6 proofs that Satan is the winning the war against God (humor)

[Cinjin]

I find it 'funny' how an atheist does not believe in the God of the bible but some how have access to intimate details to the mind/thoughts of satan.

I find it 'funny' how a christian claims that the mind of god is unknowable and yet daily pisses out apologetics to explain the intimate details of his Bible.

[smax]

Importance? I'll tell ya what's important.

Or I would, but it's not important.

Here, just to make you feel good....

I am laughing at you.

Whatever get's the job done.

Or rather... you're having a discussion But hey, we're all having fun, right? That means everyone's a winner!

Are you?

Alas, another one so dead-set upon understanding, knowledge, faith... well, at least this one is goal-oriented

Alas, another one sooooooooo........... How do I put this..... Weird.

Is that fair?

I'm fine not talking, I much prefer to sing with my prey

So your now stalking me?

Yeah, if you call 25 years of service skimming....

Well, it's that... or skinny dipping.

Laser focus, huh?

I'm certainly better at speaking bullshit than he is... even a better philosopher, for what it's worth.

If you say so.

But I don't have what he has: renown.

Hmmm......

And he got that for being a biologist, a subject which he's contributed very well to.

Just so you know:

Biology is a natural science concerned with the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, evolution, distribution, and taxonomy.

Just saying.

Watching him in a debate, though?

* Violet Lilly Blossom cringes.

Plenty of other people share his career choice... but you don't hear about most of those people. While he's making 20K per speech, they're working year round for 2 to 4 times that (usually depending on how long they've been at it). Not everyone can be a scientific celebrity, yknow?

Precisely the point.

It's not about whether or not someone cares... it's about whether they're enjoying their use of their time or not

Ah yes, the philosopher in you finally comes out. Welcome to the discussion.

[Violet]

Here, just to make you feel good....

I'm always happy to have another laughing A laugh a day keeps monsters away!

Whatever get's the job done.

But ice cream melts: It's not a permanent solution! Especially when Summer keeps eating it.

Are you?

Why yes, I am a sexy lady having a good time. Now be a good boy, and buy me a drink

Alas, another one sooooooooo........... How do I put this..... Weird.

Is that fair?

I would consider weirdness a compliment... but considering that normality is so stupid: I consider my weirdness more as a worrying signal of homogeny.

Fairness is not involved, so I'm going to go with 'no'.

So your now stalking me?

No, I'm singing to you... I leave Ming to do the stalking.

Laser focus, huh?

Lasers aren't focused! They're just concentrated. LIKE JUICE!

If you say so.

My arsehole says so, and it has a mind of it's own, so I'm not comfortable saying it's me saying it's so.

When people ask who farted, it often answers them with 'Me!', and then they look accusingly at ME, and I give them the look of 'Hey dawg, it wasn't me!', because it's my asshole. DUH!

Hmmm......

A hard one for you, isn't it?

But: I guess that's how you like it. I'm not judging you, we don't do that judgement thing here.

Just so you know:

Biology is a natural science concerned with the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, evolution, distribution, and taxonomy.

Just saying.

Just saying... nothing? Because that's what I got out of that. I might take nothing to mean that you're amending my statement that he's a biologist with 'evolutionary', but that doesn't impact my statement at all, so I'm left with nothing again.

Maybe I could take nothing to mean that there aren't a lot of evolutionary biologists in the world, but since there are I'm lost again. Maybe you would have been better served to recognize this little gem: Mister Dawkins writes books... just about every famous scientist either wrote a book, or was credited with an awesome discovery or ten that were well publicized, and therefore became famous. Some of them, like Edison, didn't make these discoveries themselves, and were just able to bully the others away from the credit... with acute application of money

But then, we're still left with trying to pull everything from the something that is nothing, and that's silly as we could apply it to anything.

Not everyone can be a scientific celebrity, yknow?

Precisely the point.

Writing books helps, but why would I want to be a scientific celebrity? I could be a movie star, or I could be a porn star, or a cooking master... but we're left again asking: why would I want to be one of these?

I'm quite happy enough not being famous, regardless of how easily popularity comes to me. To be liked is better than to be known in my eyes, and hence I don't do any spectacular mass murderings of humans in a totally awesome manner . Are you suggesting I should start?

Ah yes, the philosopher in you finally comes out. Welcome to the discussion.

The philosopher in me is indeed attracted to women... but I cannot seem to find a discussion here. Is it in another thread? Must be. I'm gonna go look over there for a while, maybe a discussion will start here when I get back... or maybe you'll get your butt kicked about some more, I'm good with either

[smax]

I'm always happy to have another laughing A laugh a day keeps monsters away!

Just curious, is all your knowledge based on cartoons? Don't take offense, just asking.

Why yes, I am a sexy lady having a good time. Now be a good boy, and buy me a drink

Don't you think you've had enough for one day?

I would consider weirdness a compliment... but considering that normality is so stupid: I consider my weirdness more as a worrying signal of homogeny.

Interesting theory.

Fairness is not involved, so I'm going to go with 'no'.

Fair enough..... Ooops!

No, I'm singing to you... I leave Ming to do the stalking.

Should I do the whole Simon Cowell thing, or do you prefer nice?

Lasers aren't focused! They're just concentrated. LIKE JUICE!

I see, so you are an overly literal figuratist, huh?

My arsehole says so, and it has a mind of it's own, so I'm not comfortable saying it's me saying it's so.

When people ask who farted, it often answers them with 'Me!', and then they look accusingly at ME, and I give them the look of 'Hey dawg, it wasn't me!', because it's my asshole. DUH!

Wow! Could you warn me next time? I like to have my food completely digested before having my imagination tortured by Jigsaw.

A hard one for you, isn't it?

Not at all. I'm just used to a crowd that get's inference. That's all.

Worry not, however, I'm adjusting as we speak.

But: I guess that's how you like it. I'm not judging you, we don't do that judgement thing here.

Why do I not feel as if you speak for the group? Again, don't be offended, just asking.

Just saying... nothing? Because that's what I got out of that. I might take nothing to mean that you're amending my statement that he's a biologist with 'evolutionary', but that doesn't impact my statement at all, so I'm left with nothing again.

Maybe I could take nothing to mean that there aren't a lot of evolutionary biologists in the world, but since there are I'm lost again. Maybe you would have been better served to recognize this little gem: Mister Dawkins writes books... just about every famous scientist either wrote a book, or was credited with an awesome discovery or ten that were well publicized, and therefore became famous. Some of them, like Edison, didn't make these discoveries themselves, and were just able to bully the others away from the credit... with acute application of money

Like I said, I'm adjusting as we speak...

Dawkins has all the background to make intelligent observations about a variety of subjects, not the least of which is religion and it's ridiculous claims.

Your objection to him as a valuable contributor to the subject is baseless, and probably reflects your disdain for him moreso than it does your actual opinion.

In short, me thinks you no likey people that criticize Christianity (or religion in general).

Was that clear enough?

Writing books helps, but why would I want to be a scientific celebrity? I could be a movie star, or I could be a porn star, or a cooking master... but we're left again asking: why would I want to be one of these?

I'm quite happy enough not being famous, regardless of how easily popularity comes to me. To be liked is better than to be known in my eyes, and hence I don't do any spectacular mass murderings of humans in a totally awesome manner . Are you suggesting I should start?

Not at all. I'm just suggesting that you might want to show a little respect for the man's credentials.

That doesn't mean that you should like or agree with him. It just simply means that it's ridiculous to question his position as a legitimate contributor to the subject matter.

The philosopher in me is indeed attracted to women... but I cannot seem to find a discussion here. Is it in another thread? Must be. I'm gonna go look over there for a while, maybe a discussion will start here when I get back...

I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for any meaninful discussion to develop about Christianity. The nature of the beast (Christianity) is to suppress and discourage any believers from pursuing knowledge. Take it from a former member of the tribe.

No, on second thought, don't....

1 Timothy 6:20-21
O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,” for by professing it some have swerved from the faith. Grace be with you.

Nothing like sealing the covenant with propaganda. Have to admit, however, it works like a charm.

or maybe you'll get your butt kicked about some more, I'm good with either

You'll have to introduce me to this secret panel of qualified and impartial judges.

Love to meet em'.

[Violet]

Just curious, is all your knowledge based on cartoons? Don't take offense, just asking.

That, and my imagination. Why, where do you get your knowledge?

Don't you think you've had enough for one day?

No matter how much you stumble and such: you can never fall off of the floor!

Interesting theory.

I've got more... get this one: you're incapable of making a joke. I'm waiting, my dear

Fair enough..... Ooops!

Should I do the whole Simon Cowell thing, or do you prefer nice?

Already done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8el_P4yvfc

I prefer Florence.

I see, so you are an overly literal figuratist, huh?

Figuratively

Wow! Could you warn me next time? I like to have my food completely digested before having my imagination tortured by Jigsaw.

How do I warn you of something silent? You'll be dead before I have a chance to tell you to not breathe!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPrAuF2f_oI

Jigsaw's very straightforward with his tortures... I assure you: I can do better

Not at all. I'm just used to a crowd that get's inference. That's all.

Worry not, however, I'm adjusting as we speak.

You should try conference, everything's better in groups.

Like sex, and waffles!

Why do I not feel as if you speak for the group? Again, don't be offended, just asking.

Because you have a leader's instincts... which are often wrong. Like here.

I didn't say 'all of us', but rather: 'we'. Now, I could give you some bullshit about how there's a whole lot of people who agree with me... or I could teach you a quirk of the english language. But the latter sounds like a lot of work (can't teach the stupid, yknow?)... so I'm gonna feed you bullshit about how there's a whole lot of people who agree with me

I'm the boss.

Like I said, I'm adjusting as we speak...

I'M GIVING HER ALL SHE'S GOT, CAPTAIN!

Dawkins has all the background to make intelligent observations about a variety of subjects, not the least of which is religion and it's ridiculous claims.

All the background? Why you're right! He is a white Englishman... I retract all of my objections: he intelligently observes a variety of subjects, and is correct on all matters religious because it's ridiculous.

Your objection to him as a valuable contributor to the subject is baseless, and probably reflects your disdain for him moreso than it does your actual opinion.

In short, me thinks you no likey people that criticize Christianity (or religion in general).

Was that clear enough?

He's quite a valuable contributor to biology... he is quite not a valuable contributor to theology.

Maybe my objection to him as such comes from watching him flub up his 'debates' horribly... but you're right: it's probably baseless.

I criticize religion as well as any other hooker you might find here... and I count atheists among my friends (the larger portion of them, even). But if their criticism is terrible, I'll be among the first to tell them so

No, you'll have to speak slower, sonny... my old ears only pick up every other word you say.

Not at all. I'm just suggesting that you might want to show a little respect for the man's credentials.

That doesn't mean that you should like or agree with him. It just simply means that it's ridiculous to question his position as a legitimate contributor to the subject matter.

His credentials impact his arguments... how?

I question his position as "a legitimate contributor" to theology because of his previous attempts at doing so, and nothing else.

I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for any meaninful discussion to develop about Christianity. The nature of the beast (Christianity) is to suppress and discourage any believers from pursuing knowledge. Take it from a former member of the tribe.

No, on second thought, don't....

1 Timothy 6:20-21
O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,” for by professing it some have swerved from the faith. Grace be with you.

Nothing like sealing the covenant with propaganda. Have to admit, however, it works like a charm.

There's plenty of philosophical substance to Christianity, whether it has meaning or not would depend upon the individual.

The only thing 'wrong' with that quote is that it believes it's own knowledge to not be 'falsely called', introspection-lacking and all

Charms were always the worst laborers, right after women!

You'll have to introduce me to this secret panel of qualified and impartial judges.

Love to meet em'.

The only qualification is how talented you are, and impartial judges cannot exist subjectively.

I'd be disturbed if anything otherwise were claimed.

[The Grand Nudger]

If the story were actually true, it would be far more likely that god IS the devil. It's all too perfect. Drich himself admits that god needed man to "fall from grace." There you go - god shape-shifted into the devil and voila -- instant scapegoat.

He appears as the devil whenever he needs to and then fills in any gaps with stories about how the Devil is the boogeyman out to get everybody.




Meh, here in reality, silly stories about angry gods and their phony curses are of no consequence. Sheep are stupid, and should be eaten ... not listened to.

From nothing, nothing comes Cin. The devil -is- part and parcel of god in the mythos. The one cannot be separated from the other as it is merely an extension and offshoot of the source. Those things which the one wants and does are ultimately part and parcel of the things and plans that the other wants and does. Classic yin yang bullshit. Remember, ancient near -EASTERN- myth. Go a little farther afield and you'll be able to find gods and demigods that aren't part of each other, and actively fucking hate each other. This particular myth (the judeo-christian one) is just gaslighting writ large. Celestial division of labor. Ultimately, in the narrative, everyone (you..me, the devil and uncle Bob) is working for the same firm.

[Cinjin]

From nothing, nothing comes Cin. The devil -is- part and parcel of god in the mythos. The one cannot be separated from the other as it is merely an extension and offshoot of the source. Those things which the one wants and does are ultimately part and parcel of the things and plans that the other wants and does. Classic yin yang bullshit. Remember, ancient near -EASTERN- myth. Go a little farther afield and you'll be able to find gods and demigods that aren't part of each other, and actively fucking hate each other. This particular myth (the judeo-christian one) is just gaslighting writ large. Celestial division of labor. Ultimately, in the narrative, everyone (you..me, the devil and uncle Bob) is working for the same firm.

A touch verbose, but yes, I'm in agreement.

[smax]

That, and my imagination.

Cartoons, and your imagination. Nice!

But, yeah, Richard Dawkins is a joke. Him and his measly Doctor of Science degree from some obscure school called Oxford, and his stupid God Delusion book who no one, except for the 2 million people who've bought, even gives a shit about.

I still can't believe Oxford made Dawkins a public spokesman. And why numerous organizations are willing to pay this man $20,000 to speak is beyond me.

I'd much prefer someone like Pocahontas or Shrek!

Why, where do you get your knowledge?

Just a little place I like to call reality. Nothing that would interest you.

I've got more... get this one: you're incapable of making a joke. I'm waiting, my dear

Oh, you are an authority on humor? Cool! Can you provide a link to all your great, hilarious works? Or even some for that matter?

How do I warn you of something silent? You'll be dead before I have a chance to tell you to not breathe!

I was referring to the description itself, but let's not let a little thing like context ruin what has been an otherwise delightfully incoherent conversation.

Jigsaw's very straightforward with his tortures... I assure you: I can do better

To this I have no doubt.

You should try conference, everything's better in groups.

Like sex, and waffles!

Even in groups, conversations are much more fun and entertaining when people get inference.

Saves a lot of boring and unnecessary explanation.

I didn't say 'all of us', but rather: 'we'. Now, I could give you some bullshit about how there's a whole lot of people who agree with me... or I could teach you a quirk of the english language. But the latter sounds like a lot of work (can't teach the stupid, yknow?)... so I'm gonna feed you bullshit about how there's a whole lot of people who agree with me

I don't read or comprehend so well with my helmet on.

I'm the boss.

Boss, as in the final obstacle between the hero and the princess, right?

That sounds about right.

He's quite a valuable contributor to biology... he is quite not a valuable contributor to theology.

Translation: he doesn't promote what you like so he sucks.

Maybe my objection to him as such comes from watching him flub up his 'debates' horribly... but you're right: it's probably baseless.

Completely subjective observation, one poorly supported. The guy is so terrible they keep asking him to come back and keep paying him handsomely to do so.

On a related note: you don't hear about a lot of Atheist winning debates with Theists, and the reason for that is obvious: the vast majority of the world are Theists.

It's like trying to argue with a 4 year old about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, or the Fairy God Mother. It's just not the right time.

People used to believe in Zues. It would have been nearly impossible to win a debate opposing that belief during that period.

Now, any idiot could win that debate against someone of superior education.

It's all about timing, and now is not the right time.

I criticize religion as well as any other hooker you might find here... and I count atheists among my friends (the larger portion of them, even). But if their criticism is terrible, I'll be among the first to tell them so

Well, you have yet to make any such case here. You just don't find the material funny, which is fine.

His credentials impact his arguments... how?

He's an evolutionary biologist who opposes the views of creationists. Pretty obvious how his credentials impact his arguments.



You are right, it's the unintended humor that hits hardest.

Me thinks you need to think more.

I question his position as "a legitimate contributor" to theology because of his previous attempts at doing so, and nothing else.

The man wrote a book about god that sold 2 million copies. Any other theories?

The only thing 'wrong' with that quote is that it believes it's own knowledge to not be 'falsely called', introspection-lacking and all

People are so quick to excuse Christianity in areas where they would quickly condemn cults for doing the same thing.

This is definitely one of those areas.

[The Grand Nudger]

A touch verbose

LOL, as always. Practice, practice, practice.

[Violet]

LOL, as always. Practice, practice, practice.

No matter how much you practice in LOL: there's no carrying those feeders without me

Hell... you'll be pressed to do so with my help TT__TT