The Jesus Freaks Will Hate This

[Huggy Bear]

Odd, because he's the one that issued the warning...case closed then.

[Thumpalumpacus]

What's really funny is that this instance obviously stuck out in his head because he found it nearly instantly. From over a year ago in a thread that only had like 30 posts. Saying he's wrong is so painful he has PTSD about it and can recall each instance with perfect clarity.

^^^^This^^^^

---

This is getting really painful. I'm always at that crossroads with a theist: do know they are being dishonest, or do they really not understand at all?

It's clear to me that Buggy doesn't understand that this here's a Tex-Mex party, and he's the piñata.

Somebody's gonna knock the candy outta him before too long.

And that meltdown will be glorious.

---

You guys seem to be able to dish out the insults, but whine when YOUR OWN words are quoted back...pathetic.

I have not once complained about your name-calling, because I don't give two shits rubbed together what a narcissistic, febrile moron thinks of me or my opinions.

Quote that. I double-dog dare you. Put that in your sig.

Oh, I almost forgot: Dumbfuck.

---

it isn't out of context, faf stated I don't know science. My sig is in total relation to that statement, showing he's the one that doesn't know "science".

And where is that context presented in the quote?!?

---

The point, which you miss Huggy, is that you've purposefully omitted the rest of the context where FaF admitted a mistake following clarification of the post/question you initially posited.

Worse, he doesn't provide context within the text of the quote making it impossible for anyone who has not read the relevant threads to know what the context is.

And even worse: he's yammering about context, when he thinks that one sentence is not related at all to another sentence, even in the same paragraph. "Period, not comma", remember?

---

I don't even read Huggy's posts anymore.

I just skip ahead to where everyone else rips him a new asshole.

At this point, he's looking like a sprinkler.

[Huggy Bear]

I have not once complained about your name-calling, because I don't give two shits rubbed together what a narcissistic, febrile moron thinks of me or my opinions.

Really?
http://atheistforums.org/thread-30615-po...#pid848277

Also, "Muppet" is getting old. Can't you show any creativity at all, or have you run out of insults? Shit, this really is like having a whack at a punching bag. What a scrub. You definitely need to up your game ... you wouldn't make a pimple on a real troll's ass.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Really? injustice is a way of life for me baby.

[robvalue]

[Thumpalumpacus]

I have not once complained about your name-calling, because I don't give two shits rubbed together what a narcissistic, febrile moron thinks of me or my opinions.

Really?
http://atheistforums.org/thread-30615-po...#pid848277

Also, "Muppet" is getting old. Can't you show any creativity at all, or have you run out of insults? Shit, this really is like having a whack at a punching bag. What a scrub. You definitely need to up your game ... you wouldn't make a pimple on a real troll's ass.

I was speaking of complaining to the mods. Sorry if you're so stupid you couldn't get the, ahem, context ... muppet.

Yes, I will complain about your boring repetition of that, because I at least expect a little creativity from you. Why are you such a disappointment? Why can't you think of anything better?

You're such a programmatic thinker, so predictable, so uninspired. Your schtick is a combination of mental masturbation, self-righteous gloating, and unjustified pride.

So yes, in that sense, I will complain about your terribly boring inability to actually swat someone. But I can promise you that I will never report you insulting me to a mod ... ever.

I will simply break out a few more words and have everyone here laughing at you.

Dumbfuck.

[Huggy Bear]

You're right, the context on which you made this statement is crystal clear.

I have not once complained about your name-calling, because I don't give two shits rubbed together what a narcissistic, febrile moron thinks of me or my opinions.

Quote that. I double-dog dare you. Put that in your sig.

My sig privileges have been permanently revoked.....

[Cyberman]

Odd, because he's the one that issued the warning...case closed then.

Fine. It may be of interest that he wasn't the person who filed the report, however.

[Joods]

Being relatively new here, I seem to be noticing a pattern in the threads where you are involved Huggy. So as to not get any mixed messages from my comment, I'm merely pointing out the pattern is ONLY in the threads I have read in the three short days I've been here. So I can only speculate as to any other threads you have participated in. But why, and this is my question, does it appear that you have the terrible habit of hijacking every thread you comment on? This thread isn't even on topic any more. Matter of fact, it's changed topic several times now.

I'm guessing, and again, this is mere speculation, that this sort of tactic helps you draw attention away from having to answer any questions pertaining to the topic on hand when you craziness has been called into question. It would also appear that you enjoy being in the spotlight, as long as it fits into your terms and conditions. You seem to me, to be a very confused person.

That is all... back to my reading now.

[Huggy Bear]

Being relatively new here, I seem to be noticing a pattern in the threads where you are involved Huggy. So as to not get any mixed messages from my comment, I'm merely pointing out the pattern is ONLY in the threads I have read in the three short days I've been here. So I can only speculate as to any other threads you have participated in. But why, and this is my question, does it appear that you have the terrible habit of hijacking every thread you comment on? This thread isn't even on topic any more. Matter of fact, it's changed topic several times now.

I'm guessing, and again, this is mere speculation, that this sort of tactic helps you draw attention away from having to answer any questions pertaining to the topic on hand when you craziness has been called into question. It would also appear that you enjoy being in the spotlight, as long as it fits into your terms and conditions. You seem to me, to be a very confused person.

That is all... back to my reading now.

If you've read this thread and came to the conclusion that I'm the one that took the tread off topic, I really don't have much to say to you....
The discussion was about whether or not Jesus was married.
http://atheistforums.org/thread-31826-po...#pid886968

The thing is, there is proof the above didn't exist, If you're claiming something in the Bible didn't exist, prove it.

Yeah, you shift that burden of proof like nobody will notice, Huggy!

How about a worldwide flood, since there's plenty of contradictory evidence, geologically speaking, for that? Oh, and the resurrection? No possible way that could happen! I mean, I'm not required to do this at all, given the aforementioned shifting of the burden of proof, but it is a relatively trivial question to answer.

As you can see, I'm still on subject, and you also see who takes the conversation off topic.

And this one is good also,
"Huggy condones rape!"
"no wait, I slightly misremembered what he said."
as if accusing someone of condoning rape is a minor mistake...

I actually wouldn't be surprised if this is the case: I remember one of my first interactions with Huggy was on a certain rape-related issue in the bible, and his entire position was that no rape happened because the actual word "rape" was never used in the text, despite the context making it very clear what was happening.

Selective, ridiculous over-literalism is kinda his deal.

Now THAT is a bald faced lie.
We already know you have a selective memory, how about providing the link to support to that claim?

Actually, I did misremember slightly: we weren't talking about rape, but slavery. The word "slave" does not appear, and therefore it cannot be slavery.

Incidentally, you really shouldn't have challenged me on this point, because I'm having genuine trouble picking between instances of you using this exact same argument whenever it's convenient for you. Over multiple topics, in fact: Here's you asserting that the bible doesn't say you can own people as property, because it uses the word "possession" not "property." And here's you, in one of your most ridiculous moments, asserting that a particular homeopathic fraud can't be religious in nature because it's only called the "Jesus Shot," and the word "Christ" is never used.

You actually made the situation far, far worse for yourself than if you'd just shut the hell up and accepted your own idiotic behavior. And what was that about me lying? I found three references to that exact argument coming from you: I guess you were the one lying here, eh?

As you can see, He once again goes way off topic.

---

Going back through the thread, I came across something Ironic.

U mad?

The mating call of the troll.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-31826-po...#pid889197

Ahh... I'm afraid you didn't phrase your answer in the form of a question... so...

Hypocrite,
You're lucky I can no longer use sig's, in a way I guess that's protecting you guys from yourselves.