Aug 29 - Bill Nye The Science Guy Rips On American's Who Teach Creationism To Children

most viewed right now
 172
Image(s) inside Dec 16 - Virginia woman killed by her pit bulls in ‘grisly mauling’
56 comments
@news
most viewed right now
 125
NBA Isiah Thomas Says His Family was Worse than Lavar Ball "He Used to Rob Eve..
31 comments
@sports
most viewed right now
 117
Image(s) inside Uncle Murda Comments On Chinx's Killer Who Is Linked To Him!
72 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 68
 Image(s) inside 50 cent Ex likes photo of his shooter Hommo on IG
13 comments
@hiphop

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

Props Slaps
 5 years ago '11        #221
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
[quote=Dark Bunny Lord;24472339]Good then you now officially showed you are not worth anyones time if you can't even take the time to read the things you're disagreeing with in their entirety. That says a lot about you.

 Kadillac87 said:
Here goes the website:

Thousand of more just like it. Same verses every time. Taken out of context with no mention to the whole story. It's like showing A Time to k!ll and only showing Samuel L Jackson saying "Yes I think they should die, and I hope they burn in hell" If you just look at that, you might think, that guy is a pretty cruel guy. But when you look at the whole movie, you see he is justified in feeling that way.[/qoute] Or maybe, just maybe I opened my bible. Let's see, opening it up now and... gasp, those verses are still all there.


Again you are justifying murder for the crime of insulting someone. You are a terrible human being if that is what you consider justice.

Again, if the best you can come up with is might makes right then I'm done with you. If this was justified then why don't we just k!ll people for speeding? How about jaywalking? Shoplifting, a.ssault, lieing to an officer, parking in a handicapped zone, parking in a unloading zone, etc, etc, etc. Because we realize the death penalty is reserved only for very serious crimes. "Looking at" or "touching" something is NOT a crime worthy of death, how twisted do are you to believe that this they deserved to die for that?
Also the U.S. military doesn't sentence anyone to death for touching something they shouldn't touch that harms no one or looking at something their not supposed to look at, nor are they an ALL POWERFUL BEING with infinite options at their fingertips.

Yes see 2, why don't we k!ll people for jaywalking?

I'm sorry but this is horsesh*t. God has INFINITE POWER and you are justifying him k!lling children for something they didn't do? That's nonsense and you know it, if you're going to grant that and call it good then you have to say the women smoking crack is good despite the harm she's doing to her baby as God would be the mother (ie the one doing damage to the innocent) in this case.
So if you want to defend this you have to liken God to a pregnant women doing crack and say this women is good, is that what you're really doing?

Take a biology class idiot, removing a child from a pregnant women is not taking away a blessing, it's taking away an normal act of biology. There is no "bargain" stated that you needed to believe and worship Yahweh to have children, if that where the case then here the fu*k did all the non-believers or worshipers of other God's come from? Last time I checked pregnancy isn't something limited to Christians.


All powerful God can't find his way around moats and gates... and I'm the one that's ignorant of scripture. I don't even know what to say to that, I mean clearly you didn't read what you just typed before you hit enter.


I've read the entire damn book, I know you're going to lie and continue to insist I haven't, but you've clearly shown you have little to no intellect (especially no number 7 where you claimed an all powerful being that could create the entire universe in a mere 6 days could be thwarted by moats and gates).
Keep building strawmen though, I'm sure at least you will believe your accusations with how well you've defended your points thus far. The rest of us will laugh at the crazy poorly constructed drivel seeping out of you.
You read the whole book, but yet you try to say the cities in Ezekiel and Isaiah are two different cities? Come on, son. Who you trying to fool? Either you didn't read the whole book or you're purposefully trying to mislead to bolster your own viewpoint. I skimmed what you typed again. Why waste time discussing the Bible with people who clearly didn't read it? I didn't say God was thwarted by moates and gates. Again, if you read the Bible like you claim, you would easily know what I was referring to.

We're all adults here, no need to lie. If you read the whole book, answer me this question. Why did you try to make it seem that Ezekiel and Isaiah were referring to multiple cities, instead of one, Babylon?

Now here's where you say you're done, won't return, and insult me because you can't come up with a logical answer to show did read it and wasn't purposefully trying to be misleading.
 09-04-2012, 02:06 AM         #222
Dark Bunny Lord 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
You read the whole book, but yet you try to say the cities in Ezekiel and Isaiah are two different cities? Come on, son. Who you trying to fool? Either you didn't read the whole book or you're purposefully trying to mislead to bolster your own viewpoint. I skimmed what you typed again. Why waste time discussing the Bible with people who clearly didn't read it? I didn't say God was thwarted by moates and gates. Again, if you read the Bible like you claim, you would easily know what I was referring to.

We're all adults here, no need to lie. If you read the whole book, answer me this question. Why did you try to make it seem that Ezekiel and Isaiah were referring to multiple cities, instead of one, Babylon?

Now here's where you say you're done, won't return, and insult me because you can't come up with a logical answer to show did read it and wasn't purposefully trying to be misleading.
When did I ever say they where two different cities? Again, STOP building strawmen, it only makes you look more desperate.
Also you continue to insist I didn't read it, fine, I'll insist that you actually worship the devil. See I can make wild baseless a.ssumptions to =D

Actually what you said originally was that God was merely showing them what would happen, not taking a part in it. Then you back-peddle and say God was going to smash the walls and dry the moats, allowing for the murdering rapists that he commanded to come on in and do their thing.


Rather than continuing to argue and hear you dodge points and try to justify blatant murder I'll simply run down what you seem think was Good law and thus if it was good would certainly hold no opposition to it being met again aye?

1. If anyone breaks any law they deserve the death penalty. This even includes menial things like jaywalking.
2. It should be law that only the Christian God may be worshied, if a citizen is found worshiping a different God then refer to law 1.
3. If someone warns you not to do something and you do it, you shall be treated as if you broke the law given the consequences of rule 1 and the executioner is not to be held accountable for their aciton was good and thus lawful.
and according to you, all these are good. Nice to know you want to justify the insane theocracy that led humanity through things like the crusades and Spanish Inquisition.

I mean for fu*ks sake man are you listening to what you're defending? I could point out a passage where God is froloking through a field of blood that ran up to his knee's filled with the floating corpses of new born infants as he sucked the marrow from their bones and sung a jolley tune and your response would be "see you're taking it out of context, he warned those infants not to go in that field" as if somehow that would make the act any less evil. Here's a hint, I don't give a sh*t if he warned people not to do something, warning someone not to do something IS NOT justification to k!ll them. You tried using the military example, guess what the military does when someone doesn't shine their shoes right or hell even abandones the military? I'll give you a hint, it isn't k!lling them and this is from human beings who DO NOT claim the be perfect or all good as opposed to the God you're defending who not only claims to be perfect and good but also has INFINITE optios to deal with situations if he's ominipotent... and yet his best choice time and time again seems to be "herp derp I'll just fu*king k!ll it. I mean what else would a loving deity do? Resolve it peacefully? Ha, what a laugh".

Now go ahead, say whatever you want to justify the continued blatant murder in the bible but I'll drop this morality topic after this because you're clearly going to just twist and turn rather than provide ANY good reasons to show how these acts are not evil (again resorting to might makes right, and he's God so he can do whatever he wants and it's good).



If you actually want to return to the main point, the one of if creationism should be taught in school, I'd be glad to continue from there but I'm through with this tangent you spinned us off on in an attempt to avoid staying on topic.
 5 years ago '11        #223
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Dark Bunny Lord said:
When did I ever say they where two different cities?
 Dark Bunny Lord said:
7. Isaiah 13:15-18, God commands his people to literally go into a city and slaughter everyone specifically noting to cut up peoples babies in front of them and then r*pe their wives.
8. Ezekiel 9:5-7, Oh look another city where God commands his people to go in to a city and k!ll all the men, women, and children sparing only those with a marked forehead.

Explain why you said "Oh look another city" if you knew both verses refer to the same city. Does another not mean additional anymore? Answer it and I will stop skimming through your posts. It's clear to see you were saying they were two different cities. It shows your ignorance of the subject matter or you intention to deceive. If either is not the case, I will gladly read what you have to say.


Last edited by Kadillac87; 09-04-2012 at 08:38 AM..
 09-04-2012, 10:13 AM         #224
Dark Bunny Lord 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
Explain why you said "Oh look another city" if you knew both verses refer to the same city. Does another not mean additional anymore? Answer it and I will stop skimming through your posts. It's clear to see you were saying they were two different cities. It shows your ignorance of the subject matter or you intention to deceive. If either is not the case, I will gladly read what you have to say.
It's awesome, you sit here and dodge points, don't acknowledge counters, and continue to move the flagpost and change the topic whenever your proven wrong on something, then you find one thing where the same city is mentioned twice and go "AH HAH, GOT YA. You mentioned God commanding murder and r*pe in the same city" with a smug face as if it's some great victory on proving your point on how good God is.
Being the better man, ie one that will actually acknowledge your point instead of dodging it I'll explain. I said so because I was simply pulling the verses from my bookmarks (not a website as you seem to continue to insist you know I'm doing despite not knowing me at all) and didn't spend the time reading the entire chapter all over again (and before you build another strawmen no, this does not mean I haven't read it, if that was the case my bookmarks would not exist) just so you could go "nah see murder and r*pe are ok when God commands it".

So I answered that, now you answer my law question. Do you honestly think that k!lling someone is ok as long as you warn them not to do something first? Because you seem to be making that EXACT claim for God.


Last edited by Dark Bunny Lord; 09-04-2012 at 10:23 AM..
 09-04-2012, 11:04 AM         #225
Dark Bunny Lord 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
Explain why you said "Oh look another city" if you knew both verses refer to the same city. Does another not mean additional anymore? Answer it and I will stop skimming through your posts. It's clear to see you were saying they were two different cities. It shows your ignorance of the subject matter or you intention to deceive. If either is not the case, I will gladly read what you have to say.
I'm sorry but you don't get to sit here, acknowledge only certain things I say while ignoring all the rest, dodge points, change topics, and then find one thing and go "oh oh oh, explain this".
Being the better man though I will, I said so because I was simply pulling the verses from my bookmarks (not a website as you seem to continue to insist" and didn't spend the time reading the entire chapter all over again just so you could go "nah see murder and r*pe are ok when God commands it".

So I answered that, now I'm going to point out what an intellectually dishonest you are by means of showing everything you ignored and/or changed the topic on to dodge points in hopes (insanely unrealistic hopes but hopes) that you might understand why people can't take you seriously or simply get frustrated with people like yourself:

---You initially began stating that scientific theory and faith where on the same level because science made a.ssumptions. I went into depth (and kindly at that) on what a theory was and how it was anything but a mere a.ssumption which you promptly ignored and continued to spout on about how science just made a.ssumptions.

---You then tried to provide evidence for God by stating things like the chariot wheels supposedly found in the red sea. When I pointed out that the discovery was actually just scraps of wood that the founder refused to let anyone peer review you claimed that I was just going to dismiss any evidence you gave rather than finding peer reviews done on his discovery to counter my point.

---You stated that there was tons of archeological evidence for God by stating the evidence confirmed some events in the bible. When I acknowledged that there was indeed evidence for SOME of the events in the bible I pointed out that if there was evidence for New York this would not be indicative of Spiderman existing just because New York is in the spider man comics and thus you couldn't expect proving a single historical event unless it was one that had something testable and wasn't a mere argument from ignorance or god of the gaps fallacy that it would not prove God... you responded... yet again... by crying about how I would simply dismiss all your evidence no matter what was presented to me rather than acknowledging that proving A doesn't necessarily prove B.

---You stated that Noah's ark was reconstructed and proven it could have happened and would indeed be stronger than ships of this day. I explained that Gopherwood, no matter how constructed, was not stronger than steel. I made a comparison between the Ark and the Titantic (the ark being vastly smaller) and gave numbers (rounding down to be generous to your side) of the number of animals that would be on Noah's boat and how even with the surface area and even if you DIDN'T account for the food or water all those animals would need, that the boat would not be able to fit even a 10th of the population it was said to.
Did you come back and link me the article showing the reconstruction of Noah's Ark? Did you state how he could have fit more volume on the ship than was actually possible? No. You never acknowledged the points made and changed the topic.

---You continued to state that now testimony was evidence for God. When I pointed out that there is testimony for millions of different Gods and even contradicting testimonies for the SAME Gods within different denominations and that you wouldn't accept these other testimonies but instead expected us to give special privilege only to those regarding your God... you again went to the crying angle of "you won't ever accept any evidence I give you" ark rather than acknowledging the points made.

---Next rather than continue the point by citing papers, acknowledging any of the points I made, or anything else that someone would consider honest debate... you change the topic suggesting that I "should read proverbs once in a while" as if this would somehow make your point stronger because you thought it had good moral lessons.

---I point out several instances of God committing murder for what I feel is entirely unjustified. None to shockingly your response is to make excuses for God ie "Oh well he told them not to touch that", "he warned them" and the like. As if warning someone of something is excuse to murder them.

So here's your last chance, are you or are you not going to stay on topic? OR are you going to continue to waist everyones time and dig yourself further into the pit?
 5 years ago '05        #226
Bea5T 137 heat pts137
space
avatar space
space
$20,515 | Props total: 206 206
Bill Nye the GOD has spoken, listen children
 5 years ago '11        #227
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Dark Bunny Lord said:
It's awesome, you sit here and dodge points, don't acknowledge counters, and continue to move the flagpost and change the topic whenever your proven wrong on something, then you find one thing where the same city is mentioned twice and go "AH HAH, GOT YA. You mentioned God commanding murder and r*pe in the same city" with a smug face as if it's some great victory on proving your point on how good God is.
Being the better man, ie one that will actually acknowledge your point instead of dodging it I'll explain. I said so because I was simply pulling the verses from my bookmarks (not a website as you seem to continue to insist you know I'm doing despite not knowing me at all)"= and didn't spend the time reading the entire chapter all over again just so you could go "nah see murder and r*pe are ok when God commands it".

So I answered that, now you answer my law question. Do you honestly think that k!lling someone is ok as long as you warn them not to do something first? Because you seem to be making that EXACT claim for God.
At least you finally admit what we knew all along, you're trying argue something without even reading the full context. The Bible builds upon previous books. You just can't read one book and understand the situation. You keep saying God commanded murder and r*pe. This goes back to the point of your ignorance of the situation. If you know the background, you will know that God has a plan to bring those who are faithful to him closer and to punish the wicked. I will try to explain it to you.

Now, Babylon was the not people of God. They were unholy. God allowed Babylon to rise for a greater purpose, to turn back the hearts of his children towards him. Why God allow evil to rise if he's such a just God? That is a valid question. It has been asked by many followers in the Bible. If you read it, you will know. Do you know what good is if there is no evil? Do you know what darkness is if there is no light? Evil exists because of free will. We all have a choice to do what's right or wrong. God can still use both, the holy and unholy, for his purpose. Ok, back to the history.

Isareal had forgotten their God. The God who has blessed them over and over and again and protected. They thought it was their own actions instead of God who had exalted them. So God said, ok. I will break down your pride and arrogance and show you the error of your ways. God used Babylon to capture Isareal and hold them captive. Now that they were captive, they cried back out to the God they forgot. By using Babylon, he brought his people back closer to him. Now as I stated before, Babylon was an unholy nation. They were pretty much savages. Destroyed all in their and took what was not theirs. For their evil acts, God was going cast a great judgement against them. Even though judgement was coming, he still used them for his purpose.

Now the people of Isareal were in captive 70 years under Babylon. They did not turn from their ways. They still were committing evil acts. Isaiah and Ezekiel and the prophets God used to tell his people in captivity, that judgement was coming against Babylon and they would be freed. For Babylon has sowed evil, and now they shall reap it. After seeing the judgement of Babylon in a vision, Ezekiel questioned God's judgement. He knew Babylon was evil, but there were innocent people who did not deserve what would happen. The doctrine used back then was "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge?". God response is recorded in Ezekiel 18. Read it if you want to know more. After receiving his vision, Ezekiel ran through the city telling everyone of Babylon's destruction and to flee.

Now they did not believe him because Babylon was thought to be impenetrable. Surrounded by great rivers that no army could cross and by gates that no man could break. As seen before, God used the evil of Babylon to correct the path of his children. Now he is using the evil of the Persian people to judge the wickedness of Babylon. He dried up the rivers and open the gates and Babylon was now vulnerable to be conquered. If you know anything about history, you would know how barbaric conquering another empire was. Once Babylon was conquered by Cyrus, he freed God's people. Now the children of Isareal were no longer captives and through this ordeal, they grew closer to God.

Now to your law question. You are making the illogical equation between a person of authority and person with no authority. If shoot a random person, what is the punishment? 5 years? 10 years maybe? If you shoot a cop, what is the punishment? Life in prison or death. Even in our own legal system, the penalty for disobeying or harming a person in authority is severe. If you spit in the face of the President, you will probably be shot dead by the Secret Service. Why is that? The penalty for disobeying those in authority has always been severe. This isn't just a God thing. It is seen everywhere. Now don't make the mistake of thinking that those who were struck down for disobeying God were perfect men. It is probably safe to a.ssume that their disobedience was a prolonged act. We only see the culmination of it, and not the build up.

Now you can question the justness of God, that's perfectly fine. People in the Bible have constantly done it. But to question something without reading it is you parading a mockery. That is not acceptable.


Last edited by Kadillac87; 09-04-2012 at 11:58 AM..
 09-04-2012, 12:50 PM         #228
Dark Bunny Lord 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
Yay for acknowledging nearly nothing said in my post.
So I'll stop bothering and just make fun of you for continuing to use the "He's God he can do what he wants" arguments to justify mass murder.


[pic - click to view]

 5 years ago '11        #229
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Dark Bunny Lord said:
Yay for acknowledging nearly nothing said in my post.
So I'll stop bothering and just make fun of you for continuing to use the "He's God he can do what he wants" arguments to justify mass murder.


[pic - click to view]

What didn't I acknowledge from your post? I explained to you the God commanding r*pe point that you brought up. I acknowledged you finally admitting that you didn't read the full context. And I answered your question about the law. Show me what I didn't answer or acknowledge?

At least you have shown your true colors. You wasn't here to ask question to better your understanding, but by your own words, you are here to "make fun of" or mock. But we already knew this anyway.


Last edited by Kadillac87; 09-04-2012 at 02:23 PM..
 5 years ago '11        #230
GetuOne 73 heat pts73
space
avatar space
space
$4,475 | Props total: 6 6
 NaMeLeSs- said:
wow he still looks exactly the same


[pic - click to view]

Science

 5 years ago '08        #231
slimdogg3325 1 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$5,872 | Props total: 723 723
 Kadillac87 said:
What didn't I acknowledge from your post? I explained to you the God commanding r*pe point that you brought up. I acknowledged you finally admitting that you didn't read the full context. And I answered your question about the law. Show me what I didn't answer or acknowledge?

At least you have shown your true colors. You wasn't here to ask question to better your understanding, but by your own words, you are here to "make fun of" or mock. But we already knew this anyway.
your wisdom is commendable...
 09-04-2012, 05:16 PM         #232
Dark Bunny Lord 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
What didn't I acknowledge from your post? I explained to you the God commanding r*pe point that you brought up. I acknowledged you finally admitting that you didn't read the full context. And I answered your question about the law. Show me what I didn't answer or acknowledge?

At least you have shown your true colors. You wasn't here to ask question to better your understanding, but by your own words, you are here to "make fun of" or mock. But we already knew this anyway.
Oh gee, let's see, how about... oh I don't know, the ONE QUESTION I ASKED perhaps?

Or maybe you could have acknowledged ANYTHING in the long bulletin pointed list I put out showing every time you danced around points, dodged questions and changed topic. No no, can't do that, then you'd have to be intellectually honest and abandon some of your strawmen arguments.


Last edited by Dark Bunny Lord; 09-04-2012 at 05:18 PM..
 5 years ago '11        #233
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Dark Bunny Lord said:
Oh gee, let's see, how about... oh I don't know, the ONE QUESTION I ASKED perhaps?

Or maybe you could have acknowledged ANYTHING in the long bulletin pointed list I put out showing every time you danced around points, dodged questions and changed topic. No no, can't do that, then you'd have to be intellectually honest and abandon some of your strawmen arguments.
I answered your question. Your question

 Dark Bunny Lord said:

So I answered that, now you answer my law question. Do you honestly think that k!lling someone is ok as long as you warn them not to do something first? Because you seem to be making that EXACT claim for God.
My response.

 Kadillac87 said:

Now to your law question. You are making the illogical equation between a person of authority and person with no authority. If shoot a random person, what is the punishment? 5 years? 10 years maybe? If you shoot a cop, what is the punishment? Life in prison or death. Even in our own legal system, the penalty for disobeying or harming a person in authority is severe. If you spit in the face of the President, you will probably be shot dead by the Secret Service. Why is that? The penalty for disobeying those in authority has always been severe. This isn't just a God thing. It is seen everywhere. Now don't make the mistake of thinking that those who were struck down for disobeying God were perfect men. It is probably safe to a.ssume that their disobedience was a prolonged act. We only see the culmination of it, and not the build up.

Now you can question the justness of God, that's perfectly fine. People in the Bible have constantly done it. But to question something without reading it is you parading a mockery. That is not acceptable.

Now, we both know your question is posed in such a way so you can say God or his followers are immoral. If I simply say yes, you will use some rudimentary example to say I'm immoral for believing that. If I simply say no, you will say then why is it ok for God to do it just because he is God. We already know your game and the trap you're trying to lay. In legal terms, this would be called leading a witness; suggesting a question in such a way to ensure your desired answer. So I provided examples of what we morally consider just punishment to authoritative figures. As quoted directly, I said "Even in our own legal system, the penalty for disobeying or harming a person in authority is severe." Is k!lling for disobeying moral? It depends. We as humans say in the case of certain authoritative figures, yes, it is. This answer does not satisfy you because you can't twist it to call God immoral. You say it's dodging, but it's simply not answering a fool according to his own folly.

And I didn't see your other post. If it is as long as you say it is, I probably won't read it. You are free to repost your objections in a condensed format. My attention span isn't really tolerate of foolishness.

 5 years ago '08        #234
The Fifth KD 2 heat pts
space
space
space
$3,480 | Props total: 1272 1272
This is what I find absolutely HILARIOUS about creationist:

They shoot down the theory of evolution as unproven flawed science (even though its been observable in modern times).....

and literally their response to "explain the origin of the universe" is "God did it".

That's it. No answers to explain how, why or who created god

nothing to explain what makes this answer anymore valid than the literal thousands of religious/mythological based stories on the birth of the universe.


No valid backing of evidence at all.

It doesn't matter IF the theory of evolution is flawed (and I don't think it is) if your own answer to the origins of universe is even more incorrect.
 09-04-2012, 06:22 PM         #235
Dark Bunny Lord 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
I answered your question.
No, you gave a cop out. Again you where directly asked something and you danced around it.
All you said was that if you said yes I could point out you where immoral, and you're fu*king right, if you think it's ok to murder people for disobedience to something as arbitrary as "don't touch that" (which God did with the ark, even you admitted this) then you are a terrible person from my perspective. If you said no then you'd be granting special pleading to your God.

There is no twist, if you can't answer a simple yes or no question and instead have to come up with a paragraph of excuses it's clear you simply don't wish to be honest. I don't care if you said yes or no and then spent any amount of text explaining WHY you said it, that'd be fine because you'd be simply explaining why you answered the way you did, but you couldn't even do that.

Lastly you once again point out that you didn't read my post. No wonder you believe what you do if you never read or listen to what the opposition has to say (this is the second time you've admitted to it and I'll bet you've just skipped over what people have responded to you many times before if this is indicative of your normal behavior).
 5 years ago '11        #236
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Dark Bunny Lord said:
No, you gave a cop out. Again you where directly asked something and you danced around it.
All you said was that if you said yes I could point out you where immoral, and you're fu*king right, if you think it's ok to murder people for disobedience to something as arbitrary as "don't touch that" (which God did with the ark, even you admitted this) then you are a terrible person from my perspective. If you said no then you'd be granting special pleading to your God.

There is no twist, if you can't answer a simple yes or no question and instead have to come up with a paragraph of excuses it's clear you simply don't wish to be honest. I don't care if you said yes or no and then spent any amount of text explaining WHY you said it, that'd be fine because you'd be simply explaining why you answered the way you did, but you couldn't even do that.

Lastly you once again point out that you didn't read my post. No wonder you believe what you do if you never read or listen to what the opposition has to say (this is the second time you've admitted to it and I'll bet you've just skipped over what people have responded to you many times before if this is indicative of your normal behavior).
Thank you for proving my point. You say I danced around it, but even by your own admission, you said you were using it to call God or his followers immoral. This is not rocket science. As I called long before, you are clearly not interested in discussion, only in mockery.

There is a reason why I skim your post. You have already shown you are foolish. Why play this game with you when it is already clear what your intentions are? You are trying to disguise a foolish and dishonesty argument as one of intellectual opposition. I'm sorry for not falling for your foolishness.

Proverbs 26:4-5

4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you yourself will be just like him.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
or he will be wise in his own eyes.
 09-04-2012, 06:38 PM         #237
Dark Bunny Lord 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
Thank you for proving my point. You say I danced around it, but even by your own admission, you said you were using it to call God or his followers immoral. This is not rocket science. As I called long before, you are clearly not interested in discussion, only in mockery.

There is a reason why I skim your post. You have already shown you are foolish. Why play this game with you when it is already clear what your intentions are? You are trying to disguise a foolish and dishonesty argument as one of intellectual opposition. I'm sorry for not falling for your foolishness.

Proverbs 26:4-5

4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you yourself will be just like him.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
or he will be wise in his own eyes.
Buzz, wrong again moron. I said I would call you immoral IF you said that k!lling for doing something menial you told them not to was ok. I did not say that if you believed in God you where immoral. Catch this, you can believe a God exists and still not think that it's actions where proper.
Imagine that.

Of course reality is you either
A) Do think that it's ok to k!ll someone for something as meniel as touching something you tell them not to
or
B) You are a reasonable human being and DON'T think that's ok, but don't want to admit that your God might have done something evil for fear of reprecussions.

That logic's a bi*ch aint it? Checkmate fu*ker.

P.S.
As far as quoting random bible verses to someone that doesn't believe in the bible, I can do that to, except you do believe it, oh well.
Matthew 5:22
"But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire."


Have fun in your imaginary barbecue.


Last edited by Dark Bunny Lord; 09-04-2012 at 06:45 PM..
 5 years ago '11        #238
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 Dark Bunny Lord said:
Buzz, wrong again moron. I said I would call you immoral IF you said that k!lling for doing something menial you told them not to was ok. I did not say that if you believed in God you where immoral. Catch this, you can believe a God exists and still not think that it's actions where proper.
Imagine that.

Of course reality is you either
A) Do think that it's ok to k!ll someone for something as meniel as touching something you tell them not to
or
B) You are a reasonable human being and DON'T think that's ok, but don't want to admit that your God might have done something evil for fear of reprecussions.

That logic's a bi*ch aint it? Checkmate fu*ker.
It's funny to see your anger and name calling increase when I refuse to play your foolish game. As I stated before, if you think God is unjust, that's fine. There are numerous examples in the Bible of his people questioning God's judgement. You are not alone when it comes to a lack of total understanding of God's ways. But we both know, you're not questioning, you're trying to construct a foolish argument hoping someone fall for it. Sorry for ruining your plans for mockery.

And I just seen the Bible verse you posted. It just goes to underscore you lack of understanding of the book you supposedly read.

It shows how unjust anger leads to murder. Just like a couple verses later, it says how lust leads to adultery. Read Matthew 5:27-28. Notice the parallels to 5:21-22.


Last edited by Kadillac87; 09-04-2012 at 07:03 PM..
 09-04-2012, 06:55 PM         #239
Dark Bunny Lord 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
It's funny to see your anger and name calling increase when I refuse to play your foolish game. As I stated before, if you think God is unjust, that's fine. There are numerous examples in the Bible of his people questioning God's judgement. You are not alone when it comes to a lack of total understanding of God's ways. But we both know, you're not questioning, you're trying to construct a foolish argument hoping someone fall for it. Sorry for ruining your plans for mockery.
Yeah it's incredibly funny to see that people get frustrated with you when you don't answer questoins, make constant excuses, and build strawmen, imagine that.
There is no lack of understanding, k!lling someone for touching something, k!lling someone for something they did not do (the plethora of kids did) is wrong.

Ruining my plans? Sorry pal, all you did was prove how blissfully brainwashed you are. That you would make ANY excuse to prevent yourself from making a judgement call for God with the same standards you would anyone or anything else.
 5 years ago '04        #240
buck1623 
space
space
space
$992 | Props total: 362 362
all sin is equal. rather he touched something god told him not to touch or not. god told adam and eve not to eat a apple. 1 apple doomed all of mankind... so why shouldnt disobedience be punished?
Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 37
Erykah badu shows that fur burger
80 comments
24 hours ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 26
Infinity War Countdown - 140 days left: Disney pulls dick out on the entertain..
71 comments
1 day ago
@movies
most viewed right now
 24
Image(s) inside Might let her meet the parents
78 comments
24 hours ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 23
Image(s) inside Dec 15 - This Colorado city declined to allow pot sales. Now it's havi..
27 comments
1 day ago
@news
most viewed right now
 19
Image(s) inside Dec 15 - Amazon may have just dropped a clue about the home of its new..
82 comments
1 day ago
@news
most viewed right now
 17
Dec 15 - California Warns People to Limit Exposure to Cellphones
32 comments
1 day ago
@news
most viewed right now
 9
Image(s) inside Chinx’s Killer attended his funeral!!!!!smh
141 comments
19 hours ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 9
Jeezy dissed Ralo on "Respect" , i told Ralo and its about to go down.
276 comments
1 day ago
@hiphop
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy