Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Star Press

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Comments (Page 376)

Showing posts 7,501 - 7,520 of11,195
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7937
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

2

Givemeliberty wrote:
Spot on and factually sound. A nice video on how apologetics attempt to argue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
<quoted text>
Cheers

There really is so much nonsense, contradiction and error in the Bible - it's chock full of it.

No wonder there are so many apologists around making their lame excuses on behalf of their invisible sky pixie.

LOL

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7938
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

3

It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Great post!
Thanks

There is so much more that can be said about the murderous Christian hatred of the Jews.

A few posts back you mentioned Martin Luther.

His anti-Semitic policies included:

Burning synagogues, confiscating Jewish property, burning Jewish books, sending Jews into forced labour, burning Jewish homes, etc.

All were taken up by Hitler.

Dim loves all this anti-Semitism - it's an intrinsic part of his belief system.

Of course you won't see any hatred for the Jews in Darwin's inspired works - which explains why Dim hates Darwin so much.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7939
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

3

It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the heads up there. Both from Wiki :
"Blood libel is a false accusation or claim that religious minorities, usually Jews, murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays. Historically, these claims—alongside those of well poisoning and host desecration—have been a major theme in European persecution of Jews."
"Host desecration is a form of sacrilege in Christianity ... involving the mistreatment or malicious use of ... the sacred bread used in the Eucharistic service or Mass."
You're welcome

It wasn't that long ago when Sarah Palin used the term "blood libel".

I guess we'll never know what she was trying to achieve by using that term as it backfired right in her face. The Christian mindset sure is spectacularly dumb.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifam...

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7940
Dec 8, 2012
 
Just interesting how Matt lays out these idiots arguments and entertains with a card trick to boot :)

But what can one expect? They have to do this Santa believing style argument because their holy book is such rubbish.
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Cheers
There really is so much nonsense, contradiction and error in the Bible - it's chock full of it.
No wonder there are so many apologists around making their lame excuses on behalf of their invisible sky pixie.
LOL

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7941
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You and the other atheists in here are about as sane as asylum escapees, lol.
Says the person who has an imaginary friend that talks to them, who think this imaginary friend can actually influence the real world, and swears the imaginary friend is real even though you have no evidence to suggest otherwise.

You're just like those housewives who go insane watching soap operas thinking that the actors are the characters.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7942
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
Suffice to say we're not afraid to tackle your posts and disassemble them with consummate ease. You keep throwing them up - we'll just keep right on knocking them down.
Don't you wish? You ignorant dingbat – lol. You're nothing more than a joke.

Funny how you jokes say you don't read my posts, yet you keep trying and failing to challenge the material. That's all the proof I need that they hit a nerve. That's why you stay unhappy.

And that's the way I like it.

So I know I'm right on track......LMAO

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7943
Dec 8, 2012
 
Atheism: What a Joke

“Assuming, no doubt, our anxious world could use a good laugh, Stephen Hawking undertakes to provide one. He says the universe created itself.

The theory itself isn't the joke. The joke is the dogged persistence of atheists trying in the face of common sense to persuade the world as to the wisdom they see in their every utterance. Another way of putting it would be, atheism is the joke.

The likes of Hawking, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins -- how, by the way, does Britain, the land that bred Lewis, Chesterton and Wesley, manage to produce so many certified atheists?-- Hawking & Co., I say, want everyone to see God as, I guess, some sort of celestial intrusion in the affairs of intelligent men and women.

Hawking's new book, "The Grand Design," (written with one Leonard Mlodinow) argues that "the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."

I suppose the intent of such stuff is to render non-atheists, Christians especially, mute and fearful. Which is more than a little bit odd. Who is likely to grow mute in the face of a bald claim that the universe more or less invented itself? Was Hawking there with his camera? That would be the first question. Soon other questions would follow. The vast variety of life -- that was spontaneous, too? The human organism -- the brain, the eye, the ear, the digestive tract -- just sort of, you know, happened? The sky, the seas, the seasons, not to mention human reproduction -- those things, too? And the greatest minds of history failed to catch on, century after God-fearing century? That or they practiced denial? Uhhhh ... yeah.

There is a poignancy to the atheist fixation on showing up God. What's wrong with these people? Many of them are technically intelligent (Hawking is routinely labeled "brilliant"), but they swallow with satisfied smiles the intellectual bilge called atheism. They've been doing it forever -- so long indeed that taking an atheist seriously requires a leap of faith so enormous that no one, least of all the atheist himself, can see from jumping-off spot to landing point.

The atheist mode is pure assertion. It's, shut up, listen here, I'm giving you numskulls The Facts. I imagine there have been, here and there, pleasant atheists. If so, one rarely runs across them. They've all got some Hawking, some Hitchens, some Mencken or Shaw or Robert Ingersoll in them: the desire to strut before the Stupid Masses; to show off a bit; to puncture the illusions of folk less enlightened than themselves, pinned down by the weight of superstition and terror. What a bunch of rubes and yokels, these believers! Not that they don't come in handy as rhetorical foils and customers.

It's really all too funny, as things tend to get when certain people -- over and over without pause -- do the same stupid things. Such as instruct the whole of human history to get off this God thing and start believing in spontaneous creation. I can see it all now, can't you?-- The Church of Spontaneous Creation; services whenever you're feeling spontaneous; come feel the creative power surge through your veins; learn to laugh at fools and frauds and idiots stupid enough to disagree with the doctrine of "It All Just Happened."

It is funny: like W.C. Fields assuming the posture of sobriety, Malvolio the pose of Lady's Man. The obverse of Reality is the Ridiculous -- that which makes itself farcical precisely by taking itself with deep earnestness.
http://townhall.com/columnists/billmurchison/...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7944
Dec 8, 2012
 
This is why I can't take Atheism seriously

“Judging by if you are an Atheist. I assume you based most of you're understanding on logic. A lot of Atheists always state that the reason that they are so hell bent on debating religion is because of the harm religion does. That it promotes bigotry racism and sexism. Well:

First point: Why do we not just target all sexists, racists, and bigots? Wouldn't campaigning against them specifically be more "LOGICAL" instead of generalizing that all religious people do so much "harm" and are promote such bad moral teachings when you would be have to be ignorant to know that is not true.

Second Point: How the hell does harm of religion have anything to do with whether or not it is true? I mean just because there are negative effects of something doesn't disprove it's validity. Look at your logic on this point also.

Third point: I know most of you would claim to be agnostic atheists but totally contradict that by saying "there is no god" "god doesn't exist". This would be a "Gnostic" position. Which will be totally absurd. I mean, I simply state I don't know at all. Not really agnostic because I am not religious, simply because it is beyond the capacity of human knowledge. Taking such a ballsy claim as to there is no God is simply arrogant and stubborn.

Point 4: Now, I know most Atheist in real life are pretty chill because I have Atheist friends. Although, when it comes to the internet there are constantly remarks insulting theists and their intelligence. If you were to actually "use" some of your well known logic. You would know that religion does not correlate with intelligence. You use the defense that most scientist are Atheist, so Atheism is the better choice, then totally throw out the claim that most of the world is Catholic so Catholicism is correct. This Double Standard is inconsistent.

(Just another "little" thing, a lot of Atheists say I wonder how stupid Christians feel when there is not God. I can't even begin to how contradictory and stupid this makes whoever the person who stated this is. First of all, "where" the hell are they realizing this? In an AFTERLIFE? Oh, wait you don't believe in one. Then this is pretty hypocritical if you ask me.”
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index...

[He's not a Christian, but he made some GREAT points, lol.]

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7946
Dec 8, 2012
 
''Scant understanding of science makes you an atheist. Deep understanding of science makes you a believer''– anonymous

“God is dead" - Neitzsche

"Neitzsche is dead" - God

"I'll pray for you all, anyway. Jesus Loves you. Even if you don't love yourselves"

“Nobody talks so constantly about God as those who insist that there is no God.”- Haywood Broun

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7947
Dec 8, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Says the person who has an imaginary friend that talks to them, who think this imaginary friend can actually influence the real world, and swears the imaginary friend is real even though you have no evidence to suggest otherwise.
LOL

Nope - those rodents you came from and live with aren't imaginary. They are quite real, and repulsive, like you.

WHY don't you get rid of that horrible picture?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7948
Dec 8, 2012
 
Re-posting:

From Fox News:

Junk Science

Bad predictions, concealed data, lies about global warming, junk computer models, cancer lies, etc.
www.video.foxbusiness.com/v/4159451/top-five-...

(Even with today's sophisticated technology, scientists miss the mark over and over on the simplest issues; how much more likely the marks were missed in their findings of 100 years ago on the more complex issues.)

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7949
Dec 8, 2012
 
Oh look! More spamming from the creatard troll! Scroll time is epic in this thread.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7950
Dec 8, 2012
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You and the other atheists in here are about as sane as asylum escapees, lol.
Yeah, we are the insane ones who are willing to chow down on the flesh of our dead zombie leader. We also drink the blood, of this same freak-god who would make us eat our own children. Ooops, wait a sec, that is you nut cases, not us. So who's the loons now?

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7951
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you wish? You ignorant dingbat – lol. You're nothing more than a joke.
Funny how you jokes say you don't read my posts, yet you keep trying and failing to challenge the material. That's all the proof I need that they hit a nerve. That's why you stay unhappy.
And that's the way I like it.
So I know I'm right on track......LMAO
You're on the idiot track, that's for sure.

How very like you to ignore the facts:

Facts that show you posting, running away and having your posts torn to shreds.

Facts that show how from your own posts we can see that you reject what the Bible says.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7952
Dec 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah, we are the insane ones who are willing to chow down on the flesh of our dead zombie leader. We also drink the blood, of this same freak-god who would make us eat our own children. Ooops, wait a sec, that is you nut cases, not us. So who's the loons now?
LOL

Not forgetting the talking snakes and donkeys and bread baked with shite.

ROFLMAO!!

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7953
Dec 8, 2012
 
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
I have attended more than a thousand meetings with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I know what I'm talking about. How many sacrament meetings have you attended at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints?
I find it a bit amusing that you are dictating to me what I believe on an Atheist Forum entitled "Don't dictate beliefs."
Mormon's don't believe God is going to give them their own planet when they go to Heaven and they don't believe Joseph Smith is God.
Hail Zenu!

Oh wait, that's the other crazy religion:)

I'm kidding, don't get salty.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7954
Dec 8, 2012
 
Sambrotherofnephi wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you heard of Philo Farnsworth? He helped develop the TV, he kinda understood science. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo_Farnsworth
How about Henry Eyring? "He pioneered the application of quantum mechanics to chemistry. He also was awarded the National medal of Science for devolving the Absolute Rate Theory of chemical reactions. He was elected president of the American Chemical Society in 1963 and of the Association for the Advancement of Science in 1965."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Eyring
Or Richard Scott, a nuclear engineer? All involved with science, all religious.
BYU Biology Professor Steven Peck
http://blog.beliefnet.com/flunkingsainthood/2...
Damn? 3 people!

Religious scientists don't "prove" religion just like atheists scientists don't "prove" there is no god. And if we are going to go with this logic, there are far, far more atheist scientists than there are religious scientists. Personal beliefs are personal beliefs.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7955
Dec 8, 2012
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
This part was funny: "does not mean everyone is else" LMAO
"Everyone is else" (?)
This part was just as funny: "Some people are able to speak relatively well on a variety of subjects"
LOL - True - and I post many of what they speak and write about.
So yes, many people are, but alas, you're not one of those people.
You really offer us zero.
LOL
Wow, a simple typo. Good catch Columbo!

And this isn't a forum that I post in. It's too full of spam. I just drop by occasionally to watch you play "2 stooges" with kjv, watch everyone else tear you up, and catch the occasional interesting comment. None of which come from your spam. You don't talk about anything, you spam.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7956
Dec 9, 2012
 
Khatru wrote:
Suffice to say we're not afraid to tackle your posts and disassemble them with consummate ease. You keep throwing them up - we'll just keep right on knocking them down.
derek4 wrote:
You ignorant dingbat – lol. You're nothing more than a joke. Funny how you jokes say you don't read my posts, yet you keep trying and failing to challenge the material.
Meathead.

You're a painfully stupid little man, Dim. Khatru tells you right here in his post that he reads yours. We all do, and we have all commented on them. Only in your impoverished imagination are people saying that they "don't read [your] posts."

You, on the other hand, make a point of announcing that you don't read the posts of others between announcements that those responses didn't impress you enough. This is why you are called Dim.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7958
Dec 9, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
You're on the idiot track, that's for sure.
How very like you to ignore the facts:
Facts that show you posting, running away and having your posts torn to shreds.
Facts that show how from your own posts we can see that you reject what the Bible says.
You have no facts. You don't want your life cluttered with facts.

The facts I post are all still in place, and more science fraud reports are showing up in the news every day. Your futile attempts to rebut them are sad jokes. This is because you're powerless and weak – powerless to change what science magazines and news reports say on fraudulent science and science misconduct; powerless to rewrite history. You're weak. Your comments never get off the ground. Just like you – sitting there on your fat rump and never getting off the ground.

So let's face it – you're nothing but a failure all around, and a miserable one.

I flush you down the drain with the dirty bathwater.

LMAO

Here's just ONE example of the hundreds I've posted already – let's take a look at it again, and thank you for inviting me to re-post it for you:

From Science Daily:

Facts in Scientific Drug Literature May Not Be

(May 29, 2012)— A growing concern with fraud and misconduct in published drug studies has led researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago's Center for Pharmacoeconomic Research to investigate the extent and reasons for retractions in the research.

"We were surprised to find the proportion of retractions due to scientific misconduct in the drug literature is higher than in general biomedical literature," said Simon Pickard, associate professor of pharmacy practice and senior author of a study published in the journal Pharmacotherapy.

Nearly three-quarters of the retracted drug studies were attributed to scientific misconduct, he said, "which includes data falsification or fabrication, questionable veracity, unethical author conduct, or plagiarism. While these studies comprise a small percentage of the overall literature, health care professionals may rely on this evidence to make treatment recommendations.

These studies can affect the treatment of thousands of patients, since scientific publications are often printed months in advance.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/...

Let me know if I can post some more like this fer 'ya, Khatru. And you say you don't read my posts when you say you don't “plough through” the material – I still recall you saying that, and more than once. Then you turn around and say you've “torn to shreds”[my] posts? How do you do that if you haven't ploughed through them? You have a shredded brain.

You've “ploughed through” too many comic books.

LMAO

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 7,501 - 7,520 of11,195
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••