NamelessFaceless wrote:That's an excellent video, but honestly if the "God/Gloria" of the bible actually did show up and introduce himself, I'd reject him. Because he's a cunt. What kind of fucked-up god is it that would impregnate a young girl, then murder his own offspring as a sacrifice to himself? Good thing he doesn't exist.

It's worse than that, because he is his own offspring. So he impregnated his own mother with himself, then sacrificed himself to himself to appease himself...for a problem that he caused.

Funny how believers just don't see it that way.

Wiðercora wrote:

NamelessFaceless wrote:That's an excellent video, but honestly if the "God/Gloria" of the bible actually did show up and introduce himself, I'd reject him. Because he's a cunt. What kind of fucked-up god is it that would impregnate a young girl, then murder his own offspring as a sacrifice to himself? Good thing he doesn't exist.

It's worse than that, because he is his own offspring. So he impregnated his own mother with himself, then sacrificed himself to himself to appease himself...for a problem that he caused.

And it was all planned considering he's omniscient, and omnipotent - it couldn't ever have turned out any other way.

And the people who believe in this god also believe that abortion is just wrong? Surely removing a fertilized egg is a little less of a murder than the willful planning of allowing your own son to grow to middle age and then having him brutally murdered.

This is why I think I'm against God:

He's kind of a fuckup when it comes to gift giving.

ispoketoanangel wrote:The question is perfectly legitimate. You only need to read this forum more than 5 minutes to realize most members of the Church of Atheism hates God. The vitriol speaks for itself. "Mary was a whore", "The Omnicunt", "Jewish Zombie".

Jesus would appear right in front of them, they would spit on him and crucify him again.

Oh look, it's strawman caricature time again. You never learn the basics, do you, despite repeatedly being schooled upon them by numerous diligent posters here?

The simple fact of the matter is, no supernaturalist has ever provided any real evidence supporting the assertions of his or her favourite mythology. This is true for all of them, including yours. As a direct corollary of this, no one here is obliged to treat supernaturalist wishful thinking as constituting established fact, because, wait for it, it isn't established fact. Live with this.

While you're at it, drop the tiresome "church of atheism" canard, because it IS a canard, and you've been presented on numerous occasions with sufficient material to learn why it's a canard. Because, wait for it, churches involve people gathering together to share their uncritical acceptance of unsupported blind mythological assertions. Not only have you been told repeatedly, that atheists reject uncritical acceptance of unsupported blind mythological assertions, and indeed reject belief itself as purportedly constituting a source of substantive knowledge, but moreover, that this is the sole feature they share, and that with respect to a wide range of other issues, they are diverse and heterogeneous. But please, don't let actual facts get in the way of another of your tedious little diatribes, will you?

Furthermore, the instances you cite above of vitriol arise for substantive reasons. Amongst these being that your particular species of imaginary magic man is a particularly vicious and psychotic entity, and is so according to the assertions erected within your own mythology. After all, it's your mythology that erects the following assertions:

[1] That your magic man set about exterminating all life on the planet with a magic flood, with the exception of a 600 year old drunken barge captain and his immediate relations, plus whatever creatures lived within walking distance of his house;

[2] That your magic man ordered his raving, piss-stained followers to exterminate neighbouring peoples, in some cases even exterminating their livestock, whilst in others being granted purported "permission" to kidnap all the virgin girls as sex slaves;

[3] That your magic man purportedly orders death by stoning as a punishment for a huge range of purported "offences", several of which most people here don't consider to be real offences at all.

Now since it's your mythology that asserts this, why do you have a problem with the rest of us taking these assertions at face value, and arriving at the logical conclusions?

Another reason you see barbed remarks directed toward your imaginary magic man and your mythology, is because quite frankly, we're sick and tired of being berated constantly by mouth-on-a-stick supernaturalists, telling us that their mythology-based fantasies are real, and that we are purportedly "deificient" because we happen to prefer reality to fantasy. We're also sick and tired of seeing mouthy supernaturalists trying to corrupt and pervert science education, spreading lies about valid scientific theories, and engaging in conspiratorial scheming and conniving to shove mythology into science classes where it doesn't belong. We're also sick and tired of hearing mouthy supernaturalists telling us that we're vermin, that we deserve to burn in hell, and that we're all immoral scum worthy of nothing but extermination (a view you yourself expressed here on at least one occasion, implying this with your original choice of user name), only to see many of the same mouthy supernaturalists, demonstrate that their bleating and crowing about being "morally superior", because they believe in a cosmic peeping tom, rings hollow when those same supernaturalists are caught buggering little boys, raping under age girls, defrauding the taxman or committing gruesome murders, activities which never feature in any of our day to day lives.

Basically, if you want to see less vitriol, tell your fellow supernaturalists to clean up their act, and stop behaving like spoilt brats.

Will S wrote:Please hang on for just one moment, chaps!

Recently, I haven't been following discussions in this forum, and I don't know what ispoketoanangel's usual form is. That's to say, for all I know, his habitual style is highly provocative, and invites the sort of response which he's been receiving here.

But, looking at this as something of an outsider (though as somebody who's probably as hard-bitten an atheist as any of you), it does seem to me that some of the responses to ispoketoanangel's last message are a bit over the top. Shouldn't we concentrate (as I suggested above) on the fact that 'Why are you against God?' is, actually, a trick question? Though, of course, some of the people who ask it may not fully appreciate that it is a trick question.

Just thought I'd say this ... now don't all start pitching into me.

Basically, he's receiving the responses he is, because he has form. He has a large number of unpleasant precedents to his name, stretching right back to his first appearance on these forum pages, starting with his very first post, in which he launched this delightful little topic. You can also read this delightful little post of his, which was only his fifth post after arriving here, in which he explicitly expresses the view that people such as you and I should be exterminated. A little later, he gave us all an insight into how little he cares for the proper rules of discourse with this post, demonstrating conclusively that his sole purpose in arriving here was to engage in ideological stormtrooping for his nasty little doctrine. You can also read this post for an insight into how he considers us all to be some sort of sub-humans. These examples are not unique. Search his posts and you will find numerous others. He's been generous with the provision of evidence in this regard.

Oh, and recently, he's branched out into Santorum-level rabid homophobia, which was why he earned himself a month's posting holiday a little while back. I see he's also launched this delightful little thread, no doubt inspired by the tiresomely familiar Christofascist lie, that treating gay people as fellow human beings means you want to fuck farm animals.

As I said, he has form, and as a result of the despicable precedents set in his posts, many here consider his assorted offerings worthy of special attention in this regard.

Exactly how is pointing out that he's posted what amounts to hate speech against the rest of the members here, an attack against his person?

Good job Cali.

So, if I cut off Santorum's dick, that means that God is working through me to give him a special gift?

If certain Christians have "found Jesus," that means that he never died for our sins. The whole thing was based on make believe to start a new religion from Judaism. The made up religions keep coming: The Muslim religion and Mormanism was based on Christianity. What's next?

ispoketoanangel wrote:The question is perfectly legitimate. You only need to read this forum more than 5 minutes to realize most members of the Church of Atheism hates God. The vitriol speaks for itself. "Mary was a whore", "The Omnicunt", "Jewish Zombie".

Jesus would appear right in front of them, they would spit on him and crucify him again.

If Jesus appeared right in front of people on this website, I'm sure most people would be happy to have a beer with him. Is he really the son of God? Is God really the cunt described in the bible? Can we test his powers? ect...

But our time would be limited, no doubt the stupid hicks of this world (many of whom subscribe to Christianity) wouldn't be able to accept that Jesus doesn't have white skin. They'd probably start calling him a fraud or "satan in disguise" and end up blowing his brains out.

Zwaarddijk, Cali has a documented history of being spiteful toward other users. Starr gave him a serious warning about his behavior.

Hey ISTAA, how's the sista?

Perhaps you could explain to me the nature of this God that I'm supposed to hate so vehemently (as with all in our congregation, blindly following the dogmas espoused by our One True Church of Nonbelief). You see, I've been having trouble lately in that I can't really hate anything I can't perceive, because imperceptible things don't bother me much. People do, especially peeps trying to bullshit me. Used to make me quite bilious. But I do try hard not to hate them.

ChasM wrote:This is why I think I'm against God:

He's kind of a fuckup when it comes to gift giving.

New pick up line.

"Look, I think you should just accept the gift god is going to give you willingly before I have to push it onto you."

ispoketoanangel wrote:Zwaarddijk, Cali has a documented history of being spiteful toward other users. Starr gave him a serious warning about his behavior.

I beg to differ. He has been nothing but the perfect English gentleman to me. And the best teacher I've ever had.

Zwaarddijk wrote:

ispoketoanangel wrote:Zwaarddijk, Cali has a documented history of being spiteful toward other users. Starr gave him a serious warning about his behavior.

So ... do ... you! So don't go around playing the victim, now, it doesn't really suit you.

And as already pointed out in another thread where ISTAA brought this up in a similarly totally irrelevant fashion, Starr didn't give him a serious warning about his behavior, and in fact quite clearly stated that while this specific incident was a problem, that they supported him wholeheartedly and were grateful for all his efforts.

Why is RatSkep against people who speak to angels?

ispoketoanangel wrote:The question is perfectly legitimate. You only need to read this forum more than 5 minutes to realize most members of the Church of Atheism hates God. The vitriol speaks for itself. "Mary was a whore", "The Omnicunt", "Jewish Zombie".

Jesus would appear right in front of them, they would spit on him and crucify him again.

Can one of these religious idiots show me some evidence that a "Church of Atheism" even exists, let alone that we belong to it? I feel like building one of them myself, just for the ultimate irony value. However, building a really ornate warehouse to store nothing doesn't seem like a valuable use of my time.

As for a rebuttal of "Why are you against God?" I would say "any being that doesn't have clearly defined scalar and vector quantities is my mortal enemy."

tsninjapirate wrote:

ispoketoanangel wrote:The question is perfectly legitimate. You only need to read this forum more than 5 minutes to realize most members of the Church of Atheism hates God. The vitriol speaks for itself. "Mary was a whore", "The Omnicunt", "Jewish Zombie".

Jesus would appear right in front of them, they would spit on him and crucify him again.

Can one of these religious idiots show me some evidence that a "Church of Atheism" even exists, let alone that we belong to it?

They try, and they fail