Comments on: Book Discussion

By: owbxgxnc

owbxgxnc — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 09:01:13 +0000

PSj4uC jqljcilmauws

By: Jane

Jane — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 23:51:19 +0000

Posted on That story isn’t in any other gpeosls. I wonder why. Hmmm. because it never happened?

By: Dooguk

Dooguk — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 21:39:19 +0000

All my life I have walked in the wilderness.
Now He has touched me with His Noodly Appendage.
What do I do now?

May the Sauce be with you.

By: puppygoogoo

puppygoogoo — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 08:41:40 +0000

Christian Science Teacher,

I have a few questions/statements,
1. If i answer god did it to all questions i technically cant be wrong?
2. What degree does this study go towards?
3. Yes we are kidding, close but no cigar.
The whole FSM doesnt exist argument hey, well i have 2 questions for you.
1. Can your god do anything?
2. Can he make a rock so big he can’t lift it?

Hope to hear from you

Puppygoogoo

By: SillyKiwiMan

SillyKiwiMan — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 06:11:30 +0000

That’s exactly what we’re saying.

You just try to prove us wrong.

PS, just how cloesly related were your parents?

By: nun s equator

nun s equator — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 21:45:33 +0000

Speaking of evidence. Since i began posting here, some1 HACKED our device & removed evidence of abusive treatment (by police). 4 the record. I strongly suspect not all here r in agreement on things as it appears…no offense. I ought have expected as much by this point…

By: Tasm10

Tasm10 — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 21:02:26 +0000

Note: seeing not “seeinh”- Damn you sausage fingers!!!!!

By: Tasm10

Tasm10 — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:58:35 +0000

Hi Guys,

Christian “Science” Teacher, perhaps you are used to voicing your beliefs unquestioned but, do you have to use the term “True God” to describe your god? Are you unaware of the blantantly inflammatory nature of such an assertion or do you just like provoking a response from us? Whenever someone makes that assertion we always ask the same question, “How is your God the True God?”, and the response is invariablely the same- silence. You have very little evidence to make such a claim, in the markscheme of life you’ve lost half marks by not providing a justification supported by evidence. Markscheme guidance: ignore phrases such as “because he is.”. Where is the gathering data, testing hypotheses, publishing results? Oh! wait, there is no data, no evidence, your beliefs are just beliefs- you can wish them to be true as much as you like but that is not how the universe works (as far as we know) . Anyway we do have evidence for the existance of the FSM, the Holy Book written by the Prophet Bobby, because it says so it must be true! I find free thought such a challenge so I’m glad that there’s somebody who can manufacture “evidence” so we can all live in a happy, fantastical fairy world where we can frolic with unicorns and fairies all day! Of course all those who question our beliefs must DIE AND BURN IN HELL!! RAARGH!!! CAPS MEAN DOOOOOOM!!!!! That way we don’t hurt our little heads by worrying about things like “bias”,”proof”, “accuracy”, “validity” or “evidence”. Yay, suppression of logical and free thought FTW!!!( Those Puritans must be damn proud of us, seeinh how “far” we’ve come)

R’amen
Tasm10

By: nun s equator

nun s equator — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:00:35 +0000

So technically, w/o realizing it, in his image…

°°°°
°°°°°°° ; )
°°°

By: nun s equator

nun s equator — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:55:56 +0000

U obviously have not seen my hair. It looks just like fusilli when i allow it 2 air dry…if i knew how 2 upload a pic id show u…

By: nun s equator

nun s equator — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:51:53 +0000

& in urliest stages, the fsm could have existed in unrefined format. ..not yet honed into finished product. man DOMESTICATED & CULTIVATED variety of items, refined etc but, not create d per se.

By: Apprentice Frederic

Apprentice Frederic — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:12:45 +0000

Of course you can’t argue with a fact. You can, however, argue with a Christian Sciance Teacher – but only if you don’t mind wasting your time; theological-style disputation has always been a waste of time. 1., 2., 3., 4., …. are supposed to be unassailable – and relevant, just like: 1., “God” (MY God) is omnipotent, omniscient, etc., 2., “God” (MY God) has ALWAYS existed, blah, blah, et cet. As far as the conflict between religion and scientific data, Christian Science pretty well epitomises that: Almighty God swoops down and (in response to directives from the worlds CST’s) cures those upon whom mere medical science has given up? (Sorry, couldn’t avoid the ending preposition….)