Originally posted by RJHindsThere was nothing wrong with what divegeester did. It's been a brand of RHP humour since I've been a member. People do it many times a week. Your original post is still there for all to see. The fact that divegeester is satirizing you is indicated by him posting "Fixed".
... divegeester replied to my post with Fixed after editing it ...
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHinds[/b] Does that mean he's the "best kind" of Christian too ?
My original post said the following:
[b]I am a lying, cheating, obnoxious, redneck, Christian. That's the best kind. That's because I really need Christ as a Savior. No doubt about it.
Then divegeester replied to my post with Fixed after editing it so that it looked like this:
Originally posted by RJHinds
I am a lying, cheating, obnoxious a ...[text shortened]... e it in his text and leaving my text as it was and still adding the word "Fixed" at the end.
You know, Lying, misrepresenting, cheating, etc. etc.
Originally posted by sonshipI have no indication that he is a Christian at all. I have openly declared myself a Christian and you can believe it or not. I know I am in need of a Savior because I have sinned and I continue to sin, even though I have made efforts to stop sinning. I am weak but my Savior is strong and I turn to Him for forgiveness and salvation.
Does that mean he's the "best kind" of Christian too ?
You know, Lying, misrepresenting, cheating, etc. etc.[/b]
It is my opinion that the best kind of Christian recognizes his sinfulness and his need of a saviour. If you disagree with that, then so be it.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by RJHindsmaybe you should try atheism for a while. its working fine for me. i hardly ever sin.
I have no indication that he is a Christian at all. I have openly declared myself a Christian and you can believe it or not. I know I am in need of a Savior because I have sinned and I continue to sin, even though I have made efforts to stop sinning. I am weak but my Savior is strong and I turn to Him for forgiveness and salvation.
It is my opinion tha ...[text shortened]... recognizes his sinfulness and his need of a saviour. If you disagree with that, then so be it.
Originally posted by RJHindsRefute atheism? How? As atheism makes no claims and encompasses no beliefs, there's nothing to refute. There is no content to atheism. It is nothing more than the negation of theistic claims, which must sink or swim on their own merit. The only thing one can do is to uphold or refute the validity of theistic claims. There is no such thing as refuting atheism.
I thought this was a good video to refute Atheism. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGpPLCFhE
Here is another one to enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMX_z6bvruo
Originally posted by RJHindsPretty sure there's a clause in there warning against engine use too. I suppose you treat the Ts & Cs rather like the bible, and just go along with the bits you like eh?
Didn't you see this:
[b]Please edit quoted text responsibly. Making modifications which misrepresent the original post will result in a forum ban.[/b]
Originally posted by avalanchethecatHow can you blaspheme if you don't believe in that which is
No, it's perfectly possible to be an atheist without blaspheming.
supposed to have been blasphemed against?
Salman Rushdie is alleged to have blasphemed when he wrote the Satanic Verses.
The cartoon that appeared in a Danish newspaper poking fun at
the prophet Mohammed is also alleged to be guilty of blasphemy.
But supposing someone believed in little green men from the planet Nirvarna
who were GODS and all life and knowledge came from them?
And I said you're crazy? Would I then be guilty of blasphemy?
No one can prove the supernatural exists, so how could you blaspheme about it?
Originally posted by johnnylongwoody"Blasphemy" is a kind of thoughtcrime and the suggestion that it applies to non-believers requires doublethink but, in my experience, pointing this out often provokes duckspeak.
How can you blaspheme if you don't believe in that which is
supposed to have been blasphemed against?
Originally posted by RJHindsDo you reckon RJ has actually seen that first video? Or is this an example of Poe's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law) in action?
I thought this was a good video to refute Atheism. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGpPLCFhE
Here is another one to enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMX_z6bvruo
Or is the 'RJ' character the parody, as has been suggested several times? I am finding harder and harder to believe that RJ can really be that mind-numbingly stupid.
RJ, own up. Do you really honestly think that first link is an attempt to refute atheism?
--- Penguin
Originally posted by PenguinMy bet is that he went through it and swallowed the lot, probably while doing jazz-hands and echoing 'hallelujah' et c.
Do you reckon RJ has actually seen that first video? Or is this an example of Poe's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law) in action?
Or is the 'RJ' character the parody, as has been suggested several times? I am finding harder and harder to believe that RJ can really be that mind-numbingly stupid.
RJ, own up. Do you really honestly think that first link is an attempt to refute atheism?
--- Penguin
Originally posted by sonshipDid you get the part where he called the pillar of salt lady the 'pillow' of salt? That was a big clue.I thought this was a good video to refute Atheism. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjGpPLCFhE
As soon as I saw who did the video I knew it was sarcasm.
That guy is some kind of atheist comedian wannabe.