Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 6:15 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Alincolnism?
#11
RE: Alincolnism?
Nonetheless, there is no evidence for your fucking godboy. Try to keep that firmly in your head.
Reply
#12
RE: Alincolnism?
(October 30, 2013 at 3:24 pm)Faith No More Wrote: I don't get it. Was this supposed to be funny?

I get the feeling that Christians are trying to mock atheists, but it's so poorly done that I can't be sure. Instead of being a parody of atheists, it's a parody of the straw-atheists religious people see in their head.

Christians should just abstain from attempting to be funny. Jesus sucks the humor out of everything.

I hear ya. I'm confused as well. If it's parody, it's not funny, and usually parody or satire as an element of humor to it. This is just plain stupid. Great satire can be seen in the works of The Onion, and they do it so well that people often take it seriously because they don't get the joke.

But nobody ever accused Christians of having a great sense of humor.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
Reply
#13
RE: Alincolnism?
(October 30, 2013 at 2:17 am)Lion IRC Wrote: I was really loving it til I got banned from Farcebook .

Pray tell, what did you do to get banned from FB?
Reply
#14
RE: Alincolnism?
Just looked through some of the early stuff - hilarious!
ROFLOL
Reply
#15
RE: Alincolnism?
(October 30, 2013 at 4:11 pm)cato123 Wrote:
(October 30, 2013 at 2:17 am)Lion IRC Wrote: I was really loving it til I got banned from Farcebook .

Pray tell, what did you do to get banned from FB?

pseudonym.

...because everyone on FB has to use their real name. Wink Shades

I said, if folks can make up their own definition of marriage, I can change the definition of "real name".

Turns out you CAN use fake names on FB - as long as you support same sex 'marriage', hate religion, vote Democrat, troll Ray Comforts page, etc. etc.
Reply
#16
RE: Alincolnism?
'Well...other than THAT, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?'

Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#17
RE: Alincolnism?
Quote:pseudonym.


Seems like a minor crime.
Reply
#18
RE: Alincolnism?
(October 30, 2013 at 3:48 pm)John V Wrote:
(October 30, 2013 at 3:39 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: When they can produce a photo of christ and some of his handwriting they can compare the two.
Yeah, cause no one existed before the invention of cameras.

I wouldn't say the page is accurate for atheists in general, but it's spot-on regarding mythers. That's pretty much how they come across.

Well no, my point was there is mounds of contemporary and verifiable evidence for Lincoln but for Jesus there is none, which is odd considering the stir he was supposed to have made at the time.

I used to think that Jesus probably existed, purely because of the rationalising done by christians to excuse the shameful death by cruscifiction and his conviction. It seemed like the sort of thing people would do to excuse following a nut job like Manson or Koresh. But now I think his existing was a later invention.



You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.

Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.




 








Reply
#19
RE: Alincolnism?
(October 30, 2013 at 10:05 pm)Lion IRC Wrote: I said, if folks can make up their own definition of marriage, I can change the definition of "real name".

Turns out you CAN use fake names on FB - as long as you support same sex 'marriage', hate religion, vote Democrat, troll Ray Comforts page, etc. etc.

Your post seems to indicate that there was more behind your banning than just the use of a pseudonym.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
Reply
#20
RE: Alincolnism?
(October 31, 2013 at 5:08 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: Well no, my point was there is mounds of contemporary and verifiable evidence for Lincoln but for Jesus there is none, which is odd considering the stir he was supposed to have made at the time.
What do you mean by verifiable? That word's been tossed around a lot lately.
Reply





Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)