September 2006 Screwballs [Archive]

View Full Version : September 2006 Screwballs

jpholding

August 31st 2006, 09:54 AM

Again, since I'm banned from the auction Sept. 1-3 I'll start this now.

Sheepdog

September 2nd 2006, 01:14 AM

We already have a howler...

what percentage of atheists beleive that unborn babies in the womb should be protected from abortion after,ADTER, the third trimester?
from: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83309

as bandecoot pointed out, no one supports abortion after the third trimester, since we call them BABIES at that point. :haha:

familyof6

September 2nd 2006, 01:22 AM

Crow

September 2nd 2006, 01:26 AM

I'll third that nomination. What a whack job. :lol:

norwegen

September 2nd 2006, 08:44 AM

as bandecoot pointed out, no one supports abortion after the third trimester, since we call them BABIES at that point. :haha:Glass*Soul pointed it out. Bandecoot seconded her observation.

Sheepdog

September 2nd 2006, 12:59 PM

well, bande was the one who pointed it out to me. so :rasberry:

Telleriab2

September 2nd 2006, 01:22 PM

I posted a button about trolls in a thread somewhere. I shall just do it here.

It is not worth it. It just isn't. Move along.

Tickle Me Goody

September 2nd 2006, 01:56 PM

Yes, this Tresangels person is something else. I am so happy that most of the other Christians I've encoutered on this site don't behave this way. Everyone should read his 'question' posts. He sounds like a lunatic. In fact, I think to give him screwball of the month is an insult to screwbals everywhere.

I agree! That would elevate all other screwballs to a lofty position.

How about Jim Eisele, he seems to be a "plain vanilla" screwball.

Cynic Sage

September 2nd 2006, 04:53 PM

I agree! That would elevate all other screwballs to a lofty position.

How about Jim Eisele, he seems to be a "plain vanilla" screwball.

You have to quote something he said.

Cynic Sage

September 2nd 2006, 05:03 PM

Yes, this Tresangels person is something else. I am so happy that most of the other Christians I've encoutered on this site don't behave this way. Everyone should read his 'question' posts. He sounds like a lunatic. In fact, I think to give him screwball of the month is an insult to screwbals everywhere.

Tresangels serves up another "question for athiests" with some Wonka's Tasty Fudge on the side:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83217

Q. When Krishna was teaching by the lake, did he refer to the bird as a bird of war or a bird of peace?

:twitch::huh:

Tickle Me Goody

September 2nd 2006, 05:21 PM

You have to quote something he said.

See my signature

Cynic Sage

September 2nd 2006, 05:34 PM

See my signature
Can you link to where he said it? Sigs change over time.

Tickle Me Goody

September 2nd 2006, 05:36 PM

Can you link to where he said it? Sigs change over time.

You really make a guy work. I'll go look.

Tickle Me Goody

September 2nd 2006, 05:46 PM

Can you link to where he said it? Sigs change over time.

I'm not certain how to do this.

Does this work?

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=1632421#post1632421

sc_q_jayce

September 3rd 2006, 02:54 PM

On behalf of JP Holding:

Give Doubting John a Screwball for this entry in his blog:Let me state for the record that I am a freethinker first, and an atheist second. No freethinker faces a potential excommunication or heresy trial for not abiding by the party line as far as I'm concerned. I left Christianity partly over this party line attitude. Acharya S. was a Blog member here for a week until she recused herself because of her critics, and I have invited Bob to be a member here with no luck yet.

Where I agree with people, I agree. Where I disagree with people I disagree. That's it. For instance, I do believe Jesus was a historical figure in the 1st century, unlike them. But I learn from everyone.

The goal here at DC is to Debunk evangelical Christianity. This could be done by a Deist, a new age pantheist, an agnostic or an atheist. Where we agree we agree. Where we have our own disputes, we will dispute. Christians do the same thing when it comes to differing views of Calvinism, eschatology, baptism, pentecostal gifts, church polity, and so on. But unlike them such disputes do not undercut a common goal we have when it comes to Christianity.

I (along with Ed Babinski) do not put up barriers between freethinkers so long as we share the same goals. Where we disagree we will disagree, but our commond ground is still that we are freethinkers. We are not hamstrung by religious dogmas and creeds and scriptures that define whether or not we are allowed in the group. We just ask that people are able to back up their beliefs and defend them in areas where we share common ground. Even if someone is way out of bounds with what I think can be rationally defended, I can still say, "but she makes a good case against Christianity...she makes me think."Acharya S makes him think. That speaks for itself.

Teallaura

September 3rd 2006, 03:07 PM

:twitch: Anyone else beginning to think the 'freethinker' is another way of saying 'incapable of holding a congruent thought'?

Jnthn

September 3rd 2006, 03:16 PM

:twitch: Anyone else beginning to think the 'freethinker' is another way of saying 'incapable of holding a congruent thought'?
Don't know if being a freethinker renders you incapable of holding congruent thought, but it seems, contra "freethought", that one needs a framework or scaffold to hang thoughts and concepts in. The absence of a framework suggests you have a miasma of data to play with.

Given that the scaffold exists - your worldview - the primary area of any discussion becomes that of the validity and robustness of the framework.

J

lilpixieofterror

September 3rd 2006, 07:35 PM

Here another quote I think you guys would love by our good friend Jim Eisele:

You’re completely wrong here. We’ve already talked about a number of things. And I’m starting to feel bad about bursting your bubble. Could you handle the development of serious doubts about your faith? Christianity manipulates people. And you’re showing the classic signs of being manipulated. I can show you why you’re wrong. But I would feel remiss about proceeding without warning you.
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83169&page=5

If you care to read my response here it is!

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83169&page=6&pp=16

Tickle Me Goody

September 3rd 2006, 07:46 PM

:twitch: Anyone else beginning to think the 'freethinker' is another way of saying 'incapable of holding a congruent thought'?

:thumb:

YeshuaMarine

September 3rd 2006, 07:53 PM

On behalf of JP Holding:

[/size][/font]
Acharya S makes me think too. She makes me think if someone could humanly be that stupid......

Emo (emotionally overcharged) Evolutionists are my nomination for the month. We Creationists have been rolling over Evolutionists in the Natural Science debates (Me and Jorge Fernandez specifically). I've participated in three debates, and the Creationists have three victories under their belt.

Check them out:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=1638478#post1638478

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=71704

And of course...the ever classical:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=82974

Enjoy guys, as Tuck and Goody Goody most certainly have! :lol:

familyof6

September 4th 2006, 02:20 PM

I respectfully reiterate my Screwball Nomination with this gem from Tresangels:

please keep your atheistic ,hedonistic children away from my children....my children(ne grandchildren) will grow up to be Christian medical missionaries....

I'm not sure how to link it, but everyone should review his "question 6 for atheists" thread. (and others) I was attempting to answer his question with some census figures and the like, and he began berating me and my family. Then he proceeded to have the audacity to say that I was 'only on this site to bash Christian medical missonaries'. This guy is Screwball of the Year, if you ask me. There are some other great Screwball posts on this site, but trust me; this guy takes the cake. :eek:

Cynic Sage

September 4th 2006, 10:40 PM

Frank Walton tries to form an apologetical argument from a music video:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83319&page=1&pp=16

This (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Sm3trB1fe4) is an intriguing video on the theory of evolution by the great and thought-provoking band, Pearl Jam. (http://www.pearljam.com/) When you watch the video (Do the Evolution (http://www.lyricsstyle.com/p/pearljam/dotheevolution.html)) you get a sense of the direction man is headed - a life of misery. This is exactly what evolution promises you - a life of everlasting misery. Sure, according to evolution, life is objectively meaningless and that doesn't necessarily negate any subjective meaning we give our lives, but guess what? The video makes it clear that that doesn't matter anyway. No matter how you see it - subjective or objective, you're doomed to a nihilistic lifestyle.

Bioethicist Wesly J. Smith once asked, "Does ever human life have equal moral value because it is human? Answer yes, and we have a chance of achieving universal human rights. Answer no, and it means that we are merely another animal in the forest."

Pearl Jam's answer is an unfortunate "no."

I recommend all atheists watch this video. And after that ask yourself, "Is this kind of life worth living?"

Cynic Sage

September 5th 2006, 12:27 AM

"The True Bible Code" site:

http://www.truebiblecode.com/

We now predict a terrorist Nuclear Bomb will hit the UN plaza in Midtown Manhattan on the sabbath of 2006Elul13 or 2006Elul20 or 2006Elul27 (Sundown Friday to Sundown Saturday 8/9th or 15th/16th or 22nd/23rd)

We now have 11 scriptural calculations all of which predict this attack as falling in the Biblical Lunar Calendar month of Elul, 2006 (i.e. before September 26th, 2006). For a brief presentation of all of these calculations - see 11proofs (http://www.truebiblecode.com/understanding271.html#1). The attack will mark the start of what Isaiah 2, Isaiah 13, Ezekiel 7, Ezekiel 13, Joel 2, Amos 5, Zephaniah1, Zechariah 14 and Malachi 4 all describe as the 'Day of Jehovah' and what 1 Thessalonians 5 describes as the 'Day of the Lord', where the Lord is Jehovah rather than Jesus. For more on that 'day' see U272 (http://www.truebiblecode.com/understanding272.html). The 'Day of Jehovah' is the last half, the last 2 years, of the 4 year Great Tribulation of Matthew 24. It is the 12 'hour' daylight part of the 24 'hour' day of the Great Tribulation which lasts from 2004Elul14 to 2008Elul15, the last day of Armageddon. The reason that we, in the West, have not seen much evidence of the Great Tribulation as yet, is that we have for the last 2 years been in the evening part of the Great Tribulation, the night time part of it. The Hebrew day runs from sundown to sundown, so it starts with the evening half and then comes the morning half. So it is this present BLC month of Elul when we change from the night time part of the Great Tribulation to the day time part. This month is the dawn!

xtreem5150ahm

September 5th 2006, 11:53 PM

Hi,

As promised, i submit myself... although the reason is becoming hazy :teeth:

johnny

Leonhard

September 6th 2006, 07:16 AM

In a thread about getting the major religions to fight eachother;

you're right on - except it should be the grand alliance of buddhists, taoists, daoists and hindus against the christians, jews and muslims. the three "main" religions of the west ARE the source of all earths problems. while christians, jews and muslims are clearinghouse religions for slaughter and hatred in the name of some mangod figure, the others are NOT since they embrace nature and man's relationship to that nature - christianity, judaism and islam are all environmentally destructive as are the narrow mindsets of their fock."

And it just gets worse and worse...

"my point was that all religions that deal with some mangod figure are steeped in false perceptions of reality whereas most eastern religions recognize what we really are - god. the war and hatred stems from externalizing god! when one internalizes, there is no need to "prove" anything or to indoctrinate unwilling others! the stupid three CJ&I are really that - forceful and intolerant. look at history. they gotta go. god is god, no definition necessary since we are "he". :)"

And now, can you spell irony?

i was making a kind of ironic point - it being that the elimination of "religion" as a doctrinated force for intolerance is perhaps only achievable by equal doses of reality based "action". get it? example - buddha, jesus, shiva, mohammed, moses, etal are simply evolutionary vessels for the divine conciousness - "GOD" (UNIVERSAL AWARENESS?) simply takes over a body from time to time in order to experience and teach from a standard we can understand. they've all basically said the same thing over and over yet major world religions DO EXACTLY the opposite as do their blind and ignorant flock of sheep. independant and critical thinking populace will spell less and less religion until hopefully the folly they represent dies off. we have outgrown the need for magical explanations for events and should claim our rightful inheritance as the very image of god itself! then, WITHOUT fear, we eliminate hatred. fear being the sole source for this. think of death as a welcome next step and eachother as simply another manifestation in quantum existence as ourselves in another form!

Funny website; Its an okay source for the latest news from the science frontiers, but it has one of the most screwy forums I've ever seen!

KurzweilAi Mind-X/forum (http://www.kurzweilai.net/news/frame.html?main=/news/news_single.html?id%3D5886)

YeshuaMarine

September 6th 2006, 12:10 PM

I have a special announcement from JP Holding. Many of you may be aware that he is banned from T-Web until tomorrow, however, in his absence, I have been requested to put up an August screwball feature: http://www.tektoonics.com/parody/aug06scr.html

Enjoy :lol:

God bless,

Casey Powell

familyof6

September 6th 2006, 03:18 PM

YeshuaMarine

September 6th 2006, 03:20 PM

Another message from the big dawg, JP Holding himself:

From Bill Curry, one of DoubtingJohn's latest useful idiots, on the Duh!Bunkin' Christianity blog:

There are some pitfalls to using experts conclusions as evidence. It is quite likely that experts are influenced by things that should not affect ones reasoning, such as their background and/or funding. It is not that experts can't overcome biases, but I want to examine the evidence that should influence the experts. The evidences that really need explanation are aspects of existing documents. The existing documents are copies (of copies) of earlier reports.

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/09/evidence-for-resurrection.html

Tickle Me Goody

September 6th 2006, 04:36 PM

Another message from the big dawg, JP Holding himself:

From Bill Curry, one of DoubtingJohn's latest useful idiots, on the Duh!Bunkin' Christianity blog:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/09/evidence-for-resurrection.html

You still have not fixed your signature.

How can we trust you?

GG

YeshuaMarine

September 6th 2006, 06:25 PM

Awwww, isn't that cute? Apparently I have an I.Q. of 5.

AWWW how cute that comment is.....especially since JP Holding was just giving you the benefit of the doubt:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

YeshuaMarine

September 6th 2006, 06:26 PM

You still have not fixed your signature.

How can we trust you?

GG

Good point...and you've been helping me out quite a bit against the Emo Evos too.....so yeah, I'll try to fix it now (just haven't gotten around to that yet)> :teeth:

YeshuaMarine

September 6th 2006, 08:50 PM

Again, since I'm banned from the auction Sept. 1-3 I'll start this now.

JPH,
For when you return tomorrow....welcome back, and as requested your posts have been submitted :wink: !

God bless,

Casey Powell

Can we nominate Glenn Morton, who's argument I tore up by pointing out just simply 3 logical fallacies in his argument:

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/moreandmore.htm

In recent reading of Dembski and other ID proponents I saw them make a claim which has been made for over 40 years. This claim is one that the young-earthers have been making. The claim is that the theory of evolution (or major supporting concepts for it) is increasingly being abandoned by scientists, or is about to fall. This claim has many forms and has been made for over 178 years. This is a compilation of the claims over time. The purpose of this compilation is two-fold. First, it is to show that the claim has been made for a long, long time. Secondly, it is to show that entire careers have passed without seeing any of this movement away from evolution. Third, it is to show that the creationists are merely making these statements for the purpose of keeping hope alive that they are making progress towards their goal. In point of fact, no such progress is being made as anyone who has watched this area for the last 40 years can testify. The claim is false as history and present-day events show, yet that doesn't stop anyone wanting to sell books from making that claim. Now for the claims in chronological order.

Notice how all of the evidence runs against Dr. Glenn Morton...one cited from 1825, one from 1840....one 60 years later....one every decade up to around 1960.....then a few more, then up to 1980 a few more.....THEN A WHOLE TON between 1985 and 2006......

Who here is lying again? :lol:

No doubt this refutes ALL of the evidence that Creationism has provided in Scientific discoveries :teeth:

TuckEverlasting

September 6th 2006, 09:07 PM

I tried. I really did. I was going to hold off on nominating YeshuaMarine since JP seems to have some sort of respect for him (!), and I didn't want JP to get put in a socially awkward place. However, the time has come for me to abandon this position. YM offered this gem (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1641999&postcount=34) to one of TWeb's best and most learned science posters:

Hey guess what Sylas...your post has been reported for stupid! Grow down, your heads too big!

I guess you guys should know...that I ain't called the Jesus Marine for nothing......if you don't like my heated comments...suggest you get out da kitchen!

Lads, you know those irony meters you're so fond of - the ones you're always handing out? You won't be receiving any more of them - the factory just blew up. :no:

For now, I'll refrain from any more nominations, since virtually the YM catalogue deserves an award anyway. :metro:

In other news, here's some news:

TWeb Weekly News Report
Dumbest TWebber Cloned In Practical Joke Mishap

TWeb Weekly News has learned that the the dumbest TWebber of all time (according to records kept meticulously by Amazing Rando & Sons), Johnny Skeptic, has been cloned during a practical joke gone awry.

Scientist Glenn Morton had this to say:

'Yeah, we wanted a clone of limited intelligence to clean the fumes outta the oil-drilling equipment. We figured we couldn't go wrong with Johnny Skeptic - heck, maybe those fumes'd make him smarter. One day, though, I laughed a little too hard at one of those there email spoofs that get passed around... I accidentally dropped my peanut butter sandwich in a vat of amino acids, and, well, that was the end of it - we ended up with something a little bit unexpected, to say the least!'

Dubbed 'YeshuaMarine' by, well, himself, the clone possesses the same DNA and IQ as his predecessor. When asked what sort of Marine training he'd received; whether he had, in fact, gone through Camp Pendleton, he had this to say:

'No, sir, I went through Fort Lion. As in Food Lion. Yeah, the training was pretty tough; luckily, they didn't notice I skipped out on class to study the twinkie rack. No, sir, I don't think I'll be going back. The girls keep giving me these weird looks. All I wanted was some survey information - which evolution classes they'd taken, ID in the classroom, hip-to-chest ratio, stuff like that. Sheesh. Weirdos. It's ok, though; I thrashed them in oral debate.'

YeshuaMarine

September 7th 2006, 08:15 AM

I tried. I really did. I was going to hold off on nominating YeshuaMarine since JP seems to have some sort of respect for him (!), and I didn't want JP to get put in a socially awkward place. However, the time has come for me to abandon this position. YM offered this gem (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1641999&postcount=34) to one of TWeb's best and most learned science posters:

Lads, you know those irony meters you're so fond of - the ones you're always handing out? You won't be receiving any more of them - the factory just blew up. :no:

For now, I'll refrain from any more nominations, since virtually the YM catalogue deserves an award anyway. :metro:

In other news, here's some news:

TWeb Weekly News Report
Dumbest TWebber Cloned In Practical Joke Mishap

TWeb Weekly News has learned that the the dumbest TWebber of all time (according to records kept meticulously by Amazing Rando & Sons), Johnny Skeptic, has been cloned during a practical joke gone awry.

Scientist Glenn Morton had this to say:

'Yeah, we wanted a clone of limited intelligence to clean the fumes outta the oil-drilling equipment. We figured we couldn't go wrong with Johnny Skeptic - heck, maybe those fumes'd make him smarter. One day, though, I laughed a little too hard at one of those there email spoofs that get passed around... I accidentally dropped my peanut butter sandwich in a vat of amino acids, and, well, that was the end of it - we ended up with something a little bit unexpected, to say the least!'

Dubbed 'YeshuaMarine' by, well, himself, the clone possesses the same DNA and IQ as his predecessor. When asked what sort of Marine training he'd received; whether he had, in fact, gone through Camp Pendleton, he had this to say:

'No, sir, I went through Fort Lion. As in Food Lion. Yeah, the training was pretty tough; luckily, they didn't notice I skipped out on class to study the twinkie rack. No, sir, I don't think I'll be going back. The girls keep giving me these weird looks. All I wanted was some survey information - which evolution classes they'd taken, ID in the classroom, hip-to-chest ratio, stuff like that. Sheesh. Weirdos. It's ok, though; I thrashed them in oral debate.'

Wow, thats quite...an impressive piece of work we have here.... :lol: (gotta love being misrepresented).

Hey...can't help but bash the monkey brained idiots in the Natural Science department there....

Have you even been reading their arguments? "Those typical Creationists...they're all the same." "Creation Science, its all about politics." "Stupid special creation!" "ID taught at Cornell University as a Biology course is actually a Philosophy course." "Those Evolutionists that became Creationists are not Evolutionists that turned to Creationism because I said so." "The Chaos Theory explains the origins of the universe (ha)!" "Did you know there's more than one 2nd law of entropy?"

Yeah....sorry there, you've got the wrong screwball.....(though I admit, I can be quite a screwball at times :lol: , especially if provoked and pushed over the edge like I have been here).

Ahhh...the Food Lion genetic fallacy goes on and on. I perform a survey of William & Mary students being taught Intelligent Design in their Biology courses, and of course, I get pond scum comments like this jerkoff Morton here.

jpholding

September 7th 2006, 09:21 AM

I can't leave you people alone for even three days, can I? :glare: :lol:

September 7th 2006, 10:28 AM

I can't leave you people alone for even three days, can I? :glare: :lol:

What, you originally thought you could? Maybe you're not quite as reasonable as we once thought. :uneasy:

Mind if I submit my old friend "atheistthoughts" for a Screwball nomination? I suppose this is a fairly mild screwiness, but still one that deserves to be mentioned. Or quarantined. Preferably both.

One main reason I will never become a Christian is because the bible is very anti-logic and anti-reason. Atheists constantly talk about how bad faith is. Those apologetical Christians out there usually try and counter with a definition of faith that suggests that it's believing based on evidence (note that this isn't backed up by the definition). Luckily for us, we don't have to use human definitions, since the bible provides one in Hebrews 11:

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

I don't see anything about evidence there. In fact, it seems to support the dictionary definition. If this doesn't convince you, let's look at 2 Corinthians 5:

We live by faith, not by sight.

Notice how fiaht is not only defined by lack of evidence, it is contrasted with belief based on evidence. These passages not only show what faith is, but that faith is good. Let's look at a verse later in Hebrews 11:

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

This, I admit, seems contrary to my point if you look at it the right way. As an explanation of why faith is necessary, it onyl talks about believing in him. This leaves the door open to believing based on evidence. Unfortunately for Christian apologetics, the former passages contradict this idea, and leaves two possibilities. Either God wants us to believe without evidence, or the writers of the bible didn't expect there to be evidence for this God.

Source: http://www.xanga.com/atheistthoughts/526720909/item.html

:eww:

jpholding

September 7th 2006, 11:07 AM

Oh yeah? This is worse.

A reader nominates the Rev. Betsy Singleton, pastor of Quapaw Quarter United Methodist Church in Little Rock. Rev. Singleton is probably better known as being the wife of U.S. Representative Vic Snyder. She did a series on "difficult questions Christians face" which is online at

http://www.qqumc.org/templates/System/details.asp?id=27751&PID=330641

Among the "gems" in her sermon, which DEFINITELY qualify her for a Screwball award:

"My task here today is not to take us through a history of the development of world religions; others like writer Karen Armstrong can do that far better than I."

"I can imagine Jesus disagreeing theologically with someone, as he often did, but I cannot imagine him rejecting anyone. There is no biblical story that says he does so."

"I also cannot accept this view because it has contributed to Christian arrogance and historical evils like the Crusades in the name of God."

She also claims that the phrase "no one comes to the Father but my Me" actually is not an indication of Christianity's exclusiveness. No, instead, what it actually means is, "God's work in Christ is actually for all people and that God may apply his grace to anyone God chooses, including the faithful Hindu or Buddhist who does not know Christianity and never will."

"Let’s go to the Bible first. Beginning with Christian scripture, we can locate a number of passages that refer to God’s omnipotent power. ... That does not mean these portraits of God are accurate, but rather, it truthfully shows us how we limited human beings long for and try to develop answers to the problem of evil. Scripture contains some of these answers."

The book of Job does not refer to Satan.

Compares politically activist Christians to the theologians who supported Hitler.

Also note that, in two of the sermons, she quotes the Bible 8 times and other sources (including Armstrong, NPR, poems, and a source titled "The Myth of Christian Uniqueness") 16 times.

September 7th 2006, 04:57 PM

Okay, now that one's just downright painful.

Rayado

September 8th 2006, 11:17 AM

Hereoisreal, for this (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1642165&postcount=1) knockoff of the BibleWheel, based on that virtuous and moral object, the RouletteWheel:

Jesus said, "I have choosen you twelve." (one is a booger)

12 + 12 = (3 x God) + (3 x Jesus)

The first, second, and third 12 total 666 ( 9 x Jesus )

Check out a roulette table.

The 3rd 12 + 12 foundations = (6 x God) + (3 x Jesus)

The first, second, third, and forth 12 = (3 x God) + (3 x Jesus) + 3 x AZ

AZ =(alpha & omega), (first x last), or (beginning x end)

The above numbers and the bible verses below all paint

the same picture:

(AZ + half AZ) x (AZ + Love) = Iron

Rev 12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and [to] his throne.
Eze 22:30 And I sought for a man among them, that should
make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before me for the land,
that I should not destroy it: but I found none.
Zec 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he [is] just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
Mat 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. (AZ under)

"Word" x 3 AZ = Love x G x O x D
Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

:twitch:

jpholding

September 8th 2006, 12:03 PM

Email on my article on Edmund Cohen:

I like how Holding criticizes Cohen because he has a well rounded and extensive education.

You folks are insane, you know?

jpholding

September 8th 2006, 12:43 PM

Dimbo (Brooks Trubee) supplements his Gold from June 2006 with this update to the anointed-one.com Holding hate site:

(Holding) says that he does in fact use the donations that he receives for groceries and mortgage payments. In a response to this page, (Holding) wrote the following:

"So I want your money, but not TOO much of it, thanks...(By the way, yeah...it DOES include groceries and mortgage payments...that's what a 'salary' is usually for, when a non-profit pays its workers...)"

Oh, I am SO bad. :lolo: :lol:

Farrell Till shares the award with this evaluation of me:

I think that he no more believes most of the stuff that he recycles on his website from books and journals than he believes that cows can jump over the moon. He does what he does for the m-o-n-e-y. He apparently lacks the charismatic personality--and certainly the physical presence--to become a successful megachurch pastor, who could dazzle the gullible from the pulpit and really rake in the loot, as do the likes of Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, D. James Kennedy, James Dobson, etc.; otherwise, we would be having The Hour of Sarcasm beaming from Orlando and adding to the religious pollution of the airwaves.

I don't have the physical presence to pastor a megachurch? Even if I wanted to (I don't), has he seen TD Jakes lately? :lol:

And that reminds me, when was The Farrell Till Show gonna be on prime time again? This from a guy who goes into those instant photo booths and gets back messages that say SORRY, YOU HAVE BROKEN THE LENS.

Hence, (Holding) has had to settle for a much smaller piece of the pie baked from the fruits contributed by naive Bible-believers who deprive themselves of money most of them need themselves so that they can give millions of dollars each year to charlatans like him. As long as he can be the big fish in a little pond, he will no doubt continue to crank out internet hackwork that will give him at least a nominal PayPal income that will enable him to doodle in church during the sermons, spend only five minutes per day reading the Bible and five seconds praying at meals, while he sits in front of his computer at home munching on the little piece of the pie that the PayPal-take from his choir members has brought him that day."

You heard it here first, you poor slobs. :lol:

YeshuaMarine

September 8th 2006, 02:04 PM

Good save in the locker room guys. I almost had to vote myself for that insult routine I pulled.....good correction.

Thanks.

Your brother in Christ,

Casey Powell

jpholding

September 8th 2006, 05:51 PM

Note to self -- myth buster gets his start for the month:

The similarity of Military Service to slavery in the ANE is not a moral justification in my opinion. The Military is EVIL. They brainwash people. It's a liscence to murder.

Leonhard

September 8th 2006, 06:58 PM

More youtube madness, but this time it's a nut interviewed about his Ph.D thesis, which states (amongs other things) that believing in evolution forces you to disband traditional religion.

Youtube Ph.D Evolution - Religion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obZNtCzxfAk&mode=related&search=)
Apparently its possible to a very educated moron.

Ishmael

September 8th 2006, 07:05 PM

YeshuaMarine

September 8th 2006, 07:08 PM

JP: I nominate Casey Powell for the month of September because you must've missed him on http://fsm.typepad.com/hatemail/2006/07/i_do_believe_yo.html last month.... hillarious ravings of a idiotic, nit-wit, pretend apologist, who even references tektonics.org--- and he is fighting a parody god!! :lol: :lol:

..my side hurts... :lol:

Yeah...I'm sure you're hurting from all of that...."THINKING"....too

Watch it, it might blow up on you there.....

No I don't mean your brain...I really doubt you have one of those. I meant your ego.

Hey, when are you going to debate JPH again? Oh right...never you big chicken!

Thats real cute. Someone hacks into my Yahoo account, sends a nasty letter to Bobby Henderson...I have to change my e-mail account and I get harassed when I ask him to take the message off of his website.....meanwhile, I get falsely represented...and they still keep the message up. The person who committed the act, Robert Patrick, confesses to actually writing the letter and pretending to be me, and you still bring this up? You're just beating a dead horse Ishmael. Thats yesterday's news.
Ishmael, you have been reported for that unnecessary post.

I nominate the grinch:

But the Grinch isn't giving up. He's going to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to outlaw Christmas as a holiday.

''It's not that I'm against Christmas,'' insists Cincinnati lawyer Richard Ganulin. ''I'm seeking the dignity of equality for non-Christians.''

For the second year in a row, Ganulin lost a lawsuit challenging Christmas as a national holiday.

The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that Christmas is a legal federal holiday in the United States. The court upheld a decision issued just before Christmas last year by Cincinnati U.S. District Court Judge Susan Dlott.

''I'm going to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court,'' said Ganulin, who admits his chances are remote. ''I hope the Supreme Court rules in my favor, but I'm a realist.'' Sixth Circuit judges Boyce Martin, Ralph Guy and Guy Cole didn't explain their ruling except to say they agreed with ''the reasons set forth in the district court's opinion.''

Ganulin, who is Jewish, said he was disappointed the appellate court didn't analyze Ms. Dlott's decision, which he says is wrong in three ways.

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/news/an201222c.html

Ishmael

September 8th 2006, 07:13 PM

Thats real cute. Someone hacks into my Yahoo account, sends a nasty letter to Bobby Henderson...I have to change my e-mail account and I get harassed when I ask him to take the message off of his website.....meanwhile, I get falsely represented...and they still keep the message up. The person who committed the act, Robert Patrick, confesses to actually writing the letter and pretending to be me, and you still bring this up? You're just beating a dead horse Ishmael. Thats yesterday's news.
Ishmael, you have been reported for that unnecessary post.

Unfortuneately for you, the IPs are posted, so your LIE doesn't hold up to common sense. Try again.

YeshuaMarine

September 8th 2006, 07:15 PM

Unfortuneately for you, the IPs are posted, so your LIE doesn't hold up to common sense. Try again.

Do I need to go over this again?

Williamsburg Public Library was where he broke into my account Ishmael. That is on CW's SITE! Meaning, that the message was written from my job location, and I got blamed for it because it was written in the proximity of where I work, therefore, the IP was the same, and this was unavoidable. The quote was written at the Williamsburg Public Library. This was where I made posts later on to his website, and thats why the IP addresses are the same. Please take that dead story somewhere else (try burying it for once). It has been thoroughly explained away.

I secondly vote for TROLLS on T-Web. I'll name a few:

Minnesota, SoundSfr, Ishmael, Taoist, StabbytheClown...just to name a few. Don't "de-bait" these guys.

By the way, how are you doing JP?

Ishmael

September 8th 2006, 07:17 PM

Do I need to go over this again?

Williamsburg Public Library was where he broke into my account Ishmael. That is on CW's CITE! Meaning, that the message was written from my job location, and I got blamed for it because it was written in the proximity of where I work, therefore, the IP was the same, and this was unavoidable. Please take that dead story somewhere else. It has been thoroughly explained away.
It's been attempted to be lied away, but it does make a good screwball nomination.

YeshuaMarine

September 8th 2006, 07:26 PM

It's been attempted to be lied away, but it does make a good screwball nomination.

The only one who is lying is you Ishmael.

And your track record hasn't shown you to be a very honest source either.

I.E. (You say you're going to debate JPH, when you're really not).

If you think you're so awesome, why don't you take him out now? HMMMM? Scared of how you're going to handle public humiliation?

Ishmael

September 8th 2006, 07:35 PM

The only one who is lying is you Ishmael.

And your track record hasn't shown you to be a very honest source either.

I.E. (You say you're going to debate JPH, when you're really not).

If you think you're so awesome, why don't you take him out now? HMMMM? Scared of how you're going to handle public humiliation?
I never said I was going to formally debate JP, although that doesn't mean that I am not going to some day. I did say, and I think that JP is preparing his first post, that I would have a discussion with him about the evidence that Christianity is the only sensible worldview, or that "...the evidence shows it factually true, and that is why it makes sense..."

I know its hard for you to understand these distinctions and are grasping at straws order to shift the focus away from your lieing, absurd online behavior, and general lack of good sense, but rest asured that I will do what I have said I will do. Also, the original challenge was made towards you. See this thread: Prove it. (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83157&page=1&pp=16)

YeshuaMarine

September 8th 2006, 07:44 PM

I never said I was going to formally debate JP, although that doesn't mean that I am not going to some day. I did say, and I think that JP is preparing his first post, that I would have a discussion with him about the evidence that Christianity is the only sensible worldview, or that "...the evidence shows it factually true, and that is why it makes sense..."

I know its hard for you to understand these distinctions and are grasping at straws order to shift the focus away from your lieing, absurd online behavior, and general lack of good sense, but rest asured that I will do what I have said I will do. Also, the original challenge was made towards you. See this thread: Prove it. (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83157&page=1&pp=16)

Blah blah...blah blah blah blah blah. :lol: Yup, there are those words again. I'll believe it when I see it Ishmael. Yeah thats nice, I already saw you get blown away by JP Holding there. That hardly counted as a formal debate. Why don't you try something that JP Holding is actually well versed in? Like Christian History or something like that? Oh are you really? Bout time...(can't wait to see this joker get killed...such lack of discernment).

Ishmael

September 8th 2006, 07:55 PM

Blah blah...blah blah blah blah blah. :lol: Yup, there are those words again. I'll believe it when I see it Ishmael. Yeah thats nice, I already saw you get blown away by JP Holding there. That hardly counted as a formal debate. Why don't you try something that JP Holding is actually well versed in? Like Christian History or something like that? Oh are you really? Bout time...(can't wait to see this joker get killed...such lack of discernment).
It's really amazing how idiotic you are. Are you sure that you are the same religion as JPHolding is?

YeshuaMarine

September 8th 2006, 07:56 PM

It's really amazing how idiotic you are. Are you sure that you are the same religion as JPHolding is?

NAWWWW I'm Buddhist......(sensing the irony here guys?...."You're an idiot...and now...I'm going to ask an idiotic question." Isn't there some kind of Psychological disorder where they push their problems onto you and then claim that they don't have a problem....OH WAIT THATS RIGHT..DENIAL!)

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!

jpholding

September 8th 2006, 08:30 PM

YeshuaMarine

September 8th 2006, 08:32 PM

Well, no, I'm waiting on you to give me a lead there. Now you behave yourself or I'll redraw your white whale being eaten by a Sanslorian banquet party.

Amazing how these chums with big mouths seem to run away and hide when they get a taste of their own medicine...ain't that the truth? :lol:

Ishmael

September 8th 2006, 08:35 PM

Well, no, I'm waiting on you to give me a lead there. Now you behave yourself or I'll redraw your white whale being eaten by a Sanslorian banquet party.
I am not sure what you are looking for, I thought you were going to present your evidence and then I would do some research and respond... you'll have to help me a little...

YeshuaMarine

September 9th 2006, 11:19 AM

I keep hearing the rumors...."Darn that YeshuaMarine, always trying to act like JP Holding." Well guys...sorry, the name's Casey Powell, and while I greatly admire Mr. Holding for his uncanny ability to outwit the dimwit secularists, I am DEFINITELY no JP Holding :wink: . But ya know what? I do have a bit of a flair with my personality. This is quite the person I am in real life, the center of attention at parties, and I naturally bring it to myself. I don't have to go out and find it, it usually finds me. So if my personality resembles that of JP Holding a bit...you're half right! Mr. Holding is an INTJ. So, what does that mean from the Meyers Briggs side of things? To outsiders, INTJs may appear to project an aura of "definiteness", of self-confidence. This self-confidence, sometimes mistaken for simple arrogance by the less decisive, is actually of a very specific rather than a general nature; its source lies in the specialized knowledge systems that most INTJs start building at an early age. When it comes to their own areas of expertise -- and INTJs can have several -- they will be able to tell you almost immediately whether or not they can help you, and if so, how. INTJs know what they know, and perhaps still more importantly, they know what they don't know.

INTJs are perfectionists, with a seemingly endless capacity for improving upon anything that takes their interest. What prevents them from becoming chronically bogged down in this pursuit of perfection is the pragmatism so characteristic of the type: INTJs apply (often ruthlessly) the criterion "Does it work?" to everything from their own research efforts to the prevailing social norms. This in turn produces an unusual independence of mind, freeing the INTJ from the constraints of authority, convention, or sentiment for its own sake.

INTJs are known as the "Systems Builders" of the types, perhaps in part because they possess the unusual trait combination of imagination and reliability. Whatever system an INTJ happens to be working on is for them the equivalent of a moral cause to an INFJ; both perfectionism and disregard for authority may come into play, as INTJs can be unsparing of both themselves and the others on the project. Anyone considered to be "slacking," including superiors, will lose their respect -- and will generally be made aware of this; INTJs have also been known to take it upon themselves to implement critical decisions without consulting their supervisors or co-workers. On the other hand, they do tend to be scrupulous and even-handed about recognizing the individual contributions that have gone into a project, and have a gift for seizing opportunities which others might not even notice.

In the broadest terms, what INTJs "do" tends to be what they "know". Typical INTJ career choices are in the sciences and engineering, but they can be found wherever a combination of intellect and incisiveness are required (e.g., law, some areas of academia). INTJs can rise to management positions when they are willing to invest time in marketing their abilities as well as enhancing them, and (whether for the sake of ambition or the desire for privacy) many also find it useful to learn to simulate some degree of surface conformism in order to mask their inherent unconventionality.

Personal relationships, particularly romantic ones, can be the INTJ's Achilles heel. While they are capable of caring deeply for others (usually a select few), and are willing to spend a great deal of time and effort on a relationship, the knowledge and self-confidence that make them so successful in other areas can suddenly abandon or mislead them in interpersonal situations.

This happens in part because many INTJs do not readily grasp the social rituals; for instance, they tend to have little patience and less understanding of such things as small talk and flirtation (which most types consider half the fun of a relationship). To complicate matters, INTJs are usually extremely private people, and can often be naturally impassive as well, which makes them easy to misread and misunderstand. Perhaps the most fundamental problem, however, is that INTJs really want people to make sense. :-) This sometimes results in a peculiar naivete', paralleling that of many Fs -- only instead of expecting inexhaustible affection and empathy from a romantic relationship, the INTJ will expect inexhaustible reasonability and directness.

Probably the strongest INTJ assets in the interpersonal area are their intuitive abilities and their willingness to "work at" a relationship. Although as Ts they do not always have the kind of natural empathy that many Fs do, the Intuitive function can often act as a good substitute by synthesizing the probable meanings behind such things as tone of voice, turn of phrase, and facial expression. This ability can then be honed and directed by consistent, repeated efforts to understand and support those they care about, and those relationships which ultimately do become established with an INTJ tend to be characterized by their robustness, stability, and good communications. http://www.typelogic.com/intj.html

Well, while this is nice and dandy and all (and believe me JP, if you read this, INTJs are good people).... I personally am an ESTJ. So I have a personality, incredibly enough :) of that of very rough and rigid individuals. Firm but fair would describe my personality. ESTJ's are classified as such: Every right-minded man has a philosophy of life, whether he knows it or not. Hidden away in his mind are certain governing principles, whether he formulates them in words or not, which govern his life. Surely his ideal ought to be to contribute all that he can, however little it may be, whether of money or service, to human progress.
--John D. Rockefeller, Random Reminiscences of Men and Events
ESTJs thrive on order and continuity. Being extraverted, their focus involves organization of people, which translates into supervision. While ENTJs enjoy organizing and mobilizing people according to their own theories and tactically based agendas, ESTJs are content to enforce "the rules," often dictated by tradition or handed down from a higher authority.

ESTJs are joiners. They seek out like-minded companions in clubs, civic groups, churches and other service organizations. The need for belonging is woven into the fiber of SJs. The family likewise is a central focus for ESTJs, and attendance at such events as weddings, funerals and family reunions is obligatory.

Tradition is important to the ESTJ. Holidays, birthdays and other annual celebrations are remembered and observed often religiously by this type. The ESTJ is inclined to seek out his roots, to trace the family heritage back to honored ancestors both for a sense of family respectability and for a sense of security and belonging.

Service, the tangible expression of responsibility, is another key focus for ESTJs. They love to provide and to receive good service. The ESTJ merchant who provides dependable service has done much to enhance his/her self image.

ESTJs have an acute sense for orthodoxy. Much of their evaluation of persons and activities reflects their strong sense of what is "normal" and what isn't. ESTJ humor is frequently centered around something or someone being off center or behaving abnormally. (HAHA yup thats me).

ESTJs promote the work ethic. Power, position and prestige should be worked for and earned. Laziness is rarely viewed with ambivalence nor benevolence by this type.

Some men can make decisions and some cannot. Some men fret and delay under criticism. I used to have a saying1 that applies here, and I note that some people have picked it up.
--Harry S. Truman, Mr. Citizen
1"If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." (Did I not state this my very self one time?)
The ESTJ is outspoken, a person of principles, which are readily expressed. The ESTJ is not afraid to stand up for what he/she believes is right even in the face of overwhelming odds. ESTJs are able to make the tough calls.

Occupations attracting ESTJs include teaching, coaching, banking, political office, and management at all levels. http://www.typelogic.com/estj.html

So while JP and I share a TJ function on Meyers Briggs, I outweigh him on the ES side of things. But hey..you know what I say? Bow to the master! Especially when that person is better suited in an area than you are (in this case, just about every forum and thread on T-Web). So yes, I give kudos to Mr. JP Holding...cause he is truly the man, but just remember, my name is not JP Holding, but rather, CASEY POWELL! :smile:

God bless!

Oh and incredibly enough, ApologiaNick and I had a conversation one time about the Disciples and their personalities. He mentioned that Peter was a very outgoing person, while he probably matched a personality type of that of Paul. Interesting enough, guess who was an ESTJ? Simon Peter (Christ's disciple). Other people my personality resembles are: U.S. Presidents:
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
William Henry "Tippecanoe" Harrison
Franklin Pierce
Grover Cleveland
Harry S. Truman
Lyndon B. Johnson
George W. Bush (SCARY THOUGHT)
Carrie Nation
Elliot Ness
John D. Rockefeller
Bette Davis
Robert A. Taft (U.S. senator, son of Pres. Wm. H. Taft)
Sam Walton, owner and founder of WalMart stores
Barbara Stanwyck
Rev. Billy Graham (the man of ministers himself)
Dale Bumpers (U.S. Senator, D-Arkansas)
Phil Fulmer, head football coach of the U. Tenn Vols
Pat Head Summit, head basketball coach of the Lady Vols
Bill Frist, M.D. (U.S. Senate Majority Leader)

Fictional:
Lucy (Charles Schultz's Peanuts character)
Mrs. Harbottle (Herriott, All Creatures Great and Small)
Mrs. Rachel Lynde (Anne of Green Gables)
The Mayor (The Music Man)
http://www.typelogic.com/estj.html
So greetings, and thanks for welcoming me to T-Web. I am quite honored to be heralded in the same sentence as JP Holding, even if by sarcastic means, but I have to reject the gesture at this time. So the mystery behind the man comes out....YM has a name indeed.

God bless,

Casey Powell

Please review the rule in regards to cut and pasting copyrighted material before posting again. This is not the first time you have been warned about this. Also please use the quote tags when citing copyrighted materials.

Ishmael

September 9th 2006, 11:36 AM

Wow, nice cut-and-paste job on type description narratives!

Oh, and by the way, no one confuses you with JPHolding, he seems to have some character and knowledge, niether of which you have and that has nothing to do with Jungian Typology.

jpholding

September 9th 2006, 11:44 AM

I am not sure what you are looking for, I thought you were going to present your evidence and then I would do some research and respond... you'll have to help me a little...

Well, go over there and tell me what you want evidence for specifically. Resurrection of Christ? Who wrote the Gospels? Pick up to three. Anything I specialize in. I'll be back there Monday for it.

and believe me JP, if you read this, INTJs are good people

Heck, guy -- I link to that description on Tekton. :teeth:

See ya'll later.

YeshuaMarine

September 9th 2006, 12:05 PM

Ishmael

September 9th 2006, 12:13 PM

Ishmael, keep talking. I am reporting your posts from here on out.
Let me get this straight... you are cutting and pasting large blocks of text, giving the appearance to any reasonable person that you are writing it yourself-- well, at least until they see the link at the end of it, and even then a person would naturally assume that link meant a reference, not a large quotation of some one else's work -- and you are going to report me for point out that you have no character or knowledge? Good luck with that.

.

One Bad Pig

September 9th 2006, 05:03 PM

:popcorn:

lilpixieofterror

September 9th 2006, 06:59 PM

This one comes from our good friend myth buster....

Only an idiot would join the U.S. military. There's no way I would sign up to potentially die for these warmongers, these evil fools who start wars so corporations can profit from them and their rich friends can get richer. Who is stupid enough to think that going to war in Iraq is going to stop terrorism? It has only encouraged it ten-fold. We recently came close to enduring more terrorist attacks when those Islammo-fascists almost hijacked a bunch of planes. Our presence in Iraq did nothing to counter that terrorist attempt did it?

America is a hypocritical pile of trash. We bully and kill people all over the world, claiming to be spreading democracy and freedom. Do you have any idea how many democratically elected governments we have overthrown only to be replaced with a dictator we can more easily control? America really IS the great Satan! No way would I sign up to defend this country of lies. Democracy is dead in America. For anyone who cares to educate himself, it's common knowledge that the last two Presidential elections were rigged. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. laid out all the evidence in a recent Rolling Stone article. The once great country of America died a long time ago. In its place is something far more sinister and evil.
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=82953&page=16&pp=16

Hear that people? We are fighting for Oil (even though not one drop has yet to come to the US). America is no longer a democracy (even though we do vote). Rolling Stones is not a reliable source on 'riged elections' (just ignore anti-bush publishers who have said no such thing). I could go on and on and on, but I don't want to ramble...

Crystal

Sheepdog

September 9th 2006, 07:43 PM

myth buster's a riot

Teallaura

September 10th 2006, 12:50 AM

Um, Sheepy, it starts with the letters 'id', not 'r'.....

:grin:

On the bright side, at least the US military won't ever have to worry about putting him in command of anything important... like the latrine... Men get really out of sorts when you don't build the latrine convenient to camp....

If his sense of direction is as good as his understanding of politics and history, I figure any latrine he was in charge of would be about two miles behind enemy lines....

:no:

Sheepdog

September 10th 2006, 03:51 AM

And in Canada

Teallaura

September 10th 2006, 08:52 AM

:hehe:

YeshuaMarine

September 10th 2006, 04:55 PM

Loving this thread

Hey guys...who's that handsome devil there? Why....thats me!

Cynic Sage

September 10th 2006, 07:10 PM

TuckEverlasting

September 10th 2006, 07:18 PM

Does anyone else think YM looks like Tom Cruise?

lilpixieofterror

September 10th 2006, 07:21 PM

myth buster's a riot

Yes he is... :lol: I just love to turn his crank and watch him ramble on, it's hours of entertainment and cheaper than a movie (well, when I get home it will be).

On the bright side, at least the US military won't ever have to worry about putting him in command of anything important... like the latrine... Men get really out of sorts when you don't build the latrine convenient to camp....

If his sense of direction is as good as his understanding of politics and history, I figure any latrine he was in charge of would be about two miles behind enemy lines....

I doubt he even knows what a latrine is... let alone how to manage one...

Cynic Sage

September 10th 2006, 07:28 PM

Does anyone else think YM looks like Tom Cruise?

Aw heck! This is just what we need. Westernized Christianity already has it's own Tom Cruise, his name is Kirk Cameron.

TuckEverlasting

September 10th 2006, 07:38 PM

Aw heck! This is just what we need. Westernized Christianity already has it's own Tom Cruise, his name is Kirk Cameron.
Maybe the Raelians cloned a whole bunch of them? :nsm:

YeshuaMarine

September 10th 2006, 08:14 PM

Maybe the Raelians cloned a whole bunch of them? :nsm:

:blush:
Aw shucks guys.... :lol: :rofl: :lmbo: Now thats truly funny for real there, lol.

Oh didn't know Holding was socially withdrawn. Couldn't tell there. I'm the anti-thesis of withdrawn (anybody would tell you that too). I will say, I know more than I'm letting on at these Evolution debates so far. Some of these comments are sarcastic, and taken a bit too seriously. That doesn't mean that I'm stupid enough to think I'm smarter than everybody else on all of these threads however. Just means I like to have a good time here and there on these threads. If that means insulting a few Evolutionists...hey thats alright (perhaps the quality does need to be improved upon, as Johnny alluded to a bit earlier today).

What you will learn about me is I don't follow in anybody's shadow. I do my own thing. Sometimes thats good, and sometimes, its really awful bad! :teeth: . So if I do something thats totally stupid and whacked out (and granted you have been there to help me out when I have so far here) just let me know to tone it down a notch, and I'll follow accordingly. I am new at this Apologetics thing, so the help I get from you guys is much appreciated.

jpholding

September 11th 2006, 09:18 AM

Email from the "Blather On Without an Answer" Department"

Why go through so much trouble with this website? None of it is convincing.

Don't you begin to feel that something is wrong with the Bible when complex and
deep knowledge of ancient Middle Eastern and Greek languages is required to
explain away contradictions and flaws?

Your ability to twist and bend the Bible to say exactly what you want it to say
is impressive in a sad way...

It is clear that you are not taking all the evidence in an objective manner and
coming up with a conclusion, but are instead taking the already "Set-In-Stone"
conclusion that the Bible is true and inerrant, and working backwards to prove
it.

Despite your attempts to take a "Jus' Folks" down-to-Earth "really this is
common sense" approach, and mix it with a "I know loads of Ancient languages
and you don't, so nah nah" approach, the site still comes off as a weak and
desperate last stand of Christian ideology against the onrushing realities of
Science and modern knowledge.

Why you would choose to worship a God who very forthrightly states that all who
do not act like he says they should act, and believe what he tells them to
believe spend eternity in unimaginable agony, I do not know.

Personally, I would feel like a toady, who served a being who looked upon me as
nothing more than an insect or a puppet. My life would be meaningless, and all
I could look forward to was worshipping this same being, the one who would
torture most of the people I knew forever. Kindness, or frienship with people
who aren't exactly the same as me would be meaningless, because I would know
the horrible fate that awaits them...

I couldn't stand worshipping a God who would do that, anymore than I would
worship Hitler or Stalin... Because what could a mere man ever do that equals
the horror of torturing and maiming billions upon billions of people without
end, people that he ironically claims to love and cherish. What kind of a
horrible sadist would do that?

Evil is evil. So, I feel either I use my common sense and see that the Bible is
full of flaws, and represents humanity as useless puppets that serve an
allmighty being who purposely created an enormous torture pit for the vast
majority of them, and reject religion, or I worship an evil god who does not
exist out of fear because someone says I should.

Love is not love that is given under fear of torment and unspeakable pain.

Atheist, free of doubt, fear, and hatred...

Hum. So is someone under anesthesia...

And here's a first. Mrs. H would like to submit the following for a Screwball Award. We received this credit card offer:

[attachment=1]

What a crass commercialization!

BTW:I thought JP was somewhat socially withdrawn.

You could put it that way. The INTJ type draws strength from being and working alone. We don't form a lot of lasting friendships and are exceptionally devoted to those we do form.

YeshuaMarine

September 11th 2006, 09:43 AM

Email from the "Blather On Without an Answer" Department"

Hum. So is someone under anesthesia...

And here's a first. Mrs. H would like to submit the following for a Screwball Award. We received this credit card offer:

[attachment=1]

What a crass commercialization!

You could put it that way. The INTJ type draws strength from being and working alone. We don't form a lot of lasting friendships and are exceptionally devoted to those we do form.

I myself consider everyone I meet basically somewhat of a friend for life to them the first time I meet them. I would describe myself as being more Hispanically oriented in that sense. If I get crossed though..watch out!

Yo puedo hablar espanol tambien! Yo domino.

I do have a bit of a temper problem that I need to work on. While it does not constitute me cussing or beating up someone, it can be rather unpleasant nonetheless.

One Bad Pig

September 11th 2006, 12:14 PM

Mastralvarado posted this gem (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83427):

Hello people,

I was wondering if you would be so kind as to count how many trees of life are mentioned here:

Apocalypse 22:2. In the midst of the street thereof, and on both sides of the river, was the tree of life, bearing twelve fruits, yielding its fruits every month: the leaves of the tree for the healing of the nations.

In medio plateae eius et ex utraque parte fluminis lignum vitae adferens fructus duodecim per menses singula reddentia fructum suum et folia ligni ad sanitatem gentium

Its in this thread I post because I am a muslim.

The majority wins*.

*Restrictions apply. Restricted everywhere except democratic countries.

Last edited by mastralvarado : September 4th 2006 at 02:08 PM. Reason: added greek meaning

(Edit comments added for extra irony - apparently he can't tell the difference between Latin and Greek.)

Follow-on post:
No one wants to participate in my poll then?

You leave me no choice but to give you a trinity of possible answers (only one is correct):

A) The word tree used here is plural and there are three trees: one in the middle of the city and one on each side of the river.

B) The word tree is singular. The tree's presence extends beyond the city to the river and past it.

C) The word tree is plural and the tree is everywhere.

jpholding

September 11th 2006, 03:40 PM

Alert: New Fundy Atheist may be on his way. I got bored with a creep calling himself "Rev Counter" who did the usual shebang on Luke 14:26 and replied with such works of genius as these:

As the passage stands Jesus does invite his followers to hate. That is what is written. Whether he said something completely different elsewhere (bearing in mind the writer did not know that at the time of writing because the New Testament was not yet edited down) is not a valid defence. If there are two contradictory statements I agree you have to use judgement to determine which is the more relevant but are you really arguing that the Bible has to be read using human, and therefore imperfect, judgement? Your views are an anathema to other Christian guides I have consulted (although admittedly they did demonstrate the intelligence to open a bottle of cola without using their teeth). The idea that your reply directly addressed this is obvious nonsense. Go on, try again, just for a laugh!

If you read correctly (I assume you can read and your dog is not doing this for you) you will see that I did talk about context. I assume that you do accept that American Constitutional law is man made. I know but I have to check. Then, presumably you will admit that, as a man made device, it is prone to human error. Ergo these errors are extant until amended but the amendments are also manmade and also prone to error. The more amendments that are made and the longer time goes on the cumulative impact of these errors builds up until the original intention is unsustainable. This is, in essence, the history of mankind. Idea, imperfect implementation/interpretation, gradual failure, new idea. The development of man is aided when the new idea is better than the old and includes less errors. It takes time and civilisations come and go in the meantime but it is generally working.

Obviously the word of a god would be outside that scenario (perfect idea and no errors) but, as you say, even the Bible needs interpretive context so clearly it is not the word of a god.

[I said]:Then it is time to do some homework. Try deSilva's Honor, Patronage, Kinship and Purity for a simple introduction.

Ah, there is another one. Any more or is that it? Is deSilva a modern thinker? Does he share the status of Augustine (made saint by a grateful pope)? If not I will wait until I have exhausted those generally considered by a wide audience to have made a contribution to the debate. I do not dismiss deSilva, how can I, I have not read it, but my reading list is already long and your recommendations are not proving useful. Can you give me a précis?

[on crucifixion being shameful]: Furthermore why is it abhorrent if Jesus’ message was dependent on his suffering on behalf of us all? Would it have worked if he had come down, preached, been betrayed, got a six month suspended sentence and went home? Surely the very essence of his being sent was that he had to suffer and die. Ergo it could not be abhorrent but part of the plan. I would agree that it is not the nicest way to breathe your last but there are worse. Flayed or hung drawn and quartered anyone?

He's very adept at dodging, missing the point, and not understanding what you're saying. Please give him our usual "myth buster" welcome if he ever shows his face. :thumb:

Soundsurfr

September 11th 2006, 04:00 PM

So if I do something thats totally stupid and whacked out (and granted you have been there to help me out when I have so far here) just let me know to tone it down a notch, and I'll follow accordingly. I am new at this Apologetics thing, so the help I get from you guys is much appreciated.

Nah, man. Just keep doing what you're doing. You're doing great so far.

:whistle:

Roundhead

September 11th 2006, 04:02 PM

Alert: New Fundy Atheist may be on his way. I got bored with a creep calling himself "Rev Counter" who did the usual shebang on Luke 14:26 and replied with such works of genius as these:

He's very adept at dodging, missing the point, and not understanding what you're saying. Please give him our usual "myth buster" welcome if he ever shows his face. :thumb:

Hello.

JPHolding suggested I come to this forum because they were unable to offer help on some questions I raised. Contrary to the impression given above I am not a "fundy" (assuming that is a childish abbreviation of fundamentalist) but I am seeking some answers. I do not really expect to get them but I am always an optimist!!

Who can help?

Jnthn

September 11th 2006, 04:08 PM

Hello.

JPHolding suggested I come to this forum because they were unable to offer help on some questions I raised. Contrary to the impression given above I am not a "fundy" (assuming that is a childish abbreviation of fundamentalist) but I am seeking some answers. I do not really expect to get them but I am always an optimist!!

Who can help?
The key to benefitting from being at TWeb is listening and understanding, otherwise you'll be sent running like numerous skeptics that have thought Christianity and apologetics are a light touch. We play hard and pray hard.

I hope the last sentence of your post isn't an indication of your closed mindedness. We shall see :teeth:

Have a look around, get to know the various areas of the forum as some have specific purpose and rules.

Welcome to TWeb!

J

jpholding

September 11th 2006, 04:13 PM

Contrary to the impression given above I am not a "fundy"

Fundy atheist (or Skeptic). A very correct description of your mindset.

So what happened to the brave kitscher who called me a coward in his last email after I invited him here (awful cowardly of me to ask you for public debate, huh)? Did you leave the other face at home? :lol:

Who can help?

In your case, perhaps a psychiatrist. But if you want to do something, start a thread in the Apologetics 301 section. Not here. I'll leave you to be laughed at by the wolves until tomorrow...I close for business about this time.

Roundhead

September 11th 2006, 04:28 PM

Fundy atheist (or Skeptic). A very correct description of your mindset.

So what happened to the brave kitscher who called me a coward in his last email after I invited him here (awful cowardly of me to ask you for public debate, huh)? Did you leave the other face at home? :lol:

In your case, perhaps a psychiatrist. But if you want to do something, start a thread in the Apologetics 301 section. Not here. I'll leave you to be laughed at by the wolves until tomorrow...I close for business about this time.

Thanks J for your welcome. I hope I am open to reasoned debate. I feel sure there are people here that will let me know if they think I am not!!

I note that after JPHolding invites me here for a debate he promptly goes to bed! Can you block my emails here too JPHolding?

So, as new boy, can someone point me in the direction of intellectual debate as opposed to the childish ranting of JPHolding? Thanks

One Bad Pig

September 11th 2006, 04:41 PM

Thanks J for your welcome. I hope I am open to reasoned debate. I feel sure there are people here that will let me know if they think I am not!!

I note that after JPHolding invites me here for a debate he promptly goes to bed! Can you block my emails here too JPHolding?
He's not going to bed, he's just stepping away from Tweb for the day. Have patience; he'll be back tomorrow.

So, as new boy, can someone point me in the direction of intellectual debate as opposed to the childish ranting of JPHolding? Thanks
Why don't you start a new thread in Apologetics 301? Alternatively, you could browse the Christian-only sections for an amenable opponent and ask them to participate in a Basketball Court thread with you.

Teallaura

September 11th 2006, 04:44 PM

FYI: You aren't permitted to post in theist only or Christian only areas. You can PM someone to ask them for a debate, however.

Jnthn

September 11th 2006, 04:46 PM

Start here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/index.php?). Dip into the subject areas that catch your eye. Read the subsection sticky notes to get an idea of their remit and to avoid etiquette faux pas. Lurk awhile. Engage your brain, not your mouth.

J

jpholding

September 11th 2006, 09:09 PM

I note that after JPHolding invites me here for a debate he promptly goes to bed! Can you block my emails here too JPHolding?

This is what I mean when I say Dumbo here contrives excuses. :lol: Just wait until someone hits him with facts.

For years now, everyone here knows that I sign off at 4:30 ET, usually for the day; now and then (like now) I sign on in the evening or on weekends, but the overall rule is that 4:30 is the time I leave.

Now Dumbo comes in here and wants to pretend that there's some sort of conspiracy! :lol: And here's more of his idiocy:

Why should you take a critique of your avatar so personally? You seem to demonstrate all the symptoms of someone very uneasy and insecure with yourself. I am genuinely sorry to hear that and I would of course apologise if that was the case.

Idiot didn't have a clue that my line "The Immortal Returns" was a reference to my Hearthstone comics storyline in which the character pictured -- Eidolon, an immortal being -- returns to the narrative. Dim bulb actually thought I was referring to MYSELF! :rofl:

So, as new boy, can someone point me in the direction of intellectual debate as opposed to the childish ranting of JPHolding?

Looks like the brain has already been decommissioned. :rofl: Multi-level screwball award winner.

jpholding

September 12th 2006, 11:08 AM

Note to self...Gold for Nanimose:

If you not only look at the pictures but read the text also the point is right there. Why does an all-good God and son of God have knowledge of Sin. If you really are trying to turn yourself into an all-good person, does it make sense to be reading about all these bad things? Especially with acts of sin that are committed at the highest degree. What Lost said was irrelevant. What did I say about Bible Readers excusing these things?

("Your point being what? This sounds like the evening news.")

what would you know about the news? I think you meant a movie. What the hell is mutually exclusive? My morals are better than any Christian who you never hear talk about Morals and are obsessed with who believes in God more or atleast sound like they do. Am I suppose to find your immaturity amusing, Jesus said "be like a child" then he slams a wineskin.

I still can't believe in the Bible regardless of if it's G or R rated. Can an all-knowing God really be all-Good? (an already established atheist argument)

Crow

September 12th 2006, 11:58 AM

If BurntOffering doesn't merit a nomination, nobody does!

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83845&page=1&pp=16

One Bad Pig

September 12th 2006, 01:35 PM

If BurntOffering doesn't merit a nomination, nobody does!

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83845&page=1&pp=16
Yeah, she's always been this odd.

BurntOffering

September 12th 2006, 09:50 PM

Did I win :lol: Do I have to nominate myself :ahem:

Peace out

jpholding

September 13th 2006, 11:47 AM

Email:

If your Bible was written by God, why and who are you to "interpet" it? Are you saying God was not competent...are you saying God whispered new authority in your ear?

Why do all newer "revised" editions of the Bible reflect the word of God? How could they? They simply reflect the ideas of the men that revised them.

*******

PS -- Regardless of who did what, would mods please trim off the excess messages that aren't specifically Screwball nominations (including Roundhead's belches, and all that action I missed last night)?

jpholding

September 13th 2006, 01:00 PM

Dee Dee said to start a new one and I'm too tired to argue. :rasberry: :hehe:

September 13th 2006, 02:13 PM

Dee Dee said to start a new one and I'm too tired to argue. :rasberry: :hehe:

Wait, what precisely happened to the old one? :huh:

dizzle

September 13th 2006, 02:20 PM

It was moved for admin review. If you have any questions you can PM me. The old posts that are not at issue will be merged into this thread when our mods have time.

jpholding

September 13th 2006, 02:21 PM

Wait, what precisely happened to the old one? :huh:

I'll let the admins here answer that if they want to. :sigh:

Add: Oops, they just did....

September 13th 2006, 02:30 PM

It was moved for admin review. If you have any questions you can PM me. The old posts that are not at issue will be merged into this thread when our mods have time.

Okay. :smile: Just checking to make sure whether or not we'd have to resubmit any nominations previously made.

Carry on then, all.

Tickle Me Goody

September 13th 2006, 02:30 PM

Dee Dee said to start a new one and I'm too tired to argue. :rasberry: :hehe:

What?! Not another Dee Dee suck up. :doh:

:shocked:

dizzle

September 13th 2006, 02:36 PM

Okay. :smile: Just checking to make sure whether or not we'd have to resubmit any nominations previously made.

Carry on then, all.

Nah, it is just labourious to split a thread, so it was moved until it could be done. I am asking someone on staff to volunteer to do it and move back the posts that are not the issue, which is the majority of the thread. I told JP to start this one so that there would still be a thread going while we get around to doing this.

jpholding

September 13th 2006, 03:12 PM

What?! Not another Dee Dee suck up. :doh:

I'm saving the argument for when it's more important. :rasberry:

One Bad Pig

September 13th 2006, 04:09 PM

I nominate YeshuaMarine for making a sockpuppet to pick a fight with.

jpholding

September 13th 2006, 04:26 PM

Oh, before I go...nudder screwball alert. He just registered: "owlafaye". He produced that last email I posted as a "response" to my article on Edmund Cohen. I got so tired of his ignorance I blocked him and told him to come here for some public humiliation if he wanted to discuss it further.

Here's some of his gab from other emails:

Cohen's review of the "Mind of the Bible Believer" had become the definitive reference for those seeking information on the phenomena of Fundamentalism in a modern, scientifically driven society,

The arguments of Fundamentals regarding evolution have been successfully defeated in every aspect through the most empirical of facts and repeatable, demonstrable experiments in the field and careful review by successive generations of Darwin's peers.. Evolution touches on and is responsible for the dramatic advancements in every aspect of human endeavor.

With reason, rational thought and that very logic that escapes belief and faith, the arguments of Fundamentals have also been re-evaluated each generation and they continue to fall in the face of simple truth and new factual information.

The mere fact that institutions such as the Academy of Science are the target of disbelief, ridicule and contempt is indicative of a movement within the Christian community, similiar to conspiracy theorists and other fanatic movements, that will not take no for an answer no matter what the presentation. This aberrancy is classified as "normatively insane" and demands a close watch on it's inherents.

No better reason for maintaining the separation between church and state exists.

Extremist Christian thought is not acceptable in most of all mainstream Christendom and a better understanding of the historicity of Christianity is beginning to emerge in this stream of reasonable, better educated religious thought.

The mere extremism of Fundamental doctrine has stimulated Christianity and has opened the minds of its scholars to the myriad evidences of unsupportable claims that point to the myth of Jesus .

It is more the spirit of the purported Word than the man himself that is beginning to emerge as the guiding "light" in Christian churches today.

The world's infrastructure and instant communication and information will drive the fundamental element into that silence from which it emerged in the 20th century.

Cohen's definitive review is accepted throughout the Internet...I can't see how someone without any similiar credentials and little experience can refute such a brillant, reviewed and fully accepted piece of writing.

You rant and rave and I pull your chain...you are a self-chained slave to your silly beliefs.

Well, of course. Messiah based religion is based on the fear of punishment. Instilling fear of not adhereing to the faith (being sent to hell). Fear based religionists are born to sorrow, constantly seek their guilt and forgiveness...No wonder they are believers in a punishing God...it naturally follows that your God is a punisher...although I can't see why an omnipotent deity needs followers and worshippers. If he fears then he isn't a God.

....religious fanatics such as youirself Holding; are not known for character or a sense of humor.

Christians are an imperious, aroogant, sanctimonious and bigoted lot no matter where you find them...

Question a Christian, display incontrovertible fact and their eyes begin to reflect the fear within...they are running scared Holding...just like you.

The problem is that you do not have any recognition or basis for your
article, whereas Cohen's as been acclaimed and referred throughout the
Internet.

Just because you criticize him doesn't mean you are correct or an accepted
critic. And of course, you are essentially a nobody outside of
FunDumbMental circles.

Have fun eating him up.

Darth Executor

September 13th 2006, 10:06 PM

I'm back. What did I miss?

Darth Executor

September 13th 2006, 10:13 PM

*double post please ignore*

TuckEverlasting

September 13th 2006, 10:22 PM

I'm back. What did I miss?
You have *no* idea. :hehe:

Christy

September 13th 2006, 10:24 PM

I nominate YeshuaMarine for making a sockpuppet to pick a fight with.
That was really wierd

Darth Executor

September 13th 2006, 10:40 PM

You have *no* idea. :hehe:

I should have received a detailed PM five minutes ago. You dissappoint me.

TuckEverlasting

September 13th 2006, 10:49 PM

I should have received a detailed PM five minutes ago. You dissappoint me.
Look, this is what you get when you abandon us to chase dreams of candyland (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83651). :nsm:

Pilgrim

September 14th 2006, 09:41 AM

I'm back. What did I miss?
It'snot so much that you missed anything, it's how much we all missed you big guy.

Darth Executor

September 14th 2006, 10:04 AM

You're not going all brokeback mountain on me, are you?

jpholding

September 14th 2006, 10:47 AM

I'm back. What did I miss?

I sent three fundy atheists here since you left.

jpholding

September 14th 2006, 11:10 AM

Email:

Just dropped into your website. what mumbo jumbo. what verbal flatulence. The muslim seeks to show that Jesus was not God and your response is an intellectual muddle of graduate school quasi-religious jargon and textual references that make the books on semantics I studied at Hebrew University look like primary school readers.

When I read this kind of Christian apologia, it shows me why muslims are rapidly gaining ground on Christians.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a very religious, Christ-oriented individual. But I
didn't get my faith from intellecutal claptrap such as that offered here.

You know what...if Jesus was not a man, why bother trying to emulate him????

We know that Jesus was the Messiah because "he humanized humanity from his cross."

Please tell me where in the OT, the Messiah is declared to be God.

Pilgrim

September 14th 2006, 11:15 AM

Email:
That's rich. He casually trys to drop his academic credentials (a dubious claim IMHO) and then in the next breath says that academia and the intellect are worthless. Nutters.

Newb

September 14th 2006, 05:35 PM

Darth Executor

September 14th 2006, 05:42 PM

hey guys....

How are you doing? I'm new on the site and I have been looking for some answers to the truth. I'm an Atheist who is basically seeking out the truth, though I do not believe it to be Atheism at all. How do you recommend I address this issue?

Well, dropping by the apologetics section and asking why people believe would be a good start, although if you're looking for answers from anybody other than Christians or non-theists you might want to drop by some more specific web sites as those two groups seem to be the overwhelming majority here.

And why are you guys so mean to people on this thread?

Short answer: Because they deserve it.

One Bad Pig

September 14th 2006, 05:48 PM

hey guys....

How are you doing? I'm new on the site and I have been looking for some answers to the truth. I'm an Atheist who is basically seeking out the truth, though I do not believe it to be Atheism at all. How do you recommend I address this issue?
If you have questions about Christianity that you would like to have answered in a non-debate format, post them in Intro to Christian Theology. If you're looking for a debate, check out the Apologetics forum.

And why are you guys so mean to people on this thread?

Regards,

Danny
I don't see it as being mean, but exposing obdurate error. People who are looking for honest debate don't tend to be featured here.

jpholding

September 14th 2006, 06:18 PM

For example, this email...

You couldn't resist replying though I said I didn't care about your opinion. You lose. I even considered at one point to ask a history professor comment on your arguments, but couldn't be bothered. Your arguments are - I repeat - simply too lame.

Oh, and who's this guy a sock puppet for, ya think? :wink:

Newb

September 14th 2006, 06:18 PM

If you have questions about Christianity that you would like to have answered in a non-debate format, post them in Intro to Christian Theology. If you're looking for a debate, check out the Apologetics forum.

I don't see it as being mean, but exposing obdurate error. People who are looking for honest debate don't tend to be featured here.

Okay, that makes sense (except I don't know what the word obdurate means). That sounds like a good idea "One Bad Pig?". Its interesting, I already believe in Intelligent Design. I know that sounds weird. But I don't know about this whole God thing yet. I'm still looking though.

dizzle

September 14th 2006, 06:24 PM

General Theistics is less "hostile" area for discussion too.

Newb

September 14th 2006, 06:37 PM

General Theistics is less "hostile" area for discussion too.

Yeah some of the guys in the Natural Science department are really mean. I told some of them that I thought ID was a good enough Science to consider, but I was a Naturalist open to religion. This guy named Gaytheist was very condescending towards me.

One Bad Pig

September 14th 2006, 07:02 PM

Okay, that makes sense (except I don't know what the word obdurate means). That sounds like a good idea "One Bad Pig?". Its interesting, I already believe in Intelligent Design. I know that sounds weird. But I don't know about this whole God thing yet. I'm still looking though.
ob·du·rate
adj.
1.
a. Hardened in wrongdoing or wickedness; stubbornly impenitent: "obdurate conscience of the old sinner" Sir Walter Scott.
b. Hardened against feeling; hardhearted: an obdurate miser.
2. Not giving in to persuasion; intractable.

My user name is the name of one of my favorite bands.

Darth Executor

September 14th 2006, 07:13 PM

Banned already? Who was it?

TuckEverlasting

September 14th 2006, 07:15 PM

ob·du·rate
adj.
1.
a. Hardened in wrongdoing or wickedness; stubbornly impenitent: "obdurate conscience of the old sinner" Sir Walter Scott.
b. Hardened against feeling; hardhearted: an obdurate miser.
2. Not giving in to persuasion; intractable.

My user name is the name of one of my favorite bands.
Heh! I got another one:

Transparent (http://m-w.com/dictionary/transparent)
1 a (1) : having the property of transmitting light without appreciable scattering so that bodies lying beyond are seen clearly : PELLUCID (2) : allowing the passage of a specified form of radiation (as X-rays or ultraviolet light) b : fine or sheer enough to be seen through : DIAPHANOUS
2 a : free from pretense or deceit : FRANK b : easily detected or seen through : OBVIOUS c : readily understood d : characterized by visibility or accessibility of information especially concerning business practices

And another one!

Try-ing-much-too-hard-to-app-ear-nev-er-to-have-vis-it-ed-T-Web-before
phrase
1. An activity typically engaged in by slow-witted trolls who have been banned several times already
2. That actually about sums it up

One Bad Pig

September 14th 2006, 07:16 PM

Banned already? Who was it?
YeshuaMarine

Cynic Sage

September 14th 2006, 10:40 PM

I nominate YeshuaMarine for making a sockpuppet to pick a fight with.

Linky Linky.

This I gotta see.

One Bad Pig

September 15th 2006, 01:03 AM

Linky Linky.

This I gotta see.
It was here, actually. It got split off into one of the leadership fora though. Sorry.

jpholding

September 15th 2006, 10:21 AM

Reader nominates Carpe, for not knowing the answer to this as a professed former Christian:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1653025&postcount=38

Your earlier comment was that god was not satisfied with anything but perfect morality. We are finite beings, NJon. According to your worldview, we were created so. Perfection is beyond us. Not to mention that we are constantly confronted with situations where we have to choose between the lesser of two evils.

And we are temporal. We live and breathe for a mere few decades, and accoridng to the Christian worldview, at the moment of our deaths it is the nature of those temporal lives that dictates how eternity is spent. At the instance of death, the choice is made for all eternity. Infinite consequence for finite transgressions.

The whole thing is so nonsensical - so irrational - it constantly amazes me that so many people just don't see it. Why at the instance of death? How can any notion of justice include eternal spiritual consequences for finite physical actions?

Not to mention the honor-shame factor.

Darth Executor

September 15th 2006, 02:37 PM

Nomination for Agence France Presse:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/09/15/060915144505.qjpgmlg5.html

By unwittingly angering Muslims with his comments on Islam, Pope Benedict XVI has shown that he has yet to shake off his academic theological roots and master the global media machine with the same deftness as his predecessor.

Great advice, morons.

jpholding

September 15th 2006, 03:21 PM

Reminds me of fundy atheist item #43...

"When the Pope says that God may have used evolution, he is an enlightened religious leader whom Christians should listen to. When the Pope preaches on the sanctity of human life from conception, and thus denounces abortion, he's just a senile religious bigot who should keep his opinions to himself."

Cynic Sage

September 16th 2006, 09:30 PM

UNICORNS:

http://www.unicornsunited.com/INDEX.HTM

[attachment]
click to enlarge

http://www.unicornsunited.com/PAGE4.HTM

Other interesting topics covered in this book:

A discussion of the meaning and symbolism in the
book/movie The Last Unicorn.

Are unicorns in the Bible really a mistranslation?

Why are unicorns often pictured with a rainbow?

Do unicorns love dragons?

Are unicorns and lions going to fight together in
the Last Days?

Their site also has a place where people can submit their unicorn moments:

http://www.unicornsunited.com/PAGE6.HTM

what iam about to reveal here is really going to sound crazy so please bare
with me i assure you iam not lol but when i was little i lived in orlando
florida and we for most of that time lived in a trailer park that had a orange
tree grove behind it my mother being very protective of me never wanted me to
go into the grove ....well as it happens childern defy their parents for
whatever reason and one day i went exploring and to this day the the moments
of what happened have never left my mind...(heresthe crazy part).........i was
playing in the dirt making ant hills for ants lol not knowning at the time
they had to make their own homes , when {this part is hard to describe}......a
silence fell over the grove as if the whole world had stopped then thats when
i saw what at the time i thought was a horse [IT WAS NOT TILL MANY YEARS LATER
I FOUND OUT IT WAS A UNICORN]......and the horse walked slowly toward me and
said that no matter what i should always remember this meeting and whenever i
felt sad i should remember ...and when people are cruel i should remember and
in turn for remembering i will be rememebered . I have never spoke of this to
anyone i have always felt alone in my being except for that one moment and
sometimes in my minds eye i can hear the unicorns words and iam then i feel a
calm like no other and now that i know there are others iam joyful at your
discovery and feel as if the unicorn has made good on its promise..... thank
you for letting me share this i have carried this memory for many years unable
to speak of it with anyone. unilight to all ....ucornia

:twitch:

OldManZangetsu

September 18th 2006, 09:16 PM

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=84071

I'm not sure what to nominate from this thread, BO is just all around wierd.

jpholding

September 18th 2006, 09:59 PM

Email that wins the PC Open Self-Contradiction Award:

I'm sorry, I've been doing some reading here for the first time today on your website and I just don't know how to tell you how underwhelmed I've been so far by the level of intellectual, scholarly, or logical information/debate offered.I guess my hopes were too high to begin with. Although I understand that religion is about faith and not about logic, if you're going to set up a website as well as write books , articles, speeches, etc. on a subject, you'd think you'd try to be more rational and reasonable in your arguments.

One example of what I mean is that every time I read a response from your site to a critic, the point the person made is completely ignored and the writer is then in turn criticized for things that have nothing to do with the valid points made. You should be able to argue point for point and not have to rely on distortion, distraction, or just general name calling.If you could try to stick to the issues you could be taken more seriously. At least I know it would be more interesting for this reader.

I would not try to imply that atheists are somehow more open minded ( just because they are atheists), however, every atheist I know looks at every argument/important issue from every conceivable angle before forming an opinion and are then still willing to hear/read any contrasting opinions on the subject. Have you ever considered listening/reading with an open mind, taking into consideration the possibility that you might actually be wrong?

Also, if you guys are so certain of your beliefs, why do you feel the need to justify them at all? This is not meant to imply that you are somehow doing something wrong, or shouldn't be doing what you are doing, I'm just curious. Truthfully , it does smack a bit of desperation though.

Kelp

September 18th 2006, 11:06 PM

Kelp

September 18th 2006, 11:09 PM

How about this: http://www.vincentcheung.com/2005/06/09/why-god-created-evil/

I thought it was pretty nutty.

Kelp

September 18th 2006, 11:15 PM

Vincent Cheung may deserve a general screwball also.

And these guys seem a little weird, to.

http://yourarmstoisrael.org/Articles_new/shabbat/?page=hidden_agenda_of_baal&type=3

Interesting, thing about that above site, JP. Seems these folks'll sell ya a genuine Book of Jasher for like $15. You were lookin' for one of 'em, right? :lol:

One Bad Pig

September 20th 2006, 05:26 PM

I nominate new Twebber trex, for his very first post (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1657048&postcount=31):

MasterPath is real science of God realization. Gary Olsen IS the current living and only spiritual master alive in this country. Astonishing, yes. True, nevertheless. Take an initiation (in soul) and enjoy the ride.

Their is NO deceit in this doctrine. Only in your own limited mind with its concepts and thoughts and basically erroneous conclusions. That is not intended as a slight. However, it IS the way it is.

P-Dunn

September 20th 2006, 09:17 PM

Here are some loony YouTube quotes from the comment boards (http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=dzzORZhnCao&fromurl=/watch%3Fv%3DdzzORZhnCao) of Marshall Brain's videos. All the bold parts are my own emphasis added.

Jesus is God? God cannot die? Jesus = God= died on the cross= God was dead for 3 days! Is Jesus man. Many men have died for their belief= not such a big deal to kill a "man". Sacrifice? where, he knew he would be alive again in three (A bit less actually) days.
But if Jesus is God and God knows everything and only God knows the hour of the coming, jesus must have lied when he said he didn't know. In fact he said only God knew. . . . But Jesus is God and God cannot lie? and that makes sense?
Obviously the word "hypostasis" would mean nothing to this guy. :lol:

The plane airjackers in 9/11, the inquisitors who killed Giordano Bruno and humilliated Galileo, all they had sticked to what they believed, too.
Plane airjackers?

There are far better refutations of Christian philosophy- we don't need to use poor logic, when logic is on our side.Try whywontgodhealamputees.com.
I think this is rather self-explanatory... :lol:

Ah just get over it, God is a load of rubbish.
A lame old fairytale.
Adam and eve was demolished with evolution.
Noahs ark, he 'drowns' all living creatures.. What about fish?
Plus noah is 200 years old accoridng to the bible..
If that was true then wouldn't it be in the guinness book of records? Well it's not. So nuhh!
The bible was written by a bunch of crack heads with weird imagination.
Ah yes, The Guinness Book of World Records is the answer to all your Biblical criticism needs. It makes sense knowing that "krizzymoo" is a fourteen-year-old girl.

These are all from one video. There are six now. Plenty of screwball material over there...

Darth Executor

September 20th 2006, 09:30 PM

I somehow managed to forget a nomination for Rosie O'Donnell.

http://newsbusters.org/node/7577

O’Donnell: "And just one second, radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America."

Yep, Christians are murdering civillians if they cooperate with the foreing dogs, burning down embassies and beheading infidels. I wonder if these people realise that if extremist Muslims took over the world, Christians would have it much better than them. All we have to do is pay some tax. I wonder if she'd change her tune at the sight of a sharp scimitar (if she can even see it through the head covering she'll be wearing).

Cynic Sage

September 22nd 2006, 01:30 AM

A nomination for David C. Pack of the Retarded Church of Gob:

http://www.thercg.org/books/scv.html?gclid=CI_kn_6-wIcCFSjTYAodUBkJFQ

Should Christians VOTE?

x.jpg /images/interface/m.jpg /images/interface/r.jpg /images/interface/00-logo.gif
Millions believe voting is their civic and patriotic duty. It is the democratic way. But is it God’s way? Christ’s gospel is about government. If He were here today, would He vote? Would His servants participate in the politics of this world? Does His Church practice voting—to decide doctrine, or select board members and leaders? Are God’s leaders chosen by men’s ballots? Here is the Bible teaching on voting, made plain!

BY DAVID C. PACK

Jesus Christ brought a message about government. Everywhere He went, He preached—He announced—the coming of the kingdom of God. He explained that it would be a world-ruling government that would smash and replace all the governments of men.

You may have supposed that the governments of modern nations generally reflect God’s way. This is almost everyone’s assumption. Yet, while God does, in fact, establish and remove nations, this is not His world! This is why Christ foretold the arrival of a supergovernment to replace the confused, inefficient and ineffective governments of men, so powerless to solve any of the world’s biggest problems.

...

Should Christians continue voting or participating in the politics of their country?

A Christian is one who follows—who copies—Jesus Christ (I Peter 2:21 (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29); Phil. 2:5 (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29)). What would Christ do if He were on earth today? Would HE participate in the governments or politics of men? What does the Bible teach about voting to select leaders—either in national governments or in the selection of church leaders in various denominations?

Christ would not vote, because He understands the origin of the governments of this world and who is behind them.

Where did the governments of men come from? How did they originate? Who is behind them? Why is there so much strife and competition in the world today? Is this God’s world—reflecting His way, and His direction and guidance?

Most theologians, religionists and churchmen blindly assume that it is. Therefore, they conclude that if “all Christians work together, in love and unity, to make this world and its governments a safer and better place for all, we can bring peace, happiness and prosperity to the world.” This is a completely wrong viewpoint. Nowhere did Jesus say “go into all the world and strive to make it a better place by becoming part of it.” Instead, He said, “Go you into all the world and preach the gospel.” Christ did not come to make this world better. He announced the coming of a better world, under His government!

Blind, deceived men think they can bring about the kingdom of God through human effort. They see certain evil forces at work and feel compelled to “do something about it.” They assume that Christ would be an “activist” striving to “make the world a better place.”

"Trying to make the world a better place"? Those sick MONSTERS!:twitch: HOW DARE THEY TRY TO MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE! :rant:

Be honest! Haven’t you heard this many times? Haven’t you heard churches urge people to “get involved” or “take a stand” or some similar thing, in order to improve national or world problems of one sort or another? (Read our booklet What is the KINGDOM OF GOD? You may also read our book Tomorrow’s Wonderful World – An Inside View! to learn much more about the most important event that will ever occur on earth.)

But is this God’s world now? Does HE want Christians to “make the world into a better place”?

Better do my Christian duty and sit on my butt all day.

jpholding

September 22nd 2006, 10:30 AM

Email for the Failure of Technology Department:

Hello tektonics.org,

I recently find your site http://www.tektonics.org by searching Google for "jewellery" . I think our websites have a similar theme, so I am a bit interested in exchanging links.

If interested please send me the Title, URL and Description of your website or the HTML code, so that I can put them on my website of same category and in return you will provide a link from http://www.tektonics.org website.

:hrm:

Raptor

September 22nd 2006, 11:11 AM

Email for the Failure of Technology Department:

:hrm:
Where can I buy "jewellery" at Tektonics? (On second thought, imitation ANE trinkets inscribed with Rangslinger might not be so valuable after all. :hehe: )

Darth Executor

September 22nd 2006, 07:44 PM

Not a screwball. Cirisme posted this in the amphitheater but since you don't drop by very often in there I'll just post it here so you can see it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xEzGIuY7kw

Cynic Sage

September 22nd 2006, 11:10 PM

A nomination for Kid's on Fire:

http://kidsinministry.com/Current.PastEvents/WavesOfGlory.html

ABC did something on it too (even some video footange):

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2455343&page=1

http://youtube.com/watch?v=co1_9lR9EpM

Speaking in tongues, weeping for salvation, praying for an end to abortion and worshipping a picture of President Bush — these are some of the activities at Pastor Becky Fischer's Bible camp in North Dakota, "Kids on Fire," subject of the provocative new documentary, "Jesus Camp."

"I want to see them as radically laying down their lives for the gospel as they are in Palestine, Pakistan and all those different places," Fisher said. "Because, excuse me, we have the truth."

"A lot of people die for God," one camper said, "and they're not afraid."

"We're kinda being trained to be warriors," said another, "only in a funner way."

GAH! When will we learn! Just because a war-metaphor works in 1st-century AD doesn't mean it will work now. When unbelievers hear us saying words like "be willing to die for God" and "be a warrior for God" to each other, they think "OMG t3h xtians r gonna kill us all"! :rant:

I swear, someone should publish and Secularish-Christianese dictionary or something.

http://kidsinministry.com/Articles.Teachings/PeeWeeProphets.html

I bet 5 pearls that over half these kids apostasize by college-age. Any takers?

The camp is appearing in a documentary called "Jesus Camp". here's the trailer:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=y_EKHK1C2IE

People voice their opinion on the "worshipping to an image of Bush" thing:

http://youtube.com/results?search_query=Worship+Bush+

Darth Executor

September 22nd 2006, 11:23 PM

GAH! When will we learn! Just because a war-metaphor works in 1st-century AD doesn't mean it will work now. When unbelievers hear us saying words like "be willing to die for God" and "be a warrior for God" to each other, they think "OMG t3h xtians r gonna kill us all"! :rant:

They taught us plenty of war metaphors in the hippy HQ that is Toronto, Canada. If unbelievers take it the wrong way it's their fault for being stupid, illiterate morons who snorted coke through English class.

jpholding

September 23rd 2006, 09:04 AM

GAH! When will we learn! Just because a war-metaphor works in 1st-century AD doesn't mean it will work now. When unbelievers hear us saying words like "be willing to die for God" and "be a warrior for God" to each other, they think "OMG t3h xtians r gonna kill us all"! :rant:

I bet 5 pearls that over half these kids apostasize by college-age. Any takers?

No fair. jimbo already proves you right. Remember how he wet his pants over my "warrior" language? And I didn't even say something of that nature.

jpholding

September 23rd 2006, 10:09 AM

Reader nomination for this thread:

http://reddit.com/info/8csb/comments/c8dio

Darth Executor

September 23rd 2006, 05:54 PM

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1658262&postcount=36

I consider myself to be on the christian side of things. Yes, it was ignorant for SOME muslims to do the violence they did as a result of what the pope said, and it's WRONG. HOWEVER, looking at the history of the carnage that some christians have caused since time began, to others......

Overhyped "history of carnage" aside, I find it funny that Christians somehow managed to cause carnage "since time began" when Christians have only been around for the last 2000 years or so. It's even more ridiculous if you believe in an old earth and thus believe humans didn't even exist for about 12 billion years. :no:

Cynic Sage

September 24th 2006, 04:47 PM

In the "I hope this site is a gag" category:

http://jesuspan.com/

So I guess that explains all the sightings of Christ's face in pancakes and tortillas all over the place.

http://www.mosqueclock.com/

"Please remove your shoes before entering the site." :lol:

Cynic Sage

September 24th 2006, 05:52 PM

Appaerently, according to the BBC (not a screwball), the mugs the little girls smashes w/ the hammer in the footage from "Jesus Camp" have the word "Gov't" written on them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97NFNXk8aFc&mode=related&search=

I wonder how those in charge of "Kid's on Fire" reconcile that with Romans 13:1-7 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=52&chapter=13&version=31&context=chapter)?

Cynic Sage

September 24th 2006, 08:37 PM

The Pagan Wolf whines at the moon (warning: contains foul language):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxJwQ63WS4Y

He also appears to get his information on Christian Missions from the movie "The Chronicles of Riddick"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0_ocfaGjt0

Also, I found this interesting parody (not a screwball) of all the paranoia-mongering surrounding the Jesus-Camp film:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90o_VL3W500

jpholding

September 25th 2006, 11:04 AM

Froth at the Mouth Award to:

http://www.churchofreality.org/opinion/christian.htm

Choice tidbits...

Christianity is a "we're better that you" religion that openly disdains all other religions, including other Christians. It creates a highly exaggerated sense of self importance that is sustained by the oppression and judgment of others. Christians see the world as a battlefield where God is at war with the Devil who are fighting this war through human surrogates with Christians as the good guys, and everyone else as the bad guys. And since this is a holy war, all is fair. It is ok for Christians to be dishonest in order to gain power to fight for Jesus.

For example, if a Christian were to kill me for posting this web page, publicly the churches would condemn it as murder and wrong. However, in their heart they would be thankful that some one killed me because I am an instrument of Satan and therefore deserve to die. I would be an enemy killed in battle. At a minimum, they are out there praying for my soul, because I am lost and they are found.

From the perspective of a non-believer, I see Christians in general as self-righteous, hate filled, and indulging in behavior that is very bizarre. If someone is speaking in tongues, either God is speaking through them, or they are so mentally ill that they are hallucinating that God is speaking through them. Is God really speaking through them? Well, if God is all powerful, then can't he speak for himself? If not, God has a problem. If so, then the Christian who thinks he's speaking for God has a problem. The bottom line is, Christianity is a cult. (Actually, thousands of related cults) And as a culture, it sucks.

P-Dunn

September 25th 2006, 05:23 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzJuz2qVz_E

Marshall Brain is at it again. This time he's ripping of The Interview with God (http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/), right down to the music and style, to make claims that add up to, "Since God doesn't speak to me out loud, he must not exist," and blame things like traffic jams and world hunger on God. I especially liked:

Many people claim to hear God's perfect, all-knowing voice, [pictures of religious leaders and President Bush appear] but we know that they are lying. If they really heard a perfect, all-knowing voice, then their decisions would be perfect and all-knowing.

jimmiej

September 25th 2006, 08:56 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzJuz2qVz_E

Marshall Brain is at it again. This time he's ripping of The Interview with God (http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/), right down to the music and style, to make claims that add up to, "Since God doesn't speak to me out loud, he must not exist," and blame things like traffic jams and world hunger on God. I especially liked:
Patrick...have you ever thought that there might be bigger, smarter fish for us to fry than Marshall Brain? Anyone can make irrationality look bad.

Cynic Sage

September 25th 2006, 11:08 PM

A few chapter excerpts from Richard Dawkin's "The God Delusion" are put up on the BBC website:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/5372458.stm

Dawkin's actually says that he doesn't like the Bible cuz he thinks it's "weird". :lmbo:

Cynic Sage

September 25th 2006, 11:14 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzJuz2qVz_E

Marshall Brain is at it again. This time he's ripping of The Interview with God (http://www.theinterviewwithgod.com/), right down to the music and style, to make claims that add up to, "Since God doesn't speak to me out loud, he must not exist," and blame things like traffic jams and world hunger on God. I especially liked:

Hey JP, you ever gonna put out any of your hillarious parody-refutations of yours out as a video on youtube?

Christy

September 25th 2006, 11:54 PM

I think that this guy got his panties in a twist when he read your' fundy atheist list. It seems like it anyway: http://community.livejournal.com/christian_ethic/335.html

100 Ways To Tell If You're A Christian Fundamentalist
Treatment of non-Christians:

1. You storm into atheist forums preaching fire, brimstone, and divine wrath, but you scream “persecution” the moment atheists start teasing you for it.
2. You threaten non-believers that something that does not exist will send them to a place that does not exist.
3. You think atheists are going to hell even though hell has never been proven; yet you can’t stand it when atheists point to Christianity’s brutal history even though it has been proven.
4. You are deeply offended whenever atheists criticize or insult God, even though they are attacking an idea and not an actual entity.
5. You feel everyone should be subject to the laws of Christianity, yet you take offense when atheists say that humans are still animals and subject to the laws of nature.
6. You address all non-Christians as atheists.
7. You expect followers of other philosophies such as Buddhism to conform to your own narrow definition of them, yet you can’t stand it when Christians are stereotyped.
8. You think that atheism is a religion.
9. You can’t tell the difference between atheists and agnostics, and you probably do this deliberately.
10. Whenever you hear about any other religions you need to know how Jesus fits into them.
11. You act surprised when atheists tell you they have Christian friends and family members.
12. You can’t imagine how a bad experience with Christianity might cause someone to abandon it.
13. You ignore what Jesus said about humility or being non-prejudiced, because after all this is about sticking it to the atheists!
14. You use the words “heathen”, “godless”, “heretic”, and “infidel” pejoratively.
15. You pull out random bible quotes as if that actually proves anything other than the bible has an opinion.
16. You incessantly quote the bible to atheists as though they’d never heard such things before.
17. You accuse non-fundamentalist Christians of not being “true Christians” (a lot of fundamentalist atheists do this too).
18. You consider it disrespectful when atheists say Jesus is dead, yet you have no problem plastering Jesus’ bloody tortured half-naked visage on a pagan Roman execution symbol.
19. You accuse atheists of having no morals, yet admit that you would abandon your own morals if God did not exist.
20. You go around preaching to everyone to be thankful for what they already have; yet you believe you are entitled to an eternity in heaven on top of your normal lifespan.

Origins:

21. You think that a poem written thousands of years ago by desert tribals with heat stroke should be interpreted as literally true.
22. Despite the fact that every culture around the world has its own origins story, you believe that the one dreamed up by the ancient Semites must exclusively be true.
23. You believe that one naked guy named all several million species of animals in the same day, even the ones that hadn't been or have yet to be discovered.
24. Despite the fact that the default gender for all species including humans is female, and a hormonal change is necessary to produce a male, you believe that woman was created from man.
25. You claim that C-14 dating is unreliable because of contamination, even though any such contamination would actually make a sample seem older than it actually is.
26. You think that if evolution were proven false today, creationism or intelligent design would take its place tomorrow.
27. Even though the earth is an average planet, revolving around a smaller than average yellow sun, in a typical star system, in the suburbs of a regular spiral galaxy, you believe it is the center of the universe.
28. You assert that evolution is a lie or a false theory and yet you know little to nothing about it.
29. You reject evolution to uphold dogma at all costs, yet you are unwilling to give up any other fruits of scientific inquiry including your car, your computer, or modern medicine.
30. You think that a deity as stupid and destructive as Yahweh could be the intelligent creator of the universe.
31. You think the big bang theory implies that everything came from nothing.
32. You think that evolution says that humans came from monkeys.
33. You have used the idiotic 747 out of a junkyard analogy at least once to try and prove evolution wrong.
34. You claim that evolution is “highly improbable” even though you are willing to believe that Jesus was born of a virgin, had supernatural powers, rose from the dead, and flew away.
35. You believe that finding a single error in evolution proves it wrong, yet when an error in the bible is pointed out you try to justify it to a prejudiced notion.
36. You think the fact that science must correct itself in order to approximate the truth is proof of its unreliability, yet you have no problem using stale apologetics to explain away the inconsistencies in the bible.
37. You accuse evolution of being “racist” yet you cling to a book that is loaded with messages of ethnocentrism and racial supremacy.
38. You claim that Darwinism lead to eugenics and its abuses, yet you stubbornly defend biblical passages describing God’s people exterminating members of other races.
39. When it comes to the verses in Isaiah that say the earth is flat, you dismiss them as figurative because otherwise it would make you look stupid in this day and age.
40. Yet when it comes to the verses in Genesis that describe a 6 day creation period, you take them literally even though it makes you look stupid in this day and age.

Dogmatic Reasoning:

41. You claim that God is omnipotent and omnibenevolent, yet you blame human free will whenever something bad happens.
42. You judge humanity by the worst among them in order to justify original sin, yet you take offense when atheists judge Christians by the worst among them.
43. You constantly refer back to the teleological, ontological, and cosmological arguments even though the logical flaws in them are widely known.
44. You scream “category error” whenever you are asked for observational proof of an afterlife, even though you can’t describe heaven or hell without using physically derivative terminology.
45. You are deeply offended when atheists tell you that the bible is mythology by comparing it to the Iliad or the Odyssey, and you presuppose that the bible is special in order to refute atheists who compare it to Harry Potter or The Lord of the Rings.
46. You can’t comprehend the similarity between an ad ignorantum proof of God, and an ad ignorantum proof of leprechauns, pink unicorns, dragons, aliens, etc.
47. You use one part of the bible in order to prove the validity of something written elsewhere in the bible, i.e. Jesus mentioning Adam and Eve by name proves that Genesis is literally true.
48. You claim that God is personal and has human qualities, yet you dismiss the fact that these human qualities would put limitations on him.
49. You claim that God is omnipresent, yet insist that people need to go to church to talk to him, that it’s possible to be lead away from him and become “lost”, and that the word of God is contained only within the bible.
50. You prefer to see things in terms of black and white, where an action is either right or wrong, an idea is either true or false, and a religion is either correct or incorrect.
51. You think that the financial success of The Passion of the Christ is an indication that Christianity is the one true faith.
52. You act as a spokesperson of God and claim that your interpretation is the correct one, but when backed into a corner you claim God is beyond our understanding.
53. You claim that your religion must be correct because of how old it is, but that your denomination must be correct because of how new it is.
54. You think Christianity has a monopoly on truth, morality, and anything pertaining to spirituality.
55. You believe that without God there would be no basis for morality.
56. You use the argument from incredulity to defend the argument from design, the acts of violence in the bible, and the idea that everyone who isn’t a Christian will burn in hell forever. “Yeah well I’d like to see you come up with something better!” etc.
57. You point to gaps in modern scientific knowledge and say that science doesn’t have all the answers, yet whenever you need to explain how something happened you throw up your hands and say “goddidit”.
58. You scoff at theories that infer that the energy making up the universe may have always existed, even though you have no problem believing that God has always existed.
59. You think that the purpose of designing something is to make it as complex as possible; so long as it works more often than not who cares?
60. When all else fails you try to defend the argument from design by suggesting that the design was meant to be artistic in nature.

Biblical Interpretation:

61. You consider blasphemous the theory that Jesus was married with children in accordance with Jewish tradition, because after all we can’t have a god impregnating a human and producing offspring…
62. You think that the post-mortem deification of Jesus is explicitly stated in the bible.
63. You read literal or “prophetic” meaning into verses which were most likely poems written by bards, minstrels, and musicians.
64. You focus on the literalism of fables such as Noah’s Ark rather than on the lessons such stories were trying to teach.
65. You are perfectly willing to ignore the OT except when it comes to such idiocy as original sin, the Ten Commandments, and the mosaic laws pertaining to homosexuality.
66. You cherry pick said verses about homosexuality out of Leviticus, while ignoring the part about it being punishable by death and dismissing the rest of the Levitical laws as outdated.
67. You think that the doctrine of the holy trinity is biblically based.
68. You think that someone’s hallucinogenic dream about events that have already happened is a prediction of the end of the world.
69. You think that vague or post facto prophecies prove the bible’s legitimacy, even though anyone can make a prophecy and be right provided there is no exact time or location.
70. You think that a deity, who violates his own laws, plays favorites, routinely changes his mind, and who acts on emotional satisfaction, is a source of “objective morality”.
71. You think that a deity, who inflicts eternal punishment for finite sins and thought crimes, punishes people for the actions of others, and uses capital punishment for nearly everything else, is “infinitely just”.
72. You think that the bible, which advocates polygamy, sex slavery, incest, rape, and spousal abuse, should be a model for “family values” and “sexual morality”.
73. You defend biblical acts of violence by claiming that it was self-defense, even though the bible clearly says that the Israelites massacred peaceful tribes.
74. You defend the plagues of Egypt by pointing to the enslavement of the Israelites, even though the Israelites themselves practiced their own cruel form of slavery.
75. You defend the historicity of the bible even though it was never meant to be a history text.
76. You believe that the bible should be used as a science textbook even though it was never intended for that either.
77. You focus almost entirely on the way Jesus died, saying that the most important thing he did was to die for our sins, rather than focusing on what he said or did while he was alive.
78. You don’t think there are any contradictions in the bible, other than a few typos or copyist errors.
79. You actually believe that “God is love” just because it said so in the bible.
80. You blame Satan for everything bad that happens in the bible or otherwise, even though it’s Yahweh himself who orders or carries out about 99% of the evil acts in the bible.

History / Politics:

81. You gleefully point to the fact that Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were atheists and claim that their mass murders were done “in the name of” atheism, ignoring the fact that they were communists.
82. You also ignore the fact that Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were totalitarian dictators, which would mean they had more in common with Christian dictators and warlords who carried out atrocities in the name of their religion.
83. You think atheism had something to do with the fall of the Soviet Union, while overlooking economic factors and a little incident called the Cold War.
84. You think that just because Hitler wasn’t a Christian means that Christianity didn’t play any role in what he did, and you overlook the fact that Final Solution author Heinrich Himmler was Catholic and Nazi Germany was predominantly Christian.
85. You forget that the bible was once used to justify the institution of slavery.
86. You claim to be “pro-life” yet you have no problem with the death penalty, the destruction of environmental regulations, and preemptive wars against non-threatening nations.
87. You actually believe that the bible supports your pro-life agenda, and that it should be used to teach children the “value of human life”.
88. You are vehemently opposed to euthanasia-- that is unless the patient runs out of insurance or has not had his or her case publicized.
89. You think that the most important issues of the day are gay marriage, abortion, and stem cell research.
90. You trivialize the holocaust by comparing abortion rates to it.
91. You believe that human personhood begins at conception, even though there is no scientific OR biblical basis for this belief.
92. You oppose contraception AND abortion at the same time, even though the former could help prevent the latter.
93. Even if you aren’t a Catholic you quote the pope when he condemns abortion and same sex marriage, yet you dismiss him when he says that evolution is more than just a theory.
94. You claim that America was founded on “Christian” values—although if you count war, conquest, cultural destruction, forcible conversion of indigenous peoples, slavery, and gender roles, then you might have a point.
95. Any politician who wears his “Christian” faith on his sleeve is able to sucker you in, regardless of how dishonest or insincere he may be.
96. You would never even think of voting for anyone who isn’t a Christian. God forbid if an atheist should ever run for office.
97. You think that the only faith-based charities that do worthwhile work are the Christian affiliated ones.
98. You believe that the Ten Commandments ought to be the fundamental basis of law and morality in any modern civilization.
99. You oppose secularization and want to see more religion in politics, even though it was precisely the separation of church and state that allowed Christianity to thrive and gain so much influence in the US.
100. You think that the only terrorists out there are Muslim, and that there is no such thing as a Christian terrorist.

jpholding

September 26th 2006, 10:04 AM

Hey JP, you ever gonna put out any of your hillarious parody-refutations of yours out as a video on youtube?

I don't have the sort of software needed to do that. If someone else does...

Yep, Christy....that list does get fundy atheists uptight. :lol:

Teallaura

September 26th 2006, 11:35 AM

81. You gleefully point to the fact that Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were atheists and claim that their mass murders were done “in the name of” atheism, ignoring the fact that they were communists.

And this matters why? :eh: What the heck does that refute? :huh:

I can see why he wants to remain anonymous... :gack:

jpholding

September 26th 2006, 11:37 AM

When they try to imitate me, they just never do quite as well....

ADD: This is pretty funny. I'm sure a Skeptic used to have this domain, and I know I made this joke about it:

http://www.skeptictank.com/

jpholding

September 26th 2006, 11:46 AM

Dangit. I leave a sec to see what Doubting John's blog has on it and the first thing that happens is crap comes out of my screen:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/09/should-women-wear-hats-in-church.html

Useful idiot Bill Curry does it again! "Skolarship? Wuz dat?"

DJ needs to come clean this crap off my carpet for free. :hehe:

Added: Curry also offered this dumb statement in his own defense on Triablogue:

I understand that commentaries are very useful tools if you want to ignore a clear teaching in the text.

Consider Luke 6:30 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. The text is clear but you don’t need a commentary to ignore it, you know it’s ridiculous. I suspect that you know it’s stupid and you run to a commentary to see the best rationalization that makes you feel good about ignoring the advice of Jesus.

Consider the very next verse: 31Do to others as you would have them do to you. I know I’m presuming that you and Steve don’t enjoy personal invectives directed toward you, yet the invectives fly. I am sure that you and Steve can find the appropriate commentary showing how this verse isn’t meant to apply to anyone as evil as us debunkers, (only to left-handed Calvinists on Tuesday’s). So obviously you don’t think Jesus was capable of clearly communicating his intent, or maybe he didn’t know what he was talking about.

:rofl: :lolo:

DJ, you need to clean out your house.

P-Dunn

September 26th 2006, 06:47 PM

Patrick...have you ever thought that there might be bigger, smarter fish for us to fry than Marshall Brain? Anyone can make irrationality look bad.
...Yes, but it's so much fun to pick on Mushy. :lol:

I was thinking that after we refute the last proof on GII, we do one or all of the following:

1) Edit all the articles to make them better and post them on an actual website with a domain name and everything. How about www.normalintelligentperson.com?
2) Move onto some of the writings of atheist Sam Harris, author of The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation. He's brighter than Brain is (not by much though) so it should be interesting.

I don't have the sort of software needed to do that. If someone else does...
I've got some. You could do a parody-refutation and send me the transcript. That would be a riot...and it would certainly cause one amongst the atheists there. :teeth:

jpholding

September 27th 2006, 09:25 AM

I've got some. You could do a parody-refutation and send me the transcript. That would be a riot...and it would certainly cause one amongst the atheists there. :teeth:

OK. Send me some email with some ideas and we'll discuss it.

Speaking of emails, here's a nutter from the Here's An Answer Instead of One I Don't Have category:

Just read your commentary on the Jephthah story in Judges.

I gotta say, fella--I'd love to have you as a lawyer if I ever got into serious legal trouble. For a textbook example of how to "prove" that black is white, your little exercise in obfuscation is hard to beat.

I think maybe your next assignment should be a dissertation on what the meaning of "is" is. I bet you could do much better than Bill ever did.

The story of Jephthah--at least in terms of what he vowed and what he wound up doing--is about as unambiguous as anything in the Bible. But since it doesn't fit in with your theology, you get out the smoke and mirrors. And I don't doubt you manage to bamboozle a lot of your readers.

Apologetics indeed. What really begs for an apology is your dishonesty.

jpholding

September 27th 2006, 10:57 AM

Nudda email from the same category:

Do you mean to tell me that a man lived on this planet who could walk on water, raise people from the dead, heal the sick and do all sorts of wonderous feats? You also believe that this person rose from the dead and flew away to a magical never land up in the sky. One must have to be pretty gullable to believe that.

lilpixieofterror

September 27th 2006, 11:44 AM

I think that this guy got his panties in a twist when he read your' fundy atheist list. It seems like it anyway: http://community.livejournal.com/christian_ethic/335.html

Funny list Christy, I found this to be a riot:

21. You think a poem written thousands of years ago by desert tribals with heat stroke should be taken as litterly true.

I guess everyone living in the middle east get's heat-stroke! Even though it makes it impossible to write and most often... kills.

Crystal

P-Dunn

September 27th 2006, 04:53 PM

OK. Send me some email with some ideas and we'll discuss it.
Awesome...Sent it a few minutes ago.

One Bad Pig

September 28th 2006, 12:36 PM

Here's (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1664553&postcount=71) a gem from "Science of Time":

Read your scriptures. Do they provide any certainty for the next day, hour or so. To me the Qu'ran certainly provides certainty for the now. Do the other scriptures such as Thora and Gospels?
<snip quote of OS>
Sadly Old Shepherd, there is no NO ONE left that teaches the true meaning of Islam. Islam is NOT a religion, but a state of being. A believer of the God of Noah, Abraham,.......... need I go on?

The Koran is a small book, with text comprable to the KJV 1611 New Testament. A beliver is Muslim or infidel. A believer is Christian or heathen. The bottom line is a Muslim is a Christian, and an infidel is a heathen. A believer worships and honours God, and a heathen is a Satanist.
:twitch:

jpholding

September 28th 2006, 12:59 PM

Awesome...Sent it a few minutes ago.

I ain't got one from ya.... :sad:

Shadow Phoenix

September 28th 2006, 03:48 PM

JP. Here's some gold from Dusty.

I don't know who Dan Barker is. I figured it out for myself. Holding is a good example. He apparently likes to be teased and ridiculed so he does so unto others. But some others may not like to be treated like that. Thus, we see a flaw with the Golden Rule in action. It doesn't have to be negative or "masochistic." Say I'm a really touchy-feely type and I like to put my hand on people when I talk to them and I appreciate it when people treat me the same way. But my friend doesn't like to be touched and resents it when I put my hand on his shoulder while speaking to him. Thus, the Golden Rule isn't mutually beneficial in this isntance. Thus, Jesus established a rule far from perfect, exposing his base humanity devoid of any divine connection. Only a moron could believe the Golden Rule is perfect and Jesus is a god! This little problem obviously doesn't exist in the negative which, as Confusius (sp?) put it, "What you do not want others to do to you, do not do to them," renders it closer to perfection.

I don't like to be touched, therefore, let's abandon the golden rule!

edited to add: Lo and behold, he has yet another gold in the same thread which I shall provide a link to.

Truth is but an illusion. There is no truth.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=83633&page=10

aikidoka

September 28th 2006, 06:59 PM

This myspace skeptic (http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=103799069)

For bringing up the "Why does the God condone slavery?" question here. (http://forum.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=messageboard.viewThread&entryID=23652906&categoryID=0&IsSticky=0&groupID=100096596&Mytoken=06A875E2-4F6F-4B8A-849C38F877BF89302681185)

And for responding with this when someone referenced Glenn Miller's article on ANE practices and the Bible regarding slavery:

Wow, you found a webpage that is extremely elaborate in its evasion. It would like to suggest that the nature of slavery was different in biblical times. However, we have to assume the integrity of the word until it is disproven. Whatever the conditions of slavery were, the bible is pretty clear that a slave was someone who was owned by a master. So God condones slavery. Do you?

It only got worse after I jumped in, with his constantly using Webster's dictionary as if it trumps actual historical data.

P-Dunn

September 28th 2006, 09:20 PM

I ain't got one from ya.... :sad:
You know, I think something's messing up with that. I've sent you a few emails in the past, but I don't think you ever got those either.

I'll just PM you here.

Cynic Sage

September 29th 2006, 01:22 AM

I think that this guy got his panties in a twist when he read your' fundy atheist list. It seems like it anyway: http://community.livejournal.com/christian_ethic/335.html

I think that list may predate JP's and JP's is a parody of it IIRC.

Christy

September 29th 2006, 01:31 AM

I think that list may predate JP's and JP's is a parody of it IIRC.
Hmm, maybe. I thought that it was to the 10 ways to tell you are a Christian though, that a guy named Material Miser, or something like that, posted here before.

jpholding

September 29th 2006, 09:56 AM

I think that list may predate JP's and JP's is a parody of it IIRC.

If so, GDon is the one to ask about it.

jpholding

September 30th 2006, 01:27 PM

I'll ask mods to close this thread now as I won't be online tomorrow in all likelihood. Opening October thread in a moment.

I will look to have the September screwball feature up by Wednesday.