1051. 'I have never been happier' says the man who won gold but lost God

Comment #52454 by BillySands on June 27, 2007 at 4:09 am

Thank god for that.
I'm glad he has not found it a struggle when he dumped his faith. For many it is a very hard time. This really is good news though, and such a high profile de-convert too

BTW I'm a lot happier after losing my delusion too

1052. God Hates the World

Comment #52435 by BillySands on June 27, 2007 at 3:08 am

What I find odd is the fact that he would make you in such away to do things that he finds disgusting, like jobbies and sticky white wee wees
leviticus 15 16 "Whenever a man has an emission of semen, he must bathe his entire body in water, and he will remain ceremonially unclean until the next evening.[c] 17 Any clothing or leather with semen on it must be washed in water, and it will remain unclean until evening. 18 After a man and a woman have sexual intercourse, they must each bathe in water, and they will remain unclean until the next evening."

Indeed, god must think women are jazz musicians, as he makes them hum at rag time:
Lev15:19 "Whenever a woman has her menstrual period, she will be ceremonially unclean for seven days. Anyone who touches her during that time will be unclean until evening. 20 Anything on which the woman lies or sits during the time of her period will be unclean. 21 If any of you touch her bed, you must wash your clothes and bathe yourself in water, and you will remain unclean until evening. 22 If you touch any object she has sat on, you must wash your clothes and bathe yourself in water, and you will remain unclean until evening. 23 This includes her bed or any other object she has sat on; you will be unclean until evening if you touch it. 24 If a man has sexual intercourse with her and her blood touches him, her menstrual impurity will be transmitted to him. He will remain unclean for seven days, and any bed on which he lies will be unclean."

Yet, we are to be fruitful and multiply?

Hmmm
- Loving god or misogynistic wanker?
Don't think the bible says anything about blow jobs though

1053. God Hates the World

Comment #52421 by BillySands on June 27, 2007 at 2:11 am

Dr Benway, I've been good too.
I even helped a little old lady across the road last night. Now give us the secret of funny before my apparently poisoned mind goes on a fundie killing spree.
Oh and if DR is still reading, maybe he can explain how he got from my disgust of members of his church abusing their children to me being a sicko?

1054. God Hates the World

Comment #52143 by BillySands on June 26, 2007 at 10:08 am

Scottishgeologistausing trouble over doctrine again, you will surely go to hell :-)

Interestingly, the cristadelphians for one dont accept the trinity (they all seem a bunch of nice christians, David should take note) One of them makes agood case against the trinity in this post http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,323,The-God-of-the-Bible-is-No-Delusion,Christadelphianorg,page7#12049
.
Like you say, it's not just the johannine comma that is unoriganal, there are may such verses http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/manufall.html

Interestingly, when Christians feel theatened, they usually mention christian scientists like newton. The funny thing is, he has a unitarian, not a trinitarian.

I see David has been stomping his feet on Pharyngula - and plugging his book - and he has the cheek to accuse RD of the same. A christian suggested to me that DR is a mirror immage anti-particle to RD. I can see where he gets it from. One is a brilliant academic with a couple of best selling books, and the other one lives in Dundee

I wonder if robertson's site is moderated to cocoon his sheep from reason? Wonder how may de-converted because of the athiest invasion that he brought about.

1055. God Hates the World

Comment #52099 by BillySands on June 26, 2007 at 6:37 am

I would like to see more (intelligent) religious people on these boards who are prepared to at least attempt rational debate

I agree. I've even tried to get a few to come on.

1056. Germany imposes ban on Tom Cruise

Comment #52079 by BillySands on June 26, 2007 at 5:34 am

Nice to see the German's are not letting the religious tell them what to do (thats sarcasm by the way).
Apparently the chancellor wants an acknowledgement of Europe's Christian identity written into the constitution. Let's start with acknowledging Hitler's use of Christianity

1057. God Hates the World

Comment #52072 by BillySands on June 26, 2007 at 5:11 am

One other thing, it seems a common tactic with the religious to claim that those who disagree with them are not religious. This is total rubbish. I remember some guy on David's web site saying that there was no deate between chistians on homosexuality - apparently everyone who thinks homosexuals are OK are not by his definition christion - POOF! (pardon the word) he can stick his head in the sand and the problem disappears. David appears to be trying the same here.
He may want to compare his style with that of Jackson's and learn

Philip, praise Quetz He has provided

1058. God Hates the World

Comment #52065 by BillySands on June 26, 2007 at 4:34 am

Another great post Robert.
David, why do you keep twisting peoples words and puting your own spin on it. I really can't tell if you are deranged and actually hear what is not said, of if you are just a liar - well, we have already established that you lie, so I guess the real question is are youy a deranged liar?
It's funny, but always sad, that you accuse those who disagree with you as throwing accusations. You never actually give reasons for your opinions and just hurl abuse. This website is full of attempts by me to get into a proper debate with you, but you just make accusation and spout bile about atheism. Tell me, is it a sin to be nasty to atheists? Or does your does your belief that we are going to hell justify this behaviour? Is it a sin to give false witness too? No doubt you will tell your sheep (and I mean that in the mindless sense) about us nasty atheists, and make up thing we didn't say - as is your forte. Maybe you need a counsellor of what you read is not what you actually hear - get help dude.
People in your church may need to be told what to think, but here, I doubt there are many who did not become atheists through their own investigation. I can understand why a lost sheep like you can't grasp the fact that we don't need to be told what to think by the likes of Dawkins

Philip, thanks for the praise, but I am meerly a disciple of the one true god Quetz. He said he would send me Jessica Biel - praise his holy appendage (hope that wasn't too gay for you David)
However, making an army of gay flies costs money and I need a private jet and a play station 3, so send all donations to my evil bank account - Girls can also send in photos of themselves in their swim wear.

1059. God Hates the World

Comment #51955 by BillySands on June 25, 2007 at 4:20 pm

Hey David,
I just realised you actually answered my question. It only took 6 months to get a straight answer out of you - which is remarkably at variance with your previous implications on the subject. Could there be some hope for you? All you need to do now is stop telling people it's wrong - especially since you can't tell us why- and you will be on your way to being a compassionate secular human being.

Since the topic that the WBC are the only true followes of the bible, and because you liked it so much, I'll post this comment for you again http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,1197,Debate-between-Richard-Dawkins-and-Robert-Winston,Today-BBC,page4#46439

"Biblicists often claim that because we all seem to share certain moral values, there must be an external provider of these values (their god) that fixes them in the hearts of man (Rom.1:19). This is an idea that CS Lewis discusses in "Mere Christianity". If this were true, then all people would be able to make the same moral judgements on a given topic. This is clearly not the case. One just has to think about the number of disagreements believers have amongst themselves (gay bishops (Think requirements for salvation) women priests (Think equality) and contraception (think HIV in Africa)) are a few examples. Christians usually respond to this by saying that people have their own agendas and are not following God (in other words everyone is wrong but me). The trouble is that both sides usually make valid biblical arguments. The real problem however is that the bible is self contradictory on so many issues, that you cannot use it as a guidebook. Here is an example of the contradictions concerning homosexual bishops: the bible says that homosexuals must be killed (Lev. 20:13), Jesus never gave any instructions to the contrary. If he did, he would be contradicting God. Compare this to Paul's statement that all things are permissible; even the ones that are not good for you (1Cor.10:23). Not one to be consistent though, Paul also orders a congregation to kick a sinner out of their church (1 Cor.5:1-2) Paul also tells us that EVERYONE is a sinner (Rom. 3:9-18) so why single one group out? Yet again, Paul contradicts himself and other Christians on Rom.1:19 by informing us that rather than having God's laws written on their hearts, people actually need to be taught right from wrong (Rom. 10:13-14 and 2:21). Therefore, if even their holy book shows itself to be contradictory and inconsistent, then the idea of a morally guiding god is not a viable hypothesis.
Morality is not just a question of what you do, but why you do it. This is a common Christian response to apparent examples of moral behaviour in other animals. I do however strongly doubt that true intention based morality is a common theme in every day life. Try this thought experiment: imagine you are out and you walk past a tramp. He is a dirty-faced abusive alcoholic. His beard is encrusted with vomit, his breath stinks, and he smells of stale urine. His penis is also hanging out. What do you do? Most likely, you walk past him. You may even feel disgust and call the police. You may however throw some money at him out of pity, but that just hurts him more, because he will buy some alcohol with it. What you would not do (purely out of love for him) is take him home and help him sort out his life. But that is what Jesus tells you to do. To do otherwise is a sin (Matt. 25:41-46). The very few (if any) who would genuinely take him home, I salute you, but how many of you would also be Christian?
Now on to the stuff they don't teach you in Sunday school. Firstly, God set up man to fail. I say this because before Adam and Eve ate the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, they could not know that it was wrong to disobey this dictatorial and draconian god (Gen.3:5 and 22). To make matters even worse, he put the serpent in the garden to tempt these naïve people into disobeying him (Gen.3.1-6). God even make this evil creature in the first place (Gen.3:1). What a bastard! That shows as much parental responsibility as hiring a paedophile to baby-sit for you! Because of this situation, God condemns all mankind to die. What a thoroughly evil act. This is just the first of many examples of God punishing people for "sins" perpetrated by others (Ex. 11 (very disgusting slaughter of children) Is. 14-21-22 and Deut.5:9 for example). Imagine the police arresting you one night because your great grandfather was an Australian sheep rustler or a German concentration camp guard, it is just ludicrous. Most bizarrely, he even punishes people for being evil and audacious enough to be born to unmarried parents, or because they were born in the wrong place, like Moab (Deut.23:2-3). Bizarre, because he (through the birth of Jesus) is the bastard descendant of a bastard and a Moabite (Matt. 1:3-5, Gen.38, Ru. 4 and Matt. 1-18-19).
Not only has God created evil, he often uses it to harm others (Lam. 3:38, Jer. 26:3, 36:3, and 1Sam. 16:33 to name a few). He even uses lies when it suits him (2Chron. 18:19-22). The bible also tells us that God hardens the hearts of those he wants to destroy, such as the Pharaoh (Ex. 14:1-31) and he does this after he has bullied the Egyptians into getting his way. It didn't seem to matter that his gripe was with an individual, because he was cruel to the whole nation. God basically took away Pharaohs' free will and lead him and others to destruction. What happened to mercy and forgiveness? If you are going to make Pharaoh do something, then why not just make him let the Israelites go free, with out all that nastiness, plagues and the unjustifiable killing of Egypt's first born? If all this was true, you have got think Pharaoh must have been incredibly thick not to let the Israelites go. The exodus probably never happened, but that doesn't change the immoral nature of the god of the bible. Remember, this is a God who for no good reason other than because he is God, prevents people from believing in him and being saved (Rom. 9:18).

The whole book of Joshua is about God ordained acts of ethnic cleansing, intolerance and genocide. Apparently God did not want his people contaminated with the practices of pagans. Again, this does not justify the extreme methods that God commanded, including infanticide. This means that if you are different, God does not want to forgive and enlighten you. In fact, he wants you and your babies dead. The contradiction with NT theology is glaringly obvious! Again, God's inability to be pleased (and inconsistency) is shown when he orders the Israelites to "righteously murder" the Midianites, including women and children (Num. 39). This very act however makes the Israelites impure and unable to approach God (Num. 31:19). In other words, God says "I am the God of righteousness, who cannot abide evil. Go and carryout this evil act that I demand or I will be angry, even although this act will make you repulsive to me."

God also doesn't have a problem with forcing people into cannibalism (Lev. 26:29, Jer. 19:9). Neither does he have a problem with kidnapping women, nor with making them gifts to be used as sex slaves (Jud. 21:11-14). In fact, the god of the bible doesn't think too much of women at the best of times. These following attitudes make me sick! A rapist must marry his victim. Forcing someone to live with their abuser is just about the worst thing you can make them do, and to rub salt into the wounds, the victim's father must be compensated (Deut. 22:28-29). Eve also gets all the blame for the original sin (1Tim. 2:12-14), and women are the property of men and were created for men, because we are superior. They must be silent in church and never hold authority over men, or even teach a man (1Cor. 11:8-9, 14:34-35, Eph. 5:21, Col. 3:18, 1Tim.2:11-14). All however is not lost, as a woman can be saved through childbirth (1Tim. 2:15). The only problem is that God would rather men didn't get married (1Cor. 7:8), and for those lucky enough to get a man, child birth will be incredibly painful (Gen.3:16). Yep, God hates women!
So, what does he like then? Well, slavery for one, as long as the slaves are not Israelite (Lev. 25:44-46). Furthermore, he doesn't mind you beating them, as long as you don't kill them (Ex. 21:22-24). God likes slavery so much; he even sets different laws for the welfare of slaves and their Israelite masters. If an owner knocks out a slaves eye, he must set the slave free (Ex. 21:26). If he did it to another Israelite, the law requires the loss of his eye too (Ex. 21:22-24). I like Gandhi's observation (pardon the pun) that an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. Should the master kill the slave, the punishment is not defined (Ex. 20:21) here, but if he kills an Israelite, he too must be killed (Ex. 21:12). God also likes perfectly formed people too. Any one deformed may not approach him (Lev. 21:16-23). He must love having someone to hate, because the bible tells us that he knits people together in the womb (Ps. 139:13-15). So I guess every now and then, he uses his special magic god powers of righteous justice to decide exactly who to make deformed, just so he can hate them. The almighty loving God is also partial to accepting the occasional human sacrifice (Num. 31:40, Jud. 11:29-40) In the second example, a girl (Jephthah's daughter) was sacrificed to God because of her fathers' vows. Of course, if you question God on the subject, he denies accepting human sacrifice at all, claiming the whole idea to be abhorrent to him (Jer. 19:4-6). Nice lie your holiness! The only time God actually behaves himself, is when he is worried about how he appears to others, and not because it is the right thing to do (Ex. 32:11-14 and Num. 14:15-20). In fact, the supposed sacrifice on the cross was (as many Christians will tell you) was for his own glory.
Moral god? Don't make me laugh! I'll tell you what does make me laugh however, is the story where Elisha gets God to make some bears maul and kill 42 young boys for calling him baldy (2Kin. 2:23-24). It's a good job that they didn't call him a specky big nosed feminist and abolitionist! If they had, the loving, forgiving and slow to anger god of the bible would probably eternally curse mankind (not again!), and make us all lesbian Moabite hunchbacks. That would give him a real reason to be cruel to us. Clearly, the nature of God does not give an explanation as to where the "better" aspects of human nature come from. Modern evolutionary approaches are now, just starting to provide an explanation for the existence of morality.
More krazee kristianity here: http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/index.html
"

Yep, WBC are the true followers of Yahweh - you're off to hell - be sure and tell your kids. Just to clarify,I may not like you, but I dont actually hate you. I have no respect for your views or the way you conduct yourself on these threads, but I actually feel sorrow for you, not hate - despite what you try to say about my attitutde to christianity. You need to take a step back and stop puting words into people's mouths - stop misquoting RD for your own purposes

1060. God Hates the World

Comment #51921 by BillySands on June 25, 2007 at 2:47 pm

Billy - in his usual cheap and nasty way now tries to equate this kind of abuse with my church. Again stomach churning ignorance and hatred. This is the kind of abuse and sick mind that you are feeding, Dr Dawkins.

What is sick about not wanting people metally scarred by fearing they will go to hell for the slightest misdemeaner - including wanting a tatoo. If you think this is acceptable, it is you who is sick. This is a member of your church, and you had the balls to lie on a previous thread that this does not go on. I'm also considerably more gay friendly than you. You can stick your barbaric immoral standards up your arse. I and many others on this site are glad we dont have your sick moral codes.
I also dont subscribe to the view that all religious people are mental fuck ups. There are plenty of good one - not you however, so stop telling lies about what I believe. And this has nothing to do with ideology here. For me it is about pointing out something that is wrong - but you just have to use it to fuel your own little bigotries about atheists

1061. God Hates the World

Comment #51917 by BillySands on June 25, 2007 at 2:40 pm

No it is not religion. No it does not need any further exposure. It has already been used many times - including in TGD.

I disagree. It's been mentioned once, so lets sweep it under the carpet and and carry on with our little delusion. Is that it? You would deny others the chance to know this goes on then? How religous of you.
It most certainly is religion, so dont pretend it is not. Redefining religion does not work. Feel free to explain why these people are not religious.

And please - do not bother coming on to this thread about abuse and then be abusive in the juvenile and immature way that seems to be your forte

Actually David that is your forte, how many times have you been banned? You also lie, contradict yourself, abuse those who disagree with you, run from debate when you are losing. You are an innane bigot who cannot look beyond his own little meme and cant tolerate people who differ.
So, you never answered my question - oh tolerant one. Would you allow a homosexual to be a minister in your church?

1062. God Hates the World

Comment #51905 by BillySands on June 25, 2007 at 2:21 pm

The people in this video are crazy and would be just as crazy sans any religious influence.

I don't know about that, that little girl has had that hatred forced upon her. It will poison her mind. That's why it is abuse, and when the likes of Robertson take offense at exposing this, we should post more. There are members of his church who have been brought up fearing hell - it impacts negatively on their lives and ability to form functional relationships. Robertsons response: it's lies that doesnt go on in his church - even though I know one it has happened to - says it all really

1063. God Hates the World

Comment #51900 by BillySands on June 25, 2007 at 2:07 pm

David, stop being a prick. Do you think this should not be exposed?
This is religion and it is bad. Do you disagree? You obviously dont like people criticising religion and use words like which hunt. You seem to think you alone have a true understanding of your religion. Try reading some of the ot laws again. The bible tells us that your god is not loving - even jesus invents hell - oh and sheol is not hell. You are morally corrupt, and I left a little message on that other thread showing you cant even agree with yourself http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,1321,His-word-Attacking-religion-can-seem-like-breaking-a-butterfly-on-a-wheel,David-Baddiel,page2#51867

1064. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51867 by BillySands on June 25, 2007 at 12:32 pm

For the record I disagree with all three of your 'facts'.

David, for the record

Fact 1 You say homosexuality is wrong: http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,300,Dawkins-Delusion-3rd-article-Same-Stupid-Title,David-Robertson,page14#12797 "The Bible says that the practice of homosexuality is wrong."
AND ON THIS THREAD

Fact 2 read Leviticus 20:13 "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
"20:13. see also your comments above

Fact 3 you made the westminister confession of faith which states : "25:6 "There is no other Head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ:anor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God"

Are you confused? Which ones do you actually disgree with? You seem to be contradicting yourself

perhaps you would like to get back on to the original thread that you did a runner from - the would we be bettor off without religion one, and not make excuses. I want your opinion, not some books. That suggests you want to evadeand cant think for yourself. I find your accusation of accusations telling considering you cant agree with yourself.
Many of us here dont want you banned, you are good for Atheism, and I'm sure if you answer questions, Josh wont ban you. It seems to take less for a banning threat on your site: apparently all you need to do is post on numerous threads and actually hang around on them to debate with folk - call me rational!

1065. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51822 by BillySands on June 25, 2007 at 6:29 am

David, Just how simple do I have to make this for you?
Fact 1 you have said homosexuality is wrong. You don't justify why.
Fact 2 The bible says kill homosexuals
Fact 3 You made an oath that the pope was the antichrist. You either lied then, or you are lying now - which is it?

Do uou disagree with any of these statements?

Please clarify. Would you extend equal rights to gays in everything? Or do you discriminate without any justification other than the fact a book of grossly immoral teachings says so.

I'll rephrase my other question, would you allow a homosexual to be a minister in your church? If not, why not?

I keep bringing this up, because on several other threads you said you would happily say what harm homosexuality does, but you keep evading and clearing off without answering the question. If you cant justify your own moral position, why should we take you seriously - afterall, I believe your belief in a moral law is one reason you believe in god - although, I think the real reason is mmetic - another question you regularly evade

1066. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51683 by BillySands on June 24, 2007 at 4:28 am

Hi SG,
You're not wrong there. I would like David to see the errors of his ways and make him question his bigoted views. Failing that, I'll just keep sticking that thorn in his side and he can thank god for the gifts of blindness and bigotry.

Having said that, it does underline why we should not get our moral codes from christian fundies (mind you, the gay friendly ones are disobeying their god - lose-lose situation really)

1067. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51677 by BillySands on June 24, 2007 at 3:54 am

Something is missing here! What does this thread have to do with homophobia and the Pope? You are just a wee bit obcessed (by the way for the record - I think homophobia is a sin, and I do not think the Pope is the anti-Christ - indeed at this very moment I am reading his latest book on Jesus and throughly enjoying it - makes a pleasant change from the atheist tomes I have been digesting!).

The only thing that is missing is you accepting that you promote homophobia soley on the bible's say so. I can find your original quote if you want. Also, like homophobia, you did make an oath saying the pope is the antichrist. A(n other) debate you ran from on this thread http://www.richarddawkins.net/articleComments,1197,Debate-between-Richard-Dawkins-and-Robert-Winston,Today-BBC,page5#comments The reason I brought it up again is because there is no point starting something new with you untill you clarify this. I also asked you if you would vote for a homosexual to head your church - no answer yet - I think we know the bigot's answer. You never said why homosexuality is wrong. If it was wrong and you want us to think that you have something worth saying, you should be able to justify your position. I also count at least 3 fallacies in your obsessed comment - i see you have learned nothing here about reason (awaits generalised fallacy about atheist fundamentallists and other ad hominem - but no justification)

1068. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #51602 by BillySands on June 23, 2007 at 5:14 pm

I never said that science was about "bringing peace

vs

And so it would appear that many people easily forget that science does not hold the key to all life's problems and challenges.

I was meerly stating that is not the aim os science. To imply that some believe it so is a misrepresentation that could be considered an unaccepted enthymeme.

Hell is where xian teaching - particularly David's brand tells us that those who do not love jesus will end up. Personally I find this a distateful doctrine and if god were real, I would not consider him a just god. I certainly agree that we all make mistakes, but i don't see a need for god to be moral - i particularly find the ot laws disgustingly immoral - you know, the ones that jesus has not come to abolish and the ones paul thinks are perfect.

I cannot be certain if there is a heaven, or a hell.

Now, that's better than this comment

if Dr. Dawkins is a man who sincerely does search for truth, then he is indeed on the path to God,

I agree that I cannot be certain that there is not a god. I see no evidence for one, and plenty of evidence why your god is not real. I tried to engage david in discussion on so called messianic prophecy, historical accuracy and morality here and elsewhere - he was evasive, and abusive, hardly what I would call reasoned or loving

It is a little tough to speculate on a place you have never been, or seen.

What about a god you have never seen?

But, human history has shown itself to have perpetual problems on earth. From that alone, I would surmise that human future will continue in a similar fashion.

I agree, but religion does help people to hate and kill - look at what god commands for Jericho (although archaeological studies suggest this was made up - apparently jericho had no wall at the time and Ai had already been deserted)

something i noticed earlier

When has Christianity ever promised to bring a Utopian society or world?

I suppose that depends on how you read these verses that say god will bring peace to earth: Is. 2:2-4, Mic. 4:1-4, Ezek. 39:9 and 12. (somehow, i dont think it will happen)

And no offense, but your post is a little rich coming from someone that has accused other people of ranting. But I suppose you would consider your post to be of "reasoned debate".

There is so much wrong with that statement that i feel I need to educate you. 1. where do I accuse you of ranting?
2. if i had, how does that affect the validity of any ponts I make? (te quoque fallacy)
3. Ad hominem - doesn't address any points that you may feel wrong
4. selective generalisation of the number of posts I made here - like I said, I tried reason on David, but he just likes to dismiss and insult.

No offense, but I dont see this being productive, so you can have the last word

1069. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #51579 by BillySands on June 23, 2007 at 1:41 pm

Frank, science is about understanding and finding the truth, not about bringing peace - what a straw man. Jared exposes mant fallacies of robertson on page 1, if you cant see that, then there is no point in further engagement - especially is you have already decided that truth will lead to god - it seems you are not clear thinking enough to realise that you could be wrong. What however is true is that religion has been responsible for may crimes though, but that is not an arguement for the exstence of god, although some xians commit the fallacy of saying some folk do good things through their faith is evidence for its existance - it appears their fallacious comments are double standards. The bible and David condone homophobia, are you aying that this is a good thing?
BTW if we are all sinners (i naturally disagree*) and because of this, the world cant be perfect, how do you think it would be any different in heaven.
I don't feel from your post that you are open to debate - David isn't, so dont be disappointed if I dont reply


*We do good and bad things, but I dont believe in the concept of sin the way you do, and certainly dont think i have done anything that would deserve endless torment and suffering in hell - that concept is a form of abuse

1070. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51550 by BillySands on June 23, 2007 at 11:03 am

Wee free,
homophobia is illogical as is your belief that the pope is the antichrist

1071. In the know

Comment #51514 by BillySands on June 23, 2007 at 7:50 am

Still at least he isn't completely barmy.

Nobody's perfect

1072. Create a back-up copy of your immune system

Comment #51350 by BillySands on June 22, 2007 at 12:55 pm

Steven Madding,
That would definately be a possibility, although the host's own immune system (assuming it is still functional) should deal with the transferred immune cells. There is something called graft vs host disease where the graft attacks the host. Tissue typing guards against this, but can easily be induced in inbred strains of mice. If you breed two mice with different forms of the same gene for Major Histocompatibility Complex proteins and graft tissue from the ofspring to the parents, you can get the disease. For example, if both parents have two different forms, arbitralily called A and a, then they can produce offspring that contain AA, Aa or aa combinations of these genes. If you graft tissue from AA individuals onto the parents, the immume cells recognise the parent's a version of the gene as foreign (since they dont contain it) and attack it. It would be the same with aa tissue grafted on to the parents. This would recognise th A form as foreign. The parent mice would not recognise either grapt as foreign, because they already contan the A and a forms of the genes.


Personally, I think particular strain of mouse called the nude mouse (which has a severely crippled immune system) could be used to grow boobs on their back. For no reason other than the fact it would be cool and they could be sold to stressed out executives BWWWAAAAHAHAHAH!


Bone marrow is a much better source of stem cells, but not so easy to extract

1073. 'Purity' ring case in High Court

Comment #51346 by BillySands on June 22, 2007 at 12:15 pm

Tell me WTF is an holy kiss? And why do so few Christians ever do this? Can you imagine a big church congregation carrying this out to the letter? One massive snog-in?

I think it means you kiss everyone on the ring - like Ted Haggaed does.

1074. An Inquisition in science's name

Comment #51258 by BillySands on June 22, 2007 at 6:06 am

Time for more expletives I think http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uBAPbOWLxc Bizzarro, the language here is so naughty you better insert your femidom lest ye get pregnant

1075. An Inquisition in science's name

Comment #51239 by BillySands on June 22, 2007 at 3:27 am

Looks like someone has losened Bizarri's straight jacket enough for him to type

"Your first cause argument, still leads to the question, who caused the first cause?"

This question, for all practical purposes, is totally irrational. To ask who created God is to ask who created an entity that by definition must possess aseity, or the property of non-contingency. The question makes no sense.

The problem is that you are assuming properties about this so called entity without any evidence that it exists in the first place. The fact that you may have a problem considering initial causes - if indeed that is even the right question to be asking is not an arguement for its existance. If you start out with these assumptions about it, you have a very irrational starting point. You have essentially created it in the image you want it to have and decided what is the correct question to ask concerning "first causes" without any apparent justification. I find it bizzare that you are clutching at such straws. Your God is supposed to want a relationship with people, he is supposed to be able to heal the sick, raise the dead and perform all sorts of miracles. He is supposedly aware of our innermost thoughts and knows when stars drift out of place. He has supposedly spoken to prophets and brought plagues and judgements on those he does not like, and you are telling me that you asre using the fact that you can't explain the begining of the universe is evidence that he exists.

Robert

Let's be clear - neither am I. :|

Let's be clear, neither is Bizarro. He is driven by the agenda of his meme
PS Manning sounds scared and is trying to demonise atheism - soon he will be gathering angry mobs carrying torches

1076. Atheists: stand up and be counted

Comment #50862 by BillySands on June 20, 2007 at 8:31 am

sargeist
Don't know about ceasar, but this reminds me of something

Betrayed by a friend = er.. Betrayed by a friend

Concerning the betryal, christians claim that Psalm 41:9 predicted that jesus would be betrayed by a friend. Firstly, anyone reading the psalm can see it is not about jesus. Secondly, this friend is actually described as a devil. John 6:70. Strange friends jesus has.

I cant believe they are trying to introduce ID into scottish science classes: http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.1477583.0.0.php Lets introduce The God Delusion into RE classes and school assemblies - fairs fair after all

1077. U.S. circumcision rate drops

Comment #50718 by BillySands on June 19, 2007 at 4:02 pm

let's say a young lady friend of his was like a clumsy oaf with filo pastry. Riiiiiip!

Ow, sounds like he needs a new banjo string

1078. The Great Mutator

Comment #50657 by BillySands on June 19, 2007 at 8:50 am

I saw this worrying article about considering intelligent design for Scottish science classes http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.1477583.0.0.php

1079. U.S. circumcision rate drops

Comment #50619 by BillySands on June 19, 2007 at 5:35 am

Stephend, dare one ask how your friend managed to mutilate his boaby? Did he make a wallet out of the skin? It would be handy going on holiday - give it two strokes and it becomes a suit case

1080. U.S. circumcision rate drops

Comment #50612 by BillySands on June 19, 2007 at 4:53 am

If the religious stop being circumcised, does that mean the next generation will be complete pricks?

What do you call a 50p circumcision?




A rip off

1081. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #50457 by BillySands on June 18, 2007 at 9:04 am

Hi Theo, thought you had become one of us.

I will be coming back shortly, just have some things to deal with first.

Hope you're not as late for your second comming as jesus is :-)

1082. In the know

Comment #50253 by BillySands on June 16, 2007 at 3:52 am

Since when was providing evidence (or lack of) reason and arguement telling people what to believe. Wee Flea could have written that bullshit - I see you have been misrepresenting atheists in the scottish parliment news letter again. You never did tell us, should a homosexual be allowed to be in charge of your church - naturally, I'm not talking about god here, but he often breaks his own rules, so in principle, he could be gay: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUtDWru1po0

1083. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #50250 by BillySands on June 16, 2007 at 3:21 am

Devolved, I think you can take it we assume it rained before the flood. However, the word "nathan" which is used in gen 9:13 actually means "to make". Look at verse 14:"It shall come about, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow will be seen in the cloud,"So, pay attention to context and try again!
Your desparate explanation is a bit like god saying to someone with 2 legs "here, have two legs as a sign" Still, what a bastard, killing every thing, and you actually believe he is loving and forgiving

1084. The Benny Hinn Report

Comment #50121 by BillySands on June 15, 2007 at 6:30 am

I remember seeing people wheeled in on hospital beds attached to oxygen, all hoping to be healed. They are probably all dead now. Yet, miraculously someone with a sore wrist and a numb leg got healed. I would happily kick him in the hairy swingers untill my foot hurts, then change feet.
Talking of btutal beatings, this is hilarious http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HuobIhYVmU

1085. The Benny Hinn Report

Comment #50113 by BillySands on June 15, 2007 at 5:50 am

This guy is a total C*nt! I remember seeing him pretend to heal a white guy with a black disease - scickle cell anemia. Sill, the only difference between this con man and the purveyors of lies and false hope found in other churches (lets call them ministers for short) is that he is more sucessful at lying and stealing than them

1086. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #49942 by BillySands on June 14, 2007 at 7:49 am

David ran off crying, we seem to have kicked his arse so hard the bruising has formed itself into a rather amusing shade of tartan!

Yes, that must have really hurt given his attitude to getting your ring bashed - I think Frankie Howard momentarily possessed me there.

just heard some scurrilous rumour there were 6 Jesus shaped people hanging around in Jerusalem around that period

I believe one was callefd Apollonius of Tyana http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollonius_of_Tyana

He Wanks as highly as any messiah known in Wome you know. He was a bit of a Sillius Soddus you know

1087. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #49940 by BillySands on June 14, 2007 at 7:30 am

Newathiest, Devolved is working on the assumption that life can only occur in the form will lead to people.
Ozone is no problem. Life lives in the sea and UV does not penetrate. Also, who is to say that in the abscence of ozone, natural sun block would not evolve - infact, it did!
Temperature - we get life at the bottom of antarctic glaciers and in hydrothermal vents at temperatures of a few 100 degrees (I'm actually about to play with a protein that can work at 95 C).
The colour of the sun and photosynthesis - life does not need the sun for energy - see hydrothermal vents ad chemosynthesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemosynthesis Then, there are all the other photopigments in nature: eg Chlorophyll A and B, carotenoids, bacteriorhodopsin and opsins (remember them?) that all absorb at different wavelengths, so, other ways of harvesting light energy already exist.


Auchtung, I'm completely bloody sick of this misanthropic stuff give us some difficult ones devolved you bottom burp. See you teddy bear! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxkFwwRYnco

1088. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #49934 by BillySands on June 14, 2007 at 6:33 am

Hi Philip,
Dont remember sideshow Dave challenging you. He deflected and ran more like.
It was Indeed Herod who ordered the command (although a different Herod appears later in the jesus story - the one who killed John the baptist - who according to the bible was the return of Elijah (matt3:1-2) who was to precede the messiah, although according to the bible, he wasn't(john 1:21-23)?????????)How ever, he did not fulfil the purpose of Elijah MKII: bring family harmony: Malachi 4:5-6 - so someones fibbing.
Anyway, as well as the fact the genealogies of Jesus in Matt 1 and Luke 3 wildly contradict each other, they give different times for the birth of Jesus. Herod died in 4BCE, Luke says that Jesus was born during the census of Quirinius (cyreneus) This did not happen before 6CE. So if luke is right, the visit of the wise men and the slaughter of the innocents was made up (something historians have thought for a while. If Matt is right, then luke is wrong. The bible also contradicts itself on where jesus grew up, but that is another story. This is the so-called fulfillment of the travel to egypt prophecy

Matthew claimed that this fulfilled a prophecy that said "I have called my son out of Egypt" (Matt. 2:15). He also says that this fulfills another prophecy stating that "he will be called a Nazarine" (Matt. 2:23) because they moved to Nazareth. It is very important to note that Matthew himself states that both these stories fulfill genuine prophecies. It is not the case that some uninformed believer has come up with this idea by himself, and it has then worked its way into popular tradition. It is stated by a so called inspired writer of the bible. It is therefore considered by believers to be the true word of their god. Therefore, if any prophecies should be true, these two should be. The first one is taken from the book of Hosea, (11:1). It states "When Israel was a child, I loved him as a son, and I called my son out of Egypt". So, the "son" is a metaphor for the nation of Israel, and not Jesus (also note that God "called his son", he did not say that he will call his son). This verse is about the exodus that Moses lead out of Egypt, and even more importantly, this son is referred to as rebellious (Verse 2), unappreciative of God (verse 3) and because of this, the "son" will be punished (verse 5). The last time I read the bible, Jesus was the perfect example to us all. Therefore, this is yet another reason to doubt that this verse is about a future incident in the life of Jesus.
The Nazarene prophecy can not be found anywhere in the bible, so perhaps Matthew just made this up, to make Jesus sound more like the messiah. Some Christians claim that it refers to Judges 13:5 "You will become pregnant and give birth to a son, and his hair must never be cut. For he will be dedicated to God as a Nazirite from birth. He will rescue Israel from the Philistines." Clearly, this is not about Jesus. It is about Samson. Furthermore, a Nazirite is not a Nazerene. A Nazirite is member of a Jewish sect that amongst other things must not drink wine (Lev.6:1-31). The fact that Jesus drank wine disqualifies him from this verse (Matt. 26:8) .This claim only goes to show that some Christians will grasp at anything to try and assert that the bible is always correct

Any way, if you can put up with it's length, this link discusses the time of jesus' birth http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/quirinius.html

I actually challenged David on this and he got abusive and ran off crying http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,1197,Debate-between-Richard-Dawkins-and-Robert-Winston,Today-BBC,page5#47314

Welcome back down under

1089. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #49925 by BillySands on June 14, 2007 at 5:57 am

Oh well, it seems OK now. I was just commenting that Steve's comment reminded me of one somewhere else that said that if the universe was designed for mankind, then mankind was designed for pubic lice. Therefore the universe was actually designed for pubic lice.

Zaphod's was more scientific

1090. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #49881 by BillySands on June 14, 2007 at 2:24 am

Zaphod and I had posted comments last night. They have now mysteriously disapeared. Has this happened to anyone else?

1091. Baptists Warned About Islam, Atheism

Comment #49707 by BillySands on June 13, 2007 at 3:50 am

am still waiting for David to realise the importance of knowing where his towel is rather than his god, towels are so much more useful!

Perhaps he has thrown it in?

1092. Baptists Warned About Islam, Atheism

Comment #49705 by BillySands on June 13, 2007 at 3:45 am

Oh, still waiting for the answers to my questions on that other thread.....

Me too

1093. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #49695 by BillySands on June 13, 2007 at 2:23 am

Devolved, dont talk rubbish. You are spouting the same refuted junk - although you probably never actually read the rebuttals. Did you actually read any of those CMI articles you posted? and did you agree with them? Do you thing those funny drawings were actually evidence that Eryops co-existed with humans? What about Rainbows? What about opsin genes that allow us to see them?
I dont believe for a minute that those comments are the real reason you specifically belive -out of all man's false gods - in yours. You are just retrospectively clutching at straws to try and make delusion apear rational

1094. Baptists Warned About Islam, Atheism

Comment #49693 by BillySands on June 13, 2007 at 2:12 am

Wee Flea, a man who publicly declared the pope to be the antichrist should not try and take the moral high ground

1095. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #49556 by BillySands on June 12, 2007 at 11:28 am

Could I ask therefore that you don't rise to the bait until he has answered the questions that have been raised in other discussions

However, feel free to throw rotten fruit at him and boo as he fiendishly avoids debate :-)

1096. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #49489 by BillySands on June 12, 2007 at 5:00 am

Thanks Philip, I thought he had something up with him that prayer cant fix like---welll....anything at all.
Quetz, Do I still get to play Ride of the Valkyries when I happens?

I'm happy to accept that I was once deluded in faith. There is no other way to put it. Many christians no doubt think the devil has deluded me. That's their opinion, I couldn't really care what they think. I may think they are silly, but dont take offence - its called maturity - sticks and stones etc. If christians take offense at being called deluded, well, you have to break a few eggs to make an omlette.

How do you tell someone they are so morally corrupt that they are going to burn in hell for all eternity with out causing offence?

1097. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #49474 by BillySands on June 12, 2007 at 4:01 am

Quetz, I'm worried about him, this is his 3rd post on different threads where he has not called us fundies or been generally abusive.
I'll make it easy for him:
I don't care about reason, religion must be eradicated by force - kill fundies - kill kill - fundies are Japan and I am Godzilla - exterminate all gods in the name of atheism!

That should put the colour back in his cheeks :-)

1098. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #49468 by BillySands on June 12, 2007 at 3:20 am

Bring back the real wee flea! Then he can answer the questions put to him on other threads

1099. 60 SECONDS: Richard Dawkins

Comment #49450 by BillySands on June 12, 2007 at 2:16 am

Tie Interceptor,
There were 4 lengthy rebuttals in the Scottish metro, and no faith heads today. I'll try and scan them - my scanner is knackered at the mo) and I'll ask zaphod to post them (beyond my PC skills)

1100. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #49358 by BillySands on June 11, 2007 at 3:36 pm

Devolved, it was rather rude of you not to read Roberts lengthy rebuttal of that trash you posted on dating. A lot of time clearly went into it. But then, we already know you are not interested in the truth - if itsnot biblical, then its not true - right. Rather than debate, you njust paste and run.

Sorry I missed the fun here guys. We should have a devolved watch and send each other PMs as to his whereabouts. That way we can deal with this constant posting of the same stuff.
Devolved, you have posted links that state duplications happen, mutations happen and selection happens, so what is your problem? Remember opsins? I think it is wierd that you ignore other evidence and demand an asnswer to a specific question that you percieve as a weakness. However, it is not a weakness, and you have been given answers. Strange you are not consistent and reject god because you have not seen him or heard him or or met someone who has sen him, or met someone who has heard him, or seen a miracle or realised that biblical genalogies contradict each other or....or....or etc........... Your mind truely is closed to reason

Hows' the dinosaur hunting?