RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (6) < 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 >   
  Topic: Thoughts on Hell, for Kevin Miller's new Film, Hellbound< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3353
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,11:42   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Mar. 24 2011,10:17)
OgreMkV: I find it laughable that you would quote J-Dog and then ask if †I'm going to discuss this subject in an adult manner. Clearly discussing things in an adult manner isn't a requirement to be part of this group. But to answer your question simply, yes. I don't need two millstones around my neck.

I find it laughable that you are not engaged in discussion on a discussion forum.

I find it laughable that you are asking a group of mostly atheists about who you should go to for information on religious psychology (most modern web browsers have this thing called a 'search bar').

I find it laughable that you claim to want an adult conversation, yet have not yet begun to do so.  (In practice not concept.  I do think it's possible to have an adult conversation about unicorns using the criteria I described originally).

I find it laughable that you have pledged to not lie about this production, yet refuse to admit you lied about your previous production.

I find it laughable that your religion must base its entire existence (not to mention recruitment efforts) on lies.

I find lots of things laughable... yet I'm still willing to have the conversation, I haven't found anyone on from the fundamentalist Christian side who is.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
J-Dog



Posts: 4369
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,11:54   

Kevin - And you still haven't discussed why we or anyone, should treat "hell" any more seriously than we do "leprechauns and unicorns".


Most Sincerely,

J-Dog (aka: Millstone)

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Steverino



Posts: 411
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,11:55   

http://www.alivingdog.com/Dispelled.html

Dispelled: An Interview with Expelled †Writer Kevin Miller
by Gord Wilson


 
Quote
To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.


Kevin, my impression is, you're not as smart as you think you are.

--------------
- Born right the first time.
- Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers.
- It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,11:56   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Mar. 24 2011,16:17)
OgreMkV: I find it laughable that you would quote J-Dog and then ask if †I'm going to discuss this subject in an adult manner. Clearly discussing things in an adult manner isn't a requirement to be part of this group. But to answer your question simply, yes. I don't need two millstones around my neck.

Awwwwwwwwww. Kevvy Wevvy is having a snit.

1) Talk about something serious and you might get serious conversation.

2) Don't lie, misrepresent, and slander innocent folks and you might get people treat you nicely.

You've already failed 2), you're failing 1).

Surely a Big Important Movie Maker like you knows how to contact Dan Dennett (for one example). Hell*, even I know how to contact Dan Dennett, and I'm a total nobody. I'm sure Prof Dennett has a few ideas about who you could contact. How about Hector Avalos? There you go, two names for you. No charge. Two names you would already know had you bothered to educate yourself beyond the "Fundy Basement" level.

And yet you come to a minor website full of nasty meanies (and nobodies as you are fond of reminding us) when you could pick up the phone/contact serious people like Wes etc individually. Gosh, it's almost like your claimed motives aren't anything resembling your real ones....curiouser and curiouser. Could it be you are in fact a disingenuous, sanctimonious, dishonest, intellectually vacuous, pious fraud? Oh wait, yes it could.

As for "discussing things in an adult manner", why do you assume you are worthy of that level of engagement? You've yet to demonstrate you can do it yourself. Remember "Expelled"? We do. A Riefenstahl-esque piece of misleading propaganda, chock full of lies and misrepresentations if there ever was one. Hell**, even old Leni had some talent, you....clearly not so much.

Now grow either a spine, or some reasonable sense that your former production was grossly and deliberately misleading (but I repeat myself), and then you might be worthy of some tiny scintilla of serious treatment. Until then...TEH MOCKERY! (Which is fun, sorry)

I may find suitable LOLcats when I find the time.

Louis

*Oops I did it again!

**And again! Naughty naughty Louis.

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,11:59   

Quote (Steverino @ Mar. 24 2011,17:55)
[SNIP]

Kevin, my impression is, you're not as smart as you think you are.

Your impression of Kevin. It is va-ah-AH-stly better than mine is.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4369
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,11:59   

Quote
Kevin, my impression is, you're not as smart as you think you are.



FTW!

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,12:09   

Quote (Steverino @ Mar. 24 2011,12:55)
http://www.alivingdog.com/Dispelled.html

Dispelled: An Interview with Expelled †Writer Kevin Miller
by Gord Wilson


Quote
To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.


Kevin, my impression is, you're not as smart as you think you are.

Quote
If evolution is true, you could not know that it's true because your brain is nothing but chemicals. Think about that.


think about that Kevin

what a tard.  wants to be kent hovind.  yet comes here asking for "sources"

bwaahahahahaha

no folks, he aint done lying yet!

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,12:10   

Quote
. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of.


LOL @ KEVIN.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,12:13   

I wonder if Kevvo is capable or willing to discuss his claim that the existence of reason, and the human capacity for it, somehow proves the existence of his deity?

That at least strikes me as a serious topic, unlike hell (or its lesser cousin, heck). Ok so it's a well refuted claim, but I can just about see my way to believing Kevvo might not be aware of that. Reading is clearly not his strong suit.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3353
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,12:38   

It's actually kind of surprising that "this guy" would go that route.

The normal fundy tactic is to deny that reason is the only tool we have for figuring things out.  Instead, they also claim 'revelation' as a method for figuring things out.

So, umm... what's-your-face... do you deny revelation and accept reason as the only method for finding out things about the universe

-or-

Do you accept revelation and all the problems, misconceptions, confusion, and interpretation problems that it causes... not to mention that there is no evidence that revelation comes from God, any god, or anywhere other than the fallible mind of a single human?

Which is it please.  Once we know that, then we'll know exactly how to discuss things regarding 'hell' with you.

I mean, if you think reason is totally useless, then there's nothing anyone can ever do to help you.  Although I will insist that you destroy any tools developed by reason (unless you are a hypocrite).

If you think reason is OK and revelation has problems, then we should easily be able to convince you that 'hell' only exists in the minds and philosophy of Christians and the only bearing it has on the universe is how it makes others act (which, of course, is the entire point, to control other people).

* Yes, there is snark in here.  If you refuse to consider the question because of the snark, then you are much too thin-skinned to hang around here.  If you refuse to consider appropriate questions because they were asked in a 'mean' way, then I would encourage you to return to your church and stay there.  The real world is much to violent for you.

However, if you choose to respond to the questions, answer them, with approrpiate citations, then we can have a real discussion and the level of snark will probably drop.

The choice is up to you.  Your actions totally determine how you will be treated.  Respect is earned, not given.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10325
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,12:39   

Quote (Steverino @ Mar. 24 2011,11:55)
http://www.alivingdog.com/Dispelled.html

Dispelled: An Interview with Expelled †Writer Kevin Miller
by Gord Wilson


Quote
To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.


Kevin, my impression is, you're not as smart as you think you are.

Just because it works desn't mean it's working.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4369
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,13:14   

Yo Kev!  I got a guy for you to talk to...

Pastor Doubts Hell - Gets Expelled / Fired

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,13:33   

Thanks for the tip, J-Dog (re: Pastor expelled for doubting hell). I knew I came to the right place.

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,13:38   

As far as this argument goes:
Quote
To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.
I've heard plenty of you mock it, but no one refute it.

  
JohnW



Posts: 2322
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,13:58   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Mar. 24 2011,11:38)
As far as this argument goes:
 
Quote
To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.
I've heard plenty of you mock it, but no one refute it.

If we (well, you) don't trust the outcome of reason, how do you propose we go about refuting this?  Wait for revelation?

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,14:00   

Quote
I've heard plenty of you mock it, but no one refute it.


no, and you won't, moron



Why don't you count to potato, or fuck off?

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,14:01   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Mar. 24 2011,13:33)
Thanks for the tip, J-Dog (re: Pastor expelled for doubting hell). I knew I came to the right place.

Well, if that is the kind of stuff you are looking for, you might look up Carlton Pearson (wiki), out of Tulsa. †He also subscribes to universal reconciliation and it got him declared a heretic.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. †We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,14:02   

Quote (JohnW @ Mar. 24 2011,14:58)
Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Mar. 24 2011,11:38)
As far as this argument goes:
Quote
To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.
I've heard plenty of you mock it, but no one refute it.

If we (well, you) don't trust the outcome of reason, how do you propose we go about refuting this? †Wait for revelation?

maybe he is talking about "raisins"?

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,14:06   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Mar. 24 2011,14:00)
Why don't you count to potato, or fuck off?



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. †We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3353
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,14:12   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Mar. 24 2011,13:38)
As far as this argument goes:
 
Quote
To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.
I've heard plenty of you mock it, but no one refute it.

It's not nonsensical, your 'argument' is nonsensical.

1) Dawkins uses reason to argue against God being a good thing.
2) If he used reason, then he disproved his own point.

Which of those makes no sense?  (hint, it's not the first one)

Why don't you run through the logic of how you arrived at the conclusion that using reason disproves a conclusion based on... well... reason.

While you are at it, you might want to read my post about other methods of knowing (of which there aren't any) and answer that question as well.

So far, I've seen several questions asked of you, but you refuse to answer.  So, Louis and J-Dog are correct, if you won't talk as an adult... all we're left with is humor.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,14:14   

Quote (JohnW @ Mar. 24 2011,19:58)
Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Mar. 24 2011,11:38)
As far as this argument goes:
Quote
To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.
I've heard plenty of you mock it, but no one refute it.

If we (well, you) don't trust the outcome of reason, how do you propose we go about refuting this? †Wait for revelation?

There may be some grammatical confusion somewhere in there. Kevin, could you please rephrase this so everyone (including non-US citizens) can get a feel of what you mean? I'm sorry but I feel there's something in there I don't get, because it makes no sense to me...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,14:20   

If Dawkins is right... about evolution...
and evolution rewards understanding reality, planning (frog leading fly to hit it, Komodo dragon waiting for tourists), etc....
it would seem that evolution would not support reason only if the world itself were not reasonable.

Do you think there are "Rules of Right Reason" that are independent of the world? Can you mention one?

--------------
Iím referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
Iím not an evolutionist, Iím a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
Henry J



Posts: 4115
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,15:00   

When a paragraph is self-refuting, adding an additional refutation to it would be redundant.

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,15:11   

Quote
Kevin: To me, something like The God Delusion †is a really good challenge to think through what I believe in and why do I believe it, and ask myself the big questions. Essentially, if Dawkins is right, the very tool he used to form his argument, which is reason, we have absolutely no reason to trust the outcome of. So his argument has destroyed the tool he used to create the argument. So itís nonsensical.


A problem with this argument (among a few I might add), Kevin, is that it assumes that tools have qualities requiring trust as opposed to parameters in which they can be validly operated. Why would you assume such? Does a hammer or a saw require trust? No, they require training and skill to use and some idea of why the tool would be useful for a given task. Reasoning/logic is no different - it is a tool for determining whether a given person's thought process or concept accurately holds to a given set of rules. The problem many creationists have with the concept of reason is they presume reason defines the rules. It doesn't. Repeatability, consistency, and predictability define the rules and those rules we refer to as "reality".

So in essence, your problem with Dawkin's argument is that you don't think that his tool can be used reliably to assess the rules that make up your reality. Basically that's like arguing that hammers aren't valid tools because you believe that milk should make a good nail. †

Hate to break it to you, Kevin, but that would be your problem, not his.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed. †Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10325
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,16:08   

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/comment....#

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Henry J



Posts: 4115
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2011,16:54   

Not to mention that the claim that if we can't trust arguments based on reason, then we wouldn't be able to trust that argument, either, since it's allegedly based on reason.

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2011,00:52   

My thought process: If what we refer to as reason is nothing but the product of chance + necessity, then the outcome of our reasoning process couldn't be anything more than the same--a product of chance plus necessity. Therefore, the things we refer to as thoughts and arguments are of no more consequence than than the process in our body that manufactures insulin. I'm not saying that's how I think. I just see it as the logical consequence of an atheistic point of view. Put another way: If chance + necessity are the only forces at work in the universe shaping life and everything else we see around us (another way of saying random mutation plus natural selection), you can't sneak anything else in and pretend that the thoughts in your brain are a product of anything that would give them significance beyond what you ascribe to them. So why give credence to them? Why feel passionately about them?

I guess my point is, I hear a lot of people espousing an atheistic point of view but very people actually living out the logical consequences of that point of view. Even Will Provine, who has done as good a job as any of following things through to their logical conclusions, does not seem to live according to his espoused worldview.

But I'm off topic. This thread is supposed to be about hell.

  
k.e..



Posts: 3073
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2011,01:52   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Mar. 25 2011,08:52)
My thought process: If what we refer to as reason is nothing but the product of chance + necessity, then the outcome of our reasoning process couldn't be anything more than the same--a product of chance plus necessity. Therefore, the things we refer to as thoughts and arguments are of no more consequence than than the process in our body that manufactures insulin. I'm not saying that's how I think. I just see it as the logical consequence of an atheistic point of view. Put another way: If chance + necessity are the only forces at work in the universe shaping life and everything else we see around us (another way of saying random mutation plus natural selection), you can't sneak anything else in and pretend that the thoughts in your brain are a product of anything that would give them significance beyond what you ascribe to them. So why give credence to them? Why feel passionately about them?

I guess my point is, I hear a lot of people espousing an atheistic point of view but very people actually living out the logical consequences of that point of view. Even Will Provine, who has done as good a job as any of following things through to their logical conclusions, does not seem to live according to his espoused worldview.

But I'm off topic. This thread is supposed to be about hell.

Your reasoning maybe the product of improbability and need leading to your perception of an existential angst.

But even a dog can figure out how to cross a busy road road without being hit by a car, many however get hit.

Your powers of reasoning don't seem to be much use why don't you take up something more suitable?

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror" DAVE TARD
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2163
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2011,02:18   

[quote=kevinmillerxi,Mar. 24 2011,22:52][/quote]
†  
Quote
My thought process: If what we refer to as reason is nothing but the product of chance + necessity, then the outcome of our reasoning process couldn't be anything more than the same--a product of chance plus necessity. Therefore, the things we refer to as thoughts and arguments are of no more consequence than than the process in our body that manufactures insulin. †


Yeah... and?

†  
Quote
If chance + necessity are the only forces at work in the universe shaping life and everything else we see around us (another way of saying random mutation plus natural selection), you can't sneak anything else in and pretend that the thoughts in your brain are a product of anything that would give them significance beyond what you ascribe to them. So why (1)give credence to them? (2)Why feel passionately about them?



1) Because they work.
2) Because we're wired that way.

†  
Quote
I guess my point is, I hear a lot of people espousing an atheistic point of view but very people actually living out the logical consequences of that point of view. Even Will Provine, who has done as good a job as any of following things through to their logical conclusions, does not seem to live according to his espoused worldview.

But I'm off topic. This thread is supposed to be about hell.


Okay, that was sort of English... are you saying nihilism is the only logical consequence of atheism?

We're still social animals, and subject to the drives and reactions and values that helped us survive as such. †

Just because we don't see the point in believing in your imaginary friend doesn't mean we can't love our families. Can you not grasp that?

As for "reason", again: because it works! The volcano blew because magma forced its way through the earth's crust, not because we didn't sacrifice a virgin.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2011,03:59   

Quote (fnxtr @ Mar. 25 2011,02:18)
I hear a lot of people espousing an atheistic point of view but very people actually living out the logical consequences of that point of view.

Kevin,
If by that you mean a random spree of murder and mayhem whenever the mood strikes, then, well, why don't we meet up some time and I can tell you all about it?

Seems to me the people who should know best about "logical consequences" and hell are the child abusing priests and yet they still do it.

Perhaps it's because in your religion you can be forgiven at the drop of a hat? So "hell" is something for non-believers, whatever the believer themselves has done.

So stick it up your fundament, liar boy.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
  174 replies since Mar. 23 2011,12:47 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (6) < 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]