Feed on Posts or Comments 25 April 2018

Christianity Thomas on 04 Jul 2009 01:39 pm

Christians are jerks AND God is imaginary

This true story is so sad on multiple levels:

The Christians and the wallet

Short version: Atheist finds a wallet. Atheist returns wallet to rightful owner. Owner is effusive in his thanks and starts praising/thanking God as well. Owner introduces atheist to wife, who is also praising God. Owner and wife realize their benefactor is an atheist. Atheist instantly turns into a loser.

Moral of the story: Christians are jerks because they refuse to acknowledge reality. What reality just demonstrated to them is:
1) Atheists are honest people.
2) Atheists do the right thing.
3) Their good fortune is the result of atheist morality.
3) God had nothing to do with the wallet returning.

132 Responses to “Christians are jerks AND God is imaginary”

  1. on 05 Jul 2009 at 12:42 pm 1.Ross said …

    I don’t think you got the moral of the story quite right. Here’s what I think you meant:

    Moral of the story: At least two Christians are jerks because they refuse to acknowledge reality.

    1) At least one atheist was an honest person on at least one occasion.
    2)At least one atheist did the right thing on at least one occasion.
    3)Their good fortune is the result of one atheist’s morality.
    4)God had nothing to do with the wallet returning.

    There. FTFY. As an atheist, I just like to avoid generalizations and the us vs. them mentality, just because there are plenty of Christians who are good people and plenty of atheists who are not.

  2. on 05 Jul 2009 at 8:00 pm 2.AntiRoss said …

    I have to disagree with the final paragraph of comment #1 because I think that a fair generalization can be made. There are plenty of good people, period; atheist, Christian et al. In this case, though, these people have had their worldview poisoned by their religion. It seems to me to be a very common phenomenon…

  3. on 05 Jul 2009 at 10:50 pm 3.Xenon said …

    LOL, I would love to hear the other side of the story. It is desperation when you take a bloggers story as fact and present as a blog topic. Yes, I think it is fair to say there are jerks under every possible religion/worldview/etc. I wouldn’t expect such a childish conclusion from a blog that is suppose to be one on the more analytical.

  4. on 06 Jul 2009 at 3:21 am 4.bahramthered said …

    The original story (Happened to me):

    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php?topic=7454.0

  5. on 05 Aug 2009 at 11:49 pm 5.Big T said …

    How many good Christ fearing people would have kept the money thinking it was a gift from there fake god. At least if I were to keep the money I know it is because I was a greedy s.o.b. Not because I think god is giving me anything.

  6. on 17 Sep 2010 at 8:58 am 6.Anonymous said …

    In answer to the topic “God is Imaginary”

    And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: 1 John 5:14 (KJV)

    Know that God may answer NO, wait, yes but not as expected or a resounding YES.

    I pray that you may come to the realization that you need to be saved from the penalty of your sin even of unbelief in God…and I pray that the answer will be YES…

    I pray also that you will be enlightened and be able to see the truth as you have been blinded…

    In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
    2 Cor 4:4 (KJV)

    I pray that the answer will be YES for I pity your lost soul…

    Otherwise if my prayers will not be answered…

    But the fearful, and UNBELIEVING, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
    Rev 21:8 (KJV) – that is HELL my friend…

    You are rational people why don’t you search the truth about hell outside the confines of the Bible (use your logic, science, near death experiences testimonials, scientific discoveries) and if you prove to yourself that HELL is true…perhaps you will conclude that God is true as well and not imaginary…I challenge you

    What if hell is not true…you won and you loose nothing, but what if hell is true, you will loose everything…THINK you rational people be reasonable

    Now judge yourself, rationalize and examine yourself with these parting provocative verses…

    He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men (that includes YOU) loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil(that also includes YOU). 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light (oh maybe this is the reason of unbelief), neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved (oh this is getting to the nerve). 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
    John 3:18-21 (KJV)

    NOW I KNOW WHY…but then again my desire is to have a “YES” answer…

    For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

    19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are WITHOUT EXCUSE: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became VAIN in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be WISE, they became fools,
    Romans 1:18-22 (KJV)

    So there it is…the proof that “God is Imaginary” is just a “VAIN IMAGINATION” by people who think they are “wise” having a proud heart. You somehow believed in God before you disbelieve in Him isn’t it, well if that is the case…the Bible speaks the truth

  7. on 17 Sep 2010 at 10:40 am 7.3D said …

    6.Anonymous said …

    What if hell is not true…you won and you loose nothing, but what if hell is true, you will loose everything…THINK you rational people be reasonable

    Holy shit, that’s like the third Pascal’s Wager post this month on this blog. Do you guys have anything that wasn’t debunked over a century ago? No?

    Hey, let me help you out. How about option 3? What if Hell is real, but it’s not run by Jesus, it’s the Norse mythology version and it’s run by Odin. Then you’re wrong too, because you ‘gambled’ on the fake god and not the real one, and now you’re not only going to hell but you’re also gonna have a really huge Nordic hammer shoved up your asshole.

    Why chance it? Start singing paeans to the Norse gods now! And the plus side is, they don’t really care if you have sex or have fun the way Jesus does. So you don’t have to live a boring life with your head up your ass singing contemporary gospel and being forced to boring church bake sales with your frigid soccer mom wife! Win-win.

  8. on 17 Sep 2010 at 1:10 pm 8.Horatio said …

    “Do you guys have anything that wasn’t debunked over a century ago?”

    3D, the reason it comes up is because the wager is because the wager is still being offered..

    When you actually dedunk the wager it will go away. Considering Pascal was quite brilliant, I doubt you can perform such a task.

  9. on 10 Oct 2011 at 11:51 am 9.Paul said …

    Evolution isn’t smart enough

    Many say that God” is an imaginary figure created by a bunch of long dead evil men to enslave others throughout the centuries… Ok, pick a religion? Any religion, you’ll always find some kind of figurehead = God…

    Part of what atheists say is accurate depending on one’s own personal point of view… However, this doubting Thomas mindset is illogical and easy to prove false… Atheistic attitudes here and abroad have now taken center stage for those living in the 21st-century have convinced themselves that there is indeed no God… We’ll as a former atheist who’s never met or heard the voice of this all-powerful entity at any given point in my life finds himself convinced with 100% certainty that this mysterious concept we call reality required an intelligent beginning of some kind…

    I don’t see how an explosion of a gaseous substance billions of years ago could have created anything as perfect as this universe…

    No Atheist would have a leg to stand on here, unless someone created that leg…

    What I’m trying to say is this; evolution is not smart enough to create anything that has any order to it… You don’t have to go very far to find some examples…

    Look at your own body, a living breathing miracle of advanced genetic engineering…

    Look at your five senses and subtract one you don’t really need… Yes, now be honest, would evolution be intelligent enough to create those five senses? Why not just one or maybe two tops…

    No, my argument against the theory of evolution is based on the overall sophistication of everything those five senses can detect…

    Sight, taste, smell, touch, and hearing… which one would you rather do without.

    Someone has given us 50 most convincing reasons to prove that God is imaginary…

    I now list just 5 arguments against this creator less evolution nonsense that tells us God is imaginary…

    (1) “Evolution is not smart enough to choose the precise distance between all the planets in this galaxy…perhaps that imaginary God is needed here?

    (2) ” Your body has a built-in defense system = (antibodies) to intricate for evolution to have engineered this by itself, without first requiring a few thousand textbooks of medical knowledge on basic anatomy 101…

    (3) ” The spinal cord in a general animal sense is an incredibly sophisticated system of microscopic engineering to say the least. Thus, for transferring tiny electric nerve impulses via micro energy pluses from the brain to all the working muscles, I don’t believe evolution that requires no intelligent imaginary creator could have engineered anything so perfect that it works 100% of the time…

    (4) ” Reproduction in relation to all animal life requires one male and one female of the species to produce any offspring, evolution working alone without a genetic same-sex crossbreeding control plan would have screwed this process up making it impossible for any thing to breed… miscarriages galore…

    (5) ” Our own planet Earth is an ongoing miracle in planetary engineering…

    In addition, the ABC’s that follow here do suggest that a great deal of intelligence was required…

    (A) That cleverly designed protective atmosphere which repels dangerous meteors. However, evolution that requires no intelligent creator falls short every time when it comes to tackling certain mathematical concepts…

    (B) Planetary mathematics dictates that all intersecting magnetic forces in a gravitational field must be perfectly balanced to achieve the rudimentary requirements of “gravitational balance…” Thus, a mathematical equation of unknown sophistication is needed here. = (X) unknown to evolution that works with a whim of chance for this requires someone who knows a thing of two about gravity…

    (C) Fact, it would take a series of super computers operating day and night for 10,000 years too accurately calculate the basic first step perimeters just to add 1% protection to this planets tough shell…
    Yet we have a protective atmosphere that is 99.9% effective against small asteroids, meteors and that deadly cosmic radiation from our own Sun, which would have killed every living creature on this planet off long before that evolution jazz kicked in…

    Fact, if we were too lose that most ingenious protective shield, then were all dead…

    Honestly, you atheist ask yourself this, is evolution which requires no imaginary creator smart enough to create the entire universe from scratch? Thus, placing so many marvelous planets at precise orbits so they don’t collide with each other?

    NO, like it or not there is without question a super intelligent entity out there somewhere in the cosmos, whose intellect is so far above us that it leaves no comparisons to man’s puny knowledge of the universe which surrounds him… For only a fool says in his wicked black heart, there is no God and everything just created itself from nothing… “”Coincidence””

    Ozzy Osborne knows the truth about evolution versus intelligent design… In his Black Sabbath years he performed one peculiar soul reaching song called, “After Forever” Ozzy asked one particular question of every devoted or soon-to-be atheist… Is your faith in evolution strong enough to exclude a creative being called God? The answer was no…

    Check out these cool lyrics from, After Forever”

    Black Sabbath’s “Master of reality” LP

    Ozzy Singing,

    “Your world was made for you by someone above… (God)
    But, you choose evil ways instead of love…
    You made me (Lucifer) master of the world where you exist…
    The soul I took from you was not even missed….yea!!!”

    Even somebody as confused as Ozzy, obviously believes in this super intelligent being refer to as God… For this song does ask the ultimate question of every “thinking being” on this planet. It centers on one factual premise, making a choice.

    Too, practice righteousness and be a blessing to others, or practice unrighteousness and destroy all those around you by projecting nothing but hatred…

    I see many things wrong with today’s atheistic movement, one particular point that focuses on death and the resurrection of the body should be considered, “the smoking gun…”

    If the atheistic concept is true and there is no God… Then it would mean that every person who has ever died is going to remain in that nonexistent state, forever…Thus, leaving no hope for a second chance at life… I don’t know about you, but that really sucks major…

    This leaving man and womankind no hope for a second chance to better themselves in another life… I don’t know about the rest of you atheist’s many who have convinced yourselves that life is meaningless…That we all go around only once, then wind up in an nonexistent state forever… Yuck!!! That would be considered the greatest tragedy to befall any creative race…

    I pray that there is a judgment day coming at some future date. Because that means that, there will be a resurrection of the dead. Thus, this one action of great love for his creations putting an end to that nonexistence equation is most welcomed indeed…

    Let’s face it? The day will come when everyone of us will face the ultimate challenge of a lifetime. A skeleton dressed in black called the grim reaper… = a physical death…

    In conclusion, if I wind up (not making the grade?) burning in hell = the final annihilation, it’ll be a comfort to know that even though I was once dead = passed away. This once thought imaginary God out of his love for all his creation would resurrect me from the dead to be placed there in this lake of fire…at least I didn’t remain dead forever = nonexistent…

    End!

  10. on 10 Oct 2011 at 1:13 pm 10.MrQ said …

    Thanks, Paul (Post #9), for putting a smile on my face.
    No LOL, just a smile.

  11. on 10 Oct 2011 at 1:34 pm 11.Lou (DFW) said …

    9.Paul said …

    “If the atheistic concept is true and there is no God… Then it would mean that every person who has ever died is going to remain in that nonexistent state, forever…Thus, leaving no hope for a second chance at life…”

    Yes, that’s correct. Just as you didn’t exist before you were born, you won’t exist after you die. What’s so difficult about understanding that simple concept? Everybody who has ever lived has experienced nonexistence. So why is death this deep, dark, concept that almost everybody has a problem understanding?

  12. on 10 Oct 2011 at 1:52 pm 12.Anonymous said …

    I think Paul understands it well enough.

    No one, not even a fundamental Christian, could string together such a grammatically poor collection of moronic nonsense and keeps a straight face.

    I call Poe.

  13. on 10 Oct 2011 at 4:46 pm 13.DPK said …

    “Evolution isn’t smart enough…”

    You make a claim despite mountains of evidence that show evolution most definite IS “smart enough”. The fact that you don’t understand or can’t fathom it doesn’t mean a thing. The caveman pondering the volcano could not comprehend how such power and energy could come out of the ground… so he concluded there was an angry god living in the volcano. He was wrong, and so are you.

    “I don’t see how an explosion of a gaseous substance billions of years ago could have created anything as perfect as this universe… ”

    Same point, but add to it the fact that if it hadn’t, you also wouldn’t be here thinking about it. Like the puddle marveling at how perfectly the depression in which it lives fits its shape, it would conclude that the hole in the ground was made specifically for it.

    “What I’m trying to say is this; evolution is not smart enough to create anything that has any order to it… You don’t have to go very far to find some examples… ”

    Simply a false claim. Then explain why a perfect creator would create a world in which 99% of all living things that ever existed on it are now extinct? Seem like inferior design work to me.

    “Our own planet Earth is an ongoing miracle in planetary engineering… ”

    And is one among probably trillions of planetary systems, the vast majority of which will NOT have the right combination of “design” to support the emergence of life… at least not as we understand it. You are trying to tell the lottery winner that it is nearly impossible to win the lottery… he won’t get it.

    And…. seriously? Ozzie Osbourn? Really?

  14. on 10 Oct 2011 at 7:36 pm 14.Ben said …

    “Like the puddle marveling at how perfectly the depression in which it lives fits its shape, it would conclude that the hole in the ground was made specifically for it.”

    Oh yeah, that is just like the grand design of a cell, the complex array of code in DNA or the fascinating design of an eye. Yeah, just like water laying in a puddle.

    The lengths atheist will go and the realities they will deny to keep up the charade.

    It puts a smile on my face.

  15. on 10 Oct 2011 at 8:02 pm 15.Lou (DFW) said …

    14.Ben said …

    “Oh yeah, that is just like the grand design of a cell, the complex array of code in DNA or the fascinating design of an eye.”

    The human eye is poorly designed, human cells go crazy (cancer), and the efficiency and complexity of DNA “code” becomes less so as human understanding of it increases.

    “The lengths atheist will go and the realities they will deny to keep up the charade.”

    No reality has been denied until you present one. So, please present your evidence for your imaginary god.

  16. on 10 Oct 2011 at 8:06 pm 16.DPK said …

    Again Ben misses the point completely. The puddle analogy was in response to Paul’s confusion about
    “Our own planet Earth is an ongoing miracle in planetary engineering… ” and could not conceive of the idea that the planet was “designed” with us in mind. We evolved to fit the planet, not the other way around. How dense can you be?

    Again Ben, just because an idea is incomprehensible to you doesn’t mean it is incomprehensible. You are no different that those who used to claim that it was “obvious” that the earth was flat and at the center of the universe.
    Just because an idea is beyond your grasp doesn’t mean that there must then be a magical god to explain it. Your ignorance is showing……
    D

  17. on 10 Oct 2011 at 8:41 pm 17.Ben said …

    “We evolved to fit the planet, not the other way around. How dense can you be?”

    Sure we did DPK. The Sears tower evolved to fit the foundation too. You guys are a hoot. I don’t think you even hear how ridiculous you sound.

    Yes, I like the poorly designed argument. It is rather new. Yes, the heart which pumps for 75 years on average and the mind that is still unexplainable and yet still man attempts to recreate these designs – and fails. DNA which is full of incredibly complex yet poorly designed evolved from???????? Tough one there, yes?

    Then let us top it off with a good insult like atheist must do. Yes, that always punctuates a good argument.

  18. on 10 Oct 2011 at 8:45 pm 18.Ben said …

    “Again Ben, just because an idea is incomprehensible to you doesn’t mean it is incomprehensible.”

    You mean like God DPK?

    Suddenly you just might find that idea incomprehensible, eh?

    Is this anything like the argument

    “the universe only looks complex to us”

    That has been one of my favorite arguments from WWGHA in the past.

  19. on 10 Oct 2011 at 9:08 pm 19.Lou (DFW) said …

    17.Ben said …

    “Sure we did DPK. The Sears tower evolved to fit the foundation too.”

    Except the the Sears Tower didn’t evolve.

    “You guys are a hoot. I don’t think you even hear how ridiculous you sound.”

    What I would like to “hear” is your evidence for your imaginary god. Until then, you sound ridiculous for continuously avoiding it with idiotic comments about anything but evidence for god.

    “Your ignorance is showing……” isn’t an insult. It’s an observation.

  20. on 10 Oct 2011 at 9:27 pm 20.DPK said …

    “Again Ben, just because an idea is incomprehensible to you doesn’t mean it is incomprehensible.”

    You mean like God DPK?

    The idea of magical gods isn’t incomprehensible to me, merely unsupported by any evidence… quite unlike evolution. I comprehend your need to invent gods and other magical creature to explain what you can’t understand… I just think it’s a poor excuse for a lack of understanding. You should go worship a volcano.

  21. on 10 Oct 2011 at 9:32 pm 21.DPK said …

    17.Ben said …

    “Sure we did DPK. The Sears tower evolved to fit the foundation too.”

    Except the the Sears Tower didn’t evolve.

    Exactly… and if the location of the Sear’s Tower didn’t have a bedrock layer underneath it sufficient to support the foundation, it wouldn’t have been built there, and you wouldn’t be using it as a poor example of a silly point.

    If the planet didn’t have the raw materials present to produce steel and concrete, the Sear’s Tower would be made of something else, or not have been built at all. Thank you for demonstrating my point… and you made us think you just didn’t understand it.

  22. on 10 Oct 2011 at 11:21 pm 22.Curmudgeon said …

    “The idea of magical gods isn’t incomprehensible to me, merely unsupported by any evidence”

    If you support evolution then there is your evidence for God. Evidence is just evasion tactics. Evolution is mathematically impossible without intelligence.

    I read a great article on multiverses last week. No evidence for these but I digress. Amazingly references to purpose and intelligence were emerging from the article from these scientist. Science is catching on that this is no accident.

  23. on 10 Oct 2011 at 11:23 pm 23.Curmudgeon said …

    “the universe only looks complex to us”

    Now that is funny! Who spit out that declaration? I missed it.

    I guess it doesn’t look complex to God. I do agree with that.

  24. on 11 Oct 2011 at 1:58 am 24.Lou (DFW) said …

    22.Curmudgeon said …

    “If you support evolution then there is your evidence for God.”

    But if you don’t, then it’s not?

    “Evidence is just evasion tactics.”

    But not providing any isn’t? That’s some convoluted logic.

    “Evolution is mathematically impossible without intelligence.”

    Show us the math. Oh, and now evolution is true, but it requires intelligence.

  25. on 11 Oct 2011 at 2:36 am 25.Lou (DFW) said …

    22.Curmudgeon said …

    “I read a great article on multiverses last week. No evidence for these but I digress.”

    No, you do not digress. You, just like the other theists here, divert attention from the fact that you have no evidence for your imaginary god.

    “Amazingly[,] references to purpose and intelligence were emerging from the article from these scientist[s].”

    Really? Show us.

    “Science is catching on that this is no accident.”

    Show us where “science” says this is an accident.

  26. on 11 Oct 2011 at 2:59 am 26.DPK said …

    “If you support evolution then there is your evidence for God.”

    You fellas really need to get together and get your story straight. Some of you theists say evolution is real, others say it is impossible… which is it guys?

    “the universe looks complex, but probably is quite simple, it’s just that we don’t know the simple way of looking at it, yet”.
    was said by Stephen Hawkins. No doubt Crum considers him stupid. That says a lot.

    And yes, please show us where science has declared the universe an “accident”. And exactly what “lack of evidence” for the existence of multiple universes concludes that there is therefore a magical god?
    That should be a good read……

  27. on 11 Oct 2011 at 3:45 pm 27.DPK said …

    To sum up the theist’s position succinctly:

    1. Anything not fully understood = god did it.

    2. Anything that we actually do understand, but seems to contradict the need for god = impossible and wrong.

    3. Any one of the first two scenarios that becomes so painfully obvious that it can no longer be denied = oh, well, god did that too.

    Ignorance and superstition have been around since the dawn of man. Maybe one day we will finally put it to rest.

  28. on 11 Oct 2011 at 5:21 pm 28.Lou (DFW) said …

    24.Lou (DFW) said …

    22.Curmudgeon said …

    “Evolution is mathematically impossible without intelligence.”

    “Show us the math. Oh, and now evolution is true, but it requires intelligence.”

    Still waiting for your math. If you want to, you can ignore trying to account for the required “intelligence.”

  29. on 11 Oct 2011 at 6:35 pm 29.Observer said …

    “Evolution is mathematically impossible without intelligence.” But everyone knows that snow flakes are made with a dash of fairy dust. They are so complex and unique, they must require the hand of a (capital D) Designer. I can’t make one! It must be so.

  30. on 11 Oct 2011 at 7:50 pm 30.Biff said …

    “Some of you theists say evolution is real, others say it is impossible… which is it guys?”

    Actually we are much closer than atheists. Some atheists say Buddhism, some say Taoism and others say Humanism. Which is it guys?

    If evolution is true, it could only be true with a God making it happen. That would in turn make the math irrelevant.

    Now,if the brainwashed masses who support evolution as fact can show us how nobody x nothing = universe and human beings through chance, natural selection and whatever other magic wand you would like to add, then bring the facts.

  31. on 11 Oct 2011 at 7:53 pm 31.Biff said …

    DPK

    His name is Hawking. Know your heroes.

  32. on 11 Oct 2011 at 8:50 pm 32.Lou (DFW) said …

    30.Biff said …

    “Actually we are much closer than atheists. Some atheists say Buddhism, some say Taoism and others say Humanism. Which is it guys?”

    Which is it what?

    First of all, your reply is a non-sequitur. Second, your question is nonsensical. Buddhism, Taoism, and Humanism are “real,” regardless of whether or not they are true. And I’m not even going into the rest of the stupidity of your question. Stop trying to be witty, and think about what you write before you post it. Your comments are so disjointed that I get the impression that you’re some kid who dropped-out of high school.

    “If evolution is true, it could only be true with a God making it happen.”

    Now you’re saying it’s possible that evolution is “true?” And which “god” would it require? Zeus?

    “That would in turn make the math irrelevant.”

    Of course the math is irrelevant, especially when you can’t provide any.

    “Now,if the brainwashed masses who support evolution as fact can show us how nobody x nothing = universe and human beings through chance, natural selection and whatever other magic wand you would like to add, then bring the facts.”

    Poor Biff, he can’t keep his arguments straight.

    Why does somebody “who support[s] evolution as fact” have to show how the universe came to be? Somebody can “support evolution as fact” and at the same time believe that their god “poofed” the universe into existence.

    Evolution is fact. Natural selection is fact. Big Bang is fact. Scientists don’t claim the universe arose by chance. Even the Pope understands those facts. All of those things have been discussed and explained here over and over. Yet you argue against and use them as if you’re some reject from a junior high debating team, one who can’t even remember the topic. The topic is god and religion. Now, please provide your evidence for your imaginary god.

  33. on 12 Oct 2011 at 12:01 am 33.Ted said …

    Lou you dodged the question. Which form of atheism is true? Please choose one only one can be true. Buddhism? Taoism? Jainism? Do you think all are true? Your form is true? What?

    Microevolution is fact and can be proven using modern scientific methodologies.

    Macroevolution is theory and has NOT been proven using modern scientific methodologies. You used the pope as a proof which should tell you something. I would like to think you are a liar, but I doubt you know your own foolishness.

    I’m impressed how you tear into others. For a moment I thought you were some sort of important individual. No, not really.

    Tearing down others makes you feel superior but the fact you don’t know fact from theory proves you are a sheep and remain completely in the dark following false shepherds.

  34. on 12 Oct 2011 at 12:43 am 34.Anonymous said …

    Ted, you should learn what atheism is before you embarrass yourself further. Still, your question is as irrelevant as it is idiotic and pathetic.

    Here’s some questions that scare the crap out of all of you believers. Let’s see you answer without resorting to dodges or changing the question.

    Where’s your evidence for YOUR god and how do you prove that out of all the gods that people have worshiped, that yours is the true one?

    Also, explain how your god doesn’t require a creator. How does that work and where’s the proof?

    Why doesn’t prayer work? How is it that believers and non-believers interact with the natural world in exactly the same manner with no advantage gained by the believers?

    Explain how the human body is so obviously not-designed. Why would an all-powerful deity make such a terribly flawed design?

    I predict you won’t answer. You won’t answer because your god is as imaginary as Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy.

  35. on 12 Oct 2011 at 1:01 am 35.Xenon said …

    Ted

    Of course he answers nothing. We have pretty much started treating him as a troll and stopped paying him any attention.

    I really am troubled by our schools when these young boys come out not knowing the difference between a fact and theory.

  36. on 12 Oct 2011 at 1:03 am 36.Xenon said …

    Oh, anonymous is Lou (DFW). Could you tell?

  37. on 12 Oct 2011 at 1:52 am 37.Lou (DFW) said …

    33.Ted said …

    “Lou you dodged the question. Which form of atheism is true? Please choose one only one can be true. Buddhism? Taoism? Jainism? Do you think all are true? Your form is true? What?”

    I didn’t “dodge” his alleged question. But I’ll answer yours. There aren’t any “forms” of atheism. Therefore, the question is without merit. Lying about the meaning of atheism is a common lie of theists.

  38. on 12 Oct 2011 at 1:56 am 38.Lou (DFW) said …

    36.Xenon said …

    “Oh, anonymous is Lou (DFW). Could you tell?”

    Wrong. I don’t intentionally comment anonymously. If I am not on my PC and I accidentally do so because my name isn’t automatically used, then I subsequently comment as such.

  39. on 12 Oct 2011 at 2:10 am 39.Anonymous said …

    Xenon / Horatio, instead of dodging the question, why don’t you show us the strength of the theist intellect and answer #34? You’re probably too scared to show that you’ve got nothing though.

    If you don’t answer, then that’s proof enough that not even a believer has any proof. At that point, let’s all agree that all you have is faith and you can crawl back under your rock until October 21, when the world ends — according to Christianity, that is.

    You believe Camping don’t you? He’s using the same bible you do. Same personal god. Or is he delusional for believing in Heaven and Hell?

  40. on 12 Oct 2011 at 2:18 am 40.Lou (DFW) said …

    35.Xenon said …

    “Of course he answers nothing.”

    Of course, that is a lie.

    “We have pretty much started treating him as a troll…”

    What is this “we” business? And if ANYBODY is a troll, it’s someone who posts comments and claims to have knowledge of god, but NEVER provides any evidence for it.

    “…and stopped paying him any attention.”

    Except when you do, even when you think I posted anonymously.

    “I really am troubled by our schools when these young boys come out not knowing the difference between a fact and theory.”

    There you go ignoring me again.

    You’re really troubled alright, but it’s not by our schools. Do you think that Carl Sagan was poorly educated and didn’t know the difference between a fact and a theory when he said “evolution is a fact, it really happened?” The sad truth of the matter is that either you don’t understand the difference between the the fact of evolution and theories for evolution or you are a liar.

    Furthermore, there never has been a theory known as “The Theory of Evolution.” It’s a misquoted and misused term mostly used by uneducated creationists. Anybody who uses the term, especially proponents of evolution, are simply wrong. It’s just as ignorant as referring to gravity as “The Theory of Gravity.”

  41. on 12 Oct 2011 at 2:23 am 41.Lou (DFW) said …

    33.Ted said …

    “Which form of atheism is true? Please choose one only one can be true.”

    Which form of not believing in Santa Claus is true? The Nazi one, the Jewish one, the christian one, the Republican one, or the Texan one?

    Please choose because only one can be true.

  42. on 12 Oct 2011 at 12:30 pm 42.Anonymous said …

    Ted / Xenon / Horatio, if the bible is accurate and your god created the universe, explain the claim that “light” was created AFTER the earth and waters when it was the other way round by billions of years.

    This is the sort of mistake that the uneducated goat-herders that wrote the bible would make, It’s evidence that the bible is a lot of nonsense and people who believe it are idiots.

    Let’s see some proof of your god from you rather than you posting your usual nonsense.

  43. on 12 Oct 2011 at 2:18 pm 43.Observer said …

    #33 Ted, Windbag, Boofoo- “Which version of atheism is true?” Hmmmm. This is a relic of your insipid xtian sectarianism. You question is as sensible, and as well reasoned, as
    “Which version of 2+2 is true? There is the 2 apples + 2 apples = 4 apples version, and the 2 oranges + 2 oranges = 4 oranges version, but what about the 2 apples + 2 oranges = 4 pieces of fruit version! Ha I gotcha!” This is called a lack of, or inability to perform abstract thought. It is symptomatic of low IQ, or being from a primitive society.

  44. on 12 Oct 2011 at 4:44 pm 44.DPK said …

    You guys are so funny. First evolution is false, then it’s not false, but you need gods to cause it, then “which version of not believing in imaginary beings is the correct one?”

    All the while refusing to answer any of the direct questions or challenges to your assertions that are presented to you over and over again.

    Biff seems more concerned that I mis-typed “Hawkins” instead of “Hawkings”. Really?

    Since others here corrected you on your clear misunderstanding of what it means to simply not believe in gods and supernatural beings… let’s ask you this… which IS relevant. Which version of god worship and path to eternal life IS the correct one? There are many versions, all claiming different truths and different knowledge… and people routinely kill each other and start wars over which version is correct. So tell us… which of the dozens of gods do each of YOU believe is real, and what do you think you have to do to win his favor and be saved.

  45. on 12 Oct 2011 at 8:27 pm 45.Ted said …

    Observer

    So are you an orange or an apple? Would your claim be that Buddhism, Taoism and Jainism are ALL TRUE?

    Or, is your particular Humanism the real and true Atheism?

    Observer thank you for fulfilling the predictable atheist attacks on those you disagree with. This leads me to conclude you definitely do not fall into Buddhism. They tend to have class.

  46. on 12 Oct 2011 at 9:29 pm 46.Lou (DFW) said …

    45.Ted said …

    “Or, is your particular Humanism the real and true Atheism?”

    I answered your question. Observer answered your question.

    Ted, what part of there aren’t forms of not believing in deities do you not understand?

    “Observer thank you for fulfilling the predictable atheist attacks on those you disagree with.”

    It is not a matter of disagreement. It’s a simple matter of understanding that you are factually incorrect.

    Try to read this slowly and think about it before you post a reply:

    I am an atheist. I am not a follower of Buddhism, Taoism, Jainism, or Humanism philosophies.

    Everything doesn’t have to be placed in the context of some religion or philosophy. It’s that simple.

  47. on 12 Oct 2011 at 9:48 pm 47.DPK said …

    “Would your claim be that Buddhism, Taoism and Jainism are ALL TRUE?”

    Ted, are you really that thick or do you just pretend to be for the sake of amusement?

    Buddhism, Taoism and Jainism also (presumably) all profess a lack of belief in garden fairies. I assume you do as well. So, what particular brand of afairyism do you think is true? Do you contend that Buddhism, Taoism and Jainism are ALL true, or is perhaps your particular version of Christianity the only one that has it right with respect to the non-existence of garden fairies?
    Please don’t dodge the question.

  48. on 12 Oct 2011 at 9:52 pm 48.Observer said …

    #45 Ted “This leads me to conclude you definitely do not fall into Buddhism.” You are correct, I “do not fall into Buddhism.” Likely this also means you have never heard of Dharma Combat. You theists on this website are so bereft of knowledge ABOUT ANYTHING it is breathtaking. You never fail to entertain.

    As for Buddhists having “class”, I suspect I know quite a few more than you do, and like any other group it is all over the map. The ones I do know though tend to be vastly more intelligent and better educated than practicing xtians. You could surmise this already.

    #46 Lou(DFW) Really sums it up. The part I mentioned above about you and your ilk having an inability to perform abstract thought really must be true. It must be like color blindness or with someone like Xenon, similar to a congenital defect where one is born without eyes altogether. I do not think it is something that can be acquired.

  49. on 12 Oct 2011 at 9:54 pm 49.Observer said …

    #45 By the way Tender Ted, how, precisely were you attacked?

  50. on 13 Oct 2011 at 2:16 am 50.Ted said …

    Observer

    That is great you know so many Buddhist. I’m sure you know many more than me. You strike me as quite the well-rounded young man.

    You seem to be leaning in their direction. Yet, let me ask again since there seems to be no consensus.

    Which form of atheism is true? Would it be Buddhism, Taoism. Jainism early Indic religions or maybe Secular Humanism? Many others, feel free to reference other forms if necessary.

    Such a very simple question I cannot understand why an answer is so difficult. No tricks here, just a simple question.

  51. on 13 Oct 2011 at 2:49 am 51.Anonymous said …

    Ted, any form of atheism is “true” in respect to the rejection of belief in imaginary gods. Gods are all imaginary, therefore atheism, which is nothing more than the rejection of such silly superstitious beliefs is true. There is no difference between “forms” of atheism because it is not a “belief” it is simply the rejection of another’s belief.
    There is no difference between a Christian’s non belief in Santa Claus and a Muslim’s non belief in Santa Claus. So what is your point? Which kind of non-Santa Clausism do you subscribe to? The Jehova’s Witness version, the Mormon version, the Jewish version, or the Hindu version? Perhaps you are a Roman Catholic or Episcopal non-Sanata-ist? Tell us, because that question makes just as much sense as yours. Your continuing to pretend that your question has some meaning makes you look completely idiotic.

    Now that I have answered your question, please answer mine in 26, 44, and 47?
    Do you think no one is noticing that you guys NEVER answer questions posed you?

  52. on 13 Oct 2011 at 3:34 am 52.DPK said …

    and sorry… 51 A was me. For some reason my desktop PC remembers me, by my macbook does not.

  53. on 13 Oct 2011 at 12:13 pm 53.Lou (DFW) said …

    50.Ted said …

    Would it be Buddhism, Taoism. Jainism early Indic religions or maybe Secular Humanism?

    NO! What part of NO don’t you understand?!

    “Many others, feel free to reference other forms if necessary.”

    No other forms are necessary because none of those things are forms of atheism. How many times does a question have to be answered before you understand?!

    “Such a very simple question I cannot understand why an answer is so difficult. No tricks here, just a simple question.”

    It has been answered. I cannot understand why that is difficult for you to understand. Are you retarded or something? If not, then you seem to be making every effort to appear as such.

  54. on 13 Oct 2011 at 1:44 pm 54.Lou (DFW) said …

    51.Anonymous said …

    “Your continuing to pretend that your question has some meaning makes you look completely idiotic.”

    No kidding. It’s as if he thinks he’s somehow out-smarting everyone else when all he’s doing is making himself look stupid. But other than admitting his belief in an imaginary god is nothing but faith, he, like the other theists here, creates a straw man in feeble attempt to discredit atheists rather than provide any evidence for his imaginary god.

  55. on 13 Oct 2011 at 4:11 pm 55.Anonymous said …

    This is more to the theists that realized the errors of their ways and accepted reality.

    What is the point of these “x questions to ask an atheist” posts? They are so consistent that it seems as if they are from some canned repository.

    In your muddled days, did you really think that if someone couldn’t give you a specific answer to some question that somehow, without even a shred of evidence, your god-did-it position was vindicated? How does that work in the theist mindset?

    Likewise, did anyone really, truly, honestly think that it was up to someone else to “disprove” a god when they also knew that their god couldn’t be proven to exist?

    Having reasoned away gods along with Santa Claus and other invisible friends, I’m curious if anyone can shed some light on how it feels to be on the other side of this argument.

  56. on 13 Oct 2011 at 5:40 pm 56.Biff said …

    Ted,

    Most of the atheist here are simply secular humanist, a religion of course, but denied by the atheists here. On occasion a simpleton may arise whose worldview is developed no more than “Duh, No God”, but most fall into secular humanist, here anyway.

    I have a close friend who is atheist but believes in a spiritual life force. A new age atheist if you will.

    I have in the past even shown them here definitions that fit atheism as a religion but they will only repeat their denial. Secular humanism is a religion according to SCOTUS.

    Anyway, hope that helps.

  57. on 13 Oct 2011 at 6:19 pm 57.Lou (DFW) said …

    56.Biff said …

    “Most of the atheist here are simply secular humanist, a religion of course, but denied by the atheists here.”

    And you are a liar. You know no such thing.

    Secular humanism is not a religion. Secular is opposite of religious.

    “I have a close friend who is atheist but believes in a spiritual life force. A new age atheist if you will.”

    So what? “Spiritual life force” – sounds a goofy as you.

    “I have in the past even shown them here definitions that fit atheism as a religion but they will only repeat their denial.”

    We don’t repeat a denial, but we do continue to show you that, as usual, you are wrong. Not believing in deities cannot be a religion. Why do you keep lying about atheists? Why can’t you simply provide evidence for your imaginary god?

    “Secular humanism is a religion according to SCOTUS.”

    Really? Show us.

  58. on 13 Oct 2011 at 6:22 pm 58.Anonymous said …

    Biff, why do you insist on trying to misdirect the conversation to avoid the questions posed here?

    Where is YOUR evidence for YOUR god?

    Put up, or shut up.

  59. on 13 Oct 2011 at 9:29 pm 59.Observer said …

    The whole thing wrt SCOTUS and secular humanism has been gone over before, but for the idiotic dumbass filth on this blog who keep saying secular humanism is a religion should look at “Peloza v. Capistrano School District”. SCOTUS specifically says

    “United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Peloza v. Capistrano School District, 37 F.3d 517 (9th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 515 U.S. 1173 (1995). In this case, a science teacher argued that, by requiring him to teach evolution, his school district was forcing him to teach the “religion” of Secular Humanism. The Court responded, “We reject this claim because neither the Supreme Court, nor this circuit, has ever held that evolutionism or Secular Humanism are ‘religions’ for Establishment Clause purposes.” The Supreme Court refused to review the case. ”

    Boofoo- You cretinous filth, you have seen the post above before. Stop lying.

  60. on 13 Oct 2011 at 9:36 pm 60.Observer said …

    #50 Ted- The responses above more than cover your question. Are you really this dense or limited? Which variety of A-Santa-ism do you follow? We are riveted to our seats waiting for your thoughtful and well reasoned response.

  61. on 13 Oct 2011 at 9:43 pm 61.SCOTUS said …

    In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that Secular Humanism was a religion. Nevertheless, many Humanists deny the significance of the Court’s assertion. In order to buttress the claim that the identification of Secular Humanism as a religion in a footnote in the Torcaso case is more than mere “dicta,” here is a memorandum prepared “[a]t the request of the staff of the Committee on Education and Labor” by Congressman John B. Conlan.

    http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/definitions/humanism_religion.htm

  62. on 13 Oct 2011 at 10:13 pm 62.Anonymous said …

    This nonsense has been dealt with time and time again. All you theists ever do is throw stones and try to divert the conversation with your red herrings.

    So, AGAIN, Christians… let’s see YOUR proof for the existence of god.

    No proof? Then no god.

  63. on 13 Oct 2011 at 10:56 pm 63.Lou (DFW) said …

    61.SCROTUM said …

    “In 1961, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that Secular Humanism was a religion.”

    Except that it did not. Post the “acknowledgement.”

    “In order to buttress the claim that the identification of Secular Humanism as a religion in a footnote in the Torcaso case is more than mere “dicta,” here is a memorandum prepared “[a]t the request of the staff of the Committee on Education and Labor” by Congressman John B. Conlan.”

    It is a MEMORANDUM. The SCOTUS FOOTNOTE does not establish any law or form a SCOTUS opinion.

    In 2000 (Kalka v. Hawk) the D.C. Circuit stated:

    “The [U.S. Supreme] Court’s statement in Torcaso does not stand for the proposition that humanism, no matter in what form and no matter how practiced, amounts to a religion under the First Amendment.”

    The SCOTUS – Secular Humanism lies are just another theist diversion of they fact they have no evidence for their imaginary god.

  64. on 13 Oct 2011 at 11:12 pm 64.Ted said …

    Thanks to SCOTUS and to Bif.

    It seems Secular Humanism is a relgion for the free exercise clause but NOT a religion for the establishment clause.

    Quite convenient.

    We have other convenient clauses such as abortion is not murder BUT if you murder a pregnant mother one is charged with double homicide.

    Yet the question is still unanswered. Which form of atheism is true? Would it be Buddhism, Taoism. Jainism early Indic religions or maybe Secular Humanism?

  65. on 13 Oct 2011 at 11:41 pm 65.Lou (DFW) said …

    64.Ted said …

    “It seems Secular Humanism is a relgion for the free exercise clause but NOT a religion for the establishment clause.”

    Ted, please quote for us where SCOTUS ruled as such.

    “Yet the question is still unanswered.”

    It has been answered several times. You are simply to dense to get it. You are excessively obtuse.

    “Which form of atheism is true? Would it be Buddhism, Taoism. Jainism early Indic religions or maybe Secular Humanism?”

    None of then are forms of atheism.

    Why do you ignore the answer that has been provided here? Are you going to keep asking over and over until somebody provides the answer that you want?

  66. on 13 Oct 2011 at 11:46 pm 66.Observer said …

    #64 Ted Your obstinacy and stupidity are remarkable. Let me re-post #51s entry:

    “Ted, any form of atheism is “true” in respect to the rejection of belief in imaginary gods. Gods are all imaginary, therefore atheism, which is nothing more than the rejection of such silly superstitious beliefs is true. There is no difference between “forms” of atheism because it is not a “belief” it is simply the rejection of another’s belief.
    There is no difference between a Christian’s non belief in Santa Claus and a Muslim’s non belief in Santa Claus. So what is your point? Which kind of non-Santa Clausism do you subscribe to? The Jehova’s Witness version, the Mormon version, the Jewish version, or the Hindu version? Perhaps you are a Roman Catholic or Episcopal non-Sanata-ist? Tell us, because that question makes just as much sense as yours. Your continuing to pretend that your question has some meaning makes you look completely idiotic.

    Now that I have answered your question, please answer mine in 26, 44, and 47?
    Do you think no one is noticing that you guys NEVER answer questions posed you?”

    So again, your question is nonsense. I don’t believe in any sort of atheism. I do not believe there are gods. My understanding is that makes me an atheist. The term atheism is troublesome as it implies there is some grand belief system associated with the term.

    That one does not believe in tooth faeries, leprechauns, wish-fulfilling Jewish zombies, gods, etc. is but a minor result of the broader world view of a mind that exceeds below average intelligence and has been leavened with at least a dash of education.

  67. on 14 Oct 2011 at 1:46 am 67.Observer said …

    #67 This is the thing that really scares me.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/14/us/politics/bachmanns-years-at-oral-roberts-university.html?_r=1&hp

    Idiot filth like Bachmann or Perry in a position of power terrifies me, and the rest of the sane world. People who go to Oral Roberts, or Liberty, or the diploma mill run by the 700 Club should be looked upon the same way as someone who gobbles dog shit off of a sidewalk. (Apologies to the late great Divine and John Waters.)

    Q: “What do you call two gay guys named Bob?”

    A: “Oral Roberts”

  68. on 14 Oct 2011 at 1:46 am 68.Biff said …

    Ted said “It seems Secular Humanism is a relgion for the free exercise clause but NOT a religion for the establishment clause.”

    This is not only convenient but prudent. They enjoy the tax-exempt status as a religion but they can peddle their religious tenets in the public schools.

  69. on 14 Oct 2011 at 2:02 am 69.Lou (DFW) said …

    68.Biff said …

    “They enjoy the tax-exempt status as a religion but they can peddle their religious tenets in the public schools.”

    You can’t possibly be that stupid to interpret that as such.

  70. on 14 Oct 2011 at 2:07 am 70.Observer said …

    #69 Lou(DFW) my fine fellow- Your charity toward Boofoo is entirely misplaced.

  71. on 14 Oct 2011 at 2:40 am 71.DPK said …

    Stupid? No.
    Devious? Yes.

    I am continually astounded by the level of lies, misrepresentation, and deceit practiced routinely by the christians and other theists here. Boggles the mind.

  72. on 14 Oct 2011 at 12:59 pm 72.Curmudgeon said …

    “#67 This is the thing that really scares me.”

    Barrack Hussein Obama our next American president.

    NOOOOOOOOO!!!!

    Secular Humanism is a religion. It is a fact. A religion does not need a deity to be a religion.

    Christianity is also taught in schools much more than people realize. It is quite easy to do legally.

  73. on 14 Oct 2011 at 1:02 pm 73.Lou (DFW) said …

    71.DPK said …

    “I am continually astounded by the level of lies, misrepresentation, and deceit practiced routinely by the christians and other theists here. Boggles the mind.”

    When one operates with a religion and “worldview” that is a lie and a fraud, then the only way to defend it is to operate as a liar and fraud.

    I, like you, am also amazed at the level of deceit to which these people will stoop to defend their faith. If they are so secure in their faith in an imaginary god, then why are they even here? All they have to do is go to church and say their prayers, and their imaginary god should take care of everything. But no, they have to try to impose their idiotic belief upon those who reject it because every person who rejects it serves to further weaken their fantasy based religion. There is, after all, strength in numbers. And because their religion itself is a fraud, each other is all they have to reply upon.

  74. on 14 Oct 2011 at 1:04 pm 74.Lou (DFW) said …

    28.Lou (DFW) said …

    24.Lou (DFW) said …

    22.Curmudgeon said …

    “Evolution is mathematically impossible without intelligence.”

    “Show us the math. Oh, and now evolution is true, but it requires intelligence.”

    “Still waiting for your math. If you want to, you can ignore trying to account for the required “intelligence.”

    Crum, I’m still waiting for your math. Or do you simply want to admit that you have none? Your lack of response serves as such.

  75. on 14 Oct 2011 at 1:08 pm 75.Lou (DFW) said …

    72.Curmudgeon said …

    “Secular Humanism is a religion. It is a fact. A religion does not need a deity to be a religion.”

    You are a liar. It is a fact.

    It is also a fact that you have no evidence to support the idea of your imaginary god. And I don’t have to lie about what religion is, or lie about what xtianity is, or lie about what theists are, or lie that the SCOTUS ruled as such, or lie that I have any math to prove that you don’t have any evidence.

  76. on 14 Oct 2011 at 1:32 pm 76.Horatiio said …

    LOL!!!!

    Lou really does tickle me.
    Have you ever witnessed anyone who only has one argument?

    You are a liar!

    That’s it. LOL!!

    Add some proof now and again Louie and someone might provide a rebuttal, but I doubt it. You are like the slapping windshield wipers most only notice as background noise.

    Help to help buddy.

    Have a great weekend (even the drones)

  77. on 14 Oct 2011 at 1:41 pm 77.Lou (DFW) said …

    76.Horatiio said …

    “Have you ever witnessed anyone who only has one argument?”

    His argument has already been shown to be untrue. His repeating it over and over makes him, and you for defending him, a liar.

    “Add some proof now and again Louie and someone might provide a rebuttal, but I doubt it. You are like the slapping windshield wipers most only notice as background noise.”

    As when you NEVER, EVER provide evidence for your imaginary god? Your “slapping windshield wipers” flew off the car a long time ago, leaving you unable to see the path that it takes as it careens of the highway of truth and honesty while obstructed by the torrential rain of lies that is your religion.

    Secular Humanism cannot, by definition, be a religion. It’s that simple. It doesn’t require any “proof” or “bullet points” to understand that simple concept. Furthermore, whether it is or is not a religion is ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT to the idea that there is a creator – god. One for which you NEVER, EVER provide any evidence.

  78. on 14 Oct 2011 at 5:17 pm 78.Lou (DFW) said …

    72.Curmudgeon said …

    “Barrack Hussein Obama our next American president.”

    Now, back to your lie –

    22.Curmudgeon said …

    “Evolution is mathematically impossible without intelligence.”

    What’s the problem, Crum? Can’t find the math without Hor’s windshield wipers to clear the way with another lie? As Hor wrote, “Add some proof now and again…”

  79. on 14 Oct 2011 at 5:35 pm 79.DPK said …

    Hey… I can play at this game as well:

    God is mathematically impossible.

    There. Prove me wrong.

  80. on 14 Oct 2011 at 5:52 pm 80.Lou (DFW) said …

    79.DPK said …

    “Hey… I can play at this game as well:

    God is mathematically impossible.

    There. Prove me wrong.”

    OK, but you asked for it –

    “Barrack Hussein Obama our next American president.”

    “You are like the slapping windshield wipers most only notice as background noise.”

    “Secular Humanism is a religion. It is a fact.”

    TAKE THAT!

  81. on 15 Oct 2011 at 12:05 am 81.Anonymous said …

    But look what these Christians believe! Is it no wonder that they have to attack other people because, otherwise, they’d be forced to explain why they believe such utter nonsense:

    Come on, we’re talking about people who think the earth is 10,000 years or less old. That the earth was formed before the sun – being the first thing in the universe. That day and night began before the sun was there to provide light. That trees, vegetation, plants etc also came before there was sunlight for synthesis. That birds came about before land animals. That Man was created from dirt, and women from a man’s rib. They believe that and more occurred over six days and the incredible being that did that, was tired and shagged out and then needed a day off! Now that’s ridiculous but that’s just the start.

    They believe in a flat earth, with stars being fixed in the sky and they believe that the earth is the center of the universe.

    They believe in talking snakes, men who live in the belly of fishes, Unicorns, and that their god punished all of mankind, forever, for daring to become educated.

    They believe that their god is all powerful and all knowing yet he is continuously surprised by the actions of his followers. They claim that their god is all-loving, yet celebrate when his unstable temperament apparently leads to him wiping out his creations in a fit of anger

    They believe in a boat that was big enough to carry two of each living thing through a flood, yet fail to see that the inadequate dimensions given in their book describe a vessel that wouldn’t ever be sea worthy.

    They believe in a god that could feed five thousand people with two fishes and fives loaves of bread, yet cursed a fig tree and made it barren when he was unable to address his own hunger.

    They believe that their god sacrificed himself to himself to make things up to himself and that everyone from then on in is in debt to this monster for the faults of their god.

    They believe in a god that lived amongst his people and could cure their ills yet, today, needs excuses to explain away his absence. They believe in an all powerful god who can do anything, yet he’s never healed an amputee, nor can anyone explain why.

    Rather than be diverted by the same old “atheists [verb] x” arguments, I’d like to suggest that we focus on the nonsense that Christians (and other faiths) believe. By focusing on that, maybe then we can get the more rational members of their cult to realize the total stupidity of their position.

    I know someone is going to come by and say that those things are not literal but some claim that they are. That notwithstanding, these are the things they must believe in because this is what their holy book says and they believe that their book is the inerrant word of a perfect god. They can’t pick and chose.

    We really should be highlighting their nonsense and hammering home that all they have are myths and other stories and that their god is imaginary.

  82. on 15 Oct 2011 at 4:55 pm 82.MegaByte said …

    Going back to the thread, this is an interesting story, but I doubt it is real. Why would the atheist need to bring up the fact he is an atheist? Was he wearing a T-shirt.

    Bottom line is this. It was not atheist morality because atheists do not have a moral code. Each practices what is right in his own eyes and other atheists have no grounds on what to judge another. I have never heard the claim atheists never do good deeds. Even Jeffrey Dahmer did a few good deeds.

    That be said, God time after time used pagans and the wicked to fulfill His desires in the life of His people. In this case, this man who appears to be a faithful follower of Christ has his prayers answered through the actions of an atheists. God is always right on time.

  83. on 15 Oct 2011 at 5:25 pm 83.DPK said …

    “God time after time used pagans and the wicked to fulfill His desires in the life of His people.”

    What a narcissistic point of view! “God loves ME!” and he has no problem “using” others to reward me.

    If that’s true, god is a wanker… and so are you. What a totally head up your ass viewpoint of the world, but pretty typical of xtian mentality.

  84. on 15 Oct 2011 at 5:50 pm 84.MegaByte said …

    The good news is you have acknowledged God. Your next step is to accept Him as Lord and your Redeemer. God loves you as much as anyone so I don’t see how this is narcissistic. Maybe you don’t know the meaning?

    My POV is not actually my POV. It is the facts as outlined in the Bible which is the history of God. If you have a problem with how God does business you need to take it up with God. That might make you the narcissist

  85. on 15 Oct 2011 at 6:40 pm 85.DPK said …

    I’ve done no such thing. That makes you a liar.
    I have merely pointed out the utter absurdity of your belief in your imaginary god. No being of enough intelligence to create the universe and everything in it from sheer will would ever behave in the manner you describe. To think so is idiotic.

  86. on 15 Oct 2011 at 6:53 pm 86.DPK said …

    “But look what these Christians believe! Is it no wonder that they have to attack other people because, otherwise, they’d be forced to explain why they believe such utter nonsense:”

    And, on queue, MegaByte steps out of the void to prove your point. How do people in this day and age, still accept such absurdity?

    Know what? Despite the fact that surveys claim the majority of people claim a belief in god or gods.. I don’t believe it. At least not in the sense of reality. I mean, I think the majority of people are actually just “Sunday believers” meaning they present a front of faith for social convention and so not to be outcast, but on some level that they may or may not admit to themselves, they know it’s bullshit. That’s why when their kids get sick they take them to the Doctor (a scientist) not a priest.
    They know that it’s ok to say you talk to god, but it’s not ok to say god talks to you… (why is that? God talked to people all the time in the bible. But if someone claims he does it now, it’s a sure sign of insanity). That’s why “God told me to…” is not a legal defense.

    The “true” believers are sadly, the ones flying airplanes into buildings and strapping on explosive vests. They believe the bullshit 100% heart and mind and are willing to demonstrate it. We ALL know they’re nuts… right? Most everyone else follows Mark Twain’s observation, “Faith is believing in stuff you know ain’t true.”
    D

  87. on 16 Oct 2011 at 12:37 am 87.Anonymous said …

    Megabyte,I am very confused by your point.

    “My POV is not actually my POV. It is the facts as outlined in the Bible which is the history of God.”

    So you actually do believe in the talking snake, a talking donkey, a man who lived in fish, a god that can feed others but not himself, women are made from a man’s rib, insects with four legs, man built a tower to the heavens, believers can drink poison, bleach, acid, anything with impunity, a god instructing the eating of bread made with human feces, and so on, and so on, and so on.

    So these are facts? Surely, as DPK observes above, you’d sound more rational if you admitted that the bible was a load of nonsense.

  88. on 16 Oct 2011 at 1:23 am 88.DPK said …

    Let me try to understand your point of view… Mega said:
    “It was not atheist morality because atheists do not have a moral code.”

    You think that all atheists are, by definition, amoral?

    “Each practices what is right in his own eyes and other atheists have no grounds on what to judge another.”

    You think that an atheist, because of the rejection of the belief in the supernatural, cannot, for example, know that murder is wrong, and have no “right” to judge another? Are you saying that only christians should be able to serve on juries, or be judges?

    “In this case, this man who appears to be a faithful follower of Christ has his prayers answered through the actions of an atheists. God is always right on time.”

    Are you saying that god made the atheist return the wallet?
    Did god make the christian couple loose the wallet to begin with?
    Enlighten us please.

  89. on 16 Oct 2011 at 4:54 pm 89.Lou (DFW) said …

    84.MegaByte said …

    “The good news is you have acknowledged God.”

    No, he didn’t. You are either incredibly stupid or an amoral liar. Which is it?

    “If you have a problem with how God does business you need to take it up with God. That might make you the narcissist.”

    How can an atheist “have a problem with how God does business?” What most atheists have a problem with is how morons like yourself try to impose their belief in an imaginary god upon everybody else.

  90. on 16 Oct 2011 at 4:58 pm 90.Lou (DFW) said …

    82.MegaByte said …

    “Bottom line is this. It was not atheist morality because atheists do not have a moral code. ”

    Bottom line is this. Xtians have a “moral code” that they mostly ignore. There is no atheist “moral code” per se, but atheists can have the same or “better” morals than an xtian or any other theist has.

    For you to claim otherwise demonstrates the weakness of your “moral code.”

  91. on 16 Oct 2011 at 6:17 pm 91.DPK said …

    Yeah. This guy thinks that god uses “pagans and the wicked to fulfill His desires in the life of His people.”
    Meaning, god MADE the atheist, who obviously has NO sense of morality, return the wallet because the person who had lost it was one of his favored. But, why didn’t god just keep the wallet from getting lost in the first place? What was the lesson here? If god was trying to show the couple that even atheists can do the right thing… well, that lesson was lost on them AND MegaByte, no? If god “made” the atheist return the wallet… then what does that say about free will? How do any of us have free will if god uses us to “fulfill His desires in the life of His people.”? Why didn’t god choose a christian to find and return the wallet so it would be apparent to the couple how kind and good fellow christians are? Hmmmmm… gee, if you really think about this even a little bit it doesn’t make any sense at all, does it?
    But we know the answer to that one right? God is mysterious………………
    Mysterious my ass?
    Who was it that said, “There is such a thing as being so open minded that your brains fall out.” ?

  92. on 16 Oct 2011 at 7:09 pm 92.40 year Atheist said …

    Regardless of the Atheist and Materialist subpopulation that adheres to personal principles, the potential volatility of such principles suggests that they haven’t the persuasive force to be a source of universal voluntary submission or guide for universal conscientious righteous behavior. It is the weightless, empty nature of Atheism / Materialism itself that renders any adopted personal, man-derived principles to be of no weight in evaluating the character or potential behavior of the Atheist.

    Certainly these arguments apply somewhat to Christians as well, and this statement always surfaces despite being a tu Quoque fallacy. With Christians, at least the principles are not volatile and can be found easily. And the same goes for Muslims. Whether or not a Christian or Muslim behaves according to their universal principles does not remove the expectation that they would, and ordinarily do, and moreover the principles give a baseline for a metric of character evaluation that does not exist for Atheist / Materialists.

  93. on 16 Oct 2011 at 9:56 pm 93.Anonymous said …

    Two years ago, 40YA originally said: “blah, blah, blah. Look at me, I know big words but not how to put them together in anything other than pretentious and empty sentences. Blah, blah, blah, I can’t prove my imaginary god exists so I’ll just post a bunch of crap on my vanity blog and hope no-one notices that it’s meaningless drivel. Blah, blah, blah.”

  94. on 16 Oct 2011 at 10:34 pm 94.DPK said …

    blah blah blah… more cut and paste BS
    http://atheism-analyzed.blogspot.com/2010/12/source-of-moral-authority.html

    Biblical morality is no different from humanist or, if you will, materialist morality because it all comes from the same place… the human mind.

    Except for the addition of some self serving religious directives… worship only me, keep holy “my day” (and make sure to leave an offering in the collection basket).. don’t doubt me… blah blah blah.. religious morality could be taught to you by a 5 year old… be nice, treat others the way you’d want to be treated, don’t lie, steal, or hurt anyone.
    What is so difficult that you think you need an ancient book written by primitives to give you a moral directive?
    Seriously?

  95. on 17 Oct 2011 at 12:33 am 95.Anonymous said …

    Interesting, isn’t it, that when a theist turns up that they don’t have the guts or wherewithal to actually address the open questions in the conversation.

    Instead, as per their usual mode of operation, they post red-herring arguments in an attempt to divert the discussion away from their ridiculous superstitious beliefs and the lack of evidence for their imaginary “personal” god.

    Come on folks, let’s see one of you stand up for your god and prove to us that he exists. He’s taking a drubbing here, make no mistake.

  96. on 17 Oct 2011 at 1:13 pm 96.Horatiio said …

    40
    Don’t sweat it. It is just frustration with their limited intellect. They are not much for intellectual conversations. They are more into school yard yapping. Lol!!
    One of the great thinks about atheism is you can make up morality on the fly. Murder can be ethical according to Sam Harris.
    Now if we can get them off wall street.

  97. on 17 Oct 2011 at 2:17 pm 97.Lou (DFW) said …

    96.Horatiio said …

    “Don’t sweat it. It is just frustration with their limited intellect. They are not much for intellectual conversations. They are more into school yard yapping. Lol!!”

    You mean like your frequent usage of childish insults – “Nose Buster,” “mambian dalit,” “Broadway in the the basement,” etc.?

    “One of the great thinks…”

    Great thinks?

    “…about atheism is you can make up morality on the fly. Murder can be ethical according to Sam Harris.”

    For the sake of argument, and while ignoring all the murdering allegedly done by, for, and in the name of your imaginary god, let’s assume that’s true.

    Now please provide evidence for your imaginary god.

    “Now if we can get them off wall street.”

    And get you off the street – period.

  98. on 17 Oct 2011 at 4:41 pm 98.DPK said …

    “Murder can be ethical according to Sam Harris.”

    Another Horatiio outright lie. You have been slammed on this so many times I wonder why you continue to bring it up.
    Harris never said “murder” could be ethical… he said “killing someone” could, under certain circumstance, be ethical. Do you disagree?
    You think there is never a situation where it would be ethical to kill someone? Bin Laden comes to mind.. Hitler, the 9-11 bombers?
    You’re so full of bullshit it isn’t even funny.

  99. on 17 Oct 2011 at 5:22 pm 99.Lou (DFW) said …

    98.DPK said …

    “Murder can be ethical according to Sam Harris.”

    “Another Horatiio outright lie. You have been slammed on this so many times I wonder why you continue to bring it up.”

    I started to address his lie again, but I didn’t. His continuous lying on this blog demonstrates that he, like his religion, is a fraud. Furthermore, it shows how he, like the atheists he wrongly accuses of doing, picks and chooses what morals to follow.

  100. on 17 Oct 2011 at 5:37 pm 100.Lou (DFW) said …

    98.DPK said …

    “You think there is never a situation where it would be ethical to kill someone? Bin Laden comes to mind..”

    Well Hor, was it ethical to kill OBL in the manner in which he was killed?

  101. on 17 Oct 2011 at 5:45 pm 101.DPK said …

    Yes, answer please. Atheist’s get to “make up morals on the fly”… but theists receive their morality from a higher power. The bible says “Thou shalt not kill.” But the red states don’t seem to have any problem with capital punishment. Aren’t they making up morality “on the fly”?
    What about war, self defense, greater good? I don’t see the absolute moral code from Yahweh listing any exceptions. Are there any? If so, where do THEY come from?
    We are all waiting for you to answer, but I predict, you will once again dodge the question completely in an effort to save yourself the embarrassment.

  102. on 17 Oct 2011 at 5:48 pm 102.Lou (DFW) said …

    101.DPK said …

    “What about war, self defense, greater good? I don’t see the absolute moral code from Yahweh listing any exceptions. Are there any? If so, where do THEY come from?”

    The Apostle Paul.

    http://danizier.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/paul-vs-jesus-and-james/

    http://www.wordwiz72.com/paul.html

  103. on 17 Oct 2011 at 5:55 pm 103.Lou (DFW) said …

    96.Horatiio said …

    “Murder can be ethical according to Sam Harris.”

    Hor lies about what Sam Harris wrote:

    “Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them. This may seem an extraordinary claim, but it merely enunciates an ordinary fact about the world in which we live. Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others. There is, in fact, no talking to some people. If they cannot be captured, and they often cannot, otherwise tolerant people may be justified in killing them in self-defense.”

  104. on 17 Oct 2011 at 7:26 pm 104.Biff said …

    Hor,

    Harris is a scary guy. He believes murdering based on a thought is OK. Suppose the thought of atheism deemed worthy of killing for? Now what Sam

    Now you have the loon at AA spewing out more hatred calling for the eradication of Christians. Sadly no atheists denounce any of this.

    No wonder the ACS will not take their money

  105. on 17 Oct 2011 at 7:57 pm 105.Lou (DFW) said …

    104.Biff said …

    “Harris is a scary guy. He believes murdering based on a thought is OK.”

    Harris’ words are here to read, and yet you write an outrageous lie about them directly below them.

    But, it gets better. Before writing this:

    15.Biff said …

    “It is about time someone rounded up all the lunacy of these idle handed atheists who have nothing better to do than be offended.”

    Biff falsely accuses Harris of something he didn’t say or write, yet Biff wants to round-up atheists for what THEY think.

    Biff, YOU are a scary guy.

  106. on 17 Oct 2011 at 9:01 pm 106.Observer said …

    #104 Biff- What is AA? Why do you continue to post nonsense about Sam Harris? Are you following the Neo-Con tried and true methodology of repeating a lie or falsehood over and over again assuming there are dullards out there, like the simpletons who have bought into Neo-Con economics and politics? Well, as others and I have pointed out many times, there are plenty stupid people on this website arguing for the wish-fulfilling Jewish Zombie and et al. Are those the people you are trying to mislead and keep ignorant?

  107. on 17 Oct 2011 at 9:08 pm 107.Observer said …

    #96 Hor- “Now if we can get them off wall street.” ??? You are advocating for xtians on Wall Street? There are some, mostly working in back office jobs. There even some in the top tiers. Most the folks are highly secular but overlap with religion in a cultural sense.

    I wish there were more dopes like you on the other end of the phone; it would be a helluva lot easier to make money.

  108. on 18 Oct 2011 at 2:35 am 108.DPK said …

    104.Biff said…
    “Now you have the loon at AA spewing out more hatred calling for the eradication of Christians. Sadly no atheists denounce any of this.”

    Have you NO SHAME? You lie and lie and lie… didn’t you read the part about “Thou shalt not bear false witness”?

    To anyone who wants to know the truth… here is the link to the blog post that Biff says calls for the “eradication of christians.”
    http://atheists.org/blog/2011/09/14/taking-the-gloves-off

    As you can see, what the article ACTUALLY says is;
    “Intolerance toward beliefs and doctrines that serve only to promote hatred, bigotry and discrimination should be lauded, as should extremist points of view toward the eradication of these beliefs and doctrines.”

    Beliefs and doctrines… not PEOPLE.

    “Bigotry, discrimination, hatred, coercion, terrorism, slavery, misogyny and everything else that is part and parcel of fundamental Christianity and radical Islam should not be tolerated, and when any of these rear their ugly heads outside of the context of religion they are not. There are laws in the United States and many other nations that protect people from these things because they have been proven detrimental to societies. Add God into the picture and all of a sudden the perpetrator becomes the victim because religion seems to change the context of everything.”

    He is absolutely right. Too much evil is accepted under the guise of “religious tolerance”.

    “If we don’t take a stand and, as a society, insist that these doctrines and beliefs are treated just the same as they would be if religion were not part of the equation, we will become extinct not due to natural selection, but at the hands of those who believe that the supernatural has made the selection.”

    Now Biff, who has publicly stated right here that, ““It is about time someone rounded up all the lunacy of these idle handed atheists who have nothing better to do than be offended.” Is crying foul!

    Biff, you are a liar and a hypocrite. And you believe that Jesus is watching and judging you?? Not possible. You wouldn’t behave so if you really thought that. You’re no different from us, you just haven’t come out of the closet yet…. hahaha.

  109. on 18 Oct 2011 at 6:40 am 109.Severin said …

    40 Horatio
    „Murder can be ethical according to Sam Harris.“

    Even if you explain Harris’ words that way, I would say: yes, why not?

    If the definition of murder is: „To kill (another human) unlawfully“, then why would S. Harris think different than the USA Government?

    Didn’t they MURDER Bin Laden?
    I mean, HOW, the hell was this kill done „lawfully“? WHICH law was followed/obeyed? Legislation of which country/nation/state covered thic act?

    Or, are you telling us: Quod licet Iovi….

  110. on 18 Oct 2011 at 6:41 am 110.Severin said …

    Sorry, my last post refres to #96

  111. on 18 Oct 2011 at 6:59 am 111.Severin said …

    104 Biff
    “Harris is a scary guy. He believes murdering based on a thought is OK.”

    The USA government people are scary guys. They MURDERED OBL.
    Harris only SAID something.

  112. on 18 Oct 2011 at 12:00 pm 112.Anonymous said …

    So, now that the theists are back, how about we get some answers?

    So, Horatio:

    Killing OBL – Ethical or not?
    Order of creation as in Genesis – Accurate or not?
    Garden of Eden story – Accurate or not?
    Balaam the donkey speaking – Accurate or not?
    Jesus feeding the multitude – Accurate or not?
    Jesus cursing the fig tree – Accurate or not?
    Story of Jonah – Accurate or not?
    Story of Noah’s flood – Accurate or not?

    This should be very easy, Horatio. This is a website about the non-existence of god, not your personal fears or your hate of people who don’t agree with you.

    So, let’s also hear about your proof of the existence of your god. Also, how do you know that the other gods are false. And, for good measure, just why won’t your god heal amputees?

    Or are you simply going to run away, again, when challenged to stick to the point?

  113. on 18 Oct 2011 at 2:18 pm 113.Suh said …

    Biff
    If they killed xitians for the last 100 years why would they stop now? Now the occupiers are showing their antisemetic side on Wall Street along with the need to break laws and attack cops. They have no shame

  114. on 18 Oct 2011 at 2:38 pm 114.Severin said …

    113 Suh

    WHO killed Christians for last 100 years, Suh?
    Please specify!

  115. on 18 Oct 2011 at 2:51 pm 115.DPK said …

    112.Anonymous said …

    “So, now that the theists are back, how about we get some answers?”

    Yeah.. good luck with that. Don’t hold your breath waiting. They won’t answer you. About time for them to revert back to their micro-macro evolution shell game, or some other diversion.

  116. on 18 Oct 2011 at 3:09 pm 116.Lou (DFW) said …

    115.DPK said …

    112.Anonymous said …

    “So, now that the theists are back, how about we get some answers?”

    “Yeah.. good luck with that. Don’t hold your breath waiting. They won’t answer you.”

    74.Lou (DFW) said …

    28.Lou (DFW) said …

    24.Lou (DFW) said …

    22.Curmudgeon said …

    “Evolution is mathematically impossible without intelligence.”

    “Show us the math. Oh, and now evolution is true, but it requires intelligence.”

    “Still waiting for your math. If you want to, you can ignore trying to account for the required “intelligence.”

    “Crum, I’m still waiting for your math. Or do you simply want to admit that you have none? Your lack of response serves as such.”

    As usual, Crum and his ilk don’t answer challenges to their outrageous lies.

  117. on 18 Oct 2011 at 4:14 pm 117.Xenon said …

    Suh
    I personally hope the wall street occupiers stay. It lets America see them for what they are.

    I see the Harris apologist are out again. We all know he believes killing one for an idea is OK. Your defense of him is sickening. This is why atheist are looked down on.

    More recently American atheist called for our eradication. Keep circling the wagons

  118. on 18 Oct 2011 at 4:33 pm 118.Lou (DFW) said …

    117.Xenon said …

    “I see the Harris apologist are out again.”

    I see the theist liars are out again intentionally misrepresenting what Harris wrote.

    “We all know he believes killing one for an idea is OK.”

    We all know that isn’t true, but it’s a fact that you area a liar.

    “Your defense of him is sickening. This is why atheist are looked down on.”

    Your attack on him by lying about what he wrote is sickening. This is why theists are looked down on for being hypocritical, ignorant people who can only defend their belief in their imaginary god by lying about those who don’t fall for their fantasy.

  119. on 18 Oct 2011 at 7:04 pm 119.DPK said …

    What does it say about the validity of one’s position when the only way you can support it is by deliberately lying and mis-representing facts?
    You were presented with the exact quotes from both American Atheists and Sam Harris and still you say,
    “We all know he believes killing one for an idea is OK. Your defense of him is sickening. More recently American atheist called for our eradication. Keep circling the wagons.”

    You sir, are a pathetic liar and intellectually dishonest. Do the only points you can make require a LIE to validate? Neither source said any such thing.

    Sad.

  120. on 18 Oct 2011 at 8:15 pm 120.Horatiio said …

    The best argument one can make.

    You are all just liars. You lie and you know you lie. Stop telling lies you liar.

    Lol!!

  121. on 18 Oct 2011 at 8:18 pm 121.Hotatiio said …

    I want to make a very serious point here.

    You lie. Stop telling your lies liar.

    Lol!!

  122. on 18 Oct 2011 at 9:00 pm 122.Lou (DFW) said …

    120.Horatiio said …

    “The best argument one can make.

    You are all just liars. You lie and you know you lie. Stop telling lies you liar.

    Lol!!

    on 18 Oct 2011 at 8:18 pm 121.Hotatiio said …

    I want to make a very serious point here.”

    You are intellectually and morally incapable of making a serious point as you have consistently shown with your comments on this blog.

    Hor, nobody simply called you or anybody else a liar – it was clearly and obviously demonstrated that’s all you can do.

    You NEVER, EVER provide any evidence for your imaginary god, or answer questions about the many lies that you post here. You must be too busy to do so because you spend so much time in your masturbatory “Broadway in the basement” fantasy about “Nosebuster dancing with Wiccans.”

    When you are finished with that, then perhaps you can come out and make an actual argument for your imaginary god rather than attempt to defend your religion by posting lies about atheists. At least when Crum can’t defend his lie, he stays in hiding longer than you do.

    Now give it a rest with the lie schtick. It doesn’t hide the fact that you have nothing of substance to offer in defense of your lies except to simply offer a juvenile retort. For example, try to actually show that your comment about Harris isn’t lie when it’s been demonstrated several times to be nothing else but a lie. Adding LOL! only further demonstrates your inability to do so.

  123. on 18 Oct 2011 at 9:21 pm 123.Observer said …

    113 Suh What? Who is killing xtians?

  124. on 18 Oct 2011 at 9:25 pm 124.Observer said …

    117 Inert Windbag- I hope the Wall Street protesters stay too. It does let most of America see what/who the protestors are, and importantly what/who America has become.

  125. on 18 Oct 2011 at 9:41 pm 125.Observer said …

    117 More on the inert windbag Xenon and the imbecile Hor, it is not clear to me these buffoons are actually liars. It is more a case that they are either too stupid to read and comprehend simple written English, or somewhat less likely they ever read Harris or the American Atheists Blog.

    Anyone interested in what was really said in the AA Blog should look at the link in 108 above. You will find, of course, that Xenon is lying.

    Anyone interested in what Sam Harris said, such as killing the likes of Osama bin Laden, should look at his website.

    Xenon keeps making the same inane arguments and stating mistruths in the hope if they are repeated often enough they will take on an air of truthiness like urban legend. This is likely how the Gospels came into being; bullshit is repeated for hundreds of years until it becomes canonical.

    Regardless, I still have a suspicion the tossers Biff, Xenon, and Hor are invented characters made by the folks hosting this website.

  126. on 18 Oct 2011 at 11:48 pm 126.Anonymous said …

    The question of whatever Harris did or did not say, is absolutely irrelevant to the question of why won’t god heal amputees. Indeed, it has nothing to do with the question of the existence of this imaginary god. Again, it’s just a diversion to avoid the main topic.

    That notwithstanding, it’s also obvious that Horatio and friends are either trolls or have no intention or desires to honestly debate this question. Obviously, not having any, you know, proof on one’s position is a significant impediment to honest discussion.

    Additionally, when we’re talking about morals and values, for a religion that was spread by the sword, Christians ought to be last people criticizing anyone.

    As it is, Biff et al seem to have quite a serious hard-on for Harris. Is that why they keep trying to get his name into the conversation?

    I wonder, what do the Christians think about the book and the characters that carry the following message that includes killing people for their thoughts? Biff, obviously you’d have to decry such evil, intolerant, angry, sadistic and sociopath commands. Right? You do consider them immoral, don’t you?

    “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them”.

  127. on 19 Oct 2011 at 2:32 am 127.Ben said …

    @121 Hor

    Good one! Lou is a one trick pony. All the lie claims and never actually providing proof!

    Sam Harris clearly stated that it could be moral to kill an individual if he deems the idea immoral. An idea is actually enough for him. Would any of these atheist ever, one time, think for themselves rather than taking up for such a bigot? How can anyone not see the danger of such an idea? Its seems not.

    Next we must ask, who make the call? Sam? No thanks! The atheists like blow-hard Observer would pee in his pants if a preacher made such a claim.

  128. on 19 Oct 2011 at 2:44 am 128.Lou (DFW) said …

    127.Ben said …

    “@121 Hor

    Good one! Lou is a one trick pony. All the lie claims and never actually providing proof!

    Sam Harris clearly stated that it could be moral to kill an individual if he deems the idea immoral.”

    Unless you can provide a quote where Harris said that, then that makes you a liar. Show us the quote. It should be easy because you claim he “clearly stated” it.

  129. on 19 Oct 2011 at 2:48 am 129.DPK said …

    “Sam Harris clearly stated that it could be moral to kill an individual if he deems the idea immoral.”

    Ben again lies. Harris said no such thing.
    He said it may be ethical to kill someone in SELF DEFENSE if their ideology is DANGEROUS and VIOLENT, and if they are, “beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others… and are UNABLE TO BE CAPTURED.

    Everyone can read the quote for themselves in 103 and everyone can see you are being deceptive in your assertions.

    You really look like an idiot when you continue to LIE to try and make a point.

    Busted again, Liar Biff.

    Now, if you please, for the 300th time, please provide your evidence for the imaginary god you claim is real. We are waiting.

  130. on 19 Oct 2011 at 6:51 am 130.Anonymous said …

    Ben@127: “The atheists like blow-hard Observer would pee in his pants if a preacher made such a claim”.

    Yet Ben, deliberately chose to ignore a post where the utter viciousness and disgusting nature of the bible was on show. So for people of limited attention span here, again, is the quote from Romans:

    “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenant breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them”.

    So, Biff, Ben, Horatio etc…. the Christian instruction manual declares death as the penalty for thought crimes such as covetousness, maliciousness, envy, and so on. Note this is a punishment for a thought, not an action.

    You theists are manufacturing a big deal about something someone didn’t say, something irrelevant to the discussion about your imaginary god, yet you totally ignore that Christianity is religion of hatred and violence. In fact, your claims are quite deceitful and that is also covered in the quote above. It’s lucky for you that your god doesn’t really exist.

  131. on 19 Oct 2011 at 1:17 pm 131.Lou (DFW) said …

    130.Anonymous said …

    “You theists are manufacturing a big deal about something someone didn’t say, something irrelevant to the discussion about your imaginary god, yet you totally ignore that Christianity is religion of hatred and violence.”

    Yes, those theists to which you refer are nothing but INTELLECTUAL AND MORAL FRAUDS.

    “In fact, your claims are quite deceitful and that is also covered in the quote above. It’s lucky for you that your god doesn’t really exist.”

    Yes, but the problem is that god does exist in the minds of people like Hor, who, when confronted with reality, can only resort to lies and dishonesty to defend their god fantasy.

  132. on 19 Oct 2011 at 4:34 pm 132.DPK said …

    120.Horatiio said …

    The best argument one can make.

    You are all just liars. You lie and you know you lie. Stop telling lies you liar.

    Lol!!

    Please note that this qualifies as an intellectual rebuttal in Horatiio’s world. No intellectual challenge, no facts, no reasoning, no answers, just mockery. I can picture him with his hands on his hips and his head waggling back and forth like a 6 year old girl. Such is the ultimate result of religiously poisoned dogmatic brainwashing. Lost his intellect in the rinse cycle along with his ability to distinguish fact from fantasy.
    D

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply