Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why God never got a PhD

MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

1. He only had one major publication
2. It was written in Hebrew
3. It had no references
4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal
5. Some doubt he wrote it himself
6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?
7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims
8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment
9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons
10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning
11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 2:42:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

1. He only had one major publication
2. It was written in Hebrew
3. It had no references
4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal
5. Some doubt he wrote it himself
6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?
7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims
8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment
9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons
10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning
11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

Haha. Some light-hearted humor is much needed and greatly appreciated in this section of the forums.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 4:23:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 2:42:51 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

1. He only had one major publication
2. It was written in Hebrew
3. It had no references
4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal
5. Some doubt he wrote it himself
6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?
7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims
8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment
9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons
10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning
11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

Haha. Some light-hearted humor is much needed and greatly appreciated in this section of the forums.

Cheers!

Point Number 12. The author is guilty of plagiarism from earlier writings and beliefs and these have not been openly acknowledged or referenced.

Point Number 13. (Unlucky for some). The author's writings have proved controversial and inflammatory and have been directly responsible for atrocities.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:08:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

@Mestari, I believe that it would be inaccurate(and destructive) to equate a fallacious appeal to ridicule attempting marginalization God claims, to lighthearted banter.

@Head

1. He only had one major publication

There were over 100 separate publications. The Bible is a compilation of these separate publications.

2. It was written in Hebrew

Eh?

3. It had no references

Scholarly references directly within the Bible:
- Citations of Priesthood (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Prophets (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Divine authority (Direct revealed theology)
- Citation of Historians.

That is just off the top of my head.

4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal

Perhaps you should come to recognize that Theology is a field of study and is the Peer review system.

-Design Inference (default review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Natural Theology (inherent review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Divine revelation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus with observational support)
-Specific interpretation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus, i.e church councils.)

5. Some doubt he wrote it himself

None claim God wrote it himself. Inspiration is not dictation which is even further different than direct authorship.

6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?

- "What have you done for me lately?" Sounds like business corporate validation process. Keep pimping.
- You also are ignoring any claims of miracles that permeate all of history.

7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims

Huh, I find science is doing the opposite and confirming claims as it progresses. Also sounds like you might have a physicality bias, philosophy and metaphysics, mathematics support God claims openly, with science pointing to a clear design inference.

8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment

Asserting a level of authority where none exists. Nice. I would agree with you if you could provide a council of higher level Divine Beings whereby all are in agreement.... wait .... does not Christianity assert three different persons sharing said essence of God all in complete agreement?
Will wonders never cease.

9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons

How does a doctorate indicate His professorship? And further, how does a substitute teacher invalidate someone's doctorate?

10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning

Now your claiming He was a professor and that expulsion is not a valid means of punishment for breaking the rules? Wow, I hope you to not teach college.
"Sure you learned from cheating! You get an A for effort."
You would put out some poor scientists, though that would explain Gleick (Global warming guy).

11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

This does not make any sense. There were over 300 moral commandments given via the Bible. The Ten commandments were pinnacle commandments. For example America is a nation of laws, though we have the Constitution and Bill of Rights as pinnacle laws.

You further seem to be complaining that "Do Not do something" is invalid as a commandment? Ludicrous.

Summary:
I am appalled such thinking is found valid in your eyes, but on the other hand it comforts me to know Theism is so obviously valid, both in rationale and in studious clarity.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:13:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:08:25 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

@Mestari, I believe that it would be inaccurate(and destructive) to equate a fallacious appeal to ridicule attempting marginalization God claims, to lighthearted banter.

@Head

1. He only had one major publication

There were over 100 separate publications. The Bible is a compilation of these separate publications.

2. It was written in Hebrew

Eh?

3. It had no references

Scholarly references directly within the Bible:
- Citations of Priesthood (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Prophets (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Divine authority (Direct revealed theology)
- Citation of Historians.

That is just off the top of my head.

4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal

Perhaps you should come to recognize that Theology is a field of study and is the Peer review system.

-Design Inference (default review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Natural Theology (inherent review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Divine revelation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus with observational support)
-Specific interpretation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus, i.e church councils.)

5. Some doubt he wrote it himself

None claim God wrote it himself. Inspiration is not dictation which is even further different than direct authorship.

6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?

- "What have you done for me lately?" Sounds like business corporate validation process. Keep pimping.
- You also are ignoring any claims of miracles that permeate all of history.

7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims

Huh, I find science is doing the opposite and confirming claims as it progresses. Also sounds like you might have a physicality bias, philosophy and metaphysics, mathematics support God claims openly, with science pointing to a clear design inference.

8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment

Asserting a level of authority where none exists. Nice. I would agree with you if you could provide a council of higher level Divine Beings whereby all are in agreement.... wait .... does not Christianity assert three different persons sharing said essence of God all in complete agreement?
Will wonders never cease.

9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons

How does a doctorate indicate His professorship? And further, how does a substitute teacher invalidate someone's doctorate?

10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning

Now your claiming He was a professor and that expulsion is not a valid means of punishment for breaking the rules? Wow, I hope you to not teach college.
"Sure you learned from cheating! You get an A for effort."
You would put out some poor scientists, though that would explain Gleick (Global warming guy).

11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

This does not make any sense. There were over 300 moral commandments given via the Bible. The Ten commandments were pinnacle commandments. For example America is a nation of laws, though we have the Constitution and Bill of Rights as pinnacle laws.

You further seem to be complaining that "Do Not do something" is invalid as a commandment? Ludicrous.



Summary:
I am appalled such thinking is found valid in your eyes, but on the other hand it comforts me to know Theism is so obviously valid, both in rationale and in studious clarity.

You must be a real hit at parties.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:32:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:13:59 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:08:25 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

@Mestari, I believe that it would be inaccurate(and destructive) to equate a fallacious appeal to ridicule attempting marginalization God claims, to lighthearted banter.

@Head

1. He only had one major publication

There were over 100 separate publications. The Bible is a compilation of these separate publications.

2. It was written in Hebrew

Eh?

3. It had no references

Scholarly references directly within the Bible:
- Citations of Priesthood (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Prophets (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Divine authority (Direct revealed theology)
- Citation of Historians.

That is just off the top of my head.

4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal

Perhaps you should come to recognize that Theology is a field of study and is the Peer review system.

-Design Inference (default review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Natural Theology (inherent review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Divine revelation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus with observational support)
-Specific interpretation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus, i.e church councils.)

5. Some doubt he wrote it himself

None claim God wrote it himself. Inspiration is not dictation which is even further different than direct authorship.

6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?

- "What have you done for me lately?" Sounds like business corporate validation process. Keep pimping.
- You also are ignoring any claims of miracles that permeate all of history.

7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims

Huh, I find science is doing the opposite and confirming claims as it progresses. Also sounds like you might have a physicality bias, philosophy and metaphysics, mathematics support God claims openly, with science pointing to a clear design inference.

8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment

Asserting a level of authority where none exists. Nice. I would agree with you if you could provide a council of higher level Divine Beings whereby all are in agreement.... wait .... does not Christianity assert three different persons sharing said essence of God all in complete agreement?
Will wonders never cease.

9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons

How does a doctorate indicate His professorship? And further, how does a substitute teacher invalidate someone's doctorate?

10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning

Now your claiming He was a professor and that expulsion is not a valid means of punishment for breaking the rules? Wow, I hope you to not teach college.
"Sure you learned from cheating! You get an A for effort."
You would put out some poor scientists, though that would explain Gleick (Global warming guy).

11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

This does not make any sense. There were over 300 moral commandments given via the Bible. The Ten commandments were pinnacle commandments. For example America is a nation of laws, though we have the Constitution and Bill of Rights as pinnacle laws.

You further seem to be complaining that "Do Not do something" is invalid as a commandment? Ludicrous.



Summary:
I am appalled such thinking is found valid in your eyes, but on the other hand it comforts me to know Theism is so obviously valid, both in rationale and in studious clarity.

You must be a real hit at parties.

You should see me do the 'MOCKerana' during a debate party :)

The above is an exercise in insobriety. No one claims the drunk puking on everyone and pissing himself is the highlight of the party.

Having fun with Wit and party enjoyment is not the intellectual insobriety displayed above.

Unless you find such things as this to be amusing though grating due to inaccuracy:
"The atheist walked into the bar and said I don't drink because I am an athiest!"Herp Derp

Accuracy and relevance.
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 4:23:21 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:42:51 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

1. He only had one major publication
2. It was written in Hebrew
3. It had no references
4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal
5. Some doubt he wrote it himself
6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?
7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims
8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment
9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons
10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning
11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

Haha. Some light-hearted humor is much needed and greatly appreciated in this section of the forums.

Cheers!

Point Number 12. The author is guilty of plagiarism from earlier writings and beliefs and these have not been openly acknowledged or referenced.

Point Number 13. (Unlucky for some). The author's writings have proved controversial and inflammatory and have been directly responsible for atrocities.

This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:50:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:13:59 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:08:25 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

@Mestari, I believe that it would be inaccurate(and destructive) to equate a fallacious appeal to ridicule attempting marginalization God claims, to lighthearted banter.

@Head

1. He only had one major publication

There were over 100 separate publications. The Bible is a compilation of these separate publications.

2. It was written in Hebrew

Eh?

3. It had no references

Scholarly references directly within the Bible:
- Citations of Priesthood (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Prophets (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Divine authority (Direct revealed theology)
- Citation of Historians.

That is just off the top of my head.

4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal

Perhaps you should come to recognize that Theology is a field of study and is the Peer review system.

-Design Inference (default review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Natural Theology (inherent review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Divine revelation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus with observational support)
-Specific interpretation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus, i.e church councils.)

5. Some doubt he wrote it himself

None claim God wrote it himself. Inspiration is not dictation which is even further different than direct authorship.

6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?

- "What have you done for me lately?" Sounds like business corporate validation process. Keep pimping.
- You also are ignoring any claims of miracles that permeate all of history.

7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims

Huh, I find science is doing the opposite and confirming claims as it progresses. Also sounds like you might have a physicality bias, philosophy and metaphysics, mathematics support God claims openly, with science pointing to a clear design inference.

8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment

Asserting a level of authority where none exists. Nice. I would agree with you if you could provide a council of higher level Divine Beings whereby all are in agreement.... wait .... does not Christianity assert three different persons sharing said essence of God all in complete agreement?
Will wonders never cease.

9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons

How does a doctorate indicate His professorship? And further, how does a substitute teacher invalidate someone's doctorate?

10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning

Now your claiming He was a professor and that expulsion is not a valid means of punishment for breaking the rules? Wow, I hope you to not teach college.
"Sure you learned from cheating! You get an A for effort."
You would put out some poor scientists, though that would explain Gleick (Global warming guy).

11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

This does not make any sense. There were over 300 moral commandments given via the Bible. The Ten commandments were pinnacle commandments. For example America is a nation of laws, though we have the Constitution and Bill of Rights as pinnacle laws.

You further seem to be complaining that "Do Not do something" is invalid as a commandment? Ludicrous.



Summary:
I am appalled such thinking is found valid in your eyes, but on the other hand it comforts me to know Theism is so obviously valid, both in rationale and in studious clarity.

You must be a real hit at parties.

You beat me to it!
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:53:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 4:23:21 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:42:51 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

1. He only had one major publication
2. It was written in Hebrew
3. It had no references
4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal
5. Some doubt he wrote it himself
6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?
7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims
8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment
9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons
10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning
11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

Haha. Some light-hearted humor is much needed and greatly appreciated in this section of the forums.

Cheers!

Point Number 12. The author is guilty of plagiarism from earlier writings and beliefs and these have not been openly acknowledged or referenced.

Point Number 13. (Unlucky for some). The author's writings have proved controversial and inflammatory and have been directly responsible for atrocities.

This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

The victims of the Biblically-inspired Spanish Inquisition probably found it offensive when they were forced to sit on the Judas Chair (have a ferocious prong thrust up their bottoms).
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:56:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:08:25 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

@Mestari, I believe that it would be inaccurate(and destructive) to equate a fallacious appeal to ridicule attempting marginalization God claims, to lighthearted banter.

@Head

1. He only had one major publication

There were over 100 separate publications. The Bible is a compilation of these separate publications.

2. It was written in Hebrew

Eh?

3. It had no references

Scholarly references directly within the Bible:
- Citations of Priesthood (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Prophets (Theological Scholars)
- Citation of Divine authority (Direct revealed theology)
- Citation of Historians.

That is just off the top of my head.

4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal

Perhaps you should come to recognize that Theology is a field of study and is the Peer review system.

-Design Inference (default review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Natural Theology (inherent review and peer ascribed consensus)
-Divine revelation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus with observational support)
-Specific interpretation (Scholastic peer reviewed consensus, i.e church councils.)

5. Some doubt he wrote it himself

None claim God wrote it himself. Inspiration is not dictation which is even further different than direct authorship.

6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?

- "What have you done for me lately?" Sounds like business corporate validation process. Keep pimping.
- You also are ignoring any claims of miracles that permeate all of history.

7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims

Huh, I find science is doing the opposite and confirming claims as it progresses. Also sounds like you might have a physicality bias, philosophy and metaphysics, mathematics support God claims openly, with science pointing to a clear design inference.

8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment

Asserting a level of authority where none exists. Nice. I would agree with you if you could provide a council of higher level Divine Beings whereby all are in agreement.... wait .... does not Christianity assert three different persons sharing said essence of God all in complete agreement?
Will wonders never cease.

9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons

How does a doctorate indicate His professorship? And further, how does a substitute teacher invalidate someone's doctorate?

10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning

Now your claiming He was a professor and that expulsion is not a valid means of punishment for breaking the rules? Wow, I hope you to not teach college.
"Sure you learned from cheating! You get an A for effort."
You would put out some poor scientists, though that would explain Gleick (Global warming guy).

11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

This does not make any sense. There were over 300 moral commandments given via the Bible. The Ten commandments were pinnacle commandments. For example America is a nation of laws, though we have the Constitution and Bill of Rights as pinnacle laws.

You further seem to be complaining that "Do Not do something" is invalid as a commandment? Ludicrous.



Summary:
I am appalled such thinking is found valid in your eyes, but on the other hand it comforts me to know Theism is so obviously valid, both in rationale and in studious clarity.

You know, Gileandos, you're such a kill-joy pompous twerp.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 6:37:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

coolstorybro. Except you're trying to be offensive, the beginning was an attempt at comedy. If you don't find it funny, then say it wasn't that funny for you, or better yet, say nothing at all.

Although number 5 made me nogalstic. Good memories...
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 6:55:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 6:37:47 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

coolstorybro. Except you're trying to be offensive, the beginning was an attempt at comedy. If you don't find it funny, then say it wasn't that funny for you, or better yet, say nothing at all.

Although number 5 made me nogalstic. Good memories...

If you believe the OP was being lighthearted you are going to have to sell harder. A appropriate light-hearted satire joke makes fun of themselves first then everyone else, while using accurate depictions, not ignorance.

Otherwise, it is rightly viewed as an attempt at ridicule.

Again accuracy and relevance:
For example:
1: There are 3 fundamental truths about religion: Jews don't recognize Jesus as the Son of God, Protestants don't recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ, and Baptists don't recognize each other at the bar on Saturday nights.

2: How do you make a room full of atheists peeved off? Tell them they are wrong.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 6:58:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:56:53 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:

You know, Gileandos, you're such a kill-joy pompous twerp.

Ouch.

You pompously post the OP, while being an ignorant twerp, killing the joy people have in their accurate faith....

then call me a "kill-joy pompous twerp" for pointing out your ignorance and appeal to ridicule, Wow.

You did not find my reply equally amusing?
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 7:02:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 6:55:26 PM, Gileandos wrote:

Again accuracy and relevance:
For example:
1: There are 3 fundamental truths about religion: Jews don't recognize Jesus as the Son of God, Protestants don't recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ, and Baptists don't recognize each other at the bar on Saturday nights.

LOL!


2: How do you make a room full of atheists peeved off? Tell them they are wrong.
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 8:06:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

The OP was in no way offensive. If you take it as such, it just proves the excessive hostility within the Religion forum. I will agree that the additional comments became rude and uncalled for, but the OP was quite obviously written in good spirits.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 8:25:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 8:06:18 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

The OP was in no way offensive. If you take it as such, it just proves the excessive hostility within the Religion forum. I will agree that the additional comments became rude and uncalled for, but the OP was quite obviously written in good spirits.

Whatever dude..

You can play dumb if you want - but that lame joke was meant to be insulting.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 8:36:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 8:25:33 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 8:06:18 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

The OP was in no way offensive. If you take it as such, it just proves the excessive hostility within the Religion forum. I will agree that the additional comments became rude and uncalled for, but the OP was quite obviously written in good spirits.

Whatever dude..

You can play dumb if you want - but that lame joke was meant to be insulting.

I have to agree.
Mestari
Posts: 4,656
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 9:28:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 8:25:33 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 8:06:18 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

The OP was in no way offensive. If you take it as such, it just proves the excessive hostility within the Religion forum. I will agree that the additional comments became rude and uncalled for, but the OP was quite obviously written in good spirits.

Whatever dude..

You can play dumb if you want - but that lame joke was meant to be insulting.

Even if it was, you have no reason to take it as such. Christ preached that we ought to live our life with love and compassion. If somebody offends you, retaliating in hostility is not the answer. When has hate and discomfort ever helped make the world a better place? You should know from the Bible that you must love your enemies, and you should love them as God loves you. It is God's job to judge them, not yours. The best you can do is show them the love of Christ and aid them in finding it themselves. Responding with anger will only serve to further the divide between the sinners and the saints. In retaliating you are going against the teachings of Christ and are reinforcing the discomfort with religion that allows atheists to justify their disbelief. With love and open arms you will find that you can touch more people in ways you have never imagined. It's one thing to claim to be a Christian. It's another to try and display to others the love that the Lord showed to you when His Son died on the cross for your sins as well as the sins of those who do not believe. He died not for the righteous, but for the ill, so that they may see His glorious teachings and feel the power of His presence in their lives.
Rules of Mafia

1. Mestari is never third party.
2. If Mestari claims an intricate and page long TP role, he's telling the truth.
3. Mestari always jointly wins with the town.
3b. If he doesn't he's mafia.
3c. If he was mafia you wouldn't suspect him in the first place.
4. If you lynch Mestari you will lose because he will be the third party Doctor or some other townie power role.
5. DP1 lynches are good.
6. The answer is always no.
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2012 11:24:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 8:36:00 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 8:25:33 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:

Whatever dude..

You can play dumb if you want - but that lame joke was meant to be insulting.

I have to agree.

This is almost depressing. Has this site really made you both so jaded that even jokes are received as attacks? This forum is often merciless and one-sided, so I suppose I can understand to a degree. Still, such defensiveness only perpetuates the divide.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2012 12:20:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 11:24:13 PM, Maikuru wrote:
At 3/14/2012 8:36:00 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 8:25:33 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:

Whatever dude..

You can play dumb if you want - but that lame joke was meant to be insulting.

I have to agree.

This is almost depressing. Has this site really made you both so jaded that even jokes are received as attacks? This forum is often merciless and one-sided, so I suppose I can understand to a degree. Still, such defensiveness only perpetuates the divide.

look.. the divide, is never going to be filled. This was lame.. and the thread should die.

I'm out of here.
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2012 11:27:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 6:55:26 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 6:37:47 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

coolstorybro. Except you're trying to be offensive, the beginning was an attempt at comedy. If you don't find it funny, then say it wasn't that funny for you, or better yet, say nothing at all.

Although number 5 made me nogalstic. Good memories...

If you believe the OP was being lighthearted you are going to have to sell harder. A appropriate light-hearted satire joke makes fun of themselves first then everyone else, while using accurate depictions, not ignorance.

Otherwise, it is rightly viewed as an attempt at ridicule.

Again accuracy and relevance:
For example:
1: There are 3 fundamental truths about religion: Jews don't recognize Jesus as the Son of God, Protestants don't recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ, and Baptists don't recognize each other at the bar on Saturday nights.

2: How do you make a room full of atheists peeved off? Tell them they are wrong.

The first one is funny because there's the punch line, where someone says something that is blatantly wrong and therefore is comical. The second one is something both sides would disagree on, and isn't an attempt at a joke, rather an insult.

The topic is "Why God never got a PhD". This is blatantly ridiculous. The ten reasons are also comical. If you don't find it funny, fine. However, it doesn't change the fact that it was an attempt at a joke.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2012 11:48:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/15/2012 11:27:53 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 3/14/2012 6:55:26 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 6:37:47 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

coolstorybro. Except you're trying to be offensive, the beginning was an attempt at comedy. If you don't find it funny, then say it wasn't that funny for you, or better yet, say nothing at all.

Although number 5 made me nogalstic. Good memories...

If you believe the OP was being lighthearted you are going to have to sell harder. A appropriate light-hearted satire joke makes fun of themselves first then everyone else, while using accurate depictions, not ignorance.

Otherwise, it is rightly viewed as an attempt at ridicule.

Again accuracy and relevance:
For example:
1: There are 3 fundamental truths about religion: Jews don't recognize Jesus as the Son of God, Protestants don't recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ, and Baptists don't recognize each other at the bar on Saturday nights.

2: How do you make a room full of atheists peeved off? Tell them they are wrong.

The first one is funny because there's the punch line, where someone says something that is blatantly wrong and therefore is comical. The second one is something both sides would disagree on, and isn't an attempt at a joke, rather an insult.

As a trained baptist, the reason that it is funny is due to relevance and accuracy! This is joking about the known hypocrisy in the church not lieing about them.

The second is absolutely hilarious because it is true and relevant to the atheistic personality. They cannot handle dissenting opinions without flipping out. (which is descriptive of the attacks upon me merely pointing out the OP was stupid)


The topic is "Why God never got a PhD". This is blatantly ridiculous. The ten reasons are also comical. If you don't find it funny, fine. However, it doesn't change the fact that it was an attempt at a joke.

All points in the OP were ignorant and blatant insults against a divine being.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2012 12:20:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I want to point out the same as Rush Limbaugh.
Obama making Jokes about republicans being founding members of flat earth society for supporting oil drilling.....

No one finds this funny and merely takes this as an insult. Neither I, nor Rush Limbaugh was laughing and he is correct to point out this is stupidity rather than comedy.

Let's get back to real comedy, and let's all be honest, that there is a reason good comedians get paid for it.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2012 11:09:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 4:23:21 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:42:51 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 2:41:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
God has never been awarded a PhD for the following reasons:

1. He only had one major publication
2. It was written in Hebrew
3. It had no references
4. It was not published in a peer-reviewed journal
5. Some doubt he wrote it himself
6. It may be true he created the world and worked a few miracles thousands of years ago, but what has he really done since then?
7. The scientific community have had major problems replicating his results and confirming his claims
8. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects in his experiment
9. Apparently he got his son to teach some of his lessons
10. He expelled his first 2 students for learning
11. Although there were only 10 requirements, most of his students have failed his tests - mostly because they were phrased in the negative

Haha. Some light-hearted humor is much needed and greatly appreciated in this section of the forums.

Cheers!

Point Number 12. The author is guilty of plagiarism from earlier writings and beliefs and these have not been openly acknowledged or referenced.

Point Number 13. (Unlucky for some). The author's writings have proved controversial and inflammatory and have been directly responsible for atrocities.

This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

Unfortunately the truth hurts sometimes. Point 13 is IMO true.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2012 11:16:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

Flowing with the spirit of Christian forgiveness and reconciliation I see? Many of your posts on other threads are like this I have noticed. I wonder what it is that causes you to lash out in this way? Maybe this is the true vengeful, disproportionate and barking mad face of Christianity that can be found in the Bible?
There are other attitudes that your Lord and Saviour commands you to adopt.
e.g. You should be offering up your other cheek so that I can slap it.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2012 11:17:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 6:58:46 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:56:53 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:

You know, Gileandos, you're such a kill-joy pompous twerp.

Ouch.

You pompously post the OP, while being an ignorant twerp, killing the joy people have in their accurate faith....

then call me a "kill-joy pompous twerp" for pointing out your ignorance and appeal to ridicule, Wow.

You did not find my reply equally amusing?

No. It was about as funny and entertaining as cot death.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2012 11:19:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/15/2012 12:20:37 PM, Gileandos wrote:
I want to point out the same as Rush Limbaugh.
Obama making Jokes about republicans being founding members of flat earth society for supporting oil drilling.....

No one finds this funny and merely takes this as an insult. Neither I, nor Rush Limbaugh was laughing and he is correct to point out this is stupidity rather than comedy.

Let's get back to real comedy, and let's all be honest, that there is a reason good comedians get paid for it.

Yes let's get back to real comedy. Like The Bible. Most of that is comedy gold.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2012 12:47:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

Geez you suck at being offensive. Want some tips?
Zaradi
Posts: 14,125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/16/2012 1:06:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/14/2012 9:28:47 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 8:25:33 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 8:06:18 PM, Mestari wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:58:47 PM, Paradox_7 wrote:
At 3/14/2012 5:45:27 PM, Mestari wrote:
This went from funny and light-hearted to quite offensive.

not very funny to me.

lets try some light-hearted banter about your family-

1. your dad wears dresses and lipstick when he's by himself at home
2. your mom likes golden showers from time to time and rocks her arabian goggles on a nightly basis!
3. Your parents should be executed for creating a useless being
4. your dad is CHP on the hershie high-way
5. you enjoy masturbating to phineas and pherb
6. when you parents die almost everyone they know is going to celebrate, because they were such utter failures!

ahaha.. i just love light-hearted banter!

don't get offended, it was all in fun! :D

The OP was in no way offensive. If you take it as such, it just proves the excessive hostility within the Religion forum. I will agree that the additional comments became rude and uncalled for, but the OP was quite obviously written in good spirits.

Whatever dude..

You can play dumb if you want - but that lame joke was meant to be insulting.

Even if it was, you have no reason to take it as such. Christ preached that we ought to live our life with love and compassion. If somebody offends you, retaliating in hostility is not the answer. When has hate and discomfort ever helped make the world a better place? You should know from the Bible that you must love your enemies, and you should love them as God loves you. It is God's job to judge them, not yours. The best you can do is show them the love of Christ and aid them in finding it themselves. Responding with anger will only serve to further the divide between the sinners and the saints. In retaliating you are going against the teachings of Christ and are reinforcing the discomfort with religion that allows atheists to justify their disbelief. With love and open arms you will find that you can touch more people in ways you have never imagined. It's one thing to claim to be a Christian. It's another to try and display to others the love that the Lord showed to you when His Son died on the cross for your sins as well as the sins of those who do not believe. He died not for the righteous, but for the ill, so that they may see His glorious teachings and feel the power of His presence in their lives.

Pwning Christians by referencing the Bible to tell them they're being obnoxious twats? I like this.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...