Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Mari ([info]drhikari) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2006-02-01 23:06:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Get rich by refuting my 4 proofs of God!


Thanks to some friends of mine for pointing this one out.

Troy, an admin on the Biblocality forums, posts a Four-step proof that supposedly proves God exists. He then challenges everybody to refute his proof by offering up $10,000 to the first person to do so...with one teeny tiny little clause to liven things up.

Troy: $10,000 U.S. is being offered to the first person who can overturn the perfect proof for God of the Bible.

The only stipulation is the challenger must present his or her case at Biblocality Forums in this thread.

Oh, by the way, if you get crass and abusive, you're banned. That includes the use of nicknames.


You can guess where this one heads, folks, when this seems to happen:

You didn't answer correctly, so I BAN J00

...and he keeps on doing it for several pages of posts.

He also seems to have this to say:

Troy: Know why you are banned: no attempt at a disproof, your line of thought is debunked, your self-declarations are selfish, you will never repent, will only repeat yourself and have nothing to offer.

Charming, isn't he?

My favorite:

Tesseract: Very intriguing, and I will most likely be banned for this but I would hope to at least be graced with a response as others have been.

Troy: I have to leave at least one atheist on unbanned. People are not banned for putting forth their best effort, but they are banned, as they ought to be, for being belligerent and obstinate in their pride. This explains what happened to those before you who failed. Though you certainly have your pride like Satan that keeps you separated from Jesus and hellbound, some mercy is helpful here towards you.

Oh, those silly atheists! What nonsensical conspiracy theories will they think up next?

It gets better when people start to counterbet against him.

Captain Win: In that spirit, I'd like to make a counter-offer. Troy, if you can offer a logical proof that Unicorns do not exist, then I will pay you the sum of one hundred thousand US dollars.

He certainly wins, alright.

13 pages and going strong, people.

ETA: Several new interesting things!

Those atheists are mass spamming/looking at my forums! It must because of MY perfect proof! Those atheists are all racists and porno addicts anyway; no need for them in MY kingdom!

Troy on being banned from Christandom's forums.

tl;dr




Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>

(Post a new comment)


[info]miss_arel
2006-02-02 08:40 am UTC (link)
Oh, I heard about this just today from a friend of mine... he thought the whole thing was hilarious. He went on the boards as 'Allah' and got banninated for 'portraying a false god', and his friend went on as 'Mohammed' and got banned for 'worshipping a murderer and a pedophile.' Good times, good times...

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]saralina25, 2006-02-02 08:50 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 08:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]darthmaligna, 2006-02-02 09:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-02-02 09:05 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]darthmaligna, 2006-02-02 09:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-02-02 09:30 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2006-02-02 03:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]smo, 2006-02-02 04:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]luxshine, 2006-02-02 05:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]smo, 2006-02-02 05:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2006-02-02 03:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]threegoldfish, 2006-02-02 03:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]annabelle_lee, 2006-02-02 04:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2006-02-02 10:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darthmaligna, 2006-02-03 06:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]darthmaligna, 2006-02-03 06:05 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]spawn_of_kong, 2006-02-04 06:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]annabelle_lee, 2006-02-03 09:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 09:05 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]roni_maxwell, 2006-02-02 09:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 09:16 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]caffeine_fairy, 2006-02-03 03:24 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-04 01:03 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2006-02-04 01:46 am UTC
"I'd call him a sadistic hippophilic necrophile, but that's beating a dead horse." - [info]darthmaligna, 2006-02-02 09:18 am UTC
Re: "I'd call him a sadistic hippophilic necrophile, but that's beating a dead horse." - [info]roni_maxwell, 2006-02-02 09:22 am UTC
Re: "I'd call him a sadistic hippophilic necrophile, but that's beating a dead horse." - [info]darkeyes, 2006-02-02 02:12 pm UTC
Re: "I'd call him a sadistic hippophilic necrophile, but that's beating a dead horse." - [info]phosfate, 2006-02-02 03:21 pm UTC
The spoonful of gag - [info]moonjaguar, 2006-02-02 05:58 pm UTC
Re: "I'd call him a sadistic hippophilic necrophile, but that's beating a dead horse." - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 06:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]drworm, 2006-02-02 04:56 pm UTC
Re: "I'd call him a sadistic hippophilic necrophile, but that's beating a dead horse." - [info]visp, 2006-02-02 06:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]gutsy_bunny, 2006-02-02 04:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rubylou, 2006-02-03 05:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]njyoder, 2006-02-05 06:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]suppendose, 2006-02-05 08:22 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]njyoder, 2006-02-05 08:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]zaliesiren, 2006-02-02 02:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]zaliesiren, 2006-02-02 02:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lots42, 2006-02-02 05:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - dracothelizard, 2006-02-03 01:40 am UTC

[info]gloria_mundi
2006-02-02 09:11 am UTC (link)
I was arguing theology with a friend last night, which is always interesting. I'm a Spritual Christian, she's a religion hating atheist who considers religion to be a form of mental illeness. The arguements can get kinda wild.

Anyways, I pointed out that if the Bible began as a true, one hundred percent chronicle of what happened, it no longer is. Words and language have changed over the years and thus what the bibe says now, isn't what it said then.

More to the point, God is eternal and timeless. He said He created the universe in six days. Is thaat six days as we mortals measure time, or six days for God?

I mean, what's a day to God measured in terms of our time? A thousand years? Ten thousand? A million? A billion?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]darthmaligna, 2006-02-02 09:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 09:14 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]darthmaligna, 2006-02-02 09:16 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 09:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-02-02 09:25 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]fuzzytowers, 2006-02-02 12:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]plazmah, 2006-02-03 05:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]fuzzytowers, 2006-02-03 04:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cleolinda, 2006-02-02 09:41 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]drhikari, 2006-02-02 09:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2006-02-02 10:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]i_mx, 2006-02-02 10:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2006-02-02 03:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 06:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]doroc_sabah, 2006-02-02 09:50 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]emiweebee, 2006-02-02 05:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ladybirdsleeps, 2006-02-02 12:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]fuzzytowers, 2006-02-02 12:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ladybirdsleeps, 2006-02-02 12:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]greenglass, 2006-02-02 07:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ayezur, 2006-02-02 09:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2006-02-02 11:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ayezur, 2006-02-03 02:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]amxjm, 2006-02-03 09:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lukita, 2006-02-02 04:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 06:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]fuzzytowers, 2006-02-02 12:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cellardoor28, 2006-02-02 01:20 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2006-02-02 03:24 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]frequentmouse, 2006-02-02 05:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 06:04 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]frequentmouse, 2006-02-02 07:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]wolfgangmozart, 2006-02-03 12:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]frequentmouse, 2006-02-03 05:19 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-03 08:14 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]adora_spintriae, 2006-02-03 01:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]isbobhereyet, 2006-02-03 01:35 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-03 08:15 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]isbobhereyet, 2006-02-08 01:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mael, 2006-02-03 03:13 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]adora_spintriae, 2006-02-03 01:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]njyoder, 2006-02-05 06:34 am UTC

[info]gloria_mundi
2006-02-02 09:27 am UTC (link)
From page 12, good old Troy explains it when asked who decides the winning argument:

All you need to do to disprove it is disprove one thing of it. Pretty simple. There is no third party who will be the judge since none have authority more than me to administer it and to discern if the Proof has been disproven.

Naturally.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-02-02 10:25 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gloria_mundi, 2006-02-02 06:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]pipssister, 2006-02-02 07:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bubba_ray, 2006-02-03 12:09 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-02-03 02:43 am UTC

[info]bubosquared
2006-02-02 09:55 am UTC (link)
OKay, I admit I've not actually read his proof, because it's not even nine yet, I've not yet had coffee, and my eyes glazed over halfway through the first sentence, but ...

The whole point of faith is that it's not supposed be be proven. That's why it's faith and not, you know, perfectly scientific proven fact. Has this twit never even read The Hitch hiker's Guide To The Galaxy?

*sighs, adds more money to Big-Ass Bible Fund*

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2006-02-02 05:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rowan, 2006-02-02 10:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]agent_hyatt, 2006-02-03 02:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]bubosquared, 2006-02-03 10:19 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]agent_hyatt, 2006-02-03 04:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2006-02-04 01:58 am UTC

[info]chikane
2006-02-02 11:27 am UTC (link)
I love how he puts forth easily refutable arguments, and uses THEM then to make further points. It's like

Proof 1:
1+1 is 3. Everyone who isn't a pathetic heathen sinner knows. It's in an old book some guy wrote 4000 years ago. And no, that line there is definitely NOT an error on the page, it definitely means 3, not 2! Morons.

Proof 2:
1+1+1+1 is 4. Use your fingers.

Proof 3:
1+1 is 3, and 3+3= 6, thus 1+1+1+1 = 6(because you can substitute the 3), in other words 4 = 6.


Totally ignoring, say, that evolution isn't linear, that not all paths it takes lead to perfection and that, oh, it is entirely possible that it gets kind of reset or reshuffled along the way. Like with ROCKS FALLING FROM THE SKY EVERYONE DIES. Especially the cool Dinosaurs.

I wish people who make arguments like that would, like, know what they were talking about. Not to mention that faith cannot ever be proven, moron. That's the point of faith...

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]diamonde, 2006-02-03 09:39 am UTC

[info]khym_chanur
2006-02-02 12:57 pm UTC (link)
Geez, I just asked for clarification and got banned; can't even read it anymore. Can anyone see what I got banned for?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]aerobot, 2006-02-02 01:20 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-02-02 01:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]aerobot, 2006-02-02 01:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-02-02 02:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jadelennox, 2006-02-02 02:19 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-02-02 02:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jaseroque, 2006-02-02 02:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2006-02-02 03:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]judyhazeleyes, 2006-02-02 08:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-02-02 11:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2006-02-02 11:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - rowleyorama, 2006-02-03 12:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-02-02 05:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2006-02-02 08:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-02-02 10:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2006-02-02 10:15 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]semiotics, 2006-02-04 02:36 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]xero_sky, 2006-02-02 05:40 pm UTC

[info]aerobot
2006-02-02 01:14 pm UTC (link)
Therefore, what you are going on about here is your petty self. You need to be delivered from not only sin but also your petty self. The petty self is is belligerence and obstinacy. Therefore, you need to be banned.

Holy mother of FUCK.

This guy is just on a fucking insane psuedo-fundie power wank and thinking smiting the godless heathens left and right like God himself.

I mean, he doesn't merely say someone is wrong because the Bible said so, he says they're selfish petty people who are devoid of conscience and he's proven what horrible godless sinners they are and they keep 'misreading' because they're illogical heathens who can't accept the truth.

TOTAL. FUCKING. PSYCHO.

Shit, maybe he was a part of the Spanish Inquisition or the Burning Times in a past life or something.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]scootermcgaffin, 2006-02-02 02:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]judyhazeleyes, 2006-02-02 08:42 pm UTC

[info]oh_envy
2006-02-02 01:28 pm UTC (link)
This just cracked me up:

Troy: "Mere self-declarations don't count.

Muhahahahahahahaah! The blinding idiocy, it's killing me

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - winterfox, 2006-02-02 07:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]oh_envy, 2006-02-02 07:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - winterfox, 2006-02-02 07:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]oh_envy, 2006-02-02 07:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - winterfox, 2006-02-02 07:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]littlebitca, 2006-02-02 07:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]oh_envy, 2006-02-02 07:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-02-02 10:14 pm UTC

[info]silrana
2006-02-02 01:40 pm UTC (link)
*adds another name to my "Get out of my religion, you are making my religion look stupid" list*

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]aerobot, 2006-02-02 01:43 pm UTC
You might want to borrow my icon. *NM* - [info]mcity, 2006-02-02 05:07 pm UTC

[info]stopthatgirl7
2006-02-02 01:47 pm UTC (link)
You know, Yahweh was originally a god of war.

I think that explains everything, really. I mean, just look at the Holy Land.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]dorothy1901, 2006-02-02 04:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]brown_betty, 2006-02-02 04:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-02-02 05:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2006-02-02 05:09 pm UTC

[info]crysiana
2006-02-02 01:52 pm UTC (link)
You know, it's actually been a long time since I've wanted to be able to punch someone in the face through the internet. I'm feel like I should thank Troy for this special moment.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]crysiana, 2006-02-02 01:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jadelennox, 2006-02-02 02:20 pm UTC

(Deleted post)
(no subject) - [info]kadath, 2006-02-02 02:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2006-02-02 03:28 pm UTC

(Deleted post)
(no subject) - [info]kadath, 2006-02-02 03:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]totchipanda, 2006-02-03 03:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rotten_fish, 2006-02-02 04:22 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]marlo, 2006-02-03 12:22 am UTC

[info]arymabeth
2006-02-02 03:58 pm UTC (link)
The assumption by many unsaved souls (thus, a good place to commence the 4 Step Proof for God) is that the universe has always been going on in the past for eternity (many unsaved cosmologists and evolutionists believe this, either biologically or non-biologically, as they have told me so). Therefore, what must follow, is that you have also had an eternity to be perfected and since you are not (since you are still a sinner and make mistakes), this proves that such evolving eternally in the past is incorrect.

Please introduce me to these "scientists" so I can poke them with sticks and boggle at the extra stupid. He completely missed the boat where Christians were all excited when the Big Bang theory was first introduced because this backed up their position that the universe had a beginning. Previously, many scientists had believed it to be eternal.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]agent_hyatt, 2006-02-03 02:39 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]innsmouth_eyes, 2006-02-03 06:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2006-02-04 02:06 am UTC

[info]radiotrash
2006-02-02 04:15 pm UTC (link)
*eyes glaze over* Uh-huh. Well then, you go on being that ultimate god warrior or something and I'm going to go over here and have a donut.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]lillyv, 2006-02-04 06:48 am UTC

[info]lukita
2006-02-02 04:17 pm UTC (link)
I want to read his bat shit, but it's way too long and my eyes kept crossing.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Let me condense it: - [info]mcity, 2006-02-02 05:10 pm UTC

[info]ingrid
2006-02-02 04:44 pm UTC (link)
Troy = the God of his own message board. I wonder where the banned people were sent, according to him. Or is that "Him"?

(Reply to this)


[info]drworm
2006-02-02 04:53 pm UTC (link)
I love this. I just read a proof in Skeptic that proved that the existence of god is illogical. I have no idea how good a proof it actually is, but it seemed a lot more reasonable then what this guy is spouting.

Also, you should totally pick up the magazine if you can find it. I'm pretty sure it's in the issue with Mythbusters on the cover. DOUBLE PLUS!

(Reply to this)

GIP
[info]mcity
2006-02-02 05:01 pm UTC (link)
*NM*

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: GIP - [info]judyhazeleyes, 2006-02-02 08:51 pm UTC
Re: GIP - [info]mcity, 2006-02-03 01:48 am UTC

[info]purplehat
2006-02-02 05:03 pm UTC (link)
Now it is such a bizarrely improbably coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful [the Babel fish] could have evolved by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
The argument goes something like this: "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

-- Douglas Adams, The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]purplehat, 2006-02-02 05:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]wrongly_amused, 2006-02-02 06:15 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]esclaramonde, 2006-02-02 09:19 pm UTC

[info]issendai
2006-02-02 05:06 pm UTC (link)
Whoa. He's so far into the batshit, he's hit the "no longer able to use words the way normal people do" stage. An eternity past of this evolving process? Whaa?

My favorite points in his initial post:

As proof of this, we can see in just a few short years (approximately 6000 years ago) since the first Adamic man (the first man with God-consciousness), we have changed and matured in leaps and bounds; thus, we will not need another 6000 years to be perfected (speaking of those who have God's uncreated life).

So we're not fornicating, moneylending, enslaving people, or killing our own family members out of jealousy? Good to know! Man, I'm glad we got past the ugly days of the Old Testament. Barbarians.
 
For example, it is no longer common practice, except in Islam, to sacrifice children on altars to their god or gods.

Do what?

Besides, I thought it was the Jews sacrificing Christian children to God. During Passover. Educate your hatred, man.

The next trick that a charlatan evolutionist, cosmologist, atheist or agnostic (as apposed to a regenerated one), being intellectually dishonest with themselves, tries to pull over your eyes (as well as their own in the might of their flesh) is through the question, "why can't God have a creator?"

I'm not entirely certain what this means. "In the might of their flesh" obviously has Deep Scriptural Meaning for him, but the only Biblical flesh reference I know is to the fleshpots of Babylon. They were actually a kind of meat stew, but that's probably too advanced a bit of Biblical knowledge for him, so he may be saying that atheists watch porn until their brains bake and they think that asking, "Why can't God have a creator?" is a good idea.

That's the only reason I can imagine why someone would want to ask that question. That, or hash brownies. Has this guy actually met a real, live atheist?

Also, why the cosmologist hate? Do astrologers get up to nasty, dirty, sinful things in the dark of their planetariums that I really should know about?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]cat_mcdougall, 2006-02-02 06:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-02-02 06:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]isntitironic, 2006-02-02 06:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-02-02 06:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]singe, 2006-02-02 06:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]isntitironic, 2006-02-02 07:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mael, 2006-02-03 03:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]napoleon, 2006-02-03 08:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mael, 2006-02-03 08:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ecchaniz0r, 2006-02-02 10:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]miss_arel, 2006-02-03 04:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]khym_chanur, 2006-02-02 11:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]agent_hyatt, 2006-02-03 02:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gabsy, 2006-02-06 05:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkvalkyrie, 2006-02-03 06:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2006-02-04 02:12 am UTC

[info]emiweebee
2006-02-02 05:27 pm UTC (link)
So, is this guy a different crazy from the Timecube guy? Because I don't feel like reading that much crazy.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-02-02 06:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]emiweebee, 2006-02-02 06:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rubylou, 2006-02-03 04:25 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]baskinglizard, 2006-02-06 05:44 pm UTC

[info]sisterelwood
2006-02-02 05:31 pm UTC (link)
I... whoa... This just boggles my mind. Someone needs to point out Troy that his level of arrogance is a deadly sin, too.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]frequentmouse, 2006-02-02 06:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sisterelwood, 2006-02-02 10:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]frequentmouse, 2006-02-02 11:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]frequentmouse, 2006-02-02 11:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]white_serpent, 2006-02-03 01:04 am UTC

[info]vengeance_bean
2006-02-02 05:40 pm UTC (link)
So apparently we can't reason out of his, um, tricky little snare of Ultimate Logic and Godlust because God doesn't want us to understand. That alone may be proof enough for me: if there is an all-powerful being that loves me eternally, then it would certainly want to spare me this kind of "understanding."

(Reply to this)


[info]issendai
2006-02-02 05:46 pm UTC (link)
The rest of the forum is priceless. Most of the members are banned, and there's a long, long spiel about how other Christian forums are Godless and carnal and mean to him. Something tells me that a little digging could bring up a gold mine of past wank.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]narcissam, 2006-02-02 08:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]issendai, 2006-02-02 09:23 pm UTC

[info]wrongly_amused
2006-02-02 06:21 pm UTC (link)

faith

1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.

2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.

3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters.

4. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.

5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.

6. A set of principles or beliefs.



Sprecken Sie English, motherfucker?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]radiotrash, 2006-02-02 11:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sisterelwood, 2006-02-03 03:29 am UTC



Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map