Mike there cannot be any debate here, because to "debate" about a God is to ignore A) His written word, B) directly observable phenomina here on earth and C) all of human history going back to the origins of this planet nearly 6000 years ago. To deny these things is a denial of reality, and I honestly feel almost as ridiculous as a child denying babies come from the stork.
42 comments
to "debate" about a God is to ignore A) His written word,
Yep!
B) directly observable phenomina here on earth
Such as?
C) all of human history going back to the origins of this planet nearly 6000 years ago.
That's the same as #1. What else ya got?
Nope-
1) We are using the words directly from your "infallible" Babble to refute your own bullshit.
2) Directly observable phenomena? You mean, like how you change and twist the facts to match your preconceived notions of the world?
(Isn't it amazing how the water seens "designed" to fit that irregularly shaped hole?)
3) 6000 years old? So it doesn't matter to you that carbon-12 dating puts the age of the Earth more like in the neighborhood of 3.4 billion years old?
4) You seriously need to rent a porno flick with a man and a woman doing what men and women have been doing since time immemorial.
Score: FAIL X 4
Are we sure T and T isn't a poe?
I mean, come on! He's saying BABIES COME FROM STORKS!
MOTHERFUCKING STORKS FOR FUCK'S SAKE!
If he's not a poe...I...I just can't contemplate such a possibility. How has someone that gullible and/or stupid not been convinced they could fly and killed himself/herself by jumping off a building?
Oh, now this is just too rich. Storks? What about The Great Pumpkin?
Hah? What about that, fundie? Or the Cabbage Patch.
Shit, the silliness never ends with these freaks.
To debate the Bible is to accept these facts(and mainstream Christians have no problem):
a)That the Bible is a symbolic book, written by a group of men in 500 BC the earliest(inspired by God or not)and is plenty of myths and allegories understandable for first millenium and Bronze age guys from the Middle East.
b)Directly phenomena on earth contradict many passages of the Bible(since when do snakes speak?, who is Caine's wife?)
c)The origins of life go back many, many years and History is only taken into account if there is written material.
And we have inferred something else from your writtings:
a)that you haven't read any book at all, not even the Bible, let alone science(judging by your Orthography and your claims)
B)That you're not likely to have children(and not to understand what fornication means)
No, no, no! Babies are found under gooseberry bushes you... you blasphemer! Storks are sinful, because teh Babble says a man must not lie with an animal, so how can storks bring human babies? Ha! Got you, you godless heathen! Praise the Holy Bush!
Mike there cannot be any debate here, because to "debate" about Sauran is to ignore A) His written word, B) directly observable phenomina here on middle earth and C) all of human history going back to the origins of this planet nearly 6000 years ago. To deny these things is a denial of reality, and I honestly feel almost as ridiculous as a child denying babies come from the stork.
Fixed.
Oh, to debate God is to ignore "His" written word? As if there is no good reason to question the Bible, let alone the idea that it was personally written by the Super Man-Phantom beyond Space and Time?
To debate God is to ignore the observable evidence of God on Earth? And we clearly know that this evidence can be attributed to God without already having God as a foregone conclusion?
And what does human history have to do with God? How can talk about ignoring human history with a straight face when you say that there was only 6,000 years of it, despite all evidence to contrary?
Yet,you are the one denying that "babies come from the stork"? Because it really sounds like the people you are debating are the ones taking that position, but you are saying that there is no argument against it, because the stork wrote a book about his activity, because of all of the unseen evidence for the stork's activity, and because of "history".
Oh, lord, Jake Steel, that just took my breath away.
I have to check the box to indicate I'm human, but I'm embarrassed to admit it.
Babies come from the stork?
Well the good news is, this person is unlikely to successfully reproduce.
Okay, it was fun to hurl an epithet as I did above; I see why Fundies enjoy it so much.
Doing what they do rather than what they say is quite... refreshing. Maybe I should also take up adultery, fraud and false witness? Sorry, but I won't go so far as to practice pedophilia.
Still, I can't just let it rest by hurling abuse, my innate honesty won't let me. It's obvious that T & T misspoke himself, and his meaning was "To deny these things is a denial of reality, and I honestly feel (it is) almost as ridiculous as a child CLAIMING babies come from the stork."
However, even with dealing with what T & T MEANT to say, he's a dumbass.
Reality is not just what's in your heard. Run and find out. The 'firmament' is not firm, God does not live in the a house that floats in the sky and is one fiftieth the size of the moon), the earth is not held up by pillars, the gospels do not agree with each other, (they are so mutually contradictory that nobody has ever been able to write a single account in agreement with all of them), and children are not brought by the stork.
Mike there cannot be any debate here, because to "debate" about a God is to ignore A) His written word,
Council of Nicea. Your "word of god" was heavily edited (and probably originally written) as a result of debate. You fail.
As well you should.
Idiot.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.