(October 25, 2016 at 7:27 am)Tazzycorn Wrote:I was kinda thinking the same. But then, it can be hard to tell a sock form a legitimate new poster since it all usually end up being the same things said anyway.(October 24, 2016 at 12:38 pm)LostLocke Wrote: Let's sit back and wait for one of our resident biologists to weigh in on that.
That's the point at which I said there's no point interacting with him.
Also, anybody else getting a stench of used sock from him?
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: December 24, 2024, 12:40 am
Thread Rating:
Religion doesn't need evidence
|
And in regards to religiousites and 'evidence', even the meaning of the word evidence is up for grabs.
In the Mormon orbit (which I'm extremely fond of noting since they conveniently documented so very very much of their perfidy and connivance and contrivance) 'evidence' of the gold plates was deemed so important that a member of the church merely having a dream about the plates was counted as evidence for the existence of the plates and the translated content on them. That dreams were counted as evidence might raise the issue of why not just display the plates? Well, that presupposes the plates actually exist, you silly twit. Additionally, if the member having the evidentiary dream regarding the plates was later excommunicated from the church, their testimony is still deemed valid, despite another issue being raised by that, why would the Mormon deity instill a confirmatory dream in member with a subsequently impure heart ? "Evidence', it's a tricky thing, ain't it ? The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
(October 23, 2016 at 5:08 am)Napoléon Wrote: If religion doesn't need evidence then I don't need religion. No sane person needs it. RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 25, 2016 at 11:23 am
(This post was last modified: October 25, 2016 at 11:24 am by Whateverist.)
Let's see .. hmmm .. things I don't need:
• Fashionable cloths; • Tasty food; • A sex partner I find appealing; • An appreciation of history or literature; • A nuanced understanding of psychology; • Familiarity with philosophy; • A knack for technology; • Enjoyment of music; • Religion. Yep, it fits right in there alright. Quote:Religion doesn't need evidence Lucky for them as they don't have any. (October 23, 2016 at 8:36 pm)Soldat Du Christ Wrote: Also, evolution is taught in schools, that requires more faith to believe in since we've never observed New DNA information being introduced through genetic mutation or any other method. Should be taught in a private school lol, perhaps you've not heard of the cichlids of Lake Victoria speciating, but those and many other instances reveal a void in your education. Some unsolicited advice: be careful using words like always or never. (October 24, 2016 at 2:08 pm)Truth_Love2016 Wrote:(October 23, 2016 at 5:26 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: "sane" is a reach for most people. Innocuous is not the same thing. Fuck off. And take your sorry piece of shit god with you. Quote:we've never observed New DNA information being introduced through genetic mutation or any other method. No one ever 'observed' your fucking god playing in the dirt to make man either, asswipe. (October 25, 2016 at 12:39 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:we've never observed New DNA information being introduced through genetic mutation or any other method. I did. Just one of the many advantages of being a kaiju. (October 24, 2016 at 2:37 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:(October 24, 2016 at 2:08 pm)Truth_Love2016 Wrote: [edit] HE GAVE HIS LIFE FOR US DONT YOU SEE!!!! He didn't die for us. He had a really bad weekend for your sins! Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni: "You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???" |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 7 Guest(s)