If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Creationist Ken Ham says that "God is a God of grace and mercy" and will demonstrate this by roasting Bill Maher in a "lake which burns with fire and brimstone" for eternity   (rawstory.com) divider line 515
    More: Amusing, Ken Ham, Bill Maher, Bill Nye, the Science Guy, roasts, mercy, PZ Myers, righteousness, lakes  
•       •       •

6796 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Mar 2014 at 1:01 PM (27 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



515 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-25 12:45:39 AM
I think that some of you need to learn what the word RESPECT means. If a person says they have a belief, they don't have to define or justify that belief to another person, least of all, someone on the internet who is rude and obnoxious. Some of the people posting here have religious/spiritual beliefs; that is their right. Some people have no religious/spiritual beliefs and that is their right. Neither belief is better or worse than the other; they simply are what they are.


//Belief or no belief, we'll all know the answer at the end... Until then, PLAY NICE.
 
2014-03-25 12:52:36 AM

allylloyd: I think that some of you need to learn what the word RESPECT means./em>

Like having the respect to concede an argument when at least 3 posters call attention to it?

methinks you haven't a leg to stand on.

 
2014-03-25 12:53:20 AM

whidbey: Ghastly: whidbey: Actually I don't fit into any of those categories

Should we go through them one at a time?
I)Do you believe the existence of god(s) can be proven?

2)Do you know if god(s) exist or not?

3) Do you believe in god(s)?

Again, I find all of those categories extremely rigid and pigeonholing. But for your personal closure here, I am close to the "non-apodeictic" qualities. Actually "Agnostic" is good enough, but you had to have a cow about that, didn't you?


Oh for fark's sake. Okay. You're a precious and unique snow flake. How dare I try to pigeon hole you by having you use the language of theology to express your thoughts on the subject in a thread about theology.

What the fark is so pigeon holing and rigid about any of that? Seemed pretty straight forward to me.


Guess I won't let on that I'm a writer

So is everyone on tumblr.
 
2014-03-25 12:55:58 AM

Ghastly: You're a precious and unique snow flake. How dare I try to pigeon hole you by having you use the language of theology to express your thoughts on the subject in a thread about theology.


Pretty sure it's a discussion of religion, not a report before the Honors Committee.

Guess I won't let on that I'm a writer

So is everyone on tumblr.


Should I sign up for an account, then?

/Grumpy farker, Jesus.
 
2014-03-25 01:10:12 AM
whidbey:
Pretty sure it's a discussion of religion, not a report before the Honors Committee.

What I am saying is you don't have to take a word which already has a perfectly cogent, and necessary meaning and twist to to mean something else so you can have a word to express how important it is that you've found a way to feel superior to "both of them".

That is the purpose of the redefinition of agnostic for the CAPITAL-LETTER-A Agnostic crowd. Divide the argument into theist versus atheist then set themselves apart from it as if that makes them superior. If anything by distorting the meaning of the word you are limiting the discussion.

There is a broad spectrum of theological thought. You're the one who has reduced it to Agnostic, atheist, and theist being the only options.

Hell, if you don't even know what you think and can't find the correct words to express it then just call yourself a Questioner. It's a little fruity namby pamby new-ageish but if a hell of a lot less annoying than the CAPITAL-LETTER-A Agnostic crowd.
 
2014-03-25 01:35:29 AM

Ghastly: whidbey:
Pretty sure it's a discussion of religion, not a report before the Honors Committee.

What I am saying is you don't have to take a word which already has a perfectly cogent, and necessary meaning and twist to to mean something else so you can have a word to express how important it is that you've found a way to feel superior to "both of them".


And we're back to our original jumping off point.

No,. I don't have a lot of respect for people who compare atheism to fundamentalist Christianity. Yes, I have a lot more respect for people who question the 2000+ old paradigm. Because if we have enough questioning it, we just might move past it.
 
2014-03-25 01:41:47 AM
The irony of religion is that because of its power to divert man to destructive courses, the world could actually come to an end... Plain fact is, religion must die for mankind to live. The hour is getting very late to be able to indulge having in key decisions made by religious people. By irrationalists. B those who would steer the ship of state not by a compass, but by the equivalent of reading the entrails of a chicken. George Bush prayed a lot about Iraq, but he didn't learn a lot about it...

Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking. It's nothing to brag about. And those who preach faith and enable and elevate it are intellectual slaveholders keeping mankind in a bondage to fantasy and nonsense that has spawned and justified so much lunacy and destruction. Religion is dangerous because it allows human beings who don't have all the answers to think that they do. Most people would think it's wonderful when someone says, "I'm willing, Lord! I'll do whatever you want me to do!" Except that since there are no gods actually talking to us, that void is filled in by people with their own corruptions and limitations and agendas...

And anyone who tells you they know, they just know what happens when you die, I promise you you don't. How can I be so sure? Because I don't know, and you do not possess mental powers that I do not. The only appropriate attitude for man to have about the big questions is not the arrogant certitude that is the hallmark of religion, but doubt. Doubt is humble, and that's what man needs to be, considering that human history is just a litany of getting shiat dead wrong...

This is why rational people, anti-religionists, must end their timidity and come out of the closet and assert themselves. And those who consider themselves only moderately religious really need to look in the mirror and realize that the solace and comfort that religion brings you comes at a horrible price... If you belonged to a political party or a social club that was tied to as much bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, violence, and sheer ignorance as religion is, you'd resign in protest. To do otherwise is to be an enabler, a mafia wife, for the true devils of extremism that draw their legitimacy from the billions of their fellow travelers. If the world does come to an end here, or wherever, or if it limps into the future, decimated by the effects of religion-inspired nuclear terrorism, let's remember what the real problem was. We learned how to precipitate mass death before we got past the neurological disorder of wishing for it. That's it. Grow up or die.
 
2014-03-25 03:52:30 AM
Our God is the One God!
Our God is the Sun God!
RA! RA! RA!
 
2014-03-25 07:36:14 AM
I wish both of these people would stop talking.  Fortuantely I can choose to not listen to either.
 
2014-03-25 10:37:49 AM

allylloyd: I think that some of you need to learn what the word RESPECT means. If a person says they have a belief, they don't have to define or justify that belief to another person, least of all, someone on the internet who is rude and obnoxious.


memedepot.com


I've been involved in a lot of discussions on this site over the years, and the treatment you've been getting in this discussion has been remarkably patient, tolerant, and polite. you're going to need to grow a thicker skin if you're going to be having discussions about religion on the internet, child.

The fact that you're apparently unable to even understand the questions that are being asked of you, much less respond to them in a meaningful, direct, substantial way is not an indication of rudeness on the part of the people asking. If you don't want to talk about your religion, don't come into a discussion to offer your condescending ("I'll explain it to you in simple language") explanations of religious issues. if you don't want to explain your faith, don't reply to people who ask you questions about why you believe the way you do.

But to get involved in such a discussion and then get offended when people point out that your answers are illogical, don't make sense, or don't actually answer the question they asked? Poor you, always the victim, always persecuted. Line on the left, one cross each


Sofa King Smart: The question you were supposed to be answering was: why episcopalian? why not catholic, or other protestant variant? baptist, southern baptist, jehovah's witness, evangelical Presbyterian snake handler...

and we all know the answer to that... because that was the sect of christianity that you grew up in and were spoon fed... you didn't consider any other 'version' of christianity, you didn't look at the issues that caused the splits in the various Christian sects... let alone even question christianity as 'the one true religion'... you didn't compare and contrast christianity to islam or judiaism, you didn't read about the various other popular non-abrahamic religions... you chose to conform without putting much thought into it... it was the easy answer.


Indeed.
 
2014-03-25 10:43:40 AM

Kit Fister: I responded to your specific, quoted line, and did so rather flippantly. If my response was out of line with what you intended to state, I apologize. I read it differently than the way you intended it. Cheers!


Fair enough, i took it as dismissive an responded appropriately. Sorry to be so snappy.
 
2014-03-25 11:10:51 AM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: A brief analogy to describe the conversation so far:

allyloyd: I drive a Ford F150

eraser8: Why? Why do you drive a Ford f150?



If you must use a car analogy to eraser8's question, I think a better one would be, "Why do you own an F150, when we don't even know if there is such a thing as gasoline?"
 
2014-03-25 07:07:27 PM

whidbey: ciberido: But if there's no soul, and no afterlife: I don't see how religion can coexist with that.

But not all religion focuses on an afterlife. We can be spiritual beings and accept that our corporeal bodies cease.


In theory, yes.  In practice, name one religion practiced today which either stipulates that there is no afterlife or is completely silent on the topic.

/If you say "Buddhism," I will cut you.
 
2014-03-25 07:10:30 PM

GregoryD: The irony of religion is that because of its power to divert man to destructive courses, the world could actually come to an end... Plain fact is, religion must die for mankind to live.


Plain fact is, you're incapable of distinguishing plain fact from your opinion.  That makes you as derpy as Ham.
 
2014-03-25 07:26:30 PM

ciberido: whidbey: ciberido: But if there's no soul, and no afterlife: I don't see how religion can coexist with that.

But not all religion focuses on an afterlife. We can be spiritual beings and accept that our corporeal bodies cease.

In theory, yes.  In practice, name one religion practiced today which either stipulates that there is no afterlife or is completely silent on the topic.

/If you say "Buddhism," I will cut you.


I'm not going to go there, but Quakers also come to mind. Some do, some don't. Probably true of a lot of people who aren't total religious loudmouths.

But I'm sure I'm not the only one on planet Earth who considers himself spiritual and isn't depending on an afterlife.
 
Displayed 15 of 515 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report