEEELLL))))!

    Na….na…na…na…na…

  29. on 30 Mar 2013 at 4:15 pm 29.alex said …

    “No doubt, alex…DPK…freddies_dead..Xcanthean Zeno..MrQ….& err..sorry..The messenger
    is going to ((((HHHHEEELLL))))!”

    dude, you just lost your singleton friend, mess. now all you got is your girlfriend, sally the sheep.

  30. on 30 Mar 2013 at 7:30 pm 30.the messenger said …

    28.s0l0m0n, I will not got to hell, because unlike you, I only offer love and forgiveness through Jesus.

  31. on 30 Mar 2013 at 7:32 pm 31.the messenger said …

    We only have one king, and he is in heaven. We only have one teacher, and he is the Christ.

  32. on 30 Mar 2013 at 9:51 pm 32.The messenger said …

    28.s0l0m0n, I will not go to hell.

    I only speak of love, but you speak of hell, and condemning others to it.
    I pray for you.

  33. on 31 Mar 2013 at 4:40 am 33.Fluttershy said …

    Sorry messenger, to hell with you ;D
    Along with all of us unbelievers D:
    I guess S0l did warn us about Allah and sheep

  34. on 31 Mar 2013 at 10:09 am 34.The messenger said …

    Brother 33.Fluttershy, you will not go to hell, as long as you follow the laws of GOD.

    All that follow Jesus shall never be condemned to hell.

  35. on 01 Apr 2013 at 4:34 am 35.Slapnuts McGee said …

    Site admin,

    Could you please ban “the messenger”? I stopped coming to and posting on this site because he/she is ridiculously trolltacular, so much so that it just ruins it for everyone. My first return to this website in weeks only shows that it has gotten worse.

  36. on 01 Apr 2013 at 10:18 am 36.Fluttershy said …

    Aww, Slapnuts, dont leave due to his complete inability to think.
    Although, please A.D.M.I.N, PLEASE, ban him. (And s0l0mon while your at it.)

  37. on 01 Apr 2013 at 10:22 am 37.Fluttershy said …

    Brother 33.Fluttershy, you will not go to hell, as long as you follow the laws of GOD.

    allah says you are going to hell

  38. on 03 Apr 2013 at 3:06 am 38.The messenger said …

    35.Slapnuts McGee, I will never leave.

  39. on 03 Apr 2013 at 2:19 pm 39.The messenger said …

    27.MattD, a Atheist site does not provide any objective evidence either.

  40. on 03 Apr 2013 at 2:28 pm 40.The messenger said …

    36.Fluttershy, I will never leave this site until atheism is washed off the Earth.

  41. on 03 Apr 2013 at 2:36 pm 41.The messenger said …

    36.Fluttershy, atheists live without logic and moral values.

    I pray that you will realize how awful atheism is.

  42. on 04 Apr 2013 at 4:04 am 42.s0l0m0n said …

    The messenger,

    I’am sorry to say you will be on the front line rather than all the atheists on the march to (((HELL))) coz you find another God other than the true God while the atheists does not recognize any God.

  43. on 04 Apr 2013 at 5:41 pm 43.The messenger said …

    42.s0l0m0n, Jesus is the one true GOD.

  44. on 04 Apr 2013 at 5:42 pm 44.The messenger said …

    42.s0l0m0n, what is the name of your GOD.

  45. on 08 Apr 2013 at 4:23 am 45.s0l0m0n said …

    Nope.Jesus is not God. One who takes Jesus as God will be thrown into the dungeons of ((((HELL)))). The name of the one true god is many. But the most popular name is _ _ _ _ _.

  46. on 10 Apr 2013 at 5:10 pm 46.Fluttershy said …

    Holy shitcakes you are crazy…

  47. on 10 Apr 2013 at 5:25 pm 47.DPK said …

    Looks like messenger is fucked.
    The catholics say he’s going to hell because he is a heretic. None of the other theist christards here will befend him because he is obviously deranged, and now his only ally, Solomon says he’ll be first in line for hell because Jesus is a false god. That makes messenger a false prophet…

    Pray for messenger that we are right and when he dies he will be simply dead. Looks like that will be the best he can hope for at this point. Sad how the theists all preach love and tolerance, until it comes to who is going to Disneyland in the clouds, and who is getting tossed into the eternal pit of fire. After all, they can’t all be right, can they?

    hahahahahaha

  48. on 10 Apr 2013 at 6:17 pm 48.A said …

    DPK actually speaking about tolerance as if he knows.

    Lol!!!!

    Go get medicated for your A.S. You are just a DFW we all use for humor break!

  49. on 10 Apr 2013 at 6:22 pm 49.A said …

    site Admin,

    Could u please highlight DPK, slappy nuts, Alexa’s posts? That would help me find them faster for my afternoon stress relief.

  50. on 10 Apr 2013 at 6:51 pm 50.DPK said …

    48.A said …

    “Go get medicated for your A.S.”

    You mean for my Auspergers? [sic]

    Sorry A, you have to learn how to spell it before you can prescribe treatment. But medication might actually help with your psychotic belief in invisible friends! Try some Xanax. I’d suggest you take the whole bottle, then you will find out how real your god is….
    Hope for your sake I’m right, and not Solomon… I’m guessing that uncertainty is maybe the cause for your stress? There’s actually a cure for that… it’s called rationality.

  51. on 10 Apr 2013 at 7:32 pm 51.DPK said …

    48.A said …

    “DPK actually speaking about tolerance as if he knows.”

    Well, the example we have is you. Yeah, we can just feel the love and tolerance oozing from your pores….

    We know you can’t spell “Asperger’s”, but can you spell “hypocrite”? I’d guess probably not.

  52. on 10 Apr 2013 at 10:12 pm 52.DPK said …

    48.A said …

    “You are just a DFW we all use for humor break!”

    hahaha… anyone else curious to know what the ASStrophysicist thinks DFW means?

    Hor, you are so funny when you try to use language you clearly don’t understand the meaning of, like “atheist”. “proof”, “evidence”, and now “DFW”.

    It must be from eating too many Australian hamburgers dude. You’ve contracted Ausburger’s syndrome!

  53. on 11 Apr 2013 at 1:18 am 53.Lou said …

    DFW is what Lou{DFW] used to be called. You are him so you should know that. Time to bring him back?

  54. on 11 Apr 2013 at 1:44 am 54.DPK said …

    53.Lou said …
    DFW is what Lou{DFW] used to be called.

    Yeah, but obviously “A” doesn’t realize that, or he wouldn’t have called me “just a DFW we all use for humor break!”. Clearly he thinks “a DFW” is something.

    But of course, as your other sock, you already knew that. Love how you step in conveniently to take the heat off your other self for being monstrously stupid.

  55. on 12 Apr 2013 at 5:46 am 55.the messenger said …

    54.DPK, Christianity teaches people to forgive evil people such as you self.

    Atheists like you, show hate and anger towards all people who speak their against their beliefs.

    Christians teach kindness, compassion, love, forgiveness, loyalty, character, and hope.

    Atheism abandons all of those things, and compels people to live without morals in their lives. Atheism is needs to be destroyed, not through violence , but through protest and love.

  56. on 12 Apr 2013 at 5:47 am 56.the messenger said …

    54.DPK, Christianity teaches people to forgive evil people such as you self.
    Atheists like you, show hate and anger towards all people who speak their against their beliefs.
    Christians teach kindness, compassion, love, forgiveness, loyalty, character, and hope.
    Atheism abandons all of those things, and compels people to live without morals in their lives. Atheism needs to be destroyed, not through violence , but through protest and love.

  57. on 12 Apr 2013 at 10:27 am 57.Fluttershy said …

    Nope
    christianity teaches hatred of minorities, athiests, and scare people with the never ending pain of ((((HELL))))

  58. on 12 Apr 2013 at 1:06 pm 58.DPK said …

    I just spoke to a friend of mine last night who I had lost touch with for many years.
    He told me that several years ago he was working on his Master’s in divinity. He said flat out that the worst racism he ever experienced in his life (he’s black) was within the churches he worked in.
    So much for your teachings of love and tolerance.

  59. on 12 Apr 2013 at 1:12 pm 59.DPK said …

    “Atheism abandons all of those things, and compels people to live without morals in their lives”

    More lies from messenger. Who are you to judge me? You have no idea how I live my life or how moral I am. For you to state that people must “live without morals” because they don’t agree with your superstitious beliefs about supernatural gods is insulting, not to mention wrong.
    You’ve got some iron balls there messenger. You sanctimonious prick. If your Jesus was real, he would be ashamed of you. No lie there.
    And tell us, from your moral high ground… Why then are our prisons overflowing with theists, and not atheists?

  60. on 12 Apr 2013 at 2:33 pm 60.RC said …

    The worst sexist are at the atheist conventions. Ask any woman who attends.

    Everyone has morals. The issue is from what do they derive? Atheist make them up as they go because they are relative. If an atheist punches someone in the nose he can claim is was morally OK. If he gets punched in the noes he will claim it was immoral. In other words, what the atheist does is moral and what others do he does not like is immoral.

    A follower of Christ lives by a moral code given by one who transcends man. It is not relative and the follower can commit acts that are moral or immoral. The follower cannot change it to suit his need.

    Therein lies the difference.

  61. on 12 Apr 2013 at 4:09 pm 61.DPK said …

    Where is this absolute code of morality you claim? We have asked hundreds of times to see it… not one theist has ever produced it.
    Show us where it is and let’s see how absolute it really is.
    D

  62. on 12 Apr 2013 at 4:47 pm 62.Anonymous said …

    A follower of Christ lives by a moral code given by one who transcends man. It is not relative

    And that “moral code” is found in the bible? Oh, that’s why there is ONLY ONE real xtian sect….ONLY ONE absolute way to interpret the writings of the bible? Sounds like a MY WAY or the HIGHWAY mentality? Those other sects have it wrong? Wait a minute……Do I make it sound like xtian sects have numerous interpretations and differing practices?……Apologies to RC for making xtians practices sound kind of relative.

    RC, where is this immutable and absolute moral code? I want to know how to behave properly.

  63. on 12 Apr 2013 at 5:32 pm 63.RC said …

    Absolutely!, see the teachings of Christ. You can find them in the New Testament. Sorry, but you are not a follower therefore His teachings will mean nothing to you.

  64. on 12 Apr 2013 at 6:48 pm 64.the messenger said …

    57.Fluttershy, Christianity teaches love and forgiveness. “forgive those who trespass against us” is a quote from the bible that means we must forgive people who sin.

    Atheism compels people to live in constant hate of all theists.

    And we do not scare people with hell, we warn them that it is a punishment for doing bad things. Hell does not last forever.

  65. on 12 Apr 2013 at 6:50 pm 65.the messenger said …

    61.DPK, for the sixth time, the Bible is the moral code.

  66. on 12 Apr 2013 at 6:51 pm 66.the messenger said …

    61.DPK, for the seventh time, the bible is the moral code.

  67. on 12 Apr 2013 at 6:55 pm 67.DPK said …

    Oh… so his teaching to “sell all you have and give it to the poor. Then come follow me.” Do you do that?
    Is that absolute, or is there some wiggle room there?
    How about the one about gouging out your eye if it offends you? I don’t see too many one eyed Christians these days.

    Now you said… “If an atheist punches someone in the nose he can claim is was morally OK.”
    Now, if someone attacks you, or say, your child… is it NEVER ok to punch them? Or just maybe, does it depend on the circumstance?
    Jesus said to treat your neighbor as you would want to be treated yourself. Well, I certainly never want to go to prison… does that mean we shouldn’t send people to prison? Or, maybe does it depend????

    Sorry, not seeing much absolute in your absolute morality there RC.

    The bible says we should not bear false witness… does that mean when the Nazi stormtroopers come knocking on the door looking for the Jews hiding in the basement that we have to tell them where they are? Or, maybe sometimes its actually more moral to lie? How about when the christians in Africa come looking for a witch to burn. Can you hide the 8 year old accused of witchcraft from them? Or is that dishonest?

    The bible says “thou shalt not kill”… does that mean you can never think of an occasion when it is right to kill??? Hmmmm
    You got some ‘splainin’ to do Lucy….
    I’ll make some popcorn…. this should be entertaining.

  68. on 12 Apr 2013 at 6:57 pm 68.the messenger said …

    59.DPK, tell me, which prisons are you referring to?

    And further more, how do you know that those people are theists?

  69. on 12 Apr 2013 at 7:03 pm 69.the messenger said …

    67.DPK, that first bible passage that you typed about was “matthew 19:16-30″, and it means that you must do all that you can to help the poor, and you must follow GOD’s teachings.

  70. on 12 Apr 2013 at 7:07 pm 70.the messenger said …

    67.DPK, when Jesus said that you must treat others as you would treat your self, he ment that we must be good to our selves and good to others, because normal people tend to treat themselves nice, so Jesus want us to treat other people nice as well.

  71. on 12 Apr 2013 at 7:12 pm 71.the messenger said …

    67.dpk, when Jesus stated that he want us to cut our eye out if it offends us, he does not mean literally cutting in out, he means that is something in your life is causing you or anyone else trouble you should get rid of it. The eye in his statement was a metaphorical eye.

  72. on 12 Apr 2013 at 7:16 pm 72.the messenger said …

    67.DPK, if your son hits you, you should not punish them by causing them an injury.

    A spanking is alright because it does not make them bleed, and it does not break any of their bones so therefore it does not count as an injury.

  73. on 12 Apr 2013 at 7:24 pm 73.the messenger said …

    67.DPK, if you are trying to protect some else’s life, you cannot lie, but you could say that you do not know exactly where they are.

    Therefore, the person that you are protecting is safe, and you are not lying, because you truly do not know the exact spot that they are in.

  74. on 12 Apr 2013 at 7:32 pm 74.the messenger said …

    67.DPK, the commandment that you are referring to does not apply to the killing of livestock or plants.

    And further more, when it states thou shall not kill, it is referring to murder.

  75. on 12 Apr 2013 at 8:07 pm 75.RC said …

    “Sorry, not seeing much absolute in your absolute morality there RC.”

    What part of “Sorry, but you are not a follower therefore His teachings will mean nothing to you.” did you not understand?

    Of course you don’t understand. You are looking to criticize not understand. The Bible is clear to never argue with a fool so I will not. You really believed I would engage in an argument in Scripture with you? Absolutely Not!! Time is way to short.

    I am curious, do you have Nazi’s knocking on your door often?

    Anonymous,

    Its not my way or the highway. It is not “my” way, it is the way of Christ.

  76. on 12 Apr 2013 at 8:54 pm 76.DPK said …

    “What part of “Sorry, but you are not a follower therefore His teachings will mean nothing to you.” did you not understand?”

    I get it… you have to believe to believe… in other words, you got nothing.

    Your “absolute” morality is a joke. There is no such thing, as you have quite clearly just demonstrated.

    Next charlatan….

  77. on 12 Apr 2013 at 8:57 pm 77.DPK said …

    “I am curious, do you have Nazi’s knocking on your door often?”

    Nice try at dodging the point.

    Do you own a house or a car, or a TV set?

    Doesn’t seem that you follow the teachings of Christ then…. or is that open to interpretation when he said the whole “camel through the eye of a needle thing?”

  78. on 12 Apr 2013 at 9:23 pm 78.DPK said …

    Tell you what RC… try and put aside your smug self righteousness for 5 minutes and do what no other theist on here will do… answer a question honestly.

    Can you think of no time when 2 moral, intelligent, reasonable, and lets even say “followers of Christ” if you will, could possibly be in disagreement about the morality of a certain action? No possibility that could earnestly and in good faith, disagree?

  79. on 12 Apr 2013 at 9:47 pm 79.RC said …

    “Can you think of no time when 2 moral, intelligent, reasonable, and lets even say “followers of Christ” if you will, could possibly be in disagreement about the morality of a certain action?”

    Once again, doesn’t matter what we think or disagree about, what matters is what does Christ teach. That is why there are absolutes in the Christ-centered morality and why atheist have no moral absolutes.

    No absolutes are great if you like making it up as you go.

  80. on 12 Apr 2013 at 10:46 pm 80.the messenger said …

    57.Fluttershy, Christianity is the teaching of love forgiveness. true Christians are loving and excepting of others.

    Atheists discriminate against theists all the time.

  81. on 12 Apr 2013 at 10:50 pm 81.the messenger said …

    59.DPK, tell me, which prisons are you referring to?
    And further more, how do you know that those people are theists?

    67.DPK, that first bible passage that you typed about was “matthew 19:16-30?, and it means that you must do all that you can to help the poor, and you must follow GOD’s teachings.

    67.DPK, when Jesus said that you must treat others as you would treat your self, he ment that we must be good to our selves and good to others, because normal people tend to treat themselves nice, so Jesus want us to treat other people nice as well.

    67.dpk, when Jesus stated that he want us to cut our eye out if it offends us, he does not mean literally cutting in out, he means that is something in your life is causing you or anyone else trouble you should get rid of it. The eye in his statement was a metaphorical eye.

    67.DPK, if your son hits you, you should not punish them by causing them an injury.
    A spanking is alright because it does not make them bleed, and it does not break any of their bones so therefore it does not count as an injury.

    67.DPK, if you are trying to protect some else’s life, you cannot lie, but you could say that you do not know exactly where they are.
    Therefore, the person that you are protecting is safe, and you are not lying, because you truly do not know the exact spot that they are in.

    67.DPK, the commandment that you are referring to does not apply to the killing of livestock or plants.

    And further more, when it states thou shall not kill, it is referring to murder.

  82. on 12 Apr 2013 at 11:20 pm 82.alex said …

    “No absolutes are great if you like making it up as you go.”

    you’re an idiot. thou shalt not kill is bull and you know it. you can squirm and rationalize it all you want, but when you’re confronted with a kill or be killed situation, most xtians would act just like most atheists, so shut the fuck up about atheists making up shit. go stick your bullshit christ given morality.

  83. on 12 Apr 2013 at 11:46 pm 83.DPK said …

    Then why are there disagreements among the followers of Christ about all kinds of things?
    Why do some say homosexuality is a sin, others say Jesus loves everyone just the way god made them? Some condem divorce, others have no problem with it. Some say abortion is wrong, others say maybe there are times when abortion is ok, like when the mothers life is in jeporday, or in the case of rape. Some say capital punishment is wrong, others say it is right. Some say drinking alchol is wrong, others have no problem with it.
    So, what are you saying RC? YOU have the inside track on what Jesus means, and everyone else is wrong?
    Show us the absolute moral code where it tells us the absolute morality as it relates to say, homosexuality, or capital punishment, just to start somewhere. Tell us, it it always wrong to kill?
    Come on now, no more dodging with cryptic answers. You made a claim that it is absolute… So tell us.

  84. on 13 Apr 2013 at 12:13 am 84.RC said …

    Legitimate questions,

    “Why do some say homosexuality is a sin, others say Jesus loves everyone just the way god made them? ”

    Homosexuality is a sin and he does love them just like they are. No problem there. See Matt 19

    “Some condem divorce, others have no problem with it.”

    God does hate divorce and does allow for it in a few instances. See Matt 19

    “Some say abortion is wrong, others say maybe there are times when abortion is ok, like when the mothers life is in jeporday, or in the case of rape.”

    I will say this one more time and in the future ignore you. It doesn’t matter what “I” say or others say. Show me where Jesus says taking a baby’s life is ever OK. Then we can discuss further.

    “Some say capital punishment is wrong, others say it is right. Some say drinking alchol is wrong, others have no problem with it.”

    Funny thing is all these claims you make apply to atheists. Anyhow, See above comment then we can discuss further.

    What part of “Once again, doesn’t matter what we think or disagree about, what matters is what does Christ teach.”

  85. on 13 Apr 2013 at 3:17 am 85.DPK said …

    on 13 Apr 2013 at 12:13 am 72.RC said …
    Legitimate questions,
    “Why do some say homosexuality is a sin, others say Jesus loves everyone just the way god made them? ”
    Homosexuality is a sin and he does love them just like they are. No problem there. See Matt 19

    But it is a sin for them to live according to the way he created them? And they will be punished for their “sin”. Kind of like beating a dog for being a dog.

    “Some condem divorce, others have no problem with it.”
    God does hate divorce and does allow for it in a few instances. See Matt 19

    So, you’re saying… It depends on circumstance? Doesn’t sound very absolute to me.
    Why do so many Christians disagree with you on this? Could it be because there is more than one way to interpret gods instructions?

    “Some say abortion is wrong, others say maybe there are times when abortion is ok, like when the mothers life is in jeporday, or in the case of rape.”
    I will say this one more time and in the future ignore you. It doesn’t matter what “I” say or others say. Show me where Jesus says taking a baby’s life is ever OK. Then we can discuss further.

    Well, is not the Jesus persona god? And did not god say to Saul; “3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’

    “Some say capital punishment is wrong, others say it is right. Some say drinking alchol is wrong, others have no problem with it.”
    Funny thing is all these claims you make apply to atheists. Anyhow, See above comment then we can discuss further.

    I noticed you specifically avoided answering this question. Why is that?

    What part of “Once again, doesn’t matter what we think or disagree about, what matters is what does Christ teach.”

    Because “what Christ teaches” is subject to interpretation, and judgement. It is not absolute. I do not disagree with many of the ideas attributed to the Jesus myth. They are nothing new, and are based on human concepts. They evolve, and are subject to judgement. Even your so called Christians cannot agree on what this “absolute” morality instructs on various issues, as you just demonstrated by avoiding a direct answer. Nice try…. Busted.

  86. on 13 Apr 2013 at 11:28 am 86.RC said …

    “Some say capital punishment is wrong, others say it is right. Some say drinking alchol is wrong, others have no problem with it.”

    Show me where Christ said these things and we will discuss further. Christ laid down the moral foundation. These “others” of whom you speak can answer for themselves.

    “Because “what Christ teaches” is subject to interpretation, and judgement. It is not absolute.”

    Again incorrect. Now on some issues we would need to seek out Christ for guidance. For example. How long to keep one on life support.

  87. on 13 Apr 2013 at 12:33 pm 87.Fluttershy said …

    Athiests and theists have morals, this is undeniable.
    Case closed…
    However, the theists make things such as intolerance exist…

  88. on 13 Apr 2013 at 2:44 pm 88.DPK said …

    “74.RC said …

    “Some say capital punishment is wrong, others say it is right. Some say drinking alchol is wrong, others have no problem with it.”

    Show me where Christ said these things and we will discuss further.”

    Do you deny that different Christian sects and even different Christians within the same sect have differing views on these issues?

    “Again incorrect. Now on some issues we would need to seek out Christ for guidance. For example. How long to keep one on life support.”

    Sorry RC, you’re quibbling. If one must “seek guidance” then your absolute morality is anything but absolute.

    Will you concede that 2 people in good conscious, after “seeking guidance” from wherever you think it comes from, may actually arrive at 2 different conclusions about how long to keep someone on life support? Or will these 2 people ALWAYS arrive at the same conclusion?

  89. on 13 Apr 2013 at 4:36 pm 89.RC said …

    D,

    Seeing you can provide nothing from Christ on these issues shows me you are just trolling. All you have are “others” which means zero. “Others” could be wrong, right, high, confused, opportunist, etc. This is about what Christ taught and you ha e no idea.

  90. on 13 Apr 2013 at 4:53 pm 90.DPK said …

    So, as suspected, you cannot support you claim of an “absolute morality” handed down by a supreme being.
    If there was such a thing, then you would have no trouble answering a question without quibbling. It would be yes, or no.

    The fact that you are unwilling to do that simply proves my point. Your claim of an absolute morality is bullshit.

    Why do you dodge the question? Are you afraid of something?

    “Will you concede that 2 people in good conscious, after “seeking guidance” from wherever you think it comes from, may actually arrive at 2 different conclusions about how long to keep someone on life support? Or will these 2 people ALWAYS arrive at the same conclusion?”

  91. on 13 Apr 2013 at 6:01 pm 91.RC said …

    When you are ready to talk about the morality as taught by Christ, pick up and Bible and see what He taught. Maybe we will talk again.

    Until then, sure DPK, sure. Whatever you say is absolutely correct.

  92. on 13 Apr 2013 at 8:38 pm 92.DPK said …

    Thanks for the admission.
    I have been talking about the morality as supposedly taught by christ. Nothing wrong with it as a starting point, but thank you for admitting it isn’t absolute, as you claimed. If it were, you would be able to give me “absolute” answers. You can’t, so you dodge direct questions and run away.
    No surprise, and a very telling response. Exactly what I expected.

  93. on 14 Apr 2013 at 1:05 am 93.Martin said …

    RC

    I like a guy who has enough scruples not to argue with an endless barrage of naïveté. DPK and alex never fail to astonish me on their inability to carry on a discussion. I used to think they were just obstinate but have concluded they really are that nescient.

    Once you learn this, you can come just to poke holes in their worldview. It can be amusing.

  94. on 14 Apr 2013 at 2:15 am 94.alex said …

    “.you can come just to poke holes in their worldview”

    asshole. get rid of the jim jones coolaid recipe. no matter how many times you try, there is no atheist worldview, you fuck. theists believe in their god. atheists don’t believe in your god, capiche?

    show us a link where you posted your same drivel in a buddist site? an islam site? those people don’t believe in your bullshit either, but you smugly come in here talking shit? you slobber with your righteous, smug, pompous prose, but your shit is predictable crap.

    go take your cross and stick it up your ass with the rest of the shit.

  95. on 14 Apr 2013 at 2:40 am 95.DPK said …

    Martin returns to define “naïveté” as not accepting his complete and utter nonsense without question. If that is being naive, sign me up!
    I’d rather be naive than stupid.

    Notice neither of them attempted to actually answer the questions… It is fun to poke holes in their world views, and then watch them get all huffy and indignant about it.

  96. on 14 Apr 2013 at 2:52 am 96.RC said …

    Martin I am absolutely open to discussion but not when the other party refuses to read, contribute and use logic.
    Its easier just to let them have their victory. That is all DPK is interested in. Glad to feed his insecurity.

  97. on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:23 am 97.the messenger said …

    81.the messenger said …
    59.DPK, tell me, which prisons are you referring to?
    And further more, how do you know that those people are theists?
    67.DPK, that first bible passage that you typed about was “matthew 19:16-30?, and it means that you must do all that you can to help the poor, and you must follow GOD’s teachings.
    67.DPK, when Jesus said that you must treat others as you would treat your self, he ment that we must be good to our selves and good to others, because normal people tend to treat themselves nice, so Jesus want us to treat other people nice as well.
    67.dpk, when Jesus stated that he want us to cut our eye out if it offends us, he does not mean literally cutting in out, he means that is something in your life is causing you or anyone else trouble you should get rid of it. The eye in his statement was a metaphorical eye.
    67.DPK, if your son hits you, you should not punish them by causing them an injury.
    A spanking is alright because it does not make them bleed, and it does not break any of their bones so therefore it does not count as an injury.
    67.DPK, if you are trying to protect some else’s life, you cannot lie, but you could say that you do not know exactly where they are.
    Therefore, the person that you are protecting is safe, and you are not lying, because you truly do not know the exact spot that they are in.
    67.DPK, the commandment that you are referring to does not apply to the killing of livestock or plants.
    And further more, when it states thou shall not kill, it is referring to murder.

  98. on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:23 am 98.alex said …

    “Glad to feed his insecurity.”

    you shit. you troll an atheist site and you’re feeding the insecurity? atheists ask for proof and you have none and you say you’re feeding? get the fuck out of here. troll a shinto site, fuckhead. when they say they don’t believe your shit, go ahead and proclaim that you’re feeding their insecurity.

    but, you won’t, because you’re prolly gay, not that there’s anything wrong with it. you hate that some atheists are gay and they are not taking the same bullshit gay counseling sessions you are.

    bullshit right back at you.

  99. on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:35 am 99.the messenger said …

    98.alex, he is referring to atheism as being insecure, you idiot.

    We do not hate gay people, Jesus does not approve of gay sex.

    We do not hate gay people, we just do not like gay sex.

    And further more, I have given you proof.

  100. on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:42 am 100.the messenger said …

    this site is crap

  101. on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:44 am 101.the messenger said …

    81.the messenger said …
    59.DPK, tell me, which prisons are you referring to?
    And further more, how do you know that those people are theists?
    67.DPK, that first bible passage that you typed about was “matthew 19:16-30?, and it means that you must do all that you can to help the poor, and you must follow GOD’s teachings.
    67.DPK, when Jesus said that you must treat others as you would treat your self, he ment that we must be good to our selves and good to others, because normal people tend to treat themselves nice, so Jesus want us to treat other people nice as well.
    67.dpk, when Jesus stated that he want us to cut our eye out if it offends us, he does not mean literally cutting in out, he means that is something in your life is causing you or anyone else trouble you should get rid of it. The eye in his statement was a metaphorical eye.
    67.DPK, if your son hits you, you should not punish them by causing them an injury.
    A spanking is alright because it does not make them bleed, and it does not break any of their bones so therefore it does not count as an injury.
    67.DPK, if you are trying to protect some else’s life, you cannot lie, but you could say that you do not know exactly where they are.
    Therefore, the person that you are protecting is safe, and you are not lying, because you truly do not know the exact spot that they are in.
    67.DPK, the commandment that you are referring to does not apply to the killing of livestock or plants.
    And further more, when it states thou shall not kill, it is referring to murder.
    on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:23 am

  102. on 14 Apr 2013 at 4:04 am 102.Anonymous said …

    “DPK and alex never fail to astonish me on their inability to carry on a discussion.” Said Martin.

    So, let’s remind everyone who Martin is.

    Martin is someone who has been repeatedly busted for trying to shore up us arguments by posting under multiple IDs on the same thread. In other words, he uses sock-puppets because his arguments carry no weight on their own.

    Second, Martin’s main “contribution” here is posting strawman arguments and then demanding that people disprove his fallacious reasoning in which he invariably tries to reverse the burden of proof. That’s multiple fallacies in one and either shows a seriously disturbed or intellectually challenged individual.

    Whenever challenged to provide a logical proof of the existence of his god, “Martin” makes excuses, then turns tails and runs.

    In other words, Martin is a troll, a sock-puppet, who cannot provide reasoned logical arguments, and if you read his post carefully, he admits he is only here to disrupt the conversation.

    What a loser. Please run away as you always do when challenged to engage in honest debate.

  103. on 14 Apr 2013 at 4:46 am 103.the messenger said …

    81
    59.DPK, tell me, which prisons are you referring to?
    And further more, how do you know that those people are theists?
    67.DPK, that first bible passage that you typed about was “matthew 19:16-30?, and it means that you must do all that you can to help the poor, and you must follow GOD’s teachings.
    67.DPK, when Jesus said that you must treat others as you would treat your self, he ment that we must be good to our selves and good to others, because normal people tend to treat themselves nice, so Jesus want us to treat other people nice as well.
    67.dpk, when Jesus stated that he want us to cut our eye out if it offends us, he does not mean literally cutting in out, he means that is something in your life is causing you or anyone else trouble you should get rid of it. The eye in his statement was a metaphorical eye.
    67.DPK, if your son hits you, you should not punish them by causing them an injury.
    A spanking is alright because it does not make them bleed, and it does not break any of their bones so therefore it does not count as an injury.
    67.DPK, if you are trying to protect some else’s life, you cannot lie, but you could say that you do not know exactly where they are.
    Therefore, the person that you are protecting is safe, and you are not lying, because you truly do not know the exact spot that they are in.
    67.DPK, the commandment that you are referring to does not apply to the killing of livestock or plants.
    And further more, when it states thou shall not kill, it is referring to murder.

  104. on 14 Apr 2013 at 12:01 pm 104.Anonymous said …

    Messenger, you have been repeatedly asked to provide citations to back up your assertions but you NEVER do. Without them, you are simply being an argumentative asshole.

    Why do you refuse to back up your drivel? No-one believes you. Why do you waste our time with this made up nonsense that not even an idiot believes?

    So, provide citations to demonstrate that your interpretation isn’t shit you just made up or fuck off.

  105. on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:17 pm 105.The messenger said …

    104.Anonymous, I have posted the links from which I have gotten this information in many of my previous comments.

  106. on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:18 pm 106.The messenger said …

    104.Anonymous, the fact that you do not believe what I say, is conclusive proof that you are an idiot.

    I pray for you.

  107. on 14 Apr 2013 at 3:51 pm 107.The messenger said …

    104.Anonymous, go to a catholic church, and attend a mass there.

    All of the information that I have been apoke has come from GOD.

    The Bible is easy to understand, but small minded atheists such as your selves fail to understand the meanings behind the bible.

    You have been consumed by your arrogance and hate, and you fail to understand even the most basic virtue of GOD, which is love. You people are so consumed by you stupidity and hate that you have lost all kindness, and all compassion, and have lived a life of hate due to the fact that you have abandoned GOD.

  108. on 14 Apr 2013 at 4:03 pm 108.The messenger said …

    104.Anonymous, here is a bible verse that I think you should read.

    Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy,it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil, it rejoices with the truth. It always protects, it always trusts, it always hopes and always preserves.

  109. on 14 Apr 2013 at 4:05 pm 109.The messenger said …

    Here is another bible verse for you.

    Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.

  110. on 14 Apr 2013 at 6:57 pm 110.DPK said …

    So many questions… lets’ see what we can do for you:

    103.the messenger said …

    81
    59.DPK, tell me, which prisons are you referring to?
    And further more, how do you know that those people are theists?

    Statistical fact in US and Canadian prisons, less than 1% of the prison populations are atheist or agnostic. Over 75% are Christians:
    http://current.com/community/92831935_atheists-supply-less-than-1-of-prison-populations-while-christians-make-up-75.htm

    67.DPK, that first bible passage that you typed about was “matthew 19:16-30?, and it means that you must do all that you can to help the poor, and you must follow GOD’s teachings.

    That’s not what it says, it says you must sell everything you own and follow Jesus. Why do you get to say what Jesus “meant” when he clearly said what he said. If he is god, I think he would be able to say what he means without some idiot like you to interpret it for me.
    So William, have YOU sold all your wordly goods and given the money to the poor? Why not?

    67.DPK, when Jesus said that you must treat others as you would treat your self, he ment that we must be good to our selves and good to others, because normal people tend to treat themselves nice, so Jesus want us to treat other people nice as well.

    Ok fine… like I said, I don’t want to go to prison, does that mean no one should go to prison? I would like to live comfortably without working… does that mean no one should have to work if they don’t want to? Thing is, I don’t disagree with that at all… the point was it isn’t an ABSOLUTE… you have to make a judgement about when it is ok to not treat someone like you would want to be treated… like when they are stealing your wallet or raping your wife… don’t be stupid. (Oh sorry, forgot, you can’t help it.. that’s the way Jesus made you).

    67.dpk, when Jesus stated that he want us to cut our eye out if it offends us, he does not mean literally cutting in out, he means that is something in your life is causing you or anyone else trouble you should get rid of it. The eye in his statement was a metaphorical eye.

    Why didn’t he say that? Why do YOU get to decide when it is a metaphor and when it isn’t? Hmmm… maybe because you have to THINK about it and realize that it would be INSANE to gouge out your eye? See.. it isn’t absolute, is it William? It requires you to make a judgement.

    67.DPK, if your son hits you, you should not punish them by causing them an injury.
    A spanking is alright because it does not make them bleed, and it does not break any of their bones so therefore it does not count as an injury.

    You are an imbecile. I said “Now, if someone attacks you, or say, your child… is it NEVER ok to punch them? Or just maybe, does it depend on the circumstance?” I wasn’t talking about punching my child… but since you brought it up, I NEVER spanked or physically assaulted my children, and it’s NOT ok to spank a child.

    67.DPK, if you are trying to protect some else’s life, you cannot lie, but you could say that you do not know exactly where they are.
    Therefore, the person that you are protecting is safe, and you are not lying, because you truly do not know the exact spot that they are in.

    Quibble quibble… that’s a lie. Point is, there are times when it is more moral to lie than to tell the truth. You splitting hairs is bullshit… you are bearing false witness for a good reason.. to protect an innocent.

    67.DPK, the commandment that you are referring to does not apply to the killing of livestock or plants.
    And further more, when it states thou shall not kill, it is referring to murder.

    Dolt… the reference was to RC’s question if there was EVER an instance in the bible when god said it was ok to kill a baby. Clearly there are many times in the bible when god himself kills babies, but also many times when god instructs humans to do it, as well. So baby killing would seem to be just fine with god under certain circumstances. I was just making a liar out of RC.

    You aren’t very bright, huh MESS?

  111. on 15 Apr 2013 at 2:53 am 111.A said …

    Welcome to Bible Study with DPK….

    Any questions? Lol!!!!!!!!

    I don’t think a 5 yr old could have butchered the Bible any worse.

  112. on 15 Apr 2013 at 4:42 am 112.DPK said …

    on 15 Apr 2013 at 2:53 am 111.A said …
    Welcome to Bible Study with DPK….
    Any questions? Lol!!!!!!!!

    I have a question. Is that your idea of a rebuttal?
    Sad.

  113. on 15 Apr 2013 at 11:39 am 113.Martin said …

    “Point is, there are times when it is more moral to lie than to tell the truth.”

    Who gets to decide when and who gets to judge it as moral?

  114. on 15 Apr 2013 at 11:41 am 114.Martin said …

    “it’s NOT ok to spank a child.”

    A moral absolute? Don’t you claim moral absolutes do not exist?

  115. on 15 Apr 2013 at 11:44 am 115.Martin said …

    “Ok fine… like I said, I don’t want to go to prison, does that mean no one should go to prison?”

    Then don’t commit a crime. If you do then the “loving”(love your neighbor) thing to do for the person you commit a crime against is to take you of the street.

  116. on 15 Apr 2013 at 2:27 pm 116.DPK said …

    “Point is, there are times when it is more moral to lie than to tell the truth.”

    Who gets to decide when and who gets to judge it as moral?

    That’s the point, each person must make these kinds of decisions themselves.

    “…“it’s NOT ok to spank a child.”

    A moral absolute? Don’t you claim moral absolutes do not exist?”

    No, that is my opinion. You being a follower of Jesus, I can see where you would have no moral problem with inflicting pain on a child. After all, it’s ok to beat your slaves as long as you don’t kill them, because “they are your property”… and you can sell your daughter into prostitution… that is your right according to your god’s law… so what’s a little crack on the butt, as long as they don’t bleed to much or you don’t break any bones, right?

    ““Ok fine… like I said, I don’t want to go to prison, does that mean no one should go to prison?”

    Then don’t commit a crime. If you do then the “loving”(love your neighbor) thing to do for the person you commit a crime against is to take you of the street.”

    So who decides which neighbor gets treated like we would want to be treated, and which neighbor doesn’t?
    Where is this written down in your absolute code? Is it near the part about the stoning to death, or the not wearing two different kinds of cloth, or the not eating shellfish part? Maybe it’s in the chapter about ripping open the bellies of pregnant women and dashing the babies against rocks.
    Show me where you got this instruction about who goes to prison and who doesn’t please.

  117. on 15 Apr 2013 at 6:05 pm 117.Martin said …

    DPK,

    So is spanking an absolutely immoral act?

  118. on 15 Apr 2013 at 6:13 pm 118.Martin said …

    The person who should go to prison is the one who commits the crime. That is the loving thing to do for both parties.

  119. on 15 Apr 2013 at 6:15 pm 119.DPK said …

    No, I suppose there might be a circumstance where it might not be immoral to spank a child. It depends.
    I never spanked my children. I guess I’d say it was an unnecessary and counterproductive act. Whether it is immoral would depend on the circumstances.

    I take it you think it is a moral act? In that case, why aren’t Christians wailing their children all the time? If it is either black or white, then you should do it all the time, or never. Or are you saying it isn’t an absolutely moral act, Martin.

    Let’s not forget Martin is the one who never answers questions… persona non grata, as I recall. I have answered your question, and now I am now done answering your questions until you answer some of mine. Man up, Martin.

    You said: “Then don’t commit a crime. If you do then the “loving”(love your neighbor) thing to do for the person you commit a crime against is to take you of the street.”
    I asked you directly: “So who decides which neighbor gets treated like we would want to be treated, and which neighbor doesn’t?”

    Why won’t you answer?

  120. on 15 Apr 2013 at 6:42 pm 120.Martin said …

    I did, the neighbor who commits the crime goes to jail.

    You are having a tough time understanding love. You probably give your child all things he/she wants calling that love. That would be the reason you can’t see punishments as love. Loves is not always giving someone what they want.

    You still failed to explain how you can state anything as immoral if there exist no absolute.

    When is it OK to lie? To avoid punishment? To take advantage of another? Further your career?

  121. on 15 Apr 2013 at 8:02 pm 121.DPK said …

    120.Martin said …

    “I did, the neighbor who commits the crime goes to jail.”

    No,you didn’t. That’s not what I asked.. I asked “who gets to decide?” That would be… you? Who ever it is has to make a judgement about which neighbor gets treated as you would treat yourself, and which neighbor doesn’t.

  122. on 15 Apr 2013 at 8:07 pm 122.DPK said …

    “When is it OK to lie? To avoid punishment? To take advantage of another? Further your career?”

    I guess you’re saying you’d have to consider the circumstances, right? To protect an innocent? Yes. To avoid punishment? Depends on if the punishment is deserved and just or not. Would you lie to save someone from a lynch mob? I would.
    To take advantage of another? No. To further your career? No. To spare someone unnecessary pain and suffering? Yes.

    See? There is no absolute answer is there Martin?

    Now, in your view, who gets to decide? If your god was real and present in the physical world, I suppose you could leave judgment to him… but in his absence, someone has to decide, no? Who would that be?

  123. on 15 Apr 2013 at 8:36 pm 123.Martin said …

    121
    The verse states “love your neighbor or as yourself”. You need to know the verse to understand they are both being loved. Again they both are being loved in the process.

    122
    No answer for when it is OK to lie. I think you believe your opinion should be the guide. Why your opinion DPK? The only absolute is everyone should get to lie when they desire. Hitler thought he was doing mankind a huge favor so I suppose he was moral in in his lies?

  124. on 15 Apr 2013 at 8:46 pm 124.DPK said …

    Your claim that I didn’t answer is a lie.

    Of course each person must decide for himself.
    If society decides that that persons decision is bad for the community at large, then the community must decide to take action. It ALL involves people making decisions… all the time. Because THERE IS NO absolute. It ALWAYS depends on circumstance, relative harm and good.. stop being an idiot. You know full well that a statement like “Do not lie” can never be a moral absolute.

  125. on 16 Apr 2013 at 1:38 am 125.alex said …

    it’s fucking plain as shit. give 100 biblical questions to 100 xtians, only the resident fuck, martin will get them all right. that’s because the dipshit, authored the correct answers.

    this motherfucker wiggles around like i can’t even describe. you atheists just don’t get it, you atheists don’t understand, why is it that you atheists…

    but not a single proof. what a fucken shit.

  126. on 16 Apr 2013 at 1:53 am 126.Martin said …

    “It ALWAYS depends on circumstance, relative harm and good”

    Oh, OK I see. So there is never a wrong time to lie. Every person decides when it is right to lie so all circumstances are acceptable as long as the individual deems them acceptable.

    “If society decides that that persons decision is bad for the community at large, then the community must decide to take action.”

    Oh, OK, I see. So the Muslim nations who put to death Atheists, Christians and treat woman like property are being morally correct since the society deemed it OK.

    It is the same morality that allows a guy like alex to hide behind a computer and cast stones with not one atheist being embarrassed enough to call him out.

    I do get it now.

    Thanks DPK

  127. on 16 Apr 2013 at 2:01 am 127.Anonymous said …

    Sigh. Here we are again. “Martin” the sock-puppet master of the strawman argument demanding answers of others as way of diverting attention away from his inability to provide proof of his god. That itself being a clear indicator of his mental illness.

    Tiresome, predictable, and more reason to ignore the clown.

    DPK, why do you bother with this fool? You should know by now that he’s going to bat away your questions with his predictable diversions.

  128. on 16 Apr 2013 at 2:29 am 128.alex said …

    “Oh, OK I see. So there is never a wrong time to lie. Every person decides when it is right to lie so all circumstances are acceptable as long as the individual deems them acceptable.”

    i’ll be your huckleberry. martin is an asshole. he takes statements and turns them around like he’s some kind of genius and then posts ass hisself to congratulate his own ass self.

    any person can decide to lie for the right reason. read it asshole. lying to the nazis in order to hide families from death is a right reason, you fuckhead.

    if you lie to a little boy in order to molest him and you think it’s acceptable, it doesn’t make it right. now, shut the fuck up.

  129. on 16 Apr 2013 at 2:53 am 129.DPK said …

    “Oh, OK I see. So there is never a wrong time to lie”

    Now, why do YOU have to lie about what I said. I did not say there is never a wrong time to lie. I said sometimes it is more moral to lie than to tell the truth. I have demonstrated this clearly. You have offered nothing in way of an alternative that isn’t idiotic.
    So, rather than engage in an honest discussion, you claim that I said something I clearly did not.
    That makes you a fraud, a liar, and a fool.
    Now that we have shown everyone that. You are done. No time for those who cannot even argue honestly and with some level of integrity. And you ask us to accept your version of absolute morality, when you yourself constantly lie.
    I’m done discussing anything with you. You are beneath contempt.

  130. on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:52 am 130.Fluttershy said …

    So the Muslim nations who put to death Atheists, Christians and treat woman like property are being morally correct since the society deemed it OK.

    Technically this is correct, but to all the christians and athiests, it is not.
    Every country and race has its own morals, so standardising them is impossible.

  131. on 16 Apr 2013 at 11:40 am 131.Martin said …

    “Technically this is correct, but to all the christians and athiests, it is not.
    Every country and race has its own morals, so standardising them is impossible.”

    Thank you Fluttershy. As I stated earlier, with no absolute standards of morality lying would always be OK as long as the one lying deems it appropriate.

    Now you said “but to all the christians and athiests, it is not”. What “standard” of morality do Atheists use?

  132. on 16 Apr 2013 at 3:01 pm 132.DPK said …

    “As I stated earlier, with no absolute standards of morality lying would always be OK as long as the one lying deems it appropriate.”

    With an absolute moral code lying would always be forbidden without any regard to circumstance. The idea of morality assumes that the person making the judgement is doing so in good faith. You can’t say, well, if we each get to decide what is moral, than there is nothing wrong with a priest shoving his dick up the arse of an 8 year old boy…. but the priest knows that is wrong, doesn’t he? There is a difference between making an honest judgement and a disingenuous one, as Martin clearly demonstrates when he intentionally lies about what others say in order to make his own point of view seem less insane.

  133. on 16 Apr 2013 at 4:56 pm 133.DPK said …

    I remember an example of situational ethics that is interesting.
    Imagine an out of control train running down the tracks toward a group of people on the train platform. The train is going to crash into them and kill them.
    You have the ability to throw a switch and divert the train to a different track where it will kill one lone person working on the tracks. Is it moral to cause the death of one person to save the lives of dozens?
    The vast majority of people answer “yes” the most moral thing to do would be to save the many people on the platform even if it meant the death of the individual.

    Now, imagine a similar situation… same train barreling toward the same group of innocent people. Only this thim you are on an overhead bridge next to a fat man… whose mass is sufficient to slow the train enough so that it would stop the train. Is it moral to push the man off the bridge onto the path of the train in order to save the dozens of people? (jumping yourself is not an option because you do not have sufficient mass to stop the train… only the fat man does)
    The vast majority of people answer “no”. It is not ok to push the fat man to his death to stop the train.

    Here you have 2 situations and 2 actions that both result in the same outcome… deliberately causing the death of one person in order to save another. Why is one morally right, and the other morally wrong even though they both have the same outcome?
    Now, if there were an absolute moral code, there would be no distinction, would there? But there is… why?

  134. on 16 Apr 2013 at 5:48 pm 134.DPK said …

    And… this just in.
    In another shining example of the “absolute” morality taught by god’s word in the bible, the loving Christians of the Westboro Baptist Church today thanked god for the Boston Bombings.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/16/westboro-baptist-church-thanks-god-boston-bombs-vo/

    And the insanity of religion continues………

  135. on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:07 pm 135.The messenger said …

    110.DPK, Jesus told that man to sell all of his possessions because he loved his property more than he loved other humans.

    Every message that Jesus teaches has more than one meaning.

    110.DPK the full meaning of that bible verse is that we should do all that we can to help the poor, and we should not love our worldly possesions more than we love our fellow humans.

    110.DPK, if someone is breaking the law, the loving/kind thing to do would be to lock up the criminal for his own safty, and for the safty of everyone in the community. once he has payed off his sentence he will be allowed to leave.

    110.DPK, working as hard as you can is what GOD wants us to do, we should not be lazy, and therefore we should reat others with lazyness.

    133.DPK, it is moral to ,as you say, flip the switch as save those people because you are have no way of knowing weither that person would live or die, unless you could tell the future.

    133.DPK, first of all, I would like to point out that if any man was as fat as you described, he would have probibly have died from a heart problem way before this insedent could have occured. Depending on what was below the bridge, maybe water, so he might have surrvived the fall.

  136. on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:11 pm 136.The messenger said …

    110.DPK, it is never ok to lie, but you can say that you do not know exactly where they are, because you truely do not know the exact spot they are in.

    That is not a lie.

  137. on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:13 pm 137.The messenger said …

    67.DPK, if someone tried to hit you, you are allowed to hit them back because you are saving them from hurting you, and you are saving your self from being hit.

  138. on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:14 pm 138.The messenger said …

    134.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    110.DPK, Jesus told that man to sell all of his possessions because he loved his property more than he loved other humans.

    Every message that Jesus teaches has more than one meaning.

    110.DPK the full meaning of that bible verse is that we should do all that we can to help the poor, and we should not love our worldly possesions more than we love our fellow humans.

    110.DPK, if someone is breaking the law, the loving/kind thing to do would be to lock up the criminal for his own safty, and for the safty of everyone in the community. once he has payed off his sentence he will be allowed to leave.

    110.DPK, working as hard as you can is what GOD wants us to do, we should not be lazy, and therefore we should reat others with lazyness.

    133.DPK, it is moral to ,as you say, flip the switch as save those people because you are have no way of knowing weither that person would live or die, unless you could tell the future.

    133.DPK, first of all, I would like to point out that if any man was as fat as you described, he would have probibly have died from a heart problem way before this insedent could have occured. Depending on what was below the bridge, maybe water, so he might have surrvived the fall.

    on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:11 pm 135.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    110.DPK, it is never ok to lie, but you can say that you do not know exactly where they are, because you truely do not know the exact spot they are in.

    That is not a lie.

    on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:13 pm 136.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    67.DPK, if someone tried to hit you, you are allowed to hit them back because you are saving them from hurting you, and you are saving your self from being hit.

  139. on 16 Apr 2013 at 11:54 pm 139.alex said …

    mess, get the fuck out of here. you got no creds and even your fellow xtians won’t acknowledge you.

    you’re just a fucked up moron who makes up shit. switch tabs quick! your porn has finished loading and you will miss the money shot, you fucken asshole.

  140. on 17 Apr 2013 at 12:35 am 140.A said …

    Martin said “As I stated earlier, with no absolute standards of morality lying would always be OK as long as the one lying deems it appropriate.”

    Martin isn’t that one of the best things about being an atheist? You do whatever you want and call it moral. You can justify anything in your own mind. DPK has duped himself well. I’m sure he considers himself the picture of good morality.

    Cheat on a test claim the test was unfair

    Shoplift at the grocery store claim they charge too much

    Lie on your taxes claim everyone does it.

    It is so easy even a 5 year old could do it.

  141. on 17 Apr 2013 at 3:03 am 141.Fluttershy said …

    Mess said..
    you are have no way of knowing weither that person would live or die, unless you could tell the future.

    I think i can safely say that a human being cannot survive an impact with a train…

  142. on 17 Apr 2013 at 3:23 am 142.alex said …

    “Cheat on a test claim the test was unfair
    Shoplift at the grocery store claim they charge too much
    Lie on your taxes claim everyone does it.”

    atheists may do this and it’s wrong. xtians on the other hand may do it KNOWING beforehand that they have the bullsheyat redemption card and predictably, they do it anyways. and again, and again.

    then they go to an atheist site and righteously proclaim their moral superiority while waiting for their porn to load. how do i know this? it’s in the bible, motherfucker. ask mess to point it out.

    get the fuck outta here.

  143. on 17 Apr 2013 at 11:40 am 143.Anonymous said …

    Still waiting for the theists to prove that their god exists.

    All they’ve got is arguments to change the subject.

    Why?

    Gods are imaginary and their life is based around worshiping the same storm god as a bunch of illiterate, nomadic, bronze-age morons.

    You wonder why we ridicule you? It’s because your beliefs are ridiculous.

    Prove your god exists. It should be so easy but you can’t do it and you are so afraid to admit it that all you can do is change the subject.

  144. on 17 Apr 2013 at 2:32 pm 144.Anonymous said …

    Research shows mental illness associated with belief in the Christian god.

    http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2013/04/belief-in-angry-god-associated-with.html

  145. on 17 Apr 2013 at 6:00 pm 145.Anonymous said …

    Are Christians likely to be mentally ill?

    Research says that they are. http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2013/04/belief-in-angry-god-associated-with.html

  146. on 17 Apr 2013 at 7:24 pm 146.the messenger said …

    134.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    110.DPK, Jesus told that man to sell all of his possessions because he loved his property more than he loved other humans.

    Every message that Jesus teaches has more than one meaning.

    110.DPK the full meaning of that bible verse is that we should do all that we can to help the poor, and we should not love our worldly possesions more than we love our fellow humans.

    110.DPK, if someone is breaking the law, the loving/kind thing to do would be to lock up the criminal for his own safty, and for the safty of everyone in the community. once he has payed off his sentence he will be allowed to leave.

    110.DPK, working as hard as you can is what GOD wants us to do, we should not be lazy, and therefore we should reat others with lazyness.

    133.DPK, it is moral to ,as you say, flip the switch as save those people because you are have no way of knowing weither that person would live or die, unless you could tell the future.

    133.DPK, first of all, I would like to point out that if any man was as fat as you described, he would have probibly have died from a heart problem way before this insedent could have occured. Depending on what was below the bridge, maybe water, so he might have surrvived the fall.

    on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:11 pm 135.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    110.DPK, it is never ok to lie, but you can say that you do not know exactly where they are, because you truely do not know the exact spot they are in.

    That is not a lie.

    on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:13 pm 136.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    67.DPK, if someone tried to hit you, you are allowed to hit them back because you are saving them from hurting you, and you are saving your self from being hit.

    ,,,,

  147. on 17 Apr 2013 at 7:26 pm 147.The messenger said …

    142.alex, GOD will only forgive you if you are truly sorry.

  148. on 17 Apr 2013 at 7:30 pm 148.The messenger said …

    142.alex, we do not flawnt our moral supiriority, atheists feel jealousy either way.

    We are not trying to make you jealous.

  149. on 17 Apr 2013 at 10:08 pm 149.MrQ said …

    “a”stroboy

    You do whatever you want and call it moral. You can justify anything in your own mind.

    Isn’t this what everybody does? Just ask Westboro Baptists, Benny Hinn, white supremacists, and, if they were alive -Jim Jones (Jonestown) and David Koresh (Waco). All had the bible (your bible) as the foundation of their morality. So everything they did must have been OK?

  150. on 18 Apr 2013 at 10:42 am 150.A said …

    Isn’t telling how Mr Q justifies atheist’s relativism by pointing to some nuts.

  151. on 18 Apr 2013 at 12:10 pm 151.alex said …

    “atheist’s relativism”

    wacha talkin about, willis? he ain’t tryna prove anything. you, otoh, is trying to prove some bullcrap. instead of pointing out these other nonsense, prove your case.

  152. on 18 Apr 2013 at 12:54 pm 152.Anonymous said …

    it doesn’t matter to hor that he is taking crap – as long as you are responding to it you are allowing him to change the subject. We should be focusing on his inability to prove the existence of his god, not his red herrings.

  153. on 18 Apr 2013 at 1:38 pm 153.MrQ said …

    From “a”stroboy:

    Isn’t telling how Mr Q justifies atheist’s relativism by pointing to some nuts.

    And who gets to decide what qualifies as xtian morality? Of course, YOU DO!!!

    Sounds kind of relative to me. Most people own a moral compass. It doesn’t always work properly but it does not require a bible. If a bible is your guide, then you could justifiably be a wife beating slave owner.

  154. on 18 Apr 2013 at 1:54 pm 154.Anonymous said …

    Note the huge amount of projection in this round of “where do atheists get their morals from”.

    What the believer seems to be saying is that without their belief in a god they would act like savages and they assume that others would be equally as antisocial. I would hate that to be true, but if someone like Martin feels that he can’t function without such a restriction, perhaps he is telling the truth after all.

    Perhaps believers are inherently psychopaths and that they NEED an external agent to stop them setting fire to people and raping little boys. It’s scary, but perhaps they really are unable to function in society without that belief and that’s what their fear is all about.

    Of course, believers still set fire to people and rape little boys even with their belief in these absolute morals that none of them can point to. Go figure.

  155. on 19 Apr 2013 at 3:48 am 155.Martin said …

    The issue is simple. Each atheists determines his own right and wrong. Therefore, there can be no immorality only opinion. They could rape little boys or start gulags and justify through their opinion as moral.

    The teachings of Christ make these actions immoral, not the opinions of men.

  156. on 19 Apr 2013 at 10:26 am 156.Fluttershy said …

    I think its safe to say that ANY sane athiest would not do such things…

  157. on 19 Apr 2013 at 12:08 pm 157.alex said …

    “The issue is simple. Each atheists determines his own right and wrong. Therefore, there can be no immorality only opinion.”

    your statement is an opinion. i’ve said before, fill out 100 moral questions for 100 random people, both theists and atheists. who would answers most of the questions correctly? moron.

  158. on 19 Apr 2013 at 12:14 pm 158.Anonymous said …

    So, Martin, what stops *you* raping little boys or starting gulags?

  159. on 19 Apr 2013 at 3:30 pm 159.Fluttershy said …

    I rape as much as i want.
    The fact is that i want to rape 0 people.

  160. on 19 Apr 2013 at 3:57 pm 160.Anonymous said …

    159, right. But Martin is fond is stating how he believes others operate.

    Past experience says Martin won’t answer or will attempt to dodge, deflect, play with semantics, or various games of avoidance. Still, this is one of Martin’s favorite subjects so anything but a clear answer would indicate a lack of integrity on his behalf.

    Let us see Martin speak for himself and explain to us clearly, and definitely, without equivocation the answer to answer to: “[Martin] what stops *you* raping little boys or starting gulags?

  161. on 19 Apr 2013 at 4:40 pm 161.Martin said …

    “I rape as much as i want.
    The fact is that i want to rape 0 people”

    That is great news Flutter but that is not nor has it ever been the point. How can an atheist make an absolute call that it is morally wrong to throw Christians into gulags, rape ANYONE or murder others.

    DPK claims all morals are relative so how do can you judge another’s morality as wrong? I have asked this many times and the question is always avoided.

  162. on 19 Apr 2013 at 5:09 pm 162.The messenger said …

    146.the messenger said …

    134.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    110.DPK, Jesus told that man to sell all of his possessions because he loved his property more than he loved other humans.

    Every message that Jesus teaches has more than one meaning.

    110.DPK the full meaning of that bible verse is that we should do all that we can to help the poor, and we should not love our worldly possesions more than we love our fellow humans.

    110.DPK, if someone is breaking the law, the loving/kind thing to do would be to lock up the criminal for his own safty, and for the safty of everyone in the community. once he has payed off his sentence he will be allowed to leave.

    110.DPK, working as hard as you can is what GOD wants us to do, we should not be lazy, and therefore we should reat others with lazyness.

    133.DPK, it is moral to ,as you say, flip the switch as save those people because you are have no way of knowing weither that person would live or die, unless you could tell the future.

    133.DPK, first of all, I would like to point out that if any man was as fat as you described, he would have probibly have died from a heart problem way before this insedent could have occured. Depending on what was below the bridge, maybe water, so he might have surrvived the fall.

    on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:11 pm 135.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    110.DPK, it is never ok to lie, but you can say that you do not know exactly where they are, because you truely do not know the exact spot they are in.

    That is not a lie.

    on 16 Apr 2013 at 10:13 pm 136.The messenger said …
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    67.DPK, if someone tried to hit you, you are allowed to hit them back because you are saving them from hurting you, and you are saving your self from being hit.

    ,,,,

    on 17 Apr 2013 at 7:26 pm 147.The messenger said …

    142.alex, GOD will only forgive you if you are truly sorry.

    on 17 Apr 2013 at 7:30 pm 148.The messenger said …

    142.alex, we do not flawnt our moral supiriority, atheists feel jealousy either way.

    We are not trying to make you jealous.

  163. on 19 Apr 2013 at 11:28 pm 163.Anonymous said …

    160.Anonymous, I have given you the answers.

  164. on 20 Apr 2013 at 1:01 am 164.Fluttershy said …

    That is great news Flutter but that is not nor has it ever been the point. How can an atheist make an absolute call that it is morally wrong to throw Christians into gulags, rape ANYONE or murder others.

    Will it make another suffer or discomfort? Immoral
    Will it help others, stop pain? Moral

    Pretty much sums it up, but of course, you cant do something like kill someone to save alot, unless the person is a terrorist or a robber or something, and will directly kill the people…

  165. on 20 Apr 2013 at 3:39 am 165.Martin said …

    Suffering is immoral and stopping pain is moral?

    That’s it? So how does stealing, as DPK states can be moral, work into that? Your simple strategy lacks much substance.

  166. on 20 Apr 2013 at 12:10 pm 166.the messenger said …

    158.Anonymous, all forms of sexual lust are wrong.

  167. on 20 Apr 2013 at 4:26 pm 167.Fluttershy said …

    165.
    stealing?
    i would say that it would be almost always immoral, but i guess that there are exceptions. i honestly cannot think of any however ;D
    Suffering involves either physical or mental harm, so doing it to someone is immoral, but stopping it, for example unplugging a person on life support (or ODing them on morphine)(and of course you would need their consent, but its illegal anyway…)

  168. on 20 Apr 2013 at 7:14 pm 168.Anonymous said …

    Martin, you keep avoiding answering the questions you ask of others. As a reminder, here’s one. We’ll get to the others after this one:

    “[Martin] what stops *you* raping little boys or starting gulags?

  169. on 20 Apr 2013 at 8:03 pm 169.Martin said …

    “i would say that it would be almost always immoral”

    Glad to hear you say that Flutter but DPK does not agree. So I suppose taking this a step further atheists could use the gulags and say it is not immoral to do so. I guess this is part of the no absolutes.

  170. on 20 Apr 2013 at 8:17 pm 170.the messenger said …

    110.DPK, Jesus told that man to sell all of his possessions because he loved his property more than he loved other humans.
    Every message that Jesus teaches has more than one meaning.

    110.DPK the full meaning of that bible verse is that we should do all that we can to help the poor, and we should not love our worldly things more than we love our fellow humans.

    110.DPK, if someone is breaking the law, the loving/kind thing to do would be to lock up the criminal for his own safety, and for the safety of everyone in the community. once he has payed off his sentence he will be allowed to leave.

    110.DPK, working as hard as you can is what GOD wants us to do, we should not be lazy, and therefore we should not teat others with laziness.

    133.DPK, it is moral to ,as you say, flip the switch as save those people because you are have no way of knowing weather that person would live or die, unless you could tell the future.
    133.DPK, first of all, I would like to point out that if any man was as fat as you described, he would have probably have died from a heart problem way before this event could have occurred. Depending on what was below the bridge, maybe water, so he might have survived the fall.

    110.DPK, it is never ok to lie, but you can say that you do not know exactly where they are, because you truly do not know the exact spot they are in.
    That is not a lie.

    67.DPK, if someone tried to hit you, you are allowed to hit them back because you are saving them from hurting you, and you are saving your self from being hit.

    142.alex, GOD will only forgive you if you are truly sorry.

    142.alex, we do not flaunt our moral superiority, atheists feel jealousy either way.
    We are not trying to make you jealous.

  171. on 21 Apr 2013 at 4:54 am 171.Fluttershy said …

    Do you realy have to copy/paste that every 20 comments?…

  172. on 21 Apr 2013 at 5:08 am 172.Anonymous said …

    Martin, you keep avoiding answering the questions you ask of others. As a reminder, here’s one. We’ll get to the others after this one:

    “[Martin] what stops *you* raping little boys or starting gulags?

  173. on 21 Apr 2013 at 8:10 am 173.Fluttershy said …

    Im going to help you Anon ;D
    Martin, you keep avoiding answering the questions you ask of others. As a reminder, here’s one. We’ll get to the others after this one:
    “[Martin] what stops *you* raping little boys or starting gulags?

  174. on 21 Apr 2013 at 2:22 pm 174.alex said …

    martin thinks he’s smart. he comes in here talking all that shit and then he leaves when it get’s hot.

    your moral bible says “thou shall not kill”. what is your motherfucking confusion? there is none, but yet you justify the shit with all kinds of excuses. you say you gots a xtian standard, but you really don’t. you just have a bunch of crap you wave about in your righteous way. go ahead motherfucker, list your xtian morals and we’ll do a situational test.

    asshole.

  175. on 21 Apr 2013 at 2:24 pm 175.alex said …

    messenger, go fuck yourself, ignorant xtian, hypocrite. how many 10 commandments are there?

    shithead.

  176. on 21 Apr 2013 at 5:21 pm 176.Martin said …

    “[Martin] what stops *you* raping little boys or starting gulags?”

    First I have absolutely no attraction to boys. Second, it is wrong. I usually ignore obvious answers for questions but the fact you have to ask scares me just a little. Anon & Flutter, are you guys attracted to little boys?

    Fluttershy maybe you could get Anon to help you? Let me try rephrasing the question. If all morals are relative, how can an atheist call anything immoral, like the raping of boys? Maybe an answer is not possible?

  177. on 21 Apr 2013 at 5:34 pm 177.Doug said …

    Blogmaster,

    As an atheist I am offended you keep letting alex use language that is offensive and embarrassing to atheist. Could you please ban him from this blog? You might get more participation.

  178. on 21 Apr 2013 at 5:43 pm 178.alex said …

    “As an atheist I am offended you keep letting alex use language that is offensive and embarrassing to atheist.”

    an appeal to authority? are you the atheist high priest these morons keep referring to? are you using the same absolute meter for offensive language? trot it out moron and let’s apply it.

  179. on 21 Apr 2013 at 5:55 pm 179.Anonymous said …

    Ever the hypocrite, eh Martin? You give answers that you sneer at when provided by others. Still, here is your chance to demonstrate how your answer is only true for Christians, is a teaching of Christ, and has never changed. That appears to be what you are arguing.

  180. on 21 Apr 2013 at 5:58 pm 180.Anonymous said …

    Looks like Doug attended the Hor school of style and grammar.

  181. on 21 Apr 2013 at 6:14 pm 181.Fluttershy said …

    Anon & Flutter, are you guys attracted to little boys?

    Who said i was a male? After all, my name is the name of a female pony from MLP…

    Although, i am a male, but no, i am not homosexual.

  182. on 21 Apr 2013 at 6:17 pm 182.Fluttershy said …

    Second, it is wrong.

    Now do you see how most people make morals?
    Is it right? Moral
    Is it not right? Immoral

    It is blatantly that simple…

    Also…
    WHY THE HELL IS Doug WANTING ALEX BANNED?

    So far, he has done nothing wrong (maybe a tad bit rude, but im an Aussie so im used to it…) and as a matter of fact, he make many cockroaches flee from the light :P

  183. on 21 Apr 2013 at 11:22 pm 183.Anonymous said …

    “Now do you see how most people make morals?
    Is it right? Moral
    Is it not right? Immoral”

    Except that Martin’s premise is that he needs to be told what is right and what is wrong and it’s cast in stone. Further, it’s the system of reward and punishment that controls his behavior. His position here is that morals are not predicated on how actions affect others, merely that someone else supposedly said “do or don’t”.

    Once again, this is possibly why certain theists (Martin is a good example) are obsessed with this moral-law-giver thing. The implication is that if they were to lose their faith, they fear that nothing would hold them back from abhorrent behavior.

  184. on 22 Apr 2013 at 12:57 am 184.alex said …

    “nothing would hold them back from abhorrent behavior”

    cept for the bullshit redemption card, with the nauseatingly non expiration date. so martin and his homies, go around with their righteous, holier than thou crap and when they fuck up anyways in spite of their so called absolute morality, they triumphantly whip out the card and proclaim that their sins are magically washed away. what a load.

  185. on 22 Apr 2013 at 1:49 am 185.Martin said …

    “Except that Martin’s premise is that he needs to be told what is right and what is wrong and it’s cast in stone.”

    Lets try to get Anon to answer this question. He/She and Flutter have an opher going at the moment.

    Anon, if you were never taught your morality then how did you come up with what is right and wrong? Is it OK to steal and lie on occasion? How did you determine when is was OK.

    Lastly, if no morals are cast in stone when is it OK to rape boys?

  186. on 22 Apr 2013 at 1:53 am 186.Martin said …

    “Although, i am a male, but no, i am not homosexual.”

    Right, I assumed you are male, you are male then what are you Whining about my little pony?

  187. on 22 Apr 2013 at 2:35 am 187.Fluttershy said …

    Casting aside that many males watch the show, wouldnt you think that the show would be watched by many females?

    Anyway, that is far off topic…

    Some morals ARE set in metaphorical stone, for example raping boys…

    However some are not, killing for example is okay (still not good in my opinion but it must be done…) if the man is for example a terrorist.

    How did we know what is right and what is wrong?
    Well i learnt it from TV shows, School and my Parents…
    The others? I would assume the same….

    Is it OK to steal and lie on occasion?
    YES, say for example a Neo nazi come knocking up on your door and asks if you have any Jews in your house (lets say you are jewish) then lie, or die…

    an opher going at the moment.
    What is an opher? O.o

  188. on 22 Apr 2013 at 3:47 am 188.Anonymous said …

    Martin, you keep pressing this “gotcha” question of yours but you have yet to demonstrate that morals do come from some higher power. Heck, you run away from providing the proof of the existence of this god of yours.

    You play this game way too often. You present a loaded question, a strawman argument, and tell people to defend themselves against your unproven assertion. It’s an asshole move that is just one long-winded argument from ignorance dressed up as a deepity question. Further, it’s blatantly dishonest how you keep associating YOUR theological nonsense with people who don’t believe that sky-daddy exists.

    Frankly your position scares me – that people are only “good” because they’ve been told to be under fear of punishment. On that, where is the Xtian injunction against raping little boys and not starting gulags? Don’t try to escape with claiming it’s stupid or not worth answering – you are the one claiming that these rules must come from your god.

    Bottom line. You need to prove that your god exists and that morals come from your god. If you can’t do that, then asking people how they can be good without your god is just you reversing the burden of proof and arguing dishonestly, as usual

  189. on 22 Apr 2013 at 5:39 am 189.Fluttershy said …

    [Martin] what stops *you* raping little boys or starting gulags?

    We still want a god related answer :P

  190. on 22 Apr 2013 at 11:45 am 190.Martin said …

    “Martin, you keep pressing this “gotcha” question”

    A gotcha question? Well if it is a gotcha question is is because you moral relativism obviously does not work. That is not my issue it is your problem.

    Fluttershy had the courage to attempt an answer while you prefer to go off on tangents in order to avoid your “gotcha” moment. Don’t be afraid.

    Anon, if you were never taught your morality then how did you come up with what is right and wrong? Is it OK to steal and lie on occasion? How did you determine when is was OK.

    Lastly, if no morals are cast in stone when is it OK to rape boys?

  191. on 22 Apr 2013 at 1:24 pm 191.Anonymous said …

    Martin, prove that morals come from your god then you have a case that your questions are relevant to atheism. You won’t do that yet you continue to insist that people answer according to your presupposition.

  192. on 22 Apr 2013 at 1:54 pm 192.Fluttershy said …

    GOD DAMMIT MARTIN WHY DONT YOU LEARN?

    What is right and what is wrong is up to yourself.

    Want to rape and kill hundreds of people? Fine, do it, i dont care, but i will laugh when i see you in the electric chair.
    Want to steal the royal Gems? /\
    Want to be nice, and in general coexist with people? GOOD JOB MATE!!!

  193. on 22 Apr 2013 at 1:56 pm 193.Fluttershy said …

    Lastly, if no morals are cast in stone when is it OK to rape boys?
    When is it ok? Never.
    May we go on and ask YOU a question now? yes? ok, thanks.

    Martin, prove that morals come from your god then you have a case that your questions are relevant to atheism. You won’t do that yet you continue to insist that people answer according to your presupposition.

    Poor anon keeps asking and you wont answer.

  194. on 22 Apr 2013 at 8:11 pm 194.Martin said …

    “Martin, prove that morals come from your god”

    I never claimed that but my little pony and I laid out no presuppositions. Don’t listen to Anonymous, think for yourself.

    “What is right and what is wrong is up to yourself.”

    So you are saying that raping a little boy is OK if a man (or woman) or even a little pony thinks it is OK? Would this be what your are saying?

  195. on 22 Apr 2013 at 9:12 pm 195.alex said …

    you dumbfuck. if somebody says they will kill all the xtians if you don’t rape the little boy, what would you do, you fucken shit? look it up in your moral book and what will it say, you ass?

    get out of here, with the bullcrap.

  196. on 22 Apr 2013 at 9:48 pm 196.Anonymous said …

    This is why Martin was declared persona not gratis.

    He throws in all these diversions, demands people prove, disprove, or explain all manner of stuff that isn’t a function of atheism, then piles on more straw and round we go again, whilst he refuses to contribute anything remotely resembling evidence.

    Perhaps Martin has a thing about not raping boys, he sure likes to discuss it. Maybe it’s his fear of not being able to hold back, much like those supposedly-moral priests. I don’t know, nor do I care. Fortunately, I have a higher regard for the human race than he does and so I don’t think he’s a latent rapist, even if he fears without a god that he is.

    Now I’m done with your silly word games and evasions. You’re not arguing anything to do with the OP, and you keep ignoring requests for you to prove your god exists, yet you argue as if he does.

    Go ahead. Make yet another pointless and incorrect attack. I’m done with you and your evasions.

  197. on 22 Apr 2013 at 10:17 pm 197.the messenger said …

    195.alex, that situation would never happen.

  198. on 22 Apr 2013 at 10:56 pm 198.alex said …

    “195.alex, that situation would never happen.”

    neither will heaven/hell/purgatory/virgins4all, you fuckhead.

  199. on 23 Apr 2013 at 12:00 am 199.A said …

    Mart,

    I think you got Anony the Mouse rattled in a gotcha moment. You didn’t expect someone who remains anonymous to actually answer a straightforward question did you? This is the atheist courtroom and they are here to drill you, not reflect on their own conflicting beliefs.

    If you want to observe what occurs when atheists gain control only look to the USSR, Cambodia and Red China. Any questions? That is their morality in action.

    Any dude who refers to himself as one of the “my little ponies” is one scary dude. I will categorize him with the alexs.

  200. on 23 Apr 2013 at 12:15 am 200.alex said …

    “…not reflect on their own conflicting beliefs.”

    bullshit god belief begats more bullshit. you’re so fucked up, you don’t even know what an atheist is. there ain’t no damn conflict, you fuck. a disbelief in your bullshit god is being an atheist. all this other shit you keep bringing up is irrelevant. neanderthals didn’t believe in your god, did they? of course, in your fucked up, brainwashed mind, neanderthals didn’t exist. the fucked up, make believe god just created the fossils and while he was at it, the xtian burnt-flesh aroma, challenged god also created the starlight in transit.

    you want to play numbers? add up all the xtians shit that’s been done and line them up, moron. but it doesn’t matter. what matters is that your god is bullshit and you can’t do anything about it except come in here, spray your xtian diarrhea around and fuck it up for everybody. and then righteously say “check please”.

  201. on 23 Apr 2013 at 1:11 pm 201.Fluttershy said …

    Any dude who refers to himself as one of the “my little ponies” is one scary dude.

    Ahem, that is rather rude to say about one of the largest fandoms in history.

    Anyway, i dont see what is wrong in the USSR, being that it doesnt exist anymore.

  202. on 23 Apr 2013 at 2:56 pm 202.Anonymous said …

    A’s response is all part of the trolling exercise.

    When someone refuses to be drawn into their little diversion, another troll or sock-puppet comes back to the fray. Then then throw out personal insults and accusations to try to bait people into another of their pet diversions.

    All because they can’t produce any evidence that their god is real. Sigh.

  203. on 23 Apr 2013 at 6:04 pm 203.Martin said …

    A
    it had been my impression blogs were for asking questions. But here all you get is anger and insults. It could be immaturity on the part of the participants. The fact Flutter sees no problem since the former USSR now does not exists is very enlightening to the mindset here.

  204. on 23 Apr 2013 at 6:34 pm 204.alex said …

    “The fact Flutter sees no problem since the former USSR now does not exists is very enlightening to the mindset here.”

    there’s that bs atheist generalization again. an atheist is somebody that don’t believe in your bs god. get it thru your head. you lying again as usual.

  205. on 23 Apr 2013 at 11:51 pm 205.the messenger said …

    200.alex, stop polluting our minds with your constant vomiting out stupid.

  206. on 24 Apr 2013 at 12:38 am 206.A said …

    Mart,

    Atheists claim that violent, murdering atheists regimes have nothing to do with atheism. For atheists, they live in denial, close their eyes while chanting atheism goud, all other religions bad.

    Compare that to US government’s denial that Islamic extremist and jihad is taking place. That is the atheists mindset. They ignore the fact that Atheists dictators have murdered more people in the last 100 years than have been murdered throughout man’s history. But of course that is not immoral because absolutes do not exist.

  207. on 24 Apr 2013 at 1:32 am 207.alex said …

    “Atheists claim that violent, murdering atheists regimes have nothing to do with atheism.”

    you dumb bitch. might as well say that the murdering bubonic plague is atheism.

    you can say all you want, but it doesn’t validate your bitch ass god belief, motherfucker. just keep on talking and praying and clicking your heels. ain’t no god gonna materialize and save your ass from the cursing i’m gonna keep dishing out.

    “Compare that to US government’s denial that Islamic extremist and jihad is taking place.”

    who cares? more blah, blah, failed attempts to detract from nonsensical, foreskin loving, burnt flesh obsessed, fig tree cursing bullsheeyat you call god.

    go fuck yourself then whine to the blogmaster.

    oh, don’t forget. the atheist homie-sapiens killed off the neanderthals. fuckin shit.

  208. on 24 Apr 2013 at 2:37 am 208.Anonymous said …

    See post #202

  209. on 24 Apr 2013 at 2:48 am 209.Fluttershy said …

    Atheists dictators have murdered more people in the last 100 years than have been murdered throughout man’s history.

    Well for one, that is generalisation, and its also a ridiculous lie.

  210. on 24 Apr 2013 at 2:50 am 210.Fluttershy said …

    Atheists claim that violent, murdering atheists regimes have nothing to do with atheism.

    Atheism doesnt exist, that would be like nosantaclausism, and those “murdering athiests” have nothing to do with anyone else, considering that athiests arent in a religion.

  211. on 24 Apr 2013 at 11:35 am 211.A said …

    “Atheism doesnt exist”

    Now I see the problem. You are high.

    When you sober up do an honest assessment. There are no websites, organizations, authors, books, blogs, federal rulings and trolls on nosantaclausism.

    And as I expected, atheist refuse to acknowledge what the murdering atheists tyrants have done.

  212. on 24 Apr 2013 at 12:08 pm 212.alex said …

    ““Atheism doesnt exist”
    Now I see the problem. You are high.”

    semantics, idiot. an atheist doesn’t believe in your bullshit god, period. all that other crap is a sideshow.

  213. on 24 Apr 2013 at 2:23 pm 213.Fluttershy said …

    atheist refuse to acknowledge what the murdering atheists tyrants have done.

    Again, generalisation, and the “tyrants” being atheist has nothing to do with their mindset.

  214. on 24 Apr 2013 at 3:12 pm 214.Painter said …

    It’s too bad that Jesus couldn’t write stuff down himself. Then we wouldn’t have this endless discussion about what he “meant.” Maybe he didn’t know how to write. Maybe he was too busy with his carpenter job. And how good of a carpenter was he? Sure he was the son of god but could he hang a door?

  215. on 24 Apr 2013 at 4:32 pm 215.Anonymous said …

    Yes, Fluttershy, this has been explained many, many, times. It’s not possible that he doesn’t understand that. It’s one of his favorite diversions.

    However, whilst you are engaged in defending against this strawman, you are not pressing home his avoiding providing evidence for the existence of his supposed-god or, indeed, responding to the OP.

    See post #202

  216. on 24 Apr 2013 at 4:39 pm 216.A said …

    Sure, the murdering tyrants separated their atheism from their hate of the religious! Lol!!!!!

    Now if you can prove it, you may have a point. You can’t and you won’t.

  217. on 24 Apr 2013 at 4:54 pm 217.alex said …

    “Sure, the murdering tyrants separated their atheism from their hate of the religious! Lol!!!!!”

    this is your god proof? moron.

  218. on 24 Apr 2013 at 5:52 pm 218.Fluttershy said …

    Now if you can prove it, you may have a point. You can’t and you won’t.

    I cannot prove it, therefore they were evil atheist killers.
    If we are to work like that, you cannot prove your god exists, therefore he is imaginary.

  219. on 24 Apr 2013 at 10:21 pm 219.the messenger said …

    217.Fluttershy, mao zedong, joseph stalin, both murdered thousands, and they were atheists.

  220. on 24 Apr 2013 at 11:15 pm 220.alex said …

    “Now I see the problem. You are high.”

    yeah, and i like fat, ugly, smelly, short, black, transsexual, old women? you on the other hand, believes in a fictional being, who died on the cross for your sins, giving you a free pass to do whatever the fuck you want, over and over again?

    don’t you get it? the atheist may commit the exact same crime, but you xtian fuckers make up this righteous/redemption shit, then wave it about when you get caught.

    wah! i’m a born sinner and i can’t help it! i’ll just be born again. what a crock!

  221. on 25 Apr 2013 at 12:14 am 221.The messenger said …

    Mr. 219.alex, just because we are Christians does not mean that we can do whatever we want.

    We have to live loving, forgiving, kind, and genorus lives.
    You are misguided.

  222. on 25 Apr 2013 at 1:16 am 222.alex said …

    “just because we are Christians does not mean that we can do whatever we want.”

    that’s because you’re an ignorant, non-bible reading, but self proclaim bible interpreter. now, go fuck yourself.

    choke on this bitch:
    John 3:16 – For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

    oh, i ferget, you’re a dumbfuck.

  223. on 25 Apr 2013 at 1:20 am 223.alex said …

    “217.Fluttershy, mao zedong, joseph stalin, both murdered thousands, and they were atheists.”

    fine. xtians & muslims murdered exactly the same amount and it’s a tie game? your god is still bullsheet. what? i can’t spell? your god is still bullshit.

  224. on 25 Apr 2013 at 1:21 am 224.A said …

    “If we are to work like that, you cannot prove your god exists”

    Sure I can and over 90% of the world believes the proof. You need to be asking why are you blind to it?

    There is also no dispute the greatest murdering tyrants of the last century were atheists. You are 0 for 2 Fluttershy.

  225. on 25 Apr 2013 at 1:24 am 225.alex said …

    “Sure I can and over 90% of the world believes the proof.”

    wrong. most of the world don’t believe in your bullshit god. pick a god, any god.

    “There is also no dispute the greatest murdering tyrants of the last century were atheists.”

    wrong again dipshit. just because bullshit comes out of your mouth, doesn’t mean it’s true. say the world is flat and it shall be?

  226. on 25 Apr 2013 at 7:11 am 226.Fluttershy said …

    Sure I can and over 90% of the world believes the proof. You need to be asking why are you blind to it?

    I do hope that proof to you means delusional people claiming divine things, lies, and the threat of Hell.

  227. on 25 Apr 2013 at 11:08 am 227.Anonymous said …

    Fluttershy. you’ll soon find out that “A” and Martin throw stuff out without proof or backing and just demand you prove them wrong; a fallacy in itself. They love strawmen and loaded questions. Basically, it’s fallacy after fallacy. Gish Gallop after Gish Gallop.

    They’ll participate as long as they are asking questions, even if it’s ones they can’t answer themselves. They’ll demand proof of whatever you say all while ignoring your requests for the same.

    When you say that’s that’s nothing to do with being an atheist the response is along the lines of “Gotcha, see atheists can’t prove xxx”, even though it’s the fallacy of reversing the burden of proof, it’s often a red-herring or a non-sequiter or a category error and so on.

    When the going gets tough, more sock-puppets appear either to replace the one that will go into hiding to avoid answering questions, or to have conversations along the lines of “Good point me. Hey, other-me, see how the atheists xxxx”. Whatever.

    You’ll notice “A” said “Sure I can and over 90% of the world believes the proof”, not only is that the fallacy of “argumentum ad populum”, he hasn’t – nor will he – tell you what this “proof” is and if you get him to tell you what the “90%” is, it almost certainly won’t be relevant to his god.

    Basically, you’re arguing with trolls and sock-puppets.

  228. on 25 Apr 2013 at 11:46 am 228.Anonymous said …

    Continued…

    Another favorite game is to combine debunked arguments with double standards and a non-sequitur.

    They’ll bleat that Mao was an atheist even though it’s as relevant as saying that people with moustaches are mass murders as Stalin had a moustache. Hitler often mentioned god and was brought up as a Catholic, but that’s held to another standard. Likewise, the inquisition which was a result of religious views/dogma, is somehow different.

    As above, they are not here for an honest debate.

  229. on 25 Apr 2013 at 12:25 pm 229.Xenon said …

    Anonymous,

    many posters have outlined proofs for God on this blog. You are ignorant and/or unaware. The problems arises when your ilk only claim is uh uh it’s not proof. Acknowledging the vast majority buys into these proofs is not a fallacy. The fallacy states the claim is true due to the fact the vast majority believe it. Learn what a fallacy is before showing more ignorance.

    Do you seriously believe Communist dictators separated their atheists beliefs from their actions? Humans do not work in this manner. It is quite reasonable to acknowledge their atheism and relative moralism as factors in their actions.

  230. on 25 Apr 2013 at 12:48 pm 230.Fluttershy said …

    229.Xenon said …
    “insert comment here”

    Humorously, every sentence in that comment was a lie ;D

    Also, anon, regardless of the theists being trolls and liars, its better to argue than to ignore ;D

  231. on 25 Apr 2013 at 1:25 pm 231.Anonymous said …

    And on cue, another sock-puppet turns up to repeat the same evidence-free claim.

    Fluttershy, have fun. As long as you realize that they are deliberately being obstructive and will try to bait you into diversions (as here), then you’ll do fine!

  232. on 25 Apr 2013 at 2:00 pm 232.Anonymous said …

    Finally, because the response from the trolls is often to accuse everyone else of their misdeeds, here’s a couple of classics from the archives;

    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/blog/?p=2369#comment-39214

    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/blog/?p=2445#comment-42192

    Now about actual evidence for the existence of any god?

  233. on 25 Apr 2013 at 3:27 pm 233.Fluttershy said …

    Trust me Anon, im from ‘Straya

    Hence i dont care about them diverting ;D

  234. on 25 Apr 2013 at 3:41 pm 234.A said …

    X,

    Don”t you know anony the mouse is extra special. He specially qualified to determine what is an is not evidence. You must also meet his demand regardless of how many times it has been presented

    Have you ever noticed he has Never Ever (sound familiar) added anything meaningful here? He spends his time calling everyone trolls and puppets. This is a mouse out of ideas. Lol!!!!

    The thing I like about most Christians is they will call out their own. Not atheists or Muslims. Just like a liberal.

  235. on 25 Apr 2013 at 7:20 pm 235.MrQ said …

    “a”stroboy:

    Sure I can and over 90% of the world believes the proof. You need to be asking why are you blind to it?

    Of course, whatever the majority of people believe has to be THE WAY IT IS. Never mind that the majority of people once believed that the Earth was flat. Hey, isn’t this some sort of fallacy….appeal to something or other. Better change your tactic “a”.

  236. on 26 Apr 2013 at 2:34 am 236.Fluttershy said …

    ^
    Indeed.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply