Video: Kathy Griffin invites Jesus to “suck it”
posted at 9:38 am on September 14, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
I don’t get Steve Doocy here. She’s trying to be funny, he says, but then she’s not trying to be funny when she says “this award is my god now”? And this too from Lauren Green, whose op-ed you’re going to swoon over:
When she accepted her long-awaited award, she said: “A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus.”
Now I could have been mildly insulted at that and turned the other cheek, as the founder of Christianity taught. But then she went on to say “Suck it, Jesus. This award is my God now.”
Aren’t you supposed to turn the other cheek at precisely the moment when it’s hardest to do so? Otherwise, what’s the great moral value in it?
Someone will explain it to me below, I’m sure. Caution — comment bait ahead.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 Next »
The old “what came first, the chicken or the egg?” argument? Seriously? Who created the big-bang? Why, the big bearded man in the sky, obviously!?! You got nothing. But keep hanging in there man, I am sure you will convince yourself again soon.
No, but everybody will ignore that “source” of yours once they’ve read it. Biblerevelations.com? Not real objective. Not exactly the Washington Post.
The Sinner on September 16, 2007 at 5:27 AM
Nonfactor:
Rather than making an exceedingly long post going quote for quote, I’ll say the following:
You are employing the constant liberal tactic of “reframing the debate (aka making *^%* up)” because you can’t win on the real premises. Faith in God is just that: You believe it without concrete evidence. I know you believe the Bible is false, but I’m sure you know the details of doubting Thomas. I do not know whether God is true or not, I simply believe in him. My belief is nuetral to everyone else’s belief, and I, unlike you, don’t waste my time trying to “prove” someone else’s beliefs are a lie.
I’ll be proven right or wrong when I’m dead, and that’s all I need.
As to the existence of The Garden of Eden, God sealed that off to mortal men. An omnipotent God could do anything from throwing it into space to having it overrun with a impenetrable(at that time) rainforest. The only knowledge we have of the garden is that it had the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Your assertion that it doesn’t exist therefore has no hard evidence. At the time, there was no technology so it isn’t like you’re going to find some Blimpie Sub napkins with Adam’s name on them.
Most of Genesis is filled with stories that are more important for their moral value than concrete historical accuracy.
Finally, one of the laws of our universe is that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred. Everything has an origin. Most scientists believe our universe to be a few billion years old, and that is was born out of a singularity which, for unknown reasons, exploded outward with such energy as to make the universe still expanding from the shockwaves today.
Since you cannot actually test the beginning of a universe, you can’t ever have proof of it. All you can do is observe the momevent of the universe and extrapolate backwards from there, but it still doesn’t explain why or how the matter singularity got there in the first place, or why it’s even neccesary.
While intriguing, my bet is that particle collider will, like anything with science, generate more questions that it does answers, or even be a multi-billion dollar failure. Your faith in it to “disprove God” is astounding. At least I don’t put all my faith into machines to prove other people are wrong.
Quite frankly Nonfactor, if you want to waste time asserting that everyone else is wrong and only you know the truth, you’re no different than “The Religious Right.” You’re like a holy roller, only your system is empty and barren of anything of moral value. A world without God and the idea of punishment for evil acts whether you are punished on earth or not is a strong disincentive for many people to commit crimes. God’s laws are perfect where human laws are flawed. Everything Hitler and Stalin did was 100% legal under their own systems. Give an atheist absolute power and he’s sure to kill without abandon; his only God is himself. It has already happened twice in the past century.
Sorry Nonfactor, if you’re counting on biblical accountings of Genesis to disprove the Christian God, you’re going to find yourself in an uphill battle. “The Garden of Eden doesn’t exist!” is not proof.
BKennedy on September 16, 2007 at 5:34 AM
So what you’re saying is, even though nobody else can prove their theories which are themselves full of unprovable speculation, the only theory you’re going to dump on is a higher power which created the universe? If you say so sonny-jim. How is chicken-egg even remotely relevant to this? It’s only relevant in your mind, because this is solely a question about origin. The universe is something, but in order to explain the big bang you first have to create a condition where all matter is condensed in a tiny singularity in a seemingly infinite amount of empty space. There’s really no way to get around either accepting that fact as a given, or to assume it was created that way by a higher power. Those are your two options, and each one cannot be proven.
But feel free to run away from that The Sinner. It’s all fun and games when you’re bashing on Christianity, but when you actually have to back up anything more than your hatred for the beliefs of others, all of a sudden it’s “That’s not fair!”
Yeah, we all know how objective the WaPo is, LOL. Next you’ll be telling me the New York Times is the arbiter of all real news, ignore the fraud and corruption, nothing to see here.
BKennedy on September 16, 2007 at 5:49 AM
Really? So why do you dodge the question? Shouldn’t it be easy for you to answer, being that you claim it’s a proven fact?
Here, I’ll ask again. Read it really slow this time and maybe you’ll have better luck.
How about giving it a shot?
So the findings of scientists don’t count if a religious publication happens to publish them? Let me guess. Scientific findings are only valid if published in The DailyKos? Huffington Post? Democratic Underground? The New Republic?
Mighty honest of you.
Gregor on September 16, 2007 at 6:12 AM
“Because?” Uh, WHO did you say was begging the question? The logic here is stunning.
Since this statement has nothing to do with logic and reason (if we knew someone made us it would be only logical and reasonable to listen to that being’s instructions on how He wants us to live), it sure seems as though that’s the real issue here for you. Certainly appears that way anyway, from everything you’ve said.
inviolet on September 16, 2007 at 8:31 AM
This is a great example of the mind of an atheist. It’s not about whether or not God exists. It’s all about it being easier to live without fear or guilt for your actions. Because, by God, nobody’s going to tell them how to live their life. By refusing to believe in God, they eliminate the need for rules or limitations and can then do whatever it is they want at anytime.
This is also why liberals love to condemn morals. Their favorite line … “don’t push your morals on me.” The truth is that even if religion was a sham, and God didn’t exist, morality would still be clearly defined. Morals weren’t brought down by Moses on tablets. Morals are common sense and even Atheists know when they’re doing something wrong, but they don’t want to stop. So it’s easier to blame morals on a false belief in God, opening up the door to act freely without guilt. But even if there were no God … morality would still exist, and Nonfactor and Sinner would still be trying to find ways to avoid feeling guilty.
Gregor on September 16, 2007 at 10:06 AM
Well said, Gregor. It is always easier to make excuses than it is to face up.
Lawrence on September 16, 2007 at 10:18 AM
I just want to thank Sinner. If not for his contrary attitude I would not have gotten the opportunity to read and learn from so many pearls offered by so many of you who obviously have studied the Word and other material.
I would just hope that something didn’t happen in Sinner’s life which is causing him to act up like a mad and obstinate child. I suspect that he really believes, in the back of his head. He probaly thinks that the God he secretly believes in won’t actually hold him accountable for what he does with his life…hum… Someone else to pray for..which I will.
CCRWM on September 16, 2007 at 12:58 PM
You have been thoroughly discredited by Nonfactor and are not worth wasting another typed word on.
The Sinner on September 16, 2007 at 1:06 PM
OK, but in order to recreate the beginning of nothing … wouldn’t you have to start with absolutely everything? This is ridiculous. We could run circles all day, but I got way better shit to do.
Riiiiiight, so any atheist MUST be a liberal, none could possibly be a conservative, right? So gays, hispanics and now atheists are not welcome in the GOP I take it? Well any party you are a member of, I’d gladly pass on. It is no wonder you religious zealots have driven so many from the GOP.
The Sinner on September 16, 2007 at 1:15 PM
So you admit it’s irrational and illogical? Good. Now don’t lecture me on logic or reason again.
Because who wants to think logically when they’re alive? It’s so hard!
Okay, some Christians hold onto the idea that Genesis is 100% true and chastise other Christians for saying otherwise being that if it wasn’t true then their religion is false, yet some Christians like yourself see the blatant inaccuracies in Genesis and say that it’s not supposed to be true. Pathetic.
I still can’t get over your “you can’t prove a negative” meme. I’m sure you thought yourself so clever when you mistook the idea of a god for your own personal God. Genesis is false, you’ve admitted it yourself (stories aren’t important for historical accuracy), your religion is false, and insisting otherwise is insane.
One of the most stupid assumptions made by the religious about atheists. That we don’t have any moral code, that if we don’t believe in your God we must not believe in right or wrong. That if we aren’t afraid of burning in hell for eternity then we’ll just do whatever we want. The fire and brimstone motif of Christianity might have been useful in controlling the masses a thousand years ago, in a modern world like this religion isn’t necessary. Sure, there are still immature people who would turn into rapists and murderers if they weren’t promised an eternal paradise after death, but that just doesn’t speak well to the inner workings of Christians.
I agree, morality is a human creation, which isn’t to say that atheists don’t have morals. You’re using a straw man whenever you attempt to claim that atheists don’t have a standard of morality. I’m sure you wouldn’t say the same thing when referring to AP.
Nonfactor on September 16, 2007 at 1:27 PM
Wouldn’t want to speak for someone else, but that doesn’t sound to me like “atheists have no moral code.” In fact it’s theists’ contention that the fact that atheists HAVE a moral code that should be a piece of evidence to them (just one piece, mind you) that we are not just products of random mutations.
inviolet on September 16, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Reminds me of a story about a group of buddhist monks who had the idea that if they were going to die, then they were going to die. In high school, my friends and I would joke about playing along by running across busy streets.
My ideology has a little more personal responsibility in it. I’ve never once driven drunk and have a problem with people who do.
I didn’t. And no, not quite but close enough.
So what you’re telling me is that the Big Bang is going to be reproduced, showing exactly how the world was created from nothing?
Because that’s not what the article says.
Again, Sinner, that’s the whole point. In pure layman’s terms, Allah basically said that when Christians are criticized, THEN they should pat themselves on the back for how much better they are.
And that’s exactly what happened.
Last, it’s impossible to prove that Christians are not as murderous as radical Muslims without proving that Christians are not as murderous as radical Muslims.
If I told you, Sinner, you suck just as much as Rosie (hypothetically), you’d have to then prove that you don’t by proving how much better than her you are, patting yourself on the back for how you don’t break into “fire can’t melt steel” rants.
I mean, no one should be praised for not saying “fire can’t melt steel.” But it’s useful to say this when you’re accused of being like Rosie.
Esthier on September 16, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Ugh…I wish I didn’t have to go to a family function this afternoon. I am so looking forward to reading all the stuff Gregor and others have provided. This place is a veritable treasure trove!
Nonfactor…thou protest too much…and with too much anger…makes one wonder… yep…added to the list :)
CCRWM on September 16, 2007 at 1:43 PM
*snort*
Yeah, Nonfactor did a great job there proving to everyone the Garden of Eden did not exist with his brilliant discourse about how, uh, well, technically he didn’t prove anything, just blustered about in his usual self-righteous manner.
I love you too The Sinner. And if I’m not worth the time for one typed word, why did you bother with sixteen?
BKennedy on September 16, 2007 at 2:22 PM
If you’d paid attention to any of the previous threads on this topic I wouldn’t need to write this post. Man didn’t originate in the Middle East, man originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago, evidence shows us this. Man never lived to be more than 500 years old, evidence shows us this. There was not a flood 5,000 years ago that wiped out life on this planet (or even in a specific section of the Middle East depending on how you want to interpret The Bible to fit your biases). Your free to ignore the evidence, but if you do don’t go on thinking you’re a rational being or that your faith is a logical construct.
Nonfactor on September 16, 2007 at 2:44 PM
That makes no sense whatsoever.
Even if they’re never been a flood of the kind mentioned in the Bible, that doesn’t prove that no one would ever have built such a boat.
It’s nonsense to even look for a game console with the capabilities the ps3 claims to have, since no one needs a machine like that anyway and therefore no one would have built one.
Esthier on September 16, 2007 at 3:17 PM
This entire thread makes me want to stick all of you fanatical atheists and overzealous Christians on a rocket ship and shoot you off into space. Maybe together you can find God and/or the origins of the universe. Or just bore each other to death with the same closed-minded babble from both directions.
Best of all, you’d be leaving in peace those of us who think the universe is a pretty amazing place, but who recognize the one obvious truth: that none of us actually know the answers, and the only thing that we’re certain of is that we can’t really be certain of anything. Those of us who know perfectly well there are things we don’t know, probably great and interesting and wonderful things, but that we’ll never really know about them … at least not in this lifetime.
Those of us who admit the blisteringly obvious fact that it is equally stupid to either insist you know God does not exist or insist you know the true nature of God if he does.
Both propositions are logical impossibilities.
More to the point, the other thing I know with absolute certainty is that none of you are going to solve the mysteries of the universe here. All you’ve really accomplished is to help Allahpundit get an i-Phone.
He certainly deserves it. One throwaway post about a celebrity none of us actually watch, and he draws 500+ comments and
Godwho knows how much ad revenue.When I used the word Pavlovian to describe you freaks I was being way too nice. More like piranhas tossed a bloody spool of rotted intestines. Yummy.
All of this is why I invite you to hop on my rocket ship. You could spend years disrespecting each other and pretending you know something the other guy doesn’t. It’d be a blast. The only bad part for you is that you’re taking the Muslim fanatics with you.
Good luck with that. Those folks are sure they know everything, too. So you’ll all get along swell.
Then – once you’re on your way past Jupiter and still talking out Uranus – all of us sane folks could drink beer and watch Jessica Alba movies. And happily praise the God of our choice for Ms. Alba’s delightfulness, never bothering to insist that the other guys praise our God or any God, all of us content to know we’ll find out the truth soon enough, one way or another.
(Although anybody who can look at Jessica Alba and be sure there is no God just isn’t paying attention.)
People who actually think they know everything – about things they can’t possibly comprehend – scare me.
Boo!
Carry on. I have to go buy the first season of Dark Angel on DVD. Hallelujah.
Continue sucking it.
Professor Blather on September 16, 2007 at 4:24 PM
What a pathetic post coming from a normally rational person. It still comes down to faith, either faith that there is no God or faith that their isn’t.
Rose on September 16, 2007 at 4:31 PM
I mean faith that there is or faith that there isn’t. I’m so shocked by Blather’s ramblings that I’m not typing straight.
Rose on September 16, 2007 at 4:33 PM
I know Jessica Alba’s uncle and cousins. Too bad I couldn’t get you an autograph.
Rose on September 16, 2007 at 4:34 PM
If there never was a flood the story of Noah is false. Sure, someone could’ve built a big boat, but it wouldn’t mean the story is true considering there never was a flood.
Nonfactor on September 16, 2007 at 4:54 PM
WTF?
No. Not if you were correct, but then again … you’re not.
Gregor on September 16, 2007 at 5:25 PM
Yes, it was disrespectful for her to tell our Lord and Savior to **** it, that made me wince the way it hurts me to see anyone do something for the praise of man that cheapens them in the process. She didn’t hurt the cause of Christ, she just made some news…we Christians should NOT give her the response she wants, which is a lot of fussing about it.
And really, I believe she was correct when she said Jesus had nothing to do with her getting that award. Jesus surely would not promote her kind of vulgar, coarse humor. I actually WOULD have been offended if she’d claimed Jesus as her own, because THAT’S how the cause of Christ s hurt, when hypocrites do works in His name that He never authorized.
JustTruth101 on September 16, 2007 at 7:41 PM
Give her enough time on the D list and she will eventually see the error of her ways and join that one guy who is always asking for a $58 seed. Atonement will be complete.
Bradky on September 16, 2007 at 7:57 PM
I for one realize I don’t know everything. Some of us do find the search for truth more enjoyable than watching Dark Angel. If you don’t find it enjoyable, maybe you shouldn’t read it instead of chastizing us for the long post by [drum roll] making an excedingly long post?
12thman on September 16, 2007 at 8:26 PM
PS: I was floored when the preacher for a service I went to this afternoon used Psalm 115 for part of his sermon.
12thman on September 16, 2007 at 8:39 PM
AP..would it be asking too much if you’d do the favor out of respect for our Lord and Savior and his followers…if you’d take that quote off of the picture link with the offensive words? There would be a ton of us who would be very appreciative of you consideration of this.
hotvol on September 16, 2007 at 9:07 PM
Nonfactor: Your entire argument revolves around the concept of disproving Genesis. Don’t put words in my mouth; I don’t believe in the biblical literalism vis-a-vis Genesis. That others believe it is not my problem, but you’re attacking an arument I’ve never made in your, dare I say, religious zeal.
There isn’t even a timeline to go with Genesis since all events therein ocurred before recorded history, so pulling 5000 years out of your posterior doesn’t help your case.
Look, I can respect you don’t believe in Christianity. but I’m not going to leave your anti-Christian bigotry left unchecked. The fact is, the only reason atheists have a moral code is because they leech off the beliefs of theists. Atheism is empty. Murder? Just fine according to atheism – it’s removing your rivals. Rape? Go ahead, that’s spreading your progeny in atheism-world. Atheists pull any moral code they have from theistic traditions, so don’t pull that “atheists have a moral code” BS. Atheist morality is a moocher of the faithful.
You know what happened in the countries ruled by atheists? Mass-murder and genocide. Atheists in power have caused more death and destruction in the last hundred years than all organized religions combined over the complete history of the world.
So go, continue to leech your morality off the people you are so, so eager to insult in your quest for validation, or whatever the reason it is you waste everyone’s time with your garbage. Your belief system is empty, and you are empty.
As to you Professor Blather, Nonfactor here is the only one claiming to know the truth. All I’ve stated is what I believe, Nonfactor is the only one going on a witch hunt.
BKennedy on September 16, 2007 at 9:20 PM
This is the proper time to insert a never more applicable truism:
– Those who think they know everything, annoy us who do -
Now, now, now. Before you give AP more hits on this blog you must be forewarned that was said with a smirk on my face.
A test, to see who has a sense of humor left here – has no been completed.
Please respond to this test by explaining how you felt when you first read the above truism.
Mcguyver on September 16, 2007 at 9:24 PM
Wow… 500+ comments on Kathy Griffin’s quip on an award show that probably 25 people in America actually watched. Rosie is probably jealous of all the attention Kathy is getting here.
But really folks, I think I have to paraphrase a great Viennese doctah here:
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and sometimes a typically raunchy joke is JUST meant to be a typically raunchy joke. OK????
Always Right on September 17, 2007 at 7:25 AM
I’m guessing that you didn’t actually ready any of the 500+ comments, which means you probably won’t read mine here either. But if you had read any of them, you’d realize that the high comment count has nothing to do with Kathy Griffin and everything to do with the fact that some of the atheists here get into arguments with some of the Christians here.
Kathy’s comment was merely the starter gun.
First off, now you’re changing your story. Previously, you were absolutely sure that there was no such boat because there was no such flood. Now you’re sure there was no such flood just because there was no such flood.
I’ll just say this, if an ark like Noah’s is found, and evidence point to it being approximately as old as the story claims it should be, it certainly wouldn’t prove Noah’s story to be true. It would though prove that at least half of the story is true and make reasonable people question whether or not the other half is true, allowing us to realize we don’t know everything for just a second.
You can keep pushing the bar back if you want, but no one is trying to prove anything to you. Disbelieve it if that’s your choice. You’re the only one who cares.
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 9:41 AM
I’m going to second this one. I’m normally a fan of his posts, but this one was unnecessary. If you don’t like what’s being discussed in the comments, then don’t read it.
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 9:43 AM
ckquote>What a pathetic post coming from a normally rational person. It still comes down to faith, either faith that there is no God or faith that their isn’t.
Rose on September 16, 2007 at 4:31 PM
This is a very typical defense of Christian belief: “Everyone has faith in something!” It’s wrong because it fails to account for the subtle but crucial difference between positive atheism and negative atheism.
Positive atheism: I believe that there is no god.
Negative atheism: I do not believe that there is a god.
Of course, if you’re a Christian and doing your best to “stand up for the faith”, then it is in your self-interest to claim (read: lie like a rug) that there is no difference.
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 10:29 AM
Not quite. Lots of people tell me how to live my life and I abide by them in many ways. I am well-aware that there are big-time consequences to making bad choices. If I lie and cheat my friends, then they will deprive me of their trust. If I am rude and punitive to people for slight infractions, then I will push people away from me. When I make bad choices, then I do feel guilty about it.
The real issue is that I can safely ignore what your “god” wants me to do, when is, in actuality, what *YOU* want me to do. And I understand that chafes Christian busybodies quite mightily. It probably also chafes you that I don’t live under the fear and guilt that your religion imposes on you. The fact that I can get by just fine without all the fear and guilt that is so central to your faith really trivializes your suffering.
Honestly, what good does all that fear and guilt do?
And are Christians the only kind of busybodies in the world? Of course not. Leftist busybodies are even worse, but there aren’t very many of those around here to rail against. And I like that.
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 10:39 AM
I hate that. It is so incredibly stupid.
Are you uncertain that it’s wrong to rape a baby to death? Do you waffle on that issue?
I don’t care if you’re just as big an atheist as I am. If you can’t unequivocally stand up for the human rights of life, liberty, and property, then you are not in my tribe. Period.
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 10:47 AM
So, you still have faith in something. Faith is not limited to ideas about God.
People have faith in their friends and family, faith in their own strength, mind and abilities, faith in finances, faith in society, faith in the government, faith in law and order, faith that tomorrow will come, etc….
Just because you do not believe that God exists does not mean you do not believe in something.
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Loundry, I don’t see a single Christian here who states that there is no difference between possitive and negative (strong and weak) atheism.
Who, exactly, are you referring to in your comment?
12thman on September 17, 2007 at 12:14 PM
My goof with the blockquote coupled with your failure to read carefully conspired to leave you in the dark.
Here is the relevant quote:
In other words: “It doesn’t matter if you’re a positive or a negative atheist. You still have faith, even if you don’t believe.”
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 12:19 PM
I haven’t agreed with much of what you’ve written in this thread, but I’m with you 100% on this.
There’s little more annoying than some smug nutjob chiming in just to set himself above the fray and condemn everybody else. It’s Clintonian at best and generally contemptible.
Kensington on September 17, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Faith is believing in something in spite of insufficient or contradictory evidence.
I don’t have faith in my family. I believe in them because I can see them and touch them every day. That’s called evidence.
I don’t have faith that tomorrow will come because I have every single day I’ve lived as evidence that one day follows the other.
You do have faith in a god because there is no evidence for a god. In fact, there is evidence against an all-powerful and loving god. Case in point: why do Christian children die from cancer? Is that part of your god’s plan?
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Common ground. I like it!
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 12:33 PM
The other option would be to make you/others a robot that makes dictated choices….
…rather than freedom of choice to do as you please and then suffer the consequences – better or worse -
that also affect other innocent people endlessly…
…unless their is a course corrected intervention somewhere along the chain of choices/resulting consequences.
Take your pick:
a) be a robot.
b) free moral agent.
Mcguyver on September 17, 2007 at 12:38 PM
Are you saying that it’s a matter of moral failure when a Christian child gets cancer?
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 12:46 PM
And where does the Bible say anything about “robots” or “free moral agents” or “free will” anyway? Scripture is an open-and-shut case for predestination, not free will.
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 12:49 PM
You have been quoting my misstatement rather than my correction. The real statement is that you either have faith that there is a God or you have faith that their isn’t. There is no concrete evidence for Darwinism. It is based on assumption and theory as well as a few bone fragments. Nothing absolute.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 1:04 PM
I know you can be intellectually honest…..
The incredible intellect of the human mind like yours can reason with the same and never have to use the Bible as a batting instrument….
So please try again – after you have put some thought into it.
Mcguyver on September 17, 2007 at 1:14 PM
And this is demonstrably false because of your willing refusal to see the difference between positive and negative atheism. I’ll re-post it here for your benefit.
Positive atheism: I believe there is no god.
Negative atheism: I do not believe in a god.
Do you see the difference between “I believe” and “I do not believe”? Can you see that one is the opposite of the other?
Can you see that you can accuse a positive atheist of having faith, but not a negative atheist?
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Semantics. They say the same thing.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 1:21 PM
As an Atheist you still have to believe that you are correct in the belief that, – get this – [drum rolls] there is no God.
Mcguyver on September 17, 2007 at 1:21 PM
I believe there is no Santa.
I do not believe in Santa. They say the same thing.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 1:22 PM
I wish I could say the same thing about you. Apparently it is your modus operandi to dodge the really tough questions. Is it part of your god’s plan that Christian children die from cancer? Yes or no?
Why on Earth would I give up my most valuable and potent weapon against those who deem me worthy of eternal torture and long for the state to punish me for my lack of fealty? I can see why it would be good for you to have me abandon the Bible, but I don’t see what’s in it for me.
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 1:23 PM
There may very well be a god. I just haven’t seen the evidence yet. I have never said, “There is no god”.
My disbelief in a god that is both all-loving and all-powerful is actually quite strong. The Christian children dying from cancer is the pneumatic nail gun blasting hundreds of spikes in the coffin of the god who is both all-loving and simultaneously all powerful.
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 1:25 PM
Cancer is a result of choice – mostly not intentional – although science has proven one can alter one’s lifestyle – again all disease, wars, accidents, the whole list of bad things are the result of someone’s choices – not always the victims.
I was sure that you can debate on this level….I’m still waiting.
Mcguyver on September 17, 2007 at 1:31 PM
But this God cannot force his power on free will moral agents – because that would be overruling the freedom of choice.
Mcguyver on September 17, 2007 at 1:34 PM
There is debate among Christians regarding why we have diseases and death. My brother-in-law who was a very strong Christian died of cancer. It was hard but we do not believe that God gave it to him. In fact it was hereditary. Two of his uncles had the same cancer and so did his mom. I also know of a man who was going in to have a tumor removed from his brain that the doctors said was cancer. His wife and her prayer group laid hands on him and prayed for him the night before his surgery. When they operated the doctors could not find the tumor. It was no longer there. We do not know why God chooses who he chooses to heal and why he chooses not to but He is still God.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 1:40 PM
This is silly. Human being do not have the ability to understand the ways and means of God any more than the dog has the ability to understand the vet.
If a dog had the thinking capacity of a human, he could appreciate the need to be jabbed with a needle from time to time, even though it hurts.
I’ve always figured that things like cancer, etc., will make more sense in the next life than in this one, once we’re more capable of understanding them.
Kensington on September 17, 2007 at 1:51 PM
Having faith in them, doesn’t mean faith that they exist.
And you also have much more evidence that no one, not even you, is guaranteed tomorrow considering how short our lives are and how many have died before you.
Surely you’re not confusing me for God. I have no idea what His plan is, but I haven’t the arrogance to assume that cancer could not be a part of His plan.
I won’t put God into my box of what I believe is right or wrong. Were I to do so, I’d be worshiping my concept of God rather than God.
So honestly, I don’t know and I don’t care why children (Christian or otherwise) die from cancer other than the fact that as humans we have bodies which are extremely vulnerable to being destroyed.
I don’t expect God to pander to me like a servant, granting every wish I have and making my life perfect just because I’ve been a nice person. Things happen in my life that I don’t like. That’s life. Those who can’t take the bad parts don’t deserve the good ones.
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 1:59 PM
If you are unconvinced that God is just and kind, then why would you want to be anywhere else but hell, as hell is the only place you can escape this being (who may not even exist) who you consider unkind and unjust?
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Wow. You’ll say anything in attempts to stay ignorant.
So if someone gets cancer and dies it’s not God’s fault (even though he has a plan for everyone and could cure it if he wanted to), but when someone’s cancer goes into remission or is cured it is God’s fault (because he has a plan for everyone and is all powerful). Riiight.
Nonfactor on September 17, 2007 at 2:09 PM
I think the best thing that we can do for you Loundry is to pray for you. I know you are thinking no, please don’t! But look at it this way, if there is no God then it doesn’t matter, and if there is one then it matters in a good way.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:11 PM
Nonfactor your thinking too small. You think in a box. You will never understand.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:12 PM
Please pray to the Muslim God for me too, and the thousands of others who say I’ll suffer eternally if I don’t only believe in them but constantly worship them.
That’s an easy way to avoid my response to your stupid assertion.
Nonfactor on September 17, 2007 at 2:15 PM
So you can make your arguments and we will just shake our heads and say too bad. You will never convince us with your arguments because they are too limited. You refuse to even consider that there is anything other than that which is material. So you have closed your minds, leaving no room for debate.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:16 PM
Oh, that God chooses to heal sometimes and sometimes he doesn’t? Well, I have no problem with that. You want your God to be totally discerned. I do not need that. So you can criticize and I will still believe.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:18 PM
Oh and the Muslim god is not my God so why would I even bother!
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:19 PM
I’m sure you have your intellectual, well reasoned logic for why there is cancer – let’s start there.
OR……
Choose which one you’d like to be:
a) robot
b) free moral agent
Think about it…then come back and debate with me without pointing to me with one finger calling me an ignoramus.
Thank you, very much.
Mcguyver on September 17, 2007 at 2:21 PM
This is what we call a straw man. If you had even read the posts in this very thread you would know that this is not true. Let me reiterate: I can’t prove that a god doesn’t exist (conceptually), I can’t prove there aren’t invisible unicorns that dance around in the clouds after a rainstorm, but I can prove that The Bible is false, I can prove The Qur’an is false, I can prove the Grecian gods are false. So if a God does exist? Fine. I still wouldn’t worship it for the rest of my life or adhere to it’s view of right and wrong.
But if there’s one thing that I can guarantee to you it is this: in the next threads on this topic people like you will continue to make these baseless claims that are contradicted in the very thread they post them in in attempts to construct a straw man (they think) they can deconstruct easily. I’ll will give this to you, Rose, it’s an easy way to act superior without actually having to prove anything, if I could do it and feel good about myself I might do it too, so congratulations on winning the debate in your mind.
Nonfactor on September 17, 2007 at 2:25 PM
She said she didn’t understand why one was saved and the other wasn’t. You’re twisting what she wrote.
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 2:28 PM
Speaking of well-reasoned logic you just used one of the most basic logical fallacies out there. The either or fallacy. The ability of me to point this out to you only furthers the thought that I am indeed more logical than you.
You don’t use logic in determining why a disease exists or why someone gets a certain disease. Sometimes our bodies just aren’t capable of healing ourselves when we get cancer or AIDS et cetera. Cancer isn’t a choice. The fact that you even think that shows your ignorance. And the fact that you think your fallacious response won the debate for you “thank you, very much” only furthers that illustration of ignorance.
Nonfactor on September 17, 2007 at 2:31 PM
She may not understand it, but this is what she believes: “It was hard but we do not believe that God gave it to him.”
Nonfactor on September 17, 2007 at 2:32 PM
Yes, I have read that silly quote a number of times. You have set yourself up to be totally infallible, but you are not. You do not have proof. In your mind and the minds of others like you, you think you do. I only see superiority in you and your co-non believers. You look down on people of faith. Well, you have never impressed me with any of your posts. You act superior like your idol hitchens, but you are not. Neither of you have proven anything. Just empty philosophical arguments.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:32 PM
I could quote you 100’s of sources where by choice people changed the course of diagnosed terminal cancer…. with and without doctors.
If you are ready to inform yourself with such – Google it – study it, check the proven references with doctors confirmation of being healed….
-the information is exhaustive, lengthy, scientifically proven by hundreds and thousands of reliable testimonials.
If you refuse to do so, then you are the ignoramus as your three pointing fingers indicate.
Mcguyver on September 17, 2007 at 2:38 PM
That was fun. I like Michelle’s kitchen.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:39 PM
And you just now said that cancer has no reason for being. Christians agree with you.
The fact that people get cancer is not the thing that requires supernatural interference. Cancer is as natural as getting old and losing your teeth. No one questions God over wrinkles or menopause.
Christians accept that bad things happen. The thing we question is why God does not heal everyone.
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 2:41 PM
The problem with people who refuse to even allow themselves to consider that there is a spiritual realm is that they will look at evidences and proofs and explain them away.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:43 PM
Thank you Esthier, I thought I was clear but apparently he needs to have things explained more clearly. But even though God does not heal everyone, it does not cause me to stop believing in Him.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:45 PM
Enjoyed the debate everybody (most of you) must go though…..
be back later.
Mcguyver on September 17, 2007 at 2:49 PM
Sheesh, I guess I should reference who I’m speaking to. In reading over the posts some of my responses were out of order. Well, I guess everyone can figure out who they were intended for.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 2:51 PM
Oh, I agree. Tomorrow it could rain and the unicorns could show themselves and wouldn’t I look like an idiot? I don’t pretend to be infallible, but I know that The Bible is false, I know the Qur’an is false, and I know that the Grecian gods are false.
Rightfully so. We have evidence on our side, you have faith. It is an admitted and willing abandonment of logic and reason; you have no evidence at all to support your faith. So yes, I do feel superior to you and anyone else (Christian or otherwise) who would believe in something and worship it with no evidence at all. But don’t think for a second that you don’t do it as well. You and your ilk constantly act superior to those who haven’t yet “seen the light,” to pretend otherwise is only so you can feel better about yourself.
My goal isn’t to physically prove anything to you; I’m not a geologist or a biologist. My goal is to show to anyone who is willing to read my posts how absolutely insane your belief system is. I could give you all the geologic evidence there is contradicting The Bible, you wouldn’t believe it. It’s obvious my goal isn’t to make you stop believing in your God. If I were trying to prove anything it would be how poorly your argument for faith holds up against logic and reason.
When does someone choose to have brain cancer or bone marrow cancer or SNUC? To say that cancer is a choice as a blanket statement is ignorant. I know it, you know it, and everyone reading this thread knows it.
Nonfactor on September 17, 2007 at 2:54 PM
Every time you mention unicorns I have to wonder if you ever took a debate class. It really cheapens your arguments.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 3:04 PM
There is a lot of evidence for the Bible you just choose to dismiss it because it does not fit in with your lack of belief.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 3:05 PM
My husband has been studying the Bible for thirty years, it’s history, proofs, archeology, original languages. When someone just dismisses it without putting years of study into it, it is easy to dismiss what the critic is saying. There are many out there like my husband who have spent most of their lives dissecting this book. And many of those are men and women of great faith.
Rose on September 17, 2007 at 3:12 PM
I don’t think it’s silly at all.
Your god has a love that is greater than all the love of all humans on the planet put together. Correct?
Your god can do anything. Correct?
Then why in the hell does he not cure childhood cancer immediately?
Why don’t you just ask him? Don’t you have a “personal relationship” with him?
Could it be any more transparent how fake your religion is?
Loundry on September 17, 2007 at 3:45 PM
Something is definitely transparent, but I don’t we’d agree on what it is.
Kensington on September 17, 2007 at 4:02 PM
Proof of God’s mercy.
frreal on September 17, 2007 at 4:15 PM
Loundry, God doesn’t give children cancer. So why do you blame Him for it? If you really want answers to this question I suggest you read the first couple of chapters of Genisis and then the book of Job.
As to why He doesn’t cure it immediately… why do you expect that you are somehow intelligent enough to understand why and when an omnipotent and omniscent God chooses to act?
frreal. You have the power to save that child. Does the fact that you haven’t mean that you don’t exist?
12thman on September 17, 2007 at 4:32 PM
If life were perfect, wouldn’t we already be in heaven, Loundry?
Evil exists. It always has, it always will. Sickness exists, and its unfortunate that there are many afflicted with it, but no Christian believes God’s MO is to remove all illness. God asks us to care for and visit the sick. People learn from suffering as well as from good health.
Your idea of God the personal medic is incredibly simplistic. No wonder you don’t believe in God, you’ve never put any effort or thought into it.
BKennedy on September 17, 2007 at 4:41 PM
No but mostly likely the God I asked to help that child doesn’t exist either.
Why doesn’t God answer all those starving children’s prayers? Did they not pray hard enough? Did enough people not pray for them? So many with faith praying for the starving babies for sooo many years and they still starve.
Just like if there was really no one answering prayers.
frreal on September 17, 2007 at 5:43 PM
I thought you ran away, after the beating you took the other day. Misquoting the bible, learning that translations aren’t always perfect. Finding out that your quotes were just plain wrong. And you show up again beating your chest?
How embarrassing for you. You should have stayed hidden.
right2bright on September 17, 2007 at 5:59 PM
The answer is because prayer does not (by itself) do anything. It is God and God alone.
Prayer is not witchcraft.
Besides, just because God doesn’t make life perfect for everyone, it doesn’t mean He doesn’t answer prayers. “No” is also an answer.
You’re missing the point here. You’re equating God’s love with human love, which was the exact opposite point of the post about the dog’s reaction to vet visits.
Just because you don’t understand why God would allow a child to die of cancer does not mean that God is not loving.
Just because my cat doesn’t understand why I’ve put her on a diet (by the way, I did it to keep her from getting diabetes), does not mean that I don’t love her.
All we know is that children die of cancer, and that doesn’t seem right.
All my cat knows is that she’s hungry, and that doesn’t seem right.
Your comment about the “transparent” religion does nothing to respond to the above issue. So long as you pretend that God’s love is exactly the same as ours, you miss the big picture of the God Christians worship.
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 6:05 PM
LOL! And thus, Loundry single handedly destroys his own entire argument, which is … you can’t prove God exists, so therefore he doesn’t.
Why does this destroy his argument?
Loundry, please PROVE that it’s wrong to “rape a baby to death.”
Prove it!
Gregor on September 17, 2007 at 6:09 PM
Apparently Loundry has just seen it fit to ignore all of that.
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 6:17 PM
Thank you, Esthier. Beautifully done.
When **I** look at that horrific picture, I shudder a little bit…both for that child’s pain, and because what I’m thinking is:
I’m going to appear before God at my life’s end and He’s going to say, “YOU had the power to save that child and I expected you to. But instead you wanted to buy DVDs and a nicer house and fancy food for yourself. Why didn’t you save him? I told you what happens to people who don’t share their wealth. I warned you.” And I won’t have any answer. So that picture challenges me to do more, much more, for others.
Your average atheist looks at it and, as far as I can tell from the posts on this thread, screams, “See? There is no God!”
One blames God, the other blames himself and others for not doing more to help. And that IMO is the difference between (faithful) Christians and atheists.
The question of human suffering wrt God is very old, as you all know. Anybody ever read God in the Dock or The Problem of Pain…?
inviolet on September 17, 2007 at 6:18 PM
blames God= says no good God could allow such a thing*gets caffeine fix*
inviolet on September 17, 2007 at 6:24 PM
God’s “plan” for us is not in our physical life. It’s in the afterlife. What? You think Christians thing God is dictating their every movements like a puppet master?
God gave us our lives and allows us to live it as we choose. God does not cause cancer. God does not cause you to win the lottery. God does not cause the car accident that kills four children, and God does not cause you to lose your faith. You make your own choices and disasters happen. It’s what you do with your life that determines what happens AFTER that disaster.
Gregor on September 17, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Her actually, and it’s a very sad story, one the photographer himself had a hard time dealing with. For him, he was literally there and could literally help this girl and likely even her village.
But when he considered how monumental the task was, he thought instead to keep to his role as a photographer and did not interfere, preferring instead to try and convince others to help, which he was successful in doing.
It was pictures like this one that haunted him. He even told friends later that he wished he had helped. Years later he killed himself, leaving a suicide note:
“I am depressed … without phone … money for rent … money for child support … money for debts … money!!! … I am haunted by the vivid memories of killings & corpses & anger & pain … of starving or wounded children, of trigger-happy madmen, often police, of killer executioners…I have gone to join Ken if I am that lucky.”
Esthier on September 17, 2007 at 6:25 PM
He “knows” this, but in nearly 600 comments so far, he’s yet to offer any explanation of HOW he knows this. He simply knows, and that’s that.
Gregor on September 17, 2007 at 6:31 PM
One more correction: I should have said and the atheists on this thread.
Sorry about that. I know other atheists and the ones I know don’t talk like this, at least not that I know: they seem to focus more on helping others than using others’ suffering to disprove the existence of God to believers. Sorry, but that’s how this extremly long thread looks to me. Correct me if I’m wrong.
inviolet on September 17, 2007 at 6:50 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 4 5 6 7 Next »