Ultimate heart-ache: Michelle dumps on atheists
posted at 1:57 pm on December 18, 2008 by Allahpundit
But affectionately. Sort of. Except for her suggestion that believers treat them like “trolls.” Heh.
I think she’s referring specifically to the sort of jackassery going on at the capitol in Washington, of which neither I nor the other conservative atheist/agnostics I read are fans. But just in case not, I take comfort in knowing that I’ll always have Ayaan.
Exit question: Um, what exactly is Gretchen saying here? Christianity’s going to disappear unless we … take away atheists’ First Amendment rights?
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 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 15 Next »
@ CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 11:31 PM
Spot on if her goal was to look stupid, sure. Mocking people is apparently a Christian thing to do according to Michelle.
muyoso on December 18, 2008 at 11:35 PM
Priceless. My only regret is that Apacalyps hasn’t condemned me to an eternity in the lake of fire, yet. I have an inside man who was kind enough to get me reservations, Saint Olaf.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 11:38 PM
Now you’re beginning to get it man..
Good luck.
I knew you were too smart to be an atheist for long.
SaintOlaf on December 18, 2008 at 11:41 PM
Obviously I don’t agree that she was spot on, but I don’t have any particular problem with what Michelle said, although it’s been several hours since I watched it.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 11:42 PM
Oh.come.on.
Michelle was NOT suggesting that ALL atheists should be treated as trolls, mocked, and made fun of. She was suggesting that MILITANT atheists that are so thin skinned that they get offended at “Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer” should be treated as trolls, mocked, and made fun of. There IS a difference.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 11:43 PM
Speak of the devil!
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 11:44 PM
@ SaintOlaf on December 18, 2008 at 11:41 PM
Who created the Christian God then? Whenever a scientists mention the big bang, you guys always ask what was before it, what caused it, etc. Now I am asking the same of you. God has to have a creator, or a cause. What is it?
muyoso on December 18, 2008 at 11:45 PM
@ CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 11:43 PM
I didn’t see mention of Rudolph anywhere in that clip. That was a whole separate incident altogether. They were talking about the Washington sign in the state capital, that is it.
muyoso on December 18, 2008 at 11:46 PM
About time you showed up. Now the cabaret is complete.
MadisonConservative on December 18, 2008 at 11:48 PM
The obvious answer is that there is no answer, or else somebody, somewhere, at some time, would have provided one by now. Faith must be limited.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 11:48 PM
Well first off if I come off like any elitist, it is just what those elitists you agree with, at least on foreign policy, say when their back is turned to you.
Well like that “Abyss” quote, some stare, I shout. Nobody has to meet my “standards”, I’m pretty sure most on this site don’t think I have any standards. Your take on the Maimonides quote is interesting, but I would like to think that it really means that most people have to take their own journey toward the truth, and if they choose not to do so that is their wish, no loss to me.
But people should hear different opinions. You can go through too many media sources with such a small spectrum of information and positions argued by soundbites, similar to what Maimonides meant when he discussed erroneous imaginings in the quote above.
Of course if I were to mock Nietzsche, he would probably say:
Religion of Martyrdom, sit on your hands and things will get better when your dead, couldn’t be a truer idea for many.
LevStrauss on December 18, 2008 at 11:49 PM
Lev Strauss on the other hand is clearly not an atheist.
He is clearly a pagan (worshipper of the fallen angels)…and is most likely possessed by demons.
There’s nothing that you can say to him.
He just goes on posting lie after lie about Christ…desperately trying to further his anti-Christ agenda.
An excorcism is I’m afraid the only thing that can help him.
SaintOlaf on December 18, 2008 at 11:49 PM
Where does “INFORMATION” come from? Don’t think that the participants here have not noticed that not a single atheist here has attempted to answer the question.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Fair enough. I get what you’re saying.
I think Peter might have had some lust for power at that moment – like maybe he thought that the Jews would conquer the Roman Empire.
Worldly victories are not as important as they seem in the moment.
aengus on December 18, 2008 at 11:51 PM
@ SaintOlaf on December 18, 2008 at 11:49 PM
Another question I have for you, Why would hell be a bad place? Somehow, christians have convinced themselves that hell is bad, and that Satan would punish all of those people who didn’t correctly worship and serve God. How does that make any sense. Wouldn’t Satan, idk,maybe like the people who disobeyed God?
muyoso on December 18, 2008 at 11:53 PM
@ CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 11:50 PM
The word? I don’t get what you are asking. Information is a word we use to describe various things.
muyoso on December 18, 2008 at 11:54 PM
I don’t care what you say I worship, as long as you designate it as the opposite of yours. I accept that most gracious compliment.
LevStrauss on December 18, 2008 at 11:55 PM
What?! Are you talking about the video clip at the top of this thread? Go back and watch it again. She does indeed talk about an atheist that was offended by the secular Christmas carol “Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer”. She is holding that up as an example of militant, aggressive, offensive behavior that COMPARES with putting the sign in the Washington state capitol in Olympia. What am I missing here?
My collie says:
CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 11:57 PM
Wha? I already did. “INFORMATION” is made out of people. That may be a play on Soylent Green, but the answer was sincere. Obviously information comes from our observations of the universe in which we live… unless it’s a trick question; I’d wondered why you included it in quotes and all caps.
FloatingRock on December 18, 2008 at 11:58 PM
2 things, AllahPundito:
1) Gretchen is hot (so is Megyn). Leave ‘em alone. I’m a big fan of both.
2) Christianity is a cultural norm. Atheists need to accept the norm and get over it.
jediwebdude on December 18, 2008 at 11:58 PM
I won’t answer that question on this forum.
You’re not ready for it…
And to talk about such mysteries on this thread, in the presence of certain people here, would be like throwing pearls to swine….they don’t know what to do with it.
SaintOlaf on December 18, 2008 at 11:58 PM
If I really were a pagan, then I would have a much greater grievance than just being an ex-Christian as I am. I’d be fighting to get festival of the “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun God” back in the December 25th slot on the calender. They had it first.
LevStrauss on December 19, 2008 at 12:00 AM
If so, I’m with Michelle on that one. I love Rudolph.
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:01 AM
@ CyberCipher on December 18, 2008 at 11:57 PM
Didn’t watch the clip here, saw it on another site. The mom who wanted the Rudolph song banned wasn’t a confirmed atheist, she was just a dummy. Never read anywhere that confirmed she was an atheist.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:02 AM
You all love that little pearls phrase, don’t you?
You and your two compatriots really take the sin of pride to an amazing level.
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 12:03 AM
I’m not inclined to accept domination by anybody. And hey, I don’t have to—this is America.
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:03 AM
@ SaintOlaf on December 18, 2008 at 11:58 PM
You won’t answer it because there is no answer. That is the point.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:04 AM
And that’s an honest answer. You can’t really tell me what it is, much less tell me where it came from.
My collie says:
Collie, would you stop paraphrasing the gospel of John chapter 1 verse 47. The next thing ya’ know, my stupid dog will be re-writing the whole Bible — just like the gay militants.
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:04 AM
That’s a good question. I was wondering the same thing the other night, haven’t seen him for awhile. I hope he didn’t have a slip of the typing fingers and get the ax.
Maybe he’s just on vacation, I usually am this time of year, but not this year.
Maxx on December 19, 2008 at 12:04 AM
Only because you can’t!
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:04 AM
I miss Grue also. Maybe he ate too much.
Rose on December 19, 2008 at 12:06 AM
@ CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:04 AM
I can’t answer because its frankly a dumb question. Its like me asking you where “things” came from. Information exists only when there is something to observe it. A snake gains tons of information from its surroundings. Information is a word defined as communicated knowledge. Without the communication, there is no knowledge. Really have no clue what you are getting at. I guess I could answer it the christian way for you. GOD DID IT.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:09 AM
Lots of figure related to Christmas, but not explicitly Christian, have been created for this exact purpose. The great secular trinity of Santa, Rudolph and Frosty the Snowman namely.
It worked for a long time but these subversive icons of Christian theocracy are no longer considered neutral in the sense that America is all-inclusive. They are associated with the exclusive holiday Christmas and thus violate the separation of church and state by not representing every religion and tradition equally.
aengus on December 19, 2008 at 12:10 AM
Oink Oink. How about the full quote?
“Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.”
(Matthew 7:6)
Figuratively, not literally. God’s version of the fifth amendment.
“Like a gold ring in a pig’s snout is a beautiful woman who shows no discretion.”
(Proverbs 11:22)
Yup calling people whores is a popular tactic as well. That one has broad appeal to this day.
LevStrauss on December 19, 2008 at 12:10 AM
Yeah. Me too.
My collie says:
Oh-oh. Grue’s not Chinese, is he? — maybe he thought that the cats were food.
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:11 AM
@ CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:11 AM
Lets get to the point on this whole information nonsense. I answered your question. I want to see to what logical fallacy you are taking this before bedtime.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:14 AM
I like to think that there ARE NO dumb questions.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:15 AM
@ CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:15 AM
la di da. Come on. Get to the point. I answered your question on information, lets see where you are taking this.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:17 AM
So are you saying that you don’t think are are any dumb question, then?
Just to prove a point. :)
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:20 AM
Believe what you will.
Regardless if you are an “atheists” or a pagan (like Lev)….you have to answer this question some how.
When you are genuinely searching for answers and are ready, you can take some initiative, go to an Orthodox Church and talk to a Priest for yourself.
The fact is “atheists” have NO IDEA what Christianity is about(though they all think they do) and they wouldn’t listen if some one told them.
SaintOlaf on December 19, 2008 at 12:21 AM
@ SaintOlaf on December 19, 2008 at 12:21 AM
Christianity is about serving God. I win. If you serve God, God will bless you with entrance into heaven, which is eternal. No atheists don’t understand that. If you are making some stupid argument about Christians being good people, then you have already lost the game.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:24 AM
Hmm…and I was just gonna call SO’s comment a cop out.
soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 12:24 AM
From CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS AND RESEARCH MINISTRY
http://www.carm.org/questions/god_origin.htm
Where did God come from?
We can only partially comprehend the notion of God’s existence. To do so, we must use human concepts to speak of God: “without beginning or end”; “eternal”; “infinite”, etc. The Bible says that He has always existed: ” . . . even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God” (Psalm 90:2). And, “Your throne is established from of old; Thou art from everlasting” (Psalm 93:2). Quite simply, God has no beginning and no end. So, where did God come from? He didn’t. He always was.
To us, the notion of time is linear. One second follows the next, one minute is after another. We get older, not younger and we cannot repeat the minutes that have passed us by. We have all seen the time lines on charts: early time is on the left and later time is on the right. We see nations, people’s lives, and plans mapped out on straight lines from left to right. We see a beginning and an end. But God is “beyond the chart.” He has no beginning or end. He simply has always been.
Also, physics has shown that time is a property that is the result of the existence of matter. Time exists when matter exists. Time has even been called the fourth dimension. But God is not matter. In fact, God created matter. He created the universe. So, time began when God created the universe. Before that, God was simply existing and time had no meaning (except conceptually), no relation to Him. Therefore, to ask where God came from is to ask a question that cannot really be applied to God in the first place. Because time has no meaning with God in relation to who He is, eternity is also not something that can be absolutely related to God. God is even beyond eternity.
Eternity is a term that we finite creatures use to express the concept of something that has no end — and/or no beginning. Since God has no beginning or end, He has no beginning. This is because He is outside of time.
cadenza on December 19, 2008 at 12:26 AM
Actually, Christianity is about reconciliation. Serving God does not bring salvation, repentance and the receiving of forgiveness through Christ’s sacrifice does.
Rose on December 19, 2008 at 12:28 AM
Re: grue
Count me among the curious.
Hope he didn’t bite off more that he could chew.
“sniffs”
soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 12:28 AM
than…sigh
soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 12:28 AM
@ cadenza on December 19, 2008 at 12:26 AM
First of all, christians NEVER accept that answer when its given about origins of the universe. Secondly, if God always existed, he sure took he merry effing time. Man existed for say 100k years max. And God was around for infinite trillions and trillions of years. Makes no sense. And when things make no sense, they are usually not true.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:29 AM
My belief is immaterial. People have been asking that question for years and I’ve yet to see an answer… and that’s because the answer destroys your argument about the necessity of a creator. If another god created God, then that means there is more than one god, or that god’s can die, leaving only one. And if God has always existed throughout eternity, then your argument that there must have been a creator because the universe couldn’t have existed for eternity is shattered.
And if you’re saying that the answer is a secret, explain why that only you and few others are privy to, explain why.
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:29 AM
Let’s take a tangable example. It is ONLY an example. Let’s admit, at the outset, that the example FAILS to capture the enormity of question — but it is instructive to see what I am driving at.
I am not an expert on micro-biology, nevertheless, let’s talk about the simplest life form on earth. Most people think of single celled organism here, but they’d be wrong. Unless I’m mistaken, the simplest life form on earth is the virus. Viruses are essentially little packages of parasitic DNA that latch onto a one-celled organism, and hijaak the RNA/protein building elements of that single cell into reproducing more copies of the virus. The virus is incapable of reproducing on its own. It can ONLY survive and reproduce by attacking cells that have the elements capable of manufacturing proteins.
DNA/RNA. Bill Gates is on record admitting that Microsoft Vista, the most complicated O/S that MS has ever built, pales in comparison to the information contained in RNA/DNA. He has pointed out that it is not just simpler, but many orders of magnitude simpler than the code contained in DNA/RNA.
Where does all this information come from? And why does it exist AT ALL? Do you think that something as complicated as Microsoft Vista could have arisen spontaneously? — by random chance/mutation?
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:31 AM
I sometimes regret that I choose not to correct my posts…
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:31 AM
@ Rose on December 19, 2008 at 12:28 AM
And what sacrifice did he make exactly? He was a God, who went through a fake death, and then arose a few days later. A sacrifice would be if he didn’t arise several days later. Its like if superman allow a person to shoot him, and he falls to the ground and “dies”, wouldnt really call it a sacrifice because he knew he couldn’t really die. People have nothing to repent about, cept maybe for the people who killed Christ.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:32 AM
Exactly, which shatters the argument that the universe couldn’t have existed forever in some form or another and therefor must have been created. If God can exist forever, why couldn’t the universe have existed forever?
This doesn’t prove that god doesn’t exist, it just illustrates the fallacy of the argument that I’ve heard time and again that there must have been a creator.
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:39 AM
Lev Strauss, anytime, you need a good old-fashioned Conservative Jewish exorcism, I’d be willing to give it go. You would owe a six pack of a good microbrew beer in exchange for my efforts.
thuja on December 19, 2008 at 12:40 AM
muyoso, You are not as knowledgeable as you think that you are, nevertheless, you have made the choice not to believe the basic tenant of Christianity. That’s your right. But if you think the things you say are intelligent to those of us who have accepted Christianity, you are mistaken. And the reason they are not intelligent to us is because of the fallacies that are contained therein.
Rose on December 19, 2008 at 12:40 AM
BTW, thanks for the information.
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:41 AM
Might want to alert some atheist theologians then, since you appear to be the master of all Christian knowledge.
Sorry, I couldn’t keep a straight face while saying the second part. You f’ing loon.
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 12:41 AM
@ CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:31 AM
Of course it could have. Your argument is quite simple to answer. Just like Microsoft built Vista off of Windows XP, they built XP off of Windows 98, Windows 98 off of Windos 95, etc. Their operating systems became more complex with time. What took Microsoft 20 years to perform, likely took millions or hundreds of millions of years to occur in nature. Initial life likely didn’t have RNA or especially DNA as you and I know it, but rather various nucleotides. These nucleotides sometimes bonded, but could rarely stay bonded for enough time to form chains. Certain base pairs, those seen in RNA and DNA, could bond with each other for the length of time needed to form long chains. These chains were the first RNA molecules, and were likely the first primitive form of life. Those that could replicate themselves evolved and were able to survive, eventually forming modern RNA.
Of course, its kind of hard to pinpoint what happened nearly 4 billion years ago on this planet. In fact, its next to impossible, even with modern science. This is just a theory, which is likely all we will have in our lifetime. There are other theories as well.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:45 AM
Why should he settle for the likes of YOU. Jesus of Nazareth performed many, many “old-fashioned Conservative Jewish exorcisms” — as you put it. Furthermore, he granted people forgiveness of sin, and offered the promise of eternal life (at least to some) — and all you offer is a measily beer.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:45 AM
@ Rose on December 19, 2008 at 12:40 AM
The reason I am not intelligent to you is that I deny the basic premise with which you base your life. Its the same reason that I think that Christians and all religious people are a bit, shall we say “less knowledgeable”, believing in things that don’t exist and all. I understand fully why you do, and why most do, and its hard to blame you for it. Am I am knowledgeable as you on Christianity, most certainly not. And I never would want to be that knowledgeable, as I feel its a waste of my time.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:48 AM
First of all, christians NEVER accept that answer when its given about origins of the universe. Secondly, if God always existed, he sure took he merry effing time. Man existed for say 100k years max. And God was around for infinite trillions and trillions of years. Makes no sense. And when things make no sense, they are usually not true.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:29AM
Read this again.
cadenza on December 19, 2008 at 12:26 AM
I thought he summed that point up pretty well.
You can’t apply a concept like “time” to a Being for which the concept doesn’t/can’t apply.
Infinity and 100k are identical from an Omniscient POV.
soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 12:49 AM
A good six pack of microbrew beer alone would “cure” me.
LevStrauss on December 19, 2008 at 12:49 AM
muyoso, Fair enough. I will spend my time on those things that matter to me and you can spend your time on those things that matter to you.
Rose on December 19, 2008 at 12:51 AM
@ soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 12:49 AM
I read it plenty well the first time. I understand his point, and I reject it, because the exact same principles apply to the “big bang” theory. The only difference, is that whenever a person mentions the big bang theory, Christians scoff at the idea of time beginning after the bang, as well as just about every other aspect. Its just blatant hypocrisy.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:53 AM
@CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:45 AM
You and your Christian Collie are heretics. You make me long for the good old days of Devarim(Deuteronomy) 13. We sure made a mistake disregarding it about 33 CE.
thuja on December 19, 2008 at 12:54 AM
@ Rose on December 19, 2008 at 12:51 AM
Sounds good to me. May you have a Merry Christmas and a damn fine New Year.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 12:54 AM
No that’s not it.
Yeah that’s kind of what I’m saying.
What it boils down to is this:
If you have seen God you would know the answer to that question.
The question you should be asking yourself is: What is God?
“God” is the Holy Trinity.
He is a Tri-Une Being in hypostasis.
And yes, He is something that you will NOT understand through your intellect alone.
SaintOlaf on December 19, 2008 at 12:55 AM
There are people who are sticklers for accuracy here, so let’s get it right.
MS-DOS 1.x
MS-DOS 2.x
MS-DOS 2.x + Windows 1.0
MS-DOS 3.xx
MS-DOS 3.xx + Windows 2.0
MS-DOS 3.xx + Windows 3.xx
Windows for Workgroups 3.11
Windows NT 3.1
Windows NT 3.5
Windows NT 3.51
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 2000
Windows XP
Windows Vista
Windows Vista 64-bit
(OS/2, Windows 95, Windows ME, etceteras were all dead ends)
Thousands of genius programmers created billions of lines of code in all of this. Where were the programmers for the DNA/RNA code in the simple virus? Vista did not arise spontaneously through random mutation and natural selection. Yet it is VASTLY simpler than DNA/RNA. WHO coded the DNA/RNA?
My collie says:
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:55 AM
If you have lusted, it is the same as adultery, according to Jesus. Jesus said, “whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:27-28). Jesus is obviously talking about sexual sin. He is talking about formulating sexual thoughts in your mind about a person. In the next verse He says, “And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.” In otherwords, if your eye causes you to sin by looking at lustful things, it’d be better for you to be blind than to end up in hell with both your eyes. Of course you’ve lusted, aengus. We’ve all lusted! And knowing what Scripture says about lust, I have a hard time believing you when you say, “Yes I have (lusted) in my life, but I’ve given it up.” If that’s true, I really wanna know your secret.
You don’t wanna talk about this anymore because I am showing you to be wrong. You said,
Of course, what you’re claiming here contradicts Jesus’ own Words. You say somebody cannot lust after another another person they have never heard or spoken to face to face, but that is not what the the Word of God says. As it was just shown for you, lust is pornography of the mind, and can easily include text messaging.
Technology such as internet, IMs, text messaging, cell phones, Myspace, etc, has made cheating easier and can all be used for lusting.
That is NOT what the Bible says! In case you’re having trouble hearing from your conscience, here’s another clue to help you: How would you feel if your spouse were texting somebody on the Internet using sexual terms? Would you mind it if he or she was entertaining lustful thoughts for other people, having sexual discussions about someone other than you? In ending, you owe me an apology. I didn’t do anything wrong. You accused me using Scripture out of context and I have clearly shown you I didn’t, and that lust does not originate in our flesh. Some of the text messages Esthier and Madison were leaving each other contained sexually explicit content. These were sexually oriented messages, not just one, but several. Evil desires originate in our hearts. Thank you.
apacalyps on December 19, 2008 at 12:55 AM
If its any consolation, the Jews at least get an A for effort as far as religions are concerned, the religion has proven most adaptive and best at maintenance within the top three.
I think we can at least agree that Paul was a horrible Jew?
LevStrauss on December 19, 2008 at 12:57 AM
Unsurprisingly, you make the argument far better than Apocalypse, but it still suffers from the same flaws. Life doesn’t evolve for any specific purpose. What works, survives and what doesn’t is filtered out. (From what I’ve heard, Vista will get filtered.) Vista was created with a specific intent in mind and isn’t subject to the same forces as life. Vista doesn’t reproduce, (except in China and on on the Internet, to name a few), and having been created with a specific intent, will fail to function in it’s intended capacity if there is an error.
The difference is not limited to its origin and its nature, but also the difference between biological fuzzy algorithms verses uncompromising logic.
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 12:57 AM
So tell me — precisely HOW knowledgable, HOW educated, HOW accomplished would someone have to be before you would consider them “a peer” that is WORTHY of consideration and respect?
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:59 AM
Nah, Exodus 33:23, to paraphrase says if you see him you’re dead. See there are things I can agree with you guys with. I agree with some of their assertions. It’s a unity thread.
LevStrauss on December 19, 2008 at 1:00 AM
Actually the Hebrews are the heretics.
The Christians are the Israel of God.
Israel is not of flesh and blood but by FAITH.
The “israel” in palestine is just a sham name for a people who have rejected God.. are filled with the anti-christ spirit.. and persecute Christians.
All of the Old Testament Scripture is about Jesus Christ and God is clearly a Holy Trinity.
SaintOlaf on December 19, 2008 at 1:02 AM
Right. That too.
apacalyps on December 19, 2008 at 1:03 AM
There are no jokes that contain explicit sexual content. At all. Anywhere. Ever.
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 1:03 AM
@ CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:55 AM
Yea, I wasn’t going to go google so I could get them all, since its a needless PITA. You would get my point either way. I answered your question. It took a long effing time to happen. Modern RNA/DNA is 4 billion years in the making.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 1:04 AM
I’m an atheist, but I use the capital ‘G’ when referring to the Christian god because it’s used as a proper name in that case. I think anyone who thinks they’re making some profoundly demeaning gesture by using a lower case letter ought to find a better way to make a point.
Sign of the Dollar on December 19, 2008 at 1:04 AM
CyberCipher, I used to attend a Christian businessmen’s dinner once a month with my husband. The men (and women) who attended this dinner were not just businessmen but were also doctors, professors, lawyers, and just about any other profession. These were college graduates, most with advanced degrees. But I would bet that even these very accomplished people would be considered ignorant by the atheists on this thread because of their belief in God and even more specifically in Jesus.
Rose on December 19, 2008 at 1:05 AM
The sacrifice, was in actually becoming a human.
Think about it. God’s in Heaven listening to humans constantly piss and moan about how bad they have it.
Finally He says. “You people wanna see pain and suffering?”
“Watch this.”
So He subjected Himself to the cruelest forms of torture known to man. Didn’t have to. But He did
The rest is H.i.s.tory.
soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 1:05 AM
@ CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 12:59 AM
A frog is worthy of consideration and respect, and I consider him a peer in this grand adventure of life on earth.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 1:06 AM
Hard to find and answer when you’re not looking. Duh.
apacalyps on December 19, 2008 at 1:07 AM
Thanks for making my point FOR me. Your answer can not be proved, but can ONLY be taken on faith. You CAN NOT perform a laboratory experiment in order to prove your assertion.
My collie says:
I’m sorry, but Collie and I don’t have enough faith to believe in the things that you do.
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 1:07 AM
@ soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 1:05 AM
No, he didn’t become human. A human stays dead when you kill him on a cross. And you basically just confirmed my point. The Christian God said, hey look at how bad THIS guy (played by himself) is getting it, while the whole time knowing that he was in no danger. That isnt sacrifice, that is blatant lying and propaganda to gain followers.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 1:08 AM
Nobody I’ve ever heard of has claimed that man kind crawled out of the primordial ooze.
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 1:09 AM
@ CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 1:07 AM
No faith needed. Where you rely on faith, atheists tend to rely on evidence. There is evidence of evolution. There is no evidence of a worldwide flood, or God, or pretty much anything else in the bible.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 1:10 AM
You CAN NOT perform a laboratory experiment in order to prove your assertion.
CyberCipher on December 19, 2008 at 1:07 AM
Which assertion?
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 1:11 AM
BTW, why in the hell did you have to wait so long before finally revealing your master strategy? It’s getting late and I was about to knock off for the night. :)
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 1:12 AM
I think we could agree on more than that. I think we could agree that the subtle-minded rabbis of the Talmud had much better ideas than the crude ideas of Jesus or that pedophile bandit Mohammed. And part of the reason that the Rabbis’ ideas are better is that left wiggle room for the future. They wanted an adaptive Judaism, as you say.
While you may not find this relevant, this wiggle room is why I think that Conservative Judaism is the true Judaism and not Orthodox Judaism.
thuja on December 19, 2008 at 1:12 AM
I don’t scoff. But then, I’m the type of Christian who doesn’t claim to know the mind of God well enough to reject the possibility that The Big Bang, and, gasp!, maybe even evolution might be a part of His plan.
soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 1:12 AM
A person isnt ignorant for believing in God or Jesus. They are ignorant when they deny the things they see before them, when they deny evidence and instead rely solely on a book written centuries ago by people who knew nothing of the world.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 1:12 AM
I know of three posters here who did, though.
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 1:13 AM
What are you talking about?
FloatingRock on December 19, 2008 at 1:13 AM
So how about that Book question. Could a Book evolve?
Now, it’s time to look at a book. Any book will do. Pull one off your shelf and get a good look at it. How is it made? It has two covers, and number of pages in between, and likely some glue on the spine to hold it together. Let’s try to imagine that this book got here through the process of evolution. In that case, the book binding just came out of nowhere and happens to fit this book. The cover is the same size or slightly bigger than the book. All the pages “happen” to be cut to the same size, and all the paper is the same type of paper. Usually it’s white. It’s a wonder cardboard isn’t used for the individual pages.. but it probably isn’t practical. Oh, but how did that book “know” the difference if it made itself?
apacalyps on December 19, 2008 at 1:14 AM
@ soundingboard on December 19, 2008 at 1:12 AM
Well good for you. Now maybe eventually you can drop the whole, God’s plan thing when you figure out there is no such thing, and it will be another step. Here, I will help you. if there is such a thing as God’s plan, then every child raped, every kidnapped kid, every genocide, every absolutely evil thing, is also part of his plan. You cannot write this off as “human nature” or “devil’s play”.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 1:14 AM
Does anyone know why dipstick here keeps applying evolution to non-living things when the theory applies only to living things?
MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 1:15 AM
@ apacalyps on December 19, 2008 at 1:14 AM
A book isnt a living thing. But certainly, a book can evolve as well, if you drastically rape the definition of evolve. A book, given enough time, will decay, turn into soil, and then that soil will eventually spring life, so the molecules in the book will eventually become the molecules in a plant or tree. And something will eat that plant, and the book will become part of it, so on and so forth, till the world explodes.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 1:16 AM
But how does the living thing become a living thing?
Rose on December 19, 2008 at 1:16 AM
@ MadisonConservative on December 19, 2008 at 1:15 AM
Because someone was picking his nose in science class instead of paying attention.
muyoso on December 19, 2008 at 1:17 AM
It figurs that even though your a pagan you would be sympathetic to judaism and also misinterpret the phrase in Exodus “paraphrased..if you see him you’re dead”.
That is speaking about God the Father.
No man can know the essence of God, but we know Him through His Divine Uncreated Energies.
Lol!
St Paul was about to become the High Priest of the hebrews!
He was persecuting Christians and martyring them right before his conversion.
SaintOlaf on December 19, 2008 at 1:18 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 15 Next »