Feed on Posts or Comments 10 February 2016

Christianity &Islam &Judaism Thomas on 30 Oct 2013 09:44 pm

One of the most popular threads in the forums – athesist vs. Christian apologist

Over 3,000 people looked at this thread on Friday, and gave the forum its best day ever in terms of visitors. It is an email chain where an atheist questions a Christian apologist after the apologist’s university lecture:

Made up evidence for God? [#1999]

Good reading.

1,325 Responses to “One of the most popular threads in the forums – athesist vs. Christian apologist”

  1. on 21 Feb 2014 at 2:07 am 1.the messenger said …

    400.DPK, the Jews asked Jesus how they should pray, so Jesus taught them the “Our Father, who art in HEAVEN” prayer. That is why he said that in third person. Plus he spends most of his time in heaven, so it makes sense that he would teach them to say “art in heaven”.

    Jesus spoke in third person because he was still in the “son(jesus) form”.

    Jesus said, “Into THY hands I commend MY spirit” because he is also omnipresent, and a part of him is still in heaven. Plus he is still speaking in third person.

  2. on 21 Feb 2014 at 3:38 am 2.alex said …

    ok, messenger. you’ve convinced and converted me. what do you suggest i do about these?

    1) my gay neice
    2) my daughter who thinks she’s capable of being president of the u.s.
    3) my muslim neighbors who are trying to convert me
    4) the science that delivered technology to make me comfortable, safe, and with enough food for everyone, insist on teaching evolution.
    5) my republican friends who ask me to sign their petition to ban gay marriages.
    6) the preacher in my town who invites me to their koran burning party.
    7) the rapist who violated a certified virgin.
    8) my boss who insist that i work on sundays
    9) my urge to pray for all cancer patients instead of JUST my beloved mother.
    10) the jewish boy who insist that jesus was just a man.
    11) my atheist friends who volunteer to help the non-xtian chinese overseas.
    12) the xtian down the street who’s trying to convince me that satan worshippers should be locked up.
    13) my indian coworker who insist on saying “the gods have blessed me”.

  3. on 21 Feb 2014 at 4:25 am 3.A said …

    “I have proved the impossibility of omniscience and omnipotence co-existing.?

    Actually you haven’t but feel free to prove it anytime. You have a record of lies and misinformation….lol!!!

  4. on 21 Feb 2014 at 12:15 pm 4.alex said …

    “I have proved the impossibility of omniscience and omnipotence co-existing.?
    Actually you haven’t but feel free to prove it anytime.”

    there you go, readers, the theist mind imprint is permanent. most sane people know that talking snakes and donkeys are total bullshit, but “A”, also known as hor/martin/ass, insist on demanding proofs that only he can approve, as acceptable. without his approved proof, his god must exist with all his imaginary, contradictory, yet magical properties.

    i would invoke set theory for omniscient and omnipotence, but what’s the point? i’ve said before that if allah were to show up right now, there is nothing he could do to convince these motherfuckers, and of course vice versa for the muslims.

  5. on 21 Feb 2014 at 3:29 pm 5.DPK said …

    ““I have proved the impossibility of omniscience and omnipotence co-existing.?

    Actually you haven’t but feel free to prove it anytime.”

    Despite you empty schoolyard protestations… yes I have.
    Unless you care to explain to the class, for example, that if an omnipotent god knows perfectly that tomorrow an earthquake will level San Francisco, how could he then stop the earth quake from happening (say in response to prayers) without making his prior knowledge about the earthquake occurring, incorrect? Therefore, if his knowledge of the event is perfect, he does not have the power to change it.
    To put it in Alex’s perspective, if the set of all possible events is A.. and A is the infinite set, because god is omnipotent, and B is the subset of events that god knows will occur, then A-B is the set of thing that cannot occur. No event can exist in B and outside of B simultaneously. Therefore, IF god is omnipotent, he is not omniscient, and if he is omniscient he is not omnipotent.

    Now go away, you silly kindergarten logic is tiresome. You and Messy who says eternity is not eternal are made from the same bucket of crazy. LOL

  6. on 21 Feb 2014 at 4:25 pm 6.A said …

    “Despite you empty schoolyard protestations… yes I have.”

    Uh actually you have not. What you have proven is you don’t understand. Not surprising. Your education is very limited. Very elementary with simpleton like analysis. They are completely different scenarios.

    Early I again showed who you believe primordial soup wrote high information DNA code, but as you have demonstrated time and time again…..you have no clue how it could happen

    So there you go. Now if you can prove the impossibility of omniscience and omnipotence co-existing do so. If not go back to making fries…..lol!!!!

  7. on 21 Feb 2014 at 5:49 pm 7.DPK said …

    “So there you go. Now if you can prove the impossibility of omniscience and omnipotence co-existing do so. If not go back to making fries…..lol!!!!”

    I have, your saying I haven’t doesn’t make it so.
    Nice try but “No it doesn’t” isn’t any answer.. even on the pre-school playground.
    You are once again exposed as a complete fraud with nothing to offer.
    The soup again? Really, you are a one trick pony. Go ahead and give us your explanation for where this high information dna code came from… and don’t forget the evidence.
    Remember, despite your lies, I have not ever said “primordial soup wrote DNA code”. I have said “I don’t know.” You seem to claim you DO know… so show and tell time.
    While you’re at it, explain to us how god can have the ability to change an event he already knows will occur.
    Put up or shut up time…. LOL!!! My prediction, based on my perfect knowledge of the future, is that you will do neither. hahahahaha

    Your desperation is very funny btw… about the only thing you add to the forum… amusement.

  8. on 21 Feb 2014 at 7:13 pm 8.A said …

    “No it doesn’t” isn’t any answer.”

    I agree so why do you continue the silly argument you will not give evidence for?

    “I have not ever said “primordial soup wrote DNA code”.”

    So that was Freddie with the lies? Lol! Never argued against it! Lol!!!! aliens?

    You don”t know is just a way of bailing out, yes? You know next to nothing about God too so stop with your silly claims you cannot prove. I don’t know makes you look a little smarter.

    Oh Moe, will your comedy never stop! Lol!!!

  9. on 21 Feb 2014 at 7:41 pm 9.DPK said …

    “No it doesn’t” isn’t any answer.”

    “I agree so why do you continue the silly argument you will not give evidence for?”

    I have provided a rational and logical explanation as to why an omniscient god cannot be omnipotent. You have provided__________? Oh right, nothing other than 3 Stooges references. This is because you have nothing to counter. Simply put, if A is an infinite set of possible events and B is a subset of events a perfect god knows with 100% certainty will occur, then A minus B is a set of things that cannot occur. Since these things cannot occur, god is not omnipotent. PERIOD.
    Disprove it if you can, but your schoolgirl whining is not convincing anyone, not even yourself. LOL! This is why you offer zero counter argument… because you KNOW there is none.

    “You don”t know is just a way of bailing out, yes?”
    Not at all, “I don’t know” is a way of telling the TRUTH, a concept you have no experience with. Here is the fact of the matter… I don’t know… and neither do you. If you care to claim that you do… we are waiting for both your explanation and your proof. Since you have neither, stop embarrassing yourself… it’s getting really uncomfortable watching you squirm.

    “You know next to nothing about God too so stop with your silly claims you cannot prove.”

    Claiming I know “next to nothing” about a completely imaginary creature and you think that makes YOU smarter??? hahahahaha… Oh my goodness, you are more fun than monkeys riding bicycles!
    You know next to nothing about the magical powers of my garden gnome, so there!

    I am done with your idiocy. If you have anything to offer, do it, otherwise you once again show the depth of your delusion and desperation. I fart in your general direction. No go away or I shall taunt you further.

  10. on 21 Feb 2014 at 8:08 pm 10.A said …

    “I have provided a rational and logical explanation as to why an omniscient god cannot be omnipotent”

    um, no you haven’t. You have posted “I don’t understand therefore it can’t be?.

    Let me enlighten you. You have very poor logic skills. You need to read outside your narrow sphere of atheist blogs and read some writers you hate, that being theists. Your question is not new or even that difficult!!!!!!!! Lol!!!!!!!

    But I have seen your ilk before. You will remain ignorant because you are unteachable.

    so sad Moe….

    “You know next to nothing about the magical powers of my garden gnome”

    Uh huh, ok, back away from the ledge slllooowwwlllyyy there there Moe…….lol!!!!!!!!

    Been fun but gotta run. Late!

  11. on 21 Feb 2014 at 8:38 pm 11.DPK said …

    “um, no you haven’t. You have posted “I don’t understand therefore it can’t be?.
    Let me enlighten you. You have very poor logic skills”

    I wish you would enlighten me, but all I get from you is, …… oh that’s right, nothing. Make the attempt and lets se which one of us has poor logic skills. So far you are the only one saying “I don’t understand so god mustta done it…..” LOL.

    Take your shot. Let’s see what you got.
    But you won’t coward, just like you won’t answer the question:
    “Is there any conceivable scenario in which an individual can possibly choose an option that is different from that which an omniscient god already knows?”
    Why won’t you answer?? Because yes, you lose, no, you loose. I suppose you are going to tell us there is a 3rd option? No, you will play coy and pretend you know things you do not know.
    Fraud.

  12. on 21 Feb 2014 at 8:43 pm 12.DPK said …

    “Been fun but gotta run. Late!”

    Be careful handling the rattlesnakes and getting that social security money from them old ladies!! I know you think your god will protect you.. but you see what happened to that Coots guy, huh?
    He thought he knew stuff he didn’t know too… LOL

  13. on 22 Feb 2014 at 12:50 am 13.the messenger said …

    404.alex, 1) Treat her with love and kindness.
    2) Help her peruse her dreams, but at a young it is a phase that will probable change soon, but never discourage a dream like that, because you never know, she might achieve that one day.
    3) show love to them and treat them well, but do not convert to that religion, because it is a religion of hate.
    4) life should be about treating people with love and kindness, not material possessions. Do not oppose medical, mechanical, or electric science. Evolution and creationism can coexist.

  14. on 22 Feb 2014 at 12:55 am 14.Angus and Alexis said …

    Silly messenger, therefore you are not a true(tm) christian.

  15. on 22 Feb 2014 at 1:16 am 15.the messenger said …

    404.alex,

    5) Sign their petition to ban gay marriages.
    6) What is a Koran burning party?
    7) Pity him and try to help him stop his awful ways.
    8) Try to negotiate with him, but if he refuses just do the work, GOD will forgive you if h=you have a good reason for working on that day.
    9) Pray for everyone.
    10) Treat him with love and respect, but respectfully disagree with him.
    11) It depends on what you are helping them do. If it is charity then you should donate money and food to them.
    12) Tell him that he should battle them through words and not violence, and that they should only be locked up if they physically hurt someone.
    13) Treat her with love and respect, but respectfully disagree with her belief in many GODs.

  16. on 22 Feb 2014 at 1:17 am 16.the messenger said …

    416.Angus and Alexis, how am I not a true Christian?

  17. on 22 Feb 2014 at 3:58 am 17.DPK said …

    Messy,

    “I and the father are one”. Jn 10:30

    But then….
    “And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.”

    If Jesus and the father are one and the same, how could they have different wills? And why would Jesus ask himself to be spared his coming execution?

    Hurry up and make some more shit up quick!

  18. on 22 Feb 2014 at 12:27 pm 18.Angus and Alexis said …

    “416.Angus and Alexis, how am I not a true Christian?”

    You fail to see how in order to follow every part of the bible, you must break other parts.

  19. on 22 Feb 2014 at 12:44 pm 19.A said …

    “Angus and Alexis, how am I not a true Christian?”

    lol!!! This is the same Agnus that criticizes others when they judge if someone is a True Scotsman, Hitler for example. You know…….The No True Scotsman they like to claim of others? Lol!!!

    Have you ever seen a group of people who know so much about something they don’t believe in?

    Now she claims you, Messenger, are NOT a Christian because you “break parts of the Bible”. However she claims Hitler IS a Christian but he obviously broke many parts of the Bible.

    Is this typical atheist logic? Yes…….yes it is…..sigh!

  20. on 22 Feb 2014 at 2:42 pm 20.Angus and Alexis said …

    A, you fail to see the ironic satire i was intending to present.

    Messenger claims that many people were not “true” Christians.

    I posted a (invalid) true definition that would make HIM not a true christian.

    Get it?

  21. on 22 Feb 2014 at 3:04 pm 21.alex said …

    “Now she claims you, Messenger, are NOT a Christian because you “break parts of the Bible”.”

    then, illuminate us, dumbass. publish the motherfucking checklist that determines the true xtian. but you won’t, because ain’t such thing.

    you motherfuckers love to hedge and claim you know the criteria. hitler again? why not the fucking roman empire? almost all non-xtians, didn’t they kill a whole lot of motherfuckers back then? a bigger percentage of the total population than what hitler, etc have killed. hey, wait! the fucking romans believed in god(s).

    now, man up, beeyatch. what are the xtian determinants?

  22. on 22 Feb 2014 at 4:02 pm 22.A said …

    “I posted a (invalid) true definition that would make HIM not a true christian”

    That’s so cute. An invalid but true definition. Lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    And I posted your hypocritical stand.

    Get it?

  23. on 22 Feb 2014 at 4:06 pm 23.DPK said …

    “A” with his advanced skills in logic and reasoning, after running away from his claim that god can be both omnipotent and omnicient at the same time without any paradox, now jumps at the cahnce to change the subject and proclaims:

    “Now she claims you, Messenger, are NOT a Christian because you “break parts of the Bible”. However she claims Hitler IS a Christian but he obviously broke many parts of the Bible.”

    (Note the underlying Christian hated toward women displayed by his schoolyard tactic of referring to Angus as a “she” as if to be a woman is the ultimate insult… very telling)

    What “A” with his advanced logic skills doesn’t realize is that it was MESSENGER who claimed that a christian is not defined by belief in, or acceptance of Christ as your personal Savior, but rather by one’s actions! Angus was simply pointing out that poor messy fails to meet his own definition. LOL.

    He is just such a hot mess….

  24. on 22 Feb 2014 at 5:42 pm 24.A said …

    Note the underlying atheist hated toward women displayed by Moe. He sees calling someone she as an insult. He has never been a insult to Moe.

    Moe doesn’t even realize how he sets himself up as a sexist.

    The name Agnus is typically she so I go with it. So sad Moe sees woman in such a inferior way.

    Interesting note woman complain about poor treatment at atheist conferences around the world. Absolutely horrible……

  25. on 22 Feb 2014 at 6:25 pm 25.DPK said …

    See how “A” lies about his intent in using the pronoun “she” to describe Angus, who he knows full well to be make, as a female as a form of what he sees, in his childish and immature reasoning, as a insult, not unlike calling someone “Moe” as a reference to a brilliantly talented comedian who made a living portraying a buffoon.

    Then, in his desperation to save face, he tries pittifully to revert the blame to someone else, in typical thesit fashion, hoping no one will notice…. har har har… and BTW “A”, Angus is a make name, not a female… I suppose your education is lacking…

    “Angus is a masculine given name in English. It is an Anglicised form of the Irish and Scottish Gaelic Aonghas, which is composed of Celtic elements meaning “one”, and “choice”. A variant spelling of the Scottish Gaelic name is Aonghus. The Irish form of the Scottish Gaelic name is Aengus. A pet form of the given name Angus is Angie, pronounced “an-ghee”, which represents the Scottish Gaelic Angaidh. A short form of the given name Angus is Gus.[1] The feminine form of Angus is Angusina”

  26. on 22 Feb 2014 at 6:27 pm 26.DPK said …

    “The name Agnus is typically she so I go with it.”

    It would seem you may add that to the long list of things you think you know, about which you are 100% wrong.

    ROTFLOL…………………………

  27. on 22 Feb 2014 at 10:26 pm 27.A said …

    ROTFL!!!

    Moe using a name I never use! Lol!!!!! Check the spelling Moe, Agnus is feminine and thus correct. Your hatred of woman causes your mind to see insult due to you low view or woman. Its an atheist trait. Get help and stop hating. Lol!!

    The consider this young atheist has two names and one is a made up Tulip who speaks for him/her! lol!!!

    Add that to the long list of things you think you know, about which you are 100% wrong.

    ROTFL, I luv you Moe. You make me laugh so

  28. on 22 Feb 2014 at 11:32 pm 28.DPK said …

    Agnus is feminine and thus correct.

    Except his name is Angus, not Agnus, you retarded twit.
    Never mind, your disdain of women is a well known Christian trait, starting no doubt, when your magical god admonished women to keep their mouths shut and never have authority over men lol.

    Busted again your stupidity and ignorance. Lol. Still wait g for your proof of your omnipotent omniscient god, btw….. Any day now, any day….

  29. on 23 Feb 2014 at 12:13 am 29.DPK said …

    For those unfamiliar with the blog, here is how you tell when “A” is lying:

    Words appear under the name A, Boz, biff, curmudgeon, horatiio, xenon, 40year, and Martin. Not a complete list!
    Lol

  30. on 23 Feb 2014 at 12:29 am 30.the messenger said …

    419.DPK, he did that to show us that even though he did not desire to go through all of that pain, he was still willing to do it for us. He that to express just how awful the pain would be, on the cross.

  31. on 23 Feb 2014 at 12:40 am 31.the messenger said …

    420.Angus and Alexis, you fail to realize that some of the rules in the old covenant are not included in the new covenant. And that the laws of the old testament were completed and made new in the new covenant.

  32. on 23 Feb 2014 at 12:50 am 32.A said …

    “Except his name is Angus”

    ROTfL! No, that is his/her Tulip, remember when Butterfly created a Tulip? Are tulips his or her? They could be BI and just remain gender neutral. What about his/her obsession with the Ponies? Are they gender neutral?

    Anyhow, as an atheist you guys need to reject you disrespect if woman. They are complaining and relating their stories.

  33. on 23 Feb 2014 at 12:50 am 33.DPK said …

    Messy… YOU miss the point. If god the father and Jesus were the SAME being, Jesus would not have a “will” different from the father, and would have had no need to resign himself to the father’s will.
    Seriously now, how much longer will you ignore the obvious. If you told me Jesus and the father were both gods, ok, your silly legend supports that idea, but CLEARLY, anyone reading the bible would have to conclude that the legend shows they are not the same person, or being, if you will.
    Your ability to cherry pick and ignore parts of your own holy book is mind boggling.

  34. on 23 Feb 2014 at 12:54 am 34.Angus and Alexis said …

    “No, that is his/her Tulip, remember when Butterfly created a Tulip?”

    Err no, my name is Angus, Alexis is the tulpa.

    Messenger said…
    “420.Angus and Alexis, you fail to realize that some of the rules in the old covenant are not included in the new covenant. And that the laws of the old testament were completed and made new in the new covenant.”

    So the bible is NOT the absolute word of god?

  35. on 23 Feb 2014 at 12:59 am 35.the messenger said …

    435.DPK, they do not have different wills. He was talking to himself, because him and the father are the same person. Jesus was simply expressing his desire to avoid the pain of the cross, and his determination to endure it for the sake of humanity.

    They are both the same person.

  36. on 23 Feb 2014 at 1:50 am 36.DPK said …

    As I said messy, your ability to cherry pick and delude yourself in unequaled.
    Impressive, but not in a good way! Lol!

  37. on 23 Feb 2014 at 5:08 am 37.Angus and Alexis said …

    When people say that Jesus did such a huge sacrifice, and endured more pain than anyone else…

    I point to cancer patients, who suffer more pain.

    And i point to soldiers who sacrifice themselves, and actually get a result.

  38. on 23 Feb 2014 at 1:23 pm 38.alex said …

    “He was talking to himself, because him and the father are the same person.”

    just like when you said you talked to god and that you alone determines who the real xtians are? no? i’m lying? you keep referring to NOT REAL xtians, but yet you can’t corroborate your xtian criteria with anybody else. go ahead you dumbass, list your xtian criteria and don’t forget the rapist shit part. and the yahweh equals allah, too.

    maybe you are god? except you’d have to beat your own ass for fucking around on the sabbath day.

    dumb motherfucker.

  39. on 24 Feb 2014 at 5:04 pm 39.freddies_dead said …

    399.the messenger said …

    376.freddies_dead, I was explaining that when a human forgets something, the knowledge is not gone from the brain, it is just hard for the human to access. In a similar way, GOD will still possess the knowledge, but he will not access it, although he could easily access it if he wanted too.

    Your continued failure to explain your God’s mental abilities through analogies to human mental abilities is utterly unsurprising. Aside from the fact that all analogies are inherently flawed, your main problem is that there are no reality based referents for an omniscient being. You are having to imagine what it would be like if such a being existed. Also unsurprising is that how you imagine this being is different from pretty much every other believer.

    If you disagree you should be able to tell us how can we distinguish your God from something you may merely be imagining?

  40. on 24 Feb 2014 at 5:06 pm 40.freddies_dead said …

    401.the messenger said …

    377.freddies_dead, GOD answers all prayers,

    A baseless assertion. All the reputable studies into prayer have provided evidence that this is not true.

    but he may not give us the answer we want, but he will give us what we need.

    The old “God answers yes, no, maybe” bullshit. Accepting every possible outcome as an answer to a prayer makes prayer utterly meaningless. It’s indistinguishable from what you’d get should no deity exist.

    He is not some sort of magic butler. He is a father.

    A vicious, jealous, megalomaniacal father according to the Bible. I’m just glad that He only exists in the imaginations of believers.

  41. on 24 Feb 2014 at 10:19 pm 41.Anonymous said …

    “but he may not give us the answer we want, but he will give us what we need.”

    Aside from the “yes, no or maybe” bullshit… this is specifically NOT what Jesus said would happen.
    “If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.”
    and
    “Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.”

    Note he did not say, “Maybe it will be done for you, maybe not, and maybe you’ll get something else.” He said “Whatever you wish… it will be done for you.”

    Now Messy will explain to all of us why god didn’t REALLY mean what he said. Thank Jeehebus that the all powerful creator of the universe has people like Messy and “A” to explain to us what he ACTUALLY means! I guess the ability to clearly communicate also isn’t in his omnipotent toolbelt. But then again, he already knew that, didn’t he? LOL

  42. on 24 Feb 2014 at 11:47 pm 42.DPK said …

    443 above is me… Sorry, new browser.

  43. on 25 Feb 2014 at 12:55 am 43.the messenger said …

    439.Angus and Alexis, he was not only feeling the pain of being whipped, beaten, flesh ripped off, thorns in the head, nails through the hands and feet, but also the pain of ALL THE SINS ON THE EARTH.

    He went through more pain than anyone.

  44. on 25 Feb 2014 at 12:58 am 44.Angus and Alexis said …

    “He went through more pain than anyone.”

    Prove it…*sigh*

    “439.Angus and Alexis, he was not only feeling the pain of being whipped, beaten, flesh ripped off, thorns in the head, nails through the hands and feet, but also the pain of ALL THE SINS ON THE EARTH.”

    You are yet to prove that sins exist, nor is there any evidence that sins cause pain.

  45. on 25 Feb 2014 at 1:02 am 45.the messenger said …

    440.alex, I already told you that was a dream. Furthermore, I never said that I alone determine what a Christian is or isn’t.

    Alex, I have given many references from the bible, that specify what a Christian is or is not. You are oblivious to the truth.

  46. on 25 Feb 2014 at 1:25 am 46.the messenger said …

    446.Angus and Alexis, Luke 14:25-33 details the cost of being a disciple, and mentions carrying a cross. It does not mean a literal cross, otherwise all of the apostles would be walking around with wooden crosses on their backs. Jesus is referring to sins as the cross.

    This reveals that Jesus was not only carrying a literal cross, but also a cross of sins(mankind’s sins).

    Hebrews 12:1-3 characterizes sins as a hard thing to deal with. A hard thing to overcome.

    Sin is a violation of GOD’s laws or teachings. GOD’s laws can be broken and have been broken by all people at least once. That is what sin is, and it is real.

  47. on 25 Feb 2014 at 6:58 am 47.Angus and Alexis said …

    Going to need sources other than the bible.

    I am also humored by your claim of the bible not being literal.

    And again, i am going to need proof of sin existing.

  48. on 25 Feb 2014 at 12:28 pm 48.alex said …

    “I have given many references from the bible, that specify what a Christian is or is not.”

    you’re a moron. where does it say that allah is yahweh? why do you keep saying that some biblical shit is not to be taken literal? why do you say that eternal is temporary? see how your bullshit is laid bare, you asshole.

  49. on 25 Feb 2014 at 3:33 pm 49.Why even said …

    What is this fucking blog or whatever. This battle will always be happening until the end of time why even argue about it.

  50. on 25 Feb 2014 at 4:26 pm 50.freddies_dead said …

    451.Why even (drove by and) said …

    What is this fucking blog or whatever.

    I suspect that the lack of a question mark indicates this is most likely rhetorical but I’ll answer anyway.

    If you click on the link at the top that reads “About this blog” you would have found the following explanation:

    “WhyWontGodHealAmputees^com is a web site that explores the existence of God. This blog accompanies the site and explores God and religion in our world today.”

    This battle will always be happening until the end of time why even argue about it.

    I sincerely doubt your claim about this battle going on for ever, but we argue probably for the same reason you commented – because we can.

  51. on 25 Feb 2014 at 4:52 pm 51.A said …

    Why Even,

    This is not an argument in the classical sense. It is more luke moon landing believers vs deniers.

    Atheist are a very small cult. They are God deniers while the rest of us recognize the obvious existence of God.

    Now a genuine discussion can be had about which God is real and true. This is a legitimate debate that takes place regularly.

  52. on 25 Feb 2014 at 4:57 pm 52.Why even said …

    I now see. I apologize for my laziness. (forgetting to place a question mark at the end of my sentence) Now I understand the point of this blog.

    I would stay on this website for much longer but, I feel that my first impression will not bide well for later post that I might have. I doubt that matters to you though. I will now drift back into the darkest corner of the internet that I somehow was able to claw my way out of.

  53. on 25 Feb 2014 at 6:10 pm 53.Anonymous said …

    451.A said …
    Why Even,
    “This is not an argument in the classical sense. It is more luke moon landing believers vs deniers.”

    True… also like young earth creationists and evolution deniers.

    “Atheist are a very small cult. They are God deniers while the rest of us recognize the obvious existence of God.”

    Much like round earthers who were ridiculed while the rest of the world recognized the obvious fact that the world was flat and at the center of the universe.
    Hysterical that “A” after running away from explaining anything about the paradox of his claimed god’s properties, calls upon the argument from majority fallacy to justify his god’s existence. While at the same time ignoring the fact the the “majority” do not accept the existence of HIS particular god, while at the same time find no end to arguing, and gleefully killing one another, over the disagreement as to which one of the thousands of available gods postulated actually exists, and which ones are completely imaginary.

  54. on 25 Feb 2014 at 7:15 pm 54.Smelly ginger said …

    Atheism is the amazing truth that religious people don’t understand. Murcia was founded bai aged and that’s why it’s going down.

  55. on 26 Feb 2014 at 12:42 am 55.A said …

    Smelly ,

    You planning to destroy Murcia? Is it because they will not embrace orthodox atheism? Beautiful little town, learn to embrace it.

    Why Even,

    Your first impression was better than guys like Alex and Freddie who post here. You did fine…..chin up!

  56. on 26 Feb 2014 at 12:59 am 56.the messenger said …

    449.Angus and Alexis, the events in the bible are literal. What I said was that Jesus used metaphors in order to explain his messages to the Jews and gentiles.

    The bible is the original source for Jesus’s teachings. All teachings that are moral come from the bible.

  57. on 26 Feb 2014 at 1:22 am 57.alex said …

    “Is it because they will not embrace orthodox atheism?”

    give it up, you dumb motherfucker. just like your biblical morality, there aint no damn orthodox atheism. there aint no atheist pope/leader. you might insist, but just like the rest of your fucked up claims, you got no proof.

    because of your past tendencies, it wouldn’t be at surprising if you’re the same motherfucker, Smelly.

    just a reminder, you insist that an all knowing, all powerful god (with a grand plan) can give your free will and it’s up to atheists to disprove that it cannot happen.

    yet, you dipshits insist that unanswered prayers are excused as god’s will? and you think the readers are too stupid to figure this out? well, maybe the dumbfuck xtians can’t.

  58. on 26 Feb 2014 at 1:32 am 58.alex said …

    “…the events in the bible are literal..”

    casting demons into pigs and driving them off a cliff is literal? talking snakes/donkies? (fuck you and your plural). woman from rib? 10,000 year old earth? bleh, bleh, and more motherfucking bleh…………….

    bullshit fucking bible. you think you’re more qualified to interpret the bible more than the motherfucking preacher that died from the snakebite?

  59. on 26 Feb 2014 at 1:42 am 59.alex said …

    “Atheism is the amazing truth”

    you fuckers make everything so complicated. oooh, frozen waterfall, somebody designed it. oooh, the useless motherfucking appendix, somebody designed it.

    atheism ain’t shit and it’s very simple. no belief in your motherfucking god. got it? now, quit making up shit. enough of that in the bible already.

  60. on 26 Feb 2014 at 2:53 am 60.DPK said …

    “just a reminder, you insist that an all knowing, all powerful god (with a grand plan) can give your free will..”

    It is way more than that, it is an all knowing god who ALREADY knows, down to the most minute detail, exactly what will happen during every nano second of eternity, everywhere in the universe… yet you are free to do whatever you wish.
    The problem with this description is that there is no possible scenario that can exist in which any of us, including god himself, could POSSIBLY is any way, shape or form, doing anything different from what he already knows will happen, or has happened if that were in fact true. To god, the infinity of time would be no different to him than the past is to us. We cannot change what we already know has happened, if we could, we could never “know” what has happened. Likewise, god cannot change what he already “knows” will occur, because if he could he could not pssibly “know” it.
    And Astro’s reasoned response to this?? “You have poor logic skills.”
    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…………….
    oh wait….
    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahah haha.

  61. on 26 Feb 2014 at 8:08 am 61.Angus and Alexis said …

    “449.Angus and Alexis, the events in the bible are literal. What I said was that Jesus used metaphors in order to explain his messages to the Jews and gentiles.
    The bible is the original source for Jesus’s teachings. All teachings that are moral come from the bible.”

    Need sources of this that are cross referenced and are valid to the scientific method, or another accepted process.

  62. on 26 Feb 2014 at 1:23 pm 62.freddies_dead said …

    454.Why even said …

    I now see. I apologize for my laziness. (forgetting to place a question mark at the end of my sentence) Now I understand the point of this blog.

    Oddly defensive. I don’t recall suggesting you were lazy.

    I would stay on this website for much longer but, I feel that my first impression will not bide well for later post that I might have.

    Your first impression of us or what impression you believe we may have of you? Neither should stop you throwing in your tuppence worth if you want to.

    I doubt that matters to you though.

    Surely you should post (or not) because it matters to you?

    I will now drift back into the darkest corner of the internet that I somehow was able to claw my way out of.

    Fair enough, but thanks for stopping by anyway.

  63. on 26 Feb 2014 at 2:06 pm 63.freddies_dead said …

    458.the messenger said (to Angus and Alexis)

    the events in the bible are literal. What I said was that Jesus used metaphors in order to explain his messages to the Jews and gentiles.

    So the Bible is literal … except when it’s not.

    The bible is the original source for Jesus’s teachings.

    Correction, it is the only source for Jesus’s alleged teachings, as no-one else seemed to notice that the son of God had popped down to live amongst us for a bit.

    All teachings that are moral come from the bible.

    The Bible mostly just regurgitates what previous religions (Babylonian, Sumerian, Egyptian etc…) had already said about not murdering or stealing … only it gave people get out clauses for when they needed their God to demand that they do those things. Along with condoning violence, war, genocide, slavery and rape of course.

    The “might makes right” morality of your Bible is a truly appalling basis for any reasonable system of ethical conduct.

    Depending on which of the 7 versions of the 10(ish) commandments you choose.

    The first 4(ish) are all about vanity – I am God, no other Gods allowed, no graven images, no name taking in vain because I’m one jealous motherfucker who simply doesn’t like that shit.

    Then there’s the making a day holy for no reason other than I can and I like seeing you squirm – especially when you’ll wind up arguing about which day is supposed to be the holy one.

    Then you can honour your parents – even if they’re complete dicks.

    Thou shalt not kill … unless I tell you to (oh and it’s fine if I do it).

    Thou shalt not commit adultery, because, erm … reasons.

    Thou shalt not steal … unless I tell you to (oh and it’s fine if I do it).

    Thou shalt not lie … unless I tell you to (oh and it’s fine if I do it).

    Though shalt not covet (depending on your choice of Bible there’s 3 of these), because, erm … reasons again.

    It offers very little of use.

    Even Jesus’s messages were contradictory. Suggesting that “Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.” in 1 John 3:15 only to declare that “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.” in Luke 14:26.

  64. on 26 Feb 2014 at 5:11 pm 64.BLAH-BLAH-BLAH said …

    1. The rebellion of Satan and the fall of mankind were foreknown and foreordained by God.

    2. Those who would become the people of God, the elect, were foreknown and foreordained by God.

    3. The crucifixion of Christ, as atonement for God’s people, was foreknown and foreordained by God.

    – the argument to end all arguments..if god knows all past,present and future why create earth instead of just creating a heaven full of perfect people that graveled at his feet and live a life of ecstasy? why create sin in humans but at same time know exactly how and what we will do with our lives…that’s kinda like telling someone, ok, were gonna play a game and oh by the way you have no say so what so ever i control every aspect of the game…not really freewill! However my point is why argue about if god is real or not, because if there was a god and he was all knowing then any argument you make is useless your life has already been laid out for you and no matter what you say to show he isn’t real or fight in his honor your story has already been written and nothing you can do or say will change it …so again why create life when you know the ending , almost seems redundant.

  65. on 26 Feb 2014 at 5:34 pm 65.Why even said …

    BLAH-BLAH,

    “…so why create life when you know the ending”

    This “oh so real” god, reminds me of four year old children they do the same thing over and over thinking it’s the most entertaining thing in the world. Thing is, it isn’t. I doubt that this “god” is a four year old but, according to how the bible portrays him, he sure sounds like one. Maybe this “god” just thinks like a four year old and does the same thing knowing what will happen in the end, yet is still entertained or at least satisfied.

  66. on 26 Feb 2014 at 6:32 pm 66.A said …

    “…so why create life when you know the ending”

    Why not? Its great! But if you are an atheist I could see your dilemma. No reason for existence, depression, the seemingly uselessness of life.

    Then again God doesn’t have a need to answer to me for His actions. However, glad He created His masterpiece.

  67. on 26 Feb 2014 at 6:46 pm 67.Anonymous said …

    “Then again God doesn’t have a need to answer to me for His actions.”

    The ultimate cop-out of Astroboy. “Nothing makes sense”… it doesn’t have to…. “This is impossible”… You can’t understand. LOL…

    The even bigger question in my mind is… if god is eternal and perfect, why after an infinite time (think about that… an INFINITE time) existing in a state of absolute perfection (wars and rebellions in heaven non-withstanding LOL)… what then CHANGED to make this perfect being decide things weren’t actually perfect and needed to change?

    Yeah, ASS… god doesn’t need to answer to YOU perhaps, but you are the one making a claim about his existence HERE… so sadly, you DO need to answer to us. Since it is clear you have no intention of every even attempting to do so, that renders you, once again, completely irrelevant. LOL!

  68. on 26 Feb 2014 at 7:13 pm 68.A said …

    Lol!!

    Oh Freddie mouse! Ok, you have been dying for me to give you attention so being the great guy I am I will.

    Freddie mouse, when will you be defending the many claims you have made? I destroy your claims then you run away….lol!!!!!!!! Both as Freddie and now as your return as mouse?

    Since it is clear you have no intention of every even attempting to do so, that renders you, once again, completely irrelevant. LOL!

    Freddie mouse spewed “what then CHANGED to make this perfect being decide things weren’t actually perfect and needed to change”

    Why did something need to change? Prove something did, oh wait, this is Freddie mouse….

    lol!!!!!!!!!!!!

  69. on 26 Feb 2014 at 7:31 pm 69.BLAH-BLAH-BLAH said …

    “Then again God doesn’t have a need to answer to me for his actions.”

    I’m actually kind of envious of religious people they can live a life so blinded but believe with there whole heart there is a promise land waiting and honestly that’s not a bad life. I’m not going to bash you and make you feel bad about what you believe really no one should do that…we are human we question, but i can’t believe this with my whole heart that a god created everything and knows everything and a guy died for me for my sins(actually the jesus thing was done several times before by pagans,but that’s another point)however my mind cant wrap around such things and never will and besides my life has already been predetermined I’m just riding this bitch out..Ignorance is bliss !!

  70. on 26 Feb 2014 at 10:19 pm 70.DPK said …

    468.A said …
    Lol!!
    “Oh Freddie mouse! Ok, you have been dying for me to give you attention”

    Sorry, Astroboy… 467 was me… chrome doesn’t seem to want to remember my handle.. anyway, your mind reading skills seem to be slipping.

    Freddie mouse spewed “what then CHANGED to make this perfect being decide things weren’t actually perfect and needed to change”
    Why did something need to change? Prove something did, oh wait, this is Freddie mouse….
    lol!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Well, do you agree that the earth and the creature that live on it had a beginning?? LOL… if you do, then there was an infinite time BEFORE that when it did not. So, why change what is perfect? You’re so silly.
    But let’s take your position and see where it leads. God has existed for all eternity in a perfect state. Then, after an infinity of doing this, fo some reason, he decided to change it and create the universe we know… and us. What for?
    According to you, he already knew it would turn out badly, and result in a large percentage of the human race.. his “children” as you theists are so fond of referring to us as… suffering eternal torment and separation in the fires of hell… which he also decided to create.
    Perhaps you are saying that because he already knew this would happen, he had no choice in the matter?? No, then he wouldn’t be omnipotent, so that can’t be.
    Perhaps you are saying he didn’t know he was going to do that, or how it would turn out? No, that can’t be because then he couldn’t be omniscient.

    So, let’s review, we went from a god who had already lived an infinite existence in a state of absolute perfection to a world of fuck all misery, evil, and shit so bad that he would be forced to create a virtual copy of himself and kill himself in order to get it sorted… and even then it would be a long, fucked up process. Well, clearly something changed, no?

  71. on 27 Feb 2014 at 12:50 am 71.the messenger said …

    466.BLAH-BLAH-BLAH, he did that to make salvation worth more to us. If we have to work for something, or overcome a great struggle, we will value salvation more than if it was given to us at the moment of our creation.

  72. on 27 Feb 2014 at 1:20 am 72.DPK said …

    466.BLAH-BLAH-BLAH, he did that to make salvation worth more to us. If we have to work for something, or overcome a great struggle, we will value salvation more than if it was given to us at the moment of our creation.

    How do you know that? I have a great many things in my life that I value immensely that I didn’t have to overcome a great struggle to have.
    My children and grandchildren, for example, mean more to me than my own life…. I certainly cannot conceive that I value them any less because I didn’t have to endure a great struggle to have them.
    Where is your proof for this claim? Besides, he certainly could have created us so that we WOULD value this supposed salvation without having to endure a great struggle, but he chose not too, Right?
    Plus, he already knows who will be saved and who will go to hell for eternity, so what is the point of the struggle? What will happen will happen, according to his foreknowledge and Devine plan. Once again, you are talking nonsense…. Just like your non eternal eternity, and your god who talks to himself in the third person and asks himself to please do things…. But only if he wants….. Hahaha…. You and Astroboy must be roomies in the same loonie bin.

  73. on 27 Feb 2014 at 2:42 am 73.A said …

    Lol!!!!

    DPK, Freddie and Mouse are all the same. Lol!!!! Should have known.

    “If we have to work for something, or overcome a great struggle”

    Typically, the left leaning progressives do not see the value in work. They prefer things be given to them. It like a kid who is given everything vs one who works for what they get.

    I enjoy laughing at the same bunch who believe THEY know what a deity should and should not do. If they were ONLY really that bright! Lol!!!!

  74. on 27 Feb 2014 at 3:20 am 74.DPK said …

    Astro once again demonstrates how to completely miss the point.
    About what you’d expect from someone who believes a magical invisible man who knows everything, but gives you free will.

    Go read the post again Astro, and maybe join us when you have a clue. Lol.

  75. on 27 Feb 2014 at 12:14 pm 75.alex said …

    “Typically, the left leaning progressives do not see the value in work.”

    lame diversion noted and ignored, Again!

    “I enjoy laughing at the same bunch who believe THEY know what a deity should and should not do.”

    lol, aint it? you morons lay down what the motherfucking god is supposed to do and when the foolishness is bared, you nervously laugh and blurt out “you don’t know god”.

    1. god knows everything
    2. prayers are always answered
    3. hell OR heaven
    4. god is good

    all bullshit and demonstrably false and even using the bible as proof. of course, the retort has always been: “contextual”, “not literal”, “misinterpreted”, “god forgot”, bleh, bleh, bleh.

  76. on 27 Feb 2014 at 1:55 pm 76.freddies_dead said …

    470. A the lying prick said …

    Some shit he bizarrely aimed at me for some reason only known to himself.

    And despite his desperate cry for attention:

    Still not going to happen, A.

    You’ve proved yourself to be a liar.

    You lie about the evidence.

    You lie about other people.

    You even lie about your own identity.

    You’re a liar, A, plain and simple.

    Unless you’re presenting the evidence for your God’s existence all I’ll be doing is pointing out your dishonesty.

  77. on 27 Feb 2014 at 3:54 pm 77.DPK said …

    “I enjoy laughing at the same bunch who believe THEY know what a deity should and should not do. If they were ONLY really that bright! Lol!!!!”

    The only reason you could possibly have for laughing at someone who postulates how a being with the properties YOU claim he has (omnipotence, omniscience, complete benevolence, etc) would behave is because you disagree. If you disagree that means you ALSO claim a knowledge of how that being would behave.

    Indeed, but claiming your god possess certain properties, for example, is all knowing, you define many things about him. For example, you can’t claim that god is all knowing, and then claim a bible story in which god couldn’t find Adam because he was hiding from him, is true. You can’t claim that a god can know what I will do tomorrow, and then tell me I have the ability to change it. You can’t tell me that god knows what HE will do tomorrow, and then tell me he has the ability to change it.

    So….. seems the laugh is on you…. LOL

  78. on 27 Feb 2014 at 4:46 pm 78.alex said …

    “god couldn’t find Adam because he was hiding from him”

    that’s because god was testing adam even though god already knew what adam was gonna do/say, but because god knew the knowledge, he was obliged to follow thru or god momentarily forgot because he was too busy eyeballing Eve even though god has already created porn and have seen them all.

    har! what a crock.

  79. on 27 Feb 2014 at 6:45 pm 79.DPK said …

    Or, Jesus, who is “one” and the same with god the father, saying (to himself, mind you)… Man, this crucifixion thing is going to suck, if there is anyway I can let myself skip this part, that would be awesome… but I will do whatever I think I should, but if there is any way I could let myself off the hook for the bloody parts, I’d like that. But, I will concede myself to do whatever it is that I want. And oh, by the way, if I’d like to ask myself to forgive these people for what they are doing to me, so if there is a way I could do that, that’d be awesome too.
    Thanks, me.

    The idiocy is a never ending circus of nonsense.
    I once was looking a buying a property that was currently owned by gypsy fortune tellers. They asked me, “So, are you going to make an offer on the property?” I said, “Don’t you know?”
    LOL

  80. on 28 Feb 2014 at 12:21 pm 80.alex said …

    hey, figured it out. messenger is nephi’s long lost brother!

    (messenger)????who dat? wat dis? har!

  81. on 28 Feb 2014 at 7:14 pm 81.Anonymous said …

    Oh, Little “a”:

    I enjoy laughing at the same bunch who believe THEY know what a deity should and should not do.

    It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that the xtian gauwd is a complete idiot, especially when it’s credited with OMNI-Max capabilities (sees and knows all, etc).

    As examples:
    When said gauwd created Adam and Eve (in its image) in the garden of eden, it knew in advance that we would fail to obey his mighty commands and our banishment would be assured. The xtian gauwd also knowingly created the devil with 100% knowledge that it would not be good for humans.

    Anyway, realizing that the Adam and Eve experiment had failed miserably, gauwd decided to have a redo by flooding the Earth and reseting the sin meter. Again, gauwd knew failure was 100% assured, so the flood was, in effect, useless.

    So, gauwd wants another redo. This time its son, Gsus, is put up on a stick so that the sins between Noah’s time and Gsus’s would AGAIN be reset. We know how well that worked out; but, more importantly, so did gauwd. What an idiot!

    Not much to an all seeing, all knowing, all powerful gauwd, is there? Complete failure. Did I miss something, little “a”?

  82. on 01 Mar 2014 at 12:04 am 82.the messenger said …

    465.freddies_dead, the events in the bible are literal, ok. All am saying is that Jesus used metaphors in his sermons sometimes, in order to explain his messages.

    GOD never said that genocide or rape was alright. He condemns all murder, rape, and genocide.

    Tell me, what verse supports rape? Show me proof.

    The first parts of the Ten Commandments are not about vanity, they about loyalty to GOD.

    The sabbath is a gift to us, it is a day of rest.

    If a father or mother does unholy things to you or someone else, then they cease to be your parents, and therefore you nolonger have to honner them.

    The verse says thou shall not murder. Get a brain you nincompoop.

    Adulatory is condemned because it is disloyal and an act of betrayal toward the spouse.

    GOD never stoll anything.

    GOD never lied about anything.

    If you covet and object then you become greedy and then you start to do bad things, like letting people Starve to get money. Greed is bad.

    Those verses are about self sacrafice to GOD. He is not telling us to hate others, he is telling us to love GOD so much that all other things seem hateful in comparison. Those verses can’t mean hate, because earlier he said that we must love others as we love our selves.

  83. on 01 Mar 2014 at 12:54 am 83.alex said …

    482.the messenger said …

    you’re a dumb motherfucker. call yourself a catholic, but you don’t know or even follow the doctrine.

    when bible shit is pointed out, your standard answer is not to take shit literal. so what’s left? god is good? god is loving? god is forgetful? he acts like it. dumb motherfucker is always doing shit even though he knew what’s to be. or maybe he’s just really powerless and just following some script.

    think, you dumb motherfucker. if your god is perfect, why is the imperfect shit his own doing? it’s a fucking impossibility? if course, you’ll never get that, coz you’re a dumb motherfucker.

  84. on 01 Mar 2014 at 3:01 am 84.A said …

    “Did I miss something, little “a”?”

    oh silly Freddie- Mouse or maybe Anony- Fred! Lol;!!

    I think the question should be “Did you hit ANYTHING”?. And the answer is no….lol!!!!

    You essentially just farted in the wind with much babbling.

    Why not answer many of the questions you have been asked?

    How about rationalizing Information Theory with DNA and primordial soup programmers.

    Defend your claim the Gospels have made up writers to “keep Christianity going”.

    Defend your fish fossil as a transitional fossil using SM.

    Nah! Run again…. Lol!!!!

  85. on 01 Mar 2014 at 4:19 am 85.Anonymous said …

    littlest “a”
    Just as I thought – it all boils down to “We don’t know how life began so goddidit”. Give yourself a pat on the back and take a bow, moron.

    BTW, since you’re a “science guy”, you must’ve appreciated it when that other science guy, Mr Nye, destroyed Ken Ham in that recent debate. Right?

  86. on 01 Mar 2014 at 4:51 am 86.Anonymous said …

    littlest “a”:

    You essentially just farted in the wind with much babbling.

    I am sorry sweetheart. Where did I err? Perhaps your flavour of a xtian gauwd does not have OMNI-max capabilities? Please explain and expand……popcorn is on……..

  87. on 01 Mar 2014 at 6:43 pm 87.DPK said …

    “How about rationalizing Information Theory with DNA and primordial soup programmers”

    How about you just show us your evidence that proves exactly how that first life formed? You are the only one claiming to show how it happened. Explain it.
    Oh, and “well, I can’t think of any other way, so it must be magic.” Isn’t actually an explanation. Lol.

    We are waiting.

  88. on 01 Mar 2014 at 11:53 pm 88.the messenger said …

    486.alex, every claim that I have made about the bible has been backed up with text evidence. You cherry pick verses, but I recognize all of the verses.

  89. on 01 Mar 2014 at 11:56 pm 89.the messenger said …

    Everything that GOD does is to make us morally good, and to help us get salvation in heaven.

    Everything that happen is directed to achieving those goals.

  90. on 02 Mar 2014 at 4:03 am 90.A said …

    “We don’t know how life began so goddidit”.”

    lol, oh mousey! So silly. The God of the gaps theory is so childish! No thinking individual believes such silliness, well, other than atheists.

    Knowing how a painting was painted, a car was manufactured or how an F-22 Raptor was constructed doesn’t eliminated the designer

    You so silly mousey Freddie!! Lol!!!!!!!!!

    And, as a man of science, you should answer the questions I have posted multiple times. You should be able to show me a process that can fill the role of programmer. No God right? Then the mystical programmer must be in nature. Let see it!!!!!

    lol!!!!!!!!!!!

  91. on 02 Mar 2014 at 11:24 am 91.alex said …

    “Knowing how a painting was painted, a car was manufactured or how an F-22 Raptor was constructed doesn’t eliminated the designer”

    more of the same shit from you, eh? elliptical orbits require a designer? sand dunes? all the combinations in rubik’s cube?

    God of the gaps theory is so childish? maybe godditit is better? nomenclature, motherfucker. just because something cannot be explained, doesn’t mean allah did it, you dumb motherfucker.

  92. on 02 Mar 2014 at 11:33 am 92.alex said …

    ” You cherry pick verses, but I recognize all of the verses.”

    go fuck yourself. your defense is laughable. picked apart, your bible is left with nothing. even your ‘xtian god is good’ is bullshit. proof? prehistoric men, pre yahweh men, muslims, hindus and countless others. again, go fuck yourself.

  93. on 02 Mar 2014 at 4:08 pm 93.DPK said …

    “lol, oh mousey! So silly. The God of the gaps theory is so childish! No thinking individual believes such silliness, well, other than atheists.”

    Oh, so it’s not that? Silly me. If it walks like a duck….
    But, this is good news. This means that rather than you sticking your god into whatever gaps in sceintific knowledge there are, you actually have a definitive answer, with evidence to support it. Can’t wait! This could certainly be a life changing event, indeed, a world changing event.
    Tell us, Astro, exactly how DID the first cell develop, how did life change from simple forms to more and more complex, without evolution, of course… And don’t forget to show your evidence that supports it.

  94. on 02 Mar 2014 at 4:54 pm 94.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    lol, oh mousey! So silly. The God of the gaps theory is so childish! No thinking individual believes such silliness

    Didn’t you see Mr Nye, the science guy, destroy Ken Ham in that debate, sweetness? Did you notice that he did not install a god when he didn’t know the answer for something, LIKE HOW LIFE BEGAN. He simply said “We don’t know yet”. As a “science guy” yourself you must understand that it is a perfectly good answer since we are continuing to investigate and research. Warm comfort offered by easy answers should be of no comfort to me, nor to you.

    “lol!!!!!!!” and “Lol!!!!!!!!” are not answers but it’s good that you’re enjoying (pleasuring?) yourself.

    BTW, how about gauwd and OMNI-max powers? Does gauwd see and know all?

  95. on 02 Mar 2014 at 6:44 pm 95.A said …

    “we are continuing to investigate and research”

    Oh, so all the previous claims over the years here are just children’s stories? Lol!!!!!!

    “you actually have a definitive answer”

    Oh Dippy! Didn’t you read Freddie mouse’s post above? It is it is a perfectly good answer since we are continuing to investigate and research. It doesn’t eliminate God silly. Lol!!!!!

    Dippy, you heading to the beach to see if a Ferrari is a gonna wash up? Hey, gotta be possible right? If a programmer showed up in the soup why not a manufacturer? Lol!!!!!!!!!!!

  96. on 02 Mar 2014 at 7:25 pm 96.alex said …

    “It doesn’t eliminate God silly. Lol!!!!!”

    let’s take it to the next level. we both agree that the real God, Allah did it? no? sorry, i meant, the REAL GOD, ODIN did it? yeah, that’s it!

    dumbass, motherfucker

  97. on 02 Mar 2014 at 8:00 pm 97.DPK said …

    No one ever said it eliminates god, it also doesn’t eliminate Vishnu, or my inter dimensional sea turtle…. None of them eliminated.
    But which of them are supported? In order to seriously consider any explanation. First there must be some evidence that it even exists. So let’s have yours.
    How do you contend the first cell developed, and where is the evidence that makes it any more plausible than sea turtle?

    You have been hammered and embarrassed soooooo many times on this ridiculous point, you really want to endure it again?
    And what is your fascination with Ferrari’s coming out of the ocean? How is that any different from Ferrari’s magically being formed when a mystical being blows into a handful of mud?
    Lol.. You’re always good for a chuckle though.

  98. on 02 Mar 2014 at 8:59 pm 98.A said …

    “How do you contend the first cell developed, and where is the evidence that makes it any more plausible than sea turtle?”

    Do you believe in a sea turtle? I would imagine this is a magical sea turtle?

    I assume this is your conceived intelligence behind creation? Well, make your case. You actually make a little more sense. Lol!!!!!

    “You have been hammered and embarrassed soooooo many times on this ridiculous point, you really want to endure it again?”

    Well, when possess such an ability then I will reconsider. Its just natural selection at work Dippity Dew Da! Lol!!!!

  99. on 02 Mar 2014 at 10:47 pm 99.alex said …

    “Do you believe in a sea turtle? I would imagine this is a magical sea turtle?”

    i believe in the motherfucker. turtle took man’s rib and made woman. turtle loves him smell of burning flesh. turtle says “thou shell not steal”. any other questions?

    what about your creation? got proof?

  100. on 02 Mar 2014 at 11:49 pm 100.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    “we are continuing to investigate and research”

    Oh, so all the previous claims over the years here are just children’s stories?

    Sweetest little “a”. Don’t you understand science, “science guy”? The children’s stories are things like the flood and Noah’s ark, talking snakes, and other biblically inspired myths. Some xtians even think that gauwd knows and sees all; do you think gauwd has OMNI-max abilities? I know you won’t answer. You need the illusion to be alive for your 12 step sobriety program.

  101. on 03 Mar 2014 at 1:47 am 101.A said …

    “Don’t you understand science, “science guy”?”

    Oh Mousey…..you so silly. Bring back Freddie. Of course I do

    But your silly stories are asteroids with amino acids starting life, lightning striking the primordial soup starting life and my personal favorite…..Crick’s Panspenia! Lol!!

    Yes, I am a science guy. I can’t live as a fairytale guy like you! Lol!!!!!

    Get well freddie-mouse. You wouldn’t know science if it bit you on your sea turtle! Lol!!!!!!!!!!

  102. on 03 Mar 2014 at 2:32 am 102.the messenger said …

    495.alex, the bible is a complete text. If you interpret it as individuals verses then you will never understand its message.

    Stop cherry picking, and start thinking.

  103. on 03 Mar 2014 at 2:40 am 103.the messenger said …

    504.A, “Get well freddie-mouse. You wouldn’t know science if it bit you on your sea turtle! Lol!!!!!!!!!!”

    I have to say, that is a good joke. Good comeback brother.

  104. on 03 Mar 2014 at 2:43 am 104.the messenger said …

    503.Anonymous, if GOD is real, then so are the bible stories. I have given you proof of GOD many times, so therefore the bible is also true.

  105. on 03 Mar 2014 at 2:46 am 105.DPK said …

    Do you believe in a sea turtle? I would imagine this is a magical sea turtle?

    I’d say he’s a somewhat powerful, rather clever sea turtle. Would you define that as magical?

    I assume this is your conceived intelligence behind creation? Well, make your case. You actually make a little more sense. Lol!!!!!

    So you think a possibly magical inter dimensional sea turtle farting the universe into existence makes more sense than a natural, non supernatural process that is not yet understood? Ok. Well that says a lot. Lol!

    No, I in fact do not believe an interdimensional sea turtle created life. Know why? Because it is a silly idea and there is absolutely no evidence to support the idea that such a thing exists… Just like your biblical warrior god. Lol!

  106. on 03 Mar 2014 at 5:30 am 106.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    “Don’t you understand science, “science guy”?”

    Of course I do

    Ummmmm, no you do not. Looking for Harleys on beaches with the hor username and now you’re looking for a Ferrari. Guess you needed to change that metaphor after a Harley did wash up on a beach.

    I am a science guy. I can’t live as a fairytale guy

    Says the little sweetie pie who uses a book of fairytales as his life’s guide. Whatever keeps the bottle away. Hope it’s still working. Maybe you can answer if the bible is literally true or just a collection of parables? Doubt we’ll see an answer here either. It would over expose the hor and crash the illusion.

  107. on 03 Mar 2014 at 11:29 am 107.alex said …

    “Stop cherry picking, and start thinking.”

    you dumb motherfucker. you’ve said so yourself, most of the bible shit is not to be taken literal. some xtians have moved on and ignored creationism and sexisms. yet you, you dumb motherfucker you, steadfastly cling to the notion that a rapist may marry his virgin victim as his punishment. you know of any country around here that allows that?

    fantasizing, bitch, motherfucker. start raping and see what happens…. i guess, in your sheep herding hood, it’s ok to do that eh?

  108. on 03 Mar 2014 at 12:27 pm 108.A said …

    “Looking for Harleys on beaches”

    Oh silly Freddie mouse! You and Dippity Dew look for Ferraris on beaches. Remember? Enough time anything is possible? Yep, right on this blog more than one of your personas uttered such silliness!!!!! All materials are available and no intelligence needed!!!! lol!!!!!! Oh…..so silly

    “Maybe you can answer if the bible is literally true”

    O silly Freddie mouse! ADD kicking in? You can’t stick with one issue? The question is the existence of God? Is your only argument is that a magic sea turtle does not exist? Lol!!!!!!

    You wouldn’t know science if it bit you on your sea turtle! Lol!

  109. on 03 Mar 2014 at 2:39 pm 109.DPK said …

    Still waiting for your explanation and evidence.
    Boy you can tap dance good… but dancing around waving your arms doesn’t make your god theory any more plausible that the stupid, laughable sea turtle hypothesis. So, once again, put up or shut up. LOL

  110. on 03 Mar 2014 at 3:06 pm 110.freddies_dead said …

    484.the messenger said …

    465.freddies_dead, the events in the bible are literal, ok.

    So the commandments to stone people to death for various transgressions are literal … or are they just metaphors again? Once more the Bible is literal … except when messy says it’s not.

    All am saying is that Jesus used metaphors in his sermons sometimes, in order to explain his messages.

    Seems like all He’s done is muddle things for His believers. The theist cherry pickers find it convenient though.

    GOD never said that genocide or rape was alright. He condemns all murder, rape, and genocide.

    Except when he tells His followers to commit genocide, ala the Amalekites:

    “2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. 3 Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.” (1 Sam. 15:2-3).

    cont’d…

  111. on 03 Mar 2014 at 3:09 pm 111.freddies_dead said …

    cont’d…

    Tell me, what verse supports rape? Show me proof.

    We’ll start with Judges 21:10-24 where there’s some more genocide first. The inhabitants of Jabesh-Gilead are slaughtered except for the virgins who are kidnapped and given to the tribe of Benjamin so that they can be forcibly used as wives – that’s rape right there messy. Of course the kidnapped virgins aren’t enough so the elders of Israel tell them to hide out in the vineyards so they can kidnap the daughters of Shiloh to be their wives – more rape.

    Numbers 31:7-18 where the children of Israel war against the Midianites (more God commanded genocide). Note verse 18 “But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.”

    Deuteronomy 20:10-14 whereby you offer a city peace and, should they agree you make them slaves. Should they disagree you slaughter the men and keep the women as spoils.

    Deuteronomy 21:10-14 where you get to take a captive that takes your fancy and force her to marry you.

    Exodus 21:7-11 where you get to sell your own daughter as a slave who can be forcibly married. Oops.

    Zechariah 14:1-2 where God gathers all the nations against Jerusalem and God will make sure the women get “ravished”, uber-rapey.

    cont’d…

  112. on 03 Mar 2014 at 3:10 pm 112.freddies_dead said …

    cont’d…

    The first parts of the Ten Commandments are not about vanity, they about loyalty to GOD.

    Because He’s jealous and vain. He just can’t countenance you picking another God. Any God that demands loyalty due to their own jealousy wouldn’t be a God worth worshipping even if it wasn’t just an imaginary construct.

    The sabbath is a gift to us, it is a day of rest.

    Which day is the right one messy? Why wouldn’t an allegedly benevolent God make it completely clear which day is the “real” day of rest – especially if picking the wrong one means an eternity/long weekend in Hell?

    If a father or mother does unholy things to you or someone else, then they cease to be your parents, and therefore you nolonger have to honner them.

    So sin defeats biology now? And when your idiot parents are no longer your real parents does that free you from original sin? After all you’ve just cut the line from Adam. Cue “metaphor”.

    The verse says thou shall not murder. Get a brain you nincompoop.

    Oh the irony. The hebrew verb “Retzach” actually has several meanings that describe destructive activity including “to murder”, “to kill”, “to break”, “to dash to pieces”, “to slay” etc… This leads to different translations being used in different Bibles. Do you have any sort of argument to suggest your claim of “murder” is any more valid than the use of “kill”. Even so, God does murder. He’s omniscient and has a plan so everytime He takes a life He does so with malice aforethought. But of course whenever God does it or commands it to be done it’s prefectly fine. Go thesitic moral relativism.

    Adulatory is condemned because it is disloyal and an act of betrayal toward the spouse.

    And your God knows all about betrayal, being the entity that created it, then planned for people to commit acts of it before punishing them for doing exactly as He planned for them to do. Hell, without Judas’ act of betrayal there’s no redemption. Yet betrayal is bad. Go contradictions!

    GOD never stoll anything.

    Tell that to the people who drowned in the flood when God stole their lives because He couldn’t think of a better way for an omnipotent and omnibenevolent entity to get rid of sin. It’s especially amusing that He categorically failed in His attempt – you’d think an omniscient entity would know it wouldn’t work and that an omnipotent entity would be able to carry it off.

    GOD never lied about anything.

    1 Kings 22:23
    2 Chronicles 18:22
    Jeremiah 4:10
    Jeremiah 20:7
    Ezekiel 14:9
    2 Thessalonians 2:11

    Those lying spirits and deceptions sent by God, yes? They are lies.

    If you covet and object then you become greedy and then you start to do bad things, like letting people Starve to get money. Greed is bad.

    So jealousy is wrong? Wanting what others have is a form of jealousy. It seems your God thinks it’s fine and points out that He’s jealous – odd to punish others for being just like Him.

    Those verses are about self sacrafice to GOD. He is not telling us to hate others, he is telling us to love GOD so much that all other things seem hateful in comparison. Those verses can’t mean hate, because earlier he said that we must love others as we love our selves.

    Just look at the mental gymnastics. “When it uses the word hate it doesn’t mean actual hate, just something like hate, which isn’t hate it’s love, it just looks like hate to people who don’t understand how to cherry pick correctly.”

  113. on 03 Mar 2014 at 3:33 pm 113.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    look for Ferraris on beaches. …..Enough time anything is possible?

    Sweet cheeks, are you using he information system that makes you a “science guy”? Apparently NOT!! Find me the DNA of a Harley or a Ferrari. Let me know if you’ve seen these vehicle reproduce. Very poor analogy, try again. Maybe the Ferrari becomes a Hummer? Hey, I’ve actually seen sea turtles wash up on beaches. Is that what your trying to get around to?

    You can’t stick with one issue? The question is the existence of God?

    little “a”, sweetness, I know you’re an absolute authority on the existence of a god so I wanted to know which one to believe in. Making the wrong choice is likely to piss off god and my free pass to eternity will be revoked. Even those xtians have soooo many choices. Does it come down to which one makes you feel good?

  114. on 03 Mar 2014 at 8:12 pm 114.A said …

    “God does murder”

    Um, God cannot murderer. He gives all life and can legally take it. Sorry although atheist believe “anything is possible” that is not by definition. :)

    “Find me the DNA of a Harley or a Ferrari.”

    Silly Freddie mouse, they do not have DNA! lol!! Find mw DNA in the primordial soup before any living thing existed !!!! Lol!!! You walked right onto that. However all processed and materials ARE available to create a Ferrari, well, other than a designer.

    “Does it come down to which one makes you feel good?”

    Oh silly Freddie mouse. Since now you want to move on to WHICH God, does that mean you are now a theist? Or is that ADD kicking in? Posting under both names I see……lol!!!!

  115. on 03 Mar 2014 at 8:30 pm 115.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    He gives all life and can legally take it.

    So, sweetie, you’re apparently saying gauwd is a self assigned lawyer as well as judge- jury- executioner. Also a programmer!! Does gauwd know and see all or is that too much information to squeeze onto the resume?

    Since now you want to move on to WHICH God, does that mean you are now a theist?

    No, sorry, sweetie. Wondering how a “science guy” like yourself takes to a gauwd? Must be some sort of mechanism. Some find salvation at the bottom of a bottle….Would that be YOU?

    I notice your “lol’s” have not been capitalized lately. Are you OK, sweetie?

  116. on 03 Mar 2014 at 8:53 pm 116.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    mw DNA

    Oppps, sweetness, looks like you completely stepped on it. Better get to the biffy do some scraping. What better way to examine common descent than to perform comparative sequence analysis. Sometimes, “science guy”, you truly surprise and amaze. That must’ve been a mistake on your part. ;-)

  117. on 03 Mar 2014 at 9:07 pm 117.A said …

    “mw DNA”

    lol!!!!!! Yeah I am a science guy with big hands typing on a PDA. Have one yet?? Lol!!!!!!! Hey, but with you crazy beliefs we could just randomly punch keys and eventually type out a great classical Greek tragedy!!!!!

    “I notice your “lol’s” have not been capitalized lately”

    Absolutely loving life. Another subject change? LOL!!!!!!!!

    “you’re apparently saying gauwd is a self assigned lawyer”

    Not sure, Mr Gauwd with a law firm? Another subject change?
    LOL!!!!!!!! This is too easy. Come on Freddie mouse, provide something here……

  118. on 03 Mar 2014 at 9:42 pm 118.Anonymous said …

    little “a”, since it was YOU who brought it up:

    mw DNA

    Sweetness, don’t accuse me of a topic change. Lets talk common descent and comparative sequence analysis.
    Unless you want to debate an OMNI-max god. How you came to find god/gauwd?
    How god gets a free pass for killing all those innocent babies (think flood or one of his mandated genocides here) and telling people to rape and plunder. The old testament bastard lost his edge in the revised edition, didn’t he?
    Pick your poison, sweetie. Let’s open the discussion to all. Invite Biff and Xenon. Use your old username Horatio. Can’t forget about Castbound, what a classic buffon with his epic posting failures.

    Glad to see your LOL has been re-established, BTW!! Keep up the good work with that.

  119. on 04 Mar 2014 at 1:34 am 119.A said …

    “LOL has been re-established, BTW!! Keep up the good work with that.”

    You got it cowboy! But only when you are funny or you get you sea turtle caught! Lol!!!!!!

  120. on 04 Mar 2014 at 1:42 am 120.A said …

    “Lets talk common descent and comparative sequence analysis.”

    OK

  121. on 04 Mar 2014 at 1:47 am 121.A said …

    freedie mouse since you failed so badly in God discussions I will let you off. Can we start with the fish bump? That is priceless? Bring in freddie so we can have more fun!

  122. on 04 Mar 2014 at 1:49 am 122.A said …

    You know, I like sweetness. Had a friend who played football with the same nick. I might go with that. Thx freddie mouse!

  123. on 04 Mar 2014 at 2:10 am 123.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    You can’t stick with one issue? The question is the existence of God?

    Sweetie pie, this is what you wrote in post #508. Remember? Scroll up and check for yourself if you don’t believe me.

    Then you changed gears in post #521 and came up with:

    mouse since you failed so badly in God discussions I will let you off

    Please don’t. I need to be accountable for my statements and questions. Such as: Is god all-knowing, all-seeing, and all-powerful? Now maybe you can describe, in your own words, the “essence” of your god and be accountable and, more importantly, focused. I am waiting.

    “Lets talk common descent and comparative sequence analysis.”

    OK

    My position is there are numerous genetic markers that span all life -thanks to evolution. An excellent read would be “Your Inner Fish” by Shubin. And you, sweetie pie, say that goddidit. There’s reason and then there’s faith, right “science guy”?

  124. on 04 Mar 2014 at 2:51 am 124.Sweetness said …

    “My position is there are numerous genetic markers that span all life -thanks to evolution”

    Great Start! Now prove it is evolution. I am a man of science. Remember to use the scientific method, not the one you used for your fish bump. Lol!!!

    “Please don’t. I need to be accountable for my statements and questions”

    True but your only defense is ” We dunno”. “With time everything is possible”. You have little to offer. That is true of most cults

  125. on 04 Mar 2014 at 2:56 am 125.Sweetness said …

    Freddie Mouse speaking of DNA, your task just got more difficult. Check out the discovery made by John Stamatoyannopoulos at UW. As a man of science, I greatly enjoyed how much more fascinating DNA just became.

    That was some soup, huh? lol!!!!!

  126. on 04 Mar 2014 at 3:27 am 126.the messenger said …

    513.freddies_dead, the stoning was metaphorical according to the text evidence, so therefore the stoning events occurred but with a non literal stoning.

    When GOD commanded “Sam. 15:2-3” he knew that they would fail to complete the task. Also, a military force of 210,000 cannot possibly kill the population of and entire people in one battle.

  127. on 04 Mar 2014 at 3:44 am 127.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    speaking of DNA, your task just got more difficult. Check out the discovery made by John Stamatoyannopoulos at UW.

    Sweetie pie, as a “science guy” you realize that the search for answers will never end. This wonderful discovery shows how science continues to understand….objectively, rationally, logically. And what did John Stamatoyannopoulos say about the discovery:

    “DNA is an incredibly powerful information storage device, which nature has fully exploited in unexpected ways.”

    Sweetie: Are you saying nature =gauwd? Are we getting down to the “essence of your belief?

    “My position is there are numerous genetic markers that span all life -thanks to evolution”

    Great Start! Now prove it is evolution.

    Well, for starters we can assume that IF evolution were true, then we would have genetic markers across all lifeforms. And guess what, peaches, we do.
    If a god created life, I would assume the god would have created lifeforms from scratch unless it was a god that wanted to make it appear that evolution was true. Maybe you can expand on this a little, since nobody seems to know exactly what you believe.

  128. on 04 Mar 2014 at 3:59 am 128.the messenger said …

    514.freddies_dead, Judges 21:10-24 does not say that the Israelites have any right to rape them. The “rape statement” of yours is just a lie.

    The Midianites were killed because of their cruelty towards the Israelites, but some of them were spared(which shows mercy). The Midianities were extremely cruel and savage people, who engaged in awful, heinous acts. GOD sentenced them to die for their sins.

    GOD never commanded the Israelites to rape them though.

    Deuteronomy 20:10-14 has nothing to do with rape either. It simply says that all of them belong to the Israelites.

    Deuteronomy 21:10-14 stated that they were suppose to let the women mourn their losses(that is kind), and after that is finished then the man may marry her. Then it states that if the man had sex with her he is not allowed to sell her or treat her as a slave.

  129. on 04 Mar 2014 at 11:02 am 129.alex said …

    poor messenger, in his fucked up fellowship of uno. even among his fellow catholics, he cannot find anybody who’d share his belief that all animals descended from the ark survivors and that rapists may marry their victims (if they’re pure).

    so how’s that working out for you? you self professed bible interpreter, ye the expert motherfucker that discerns metaphorical from actual biblical text?

    you call yourself a catholic, but your shit doesn’t even jive with the pope. give it up bitch. who you tryna to convince here? the other dimwit hor? maybe you’re just tryna work up the courage to rape a virgin, but all youse got are sheep in yer nek of de woods.

  130. on 04 Mar 2014 at 12:19 pm 130.freddies_dead said …

    528.the messenger said …

    513.freddies_dead, the stoning was metaphorical according to the text evidence, so therefore the stoning events occurred but with a non literal stoning.

    What the galloping fuck is that word salad supposed to mean? The stoning events occurred but with a non literal stoning? How the hell can you have a non literal stoning event messy? You’ve simply resorted to writing rubbish because you know you’re fucked. The Bible commands death by stoning not a non literal stoning. What do you think they did? Shout “stone” at them until they apologised? Stop being ridiculous.

    When GOD commanded “Sam. 15:2-3? he knew that they would fail to complete the task. Also, a military force of 210,000 cannot possibly kill the population of and entire people in one battle.

    1 Sam. 15:18 reads “And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.” You’re a liar messy. I also love the way you diminish your God by suggesting a force commanded by an omnipotent deity couldn’t do what that deity commands. You know what they failed to do, messy? They spared one man. Agag, the king of the Amalekites. That’s it, everyone else was slaughtered. They also kept the best of the sheep and the oxen, that’s how they failed your God, they weren’t destructive enough.

  131. on 04 Mar 2014 at 12:26 pm 131.freddies_dead said …

    530.the messenger said …

    It seems that WordPress doesn’t like it when the same word is used again and again so I’ve had to change some to get it through.

    514.freddies_dead, Judges 21:10-24 does not say that the Israelites have any right to rape them. The “r*pe statement” of yours is just a lie.

    More drivel. What the fuck do you think happens to virgin girls when they’re kidnapped and forced to marry the men who slaughtered their families? You think those men never had sex with those girls? You think those girls gave consent? You’re an idiot if you think that’s what happened.

    The Midianites were killed because of their cruelty towards the Israelites, but some of them were spared(which shows mercy). The Midianities were extremely cruel and savage people, who engaged in awful, heinous acts. GOD sentenced them to die for their sins.

    GOD never commanded the Israelites to ra*e them though.

    I don’t give a shit how awful the Midianites were alleged to have been, once again, when you kidnap the virgins and give them to the men who slaughtered their families the only way they’re having sex is by force. Commanded and condoned by your God.

    Deuteronomy 20:10-14 has nothing to do with rape either. It simply says that all of them belong to the Israelites.

    Fuck me you’re deliberately blind. You can keep the women – the spoils of war. You think they were kept to do the cleaning? The washing? Bullshit.

    Deuteronomy 21:10-14 stated that they were suppose to let the women mourn their losses(that is kind), and after that is finished then the man may marry her.

    You think a month of mourning is a kindness? You think it means the woman will happily consent to marry – and have sex with – the man who helped slaughter her family/people? You really are naive. The only way that’s happening is by force.

    Then it states that if the man had sex with her he is not allowed to sell her or treat her as a slave.

    Oh, how kind? (<– sarcasm) You've had your family/people slaughtered, been forced to marry someone responsible for that slaughter and now he's decided it's no fun raping you anymore but, don't worry, he can't sell you into slavery. Such compassion.

    Your Bible is a cesspit of morality and your pathetic attempts to justify the horrors it commands is truly disgusting.

  132. on 04 Mar 2014 at 12:27 pm 132.freddies_dead said …

    523.A the lying prick said …

    freedie mouse since you failed so badly in God discussions I will let you off. Can we start with the fish bump? That is priceless? Bring in freddie so we can have more fun!

    Go fuck yourself you lying prick.

  133. on 04 Mar 2014 at 1:29 pm 133.Sweetness said …

    “you realize that the search for answers will never end. This wonderful discovery shows how science continues to understand….objectively, rationally, logically.”

    Yes, thank you.

    “Well, for starters we can assume that IF evolution were true, then we would have genetic markers across all lifeforms.”

    Actually if we assume God is true, we would have genetic markers. Just as we follow the ascent of the modern automobile from the model T to the Mosler 900S. Looking through the history we see major upgrades yet they share pistons, cam shafts, tires etc. Some adapted to their environments such as police cars, NASCAR, tractors etc. Some models even died off such as the Dusenberg. These similarities are a results of refinements by engineers with an desired design.

    “unless it was a god that wanted to make it appear that evolution was true.”

    ROTFL!!!!!, there is zero evidence to support macroevolution. You think that would be enough. Remember, it was the God haters who believed in a static universe. The reason you can’t see truth is because every hypothesis is acceptable with the exception one. One hypothesis is that life began on Mars. Yes, Mars! lol!! The flexibility of evolutionary thought is to be admired.

  134. on 04 Mar 2014 at 1:38 pm 134.alex said …

    “Yes, Mars! lol!! The flexibility of evolutionary thought is to be admired.”

    yes, lordy, lordy. woman from a rib. most flexible indeed. get the fuck out of here.

  135. on 04 Mar 2014 at 1:52 pm 135.alex said …

    “The reason you can’t see truth is because every hypothesis is acceptable with the exception one.”

    wrong again. aliens: not acceptable. xtian god creation? not acceptable. man from apes? ignorantly laughable and no, not acceptable.

    you got caught lying again…. give it up hor/martin/ass……

    reminder. omniscience and free will are mutually exclusive, you moron. do i have to prove to you that yahweh and thor can’t both exist?

  136. on 04 Mar 2014 at 3:28 pm 136.Anonymous said …

    little “a” brings up research by John Stamatoyannopoulos as an argument for his position. John Stamatoyannopoulos says:

    “DNA is an incredibly powerful information storage device, which nature has fully exploited in unexpected ways.”

    Ooops. Epic failure, Sweetie pie. May I? OK, here goes….ROFLMFAO!!!!!! Thanks, sweetness.

    Working from a weak and crumbling position, sweetie pie suggests that the existence of internal combustion engines is an argument against evolution and for gauwd. And this idiot says he is a “science guy”???? No, Sweetie, that would be a piss poor ANALOGY. No DNA in an engine, unable to work autonomously, etc, etc. I do think, however, that your position is becoming clearer.

    If you truly are a “science guy” or just want a better explanation of the genetics that indicate common ancestry, try reading “Your Inner Fish” by Shubin. He even mentions Tiktaalik in the book. Shubin much more eloquently establishes the case for common ancestry than I am able or willing to do on a blog. Especially when dealing with someone whose intelligence would very nearly match that of my nearly 5 year old child’s.

    little “a”, you’re dismissed.

  137. on 04 Mar 2014 at 4:52 pm 137.DPK said …

    “These similarities are a results of refinements by engineers with an desired design.”

    ROTFLOL….. why would a god, with perfect knowledge and unlimited powers and capabilities need to make “refinements” in design? hahaha… we know that the biblical accounts clearly shows your god as a complete bumbling fuck-up… but, seriously… LOL!!
    Yeah, that’s why 99% of all species that ever existed are now extinct…. god was refining his perfect design. I think any modern engineer with a 99% failure rate would be in the unemployment line….
    Astro, you are soooo funny. You should write a book.

  138. on 04 Mar 2014 at 5:02 pm 138.Sweetness said …

    “He even mentions Tiktaalik”

    There it is!! OK, now using the SM prove to us that this fish is proof macroevolution takes place.

    “whose intelligence would very nearly match that of my nearly 5 year old child’s.”

    Yuck! Now Freddie mouse if off on personal attacks. Sigh! I think he is getting frustrated with his position.

    “DNA is an incredibly powerful information storage device, which nature has fully exploited in unexpected ways.”

    I agree, its powerful, its an incredible information device and we didn”t expect it to have a second program! ROTFL!!………The increased complexity shoots down your naturalistic worldview down even further!

    Not off to a good start Freddie mouse. But I see your problem SO often. You will never read anything which contradicts what you want to believe. You react in anger because it is your religion. WE, the men of science look at evidence objectively and make conclusions. We don’t let others think for us.

    Now run and hide

  139. on 04 Mar 2014 at 5:38 pm 139.DPK said …

    “A”… Still waiting for your explanation and evidence.
    Boy you can tap dance good… but dancing around waving your arms doesn’t make your god theory any more plausible that the stupid, laughable sea turtle hypothesis. So, once again, put up or shut up. LOL
    How did the first cell form, and why did god, without use of speciation, need to “refine” his perfect design? Why does he allow mutations to occur? I mean, if your automobile “designer” engineered the instructions for making a car that allowed for random changes, would that be a good design?

  140. on 04 Mar 2014 at 5:44 pm 140.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    “He even mentions Tiktaalik”

    There it is!! OK, now using the SM prove to us that this fish is proof macroevolution takes place.

    Still trying to tread water, sweetie? Read the book. It just presents the common genetic markers, it doesn’t ask you to abandon your gauwd. You’re a “science guy”, the information should interest you. However, I don’t remember Shubin spelling out how the internal combustion engine proves common descent of anything….maybe you should put that one out there yourself for peer review (ridicule?).

    Another little “a” doozie regarding DNA:

    we didn”t expect it to have a second program!

    Maybe sweetie pie should have studied a little more before blowing his wad on this one. Yes the work is good…No, it does not point to a gauwd. It just adds to what we already know and understand about genetics and evolution. But it was a nice try, sweetness.

    And then little “a” follows up with:

    The increased complexity shoots down your naturalistic worldview down even further!

    Almost as if with blinders on, sweetie pie misses the part in the quote about “NATURE has fully exploited” (emphasis mine). WOW!!!!

    I wonder how it’s possible to be soooo stupid? Oh yeah, “science guy” has a god that absolutely MUST EXIST in his corner. No wonder.

  141. on 04 Mar 2014 at 7:35 pm 141.DPK said …

    Even if, for the sake of argument, one would in fact abandon the idea of a “naturalistic” explanation, how does one jump from that to a supernatural, omniscient, omnipotent god who loves you, and wants you to worship him?
    Without, of course, jumping to the “ridiculous” god of the gaps argument? Lol.
    In short… “A” your explanation sounds as goofy as the interdimensional sea turtle. Show us why anyone should believe you.

  142. on 04 Mar 2014 at 8:05 pm 142.the messenger said …

    534.freddies_dead, all of the verses that you posted do not contain any command of rape.

    Yes the women were being forced to marry or become servants, but that does not mean that rape occurred.

    Rape is specifically prohibbited according to Deuteronomy 22.

    There, in one comment I just disproved your entire arguement about rape.

  143. on 04 Mar 2014 at 8:27 pm 143.DPK said …

    So, you are saying that if a woman or girl is forced to marry someone, that isn’t rape?
    hahahahahahaha
    I guess if you believe that “eternity” doesn’t mean forever, “stone to death” doesn’t mean stone someone until they are dead, “kill” doesn’t mean kill… “slave” doesn’t mean slave…. ok, sure Messy.

    Remember, this is from the guy who said that a woman who is raped should be forced to marry her rapist because that would be just punishment for the rapist.

    Yu are on weird MF, there Messy…. and sorry, you didn’t “disprove” anything, you only made yourself look even more crazy than everyone here already knows you are.

  144. on 04 Mar 2014 at 11:15 pm 144.The messenger said …

    543.DPK, FYI, the word “rape” does not mean forced to marry. Rape means….

    (a crime, typically committed by a man, of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with the offender against their will.)

    I never said that “eternal” does not mean forever. I simply stated that due to the surrounding text, the word “eternal” is not used in a literal way, but is used to stress a long period of time.

    Have you ever heard the phrase, “this is taking forever”. It does not use the word “eternal” in a literal sense, but it does use it to stress a long period of time.

  145. on 05 Mar 2014 at 12:53 am 145.Sweetness said …

    “You’re a “science guy”, the information should interest you.”

    Very much so. Let me sum it up for you. Similarities among creatures suggest just as powerfully to a common designer as opposed to many designers. Next! lol!!! Your book and argument are not new. I have no fish within me. lol!!

  146. on 05 Mar 2014 at 12:57 am 146.Sweetness said …

    “don’t remember Shubin spelling out how the internal combustion engine proves common descent of anything”

    Of course not. It would prove just the opposite. lol!!!! (ridicule intended)

    “It just adds to what we already know and understand about genetics and evolution.”

  147. on 05 Mar 2014 at 12:58 am 147.Sweetness said …

    “It just adds to what we already know and understand about genetics and evolution.”

    Indeed? OK, how does it prove evolution over what we already know?

    I wanted this post separate. Didn’t want freddie mouse to miss it. This is going to be good! Popcorn heating……

  148. on 05 Mar 2014 at 2:05 am 148.Anonymous said …

    little “a”
    Lets summarize:
    Sweetie pie provided what he assumed was some “god news” with an entry about what a researcher, John Stamatoyannopoulos, had discovered. Researcher says:

    “…DNA is an incredibly powerful information storage device, which NATURE has fully exploited in unexpected ways.”

    The “hot scoop” which YOU provided worked more in my favour than yours…..likely due to YOUR pre-kindergarten reading and comprehension skills. In a nutshell, this is exactly the extent of your abilities. You are clueless beyond belief and with gauwd on your shoulders weighing you down, you’ll never really get science, “science guy”.

  149. on 05 Mar 2014 at 2:46 am 149.Sweetness said …

    “The “hot scoop” which YOU provided worked more in my favour than yours”

    Well readers, here we go another claim by Freddie mouse he will not prove……..sigh……..lol!!!!!!

    Here is another claim he refuses to defend.

    “It just adds to what we already know and understand about genetics and evolution.”

    Things never change. Lots of claims zero evidence. Oh well, popcorn getting cold again………sigh!..

    What did we learn new about evolution? Freddie mouse learned that primordial soup monkey is heck of a programmer! Lol!!!!!!!!

  150. on 05 Mar 2014 at 3:33 am 150.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    “The “hot scoop” which YOU provided worked more in my favour than yours”

    Well readers, here we go another claim

    Sweetie, I was going by the comments of the researcher who said it was NATURE. There’s nothing to prove. See, there’s your single digit IQ comprehension skills at work.

    OK, next step now- a real look at evolution and genetic markers at work needs a time frame….right sweetness?

    Let’s look at the age of the Earth and when Homo sapiens appeared. Can you give me an estimate on both? Someone cue the dance music, sweetness is about to start to start shuffling around. LOL!!!!!

  151. on 05 Mar 2014 at 4:10 am 151.Sweetness said …

    “I was going by the comments of the researcher who said it was NATURE”

    Now it is an appeal to authority and more ad homenim attacks. Lol!!!!!! Expected, you dont seem much on reasoning out things yourself. More of the follower who is told what to believe. Freddie mouse you are so silly! Wow!!!! Lets see….two questions ignored and Fred mouse claim of “Nature”. Nature what?

    lol!!!!!! Yes, I see why you are attempting to change the subject……again! Lol!!!

    Nope, we gonna camp right here until you can explain yourself Lucy.. lol!!!!

  152. on 05 Mar 2014 at 4:25 am 152.Anonymous said …

    little “a”:

    “I was going by the comments of the researcher who said it was NATURE”

    Now it is an appeal to authority

    Are you forgetting something, sweetie? It was you who mentioned the researcher first. You brought his work to the blog’s attention. WTF? Was that “an appeal to authority” or just a gauwd guiding you?

    Looks like the dance has began. Of course real science scares our resident “science guy”.

    Lets see….two questions ignored

    When you’re ready, here they are again (try and remember, we’re on about evolution and genetic markers):

    Let’s look at the age of the Earth and when Homo sapiens appeared. Can you give me an estimate on timeframes for both? How old is our planet Earth and when did humans first appear?

    Prediction: Keep the dance music playing, sweetness is still solo dancing, shuffling, and looking (desperately) for an exit.

  153. on 05 Mar 2014 at 6:12 am 153.DPK said …

    543.DPK, FYI, the word “rape” does not mean forced to marry. Rape means….

    Uh… Yes, forced marriage is rape… Unless you are claiming that all those ancient men took wife’s but never had sex with them. What would make you think that?

    You are so amazingly full of shit…. Hahaha

  154. on 05 Mar 2014 at 10:49 am 154.freddies_dead said …

    544.the messenger said …

    534.freddies_dead, all of the verses that you posted do not contain any command of r*pe.

    They all talk about taking the women of the conquered tribes and forcing them to marry the men who slaughtered their families. A marriage must be consummated to be valid and this means rape because there’s no way those women are consenting.

    Yes the women were being forced to marry or become servants, but that does not mean that r*pe occurred.

    Yes, it does, or the marriages aren’t consummated.

    R*pe is specifically prohibbited according to Deuteronomy 22.

    There, in one comment I just disproved your entire arguement about r*pe.

    No messy, all you’ve done is note the schizophrenically contradictory nature of your Holy book. In one breath it’s saying you can rape the women of conquered tribes to your heart’s content and in the next breath rapists – and for some truly perverted reason the victims – are to be stoned to death (which you claim doesn’t actually happen – so still no punishment for rapists). You should also note that they’re only rapists if they force themselves on women who are betrothed. If the woman isn’t betrothed then it’s all fine, you just have to marry your victim – a concept that any right thinking person would find truly disgusting.

    As I said – and have shown – your Bible is a cesspit of morality.

  155. on 05 Mar 2014 at 12:03 pm 155.Sweetness said …

    “Was that “an appeal to authority” or just a gauwd guiding you?

    Yes, your expanded claim of “Nature” is appeal to authority. You have yet to prove how DNA originated. Nature? Aliens? My acknowledgment of the authors work was a factual truth about DNA.

    we know nature utilizes DNA but you seem to think this a victory for you….lol!!!!!….care to elaborate?

    “It just adds to what we already know and understand about genetics and evolution?

    What did we learn about evolution from this discovery?

    Yes, the dance has begun. A Freddie mouse claim he will again refuse to support.

    sigh…….

  156. on 05 Mar 2014 at 1:08 pm 156.alex said …

    “You have yet to prove how DNA originated. Nature? Aliens?”

    it’s been postulated and you’re right, unproven, and? when they found millions year old dna, how does that fit in your biblical 10000 year timeline?

    IF it was proven that aliens seeded the earth with the different species of men, all that does is invalidate the theory of man’s evolution. it doesn’t render science and/or the observable timelines as bull.

    if a god did code dna, using observed/measured timelines, all that does is officially bullshitify your biblical god with his 10000 history. what? you/messenger will come up with some time/bending biblical crap?

    even if the entire evolution was invalidated, science still stands and you putting on your seatbelt is proof of your belief in newtonian law.

  157. on 05 Mar 2014 at 3:53 pm 157.Anonymous said …

    little “a”, from your post #555:

    we know nature utilizes DNA but you seem to think this a victory for you….lol!!!!!….care to elaborate?

    Sweetie, YES I do care to elaborate. It seems that you’re actually slowly tuning in – Because previously you had stated (in post #538):

    The increased complexity shoots down your naturalistic worldview down even further!

    CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!

    You have yet to prove how DNA originated.

    WHOA THERE, sweetness. That’s another topic, TRY and FOCUS. Swiftness is obviously not a trait of sweetness. We were talking genetic markers and evolution and trying to establish timeframes when you started prancing.

    “It just adds to what we already know and understand about genetics and evolution?

    What did we learn about evolution from this discovery?

    How about this as one example:

    This new discovery throws new light on evolutionary genetics as each mutation in an organism can have dual implications.

    And that was my point.

    But your turn now. Simpleton basic science required, no challenge for a “science guy” LOL!!!!!!!! Easy stuff that you already know. We won’t look for your inner fish, we’ll just go and find your inner monkey LOL!!! These are your two questions:

    Let’s look at the age of the Earth and when Homo sapiens appeared. Can you give me an estimate on timeframes for both? How old is our planet Earth and when did humans first appear?

    sweetness checks around for the nearest exit and delivers……..(more stalling I’d say).

  158. on 05 Mar 2014 at 5:37 pm 158.Sweetness said …

    “The increased complexity shoots down your naturalistic worldview down even further!”

    Exactly. Prove it wrong…..maybe u can show us your primordial soup programming monkey! Lol!!!!!

    ‘WHOA THERE, sweetness. That’s another topic”

    Ah, no, that is the topic…..DNA. But you don’t like tough questions. So…….how could something with high information content originate without intelligence? Lol!!!! Feel free to throw in some markers……lol!!!!

    “This new discovery throws new light on evolutionary genetics as each mutation in an organism can have dual implications.”

    Hey we took a step…….now prove mutations gave DNA multiple complex programmed information!…..lol!!!!

    Don’t dodge, keep googling until you come up with something better than vague references…

  159. on 05 Mar 2014 at 7:25 pm 159.DPK said …

    “Ah, no, that is the topic…..DNA”

    Apparently this is your last stand for your god, as all other explanations have been shredded. So, despite the fact that this is the “god of the gaps” argument that you yourself declared “silly”… Let’s have your explanation.
    How exactly did the first DNA molecule form? No one here is claiming to know this except YOU… so lets hear you explanation and see your evidence. What’s the problem?

  160. on 05 Mar 2014 at 9:56 pm 160.DPK said …

    “Let’s look at the age of the Earth and when Homo sapiens appeared. Can you give me an estimate on timeframes for both? How old is our planet Earth and when did humans first appear?”

    He is not ever going to answer you. He is not interested in truth, or even in honest debate. He is only interested in trying to bolster his own delusion by trying to find people who agree with his crack pot notions… like Messy… LOL. That is why he needs to invent sock puppet personages to make it seem like someone else agrees with him.

    How about it science guy? Here is your chance to save my soul… I WANT to believe… just show me exactly why I should believe you vs all the other creation stories. Show us the way.

  161. on 05 Mar 2014 at 11:39 pm 161.the messemger said …

    553.DPK, the action of forcing someone to marry someone is not rape. Rape is when sex is forced upon a person without the consent of both people.

    The israelites were allowed to force the women to marry them, but they were not allowed to force sex on them unless the women agreed to it.

  162. on 06 Mar 2014 at 12:21 am 162.Anonymous said …

    little “a” attempts to pull off some disco moves (and get the conversation onto his ONLY hope, abiogenesis):

    ‘WHOA THERE, sweetness. That’s another topic”

    Ah, no, that is the topic…..DNA

    The topic was supposed to be about GENETIC DIFFERENCES and SIMILARITIES in TODAY’S LIFEFORMS. Yes, it is about DNA and we were going to start by establishing timelines, which you have STILL FAILED to do. Instead your dancing, prancing, and arm waving continues.

    Try your best to STAY FOCUSED, Sweetie Pie, I know and understand how difficult it is for you. Are we still on about examining common descent by comparative sequence analysis?

    Feel free to throw in some markers

    Well, alright then. Markers it is. From your favourite Xtian website, BIOLOGOSdotORG we get:

    Full-genome sequence comparisons between living great apes also fit the expected pattern: orangutans and humans have sequences 97.4% identical; humans and gorillas, 98.4% identical; and humans and chimpanzees, 99.0% identical.

    Now did god create humans as unique “one of” prototypes or does god just have a sense of humour? Hey, Sweetie, why not let these brothers in god at biologos know how your internal combustion engine and car idea completely destroys these whacky scientific findings. LOL!!!!!

  163. on 06 Mar 2014 at 12:35 am 163.alex said …

    here’s messenger’s pile of shit, i’ve managed to compile and handle with extreme caution and gloves. this ain’t fake. links point back to the comment on this blog. of course hor is afraid of links.

    http://goo.gl/Vde24A

    any readers out there who agree with mess, plz feel free to post your support. chirp?

    this list is actually humorous. my favorite is the dumbass’ argument that without god you’d turn into bleh, bleh. the fuckhead can’t even comtemplate what a “thor” god would do to the 3+ billion shitheads.

    messenger, your shit is archived and you can’t hide. you can do what hor does, but we’re hip to his shit.

    A40Y-HorX-Troll/martin/science guy/ths sckence guy/biff/the hor/xenon/A/Sweetness

    lyin bitch.

  164. on 06 Mar 2014 at 12:42 am 164.alex said …

    messy’s classic. (post 39)

    “Angus and Alexis, there is no such thing as a redemption card. Redemption is a hard process. Getting forgiveness from GOD is an easy thing because he is very kind.”

    redemption is hard and easy. sorto like omniscience and free will. god can create something more powerful, but he won’t. eternal is temporary. messy, you comedian, motherfucker you.

  165. on 06 Mar 2014 at 1:41 am 165.The messenger said …

    566.alex, I do not speak for those people.

  166. on 06 Mar 2014 at 1:45 am 166.The messenger said …

    557.freddies_dead, your claims of rape are based on assumptions. You assume that rape occurred in those situations because it seems like it would happen. But I tell you, GOD condemned rape in Deuteronomy 22, therefore the Israelites were forbidden to kill anyone.

  167. on 06 Mar 2014 at 1:49 am 167.The messenger said …

    557.freddies_dead, in comment 569 I meant to type the word “rape”, not the word “kill”.

  168. on 06 Mar 2014 at 1:50 am 168.The messenger said …

    557.freddies_dead, your claims of rape are based on assumptions. You assume that rape occurred in those situations because it seems like it would happen. But I tell you, GOD condemned rape in Deuteronomy 22, therefore the Israelites were forbidden to rape anyone, even the people that they were forced to marry.,

  169. on 06 Mar 2014 at 2:06 am 169.alex said …

    Forcing somebody to marry will not result in rape? you dumbshit. assumption? you truly are a dumb motherfucker. read this passage, you dumb motherfucker. ya think it’ll be rape?

    Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.

    now go look it up, you fuckhead.

  170. on 06 Mar 2014 at 2:09 am 170.alex said …

    “GOD condemned rape in Deuteronomy 22”

    and oppositely says Numbers 31:18. god knows but don’t know. god answers prayers sometimes. god loves women but hates women. god knows all but forgets.

    god is bullshit and messenger does his own shit.

  171. on 06 Mar 2014 at 2:31 am 171.The messenger said …

    572.alex, only the virgins were allowed for marrage, because typically the virgins were not married yet. If they were married already it would be adulatory to marry another man.

  172. on 06 Mar 2014 at 2:33 am 172.Sweetness said …

    “Full-genome sequence comparisons between living great apes also fit the expected pattern: orangutans and humans have sequences 97.4% identical; humans and gorillas, 98.4% identical; and humans and chimpanzees, 99.0% identical.”

    ROTFL!!!!! OK, so prove that we evolved from the chimp. Do you realize how large a number the 1% really is? Look it up. Hey, I’m ready to believe!

    “why not let these brothers in god at biologos know how your internal combustion engine and car idea completely destroys these whacky scientific findings.”

    Um, what finding? We have similar characteristics? Duh! lol!!! Already knew that for years!!!!. I though you had something new! lol!!!!!!!!

    Freddie mouse you make me laugh so. You actually think you found something new!!!! Wow!!!!

    NOW…..

    Here is your timeline. Show me how the first DNA can be written without intelligence? What are your theories? This would be a decisive victory for you completely eliminating God. That is what the blog is about, right?

  173. on 06 Mar 2014 at 2:35 am 173.The messenger said …

    573.alex, Numbers 31:18 does not say that GOD hates or loves women. Also, it does not say that rape is ok.

  174. on 06 Mar 2014 at 2:45 am 174.alex said …

    “Numbers 31:18 does not say that GOD hates or loves women”

    did i say it did, you dumbass?

    “it does not say that rape is ok.”

    what part of “you may keep them for yourselves.” oh, i forget, same logic you’re using to say that forced marriage will not result in rape, eh?

    remember, you’re the motherfucker that said a rapist may marry his victim for his punishment. anybody else in your congregation agree with this shit? the pope? hor/martin? anybody? somebody else agree with you?

    you stand alone, you dumb motherfucker, the only true xtian, in your own fucked up mind.

  175. on 06 Mar 2014 at 2:56 am 175.The messenger said …

    577.alex, your argument is one big ridiculous accusation. You assume that rape will occur, even though their is no text evidence.

    Rape was never commanded.

  176. on 06 Mar 2014 at 3:00 am 176.Anonymous said …

    little “a”:

    Do you realize how large a number the 1% really is?

    My math is usually really poor but I think it’s a little smaller than 99%. What do you think, Sweetie Pie? Can someone check my math for me. LOL!!!!

    Here is your timeline. Show me how the first DNA can be written without intelligence? What are your theories? This would be a decisive victory for you completely eliminating God. That is what the blog is about, right?

    That’s it? Where’s the timeline, sweetie? It didn’t show up on the website!!! What are you afraid of? Always reverting back to abiogenesis. Do you have the proof that goddidit, sweetie? Didn’t think so. I have no proof and neither do you.

    Of what value is comparative genomic analysis? In your opinion, of course. Would’ve saved a lot of time if you’d have said earlier that it’s just junk science.

    Any value, in your opinion, of the genetic or molecular clock? More junk science?

    BTW, Who has completely eliminated god? Not me. Just haven’t found any evidence supporting that hypothesis yet. Got some?

  177. on 06 Mar 2014 at 3:36 am 177.alex said …

    “Rape was never commanded.”

    “you may keep them for yourselves” to do what, motherfucker? your sheepherder uncles thought they was slick and you likes it. what would you do with virgins, you dumb motherfucker? save them for your forced marriage? can’t find anybody to agree with you so you insist on fucking with this blog?

    for every stupid ass comment you post in here, you’ll get the what you deserve. scorn, motherfucker.

    i’ll tell you what. post your shit in facebook and get 5 likes and i’ll pray to your allah. ok?

  178. on 06 Mar 2014 at 12:10 pm 178.freddies_dead said …

    570.The messenger said …

    557.freddies_dead, your claims of r*pe are based on assumptions.

    Nope, they’re based on realities. The Bible considers women to be second class and couldn’t really give a toss what happens to them except when it affects their monetary value. For example, if a man claims his new bride is not a virgin and it turns out that she is, he has to pay the father 100 shekels – not the woman he’s lied about, her father. If it turns out she’s not a virgin … oh oh, get the stones ready, she’s getting killed for damaging her father’s reputation.

    You assume that r*pe occurred in those situations because it seems like it would happen.

    Not “seems like”, it does. The rape of women of conquered tribes/peoples has gone on throughout history. It still happens today messy. You really wouldn’t want to be a woman in a war zone, especially when the Christian soldiers see you as spoils of war.

    But I tell you, GOD condemned r*pe in Deuteronomy 22,

    No messy, I’ve already shown that Deuteronomy 22 (it’s verses 23 through 29 by the way) only condemns the rape of virgin Israelite women who are already betrothed and then only if they’re assaulted somewhere where, when the woman cries out for help, there’s no-one to save her. If it’s done where someone could hear and yet no-one does the woman is considered as bad as her attacker and she’s stoned to death alongside him.

    therefore the Israelites were forbidden to r*pe anyone,

    Except for virgin Israelite women that aren’t betrothed and the spoils of war (i.e. any other women) of course. They’re fair game according to your Bible. Hell, rapists of virgin daughters can even buy their victims for fifty shekels of silver – given to the father for messing with his property of course. And then he only needs to pay if he’s caught raping her.

    even the people that they were forced to marry.,

    And, as I’ve already pointed out, a marriage is usually only considered valid once it’s been consummated – when it’s a forced marriage, that’ll be rape.

  179. on 06 Mar 2014 at 12:24 pm 179.Sweetness said …

    “Where’s the timeline, sweetie?”

    The beginning….lol!! You can use whatever date you like :)

    “Always reverting back to abiogenesis.”

    Well…..yeah…..you run from it. How is it possible for DNA to form without a designer? You have no possibilities? But you know your ancestor is a Chimp ( well that might be true for freddie mouse)? lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Simple question. As Pink Floyd would say……run, run ,run, run, run

    “My math is usually really poor”

    LOL!!!! Yes, yes it is. but the first step is admitting the problem :)

    “Just haven’t found any evidence supporting that hypothesis yet.”

    Please….share….what would evidence for God look like?

    “Of what value is comparative genomic analysis”

    Pathogenesis for one. Is this what you would like to defend?

  180. on 06 Mar 2014 at 1:07 pm 180.alex said …

    “How is it possible for DNA to form without a designer? You have no possibilities?”

    this shit is old. anybody here claiming how dna was formed? you’re the one who insist on a designer. you prove it.

    “But you know your ancestor is a Chimp”

    who said that? cite it, you lyin shit. chimp fossils found older than hominids? the chimp ancestry is so stupid it’s not surprising you’d be spouting it.

    nobody here has to defend anything. when somebody says bullshit, what is the response? abiogenesis? camaros? ocean swimming? programmer?

    wrong. case in point. why are objects in the universe accelerating away? i dunno. some say dark energy and i say bullshit. the response?

  181. on 06 Mar 2014 at 1:26 pm 181.alex said …

    “why are objects in the universe accelerating away? i dunno. some say dark energy and i say bullshit. the response?”

    hor’s response: god. dark energy can’t be proven, so it must be god. alex doesn’t have a position on it, so it must be god.

    what a fuckhead. sorry, i digressed.

  182. on 06 Mar 2014 at 3:26 pm 182.DPK said …

    “Well…..yeah…..you run from it. How is it possible for DNA to form without a designer? You have no possibilities?”

    Perhaps the same way you think it is possible for a “designer” to form without a designer? LOL.

    Actually there are lots of “possibilities” just not enough evidence to fully support any of them yet.
    Tell you what… explain to us exactly how you think it occurred… and please present the evidence you have that supports your position. Remember, “I can’t imagine any other way” is just an argument from ignorance and hold no water….

  183. on 06 Mar 2014 at 3:48 pm 183.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    “Where’s the timeline, sweetie?”

    The beginning….lol!! You can use whatever date you like

    Ok, Sweetie, again I know how difficult this is for you – Having your position constrained by simple timelines takes away your wiggle room. I’ll make it easier for you because that’s just the kind of guy I’am and I hate to see you flapping in the breeze.

    The planet Earth is 4,500 million years old
    Simple single celled lifeforms emerged 3,500 million years ago
    Humans (Homo sapiens) have existed for 0.2 million years

    See, that wasn’t too difficult, was it Sweetpea?

    But you know your ancestor is a Chimp

    TSK,TSK, “science guy”. That is a very common mistake for someone who does NOT understand science. It is true that of all of the lifeforms on this planet, the chimp has a genome most similar to ours. (Remember, 99%). Even you admit that. It could mean that we SHARE a COMMON ancestor. Maybe we should investigate a little further. What do you say, sweetness?

    “My math is usually really poor”

    LOL!!!! Yes, yes it is. but the first step is admitting the problem

    But your math skills appear even worse ;-)

    Lets keep looking into what we know of life on our planet Earth over the past 15 or 20 million years. No more need to keep harping on abiogenesis, Sweetie.
    OK?

  184. on 06 Mar 2014 at 5:49 pm 184.DPK said …

    “But you know your ancestor is a Chimp”

    hahahahaha… yeah, Mr. “Science Guy” thinks that science says humans descended from chimpanzees.

    I was watching a TV interview where some ID “expert” claimed that science claimed modern humans descended from Neanderthals. And let us not forget the ID’s darling Christine O’Donnell who said “If evolution were true, why don’t we see monkeys giving birth to humans today?”

    Ignorance abounds when you gleam you “facts” from creationist websites and ancient myths and fables… or like in Messy’s case, you just make them up as you go along. har har har…………..

    Let the circus continue…………..

  185. on 06 Mar 2014 at 9:22 pm 185.Sweetness said …

    “Having your position constrained by simple timelines takes away your wiggle room”

    um, no not at all. Start from the beginning….. Any date you like. Why are you so afraid of the beginning silly?

    So what possible mechanism can create DNA? Primordial soup programmer? Lol!!!!!!

    “It could mean that we SHARE a COMMON ancestor”

    ROTFL, it could mean? Hahahahahahah, I am a man of science not fairy tales. Your grandpa was a tree swinger……lol!!!!!…..call him whatever you like Tarzan…..lol!!!!

    Back to facts…you cannot even tell me how a strand of DNA evolves from your soup. Lol!!!!!!…..and you want to tell me we have a common ancestor with and because we are similar….lol!!!!!!

    Prove it using the SM.

    Those are your two assignments. Begin!

  186. on 06 Mar 2014 at 10:16 pm 186.Anonymous said …

    little “a”:

    Looking like SS Sweetness has sprung a leak and is starting to take on water. LOL!!!!

    “Having your position constrained by simple timelines takes away your wiggle room”

    um, no not at all. Start from the beginning….. Any date you like

    Ummmm, OK. I thought that’s what I did earlier. Any date that I like? How about when I suggested we look into life 20 million years ago? Hmmmmm….Or how about we start from the beginning of when humans emerged? 0.2 million years ago. Is that good for you sweetie? Or should we use the molecular clock and look into where a divergence could have occurred? You didn’t seem to complain about my timeline, the one you were afraid to commit to. Are the numbers OK with you?

    Your position always distill down to 3,500 million years ago, when simple single celled organisms appeared.

    Back to facts…you cannot even tell me how a strand of DNA evolves

    Weren’t we trying to do some comparative genomic analysis and starting to implement the molecular clock in comparing human and chimp genomes? WTF? Even you said the (micro) evolution is a fact. Have you changed your mind?

    “It could mean that we SHARE a COMMON ancestor”

    ……and you want to tell me we have a common ancestor with and because we are similar….lol!!!!!!
    Prove it using the SM.

    I was about to when you started spouting on about the ONLY and LAST bastion where your god can reside…….abiogenesis. When you’re interested in discussing evolution, “science guy”, we can look into why we share a common ancestor.

    You seem to have come totally unhinged and lost all sense of objectivity. Just an observation, Sweetie.

  187. on 06 Mar 2014 at 11:37 pm 187.Sweetness said …

    “Your position always distill down to 3,500 million years ago, when simple single celled organisms appeared. ”

    Lol!!!!!!! It is not a position but it is a question. You obviously have no clue and your theories are laughable so lets move on. Round one to me.

    Let me make this simple. Bring anything you have that would eliminate a designer and prove to all that nature created all we enjoy ex nihlio, no creator, nada. Once you give us this SM proven evidence we can wrap it up.

    How”s that? No more excuse Freddie mouse! Lol!!!!

    Go!

    Cue: more complaining and whining and similarities fallacies and couldovs and mightovs.

    lol!!!!!

  188. on 07 Mar 2014 at 12:26 am 188.The messenger said …

    580.alex, I do not have a facebook.

  189. on 07 Mar 2014 at 12:37 am 189.Anonymous said …

    little “a”

    Let me make this simple. Bring anything you have that would eliminate a designer

    Whoa there Sweetie, who said anything about eliminating a creator/programmer/god? We were looking at genomes and evolution. Where did that come from? You seem to be losing it big time.

    Sweetie pie demonstrates, to a tee, what happens when one
    a) Has taken a god onboard and,
    b) Desperately needs to have material evidence as support for his faith and
    c) Decides to cherry pick what science holds relevance to the belief.

    Sweetie, we have compelling evidence for evolution. The two of us were slowly delving into it. You were helping me build the case until you became unstable and unhinged. Hey, you do know it’s possible to support evolution and be a Catholic who believes in a god very similar to yours. Also, Francis Collins is a Baptist who is ALSO an EVOLUTIONIST. And he runs your favourite xtian website.

    We, together, were working on a plausible working model. Why are you running away now? Remember, you did state:

    Start from the beginning….. Any date you like

    Is this just smoke from you, sweetness, or shall we re-start at or before the rise of humanity (about 0.2 million years ago)?

  190. on 07 Mar 2014 at 12:44 am 190.The messenger said …

    581.freddies_dead, Deuteronomy’s anti rape laws are not specified to just the Israelites. they apply to all people in the new covenant.

    A lot of groups in ancient times have committed rape after concurring a people. But the Israelites did not do that, because GOD specifically prohibited rape ,in Deuteronomy.

  191. on 07 Mar 2014 at 12:48 am 191.The messenger said …

    581.freddies_dead, where in the bible does it say that “virgin Israelite women” can be raped?

    You make crazy claims, but you do not provide proof.

  192. on 07 Mar 2014 at 12:59 am 192.Sweetness said …

    “Where did that come from?”

    oh sorry I confused you with stinging logic

    Um um, well, see you are an atheist. You believe no Designer is involved in Creation. Then there is the consideration we ate on an atheist blog….

    ROTFL!!!!!!!!!! Wow!!! What…..a…….mess.

    Tell you what little guy…..you tell me what you want to prove. Ok? Then we will go from there.

    “Francis Collins is a Baptist who is ALSO an EVOLUTIONIST.”

    ROTFL!!!!!!! Yes, I know. And he is not the only one!!

    He also has no problem with God!!! Lol!!!!! Did you catch that one? Lol!!!!!!!!!!

    See that is what separates your from me, I think and make conclusions for myself. Well you, you quote others and let them think for you.

    IF and its a big IF macro is true, no biggie. My worldview doesn’t change a bit. JUST MORE PROOF A CREATOR EXISTS…….lol!!!!!

    Ok go bring your best for whatever….lol!!!!….you plan to “prove”.

  193. on 07 Mar 2014 at 1:34 am 193.The messenger said …

    581.freddies_dead, the bible does not punish a woman that calls out for help while being raped, even if she is not heard.

    The bible only punishes the woman if she does not call for help.

    If she cried out for help(heard or not) she will not be punished.

    Lastly, that passage does not command stoning, and it does not say that humans are to carry out the punishment. And lastly, I already proved that the stoning is metaphorical.

  194. on 07 Mar 2014 at 2:07 am 194.Anonymous said …

    little “a”:

    “Where did that come from?”

    oh sorry I confused you with stinging logic

    Ouch, that hurts. Your stinging logic is so stupid it burns.

    you tell me what you want to prove. Ok? Then we will go from there.

    ADD? Dementia? Reading comprehension problems? Get with it Sweetpea, don’t act stupid. You’re not acting. Oh, my bad. Sorry. Don’t you remember YOUR post in #520, scroll up, if you want:

    Anonymous: “Lets talk common descent and comparative sequence analysis.”

    little “a”/sweetness: OK

    Let’s take a quick score and see where we are.
    We agree:
    The human and chimp genome is 99% identical.
    The Earth is 4,500 million years old
    Early single celled life emerged 3,500 million years ago
    Homo sapiens have existed for 0.2 million years
    The molecular clock can be used for comparative genomic analysis
    I have brought all of these facts to the debate
    You have yet to actually state a fact
    You believe some creator/programmer/god created the first single celled organisms but you have no proof, only a gut feeling
    Your inner monkey emerged and went ballistic when you began to lose this debate.
    YOU will continue to avoid debate on the topic YOU agreed to in post #520.

  195. on 07 Mar 2014 at 2:39 am 195.Sweetness said …

    “YOU will continue to avoid debate on the topic YOU agreed to in post #520”

    Debate what? Lol!!!!!!!!

    What is the topic Homer? Lol!!!!!

    You had another brain fart. You complain when I ask how DNA evolved but suddenly you are asking for proof of a Creator! Lol!!!!!!!! Topic scares you to death!!! Lol!!!!!!

    Do you realize Francis Collins believes in a Designer and he is an evolutionist?

    Does your job require you to work a window? You are a serious mess.

    OK, I am going to help you out. Read through this post 3 times. Take a deep breath, don’t get emotional. Then write out clearly your question. Have a banana and keep calm.

    You did want me to state a fact. Yes, you do need help with what facts are. Similarities among species does not prove one evolved from the other. There is no evidence for macroevolution verifiable with the SM.

    Bam! Lol!!!!!!! Luv you Freddie mouse. You make me laugh so…..

  196. on 07 Mar 2014 at 2:53 am 196.Anonymous said …

    “YOU will continue to avoid debate on the topic YOU agreed to in post #520”
    Sweetpea: What is the topic
    WOW!!!! Swiftness is not your strong suit, is it sweetness?

    you are asking for proof of a Creator

    Nope, Sweetie. Not asking for proof, none exists.

    Topic scares you to death

    If you insist.

    Similarities among species does not prove one evolved from the other. There is no evidence for macroevolution verifiable with the SM.

    You were helping me set up a working and plausible model to explain the origins of humans some 0.2 million years ago and now your behaving like your inner monkey has taken over and flown into a rage. You’re completely unhinged and unfocused. Science, I understand, scares you. It’s OK, not everyone gets it.

  197. on 07 Mar 2014 at 4:15 am 197.Sweetness said …

    “You were helping me set up a working and plausible model to explain the origins of humans”

    Great! I will defer to your expertise. Remember, I am a man of science so it will need yo meet the criteria of the SM. Thanks Freddie mouse.

    I look forward to learning from the mousekeeteer! Lol!!! Share how you know no Creator exists. This is wonderful!

    This will be so good….

  198. on 07 Mar 2014 at 4:32 am 198.Anonymous said …

    Anon: “You were helping me set up a working and plausible model to explain the origins of humans”

    little “a”/sweetness: Great! I will defer to your expertise.

    Duh, Sweetie. I said I will need your help. Reading comprehension problem? Drunk? Or are you just getting tired?

  199. on 07 Mar 2014 at 11:27 am 199.alex said …

    messenger, you dumbass. bullshit proof to prove your bullshit doesn’t work. go rape somebody and offer to marry her and see what happens. but you won’t because talk is cheap.

  200. on 07 Mar 2014 at 11:46 am 200.alex said …

    hor’s entire argument is shifting the burden of proof. again, let’s say that everything that atheists say here is bullshit. now, how the fuck does that validate the bullshit god? speak up bitch. dna programmer again? i already said atheists are full of shit and now all your diversionary straw shit is gone. whatcha got?

    what, i don’t stand for anything? contraire, motherfucker. i stand for the earth being more that 10,000 years old and what about you? you need more standing for something? dna programmer again? i said dunno and you say god? and your proof? what corvette again?

    take away all the atheists assertions and the motherfucker hor is laid bare. the xtian goddit and he can’t be convinced. even if hesus’ little sister is the real deal hor would still be hell arguing with that other dipshit, messenger.

    p.s. how’s that rape shit going, mess motherfucker?

    oh, and for the driveby xtian motherfuckers. i care because i wont stand for bullshit and injustice.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply