1 2 3 4 5 9 | bottom
Quote# 7148

some people would think your a fool for writing that....but its already been proved you are a fool so we dont have to say it again....man I just saved myself a lot of time

Christianotaku, Theology Web 2 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: -5

Quote# 7149

The Bush administration is not arguing that it can hold any civilian citizen it feels needed in prison as long as it seems necessary. They are arguing that these men are, in reality, 'enemy combatants' and therefore do not deserve the same legal protections as citizens.

Skip Lively, Christian Forums 6 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 7150

[Replying to "Bush is more an example of a man with a gun in one hand and the Bible in the other."] And the downside here is? When god drives your heart the gun can't be missused. Do you want the leader of the mightiest army to be driven by greed, power or lust,(not mentioning any names) or any other un-godly acts?

Billnew, Christian Forums 5 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6

Quote# 7151

Most of the media is indeed liberal, for exadurations get more people to buy papers and watch TV.

Outspoken, Christian Forums 12 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 7152

I guess 50 years wasn't enough time for him [a Congressman who didn't say 'Under God' during the Pledge of Allegiance] to get used to saying the pledge with God included. Only a person who is anti-God would do this. If he loved God, he would want to say His Name. Loving and acknowledging God is not considered forcing religion on anyone. The whole charade of separation of church and state is ludicrous.

Jesus Groupie, Rapture Ready 13 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 7

Quote# 7153

Why do Anti-patriots run for office anyways?

MrMannn, Rapture Ready 4 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 7154

This guy [the congressman] is so lost. It is so sad to see such a hatred for a loving God.

CJL, Rapture Ready 1 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 7155

It means simply there is no such thing (never has been never will be )as an Atheist. What you have is Believers and unbelievers... Atheism is a pure impossibility.... you would have to know everything,that's why the fool has said in his heart there is no God,(what does that make the person who says it outload?) How do we know that there are no atheists? Even agnostics are not physically/mentally blind,even they know there is a God,God has made it CLEAR to them,but their hearts cannot accept this 'sight' so they say that they don't know!! Like the person who refuses to see what is in front of him,BECAUSE he keeps putting his hands over his eyes! It is truly shocking the power of denial,and none more so than denying God's very exsistence.They ARE (not might be) without excuse.Rom 1

cygnusx1, Christian Forums 8 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 7156

There is no such thing as a weak or strong atheist,that is illogical. 'Well I believe there is no God,but I am not sure' is an oxymoron.

cygnusx1, Christian Forums 9 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 7157

It's a bit like young people,you? they know they are going to die,but they DON'T believe it, consider how most young people do things that later in life they admit 'I can't believe I did that when I was young'

cygnusx1, Christian Forums 1 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: -1

Quote# 7158

This is the type of emotional response you can expect,just continue to leave reason in the cupboard,and you will continue with the fantasy called Atheism! You could say to me 'prove there is a God' I would reply it's beyond proof,it's starring you in the face!You would probably reply 'I believe there is no God ,but I can't be certain'I would say you are an agnostic,nothing more,nothing less.

cygnusx1, Christian Forums 11 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 7159

And yes, Christianity's faith totally rapes science.

Courthead, BlizzForums 32 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 7160

Part of Christianity is that God is greater than any scientific crap that man can come up with. Thus, if I were using faith as support, I could instantly invalidate every scientific argument you had. Note how this discussion will NEVER GO ANYWHERE.

Courthead, BlizzForums 28 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 9

Quote# 7161

their god, allah (AKA satan) motivates them.

MercyMe, Rapture Ready 10 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 7162

That's why Muslims need our prayers. Their so duped.

Saint194, Rapture Ready 8 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 0

Quote# 7163

So if there is no God... Why don't we just invade every mosque in Iraq and do whatever killing we need to further our cause? All we have to tell the muslims is, is that there is no God. Surely we can drive this point home with them.

Riddick, JREF Forums 6 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 7164

Kindly stick to the Atheist viewpoint. Your dislike of Christians has been noted, but clearly observe we're not talking about Christians in this thread. I'll assume I don't have to repeat that. We're talking about the Atheist viewpoint, which should be enter and kill all since there is no God.

Riddick, JREF Forums 18 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 9

Quote# 7165

We simply surround the mosque's, invade and take the life of those inside. There is no God, hence no retribution. We can go in there and school those guys about the non-existence of God. That is the idealistic Atheist viewpoint. Be done with that mess over there. Go into the mosque's, do the necessary killin, then we can all leave that place. Thus said the Atheist.

Riddick, JREF Forums 10 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 5

Quote# 7166

Don't turn this away from the Atheist viewpoint. That is what's under scrutiny at this time. There's no God, go in and kill them in the mosque's --- the Atheist

Riddick, JREF Forums 2 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 7167

Troylus, if you believe that there is absolute 'proof' that the earth is much older than 6,000 years, then I would like to see it. Of all the research I have done comparing articles, I have come to the conclusion that the dating methods evolutionists use are unreliable. Carbon 14 dating only works only so many thousand years back, and then becomes unreliable. Anything that seems to date beyond 6,000 years is only a result of a world wide flood that caused many fossils to appear older than they really are. Catastrophism ages things pretty quickly--leaving you poor deluted evolutionists to misdate virtually everything. This leaves you the question as to whether such a flood existed. Well let me tell you, it did. I believe that todays oceans are the 'leftovers' of a worldwide flood. I also believe that most of our high jagged mountains, such as Mt. Everest were formed by the massive upheavel and underground water pressure that came from within the fountains of the earth.

Lysimachus, Someplace Somewhere 10 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 9

Quote# 7168

This is where the lunacy comes in. 'It has to come from these Professors and from certain universities [and not CreationScience.com] to be valid'. I see your line of reasoning--which leads me to believe I made a dire mistake in mentioning anything from the start. I may have missinformation as to the exact standing of 'anthropologist, biologist, and geneticist'. You don't have enough sense yet to know that these men are extremely biased and have manipulated information to suit there macroevolutionary based theories of stupidity??? I've heard countless stories where these types of men love to hide evidence, and don't let the people know the truth. Many of them are liars. If this is the attitude you are going to take toward me, I see no use in providing you any documented sources, because you can be sure that you will do all in your power to discredit it, or find something wrong with the writer. Berkeley [University's website] can go jump in my back lake for all I care.

Lysimachus, Someplace Somewhere 5 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3

Quote# 7169

I acknowledge the fact that this indeed is a subject I need more enlightenment on.... Regardless of my missunderstanding of these facts, I still hold to my views whatever bones we are talking--whether we are 'considered offshoots' or not, are either normal human beings with severe bone ailment, or amalgamations (crossbreeds between man and ape). Some say it is genetically impossible. I agree, today it is impossible. But if we are speaking from a creationists point of view, men and animals during the post flood period were much healther and more genetically capable. But not today, since man had degenerated as a result of the many damages the flood brought upon the earth.

Lysimachus, Someplace Somewhere 2 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4

Quote# 7170

Actually, the cosmic background radiation was what I had in mind when I meant that the big bang could be used for proof of creation. And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light. -Genesis... Now, if God did indeed create light, at the furthest reaches of the universe, we should expect to see light. And what do we find? Electromagnetic radiation, of which light is a part of. Also, solar light is composed of other electromagnetic spectrum, such as ultraviolet, infrared, etc.

Jedi_Templar, BlizzForums 3 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 7171

Masturbation is specifically identified in the Bible as 'unclean'... My thinking is, it makes sense that a woman who is facing her period is 'unclean', but it is easy to think that semen from masturbation is nothing more than something like 'snot', something that can be wiped away and forgotten. But these army dudes [i][in Deuteronomy 23:9][/i] weren't even allowed to reenter the camp until they became clean again. Furthermore, this is with regard to nocternal omissions... which are completely involuntarily. Why, then, could someone possibly think that masturbation, which is completely voluntary, is an exception to the rule of uncleanliness? So the next time you voluntarily discharge semen, keep in mind that, according to Old Testament law, the Lord (Yahweh), your Creator, finds it to be as filthy as the discharge of a woman's period. (Eww.)

Xiaoth, Christian Forums 31 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 9

Quote# 7172

...we don't know what technology Noah might have used to give each of the animals the best environment as possible. As for freshwater fish, Noah didn't need to have an aquarium. You are assuming that all the water around the earth had to be either SALTY or FRESH! And what basis do you have for this assumption? None. I personally would not know for sure whether the flood was all salty, partly salty in only certain regions of the globe, or all fresh, but I see no reason to not believe that some areas were salty and others fresh.

Lysimachus, Someplace Somewhere 4 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
1 2 3 4 5 9 | top