| Author | Message | ||
     Superdavetfft |
Wow... yep ya got me Blake, I'm just full of hate... yup... You still have yet to prove Fred's not here... Come on, you said you could prove a negative, you prove that and I'd like to see it. I've been told it's not possible so if it is please show me how it's done. Prove that I do not have a purple dragon... (he stayed home today though, too much scotch) Oh and what about that 'kill your own kid' question. Answer it yes or no please... Would you or would you not? I would not, under any circumstances. I'll answer this for you, How could 'god' prove himself to me if he did appear? How could I ever 'believe'? Well I'd never believe something without proof or evidence. I believe the most convincing would be for 'god' to do this; 1. Put a ring around the moon, the circle is nice but it's a little dated. He's all powerful right? 2. Tell me all the details from when I bought my first bike, he's all knowing so that shouldn't be an issue. 3. Explain why he's been absent, forever, and has never made an appearance. (no STORIES of appearances from bronze age peoples that thought sea monsters were real and the world was flat are not reliable sources.) Three things... that's it... he could change them back when he's done too... And yet then knowing he was 'god' and if he did ask me to kill my kid for him I'd ask 'Why?', 'Why is he such a sick f*ck that 'loves me' but yet wants me to endure the most horrible loss imaginable, that of losing a child.' Any god who would ask that of me is no friend. | ||
| Superdavetfft |
Sifo, more later, having too much fun with Blake... I still want to see him confirm or deny that he'd kill his kid, that's the point of this thread. Speaking of that question, would you? yes or no? Here's the question again; if 'god' asked you to kill your kid would you do it? | ||
| Tankhead |
Google: Was Hitler an Atheist or not. You could have this argument for days without going anywhere. Too much information on there mostly about the subjective and not the objective. | ||
| Tankhead |
Love one another and treat others as you would have others treat you. The horror! Love your enemies. You are an incredibly bad ambassador for atheism. Seems pretty clear you are just an anti-god Christianity-hater, an anti-religion bigot. What a bigot does is to take some situation or commentary and distort it, misrepresent it to malign others. Bigots also hold up the poor behavior of a few as representative an entire group or class of folks; their aim is to demonize the entire group. They are hateful, dishonest, divisive. Sorry Blake. Pure hypocrisy. Sorry man. No offense. But come on. | ||
| Blake |
I already answered that question Dave. But now you changed it again, using the word "asked". No, if just asked, I wouldn't. I'd have to be commanded by god to do so. (Message edited by blake on September 16, 2011) | ||
| Blake |
>>> Google: Was Hitler an Atheist or not. You could have this argument for days without going anywhere. Too much information on there mostly about the subjective and not the objective. The internet as source of consensus on truth?  I provided quotes from the man recorded during private meetings with his fellow nazis. No credible scholar agrees that Hitler was a Christian in adulthood. He tried to wipe out the church in Germany. >>> Sorry Blake. Pure hypocrisy. Sorry man. No offense. But come on. Examples please. You calling me a bigot? Provide a credible example or recant. | ||
| Blake |
Another thing that bigots do is make up fantasy scenarios to put those they hate in a bad light, you know, like "what would you do if god told you to kill your child." So then all of a sudden god is telling people to kill their children and the hater goes off in a state of pure delusion ranting and carrying on about how terrible his straw-man fantasy god is.
What a trip. | ||
| Tankhead |
You said "quotes from the man recorded during private meetings with his fellow nazis." The internet provided quotes on there that were from his fellow nazi's that he admitted he was a Catholic. There were also the quotes that you provide as truth. My point is that there is so much information about this one topic one could never win the argument. Stop getting so defensive Blake. I was trying to be neutral. Calm down. Hypocrisy: I listed two examples of your own quotes. I provided you with examples of you not being kind and not treating others the way you are being treated. By posting those commandments and calling someone a bigot, because they do not agree with you is hypocritical to yourself and to us. Now don't freak out and start hammering me. Take a deep breath. | ||
| Tankhead |
Another thing that bigots do is make up fantasy scenarios to put those they hate in a bad light, you know, like "what would you do if god told you to kill your child." So then all of a sudden god is telling people to kill their children and the hater goes off in a state of pure delusion ranting and carrying on about how terrible his straw-man fantasy god is. BLAKE. Cut it out. It is a hypothetical question? He did not say it actually happened, crimminy sakes, CALM DOWN DUDE. You are going off the deep end here. You have lost all credibility in these lsst few post. Please try and calm down. Superdave has you all bent up like a pretzel. Have a great weekend everybody.  (Message edited by tankhead on September 16, 2011) (Message edited by tankhead on September 16, 2011) | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
If you heard God out of the blue tell you to kill your child, you should have yourself checked out. That request came only once and only for ONE person. In hindsight, this request came AFTER God called Abraham out of his country and to a land revealed to him by God. God then revealed this land to Abraham and actually physically appeared to Abraham when He made the covenant with Abraham. God then revealed his plan including giving a very old man a son. God then made possible for a very old (read post menopausal) Sarah to become pregnant. There were repeated, direct encounters between Abraham and God. They spoke to one another. A direct request of God to sacrifice Isaac didn't just come out of the blue. God wouldn't have made such a request. | ||
| Blake |
"I listed two examples of your own quotes. " Neither of which constituted attacking or insulting anyone. One characterized the behavior of bigots. The other noted the views of a man who himself confesses that he despises religion and has himself stated his disdain for it and for god; he characterizes those who believe in very dim insulting terms. Stating that it seems that he hates god and religion isn't an insult. It's an observation. A pretty elementary one. That you jump in on the game attacking me personally while ignoring the really hateful insulting personal statements he's made is beyond the pale. Talk about hypocrisy! LOL! When you outed yourself as a troll, you should have been gone. I'm WAY too tolerant of trolls. You were warned and given a second chance. You're blowing it. Sorry to see it happen. A good rule of thumb is to keep your nose out of that which does not concern you. (Message edited by blake on September 16, 2011) | ||
| Blake |
Christopher, >>> BLAKE. Cut it out. It is a hypothetical question? No, it is a lot more than that. First, it is a disingenuous ploy that maligns god and is an insult to believers. Second, you omitted from your post above SDave's own delusional rant that was quoted in my post which you are now criticizing. That's just plain dishonest. | ||
| Tankhead |
I have been a member here since may of 2006. I have stayed out of these debates for all five years. I have always treated people with respect and have always been thankful for those that offered great advice here. Do a history of my posts other than the last few days. If this:::::: When you outed yourself as a troll, you should have been gone. I'm WAY too tolerant of trolls. means that you were thinking of and are now threatening to ban me from your site by all means do,feel free. While your're deciding, I will decide if I feel I can overlook your behavior and continue to contribute to this site like I have for over five years. This is a shame that you have shown your true colors again and have misinterpreted my post as a personal attack. I was trying to get you to calm down and was being sincere. Again I am asking you to practice what you preach. Can you do that? If not then I AM gone. | ||
| 2734 |
I dont agree with some of SD comments but: Blake >>What a bigot does is to take some situation or commentary and distort it, misrepresent it to malign others. Bigots also hold up the poor behavior of a few as representative an entire group or class of folks; their aim is to demonize the entire group. They are hateful, dishonest, divisive. Court >>The weak of mind can only grasp the concrete, the tangible and the visible. Only the mind that can see over the hill, the visionary mind, can experience the beauty and glory of true faith ... this statement fits your criteria Blake agreing with Court>>>Court speaks truth FT >>There was once a BW member who regularly railed against religion and stated that it was a crutch for weak people. His personal poop hit the fan and we haven't seen or heard from him. I often wonder if a "crutch" might not have helped him. ....... wishing harm to other Badwebbers and maybe even an idle threat? OOPSIE.... | ||
| Drkside79 |
To be fair both sides have crossed the line. Oh and the best part is neither side is right or wrong. You cannot force beliefs. One way or another. Blake Does have a tendency to fly off the handle. He's admitted this in the past. That being said he takes his faith seriously and some have been pressing his buttons. How'd you all assume this would play out? Oh and it's his house so.... Furthermore I have read both sides reduce themselves to insulting comments which will lead to later comments that while they may be harmless they are perceived as insulting. Both sides should sit down take breath. Oh and HAPPY FRIDAY!!!!!!!! | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
....... wishing harm to other Badwebbers and maybe even an idle threat? OOPSIE.... What? No, actually I as well as many concerned here have reached out to him. How did you get a that I was wishing harm on this person in any way? | ||
| Blake |
If you aren't contributing to the discussion and would rather critique behavior, please do it in another thread. This is of the most irritating things for me. If Dave wants to complain that I've insulted or offended him in the midst of our debating, then by all means. I just don't get the professional critics that feel the need to interject as some kind of referee. I'm not talking about you Andy. "both sides have crossed the line" If defining the characteristics and ploys used by bigots is a problem, if a bigot gets his feelings hurt, tough. If he's not a bigot, then he should stand up like a man and answer the questions I pose to him rather than pretend they don't exist. Dave's commentary expressing his disdain for religion and the bible and god is about as bigoted as it gets. The only reason some of you give it a pass is apparently because you sympathize with anti-Christian bigotry. It is apparently the thing to do in many circles these days. If he were spouting off about "gays" or women, or muslims even, there'd be outraged observers ready to lynch the man. But make the target Christians, or the Bible or god and watch people go silent. It's a real wake-up. Bigots suck! | ||
| Blake |
>>> How did you get a that I was wishing harm on this person in any way? Based on my recent discussions with him, it clear that he has trouble comprehending the written word. Could be a reading disability. Not to make fun, just trying to explain. If it's not that, then he's just a troll. | ||
| 2734 |
Twist it how you wish gents, been doin it for a day or so now. If youre gonna ban, then ban and dont talk about it. If you think I'll lose sleep over it you are completely vain. | ||
| Blake |
There's no twisting. It's easily verifiable fact. I'm just trying to figure if you have some kind of reading disability or are a troll. | ||
| Sifo |
To be fair both sides have crossed the line. To be fair; and honest, it was Superdavetfft that opened his first post with this... Another religious thread? Well hello there... Just can't stop proselytizing eh? here we go... Not exactly a very friendly tone there IMO. It gets worse though; again from his opening post... There isn't a creationist on this planet that could keep up intellectually with Hitchens or Dawkins. Especially that idiot Ray Comfort and his banana argument (look into it, it's pretty funny). Essentially debating a creationist is like arguing with someone who thinks the world is flat as Dawkins states in the above clip. Quite insulting to the vast majority of the worlds population IMO. Dawkins and SD clearly have closed minds. That's not a sign of great intelligence. Then SD follows up with this zinger... That said you don't need to be a genius to debate a creationist, just ask politely - 'prove it'. Science can prove it, evolution is a fact, not theory and you can google that all you like to learn more. Two false statements of fact in a single sentence. 1) Regarding the origins of life, or the universe, science doesn't have proof of anything at this point. 2) Evolution (as being discussed here as the origins of life) is anything but fact. For all of his harping about science, SD and almost everyone else taking the side of random chance origins have completely ignored my questions which have been completely based in science. This is quite telling IMO. They have zero interest in what science really has to say in this matter. They simply want to berate anyone who would dare to believe that there is a God. This is one of the worst forms of Bigotry that the world currently experiences and it is becoming all too accepted in the US. I give Blake pretty high marks for not simply banning SD long ago. | ||
| Kenm123t |
Good Post Sifo! | ||
| Moxnix |
Evolution? As I've stated before, I'm loath to argue with anyone claiming to be decended from a monkey. | ||
| Kenm123t |
Mox are you saying they didnt evolve? Maybe they didnt ,could be vaild arguement for the liberal heathens point of origin since many do not act human and or civilized since they revere killing the unborn. Wait we cant insult primates can we they care for their young! The primordial goo could be where they spawned kinda like pond scum. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://xkcd.com/812/ | ||
| Superdavetfft |
ummm folks... just one little point to be made... Evolution is fact, it's proven, tested, demonstrated and backed up by the scientific record and the scientific community. It's not a theory anymore so please accept the facts or do your own peer reviewed research and prove it wrong. Fair yes? http://www.talkorigins.org/ Do some homework, educate yourself, I encourage it highly. There's a reason that religious beliefs decline dramatically as personal education increases. The more you learn about the real world the less you need the imaginary friend to explain the 'why' questions. | ||
| Superdavetfft |
oh still waiting to find out how you can prove a negative Blake... prove my dragon is not here right now... (his hangover wore off so he's back to work...) you said it Blake, now back it up, unless you can't? | ||
| Aesquire |
Evolution is fact, it's proven, tested, demonstrated and backed up by the scientific record and the scientific community. Ok, I favor some variants on A Theory evolution as being fairly well proven. I could give a damn about the "scientific community", since that is a fiction. The established order of thought is often wrong. If 199 out of 200 scientists vote that the idea of rocks falling from the sky was silly, it isn't fact, it's opinion. Now the argument is if the rocks killed the dinos. Science is not settled. ( though you can usually count on Newton's laws if you don't go too big, small, or fast. ) Stating that it's not a theory anymore? That ONLY applies when disproven. Anthropomorphic Global Warming hasn't been disproven. Or Proven. Many of the most outspoken people pushing an agenda based on that theory lie a lot. Many have made a lot of money. Many insist it is proven, and the "science is settled". That combo leads me to believe that the "theory" as presented is a scam. Now, evolution as presented by Darwin, is flawed and very much incomplete. Further studies that include DNA data, and a longer look at a larger fossil record, sure seem to me to be evidence that "survival of the fittest" and sudden change in which members of a species survive after a cataclysm are difference that the bulk before...... apply in many cases. So I have to ask. Which? Theory of Evolution do you like? I might agree with you..... but the science is NEVER settled. Newton doesn't fit all situations. The Phlogiston Theory isn't used much in refineries, and Lysenko, like Al Gore, is full of it, and got a lot out of his scam. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism Also, I am of the opinion that Science can neither prove nor disprove a matter of Faith. While I think an electron microscope gives us access to the glory of nature, ( or the gods, or god, or Gaia if you prefer ) it fails to measure the wonder that view gives us. You don't use a Semaphore to get HDTV. The dragon, nice fellow. Like the BBQ sauce he brought over. He can visit anytime. Next time I'll have his fav beer. ( Tsingtao ice cold, right? ) If you really want to pick on someone, May I suggest the guys who do math on holy books to predict the Rapture. ( which was back in 1998, and so few were righteous, that no one noticed.....  ) | ||
| Tankhead |
Come on Superdave, I think we get the point about the dragon. The first statement is something I believe. Evolution as fact. No debating me. Not necessary. It is what I believe. I don't care if you don't. I certainly would never ask you to believe something you don't. That would be the ultimate insult. Just please don't even try. | ||
| Superdavetfft |
Tankhead; Admittedly I'm beating the dragon to death BUT I have yet to see how Blake can disprove it as he so affirms... I'm just trying to see if we can focus on one tiny little point instead of bouncing around. I picked Blake's claim as a starting point. Aesquire you are worshiping a false dragon! Fred only drinks PBR... beware of blasphemy  *and I withdraw from debating a known fact such as evolution. To do so would be frustrating and pointless. If you want to learn about it the materials are available... |
