Evangelist Bill Graham hospitalized

[Gunny]

You arent making any sense at this point....denial of what exactly? What smokescreen and what would it be hiding?

I'm making perfectly good sense. Just go back to the start and re-read until you get it. I have no intention of answering the same questions post after post after post. I've already addressed the issue repeatedly, and the same questions from you repetedly. It's enough.

 

[Paulie]

Maybe it was on another board. I don't recall specifically where it was, only that a few went a little far celebrating death of another human being, flawed or not.

You haven't celebrated the death of Saddam, or Zarqawi? I'm just curious...and be honest...

 

[Ruby]

I'm making perfectly good sense. Just go back to the start and re-read until you get it. I have no intention of answering the same questions post after post after post. I've already addressed the issue repeatedly, and the same questions from you repetedly. It's enough.

Nah you are just trying to hammer away at a point we covered and was just semantics.

You do agree that non-belief in pink unicorns is a belief right? Funny how you just avoid that specific...is it because it just highlights the semantics of it all and you really DO want to try to equate atheism with theism as a belief system and pretend they are based in equally valid concepts?

 

[mattskramer]

You tried to say that atheism is a "belief system", not even a little bit true. There is nothing about semantics, logic or grammar issue there. Its just a flat out incorrect statement.

There is a system to believing that god does not exist as there is a system to believing that god does exist. There are books that support theory that god exists. There are books that support the theory that god does not exist. Okay. We can call it belief that god exists and belief that god does not exist or we can call it a belief system that god exists and a belief system that god does not exist. It is simply parallel.

 

[Larkinn]

There are just an infinite amount of things that we can dream up in our imagination and that we have no evidence for.....according to your definition they are ALL beliefs. I dont believe flying spaghetti monster exists, I dont believe the grass goblin exists, I dont believe the tooth fairy exists etc. I am not at all talking about things WE HAVE evidence for, just things we have NO evidence for.

No...we have some evidence they don't exist. Unless you can think up some reason why we haven't stumbled across them by now.

Pink unicorns can also get a story and purpose built up around them as well. Lore is easy to create and pass on.

Sure, but thats not the way it is now.

There would be MORE basis to believe in the POSSIBILTY of the existence of life on other planets because there is a planet with life on it already, showing that life on a planet can and does exist. It dosent mean there IS life on other planets but there is at least SOME shred of evidence to suggest it is possible.

Hmm perhaps...if there is a difference it is a very very small one.

We have NO evidence of a "god" concept existing at all, at any time...thats why the alien one is based on somthing more concrete than god or pink unicorns.

Well we do have supposed eyewitness accounts...a.k.a. the bible.

And we have NO evidence of a sentient creator that creates planets and species at all. At least we can submit evidence of life on a planet, can we do the same for a "god"?

Some would claim there is.

True, but at least when you say its POSSIBLE you are basing that on evidence. The same cant be said on the existence of "god".

Again...some would disagree.

How come there arent words for those who dont believe in the FSM then? Its because there arent a large amount of people WHO DO believe in it so therefore there is no word to label people who dont. Its a word that exists ONLY because of so many who believe...no other reason.

Err...thats why any word exists...to attempt to describe some sort of reality.

It seems to me we are at semantics again. Thats what I said, the word agnostic exists because it deals with a non-belief of somthing so many DO believe in and get very emotional and defensive about...ie controversial. A term is then developed that isnt quite as strong as atheist, a "compromise" to appease the controversy.

No, its not. Again its not interested in appeasing the controversy, its interested in not being a part of it. Or, as I do, condemning both sides.

I have no idea whats out in space but when we speak of god, we are talking about somthing that sopposedly created this earth and EVERYTHING else too and even has many things he wants from us and is said to have communicated with us and wants to (hence all the religious books), he is all knowing and all powerful YET there is NOT ONE SHRED of evidence for this beings existence. Yes I feel quite comfortable saying that such a thing dosent exist.

Again...there is some evidence.

 

[jillian]

The sacred Kikes you fought for in Eye-rack quite correctly think Graham is nothing but a fascist in Fundie clothing

The Kikes believe it, I believe it, that settles it

Ummmmmm.... what "kikes"?

Riley was a Baptist, according to your link.

Riley was a force in the conservative wing of the Baptist Church during the 1920s. Like Winrod, Riley was rabidly opposed to the teaching of evolution, and was also extremely anti-Semitic.

All you showed was that KKK-types believe it, so I'm not sure where you're going with that.

 

[mattskramer]

I have no idea whats out in space but when we speak of god, we are talking about somthing that sopposedly created this earth and EVERYTHING else too and even has many things he wants from us and is said to have communicated with us and wants to (hence all the religious books), he is all knowing and all powerful YET there is NOT ONE SHRED of evidence for this beings existence. Yes I feel quite comfortable saying that such a thing dosent exist.

There is evidence that god exists. There is evidence that god does not exist.

[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Scientific-nbsp-Evidence-nbsp-That-nbsp-God-nbsp-Exists/lm/R2JKYA2TELVN4M/ref=cm_srch_res_rpli_alt/002-2954041-0588832[/ame]

http://www.amazon.com/tag/new atheism/ref=tag_dpp_cust_itdp_t/002-2954041-0588832&tag=ff0d01-20

 

[Shogun]

This thread is, hands down, some of the lamest shit I've ever read on this board. It goes from the ranting of a hostile christian LOOKING to start shit (despite how easy it is to quote directly from the Fallwell thread) and ends up debating if a single individual BELIEF constitutes a RELIGION?


lame-O.

ps, go read the first post and then find MY addition to the Fallwell thread for indication of just how fucking retarded this thread started out.

 

[Gunny]

This thread is, hands down, some of the lamest shit I've ever read on this board. It goes from the ranting of a hostile christian LOOKING to start shit (despite how easy it is to quote directly from the Fallwell thread) and ends up debating if a single individual BELIEF constitutes a RELIGION?


lame-O.

ps, go read the first post and then find MY addition to the Fallwell thread for indication of just how fucking retarded this thread started out.

The point to you opening your mouth and once again proving what a sourpuss asshat you are is WHAT exactly?

 

[Chips Rafferty]

There is evidence that god exists. There is evidence that god does not exist.

http://www.amazon.com/Scientific-nb...es_rpli_alt/002-2954041-0588832&tag=ff0d01-20

http://www.amazon.com/tag/new%2...cust_itdp_t/002-2954041-0588832&tag=ff0d01-20

Have you read my theological tome on how my Dog Almighty Sam’s father sent him, and a decade later, his Blessed Grand Dog, Lochie, to teach the world what the real God's unconditional love is like?

Maybe you’ve seen those decals that his devotees put on their cars, “Love is a German Shepherd”? They refer, of course, to The Good Shepherds that I am a totally devoted disciple of.

My Dog(s) are infinitely more loving and decent than Bible God, and anyone who doesn’t worship them as living Gods is most definitely going to burn in Hell forever.

I inferred this unequivocal truth, along with the entire gamut of moral, political, and intellectual teachings that mankind ever needs from Their Holey Scratchings in the backyard!

Of course you first have to accept Sam as your personal Saviour, and Lochie as His Prophet, before you too can understand arcane canine scratchings in the Kinglake mud!

Until then - as Judeo-Christo-Muslism resembles the ravings of an Arab Arakoholic - German Shepherdianity will sound like the demented droolings of a brain-damaged antipodean dry-drunk to the Unsaved!

 

[Ruby]

No...we have some evidence they don't exist. Unless you can think up some reason why we haven't stumbled across them by now.

We havent stumbled across any evidence of god either.

Sure, but thats not the way it is now.

Why should that matter, at one point each religion also didnt have its "lore" created either.

Hmm perhaps...if there is a difference it is a very very small one.

Not small, one has a precedent established, the other does not. One has proven it can exist because it HAS existed, the other hasnt.

Well we do have supposed eyewitness accounts...a.k.a. the bible.

We have witness to their "beliefs" but not evidence that what they "believed" actually existed, happened or was the truth. Lets not forget other religions that predate some of more current ones and how they had gods that interacted with us humans....that would count as eyewitness accounts but no one has any problem accepting those gods and those events didnt really take place.

Some would claim there is.

Just cause they "claim" it dosent make it true. They need to produce evidence and they havent. You can make claims but they arent accepted as truthful, valid or credible until you have produced the evidence to support them.

Again...some would disagree.

Again, they need to show evidence then. I can show evidence of a life existing on at least one planet.

Err...thats why any word exists...to attempt to describe some sort of reality.

Agnostic and Atheism derive their reality from one fact only, so many believe in somthing based on faith (zero evidence) so we need a term to describe those who DONT subscribe to that faith. Its why we dont have words for those who dont believe in pink unicorns.

No, its not. Again its not interested in appeasing the controversy, its interested in not being a part of it. Or, as I do, condemning both sides.

Staying out of the controversy and going "middle of the road" is an appeasement position. I think you take the word appeasement as a negative but it isnt neccessarily so...its however you personally look at it I guess. Some would think its a good thing to do, others would find it negaive...it is what it is.

Again...there is some evidence.

No there isnt. There are what people claim, there are gaps in our knowledge but there isnt evidence of a "god".

 

[Ruby]

There is a system to believing that god does not exist as there is a system to believing that god does exist. There are books that support theory that god exists. There are books that support the theory that god does not exist. Okay. We can call it belief that god exists and belief that god does not exist or we can call it a belief system that god exists and a belief system that god does not exist. It is simply parallel.

Seriously, I am not buying that at all. There is no system to not believing in a god, there is no system to believe in things without any evidence to support the claim. There is no parallel to that!

I cant believe you are even gonna try that!

 

[Ruby]

There is evidence that god exists. There is evidence that god does not exist.

http://www.amazon.com/Scientific-nb...es_rpli_alt/002-2954041-0588832&tag=ff0d01-20


http://www.amazon.com/tag/new atheism/ref=tag_dpp_cust_itdp_t/002-2954041-0588832&tag=ff0d01-20

There isnt any evidence that god DOSENT exist, just a lack of evidence that it does. Somthing that dosent exist dosent LEAVE EVIDENCE...it dosent exist TO LEAVE EVIDENCE!

There is no evidence that god DOES exist either. There are peoples "beliefs" and "internal experiences". There are the "god of the gaps" wherein people try to fill in unanswered questions with "god" but that is also not evidence.

 

[Ruby]

This thread is, hands down, some of the lamest shit I've ever read on this board. It goes from the ranting of a hostile christian LOOKING to start shit (despite how easy it is to quote directly from the Fallwell thread) and ends up debating if a single individual BELIEF constitutes a RELIGION?


lame-O.

ps, go read the first post and then find MY addition to the Fallwell thread for indication of just how fucking retarded this thread started out.

I am actually also pretty surprised that anyone is trying to say that lack of belief in god constitutes some sort of parallel to religion.

What I cant figure out is why? What purpose does it serve?

 

[Chips Rafferty]

Ummmmmm.... what "kikes"?

Riley was a Baptist, according to your link.




All you showed was that KKK-types believe it, so I'm not sure where you're going with that.

Down here in our so-called democratic Australia, and many other countries around the world, it only takes one cosseted **** to scream "anti-semitism" and you are in deep shit.

Obviously, Billy is considered an anti-semite by thousands, if not millions, of the master race because of his typical Good Ol' Boy remarks.

And if you still think this rabidly Proddie redneck is "decent," don't forget the bigoted old \!/ is also on record as referring to the Kikes as "satanic" and for being aghast that a filthy unsaved Catholic might become Presibent.

The man is like all Soupers, a scabby-gutted social-climbing bigot that will do anything to be accepted by "genteel" gentile society and its racist German-Anglo god.

He/they can hardly be anything else, because the Bible is nothing but the wish-we-were-so fantasy of a bunch of Arabic proto-Kikes - who were nothing but a stinking shower of shit-kicking Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves - and their equivalent of Hitler's Mein Kampf.

 

[Shogun]

The point to you opening your mouth and once again proving what a sourpuss asshat you are is WHAT exactly?

um, to point out how retarded and erroniously hostile the premise of your original post is? You know, like I already posted?

I bet that if an athiest pounced with as much vitriol as you displayed, despite the reality of the Fallwell thread, you'd be right in the fray wielding your club while crying about hostile athiests too. By all means.. quote MY post to the Fallwell thread and then quote your first post in this thread side by side. Let's see how they gel.

 

[Gunny]

um, to point out how retarded and erroniously hostile the premise of your original post is? You know, like I already posted?

I bet that if an athiest pounced with as much vitriol as you displayed, despite the reality of the Fallwell thread, you'd be right in the fray wielding your club while crying about hostile athiests too. By all means.. quote MY post to the Fallwell thread and then quote your first post in this thread side by side. Let's see how they gel.

In other words, no real reason other than you're an asshat.

Get a clue. I did no "pouncing." If you don't like your nose rubbed in the truth of your own words, don't post them.

I'm LMAO that you're taking this so personally.

But it has nothing to do with whether or not I am a Chrisitian. That's just you and your ilk doing your own editorializing. Your hate is yours, and has nothing to do with me.

 

[Shogun]

Better luck next time for all you morbid, Chritian-haters.

You mean you missed the 10-thread posting party the haters had when Falwell died? I personally didn't care for Falwell myself, but pure hatred that spewed about him was absurd.

They're out there. Wait until Chips hits this thread.

AND my personal favorite:

Maybe it was on another board. I don't recall specifically where it was, only that a few went a little far celebrating death of another human being, flawed or not.

I think my comment's getting a little skewed. I said "Christian-haters," meaning however many there are, not any specific number. And "10" is an arbitrary number. I don't know how many actual threads there were, nor even if I saw all of them on only this board.

Don't be such a da damned literalist all the time.

I guess getting bitchslapped with the very Fallwell thread you brought up as an example of all the liberal christian hating going on started to chaffe by your third post, eh?

Indeed, what is the the most humorous about your input in this thread (beyond your "run for my life" backpeddle I just quoted) is that you'd rather IGNORE the very Falwell thread you thought to use as an example after being directly challenged and, instead, resort to RSR-style namecalling and shit tossing. Say, whatever happened to your lil boy wonder sidekick anyway? Is he out buying a lawn mower because today is your day each month to groom that protruding neanderthal browline of yours?

Again, I challenge you to dig up MY posts in the Falwell thread and compare it to your pre-backpeddle offerings.. perhaps you'll figure out why it is so funny that you, of all people, are calling someone out for their posts while thinking you have any ground to call anyone an asshat. Let's see if you are man enough to admit your folly or if you lack just as much credibility as those you enjoy pointing a caveman finger at.

 

[Gunny]

AND my personal favorite:




I guess getting bitchslapped with the very Fallwell thread you brought up as an example of all the liberal christian hating going on started to chaffe by your third post, eh?

Indeed, what is the the most humorous about your input in this thread (beyond your "run for my life" backpeddle I just quoted) is that you'd rather IGNORE the very Falwell thread you thought to use as an example after being directly challenged and, instead, resort to RSR-style namecalling and shit tossing. Say, whatever happened to your lil boy wonder sidekick anyway? Is he out buying a lawn mower because today is your day each month to groom that protruding neanderthal browline of yours?

Again, I challenge you to dig up MY posts in the Falwell thread and compare it to your pre-backpeddle offerings.. perhaps you'll figure out why it is so funny that you, of all people, are calling someone out for their posts while thinking you have any ground to call anyone an asshat. Let's see if you are man enough to admit your folly or if you lack just as much credibility as those you enjoy pointing a caveman finger at.

I have YET to backpeddle, junior. More like getting bored to tears.

Now about that Reading is Fundamental course you obviously so need and skipped ....

I don't see where anything I said equates to your BS assumptions based on your overly-sensitive sense of self-importance.

I took a shot at Christian-haters. Don't recall separating them by political party. If the shoe fits, shut your piehole and wear the sumbitch.

I have not however, attempted to push Christianity on anyone, because I simply don't give a rat's ass WHAT you or anyone choose to believe or disbelieve.

I also don't believe this thread was directed at YOU personally, the poster with the lovely disposition who shows up on occasion when the whim suits.

Oh, and dig up your own posts, dude, if you feel it is necessary. I don't mind making fun of them either.

The fact is neither you, nor anyone bitchslapped a damned thing. But you keep on hoping for the day.

 

[Shogun]

HA!

yea, dude.. You go ahead and think that while you mention no less than three times that no one bitchslapped you/made you backpeddle from your original post. It's cool, dude. I'm sure you'll make the same mistake again the next time your brain forgets its physiological role and you post another amazingly retarded thread full of the same hostility you'd pounce on a lefty for posting.

I see you are about as much a man as RSR at a victoria secret closeout sale. It's too bad that you have proven to be no better than those you rail against but, at least, you've brought added hilarity for the next time you try to ACT authoratative because of anyone elses posts. Say, I bet dropping another ad hominem will make it less clear that you REALLY DON'T want to quote the very same thread you tried to use as an example.

Awsome:

"I don't see where anything I said equates to your BS assumptions"

DERRR d-d-d-ederrrrrrr

"I took a shot at Christian-haters."


Congrats, dude! Now, all you need to do is quote the specific thread you tried to use as evidence to prove your featherweight jab! Me personally? Of course not. THATS WHY STEREOTYPES AND GENRALIZATIONS ARE FOR IGNORANT JACKASSES LIKE YOURSELF. By all means, make fun of my post in the Falwell thread, dude.. if you can gather up the testicular fortitude to post something that proves how retarded this thread of yours is...


you can start RSR'ing.. right........ NOW!