Tekton: Fundy Atheists Say the Dumbdest Things

[jpholding]

It seems like it's time to start a project with this name to parody the soundbiting activities of our resident soreheads who cull TWeb and elsewhere for quotes they can grossly decontextualize and/or abuse for red herring and fallacious generalization purposes. If anyone wants to become a quote culler, drop me a PM. This is not going to be an obsession or anything like that like it is for our obsessed friends who prefer sound bites to hard academics. I can start the ball rolling with some foundational stuff but after that I will depend mostly on readers.

[Cynic Sage]

I reccomend something by Jimbo where he accuses you of being dishonest over that Bible software-related error or that Sun-Tzu book a while back. Then follow it with this link that shows him "playing fundy" at a Benny Hinn revival.

I called my friend and fellow Foundation member, B***** T*****, to see if he wanted to experience the Holy Spirit with me. He thought it would be fun and readily agreed. We decided that we would have to occasionally play-act to avoid standing out like sore (and hell-bound) thumbs. (http://www.peopleunitedforreligiousfreedom.org/adventures.htm)
I like the part where he jumps up and shouts "PRAISE JESUS!":lol:

[The Laughing Man]

I got one. :smile:

"It seems logical that if one being of the kind Yahweh (gods) exists then it is possible that other beings of that kind (gods) can exist."
--TWeb poster steamer, showing that he just doesn't understand the nature of God/Yahweh (post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=756498&postcount=1))

[jpholding]

Egad.

Meanwhile ex-christian.net is proving a fruitful area to check. A recent apostate named Derek Sansone has proven that apostasy really does mean you lose brain cells, as proven by this wacky statement:

"In addition, even if Tacitus mentioned a specific man named Jesus as the Christus, there is another possible explanation to this assertion. He could have been easily furthering the Christian agenda."

http://www.vanallens.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=4634&st=60

Wow. The depths paranoia can take you. :ahem:

[The Laughing Man]

From today:

"Why can't sidewalk be a place of worship?"
--TWeb poster garthoverman, refering to American Atheist Larry Darby's statement about keeping your religion in your homes and "places of worship" (apparently "places of worship" can be pretty much anywhere: sidewalks, parks, in the middle of the street, inside the Alabama State Courthouse...)

[Amazing Rando]

It's alot less funny when you add so much commentary.

[Soundsurfr]

How about this pompous egotistical strutting!!

I imagine you would need an entire trailer park just to fit the scholarly literature I have read that you haven't....
Oh wait. He's not a fundy atheist. Sorry.

:blush:

[BeHereNow]

It seems like it's time to start a project with this name to parody the soundbiting activities of our resident soreheads who cull TWeb and elsewhere for quotes they can grossly decontextualize and/or abuse for red herring and fallacious generalization purposes.

If they operate under ill intent, why would you want to replicate that?

If anyone wants to become a quote culler, drop me a PM. This is not going to be an obsession or anything like that like it is for our obsessed friends who prefer sound bites to hard academics. I can start the ball rolling with some foundational stuff but after that I will depend mostly on readers.

How do you know this isn't the same method used to create the original list?

[Sparko]

Hey JP

Don't forget your favorite arch nemesis :lmbo:... Johnny Skeptic. You could write a book on his quotes alone.

Here are some of his more jaw-dropping quotes:



Some terminally ill people who died, and who did not live in Oregon, died never having changed their minds about wanting to die.

--

Hindus of greater intelligence tend to reject religion more than Hindus of lesser intelligence.

--

Some time ago I shared this with Richard Carrier. He told me that I had dealt with this issue better than anyone he had yet seen. His reply began with "Well, I must say...."

--

Noted skeptic Bible scholar Dr. Robert Price told me that my alternate tomb hypothesis is one of many vailid alternate hypotheses. In addition, I have a friend who is a college professor. He has masters degrees in philosophy, an IQ of 173 and scored 1560 on his college board exams, including a perfect score of 800 in the verbal portion. He thinks that my hypothesis is as good as any that he has read so far.

--

Marilyn Savant has an IQ of 230, the highest ever recorded. She have a weekly question and answer column each week in Parade magazine. Some time ago I sent her an essay that I wrote on free will. It attracted her interest enough to send a rare private letter to me asking for my permission to use my name and parts of the essay in a possible future column on free will. So far, she hasn't yet do so. On another occasion, I disagree with an answer she gave in her column regarding geometry. Again, she sent me a private e-mail which basically said, "Interesting solution. Still I'm not sure if your way is better than mine. Still, I like it. Thanks for writing." Marilyn is not a Christian. Neither is Dr. Stephen Hawking, who is acknowledged by most physicists to be the top physicist in the world. It is one thing for you to attack my writings, but it would be another thing entirely for you to attack their world views.

--

I have cited appeals to authority. You have cited none. It is understandable that when you have no credible evidence in support of your views that you are perfectly happy to sit back and attack my hypotheses. However, now it is time for you to reasonably prove that there is not a reasonably provable correlation between IQ and lack of interest in religion.

--

After reading those exchanges you should at least admit that my approach was getting better. What do you think would have happened if my last two posts had actually been my first two posts? That would have been interesting indeed.

--

You just love to argue without really saying anything of substance.

I have already demolished 'The Impossible Faith' and I've love the opportunity to embarrass you again.

Just when I realized what your deceitful tactics were and my arguments improved dramatically, you hastily withdrew.

--

I assume that you will make a hasty exit from this thread since you can now see where it is leading. I promise you that I will roast your buns.

--

Your continued interest in attacking Rodney Stark is nothing more than a deception. By attacking Stark you make him a claimant, a role that you clearly detest, and for obvious reasons.

Whenever I ask Holding to back up his claims, he becomes a claimant, a role that he clearly detests, and for obvious reasons. At the Theology Web and elsewhere I have noticed a desperate attempt by Christians to get skeptics to become claimants when in fact the Bible in the intial, primary claimant here. If the Bible had not been written, there would be no Theology Web.

On any number of occasions Christians have attempted in private e-mails to get me to defend evolution. I never fall for that trick. In some of my debates at the Theology Web Christians have basically told me "You stated it. Now you prove it." I now tell them "The Bible says it. You prove it"

[Sheepdog]

hahahaha :lol: i knew someone was going to do this eventually.

if i happen to find any worthwhile quotes, i'll drop a line.

[Sheepdog]

dunno if garth counts. he's a pantheist (panantheist? i can't remember which).

[Piebald]

I hate the word "fundy" . . we should coin a new word or something :shifty:

[The Laughing Man]

dunno if garth counts. he's a pantheist (panantheist? i can't remember which).

Well, if the atheists can (and do) include non-fundies in their list, I see no problem with including Garth whatever he may be. :wink:

[jpholding]

How about this pompous egotistical strutting!!

Sorry, but when it happens to be true, it doesn't count either. Go back to reading your coloring books. You're in no position to argue about the erudition and study habits of others.



If they operate under ill intent, why would you want to replicate that?


I think you know the uses of parody by now, don't you?



How do you know this isn't the same method used to create the original list?

Given the speed with which they cull quotes and post them month by month, I find that rather unlikely, unless one of their staff is making use of illegal chronological displacement technology.

Thanks for the contributions, folks. Just keep going; I'll use this as a collection area (dump?).

[Sparko]

I think we also need a list of the Dumbdest Cult Sayings.

Recently Non-Trinitarian, A Jehovah's Witness, said this regarding their bible:

It was very clear to someone who doesn't already beleive in the Trinity that Paul meant all "other" created things. Col 1:15 is exactly in harmony with JW beliefs IF we insert the "other" in the text like we do scores of other times.


:lmbo:

If they tamper with scripture, it aligns with their doctrine, just like they do scores of other times!!! Bwahaahahahah.

[Xavier]

Just do a search for posts by DivineOb... You should have enough material to fill several volumes... :rofl:

[Sheepdog]

good grief! :lmbo: it wouldn't be so funny, except he says something stupid and then brags about his intellect.

[ilkhani'tus]

Just do a search for posts by DivineOb... You should have enough material to fill several volumes... :rofl:
Are any of DivineOb's posts as funny as this one (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=757981&postcount=95), Xavier?

Quote:

If you keep sticking to that totally false "ignoring evidence" claim then, what is the evidence that animals could talk in the past? Remember, that's one of the things that I was disputing!




The Bible offers a couple of fine historical accounts of animals talking.




On a humorous note, it's nice to see Holding admit that he's egotistical and arrogant!

[Xavier]

Are any of DivineOb's posts as funny as this one (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=757981&postcount=95), Xavier?

Yeah... Almost about as funny as your arrogance and ignorance in not answering the argument and attempting to drag your non-answer everywhere else.

[ilkhani'tus]

:lol: Ah, so for my having trouble in believing in talking animals, I'm the arrogant and ignorant one? Funny as hell.

"Not answering"? Bull. I showed you why I don't buy that story, yet you just keep yelling a priori dismissal all the time!

Thanks, I needed the laugh. Too bad that your a priori assertion among others is being assaulted (by a few people) on the original thread.

It's also too bad that you've really got nothing to back that claim up with other than whining about an a priori dismissal!


Well, let's see, since you seem to believe the biblical accounts of talking animals at historical face value, how's about a repeatable test of another biblical miracle? Say, a certain test in the Book of Mark?

Of course, if you can show me a talking animal, then you can forgo that...

[Xavier]

how's about a repeatable test of another biblical miracle? [...] Of course, if you can show me a talking animal, then you can forgo that...

What more proof do I need... Ilk cannot seem to grasp the fact that this is an a priori presupposition. I suppose I can now add stupidity to the list of adjectives.

:lmbo:

Yours,
Xavier

[Sheepdog]

it could be worse. Tweb's own armchair psychologist, ilkhani'tus, has left us with this funny:

The fact that you need a "god" in order to give your life meaning shows us what kind of mental state you have. Are you trying to imply that if you ever came to the conclusion that your god didn't exist, that you'd have no reason to live? Beh

:lmbo: unfortunately, we who know better recognize that trying to undermine someone's point by challenging their mental well being is pathetic and is essentially an adminssion to defeat. this, by the was, is referenced from the same thread linked to above.

Not much less than "if you don't worship MY GOD, you'll burn in hell for ever and ever. Are you choosing to believe in god because of "evidence" or just because, like a scared child, you just want to believe? If you want to keep on thinking that only people who believe in your god can have meaning, than keep right on thinking that, if that's what keeps you more or less sane.

more armchair psychology. this guy is on a role! tell me, ilkhani'tus, where did you get your degree in psychology? :lmbo:

If it's consistency you want, why aren't xians out killing witches, etc like the bible tells you to?

:rofl: we Christians are tired of refuting this dead horse. it is a sure sign of ignorance, though, when some snotty skeptic hurls that corpse into a debate.


Maybe we just believe that what a person's religion is, is a personal matter, and shouldn't be shoved down the throats of others.

:lmbo: much like you shoved your atheism down Chris_Apolo's throat? :rofl: but of course, hypocracy is par for the course when it comes to 'net skeptics like yourself.

i'm sure i could find plenty of others. from what i've seen, it seems ilkhani'tus foams at the mouth at the thought that some evil fundamentalist conspiracy might take over the government. maybe he's afraid they will take away his meds? :hehe:

[Sparko]

yeah. talking animals are clearly mythical.
:parrot:

[Xavier]

Here's a good one...

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=762144&postcount=63

Benster seems to think ancients to be neither modern nor reasonable. Also, Benster seems to think that miracles only ever happen in front of believers... Go figure... :nsm:

:haha:

[Sparko]

Here's a good one...

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=762144&postcount=63

Benster seems to think ancients to be neither modern nor reasonable. Also, Benster seems to think that miracles only ever happen in front of believers... Go figure... :nsm:

:haha:
Benster said: (Remember: Back then, rising from the dead was not altogether rare.)

:doh:

[Xavier]

I thought it was safe to assume that he was being facetious there...

However, my sarcasm detector didn't jump after than... :hrm:

[ilkhani'tus]

yeah. talking animals are clearly mythical.
:parrot:I've explained in the other thread why even the "alex" parrot is not even close to a human when it comes to either talking or understanding speech. Kind of like an ape, they had said.

[ilkhani'tus]

it could be worse. Tweb's own armchair psychologist, ilkhani'tus, has left us with this funny:



:lmbo: unfortunately, we who know better recognize that trying to undermine someone's point by challenging their mental well being is pathetic and is essentially an adminssion to defeat. this, by the was, is referenced from the same thread linked to above.Problem is, you who don't know better can't see the obvious. Cris as much as said that without his god, life would have no meaning. What would you infer from his statment?
Ha Ha HA, this is the kinda thing I am talking about! I love how I can always respond to non-theists by pretty much saying "SO WHAT!?!?" You see, when you take the ultimate being, eternity , or whatever your valid source of ultimate value is out of the picture, you are left with no ultimate meaning or value. Yet you still react to situations and propositions as if you susbscribed to a worldveiw, under which, things really mattered. HYULK! Do you see what I am saying?In that thread I explain why us godless are able to have/find meaning. Chris said that without god, you can't have meaning.

Real life shows us that people who are depressed feel that their life has no meaning. I'm just pointing out the logical results of Chris's thinking. If you have a problem with that, take it up with him. That, and I was responding with the same snarky attitude he had when he posted.


more armchair psychology. this guy is on a role! tell me, ilkhani'tus, where did you get your degree in psychology? :lmbo:Just common sense and many years of dealing with christians. Mind you, I actually have taken several psychology courses.



:rofl: we Christians are tired of refuting this dead horse. it is a sure sign of ignorance, though, when some snotty skeptic hurls that corpse into a debate.Too bad xians didn't think that that was a "dead horse" until the Enlightenment came along. A few hundred years ago, xians were doing just that. You can scoff, but you can't ignore history.



:lmbo: much like you shoved your atheism down Chris_Apolo's throat? :rofl: but of course, hypocracy is par for the course when it comes to 'net skeptics like yourself.Ok, let's talk about hypocrosy: You've criticized my "armchair psychologizing" yet you've said nothing about Chris_Apolo doing the same thing (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=757512&postcount=82):
It really is kinda funny that these people that think Christianity is completely false and a total waste of time, spend more time discussing Christianity than the vast majority of Christians. Maybe deep down they are commited theists, just like the extreme homo-phobe is usually gay. I mean, people almost never act contrary to their beliefs, yet these people talk about things that, in their atheistic worldview, make ZERO ultimate difference. In any case, they provide a good laugh for me. Then JohnSparks added his own guesses about what motivates us athiests. Again, you said nothing about them analyzing athiests, but you went on the offensive when I did the same thing back to Chris.

Now, you were talking about hypocrosy right, well, as you've shown, you would know.

If they try to make judgments about athiests mental or emotional state then we're perfectly within our rights to do the same back, no matter how much you bellyache about it.

Now, as to your charge of "shoving atheism" down his throat, all I did was explain why atheist resist fundies. I then went on later to say:
If you want to keep on thinking that only people who believe in your god can have meaning, than keep right on thinking that, if that's what keeps you more or less sane.Now, could you, since you "know better" possibly explain how that could be twisted into "shoving atheism down Chris's throat? I know you've seen that line, because you've quoted the one right after it.

So, are you also a liar, sheepdog, or are you just stupid?

i'm sure i could find plenty of others. from what i've seen, it seems ilkhani'tus foams at the mouth at the thought that some evil fundamentalist conspiracy might take over the government. maybe he's afraid they will take away his meds? :hehe:It seems sheepdog foams at the mouth whenever someone does something that the people on his side do.

[Sheepdog]

:lmbo:

argued like a true fundy atheist. thank you for further contributing to J.P. Holdings cause :rofl:

[The Laughing Man]

You always gotta love it when some fundy repackages the old "can God create a rock to big that He cannot lift it" argument as steamer did in Apologetics 101.

[Captain Ochre]

"I'm not claiming that because you have not proven your side therefore CERTAINLY my side is correct, but PROBABLY my side is correct."

Uttered by an (otherwise) intelligent atheist.

Even funnier was the time an opponent seized on the quotation, thinking that it was cited in my sig line as a laudable saying, and admonished me to remember that "it works both ways".
I replied in essence that since it doesn't work (being a fallacy) therefore it can't work both ways.
Can't remember if the latter chap was an atheist or not.

[ilkhani'tus]

:lmbo:

argued like a true fundy atheist. thank you for further contributing to J.P. Holdings cause :rofl:And ignoring every single point raised and going on to claim victory like you've just done, is that how fundy xians operate?

Oh well.

[jpholding]

And ignoring every single point raised and going on to claim victory like you've just done, is that how fundy xians operate?


Like icky'pantus hasn't run like a whipped puppy from me more than once. :ahem:

[ilkhani'tus]

Like icky'pantus hasn't run like a whipped puppy from me more than once. :ahem:Since all you do is act like an ass, why bother? You've twisted my words, and ascribed to me motives that I never intended (the Mithras thread, where I asked for information and you've somehow assumed was a challenge to debate) then proclaimed me to be "ignorant" while trying to start a fight/debate, when all I was doing was just asking for info in the first place.

You're dishonest.

If you're going to mess around like that, then just claim victory then go on to stroke your ego like that, why should I bother?




This all leaves out the salient fact that it's sheepdog who's not truly responded to me in this thread. He had a chance to actually rebut me, but he never did. He just lipped off. He apparently had nothing intelligent to say, so who cares? I'm done with that character.

[jpholding]

Since all you do is act like an ass, why bother?

Since that's virtually all that you ever say warrants, why not?

You've twisted my words, and ascribed to me motives that I never intended (the Mithras thread, where I asked for information and you've somehow assumed was a challenge to debate)

Yeah sure. ready made excuses for incompetence and inability when caught mouthing off. Tell the excuses to the hand.

[ilkhani'tus]

Since that's virtually all that you ever say warrants, why not?Holy mackeral..did that statment ever come as a surprise...



Yeah sure. ready made excuses for incompetence and inability when caught mouthing off. Tell the excuses to the hand.More like your ready made lies when caught out on it...if you can't tell the difference between asking for info and a real challenge wherein I would say "I challenge..."

I was just starting a thread for more info. Anyone who reads it should be able to see that. Except you.




Hmmmm.....should I tell it to the hand that you use to stroke your ego with? Maybe that may get through to you.


Then again, forget you.

[Sheepdog]

And ignoring every single point raised and going on to claim victory like you've just done, is that how fundy xians operate?

nope. i didn't ignore your response, but i saw nothing worth replying too. i just laughed. you know the saying, don't respond to a fool according to his folly....

[ilkhani'tus]

nope. i didn't ignore your response, but i saw nothing worth replying to. i just laughed. you know the saying, don't respond to a fool according to his folly....If anyone's wondering, that's why, after reading what sheepdog had said in his earlier post, I figured that would be a good policy to follow, so I'm just going to let that fool blather on here without any direct reply from me.


Ciao.

[Xavier]

:rofl:

[Sheepdog]

If anyone's wondering, that's why, after reading what sheepdog had said in his earlier post, I figured that would be a good policy to follow, so I'm just going to let that fool blather on here without any direct reply from me.

:lmbo:

this is too entertaining!

[jpholding]

Holy mackeral..did that statment ever come as a surprise...

Can't help it if you're too insensate to know what you're doing. Too late -- your pants were caught down and the picture was taken and posted. The old games of this sort:


if you can't tell the difference between asking for info and a real challenge wherein I would say "I challenge..."

..don't work. That game of creating a challenge using the pretense of information mining is an old one, and not very original at that.

Hmmmm.....should I tell it to the hand that you use to stroke your ego with?

No, use the one that runs your projection device. :ahem:

[Cynic Sage]

Here are some more from Johnny Skeptic.

This is JS on Jewish dietary laws.
http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=35036


God commanded Moses to eat a vegetarian diet. After Noah left the ark, God told him that he could eat all animals. God commanded Moses not to eat certain animals. Jesus, Paul and the writer of the book of Acts had no problem with a non-vegetarian diet. What’s up, Christians?

G-d never commanded Moses to eat a vegitarian diet he cammanded Moses to eat a Kosher Diet, this includes Meat(Animals with true cloven hooves that chew its cud, fish with fins and scales) as well as Bread and fruits and vegtables provided they are prepared Kosher. This is a diet for Jews.

The reason Noach was told he could eat any animal he wanted was because he was a Gentile and not a Jew. Pork is Ok for gentiles, shrimp and lobster are Ok for Gentiles but they are not Kosher for Jews.

I did not say that God commanded Moses to be a vegetarian. I said that God commanded Moses not to eat "certain" animals. Let me state my case in a simpler way. Follwoing is a little poem that I made up some time ago:

Noah and Paul went to market
Adam and Moses stayed home
Noah and Paul had roast pork
Adam and Moses had none
And Adam and Moses said "Where's the roast pork" all the way home
Hey JS, if you're gonna fib, do it the right way and edit you're OP.:lol:

And heeee're's Johnny on "What if everyone in the world disappeared".
http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26593&page=26&pp=16&highlight=Slavery


I was a fundamentalist Christian for over thirty-five years. My moral code now is exactly the same as it used to be. If suddenly everyone on earth disappeared, what kind of world do you think that we would be left with? I think a better world than we have now. For one thing, countless billions, if not trillions of dollars would be available to use for many vital human needs, not to mention millions of hours of time that would be spent on tangible benefits rather than perceived spiritual benefits.

Besides, who'd provide the goods and services you would want to use the money to obtain?
Any decent economist would laugh at such nonsense. Part of the extra money could be used to immediately pay off our record multi-trillion dollar national debt and balance the budget, not to mention eliminating state debts and balancing state budgets. In addition, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and in need of additional funds to help third world nations. Further, the U.S. needs to become energy independent. Energy dependence would occur if enough money were available.

Rather than arguing with me about this, I suggest that you contact a Christian economist and ask him if the U.S. would benefit from a gift of 10 trillion dollars and tell me what he says.
Keep in mind that the people the USA owes the debt to would be long gone, not to mention those in third-world countries would also be gone, along w/those at WorldBank and IMF.:rofl:

What difference does it makes who is long gone? If a person with a bank mortgage on his house dies, his heir will inherit the mortage. If the heir dies before the mortgage is paid off, his heir will inherit the mortgage and so on. The budget was balanced during the Clinton administration. Are you displeased that such was the case? If the national debt had been decreased by 1 billion dollars, would you have been displeased? Are you against debt reduction and debt elimination? :patrick:Three cheers for Johnny Skeptic.:patrick:
:lol:

BTW: highlights by me.

[The Laughing Man]

:lol: If everyone disappeared, who would spend this extra money? :rofl: Or how about if all the Christians disappeared? Where would this supposed extra money come from? With the Christians gone, no one else is going to go to their jobs or pay their taxes.

Contrary to Johnny Skeptic's wet dreams, the Rapture (if it happens - I don't know that it will or won't, but I'm ready for it) will result in big problems on earth.

No need for that.

[Sheepdog]

:haha: those are great!

[The Laughing Man]

Oh, lookee here. A great source for fundy atheist quotes has become available again. Apparently, Reg "the Infidel Guy" Finley has re-opened his forums to non-users. Check it out:

InfidelGuy.com forums (http://www.infidelguy.com/modules.php?name=Forums)

I've already found some dumb quotes:

"Guys, Christians are idiots, we know that. They are just so stupid it makes me sick."
--Nicomachus

"If the religious have so much faith that a god is watching over them then why do they look both ways before crossing the street?"
--Extropian1

"...and why would they be careful when a little carelessness could get them into the arms of their loving Heavenly Father so much more quickly!"
--NoDeity

And all in the same thread, too! :lmbo: I'm going to search for more. :hehe:

[BeHereNow]

Here's a good one...

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=762144&postcount=63

Benster seems to think ancients to be neither modern nor reasonable. Also, Benster seems to think that miracles only ever happen in front of believers... Go figure... :nsm:

:haha:

Um, Xavier, that isn't what he said at all, on either count. If you guys are going to make a list about stupid things atheists say, at least do not sink to the level of decontextualization. As Judo emphasizes capitalizing on the opponent's momentum, so, too, does good mockery. You shouldn't have to try this hard if something is truly mock-worthy.

Here is what Benster said:

But if I was a reasonable, modern person, then I would be puzzled, about my perceptions, for one.

He didn't claim the original viewers weren't reasonable. The implication could be that other modern viewers may not be considered reasonable, but it doesn't say anything about the originals. And Xavier... you think it's funny to say ancients aren't modern? What could possibly be your point of contention?

As for your claim that he said miracles only happen in front of believers, I really don't know what to think. The only way you could've come up with that is to twist his words something terrible. He didn't even imply that.

[Xavier]

He didn't claim the original viewers weren't reasonable.

He did so by implication in his remark.

The implication could be that other modern viewers may not be considered reasonable, but it doesn't say anything about the originals.

Since the context was on viewing the Resurrection, I think the implication was justly drawn.

And Xavier... you think it's funny to say ancients aren't modern? What could possibly be your point of contention?

Modern for their time would have been the better phrase I suppose. It amuses me that the new thrust of Atheistic argumentation seems to be "my those anicents were all so stupid".

As for your claim that he said miracles only happen in front of believers, I really don't know what to think. The only way you could've come up with that is to twist his words something terrible. He didn't even imply that.

Read his last couple of question a few times...

Yours,
Xavier

[EvoUK]

As pointed out:

"You shouldn't have to try this hard if something is truly mock-worthy."

[The Laughing Man]

As pointed out:

"You shouldn't have to try this hard if something is truly mock-worthy."

Indeed. I guess that's why the original "fundies say" list has to be put together by so many people, whereas one person can go on websites like InfidelGuy.com's forums and find loads of good fundy atheists quotes - usually a bunch in just one thread!

[BeHereNow]

Indeed. I guess that's why the original "fundies say" list has to be put together by so many people, whereas one person can go on websites like InfidelGuy.com's forums and find loads of good fundy atheists quotes - usually a bunch in just one thread!

Yeah? Well, that's what this thread's about, and it's been a month and a half now. Where's this list?

[The Laughing Man]

Reg hasn't had his forum open to non-users until recently.

[EvoUK]

Indeed. I guess that's why the original "fundies say" list has to be put together by so many people, whereas one person can go on websites like InfidelGuy.com's forums and find loads of good fundy atheists quotes - usually a bunch in just one thread!

You don't have to try to point out the mock-worthy bits out of any of the fundy quotes- they're self-evidently rediculous. That's why you lot are so highly amusing. If you have to go through and point out why a quote is silly, then it most likely isn't.

[jpholding]

Yeah? Well, that's what this thread's about, and it's been a month and a half now. Where's this list?

I'm in charge of compiling it. It's not exactly a priority.

[Cynic Sage]

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43697&page=1&pp=16

Ya gotta love steamer and his high standards.

Myself, if any book contained 10,000 prophesies that came true, I'd assume that prophesies were a natural phenomena and would urge scientists to further study it and discover the technique.
His selective memory as well.

It's time to leave the story books behind, don't you think? Time to put away childish things. It was nice when religions were harmless, but now they express themselves with car bombs and blown up abortion clinics. I know it's just a small percentage of these religions that have these kooks, but how many Christians do you know that are willing to die for their beliefs? How many nut jobs out there trying to convince them that their beliefs require them to die? Jim Jones, that UFO nut, Karesh. Religion isn't love thy neighbor anymore. Just look at this board if you don't believe me.
Gee, steamer, when was the last time you heard about an abortion clinic being blown up? I'm pretty sure the last one happened in 1997. The way you talk, you'd think that abortion clinics were being bombed on a regular basis by the average Christian pro-lifer. I don't hate to burst your bubble, steamer, but the extremely rare attacks on abortion clinics are carried out by extremists. They {abortion clinic bombings} were carried out by delusional religionists in the name of god. Much like Bush in Iraq. So the last time I heard about it was, ummm, yesterday.
Hmmm. Y'know, you're probably right. We should dispose of all religions just because steamer doesn't like the Bible. After all, look how moral, upright, and successful the Societ Union <sic> is.
What does the Soviet Union have to do with anything? Is it your view that all athiestic countries must become corrupt?
The only examples of "officially" atheistic countries that history has provided are:
1: Post-Revolutionary France (too short lived to get really serious about it);
2: Soviet-sphere Communist Eurasia;
3: China-sphere Communist Asia.

Soviet-Eurasian Communism and China-Far Asian Communism are sufficiently different so as to be separate cases.

All of these regimes have, indeed, been corrupt. The problem is, as you note, it's not specifically the atheism that corrupts these countries: where your logic breaks down is that even though you recognize that atheism is not the prime cause of the breakup of the SU or the problems in China, you consistently refuse to accept that Theism is not the primary corrupting influence in non-atheist contries.

Steamer, I do not argue that atheists cannot be moral--you do argue that theists are challenged when trying to be moral, but you apply your 21st century moral standards to Iron Age and Classical texts to make that argument. Just like Johnny Skeptic, you're using a false, ethnocentric standard--what's more, I think you know it's an invalid standard.

Where did I make the claim that theism is the primary corrupting influence in non-atheist contries?
:lol:

[Sparko]

:lmbo:

[Sparko]

Johnny Skeptic arguing about the Tyre prophesy... (but it could be any prophesy, and the result would be the same)

Johnny: The point is, did God give it? You assume facts not yet in evidence.

John Sparks: Evidence: the only mention of the prophesy is in the Bible which claims it is a prophesy given by God. Without the Bible there is no prophesy to even discuss. Therefore if you accept the prophesy exists, then it only exists in the context of being a prophesy of God, thus it is divine.

Johnny: The texts claim that various prophecies are divinely inspired, but that alone does not automatically mean that for instance the Tyre prophecy was inspired by God. I accept only that a "claimed" prophecy exists.

John: If you doubt the prophesy was ever given, then there is no prophesy to even discuss and this thread is a waste of your time and everyone elses.

Johnny: Well obviously a "claimed" prophecy was given or we wouldn't be having this discussion. My main point about the Tyre prohecy is that there is not one single thing about it that indicates that is was divinely inspired. You haven't chosen to answer my latest arguments. Why is that? Here they are again: [he repeats his same old junk again for the 5th time]

Johnny: I would like to add to the preceding by saying that several days ago I realized that my claiming that the Tyre prophecy was not fulfilled was the wrong way to go about it. That is why I decided not to claim that the prophecy was not fulfilled, but rather to ask what indicates that the claimed prophecy was divinely inspired.

John Sparks:So, you admit there is a prophesy and it came true, but now you just want proof it was from God?

1. The bible claims it was from God.
2. It came true as prophesied.

That means you have a chioce to make.

1. The bible was right and God did make the prophesy.
2. It was an incredibly lucky guess by someone who just attributed it to God.

==
Johnny's picture must be next to the word "Clueless" in the dictionary.

[Cynic Sage]

Could you post a link to the thread?

[Sparko]

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27783&page=11&pp=16

[kiwimac]

Ah JP still the subtle little devil aren't you?

How is that trailer-park of literature coming. Has it got beyond the framing? or are you still playing with the 4x2 which was its sole piece?

Kiwimac

[jpholding]

Ah JP still the subtle little devil aren't you?

Yep. And they'll never catch me. Never.

How is that trailer-park of literature coming. Has it got beyond the framing? or are you still playing with the 4x2 which was its sole piece?


It is at best still in collection mode. Between recent speaking trips, and a desire to pound on Tom Harpur's head in great and loving detail, it may not move past that for a while. Harpur. Now there's a Dumbdest Things collection all by itself.

[BeHereNow]

I'm in charge of compiling it. It's not exactly a priority.

I smell a fish!

Come on JP, what could possibly be more important?

[jpholding]

I smell a fish!

Come on JP, what could possibly be more important?

There's a special on TV for the next 6 weeks on uncooked pasta origami.

[Sparko]

Someone complained that Steamer just attacks caricatures of Christianity (which he does)

Steamer replied:

"I'm coming to the conclusion that any view held of Christianity will be a caricature to Christians unless it is the view that it is true.. "

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=846634&postcount=24


====
DUH! :rofl:

[The Laughing Man]

Someone complained that Steamer just attacks caricatures of Christianity (which he does)

Steamer replied:

"I'm coming to the conclusion that any view held of Christianity will be a caricature to Christians unless it is the view that it is true.. "

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=846634&postcount=24


====
DUH! :rofl:

I can hardly type I'm laughing so hard.

[The Laughing Man]

OMIGOSH!!!! Gary Gnu!!!! "No gnus is good gnus with Gary... Gnu."

[Jaltus]

Great Space Coaster, baby!

[Cynic Sage]

I guess this kinda helps remind everyone that all philosophical trees have nuts, not just the religious ones.

[salvationfound]

Normally I wouldn't do this but I do have to admit I really laughed when
Johnny Skeptic said this:

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44731&page=4

William Lane Craig is as good an expert as it gets in the Christian community. He has an impressive pedigree, a Ph.D. in religion and a Ph.D. in philosophy. You have no pedigree. Of course I don’t either.


So then shouldn't Johnny believe whatever Craig says if pedigree is so
important?

Also I was also trying to figure out how having two college degrees one in
Biblical Studies and being a year and a half away from my masters constitutes
no pedigree.

[BeHereNow]

Man, this is so disappointing - what a ****-tease of a thread. Where is this list?

You know, the original Fundies Say list is always hysterical and features numerous posters from different boards. This one features basically three or four quotes from steamer that barely merit a chortle.

You guys haven't given up have you? As a fan of good comedy, I eagerly await the list. Can we make it a monthly thing?

[Sparko]

Well I did quote Johnny Skeptic a few times.

But the problem is that many fundy atheists are too incoherent to condense their foolishness into a sound bite sized quote.

Take Jim Eisele as an example. To get a sense of his idiocy you have to read his entire rants in context.

[jpholding]

Man, this is so disappointing - what a ****-tease of a thread. Where is this list?

You guys haven't given up have you? As a fan of good comedy, I eagerly await the list. Can we make it a monthly thing?

I've had too much on my plate to go after it (you can see in the last week, I've had a predator/stalker/libeller to put to bed). Less funnier stuff just keeps getting in my way, darn it. :rant:

[BeHereNow]

I've had too much on my plate to go after it (you can see in the last week, I've had a predator/stalker/libeller to put to bed). Less funnier stuff just keeps getting in my way, darn it. :rant:

Recruit a sycophant, JP! Come on man, eye gno ewe cannes due it!

[jpholding]

Recruit a sycophant, JP! Come on man, eye gno ewe cannes due it!

You mean you're volunteering?

I've decided to condense these rather into a monthly feature called Tekton's Screwballs of the Month. I have to admit that I was inspired by this letter I got about my Da Vinci Code article:


Hi I came across this site http://www.tektonics.org/davincicrude.htm
and all you’re put downs of the book "The Davinic Code"
having note read the book I do have an opened mind, which is not always easy to have,

Anyway it seams your losing the battle, you have lost the battle in criticising the book, as its one of the most popular out there so give that part up.

Not far down the web page you make an error about Indian Jones and the Holy Grail being a cup, when it’s a casket box type thing

Ummmm. :glare: That's just too good to keep to myself.

[Sparko]

Hey it's kinda like Scott Adam's and his Dogbert newsletter. He posts quotes and tales from InDUHviduals. Pretty hilarious stuff.

[jpholding]

I will post this feature sometime this evening. In the meantime I will start a new thread for submissions for February's Screwballs of the Month.

[BeHereNow]

You mean you're volunteering?

:lol:

I've decided to condense these rather into a monthly feature called Tekton's Screwballs of the Month. I have to admit that I was inspired by this letter I got about my Da Vinci Code article:



Ummmm. :glare: That's just too good to keep to myself.

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about! That's self-evident humor right there. I haven't read the book yet, but you're wrong about it...

:thumb:

[jpholding]

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about! That's self-evident humor right there. I haven't read the book yet, but you're wrong about it...

:thumb:

Darn. Is that a submission? Put it in the other thread. :tongue: The irony is that I've had letters like that, too.

[BeHereNow]

Darn. Is that a submission? Put it in the other thread. :tongue: The irony is that I've had letters like that, too.

No man, I was paraphrasing the email you posted above from the guy who hasn't read the "Davinic Code", but still had an open mind. Maybe I misread him, but can you blame me? Look at his diction!

[Sparko]

Jim Eisele:

I think that you want to go to heaven when you die. Well, so does an atheist. Who’s to say that an atheism god doesn’t exist?

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=902643&postcount=294

[jpholding]

Owwwwtch....

BTW JohnS, these can now go in the monthly threads I'll be starting for Screwballs of the Month.



BHN, I will say this much -- the guy wrote me back and admitted he goofed.

[Mark_S]

Jason: You're contesting an ACTUAL HISTORICAL RESOURCE with your own reasoning? Oh please.

Johnny: And you are disagreeing with the Encyclopedia Britannica.
Well That about sums it up doesn't it?

[BeHereNow]

Owwwwtch....

BTW JohnS, these can now go in the monthly threads I'll be starting for Screwballs of the Month.



BHN, I will say this much -- the guy wrote me back and admitted he goofed.


If you get any more stuff that's as funny as the Davinic letter, please post. I love accidental comedy so much.

[dizzle]

I post goofy futurist comments on my site

[jpholding]

Whoa,

1) Can mods please close this thread so that folks will bring their comments to the Screwball thread?

2) Mark S, can you repost that in the Screwball thread?

[Sheepdog]

per JP's request, this thread is closed. please post candidates for Feb. here (link) (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46809)