Just in time for the Battle of Los Angeles!

  1. Animby says:

    # 34 Alfie, “No to both.”

    And now you speak for god?
    I’ve said it before: Alfie, you’re a hoot!

  2. lex parsimoniae says:

    “Evidently, thinking is not your forte.
    There are two reasons why you don’t mind your own business:
    my own business?”

    We both choose to come to this blog and respond to the topics posted in an effort to converse with others that found the topic of interest. Your response here is you making it anyones business who chooses to respond to your public post. Belief beyond rationale is even on topic for this thread.

    Alfie: Their is a Dragon

    Me: Great I’d love to believe in a dragon cool! but thats an extraordinary Claim. Just show me the proof, some proof any proof.

    Alfie: Look at all the people who believe in the Dragon, they have been believing in the Dragon for thousands of years.

    Me: thats nice…but not proof of a dragon just that lots of people feel the need/want to be part of something bigger and more important than themselves and tradition/peer pressure offers up the dragon.

    Alfie: the Dragon created you, me, them, everybody and everything.

    Me: Sorry did I miss your proof of the dragon? Should you ever prove the dragon then you will need to get busy and prove it can create stuff.

    Alfie faith is not the same as evidence based reasoning there is no more evidence of dragons then god/gods . I’m glad you and so many others get something from it but you would be wise to be cautious of any institutions and or ideas that are thought/taught to be above scrutiny.

    Rev/Prophet Bob Dobbs the greatest salesman who ever lived, would tell you “believe in this scripture in order to be saved from a consequence of this scripture” “this scripture tells you must proselytize others to believe in it or you will not be saved from a consequence of it”. Man what a racket and you are still buying

    Please give us some proof of your Dragon or offer up some rationalization on the topics that don’t need belief in Dragons to give credence to your ideas

  3. Animby says:

    # 42 Alfie said, “nor homosexuals, nor sodomites” Oh, dear god. MUST thou be redundant?

    I have not read the New King James Version so it may specify homosexuals but I’m fairly certain the King James Version does not. But that’s okay. I see from your previous post you’ll use whichever version suits your argument.

    The King James Version was written in the early 17th century with the instruction to the translators to make the scriptures fit the philosophy of the Church of England which, coincidentally, was formed a century earlier to make life easier for Henry the 8th. I’m sorry: to meet the needs of the protestant reformation while maintaining principles of Catholicism. Phew.

    Then, in the latter half of the 20th century, it was revised, yet again to change thou to you and, apparently introduce the word homosexual. (If you are to be believed.) So, I guess those scholars in Nashville really wanted to make sure queers are excluded from heaven. Hope none of them have a wide stance.

    Alfie, when will you realize that the mere fact there are various “versions” of the holy bible simply means NONE of them are holy and probably not even accurate since each and every version was written with an agenda and invariable based on biased translations of poor translations by undernourished monks working in windowless cells inhaling the fumes of cheap tallow candles?

    Alfie: I can prove to you there is no merciful god in heaven, He allows you to spew on the internet thereby torturing so many innocents.

    PS to all you grammar sodomites: I know sodomite and homosexual are not true synonyms. But, come on…

  4. RSweeney says:

    I love how they know which cloud to zoom on even though nothing is visible.


Bad Behavior has blocked 19634 access attempts in the last 7 days.