Page 31 of 71 FirstFirst ... 2127282930313233343541 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 708

Thread: Psalm 14: Who was Jesus' grandpa?

  1. #301
    Super Senior Member Delphinus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,301
    Quote Originally Posted by violin View Post
    You may ask me to prove to you that I ate today at 09:00PM. How am I suppose to prove that to you - I can't. And it doesn't mean it never happened.
    Actually, if you were killed and your stomach contents examined, that would provide partial proof. If we had witnesses of you eating, we could use their testimonies to show that they saw you eating. We could examine your house and find dirty cutlery and plates. All of these factors combined would prove to a high degree of probability (though not 100%) that you had eaten.

    So physics has three theories that are proven but conflict with each other.
    Not proven. Heavily supported by current evidence. As we obtain new evidence, one theory may become more likely than the other two and even be accepted as fact - just as the theory of gravity and Darwin's theory of evolution were. At one point LaMarck's theory and Darwin's were equally viable based on contemporary evidence; as more evidence was gathered, Darwin's theory won out. That's how science works.
    And we have no empirical evidence for God, and plenty for the alternatives; God is a weak and improbable theory at this point, God is dead. In addition God is logically impossible; no scientific theory outright defies logic.

  2. #302
    999 Knights Member Regantor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,825
    Never mind unbiased experimentation, then, Violin... Quantum mechanics has so many new and counter-intuitive theories like the cashmir effect that calling it "god" before you are correctly able to quantify everything falls somewhat short of the true spirit of science... If you stare at clouds long enough you're bound to find one that looks like a pointy witch riding a broom. That doesn't mean disney-style witches exist and are really just screwing with us.

    Seriously, I'm actually pretty depressed about this lately. Basically all the Japan tsunami videos on youtube are filled with religious nutjobs saying that we need to pray to god, or that we've done something wrong and that god is punishing us...

    Last year I randomly came down with diabetes, and since it was badly misdiagnosed by my GP at first, I came within a hair's breath of serious nerve damage to my eyes and limbs... Fifty years ago I would have just wasted away and died. Without science I would have just ceased to be, but all the while some preacher is wondering around the hospital trying to act like god saved my life... Never mind the fact that god must have created diabetes, tsunamis, and bed bugs with weaponized gonads aswell.

    Religion is pure ignorance and I've already staked my life on the fact that if the big man exists, it's logically impossible for him to be someone worth praising.

    As a footnote I really apologize for bringing this subject up around you, Kodos... I'm just feeling rather sour lately because of this kind of belief subjugating half the people around me. Hope you can see why I haven't been too comfortable discussing it on AIM.
    Last edited by Regantor; 03-13-2011 at 09:51 AM.

  3. #303
    Fenn
    Guest
    I see nothing happened since I last logged in. I'm feeling humourous today, let me know if what I say is incomprehensive because of that and I'll fix it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    Ignorance is only a valid excuse for bad behavior or erroneous beliefs when it is unreasonable to expect someone to know the thing they were ignorant of. It is not unreasonable to expect someone to be familiar with the ideology and practices of the ideological groups they willingly join and support. Laziness and sheepishness are not valid reasons for not doing your homework.


    ...

    ...



    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    These are immensely stupid, evil, and dangerous beliefs and should be called out on such. Also most atheists are rather less confrontational, and get less results or the same results. I've actually won over a fair handful of minds. My approach works. We need a strong and aggressive approach. People need to have it made explicitly clear to them that these beliefs are unacceptable for sane, moral, adults to hold and that we as a society of sane and moral people will not abide them and will call them out on them. The elephant in the room is loud, obnoxious, dangerous, and aggressive, and people will not acknowledge him unless we put spotlights on him and scream from the rooftops.
    Let me explain myself; I never doubted or questioned the assertiveness or the overt nature of your argument. I agree that a firm, attention-grabbing and unrelenting course of action is the best choice. It's more your demeanor that I think has some people running. As much as Christians represent their beliefs, you represent the aetheist stance. Not that I am a particularly good judge of character, and its over the internet which is never easy, but frankly you come across as a pessimistic, rude, obnoxious human being to me.

    And that's okay.

    You might be and you might not be IRL, idk. You are also completely justified in feeling downright furious since you know more than anyone how awful religion is. But, like I said, it depends on your motives. If you're simply here to prove you are right, carry on my friend. If your main motive is to change people's way of thinking, showing people that "the other side" is miserable and crude isn't going to give them any motive to change.

    I can't say whether you're method works, although I believe you when you say you've won a handful of minds. Actually, you can add me to that list if you want. But not everyone responds the same way to your approach; if you are really intent of changing as many people as possible sometimes you gotta modify your strategy to fit their character. I'm not saying be less assertive or blatant; just less rude. Aggresiveness helps your cause; obnoxiousness does not.

    I say this from what I've witnessed on this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    Also: Socrates was aggressive and insensitive.
    Yes. And in (Plato's) allegory of the cave Socrates explains that if someone left the cave and saw the truth, their eyes would be blinded after so many years in the darkness. You holding the light closer and preventing them from running back will prevent them from denying it. You taking a flashlight and smashing it through their freaking eyesocket will just scare them and put them on the defensive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    That doesn't change the fact that Morpheus was right. The reality is unchanged. If a man is taught from birth that Shanghai is the capital of the People's Republic of China, the capital does not suddenly shift to there from Beijing. Reality is not determined by belief, no matter how strongly held. As Phillip K. Dick so eloquently put it "Reality is that which does not go away when you stop believing in it."
    That doesn't change the fact that most people wouldn't believe him. You can stand on the highest mountain and proclaim you are right forever, and the evil Catholics will still run around enslaving the human race with their false beliefs.

    It's all about your intent when you made this thread, which I will now ask you outright. What is your motive here?

    Once I know this I'll have a better idea how to respond to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    You can't wake up someone who is pretending to be asleep, and there is a difference between being blind and having your eyes closed. If someone will not change their mind because of my argumentation then they will not change their mind for any argumentation. I can only help those who are truly blind, not those who merely have their eyes closed.
    I understand and disagree somewhat. I'd say its much harder to peel open the faker's eyes, but it can be done. You simply have to convince him of the dangers (and benefits) of opening his eyes as opposed to keeping them shut. If I was pretending to sleep and someone said "hey, a train is about to run over your family and if you look quick you can catch the $100 bill floating past you," I'd open 'em.

    Hence, throwing in a "you don't necessarily have to abandon your morals with your religion. Here are some examples of secular moral philosophies," more than once in 31 pages would be nice. Actually, since you are aetheist yourself, could you explain where the heck those morals come from. I still can't see much reason to do good without religious initiative.

    One last note...
    I pray that...
    I say this often without religious intent. It's more or less a metaphor I use to say "in my thoughts." If I can and want to help physically, then I will. It's often what I say when I know with certainty I can do no more than I have done for someone. It lets people know they have support and that someone is thinking of their wellbeing, while giving my mind some sort of peace. When I'm "praying," it means I know I'm out of options.

    Does using religious phrases as metaphors bothers you? It doesn't bother me anymore than using things like dragons in figurative speech/writing.
    Last edited by Fenn; 03-13-2011 at 12:08 PM.

  4. #304
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by violin View Post
    Oh, please. If I can prove to you here that what I experienced is true I would love to. But I will probably need more time and efforts and we'll probably need to meet face to face.

    So physics has three theories that are proven but conflict with each other.
    Isn't like if one prove that God exists and another person prove that it doesn't.
    Many of todays theories in science were "proven" to be wrong in the past but were recognsed at a later time.
    Physics does not have theories which are proven and conflict. If something is proven it cannot possibly conflict with something else proven. Facts cannot contradict each other.

    In order for the most theories in science to be proven you need to go to a laboratry and see experiments and data. You need alot of time.
    And?

    You may ask me to prove to you that I ate today at 09:00PM. How am I suppose to prove that to you - I can't. And it doesn't mean it never happened.
    You can. As a general rule the weight of evidence should be proportionate to the weight of the claim. "I ate lunch today at 9:00 PM" is a largely believable claim and requires little evidence to convince a reasonable person. All of the examples Del pointed out would suffice. Additionally if we knew you to be a trustworthy person and if we knew that you had no reason to lie, your say-so might be enough to qualify as proof in such a insignificant case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenn View Post
    nature of your argument. I agree that a firm, attention-grabbing and unrelenting course of action is the best choice. It's more your demeanor that I think has some people running. As much as Christians represent their beliefs, you represent the aetheist stance. Not that I am a particularly good judge of character, and its over the internet which is never easy, but frankly you come across as a pessimistic, rude, obnoxious human being to me.

    And that's okay.
    If it is rudeness to stare evil and ignorance frankly in the face and to call them out for what they are, then I proudly declare myself rude.

    You might be and you might not be IRL, idk. You are also completely justified in feeling downright furious since you know more than anyone how awful religion is. But, like I said, it depends on your motives.
    No it doesn't. If a convicted murderer tells you that it is morally unacceptable to execute people (and let's assume for the sake of argument that you agree with me and this claim) he is right. He is right if he says this with no regard to his own life, but he is right too if he says this out of a desire to avoid death. If something is true it is true. Period. The messenger's beliefs, actions, and motives are not the same thing as the messenger's message, and one should not color your opinion of the other.

    If you're simply here to prove you are right, carry on my friend. If your main motive is to change people's way of thinking, showing people that "the other side" is miserable and crude isn't going to give them any motive to change.
    Except I have. And also you will notice I'm much more polite with the people who don't repeatedly make terrible arguments or insult me first. I treat people witht he respect they show me. Tit for tat.

    I can't say whether you're method works, although I believe you when you say you've won a handful of minds. Actually, you can add me to that list if you want. But not everyone responds the same way to your approach; if you are really intent of changing as many people as possible sometimes you gotta modify your strategy to fit their character. I'm not saying be less assertive or blatant; just less rude. Aggresiveness helps your cause; obnoxiousness does not.
    Again, I am not being rude, not anymore than I have to be. It is always 'rude' to reveal to someone that they harbor beliefs that are completely unacceptable for sane, moral, people to hold.

    Yes. And in (Plato's) allegory of the cave Socrates explains that if someone left the cave and saw the truth, their eyes would be blinded after so many years in the darkness. You holding the light closer and preventing them from running back will prevent them from denying it. You taking a flashlight and smashing it through their freaking eyesocket will just scare them and put them on the defensive.
    You can make allegorical analogies all you want, but the fact is I've gotten results - moreso than any other atheist I know. So really I could care less. Hypothetical situations are less useful as evidence than actual concrete incidents.

    That doesn't change the fact that most people wouldn't believe him. You can stand on the highest mountain and proclaim you are right forever, and the evil Catholics will still run around enslaving the human race with their false beliefs.
    Yes and no. This is why it is so vital we be aggressive. We need to make it clear that we, as sane and moral people, will not tolerate insanity and evil. We will let you go to church, sure, but we won't respect you for it any more than we respect Klansmen for congregating. Religion is a universally stupid, and a largely ugly and hateful thing, and it rightfully deserves our contempt and disgust.

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  5. #305
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,813
    It's all about your intent when you made this thread, which I will now ask you outright. What is your motive here?
    I believe my intent is stated in the OP, which you should have read. If it's not, it should be and I'll probably add it later.

    This thread was initially started because a particularly obnoxious and retarded evangelical user was shitting up the forums with his awful nonsense. My ex-girlfriend (then my girlfriend at the time) asked me to come here and lay the smackdown on him. I did. It kept his antics confined to one thread, and provided lots of laughs for all. As others stepped up to the plate, I actually changed minds.

    My goal for this thread is manifold:
    1. Have fun. I like debating, and I enjoy this. I will also admit that, while it is wrong, there is certainly a certain amount of immoral pleasure to be found in bad people to feel bad.
    2. Win over some minds. I am unlikely to make anyone I actually debate see the truth. In fact, I don't know if I ever actually did. However, I do make people watching change their minds. Part of this is accomplished by the weight of my arguments, but also because it reveals how insane religious people are. I have had no less than two separate Christians forced into a corner and admit that they believe slavery and/or genocide are morally acceptable if God says it is okay. WW2dude even said he would kill someone if God asked him to. Think about that. If the voices in his head asked him to, he would murder. That is why these people are so dangerous. Every moderate is really just an extremist in potentia.
    3. Help the atheists and other people see how debate and logical argumentation is done. Critical thinking and logical debate are extremely important and valuable skills. I like to think that I am rather good at both, and I would like to think that by example I can help others see how it is done.
    4. ???
    5. Profit!

    I understand and disagree somewhat. I'd say its much harder to peel open the faker's eyes, but it can be done. You simply have to convince him of the dangers (and benefits) of opening his eyes as opposed to keeping them shut. If I was pretending to sleep and someone said "hey, a train is about to run over your family and if you look quick you can catch the $100 bill floating past you," I'd open 'em.
    It's not a perfect analogy. A person pretending to be asleep doesn't kill, rape, or torture people. Theists can and often do. A person pretending to be asleep does not teach their children that pretending to be asleep is the highest virtue you can have and that people who don't spend their lives pretending to be asleep aren't really human at all. And - even more amusingly - that it's great to pretend your asleep,but people who pretend to be unconscious are misguided and evil and also inhuman.
    Yeah.

    Hence, throwing in a "you don't necessarily have to abandon your morals with your religion. Here are some examples of secular moral philosophies," more than once in 31 pages would be nice.
    If you want to be a good person you do have to abandon your religious morals. And that is immaterial to the discussion of if God exists or not. Also I have brought up morality before when idiots have forced me to.

    EDIT: WTF. There is a third part to the post, but it won't let me post it. Please don't reply, anyone, until I get that third part up.
    Last edited by Kodos; 03-13-2011 at 04:19 PM.

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  6. #306
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,813
    Actually, since you are aetheist yourself, could you explain where the heck those morals come from. I still can't see much reason to do good without religious initiative.
    The question of God's existence has literally no effect on ethical theory, so there's no reason to discuss ethics here. This has been logically proven by Socrates, among others. Observe:
    Assume that God says 'Theft is wrong." Why? Well there are two options.
    1. God says that theft is wrong simply because of fiat. There is no rhyme or reason. Well, if this is the case then God could change his mind. Tomorrow theft may be fine. Either way, there is no logical reason behind any of God's commands or taboos and no ethical system can be derived. God's say-so here is completely worthless as a guide to moral behavior.
    2. God says that theft is wrong because of one or more reasons. Well, that's good. If we assume that God's reasons are justified and that theft is indeed wrong for the reasons God lists, then we can conclude that theft is, indeed, wrong. However, it is not wrong because God said so, but rather because of the reasons God listed. God's reasons, not God, is the source of morality. Thus God is entirely pointless as a guide of morality, since it should be his reasons, and not his commands, that we derive our behaviors from.
    QED. Whether or not God exists is as important to morality as the question of whether or not I have any leftover Chinese food in my refrigerator.

    I say this often without religious intent. It's more or less a metaphor I use to say "in my thoughts." If I can and want to help physically, then I will. It's often what I say when I know with certainty I can do no more than I have done for someone. It lets people know they have support and that someone is thinking of their wellbeing, while giving my mind some sort of peace. When I'm "praying," it means I know I'm out of options.
    Then you should say "my thoughts and hopes are with the victims of this tragedy." or something along those lines. Using the line of prayer legitimizes it. You create the sense that it is acceptable for an adult without severe mental retardation to believe in an imaginary friend and to ask this imaginary friend for help when bad things happen.

    Of course, that's not even the half of how retarded this idea is. Since Christians believe that this imaginary friend is responsible for the bad thing in the first place, and that by this imaginary friend's own 'words' that the victims deserved what they got because they did not believe in him.

    Does using religious phrases as metaphors bothers you? It doesn't bother me anymore than using things like dragons in figurative speech/writing.
    A belief in dragons is not something that is seen as an acceptable thing for a mentally sound adult to have. A belief in dragons is not something that impels parents to poison the minds of their children. A belief in dragons is not something that is used to justify murder, torture, and rape across the planet. A belief in dragons is not something that is used as a basis to extort money from millions of desperate people. A belief in dragons is not used to lie to people into thinking that their ignorance, apathy, and evil are virtues. A belief in dragons is not responsible for more suffering than anything else in human history.

    A belief in God is.

    You cannot compare these two things.

    EDIT: Finally. WTF, board?

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  7. #307
    Fenn
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    If it is rudeness to stare evil and ignorance frankly in the face and to call them out for what they are, then I proudly declare myself rude.


    No it doesn't. If a convicted murderer tells you that it is morally unacceptable to execute people (and let's assume for the sake of argument that you agree with me and this claim) he is right. He is right if he says this with no regard to his own life, but he is right too if he says this out of a desire to avoid death. If something is true it is true. Period. The messenger's beliefs, actions, and motives are not the same thing as the messenger's message, and one should not color your opinion of the other.


    Except I have. And also you will notice I'm much more polite with the people who don't repeatedly make terrible arguments or insult me first. I treat people witht he respect they show me. Tit for tat.


    Again, I am not being rude, not anymore than I have to be. It is always 'rude' to reveal to someone that they harbor beliefs that are completely unacceptable for sane, moral, people to hold.


    You can make allegorical analogies all you want, but the fact is I've gotten results - moreso than any other atheist I know. So really I could care less. Hypothetical situations are less useful as evidence than actual concrete incidents.


    Yes and no. This is why it is so vital we be aggressive. We need to make it clear that we, as sane and moral people, will not tolerate insanity and evil. We will let you go to church, sure, but we won't respect you for it any more than we respect Klansmen for congregating. Religion is a universally stupid, and a largely ugly and hateful thing, and it rightfully deserves our contempt and disgust.
    Closed the window...reply deleted. This is gonna be short.

    If being just a tad less rude will make a larger number of people willing to change their minds then you should do it. If you think I'm wrong don't. I never said what you were doing is rude. Ever.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    I believe my intent is stated in the OP, which you should have read. If it's not, it should be and I'll probably add it later.

    This thread was initially started because a particularly obnoxious and retarded evangelical user was shitting up the forums with his awful nonsense. My ex-girlfriend (then my girlfriend at the time) asked me to come here and lay the smackdown on him. I did. It kept his antics confined to one thread, and provided lots of laughs for all. As others stepped up to the plate, I actually changed minds.

    My goal for this thread is manifold:
    1. Have fun. I like debating, and I enjoy this. I will also admit that, while it is wrong, there is certainly a certain amount of immoral pleasure to be found in bad people to feel bad.
    2. Win over some minds. I am unlikely to make anyone I actually debate see the truth. In fact, I don't know if I ever actually did. However, I do make people watching change their minds. Part of this is accomplished by the weight of my arguments, but also because it reveals how insane religious people are. I have had no less than two separate Christians forced into a corner and admit that they believe slavery and/or genocide are morally acceptable if God says it is okay. WW2dude even said he would kill someone if God asked him to. Think about that. If the voices in his head asked him to, he would murder. That is why these people are so dangerous. Every moderate is really just an extremist in potentia.
    3. Help the atheists and other people see how debate and logical argumentation is done. Critical thinking and logical debate are extremely important and valuable skills. I like to think that I am rather good at both, and I would like to think that by example I can help others see how it is done.
    4. ???
    5. Profit!


    It's not a perfect analogy. A person pretending to be asleep doesn't kill, rape, or torture people. Theists can and often do. A person pretending to be asleep does not teach their children that pretending to be asleep is the highest virtue you can have and that people who don't spend their lives pretending to be asleep aren't really human at all. And - even more amusingly - that it's great to pretend your asleep,but people who pretend to be unconscious are misguided and evil and also inhuman.
    Yeah.


    If you want to be a good person you do have to abandon your religious morals. And that is immaterial to the discussion of if God exists or not. Also I have brought up morality before when idiots have forced me to.

    EDIT: WTF. There is a third part to the post, but it won't let me post it. Please don't reply, anyone, until I get that third part up.
    Dude its 31 pages. And I re-read and it...kinda explained it. Not really your personal motives though so thanks for explaining. As for them thar motives...

    1. I've wanted to ask you this but didn't have the guts. Glad to know your enjoying this and not logging on every day on the basis of pure obligation.
    2. "Win over some minds. I am unlikely to make anyone I actually debate see the truth. In fact, I don't know if I ever actually did." Hey! Hello, I'm right here!
    3. Can I receive my degree yet? Or will their be a final exam?

    Morals is a completely legit topic here. Whether they should or not, people draw morals from God. I was just saying certain morals, like service, are still justifiable and logical morals without religion and people need to realize this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    The question of God's existence has literally no effect on ethical theory, so there's no reason to discuss ethics here. This has been logically proven by Socrates, among others. Observe:
    Assume that God says 'Theft is wrong." Why? Well there are two options.
    1. God says that theft is wrong simply because of fiat. There is no rhyme or reason. Well, if this is the case then God could change his mind. Tomorrow theft may be fine. Either way, there is no logical reason behind any of God's commands or taboos and no ethical system can be derived. God's say-so here is completely worthless as a guide to moral behavior.
    2. God says that theft is wrong because of one or more reasons. Well, that's good. If we assume that God's reasons are justified and that theft is indeed wrong for the reasons God lists, then we can conclude that theft is, indeed, wrong. However, it is not wrong because God said so, but rather because of the reasons God listed. God's reasons, not God, is the source of morality. Thus God is entirely pointless as a guide of morality, since it should be his reasons, and not his commands, that we derive our behaviors from.
    QED. Whether or not God exists is as important to morality as the question of whether or not I have any leftover Chinese food in my refrigerator.


    Then you should say "my thoughts and hopes are with the victims of this tragedy." or something along those lines. Using the line of prayer legitimizes it. You create the sense that it is acceptable for an adult without severe mental retardation to believe in an imaginary friend and to ask this imaginary friend for help when bad things happen.

    Of course, that's not even the half of how retarded this idea is. Since Christians believe that this imaginary friend is responsible for the bad thing in the first place, and that by this imaginary friend's own 'words' that the victims deserved what they got because they did not believe in him.


    A belief in dragons is not something that is seen as an acceptable thing for a mentally sound adult to have. A belief in dragons is not something that impels parents to poison the minds of their children. A belief in dragons is not something that is used to justify murder, torture, and rape across the planet. A belief in dragons is not something that is used as a basis to extort money from millions of desperate people. A belief in dragons is not used to lie to people into thinking that their ignorance, apathy, and evil are virtues. A belief in dragons is not responsible for more suffering than anything else in human history.

    A belief in God is.

    You cannot compare these two things.
    *pouts* but I wanna! And prayer is not isolated to Christianity. Anyways there are a lot of expressions in our society that derive from really gruesome things, but we use them all the time today in lighthearted discussion. Do you oppose them all?

    I can't think of an example off the top of my head but if you don't know any I will try to come up with something.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    EDIT: Finally. WTF, board?
    Yeah, same happened to me. can't handle us.
    Last edited by Fenn; 03-13-2011 at 10:01 PM.

  8. #308
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    8
    omg dude how can u say god duznt exist
    i mean look around at teh world an all its cool stuff, how did it get tere if not by god, answer me that mr. smartypants. if god duznt exist how do we be good an help others. its not lyk atheists hav any morals so how can tey say christians are evil an stuff. we do gods work an u just try to hurt people bi posting all dis everywhere. y cant u see everyting god has done for u?

  9. #309
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,813
    Fenn, I'll get a reply to you later.

    Quote Originally Posted by codfan123 View Post
    omg dude how can u say god duznt exist
    Pretty easily. When you put even a small modicum of effort into your posts you find that typing things like "God does not exist" becomes quite simple.

    i mean look around at teh world an all its cool stuff, how did it get tere if not by god, answer me that mr. smartypants.


    if god duznt exist how do we be good an help others. its not lyk atheists hav any morals so how can tey say christians are evil an stuff. we do gods work an u just try to hurt people bi posting all dis everywhere.


    y cant u see everyting god has done for u?
    idk my bff jill?

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  10. #310
    Fifty Fifty Member Bacon_Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Elizabeth's Court
    Posts
    5,766
    Kodos, I pray... er, HOPE that was a Troll. (Because you fended him off in an entertaining way)

    On that note, you've said it is bad to pray. Most people consider praying and hoping to be the same. Is their a problem with hoping? I mean... Really. Yeah, it's best to go out and DO something, but some people cant and if you are doing something, is it wrong to hope that your work succeeds?
    My CC thread - Updated 01/30/14
    My AA thread - Updated 03/04/14

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •