Feed on Posts or Comments 29 August 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.

1,326 Responses to “One of the most popular threads in the forums – athesist vs. Christian apologist”

  1. on 25 Apr 2014 at 1:53 pm 1.freddies_dead said …

    1189.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “infinite punishment for a finite crime contradicts the claim that God is just”

    This is so wonderful!!!!

    On the contrary, it shows that whoever made up your imaginary God made him a contradictory douche. I don’t see how you can find that wonderful.

    OK, prove crimes are only finite.

    Seriously? You’re going to carry on claiming that an action that is no longer occurring (i.e. a specific robbery or a specific murder) is infinite? There’s a point where the crime starts and a point when it stops. They are inherently finite.

    When is the crime no longer a crime

    Who claimed that a crime is no longer a crime? Certainly not me. A murder is a murder is a murder, however, it’s still a finite action. Your attempt to blur the line between an action and a description of that action notwithstanding, you kill someone, they’re dead. End of murder. They don’t get killed over and over and over for all eternity. You can start to speak about it in the past tense as in “it happened“. It’s over, done, complete. That you refuse to understand this is just more evidence of your dishonesty.

    and provide your source for this determination.

    Reality.

    Second, prove that God is unjust in His punishment.

    P1-1. A disproportionate punishment for a crime is unjust.
    P1-2. Infinite punishment for a finite crime is disproportionate.
    C1. Infinite punishment for a finite crime is unjust.
    P2-1. God enacts infinite punishment for finite crimes.
    C2. God is unjust in His punishment.

    What is this moral claim based on?

    The metaphysical primacy of existence and the axioms existence and consciousness.

    Prediction$: Freddie Mouse runs or attempts to come in as his other ego. Source? History….

    You’re wrong. As usual.

    Lets watch………

    Still waiting for A the lying prick’s demonstration that atheists have no recourse to moral absolutes. I predict we’ll keep on waiting as he has no argument to offer.

    We can now add to that his need to present an example of an infinite crime. He won’t do that either though.

  2. on 25 Apr 2014 at 1:58 pm 2.freddies_dead said …

    1199. A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said (to Severin)…

    And thanks Chevy Man, you proved man does have fee will as some of your atheist buddies deny.

    This is, of course, a lie. The atheists actually pointed out that freewill is incompatible with the claim that there exists an omniscient deity with a plan for everything, i.e. that Christianity’s claims about the attributes of it’s God contradict it’s claims of the attributes of man.

    I’d ask you to give an argument that shows how freewill can exist in the face of an omniscient deity with a plan but we all know you can’t provide one.

    I see Freddie mouse ran as I predicted. Can’t teach a mouse new tricks.

    :)

    You’re wrong. As usual.

  3. on 25 Apr 2014 at 2:16 pm 3.freddies_dead said …

    1190.The messenger said …

    1183.alex, sev, fred, you all are oblivious to the truth.

    To what truth are you referring? And how do you account for the objectivity that you require for truth from within your inherently subjective Christian worldview?

    And you act like little children when I disprove what you say.

    You have yet to disprove anything yet. Instead you merely repeat your debunked claims as if repetition will somehow imbue them with some sort of authority. It doesn’t.

    You all are pathetic.

    I’m rubber, you’re glue.

  4. on 25 Apr 2014 at 2:34 pm 4.Severin said …

    Test #1
    For advocates of Biblical “moral absolutes”:

    You see someone you know he is lunatic and dangerous, approaching a child with a knife in his hands.
    You are 20 ft away, you have a gun, but no time to do anything but shoot.

    Would you shoot or not?

    Test #2
    In a war, you see an armed enemy approaching you.
    First (natural) reflex is to point your gun to him, but NO!!!
    God told you to love your enemy as you love yourself!
    You spread your hands, while your enemy shoots you dead.

    Would you try to hug your enemy, or shoot him?

    What would you do in such situations?
    Can you honestly answer those simple questions?

  5. on 25 Apr 2014 at 6:08 pm 5.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Chevy man said

    “You got so crazy in your irrational hate,that you don’t know what you talk.”

    ROTFL!!!!!!!!Atheists are so over the top so ridiculously girly men…. Lol!!!!! Yes I am so full of hate Chevy man. Only… That is your atheist buddies spewing the hate….lol!!!!!! Chevy man is the boy who runs home with his ball…..lol!!!

    Freddie mouse slid in and still refused to answer the questions…..no surprise.

    “Seriously? You’re going to carry on claiming that an action that is no longer occurring (i.e. a specific robbery or a specific murder) is infinite”

    Yes, it occurred and results last infinitely…..the actions exists in the scale of time infinitely. Prove wrong mousey….lol!!!!!

    “A murder is a murder is a murder, however, it’s still a finite action”

    wrong again, if so why do men spend a lifetime paying. The action and the results are infinite in the scale of time.

    And the one mousey ran from”

    P1-2. Infinite punishment for a finite crime is disproportionate”

    Prove it, provide source showing it disproportionate. The crime as finite has already been proven false.

    we can stop there since his first premise is based in opinion until he provides a source other than…..Freddie mouse…..lol!!!

    Prediction$: Freddie Mouse runs or attempts to come in as his other ego. Source? History

  6. on 25 Apr 2014 at 7:11 pm 6.Severin said …

    Test #3

    Someone slaps you for something he/she takes as a reason, or without any reason. You are slapped!

    You will:

    a) Turn another cheek, without any anger, because Bible recommends it
    b) If you don’t slap him/her back, you are, at least, very angry.

    Test #4
    Your neighbor sadistically beats his children, his wife and his dog, and you know it for sure.

    You will:
    a) Do nothing, but love him as you love yourself
    b) Try to stop the violence, if no other possibility, by calling police

  7. on 25 Apr 2014 at 7:57 pm 7.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Oh Chevy man you are such a silly goose!

    Ok, lets set the ground rules.

    Define love in the Chevy man world? I get the strong impression your version of love is this silly goose definition that is permissive and allows the object of your love to do any and all things and never allowing the object of your love to expedience consequences.

    Would I, as is typical, be correct?

    :)

  8. on 25 Apr 2014 at 9:42 pm 8.alex said …

    “Would I, as is typical, be correct?”

    did you ask all your xtian homies? any of them see your book http://goo.gl/UYo1uS? and as is typical, did they agree with all your posts?

    no? so which ones are correct and which ones are bullshit? and are they all ok with your obvious deceptions with your multiple aliases?

    post their responses here. they i’ll answer your question about being typically correct.

  9. on 25 Apr 2014 at 11:51 pm 9.The messenger said …

    1203.Severin, I understand why you think that they are mimicking other cultures, but I respectfully disagree.

    The bible tell of GOD giving parts of his message to people before Abraham(the first Jew), which leads we to believe that those teachings were passed down from generation to generation thus becoming a part of many human cultures on the earth.

    Furthermore there is a verse that teaches against slavery and rape. “Love one another” John 13:34-35. If you love someone you won’t enslave them or rape them.

  10. on 26 Apr 2014 at 12:18 am 10.alex said …

    “If you love someone you won’t enslave them or rape them.”

    but if you can’t help yourself and decide to rape, it’s ok, because messenger gives you a way out. you get to marry her.

    “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)”

    courtesy of saint messenger, guardian of rapists.

    what a dumbass motherfucker. see it all here: http://goo.gl/ib8BHO

  11. on 26 Apr 2014 at 12:22 am 11.alex said …

    “which leads we to believe that those teachings were passed down from generation to generation thus becoming a part of many human cultures on the earth.”

    who’s the we that believes in?

    “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)”

    you, yourself, and your other self?

  12. on 26 Apr 2014 at 1:00 am 12.The messenger said …

    1220.alex, the bible never supports rape.

    The marriage thing is a chance for the man to repent for his actions, and a punishment for the sin he committed. He will have to serve her, unless she decides to leave him.

  13. on 26 Apr 2014 at 1:02 am 13.The messenger said …

    1221.alex, I meant to type “me” instead of “we”. My Bad.

    But yes, there are other Catholics that agree with that theory.

  14. on 26 Apr 2014 at 1:43 am 14.alex said …

    “the bible never supports rape.”

    so about rape marriage, you just made up?

    you say bible doesn’t support it, but your rape marriage stance is beyond trivializing the crime. despicable is what you are, for advocating it.

    you could easily dismiss it and that would be the end of it, but you won’t because you’re a moron as evidenced by http://goo.gl/UYo1uS.

    name the “other Catholics” that agree with all your posts. if you can’t, it would appear that all your crap is not really catholic, ain’t it? it would appear that you just made them up, wouldn’t it.

    try appealing to your hor buddy. you think he agrees with your rape crap? go ahead and ask him.

  15. on 26 Apr 2014 at 1:45 am 15.alex said …

    oops, sorry messenger,

    http://goo.gl/UYo1uS is hor’s book.

    the stinky, toxic book of yours is http://goo.gl/ib8BHO

  16. on 26 Apr 2014 at 7:22 am 16.Severin said …

    #1207

    Yeah, yeah, we know all about your jumping from one topic to another and never answering questions whenever you have no answers that would fit your “philosophy”.

    Did you test your absolute morality on my simple examples?
    What would YOU do in such situations?

    You will never answer that, because your absolutes would become shit.

    Which they are.
    Liar!

  17. on 26 Apr 2014 at 7:37 am 17.Severin said …

    John 13:34-35
    “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

    Leviticus 25:44-46
    “However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this”

    “When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.”

    Strange ways of loving one another!
    Strange way of nonsupporting slavery!

    Pretty disgusting!
    Phooey!

  18. on 26 Apr 2014 at 7:44 am 18.Severin said …

    John 13:34-35
    “A new command I give you: Love one another…”

    So, Christians love one another on someone’s command?

    How inhuman!

    I don’t need a command to love somebody.

  19. on 26 Apr 2014 at 1:56 pm 19.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “I don’t need a command to love somebody.”

    That’s because your definition of love is a sophomoric silly goose feel like it love. I mean yeah, lol!!!!!!, anyone can do that.

    lol!!!!!

    We already see your hate for theists so your type of love is conditional and child-like.

    :) luv ya Chevy man!

  20. on 26 Apr 2014 at 2:32 pm 20.alex said …

    “That’s because your definition of love is a sophomoric..”

    that’s because xtian motherfuckers like you, insist on creating your own definition of everything. this includes the scientific method, biblical interpretation, cubits measurements, and countless more.

    perfect example is the numerous variations of the xtian religion. another, is your homeboy messenger’s fanatical insistence on marriage rape.

    fuck your definition of love. just like your bullshit morals, you reserve the right to define and move it about so that you can righteously proclaim that nobody measures up to it.

    why don’t you write down what you think love is? no? if you don’t even know what it is, how can you judge it? just like I asked your blog brother, what defines a “true xtian”?

    and your book grows, bitch motherfucker: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  21. on 26 Apr 2014 at 2:52 pm 21.alex said …

    i suspect this is what hor had in mind when he’s thinking about love.

    love is god and your ability to love him above anything else. remember abraham and his about to be sacrificed son, isaac? the omnipotent/omniscient god already knew the outcome, but he was powerless to stop the unfolding event, but i digress.

    with this love definition, of course an atheist can never have love. similarly, his quip, “You cannot be an atheist and understand absolutes..”, underlines his insistence on defining his own rules.

    messenger’s love definition is probably this. love is raping a virgin and marrying her. as directed by god and marriage, you get to love the victim over and over again. of course, an atheist could rape too, but would not insist on marriage in the name of god. that would be contradictory, (see omniscient/omnipotent).

    with messenger’s theoretical love definition, how the fuck can atheists achieve love?

    what a bunch of fucking bullshit.

  22. on 26 Apr 2014 at 7:13 pm 22.Severin said …

    Love is a feeling.
    I don’t have definition of it, I just love, or don’t love.

    What is your definition of love?

    I honestly said I don’t have it, now let us see yours.

  23. on 26 Apr 2014 at 7:37 pm 23.Severin said …

    Let us summarize our correspondence with theist in last few days:

    – Theists claim Bible is their source of moral absolutes, and force us to accept those moral absolutes, but never ever tell us which parts of it they specifically follow as moral absolutes in their lives
    – Theists claim there are moral absolutes, but never give solutions for situations in which moral absolutes can’t work (either you will kill a killer to save somebody’s life, in which case you violate “moral absolute” named “Thou shall not kill”, or you will not, and killer will kill someone because you did not act)
    – Theists insist on definition of love, but never tell us their own definition of love
    – Theists love by order (commandment), not by heart
    – Theists claim that detailed instructions in Bible about how to “handle” slaves (where to buy them, how to sell them, children of slaves become slaves and his master’s property, how to beat slaves), are in fact part of Bible talking against slavery
    – Theists think (and say it!) that raped woman should marry the rapist; they close their eyes before the fact that no punishment is ever mentioned for rapists in the Bible

    Poor people!
    In what a terrible nightmare they live!

  24. on 26 Apr 2014 at 8:13 pm 24.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “I honestly said I don’t have it, now let us see yours”

    I know, which is why you are incapable of understanding what loving a neighbor means. Asking me to tutor you will not happen. You need to grow up and learn like an adult.

    For you, love is what you felt for a girl when you were a child. Some grow up and some don’t. When you grow up, you will realize that love is more than a “feeling”.

    And you claimed you read the Bible many times…..lol!!!!!!!!! Answer is in there, do some study Chevy man.

    Let me go back to my nightmare….ROTFL!!!!!!!!!

  25. on 26 Apr 2014 at 9:03 pm 25.alex said …

    “which is why you are incapable of understanding what loving a neighbor means. Asking me to tutor you will not happen. You need to grow up and learn like an adult.”

    which is why you’re a dumb motherfucker. you and your dipshit homie, messenger, preach and pontificate on this blog, righteously proclaiming what is right and wrong and when you’re asked what your expectations are , you idiotically spout that atheists need to figure it out.

    goal post moving, you dumbass? an atheist proclaim love and you stupidly say it’s the wrong love? how about you go fuck yourself? oh sorry, i’m not cursing properly and i need to find out for myself on how to do it.

    how about, bitch, motherfucker, go fuck thyself?

  26. on 26 Apr 2014 at 9:37 pm 26.alex said …

    oops, i forgot to plug hor’s book: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    there ya go and it’s got his latest stoopid ass comment, “…you are incapable of understanding what loving a neighbor means.”

    and “You cannot be an atheist and understand absolutes..”.

    according to the motherfucker, to understand love and absolutes, you MUST be an xtian. to understand how an omniscient/omnipotent god can exist, you MUST be an xtian. to understand why a rapist must be allowed to marry the victim, you MUST be an xtian.

    what a moron.

  27. on 27 Apr 2014 at 12:09 am 27.The messenger said …

    1227.Severin, forgive men, I did not have time that night to respond. I will respond to them now.

    In comment 1207 you gave no “situations”.

    Tell me, what is so idiotic about loving your enemies? If you love your enemies eventually they will cease to be your enemies.

    Furthermore, where did I change the subject, as you claimed?

  28. on 27 Apr 2014 at 12:13 am 28.The messenger said …

    1234.Severin, love is a thing of the heart and soul. It is a thing that is chosen and cannot be force by any law. Jesus taught people to follow the law because they love GOD and one another, not to love GOD and one another because the law commands it.

  29. on 27 Apr 2014 at 12:19 am 29.The messenger said …

    1229.Severin, love is a emotional thing that can’t be forced. Jesus taught that he could give commandments of morality(such as love) but it is by choice that we follow them.

  30. on 27 Apr 2014 at 12:48 am 30.alex said …

    The messenger said …

    seriously, motherfucker. you’re back peddling your shit here when even in your own catholic you can’t sell your marriage in rape shit.

    remember, this here, your quote: “the catholic church says that rape is evil and wrong, but if a person does commit the sin of rape he must bind himself to that person and serve her for the rest of his life.”

    will you show the official catholic church viewpoint on this vile statement? you lying motherfucker. you got no cred here, bitch.

    you recanted “I have also seen heaven my self and it is amazing.”. why not the marriage rape?

  31. on 27 Apr 2014 at 1:32 am 31.The messenger said …

    1241.alex, yes, its called repentance. Look it up.

  32. on 27 Apr 2014 at 1:35 am 32.alex said …

    “its called repentance.”

    so, you’re recanting your:

    “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage) and serve her for the rest of his life.”

    it’s a good thing to do.

  33. on 27 Apr 2014 at 6:36 am 33.Severin said …

    “Tell me, what is so idiotic about loving your enemies? If you love your enemies eventually they will cease to be your enemies.”

    Try this idiotic childish philosophy with Talibans!
    Maybe in 1000 years they will eventually become your friends.
    Unfortunately, I don’t have so much time.

    “1229.Severin, love is a emotional thing that can’t be forced.”
    That’s exactly what I said, but another theist here doesn’t agree. Keep responding him, not me.

    What I did not say, but have in my mind when talking love: love is, in the first place, responsibility.
    Love without responsibility is shit, it is not love.
    You can’t understand it, can you?

    Responsibility is my top “moral guidance” in everything I do in my life.

  34. on 27 Apr 2014 at 6:55 am 34.Severin said …

    #1224
    “For you, love is what you felt for a girl when you were a child.”
    That is the maximum that could be expected from someone who expects someone else to command him love.
    He confuses his “wet dreams” with love.

    The poor guy can’t do it better.

    “Asking me to tutor you will not happen.”
    No one asks you to tutor anyone.
    Just EXPLAIN: how is it normal to love your enemy.

    You love (LOVE!!!) people who destroyed WTC and killed 3000 innocent victims?

    Sorry, I don’t. I just can’t!

  35. on 27 Apr 2014 at 5:34 pm 35.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Just EXPLAIN: how is it normal to love your enemy”

    Explain loving enemies when you cannot define what love is? Lol!!!!

    Then you give us test cases using the word love? Lol!!!!!!!!

    Being like Jesus, loving your enemies, is what the world needs. Not more hatred like Chevy man has for his enemies. Feelings come and go, real love does not. Look at the hatted alex has for everyone who posts here. Wanna be like that Chevy man??

    :)

  36. on 27 Apr 2014 at 6:51 pm 36.alex said …

    “Being like Jesus, loving your enemies, is what the world needs.”

    you’re a dumbass. didn’t you say “You cannot be an atheist and understand absolutes..”?

    it doesn’t matter what atheists do because in your delusional mind, it will never measure up unless the act is mated with your made up jesus.

    when did i advocate for anybody to be like me, you dumb motherfucker? all i bring here is contempt for assholes like you and your bullshit.

    memo motherfucker. atheists don’t believe in your fucked up god. nobody here cares about me, so go fuck your self.

    oh, look. miracfuckyoulously, your book autoupdates. http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  37. on 27 Apr 2014 at 10:37 pm 37.The messenger said …

    1244.Severin, yes the Taliban and other Islamic groups are and evil, but that is because they were raised with a religion of hate and violence. If we pity and love them, instead of hating them, the war will only last until they are out of power. But if we hate them we would be cruel to them and hurt them even after defeating them, thus becoming just as bad as them.

    Love and pity is what makes us different of the hateful Taliban.

  38. on 27 Apr 2014 at 10:38 pm 38.The messenger said …

    1244.Severin, yes the Taliban and other Islamic groups are and evil, but that is because they were raised with a religion of hate and violence. If we pity and love them, instead of hating them, the war will only last until they are out of power. But if we hate them we would be cruel to them and hurt them even after defeating them, thus becoming just as bad as them.

    Love and pity is what makes us different from the hateful Taliban.

  39. on 27 Apr 2014 at 10:43 pm 39.The messenger said …

    1244.Severin, yes love is a responsibility

    But many people love others and do kind things because they want to, and not because they think it is their duty.

  40. on 27 Apr 2014 at 10:47 pm 40.The messenger said …

    1244.Severin, Christians choose to follow GOD and his commands of love because they believe that it is their duty.

    So yes, we both agree that responsibility is important. But responsibility without a good moral guide will lead to evil acts occurring.

  41. on 27 Apr 2014 at 10:59 pm 41.The messenger said …

    1247.alex, yes we do care about you.

    I know why you are so offended about GOD’s love. You felt and feel unloved and unwanted, so you display random anger by cussing in order to vent your anger.

    Tell me, was it your parents or your friends that neglected you? Perhaps talking about it will help you confront the problem.

    Please open up your heart and soul, if not to us then to someone at least.

  42. on 28 Apr 2014 at 12:46 am 42.alex said …

    “I know why you are so offended about GOD’s love.”

    because you morons believe you have a monopoly on love. you said earlier that “Allah and Yahweh are the same GOD”, the it would only seem fair that you’d peddle xtianity and muslimanity equally, but nope?

    somebody offered their version of love and it ain’t good enough for y’all. you said earlier “Me and many catholics(including the current pope) believe that athiests can go to heaven.”, so what’s with your righteous preoccupation with your own definition of love?

    “yes we do care about you.”.

    context, moron. what i meant was atheists do not share 100% belief in all the other shits that other atheists do or believe in. i curse mightily, but not all atheists do. i don’t necessarily believe in the big bang, but that doesn’t mean god created the earth. i believe in evolution and even if you do manage to disprove it, it’s not proof for your creationism. remember, moron. atheists do not believe in your bullshit god.

    so, stop your condescending pontificating and check your own catholic facts before spewing them in here. you did good by recanting the rape shit, now think about your bullshit “hell is temporary”.

    as usual, your problem is you want to shove xtianity down everybody’s throat. if every atheist in here converted to islamity, you’d still be here antagonizing, wouldn’t you?

  43. on 28 Apr 2014 at 1:06 am 43.alex said …

    “Me and many catholics(including the current pope) believe that athiests can go to heaven.”

    if this is so, why the hell do you morons keep fucking with atheists? isn’t it presumptuous on your part to assume that atheists are not doing what it takes?

    what? you know exactly what the criteria is for an atheist to go to heaven? remember, hor’s quip “You cannot be an atheist and understand absolutes..”?

    now what? just like your nonexistent absolute morals, your requirement that atheists must believe in god in order to go to heaven is bullshit. (if you didn’t notice, it’s a contradiction).

    just like the omniscient/omnipotent god.

  44. on 28 Apr 2014 at 2:10 am 44.alex said …

    “Tell me, was it your parents or your friends that neglected you?”

    maybe it’s the bible that’s up your ass that’s making you such a moron. please, open up your buttocks and pull the gospel out. it’ll make you feel better and won’t make you so uptight.

    of course, after you’re done, you won’t be able to discern the holy book from the pile of shit you just passed.

    har!, motherfucker.

  45. on 28 Apr 2014 at 3:22 pm 45.freddies_dead said …

    1209.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Freddie mouse slid in and still refused to answer the questions…..no surprise.

    I answered all of A the lying prick’s “questions” so this is just a lie – exactly what I expected from a liar like A.

    “Seriously? You’re going to carry on claiming that an action that is no longer occurring (i.e. a specific robbery or a specific murder) is infinite”

    Yes, it occurred

    Hold up a second. There it is folks. A the lying prick contradicts himself in just three words. That might be a record. “It happened”. Not “it’s still happening”. “It happened” and why do we use past tense? It’s because it’s a finite action. It takes a finite amount of time. It doesn’t carry on happening for ever. It’s done. It’s over. The fact that it happened may be eternal but the action itself sure as shit isn’t.

    and results last infinitely…..

    Which no-one has ever disputed. A murder happened. That fact will be a fact eternally. The murder? It’s done. It’s over. It was finite. The fact of the murder is irrelevant to that.

    the actions exists in the scale of time infinitely.

    This is just word salad. A sad attempt by A the lying prick to once again conflate the action with the description of that action.

    Prove wrong mousey….lol!!!!!

    I already have done. That A the lying prick refuses to acknowledge this fact is exactly what I’d expect from a lying prick such as A.

    “A murder is a murder is a murder, however, it’s still a finite action”

    wrong again,

    Not at all and just to demonstrate that fact lets see if A the lying prick can come up with a murder that is still happening and will continue happening forever. Here’s his chance.

    I predict A the lying prick will ignore this opportunity because he knows that murder, theft etc… is finite, however, he’ll carry on making his already refuted claims about the finitude of crimes.

    if so why do men spend a lifetime paying.

    Ignoring for a moment that “life for murder” varies tremendously throughout the world, since when does 1 lifetime = eternity? Oh, that’s right, it doesn’t. Once again A the lying prick fails to conflate earthly punishment with that alleged to be meted out by the divine.

    The action and the results are infinite in the scale of time.

    Except of course the actual action (be it a murder, a theft etc…) is finite on every scale – including that of time. A murder doesn’t stretch out through eternity no matter what A the lying prick claims. It’s a moment in time, a finite period. At one point in time someone is alive. Someone then murders them and at that point in time they’re dead. A murder has happened. It took a finite amount of time. It isn’t continuing to happen as A the lying prick would like you to believe. It’s all done and dusted. Just like A the lying prick’s pathetic “argument”.

    And the one mousey ran from”

    “P1-2. Infinite punishment for a finite crime is disproportionate”

    Prove it, provide source showing it disproportionate.

    Of course I didn’t run. That was part of my argument and A the lying prick has singularly failed to address it. Instead of actually showing how the infinite is in some way equal to the finite the dishonest one asks for me to demonstrate the self evident i.e. that the infinite does not equal the finite – they are diametrically opposed concepts, one having limits while the other is limitless – therefore anything infinite as a response to something finite is disproportionate by definition.

    The crime as finite has already been proven false.

    Except, of course, that it hasn’t. A the lying prick may have tried to blur the lines between the territory and the map i.e. the actual murder and the fact of that murder, in a desperate attempt to claim that murder is infinite but I have shown that to be totally false over and over.

    we can stop there since his first premise is based in opinion until he provides a source other than…..Freddie mouse…..lol!!!

    No, A the lying prick hasn’t stopped there because there’s something wrong with my premise, it’s that he can’t actually deal with the argument at all because he’s chosen to be wrong (as usual).

    Prediction$: Freddie Mouse runs or attempts to come in as his other ego. Source? History

    And yet we all know it’s only A the lying prick that has deliberately posted as someone else to try and con the readers here. It’s only A the lying prick that has shown himself to be a dishonest lying prick.

    Plus no-one has ever run from him because he brings nothing to the conversation. His lies and attempts at obfuscation are transparent and easy to dismiss as I have done so time and time again on this and other threads.

  46. on 29 Apr 2014 at 10:36 pm 46.alex said …

    on behalf of the deads, caused the louisville, miss tornado.

    thank you great god, for killing my motherfucking ass. as i sit here in the motherfucking hell, i can only thank you for the glorious plan that you had.

    the pain is unbearable. i’m sure after a few years i will get used to it, but i’m not sure how much time has elapsed because my seiko has melted.

    please, i pray to you. give mister messenger, the strength so that he can convince that motherfucker alex, to change his ways so that he will not suffer the same fate, but while you’re at it, please explain this. if you already know alex’s fate, how in the fuck is this praying going to change anything?

    ps. send chapsticks.

    har! i’m really scared now.

  47. on 01 May 2014 at 10:30 pm 47.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Oh Freddie Mouse you silly goose! Is a word salid another term for, “You are speaking above my grade level”?

    lol!!!!!

    Freddie! An event that takes place remains on the time line indefinitely. Wake up my young ward.

    Now, ignoring you vast post of nothing, simply tell us why your determination of Gods punishment is unfair? You know, this infinite punishment for a supposed finite crime? Lol!!!! I thought morality was relative??……..lol!!!!!!

    So what makes you judgment better than all others…

    Getting the popcorn out, got my chair…..this should be great!!!!

    Prediction: no answer, just dancing with his sock puppets.

    sigh……

  48. on 02 May 2014 at 1:43 am 48.alex said …

    “An event that takes place remains on the time line indefinitely.”

    that’s why you’re a stoopid motherfucker. a place on the timeline is not the same as “on all places on the timeline”

    even so, your m.o. of making up bullshit arguments about stoopid shit is immaterial. your god’s requirement of belief as a prerequisite to heaven is stoopid food for dumb motherfuckers like you. case closed.

    stupid ass crime in this timeline is but a fraction of the total timeline, remember that bitch. in the afterlife, your time in hell would be infinite, you asshole. the comparison makes it unequal, bitch.

    of course, you’ll invoke the bullshit argument that half of infinity = infinity or 1 = 2.

    bullshit = god.

  49. on 02 May 2014 at 1:51 am 49.alex said …

    and look, hor’s book updates itself automatically, indefinitely.

    http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    his latest stoopid ass post on top. just the way god wanted it.

  50. on 02 May 2014 at 3:09 pm 50.freddies_dead said …

    1251.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Oh Freddie Mouse you silly goose! Is a word salid another term for, “You are speaking above my grade level”?

    Nope, it’s another term for something that’s so wrong it simply doesn’t make sense. A the lying prick used some words. They were even all in English, but he used them in such a way that the sentence was incomprehensible. He may as well have written “the vole greened lickspittle furious seven”. They’re all good English words, but used in this way they make no sense whatsoever – word salad. Just like A the lying prick’s claim that “the actions exists in the scale of time infinitely”.

    lol!!!!!

    I find it more sad than funny. That someone is so in love with their delusion – as A the lying prick is – that they’ll write any old shit, even if it doesn’t make sense, to try and defend that delusion.

    Freddie! An event that takes place remains on the time line indefinitely.

    Here A the lying prick seems to think he’s making a point I haven’t already made. Once the event has happened it does indeed remain on the time line indefinitely, but, as alex has already noted, that is not the same as that event stretching along that timeline for all eternity which is what would need to happen for an event to be infinite. It should be a fairly simple concept to understand if you’re not deliberately lying for Jesus.

    Here’s our time line with an event marked on it:

    ———–|———–

    As you can see, the event will always be in that exact same place on the timeline no matter how long the timeline gets, but it’s not filling the timeline and that’s because it’s finite. It happened, it’s over. Whatever that event may be it’s done. Watch A the lying prick totally ignore this and continue to lie about the finitude of events.

    Wake up my young ward.

    Now, ignoring you vast post of nothing, simply tell us why your determination of Gods punishment is unfair? You know, this infinite punishment for a supposed finite crime?

    Already done. A the lying prick’s refusal to accept this doesn’t alter the facts.

    Lol!!!! I thought morality was relative??……..lol!!!!!!

    Of course morality is relative in the Christian worldview. Firstly the commandments don’t apply to God. It’s perfectly OK for God to commit genocide on a global scale but humans aren’t allowed to do it. That’s moral relativism right there, but it gets better. Here’s where Christianity’s inherent subjectivism steps in. Because Christianity is rooted in the metaphysical primacy of consciousness where objects are subject to the consciousnesses that are aware of them (i.e. God’s will is claimed to have created everything that is apart from God and that His will is capable of changing those objects should He so wish), quite literally Christianity operates on the tenet that “wishing makes it so”. So “Thou shall not kill” commands God … except when I will you to do otherwise. Just like that killing stops being wrong and is perfectly OK, courtesy of the will of God.

    Isn’t that great? You can do whatever you like … as long as you claim it was God who told you to do it. Things are wrong … unless God wills otherwise.

    Of course if we asked a Christian to prove that God told them something we then have to resort to imagining what happened because we have no choice but to imagine God and the way He might have revealed this to the person making the claim. And why do we have to imagine? Well that’s because there are no objective facts which demonstrate that a God exists.

    When we look at reality it simply doesn’t work that way. Objects aren’t subject to the consciousnesses that are aware of them – go on, try to make your chair levitate with just the power of your mind – instead they are what they are independently of what anyone wants, wishes, hopes, demands etc… For a worldview to have a truly objective morality it can’t be predicated on a worldview that affirms the primacy of consciousness. Of course this rules out all theistic worldviews but hey, that’s just how reality rolls.

    So what makes you judgment better than all others…

    Of course nowhere have I actually claimed that my judgement is better than all others, however, I would always opt for a morality based on objective reason rather than the subjective relativism of theism.

    Getting the popcorn out, got my chair…..this should be great!!!!

    Prediction: no answer, just dancing with his sock puppets.

    sigh……

    A the lying prick predicts wrong as usual. Unless this was one of the autobiographical statements that he likes to throw out from time to time. They’re the only time he’s ever actually right about anything. In this instance it’s because he invariably refuses to answer any questions asked of him and prefers instead to pull out another sockpuppet to try to back up his nonsense instead.

  51. on 02 May 2014 at 3:29 pm 51.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “funny. That someone is so in love with their delusion”

    Oh Freddie, help me silly goose. But I will need proof of this “delusion” you claim exists. Looking forward to the evidence so we can free 80% of the world;; lol!!!!!!!

    ROTFL!!! Funny how the crackpots claim all others are in a delusion!

    “Of course nowhere have I actually claimed that my judgment is better than all others”

    Then the judgment of a deity who created all is probably be more logical than yours? Hmm? Maybe? Could it be you don’t know all the particulars the Deity might know Crackpot Freddie?

    Since it is just your opinion, you offered nothing of value other than a cracked pot.

    Thanks……lol!!!!!!

    “morality based on objective reason”

    Great! Let see the process you used!! This is exciting! Popcorn is out and ready!!!!

    Prediction: we will get nothing from crackpot Freddie mouse

    “Already done”

    Then answer the question rather than talking to yourself. The event ALWAYS exists on the timeline and God is not restricted by time. Checkmate! Lol!!!!!

    Fteddie mouse is such a silly goose. He needs to bring mouse back to help him out of his mess. :)”

  52. on 02 May 2014 at 10:03 pm 52.alex said …

    “Looking forward to the evidence so we can free 80% of the world;; lol!!!!!!!”

    occur to your motherfucking ass that the xtian god and the muslim god are mutually exclusive? you don’t think its proof that either the xtians or the muslims are full of shit? or maybe both? will you argue that they’re both right? just like the omniscient/omnipotent god or the square circle?

    dumbass.

  53. on 04 May 2014 at 1:27 am 53.The messenger said …

    1263.alex, you are so lost brother.

  54. on 04 May 2014 at 1:31 am 54.The messenger said …

    1253.alex, we do not claim to have a love monopoly. But a monopoly on wisdom and understanding of morals.

    We wish to share this knowledge with everyone, but hateful people like your self are blind to the truth and spend their lives spreading hate and deception.

  55. on 04 May 2014 at 2:53 am 55.alex said …

    “you are so lost brother”

    because you’re a dumbass motherfucker? i bet you’d still say the same thing if i were a muslim wouldn’t you? i bet you’d say the same thing if i was a buddist? it doesn’t really matter whether i’m an atheist, is it? all you motherfuckers care about is spreading your shit down everybody’s throat.

    “we do not claim to have a love monopoly. But a monopoly on wisdom and understanding of morals.”

    no you don’t, bitch motherfucker. you can’t define the shit. all you assholes do is profess your righteous assertion that atheists don’t know love and morals. remember hor’s “you are incapable of understanding what loving a neighbor means”. the only difference between an atheist’s love and a dipshit xtian is the god belief ain’t it?

    “but hateful people like your self are blind to the truth and spend their lives spreading hate and deception.”

    quote where i was spreading hate and deception, you bitch, motherfucker. the only hate i pen in here, is pointing out what a dumb motherfucker you are. you assholes, otoh, are full of shit as evidenced by your twin books:

    http://goo.gl/UYo1uS
    http://goo.gl/ib8BHO

  56. on 04 May 2014 at 3:04 am 56.alex said …

    “you are so lost brother.”

    remember how i got you to recant your “rapist may marry the victim” shit? if i am so lost, that confirms that you’re a dumb motherfucker, si?

    or are you going to recant your recant? remember, you didn’t really see heaven, you were just dreaming.

    without the god connection, name all the good shits you currently do and i guarantee that i do the same shits. i said good shits and that doesn’t include campaigning against gay marriages.

    you’ll say you don’t curse? i don’t either except to motherfuckers like you who spout bullshit constantly.

    go fuck yourself.

  57. on 04 May 2014 at 4:13 pm 57.The messenger said …

    1267.alex, marriage means bond, not necessarily a rings and brides maid kind of marriage.

    That verse means that if a person commits the sin of rape the rapist is suppose to bind himself to her and serve her.

    I have explained this many times, but you can’t seem to get it through your thick head.

  58. on 04 May 2014 at 4:18 pm 58.The messenger said …

    1266.alex, you spread hate of others every time you cuss. That is nearly all of your comments.

    They can be found in the book of alex.

  59. on 04 May 2014 at 10:42 pm 59.alex said …

    “you spread hate of others every time you cuss.”

    motherfucking bullshit purveyors, including you, deserve my cussing out. you think it’ll incite atheists hatred? whenever i cuss out the dipshit jehovah’s witnesses threatening me with hell, i’m spreading hate?

    you feel persecuted, xtian motherfucker?

    back with your rapist bonding with the victim shit? you think women feel the love you’re spreading with your fucked up rape statement? you feel that men feel the love you’re spreading when you’re talking about their female loved ones? you realize that with your rapist stance, you’re hating on about half of the population? the burden of proof is not on me, mon motherfucker. you made the statement that rapist may marry the victim, but you can’t find anybody to agree with you? hate on, bitch.

    “They can be found in the book of alex.”

    where? you too lazy to compile my posts and post it here? oops, i forget. you the dumb motherfucker that can’t even be bothered to look up the term “cubits”.

    and btw, they do have snakes and donkies in the bible, dumbass.

    once again, here’s your shitpile collection: http://goo.gl/ib8BHO

  60. on 05 May 2014 at 1:03 am 60.The messenger said …

    1270.alex, you also display a extreme sadistic nature.

    You are a sadist, and that is all you are.

    Please help your self and become something better. become kind and loving to others.

  61. on 05 May 2014 at 1:08 am 61.The messenger said …

    1270.alex, telling you about hell is a warning, not a threat.

    If a crime is committed the criminal will go to jail for a while if he is not pardoned. If a person does immoral things a lot then he will go to hell for a while if GOD doesn’t pardon him/her.

  62. on 05 May 2014 at 1:29 am 62.alex said …

    “You are a sadist, and that is all you are.”

    yeah, whatever. now, about your hatred for women with your rapist shit. why this fantasy of yours? why can’t you find any of your homies to agree with you? is it because it’s so bullshit that even xtians recognize it for what it is. of course, you’re too stoopid. that’s why it took you a long time to admit that you didn’t really see heaven.

    why do keep sticking with it even though nobody else even contemplates the shit? internet porn not enough for you?

    write me dude. we’ll meet in a courthouse where a rapist is being tried and we’ll debate publicly. you can then righteously proclaim your rapist stance. maybe you can even be the star witness for the rapist.

    write back bitch. my address is on your shitpile: http://goo.gl/ib8BHO

  63. on 05 May 2014 at 1:43 am 63.The messenger said …

    1273.alex, if a person breaks something of yours they should have to pay for it.

    They same goes in a rape situation. If a man commits the sin of rape, he should have to bind himself to her and serve her as punishment/penance.

    Tell me, how is getting a free servant hateful?

  64. on 05 May 2014 at 1:54 am 64.alex said …

    “Tell me, how is getting a free servant hateful?”

    how about a free kick in your ass hateful? write back bitch and i’ll be glad to deliver.

  65. on 05 May 2014 at 8:39 am 65.Severin said …

    If events (like crimes) are infinite, then nothing could happen at all, ever.

    If aiming a gun to someone is an event, then no one cold be killed ever, because the aiming itself, when started, would last for ever.
    But, you could not aim the gun, because, before that, you have to take (pull) the gun (another event), which would last for ever as well, according to your logic.

    No one is claiming that CONSEQUENCES of events last. I can’t say they last “for ever”, because the time itself is a relative term.
    But the events are definitely finite.
    Events themselves can’t last for ever, otherwise we would have a “frozen” reality (or would not have any).

    Did my grandmother die, or is she still dying?
    Well, according to your logic, she couldn’t have been born, because her birth wasn’t finished yet; it still lasts!

    Can’t you see what an idiot you are?

  66. on 05 May 2014 at 3:00 pm 66.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ROTFL!!!!!!!!

    Oh Chevy man you silly goose! Get in the game man!
    We are talking about God and the claim by Freddie mouse that Gods punishment is not fair on a supposed finite crime. Still waiting for mouse to provide the basis for his claim……he scurried away….of course.

    Now, for a God, who exists outside of time, since God created time, the event is a permanent fixture on the timeline and exists permanently. Way beyond your understanding so need to attempt a response. :)

  67. on 05 May 2014 at 7:54 pm 67.Severin said …

    “Now, for a God, who exists outside of time, since God created time…”

    Can you somehow prove that god exists, that he exists outside the time, and that he created time?

    A “since …” is your claim, not an argument or a proof for anything.

  68. on 05 May 2014 at 10:54 pm 68.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Can you somehow prove that god exists”

    Been done time and time again Chevy man. And hey, your fellow atheist is the one who claimed God’s punishment as unfair …..not me. And existence is not the issue…..the morality of God’s punishment is the subject so stop dodging.

    Help Freddie mouse out…….what standard do you guys use to declare God’s punishment is “unfair”?

  69. on 05 May 2014 at 11:58 pm 69.The messenger said …

    1275.alex, you are just afraid to admit that you were wrong about it being hate.

    You coward.

  70. on 06 May 2014 at 3:33 pm 70.freddies_dead said …

    1255.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “funny. That someone is so in love with their delusion”

    Oh Freddie, help me silly goose.

    I suspect that only a licensed medical professional could help A the lying prick at this point.

    But I will need proof of this “delusion” you claim exists.

    The proof is there for all to see in A the lying prick’s previous delusional claims regarding the finitude of crimes. If he wants to show he’s not delusional he’s going to have to give us an example of an infinite crime and show how it is indeed infinite. Any attempt to tie this to a deity is going to require proof that such a deity exists.

    Looking forward to the evidence so we can free 80% of the world;; lol!!!!!!!

    Do 80% of the world believe crimes committed by humans are infinite? Where did A the lying prick get this figure? I suspect he’s incorrectly using the figure for religious belief but it could just be that he’s pulled it our of his arse – after all he is a dishonest prick.

    ROTFL!!! Funny how the crackpots claim all others are in a delusion!

    I only called A the lying prick delusional, not all others. However, I’m not surprised to see A the lying prick being dishonest about it.

    “Of course nowhere have I actually claimed that my judgment is better than all others”

    Then the judgment of a deity who created all is probably be more logical than yours? Hmm? Maybe? Could it be you don’t know all the particulars the Deity might know Crackpot Freddie?

    Maybe if A the lying prick could provide any objective evidence for the existence of “a deity who created all” we might start getting somewhere. Of course he won’t (read can’t) but, even if he could, then that still wouldn’t solve the problem of said deity’s judgement being wholly subjective and relativistic.

    Since it is just your opinion, you offered nothing of value other than a cracked pot.

    Thanks……lol!!!!!!

    Since “what” is just my opinion? A the lying prick fails to mention just what it is he’s referring to here which makes his assertion pretty much meaningless.

    If it’s the finitude of crimes he’s babbling about then the objective facts I’ve presented show him to simply be wrong.

    “morality based on objective reason”

    Great! Let see the process you used!! This is exciting! Popcorn is out and ready!!!!

    Erm, objective reason is the process. Reason is the faculty by which we identify and integrate perceptual input to gain knowledge. For it to be objective it cannot be influenced by anyone’s thoughts, wishes, wants, demands etc… i.e. it’s based on objective facts, not on imagination.

    Man faces a fundamental alternative i.e. life or death. Life isn’t guaranteed so man has to act in order to survive. Man does not automatically know which action to take so he needs a means of knowledge (reason) and a code of values (morality) to guide him. Man uses reason to recognise the values he requires and it is also through reason that man identifies the proper action to achieve those values.

    In a rational worldview the standard of man’s values is his life i.e. his nature as a biological organism. If a man chooses to live he has no choice but to face the fact that life is conditional and only achieving certain basic values – food, water, shelter – will keep him alive. He also needs a reason to live. For rational people it’s to live and enjoy life i.e. life is the end in itself.

    So we can already see the difference between an objective morality i.e. a morality of values (the things that make life possible and worth living), and Christian morality i.e. a morality of duties (arbitrarily decreed commands with no reference to reality or man’s nature).

    Prediction: we will get nothing from crackpot Freddie mouse

    As usual A the lying prick’s prediction is dead wrong.

    “Already done”

    Then answer the question rather than talking to yourself.

    Already done. A the lying prick’s refusal to accept this doesn’t alter the facts.

    The event ALWAYS exists on the timeline and God is not restricted by time. Checkmate! Lol!!!!!

    And now A the lying prick is reduced to repeating himself as if that gives his baseless assertions some authority. He’s also trying to introduce facts that aren’t in evidence. If only A would give some objective evidence for the existence of his God and demonstrate that his God “is not restricted by time”. Of course every time I’ve asked A the lying prick for evidence he’s dodged the issue. I suspect that we’ll see exactly the same happen here.

    Fteddie mouse is such a silly goose. He needs to bring mouse back to help him out of his mess. :)”

    And once more A the lying prick attempts to project his dishonest behaviour onto others. I can ask for his evidence that I’ve ever used a different nom de plume in a deliberate attempt to con other readers into thinking I’m someone else but there’s little doubt that he’ll avoid shouldering his burden of proof as usual.

  71. on 06 May 2014 at 3:42 pm 71.freddies_dead said …

    1271.Severin asked of A the lying prick …

    Can you somehow prove that god exists, that he exists outside the time, and that he created time?

    And how did A the lying prick respond? Why, by dodging the issue as usual. Apparently it’s “Been done time and time again” although A the lying prick fails to give us a pointer to just one example of such a proof.

    A the lying prick then poses the question “what standard do you guys use to declare God’s punishment is “unfair”?”. Regardless of what Severin might answer can A the lying prick answer his own question? Just what standard does A the lying prick use to declare God’s punishment is fair? Can A the lying prick even understand just how such a question is equivalent to him shooting himself in the foot? Just watch him dodge the issue once again.

  72. on 07 May 2014 at 9:00 am 72.Severin said …

    “Just what standard does A the lying prick use to declare God’s punishment is fair?”

    But it is!!!
    How many times A has to tell you that god’s decisions/plans/words/deeds/… are unquestionable?
    There is NOTHING we could say about god’s decisions/…

    Who are we to question/comment god?
    Period!

    And, that, of course, are arguments!
    For imbeciles.

  73. on 07 May 2014 at 12:02 pm 73.alex said …

    “you are just afraid to admit that you were wrong about it being hate.”

    fine, bitch motherfucker. forget for a second that you’re a dumbass xtian and i’m a hellbound atheist.

    you’re a purveyor of bullshit, no different than an snake oil salesman. i’m calling out your bullshit and you accuse me of spreading hate against all snake oil peddlers?

    you state your hateable rape position and you can’t even recall anybody that agrees with you? i’m sure most women and men find your rape view disgusting and vile, but i don’t have to prove it, because your ass made the assertion that rapist should be able to marry their victim.

    you hear me psyching out the atheists to campaign to kick your ass or hate you? ever see me holding up signs? you think i’m the atheist point man leading the heathens to curse your ass? you think people are so gullible that they’ll read about me cursing your motherfucking ass and you’re afraid that everyone will start doing it?

    you dumb, rapist loving, motherfucker.

  74. on 08 May 2014 at 1:49 am 74.A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Freddie Mouse!! You silly goose. Is the word salad all you have? lol!!!

    Lets review. You claim God punishing a finite (sic) crime with infinite punishment was unjust. You were asked what this “unjust” conclusion was based on. You answer with diversions.

    You come back with questions about God’s existence

    You come back with a lie that I claimed God was just. I made no judgment.

    You, Louie and Dewey come back with insults……well an attempt at insults…..lol!!!!

    Is that it? Is that all you have? No standard? No proof a crime is finite? No proof God is unjust outside of a freedie the mouse opinion?

    ROTFL!!!!!!!!!! that is very very sad, lame and weak.

    I am a wonderful person with remarkable patience. I’ll give you another shot. Bring back Anonymous if need be…..

    :)

  75. on 08 May 2014 at 11:35 am 75.freddies_dead said …

    1278.A the lying prick posting as A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Freddie Mouse!! You silly goose. Is the word salad all you have? lol!!!

    And, as predicted, A the lying prick ignores everything anyone has pointed out to him and dishonestly claims that no-one has shown him to be wrong … as usual.

    Lets review. You claim God punishing a finite (sic) crime with infinite punishment was unjust.

    I did.

    You were asked what this “unjust” conclusion was based on.

    And I answered.

    You answer with diversions.

    Nope. As usual A the lying prick lies about what he has been presented with. I answered the questions with objective facts concerning the finite nature of a crime.

    Having demonstrated the finite nature of crimes and considering the standard definitions of “finite” and “infinite” (diametrically opposed concepts) it follows that an infinite punishment for a finite crime is most definitely unjust.

    Of course A the lying prick doesn’t like the consequences so he prefers to pretend otherwise.

    You come back with questions about God’s existence

    The questions about God’s existence were in response to things A the lying prick bought up.

    Firstly he questioned the relative logicality of a deity’s judgement vs my judgement. Obviously we can all imagine a deity capable of logically assigning punishments that are proportionate to the crimes committed, but that god is still entirely imaginary. Here, however, the argument is centred on the Christian deity. If that deity does not exist then the question is moot, hence my asking for proof of it’s existence. However, even if we assume for the sake of argument that the Christian God exists, we can see that that deity is said to mete out infinite punishment for finite crimes (according to the Bible). Such punishment defies logic in that it is disproportionate to the alleged crimes. As my judgement is based on objective facts i.e. that infinite punishment is disproportionate to a finite crime, it follows that a finite punishment would be more logical.

    Secondly A the lying prick asserted that “God is not restricted by time”. Once again we can all imagine a god who isn’t restricted by time but, also again, we’re not interested in entirely imaginary gods.

    If we unpack the claim that “God is not restricted by time” we can see that it first assumes that God exists. Obviously if this is the case it should be trivially simple to provide objective facts that demonstrate the truth of that assumption, so why A the lying prick doesn’t just present them is quite beyond me. From that starting point A the lying prick should be able to show that his God is indeed “not restricted by time” but, once more, he refuses to do so. It’s as if he knows he can’t prove his claims so he dodges the questions instead.

    You come back with a lie that I claimed God was just. I made no judgment.

    This is a lie. Not once did I claim that A the lying prick had claimed that God was just. He asked me to backup my claim (that infinite punishment for finite claims is unjust) and I did just that and no more.

    You, Louie and Dewey come back with insults……well an attempt at insults…..lol!!!!

    Any insults I may have aimed at A the lying prick were well deserved.

    ?Is that it? Is that all you have? No standard? No proof a crime is finite? No proof God is unjust outside of a freedie the mouse opinion?

    ROTFL!!!!!!!!!! that is very very sad, lame and weak.

    And here we have it. A the lying prick ignores reality and claims he hasn’t been shown to be wrong … again. Whatever helps him sleep at night. The actual facts are available to anyone who cares to read the exchanges above.

    I am a wonderful person with remarkable patience. I’ll give you another shot. Bring back Anonymous if need be…..

    :)

    A is a lying prick. I don’t need another shot as the first one did the job. There’s no need to kick a man – even one as odious as A the lying prick – when he’s down and out.

  76. on 08 May 2014 at 11:54 am 76.alex said …

    “Lets review. You claim God punishing a finite (sic) crime with infinite punishment was unjust. You were asked what this “unjust” conclusion was based on.”

    no, let’s not. as demonstrated ad nauseam in the book of hor at: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS, it doesn’t matter because you ultimately switch the burden of proof even in the face of ridiculousness. and to top it off, you even resort to lying to try to bolster your bull. remember your rl wooten quip? says that an omniscient/omnipotent god gives you free will. makes sense? bullshit. why can’t god make a square circle? so much for omnipotent. go ahead, ask me to prove that god can’t make a square circle. oh, yeah, i forget. god chooses not to.

    dumbass, motherfucker.

  77. on 08 May 2014 at 12:00 pm 77.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Obviously we can all imagine a deity capable of logically assigning punishments that are proportionate to the crimes committed, but that god is still entirely imaginary.”

    Ok, after meandering through Freddie mouse’s word salad, I pulled out another claim……well……the same claim only reworded and still no answer……I know! Incredible is it not?

    Freddie mouse, se need to know how you concluded Gods punishments are unjust? AGAIN, what is the standard and is it one we all should use and why? No changing the subject, just an answer.

    Prediction: Another word salad…pass the Balsamic vinegrette with some croutons of more diversions……lol!!!!!!!

  78. on 08 May 2014 at 1:35 pm 78.freddies_dead said …

    1281.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Obviously we can all imagine a deity capable of logically assigning punishments that are proportionate to the crimes committed, but that god is still entirely imaginary.”

    Ok, after meandering through Freddie mouse’s word salad, I pulled out another claim……well……the same claim only reworded and still no answer……I know! Incredible is it not?

    A the lying prick thinks we won’t notice how he’s twisted what was said in an effort to avoid shouldering the burden of backing up his claims. Exactly as expected.

    Freddie mouse, se need to know how you concluded Gods punishments are unjust?

    Already demonstrated. That A the lying prick doesn’t like it and has chosen to lie about being told it will not change that fact.

    AGAIN, what is the standard and is it one we all should use and why? No changing the subject, just an answer.

    I’ve already given the standard. That A the lying prick doesn’t like it and has chosen to lie about being told it will not change that fact.

    I also never claimed we should all use the standard I adhere to, but I can’t see why anyone rational would choose the subjective, relativistic morality born of Christianity when they could use an objective standard which takes account of man’s values rather than the whims of an imaginary god.

    Prediction: Another word salad…pass the Balsamic vinegrette with some croutons of more diversions……lol!!!!!!!

    And as usual the only prediction that comes true is the one about A lying and refusing to answer any questions directed at him.

    But then he is a lying prick.

  79. on 08 May 2014 at 3:57 pm 79.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “I also never claimed we should all use the standard I adhere to”

    Well how would we know? It may be wonderful, incredible, amazing but you refuse to tell us what it is??????? We what to share in your wisdom! Don’t hold it on, share with us!

    You judge God’s actions, but cannot provide the standard. Lying and claiming you provided information only puts you on the level of a politicians.

    Understandable, they dance around the questions too!! Lol!!!!!!

    Try again there chief. :)

    “they could use an objective standard which takes account of man’s values”

    Hmmmmmm, I am a man. What are those values there Freddie mouse? Let me guess, another salad…..no answer…..lol!!!!!

  80. on 09 May 2014 at 10:33 am 80.freddies_dead said …

    1283.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “I also never claimed we should all use the standard I adhere to”

    Well how would we know? It may be wonderful, incredible, amazing but you refuse to tell us what it is??????? We what to share in your wisdom! Don’t hold it on, share with us!

    And once more A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

    You judge God’s actions, but cannot provide the standard. Lying and claiming you provided information only puts you on the level of a politicians.

    And once more A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

    Understandable, they dance around the questions too!! Lol!!!!!!

    Try again there chief. :)

    And once more A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

    “they could use an objective standard which takes account of man’s values”

    Hmmmmmm, I am a man. What are those values there Freddie mouse? Let me guess, another salad…..no answer…..lol!!!!!

    And once more A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

    In light of A the lying prick’s abject refusal to actually take part in the discussion, he prefers instead to simply lie about the exchange, I see no point in continuing this conversation.

    Until and unless he can actually respond to comments made and questions asked in something approaching an honest manner – I’m not expecting actual honesty as I believe he’s not actually capable of it – I’ll simply be noting that he’s acting according to his nature … that of a lying prick.

  81. on 09 May 2014 at 11:48 am 81.alex said …

    “You judge God’s actions, but cannot provide the standard.”

    that’s why i bitch cuss the motherfucker. he thinks by insisting on debating the merits and/or the actions of his mystical god, it somehow legitimizes the bullshit.

    he even pulls out some amazing contradictory shit, like the mutually exclusive omnipotent/omniscient and righteously challenges anyone to prove that it cannot exist.

    even the good shit, such as morals and love, that his god is supposed to represent is the motherfucker’s sole domain that no atheist can ever do or achieve.

    of course, the idiot resorts to ad hominem and socketeering while posting irrelevant shits.

    i ain’t lying. it’s all here in the book of hor: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  82. on 09 May 2014 at 12:37 pm 82.Anonymous said …

    RL Wooten, the prick, little “a”, et al:

    You judge God’s actions, but cannot provide the standard

    Whoa there, buckaroo. Who the fuck said you’ve got the inside line on what an imaginary god might dictate to it’s disciples? Maybe those Phelps Baptists have it right? Benny Hinn? Swaggart?

    What is the standard that you employ? You seem so sure nobody else has one. Enlighten and educate me, please.

  83. on 09 May 2014 at 11:15 pm 83.Anonymous said …

    Alex, I do not support rape. and I proved that the bible does not support rape.

    You still haven’t answered my question, HOW IS GETTING A FREE SERVANT HATEFUL?

  84. on 09 May 2014 at 11:16 pm 84.the messenger said …

    Alex, I do not support rape. and I proved that the bible does not support rape.

    You still haven’t answered my question, HOW IS GETTING A FREE SERVANT HATEFUL?

  85. on 09 May 2014 at 11:39 pm 85.the messenger said …

    1292.alex, your pathetic insults show just how immature you are.

  86. on 09 May 2014 at 11:57 pm 86.alex said …

    “HOW IS GETTING A FREE SERVANT HATEFUL?”

    clue up, motherfucker. first of all, the servant shit is classic apologetic behavior. your words from your book: http://goo.gl/ib8BHO, says “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)”. your attempt to morph that statement into a “FREE SERVANT” is bullshit.

    advocating that rapists are to marry their vics is beyond hate, it’s crazy and that’s why you fully deserve the moniker, “dumbass motherfucker”. with you having no credibility, anything you post here deserves all the motherfucking cursing out that’s sure to follow.

    bitch.

  87. on 10 May 2014 at 12:03 am 87.alex said …

    “your pathetic insults show just how immature you are.”

    dude, your book http://goo.gl/ib8BHO is magically updated with your stupid posts for all to see. maybe, like, hor, you can try changing your handle. oops, forgit it. just like hor’s book at http://goo.gl/UYo1uS, your book has magical god given properties. it knows who you are and will sniff out your bullshit and add it to the pile.

  88. on 10 May 2014 at 12:49 am 88.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ROTFL!!!!!!

    Freddie mouse again fails to give the standard he uses to judge God and the silly goose comes back as anonymous!!!

    All he has is personal attacks. Lol!!!!!!!!

    It doesn’t get any funnier than watching Freddie back himself into corner after corner….

    Oh! Lol!!

    Still waiting for those “objective standard which takes account of man’s values”

    Another Freddie absolute he cannot define.

    Cue: word salads anonymous rants, diversions and silliness…..lol!!!!

  89. on 10 May 2014 at 1:51 pm 89.alex said …

    “… fails to give the standard he uses to judge God

    a xtian god requiring belief and arbitrarily condemns those that don’t (retards, bushmen, hindus, etc) to hell just escapes your motherfucking mind, doesn’t it?

    even if non believers lived their lives just like the xtian mofos, your god still sends them away and it just escapes your motherfucking mind, doesn’t it?

    of course, your book (http://goo.gl/UYo1uS) is a testament to your dumbass. remember your headliner?
    “China is selling fetuses as a delicacy”

    asshole.

  90. on 10 May 2014 at 1:56 pm 90.alex said …

    predictably, the xtian contra motherfucking messenger will weigh in, that belief in god is not requisite.

    if so, why the need for god? morals again? ok, then teach the mothefucking morals, sans the motherfucking god.

    case closed, bitch.

  91. on 10 May 2014 at 2:02 pm 91.Anonymous said …

    Wooten, Hor, little “a”, prick:

    Freddie mouse again fails to give the standard

    Only one moron on the blog has been verified as having multiple sock disorder. Remember when you confessed to it?? The depth of your stupidity is astounding.

    I asked for your standard. What do you employ to keep from tippling, toking, and masturbating? Would it be Geezus? I think we have a bingo. Oh yeah, LOL, ROTFL, and ROTFLMFAO.

    Waiting. Stop waffling and diverting. Try taking the high road – as is commanded by your imaginary skydaddy system of belief.

  92. on 10 May 2014 at 4:53 pm 92.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Only one moron on the blog has been verified as having multiple sock disorder”

    Lol!!!!Yes, and you can give it up…..

    ” Remember when you confessed to it??”

    Yes, because I am honest, you are a liar. Keep playing…..it is entertaining and fun.

    Here is a hint, change your approach with your second sock. It might sell better. But HEY! Or one of your socks actually answered the question that would really sell!!! ROTFL!

    luv ya Freddie mouse!!! :)

  93. on 10 May 2014 at 5:19 pm 93.alex said …

    “Yes, because I am honest, you are a liar. Keep playing”

    wrong, you lying, bitch motherfucker. look at the timelines in your book http://goo.gl/UYo1uS. you confessed because you got your motherfucking ass, busted. point out in your book where you confessed before getting busted?

    your book doesn’t lie. click on the links, fuckhead. they linkback to this blog. i tolya, your book has magical properties. it keeps up with your bullshit and updates itself. here it is again http://goo.gl/UYo1uS, with your latest, you lying fuck.

  94. on 10 May 2014 at 7:22 pm 94.Anonymous said …

    Wooten, Hor, little “a”, prick:

    “Only one moron on the blog has been verified as having multiple sock disorder”

    ….because I am honest……

    Ummmmm. No. Because you were BUSTED. But, really, I cannot blame you for rolling out new socks. Who would want to be associated and pinned down with the crap you spew. Such as: **YAWN** Sock Hor’s Harleys on beaches become, what is the analogy you now employ, some sort of automobile? **YAWN**

    So, after you’ve stated the standard you use to determine that your way is the one and only way maybe take some time and point out where Freddie and me are the same. Can you? Will you? What have you got? NADA, that’s what I thought. Hor, you are the only one confirmed socketeer here. The internet never forgets. Oh yeah, LOL!!!, ROTFL!!!!, and ROTFLMFAO!!!!!!!!

  95. on 10 May 2014 at 9:37 pm 95.alex said …

    “I cannot blame you for rolling out new socks.”

    the moron poster ‘everyone’ smells suspiciously like hor. could it be? his pompous style is a dead giveaway. how about it, hor? will you fess up?

    see post #6 and #8 above.

  96. on 10 May 2014 at 9:46 pm 96.alex said …

    well, i’ll be a messenger, motherfucker.

    hor’s book is magical! it updated itself and included the ‘Everyone’ poster. check out http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  97. on 11 May 2014 at 2:28 am 97.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ROTFL!!!!!

    This is to good to be real. Never has any posters been more obsessed than Freddie aka anonymous with handles on a blog. Another dead give away along with Freddie posting as anonymous….lol!!!!

    Personally, you can assume I am everyone on the blog. Fine, go for it Freddie aka Mouse. I mean seriously, lol!!!!!!, I left Jr High many years ago. I even agrees I am everyone but you still obsess…..

    But will you answer the questions which have sliced up your tenuous worldview? Nah, discussing people is not as frightening….right?

    lol!!!!!!!

    luv ya Freddie mouse

    Alex, you are begging for attention. Luv ya buddy.

  98. on 11 May 2014 at 2:41 am 98.alex said …

    “you are begging for attention…”

    and your all knowing god knows what it feels like to $uck deek? homo se llama?

  99. on 11 May 2014 at 2:44 am 99.alex said …

    “posters been more obsessed”

    check your book bitch. you’re the one obsessed. per your book: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS, here’s your latest tally:

    TOE:119 macro:100 soup:44 programmer:13 obsess:27 chevy:18

  100. on 11 May 2014 at 3:30 am 100.Anonymous said …

    Hor, Wooten, little “a”, prick:

    ROTFL!!!!!
    This is to good to be real. Never has any posters been more obsessed than Freddie aka anonymous with handles on a blog.

    Did you write this with your head up your ass? Obsessing that Freddie is mousey. Do you see the irony? You’re far too stupid to get it. Horatio, you’re the ONLY idiot with multiple sock disorder syndrome around here – you have a hard time keeping the sock drawer straight, right Wooten. Bill and Ted’s excellent analogy. You’re too dense for apt descriptors.

    Now, AGAIN, what standard is the one and only true standard? So far you’ve only produced a small quantity of odious rank smelling shit. Out with it, Hor. What have you got.

  101. on 11 May 2014 at 12:45 pm 101.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Did you write this with your head up your ass?”

    No I am not an atheist that should be clear…

    “Obsessing that Freddie is mousey. Do you see the irony”

    Yes, I admit I keep letting you change the topic.

    “Now, AGAIN, what standard is the one and only true standard?”

    I don’t know Freddie mouse. You judged God as immoral and claimed you used the values of man and refuse to tell us what they are…..lol!!!!

    You won’t share but still luv ya Freddie mouse. Can only assume you know you are in a corner and therefore continue to change the subject.

    :)

  102. on 11 May 2014 at 1:47 pm 102.alex said …

    “You judged God as immoral and claimed you used the values of man and refuse to tell us what they are”

    been done, motherfucker, but no matter what’s presented, you’re just gonna stick your thumb in your ears and proclaim “bleh, bleh, bleh”.

    your quip, bitch: “I know, which is why you are incapable of understanding what loving a neighbor means.”

    when confronted with the impossibility of an omniscience and free will, you resort to socketeering with your dumbass “rl wooten”.

    so what’s the point? without your declared moral metrics for your dumbass god, how the hell can your god’s morality be measured?

    oops, i forget. your god’s omnipresence makes it impossible for measurements. plus his omnibenevolence can’t make him bad. so how can god go wrong?

    dumbass, motherfucker.

  103. on 11 May 2014 at 2:09 pm 103.alex said …

    congrats, hor motherfucker. with your various socks, you’ve tallied 950 posts. http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    you’re the numero uno, delusionist!
    your fav diversions:
    TOE:119
    macro:100
    soup:44
    programmer:13
    obsess:28
    chevy:18

  104. on 12 May 2014 at 1:33 pm 104.freddies_dead said …

    1292.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ROTFL!!!!!!

    Freddie mouse again fails to give the standard he uses to judge God and the silly goose comes back as anonymous!!!

    All he has is personal attacks. Lol!!!!!!!!

    It doesn’t get any funnier than watching Freddie back himself into corner after corner….

    Oh! Lol!!

    Still waiting for those “objective standard which takes account of man’s values”

    Another Freddie absolute he cannot define.

    Cue: word salads anonymous rants, diversions and silliness…..lol!!!!

    And once more A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

  105. on 12 May 2014 at 1:33 pm 105.freddies_dead said …

    1296.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Only one moron on the blog has been verified as having multiple sock disorder”

    Lol!!!!Yes, and you can give it up…..

    ” Remember when you confessed to it??”

    Yes, because I am honest, you are a liar. Keep playing…..it is entertaining and fun.

    Here is a hint, change your approach with your second sock. It might sell better. But HEY! Or one of your socks actually answered the question that would really sell!!! ROTFL!

    luv ya Freddie mouse!!! :)

    And once more A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

  106. on 12 May 2014 at 1:33 pm 106.freddies_dead said …

    1301.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ROTFL!!!!!

    This is to good to be real. Never has any posters been more obsessed than Freddie aka anonymous with handles on a blog. Another dead give away along with Freddie posting as anonymous….lol!!!!

    Personally, you can assume I am everyone on the blog. Fine, go for it Freddie aka Mouse. I mean seriously, lol!!!!!!, I left Jr High many years ago. I even agrees I am everyone but you still obsess…..

    But will you answer the questions which have sliced up your tenuous worldview? Nah, discussing people is not as frightening….right?

    lol!!!!!!!

    luv ya Freddie mouse

    Alex, you are begging for attention. Luv ya buddy.

    And once more A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

  107. on 12 May 2014 at 1:34 pm 107.freddies_dead said …

    1305.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Did you write this with your head up your ass?”

    No I am not an atheist that should be clear…

    “Obsessing that Freddie is mousey. Do you see the irony”

    Yes, I admit I keep letting you change the topic.

    “Now, AGAIN, what standard is the one and only true standard?”

    I don’t know Freddie mouse. You judged God as immoral and claimed you used the values of man and refuse to tell us what they are…..lol!!!!

    You won’t share but still luv ya Freddie mouse. Can only assume you know you are in a corner and therefore continue to change the subject.

    :)

    And once more A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

  108. on 12 May 2014 at 4:51 pm 108.Anonymous said …

    Wooten, Hor, little “a”, prick:

    “Obsessing that Freddie is mousey. Do you see the irony”

    Yes

    Well, it’s a start. Get over it. This anonyMOUSE flies solo around here.

    Back on topic, which you keep avoiding.
    Wooten, Hor, little “a”, prick:

    “Now, AGAIN, what standard is the one and only true standard?”

    I don’t know

    That’s right, YOU DON’T KNOW. You don’t have one. Not surprised.

  109. on 12 May 2014 at 7:56 pm 109.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ROTFL, and again Freddie mouse puppeteers and dodges simple questions. Eventually your head must come out of the sand.

    Nothing new here!!!! Lol!!!!!

    luu ya Freddie mouse! :)

  110. on 13 May 2014 at 12:33 am 110.alex said …

    “Nothing new here!!!! Lol!!!!!”

    cept for you bitch, stinky, motherfucking, hor.

    relax, you asshole. atheists do fly solo. what’s the ONLY common denominator, bitch, motherfucker? answer: your bullshit god.

    big bang? nope. obama? nope. liberal? nope.

    what is it again, bitch? repeat after me, your bullshit god. all this other shit you keep bringing up and your bullshit god stays the same.

    do i give a fuck what other atheists think of me? nope. you’re still a bitch motherfucker, clinging to your bullshit god.

  111. on 13 May 2014 at 12:35 am 111.alex said …

    http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    951 bullshit posts, courtesy of the Book of Hor (aka motherfucker). did i say motherfucker?

  112. on 13 May 2014 at 12:56 am 112.alex said …

    “Freddie mouse puppeteers”

    try as he might, the motherfucker fails yet again in his attempt to lump all atheists together. in his pathetic last resort, he attempts to categorize all atheists as freddie mouse puppets. how fucking laughable.

    notice how the dumb motherfucker doesn’t confuse me with any other poster? that’s because my posts are properly laced with biting, vicious, and well deserved disdain for the multi posting beeyatch.

    btw, you dumb motherfucker, unlike you, i don’t pretend to try to be an example for anybody else in here. i just like cursing your motherfucking ass and also to point out your ridiculous collection of posts at: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  113. on 13 May 2014 at 10:04 am 113.freddies_dead said …

    1313.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ROTFL, and again Freddie mouse puppeteers and dodges simple questions. Eventually your head must come out of the sand.

    Nothing new here!!!! Lol!!!!!

    luu ya Freddie mouse! :)

    Nothing new here indeed as, once more, A the lying prick resorts to lying. Only to be expected from a lying prick.

  114. on 24 Jun 2014 at 12:11 pm 114.Reasonable said …

    I have nothing against atheism. I respect your choice to not believe in God. I also respect the very good hearted Christ believers who are trying to make you understand aboutGod. I used to not believe in God. I just go with the flow, everyday deal with mylife. I don’t even pray. But you would not believe how much lighter it feels to have God in your life. When I set aside moments in my day to share with Him my worries,they disappear from my emotional burden. I hope you find God in your life. Every single person you meet is made in His image and likeness. I dearly hope and sincerely wish that someone will show you kindness, peace and tranquility in living in this world… Through following the Lord’s teachings, may you find that He intercedes and intervenes in your life to help YOU…. It is not God’s loss if you don’t believe in Him. And this blog would seem dignified somehow if nobody would curse or use inappropriate words. As for proof, look at nature… Could this be made by science? look into the peoples’ faith in God . Can science explain faith? Sometimes, we are surrounded by so much information we don’t know what to believe in anymore…. I hope you take a moment and ask yourself what you truly believe in… May God bless you in this life’s journey.

  115. on 03 Jul 2014 at 12:24 am 115.alex said …

    1314.Reasonable said …

    you wouldn’t have a problem if you’re constantly bombarded with these?

    I respect your choice to not believe in Allah. I also respect the very good hearted Allah believers who are trying to make you understand about Allah. I used to not believe in Allah. I just go with the flow, everyday deal with mylife. I don’t even pray. But you would not believe how much lighter it feels to have Allah in your life. When I set aside moments in my day to share with Him my worries,they disappear from my emotional burden. I hope you find Allah in your life. Every single person you meet is made in His image and likeness. I dearly hope and sincerely wish that someone will show you kindness, peace and tranquility in living in this world… Through following the Allah’s teachings, may you find that He intercedes and intervenes in your life to help YOU…. It is not Allah’s loss if you don’t believe in Him. And this blog would seem dignified somehow if nobody would curse or use inappropriate words. As for proof, look at nature… Could this be made by science? look into the peoples’ faith in Allah. Can science explain faith? Sometimes, we are surrounded by so much information we don’t know what to believe in anymore…. I hope you take a moment and ask yourself what you truly believe in… May Allah bless you in this life’s journey.

    you likey, bitch, motherfucker?

  116. on 25 Jul 2014 at 2:09 pm 116.frankie said …

    A G A I N… allah, god, yahweh, elohim etc, etc…

    who cares – believe what you want, or don’t believe what you want. just don’t bitch about how “religion” is responsible for all the “problems” in the world… like “christian morality” caused the sub-prime, credit default swap problem that melted down wall street in 2008, right dip shit…? ummmm, no that would be greed that caused that, that would be people putting their own selfish desires before others… but hey! what caused the wall street melt down should be considered the “fit” (people in power) stomping on the little guy (poor working stiffs who invested in the market) which is totally natural, morally correct and observable everywhere in nature… the strong will survive, at the peril of the weak. so next time you get fucked over by some wall street huckster, just remember… you’re the weak dumb fuck in the equation.

  117. on 08 Nov 2014 at 9:43 pm 117.Christian said …

    ietTdything created needs a creator

    scientists say that the earth was created by a big bang a humongous explosion It created all things that is and was and ever will be that is what I would expect to happen from an all-powerful creator it says in the Bible in Genesis 1 God created the heavens and the earth
    universe means One verse and God spoke these words let there be it cannot be any more clear then that science proves that God exists there cannot be creation without a creator clay cannot form itself someone has to shape it Venus de Milo David The Thinker Pieta none of these were created without a creator you can’t create something from nothing there has to be a higher power and for me and my house I will follow the Lord my salvation is more important to me then to try to convince the stubborn angry close minded atheist however I will pray that God have mercy on your soul

  118. on 10 Nov 2014 at 1:02 pm 118.freddies_dead said …

    1321.Christian said …

    What boils down to “creation requires a creator”.

    Of course he never demonstrated the existence of a “creation”; merely asserted that there was one.

    He also entirely failed to explain how, if everything needs a creator, his God doesn’t, which is a fallacious case of special pleading.

  119. on 10 Nov 2014 at 1:31 pm 119.just said …

    1.Everything which has a beginning has a cause.
    2.The universe has a beginning.
    3.Therefore the universe has a cause

    God has no beginning and therefore needs no 1st cause.

  120. on 11 Nov 2014 at 10:50 am 120.freddies_dead said …

    1323.just said …

    1.Everything which has a beginning has a cause.
    2.The universe has a beginning.
    3.Therefore the universe has a cause

    God has no beginning and therefore needs no 1st cause.

    Ah, the Kalam. Which is more of a Kalamity (I’ll get my coat).

    Lets have a look at some refutations.

    It begs the question to avoid the infinite regress that plagues the standard cosmological argument. The set encompassing “things that do not begin to exist” is simply another way of saying God – unless you have another example to go in that set? In which case why isn’t that other example the first cause rather than your God?

    It’s also still special pleading as it arbitrarily asserts that God has no beginning without offering any real reason or evidence.

    Quantum mechanics (specifically quantum indeterminacy) says no to premise 1 so your syllogism fails as your conclusion cannot follow when one of it’s premises is false.

    There’s a fallacy of composition where the universe is placed on the same logical level as it’s contents i.e. premise 1 refers to the set of everything within the universe while premise 2 refers to the universe as part of that same set. However, a set should not be considered to be part of itself so the Kalam is left comparing apples and oranges.

    Of course there’s also the problem of the Kalam assuming that it’s conclusion is true regardless of what anyone may want, wish, demand etc… This reliance on objective truth presupposes the metaphysical primacy of existence (that fact that objects are independent of the consciousnesses that are aware of them) while the claim that God exists requires the metaphysical primacy of consciousness to hold (objects are subject to the consciousnesses that are aware of them such as when God was said to have bought everything into existence through an act of will).

  121. on 17 Nov 2014 at 8:13 am 121.TJ said …

    The metaphysical primacy of existence asserts that the status quo is the resulting current point of existence. That is to say that the natural laws are either fixed or the result of a past event. Regardless, all things are a result of an infinite exchange of matter, energy and time. Time recedes endlessly into the past, and will proceed endlessly into the future.

    Under the metaphysical primacy of existence, time, space and matter have no beginning and no end. The universe as we experience it, may change and reset, but the matter and energy remain constantly in existence in one form or another.

    Under the metaphysical primacy of existence, consciousness arises as a result of natural laws acting on matter and energy.

    The Bible however, asserts that time, space and matter are not the norm. Instead they are a creation of a sole persona that pre-existed as the natural, timeless conscious element. Self described as unlimited in power and knowledge, invisible and formless but not necessarily without substance or essence.

    The Bible also asserts that the very first creation was a form/image for himself(ie.God), That this self image was the personified focal point or tool, by which all other things were then created.

    The Bible begins with… “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”

    Is the universe the formation of the formless?

    Colossians 1:16
    “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.”

  122. on 30 Nov 2014 at 1:29 am 122.Believer said …

    Wow!!! God must be real for so many to keep talking about and trying to prove how real He isn’t. I would think if something doesn’t exist then there would be no point in trying to prove it, because it doesn’t exist. This is a whole lot of talking and bashing about something that isn’t even real. But it is understandable, that believing is a choice. Some choose not to believe. Some choose to believe. So why are some unbelievers so full of venom about God when in their minds He doesn’t even exist. Talk about contradiction. Trying to prove something that doesn’t exist, actually doesn’t exist. The choice not to believe is understandable, but the anger towards others who do and toward someone you say doesn’t exist doesn’t really make since. Why be angry towards a fictional character if in your heart and soul He truly is fictional? The good news is, He loves and believes in you and so do we. God bless the unbelievers He loves you, He truly loves you. :)

  123. on 01 Dec 2014 at 5:11 am 123.Hell Yeah said …

    Believer,

    Because there are consequences when a mass amount of people believe a religion is true. It causes wars and the belief that bad things don’t need to be stopped because a god wouldn’t let the bad things happen. We want to point out that there is really is no god to stop bad things, so people should act on things as if there is no god.

    A good example is with global climate change. There are many religious people out there that believe it isn’t real because a god wouldn’t let it happen, when in reality there is global climate change, so we need to act on it before it is too late. If we sit back and let a god take care of it, humans will die off quicker. Get the idea now?

  124. on 01 Dec 2014 at 6:21 am 124.TJ said …

    If God were to stop “bad things” happening, especially “bad things” caused by man. Then where would our free will be?

  125. on 22 Dec 2014 at 12:34 am 125.the messenger said …

    Understand that without Judeo/Christian beliefs we would all be suffering and dead.

    Christianity and Judaism are the blueprints for all forms of democratic government. Especially America. From the belief in “GOD given rights” all the way to it’s legal system, Jewish teachings and morals are both the foundation and the skeletal structure of the American government, as well as many other governments.

  126. on 04 Jun 2016 at 2:32 am 126.Anonymous said …

    Are you kidding me with all of this? All these things in this lunatic article can be proven wrong just by using the same method in the article only the other way around!

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply