RE exam
I know that all I ever seem to post is atheist stuff. Tough. This is funny.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 9:43,
Reply)
*stands*
*applauds for a very, very long time*
(
Griffin Saver Something, something, 2006, something., Tue 3 Mar 2009, 9:58,
Reply)
Very good sir
Although I didn't quite get some bits, because of my lack of Godliness- like the one about punching your dad, and buying an Uzi, and injecting dogs with mad-drug, and buring down an orchard, and throwing people in a blast funress and cutting off your son's wanking hand. If this is in the bible, I quite want to read this bit.
(, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 10:06, Reply)
hahahaha - i passed.
Q11 answer d - if i ever play golf, that will be my explanation for any cool shots i may play. this is very unlikely, golf = boring
you should post this on some christian/catholic forums for trolling purposes. see how forgiving they are towards you for mocking their one true religion
(
Avast is still alive!!!!, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 10:32,
Reply)
this is the wanky, show-off product of an uber anti religionist and as such reads like a five year old trying to prove a point with no evidence.
don't get me wrong, i'm not religious, i'm also not anti-religious. this is anti-religiosu and therefore, IMHO, unneccesary.
(
Just Flange, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 10:36,
Reply)
whereas your reply...
...was constructive balanced, fair and necessary
:-)
(, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 10:44, Reply)
haha precisely.
i must admit my reply was a bit pissy (i'm just in a mood 'cos of my w*rk) but these sort of things seem just a pointless as evangelical religion.
It seem like the idea is that whoever shouts their believes loudest and in the rudest manner possible is right.
(
Just Flange, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 10:55,
Reply)
dont say anything bad about work
you might get fired if you're a 16 year old girl.
(
Nostrebor can't be everything all the time., Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:01,
Reply)
Eh?
Anything that takes the piss out of Godbangers is fine in my book.
(
Brandy_Bumwinkle, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 10:50,
Reply)
i'm bored, humour me.
would you find something made by a religious nut, but flipped so that the questions were based on faith (instead of common sense/science) and were anti-science equally as relevant?
(
Just Flange, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:01,
Reply)
As I said below...
... if the questions are done well, then I don't see the problem.
It's a big "if".
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:08,
Reply)
fair point, i saw your reply downthere.
i'm partly pissy cos of work, but mostly because i see these sort of things all the time. my "atheist" friends e-mail them to me and it just seems to fuck up their own argument.
they only get pissed off with religion because it's shoved in your face, and religious nuts always believe they're right, but when i start getting the same thing from people who profess to have no religious beliefs, it starts to smack a little bit of childish "my belief is better than your belief" one-upmanship bollocks.
Granted, this quiz did make me chuckle a little.
(
Just Flange, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:18,
Reply)
I tend to side with Jonathan Miller on this...
... He refuses to describe himself as an atheist, because belief in god strikes him as being so senseless that it's not worth the wasted time.
I think that there's a lot to that.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:22,
Reply)
did the pope personally piss on your chips?
(
Nostrebor can't be everything all the time., Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:02,
Reply)
I actually agree, although I'm in favour of this sort of thing if it's done well.
But this quiz is not clever, most of the ideas he suggests can be explained away fairly reasonably by christians and it's sniping tone won't serve to make any religious people think about their assumptions.
There are plenty of holes in Christian philosophy, try focusing on them rather than just making 'God is mean, not that he exists or anything' type questions.
For example, the one about the number of people at christ's tomb was a good question.
(
chenobble rocking his explorer beard on, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:00,
Reply)
^^this^^
is precisely what i mean. it uses it's own set of values to attempt to dis-prove someone elses set of values. ultimately working at cross-purposes.
(
Just Flange, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:02,
Reply)
Granted...
Moral outrage won't work to prove the atheists' point. However, it does work against the kind of fundie who thinks - mistakenly - that you need god for morality, and that Christian (or Islamic, or whatever) morality is the same as morality period - and it works by showing that Christian (or Islamic, or whatever) morality, interpreted strictly, is counterintuitive. So if you want to keep your intuitions, then you have a problem.
Remarkably few mainstream believers, I've found, will bite the bullet and ditch their intuitions. They prefer to think that their god agrees with them, rather than the other way around.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:06,
Reply)
What counts for me is that it's funny.
Were I to come across a genuinely funny - and by that I mean perceptive and well-written - joke by fundies at the expense of atheists, I'd probably post that.
However, "funny" and "perceptive" are two adjectives that I can't recall ever having used in relation to the god-squad. "Prissy", "hypersensitive", "blinkered" and "mendacious", on the other hand...
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 11:02,
Reply)
haha
you're funny...all the adjectives you used can be used for over-sensitive atheists as well..nice one!
(, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 14:44, Reply)
^^^ This x1000
The best way to deal with religion is to ignore it. Dawkins seems to be the progenitor of the current atheism circle-jerk, and it's getting tiring.
(, Tue 3 Mar 2009, 12:01, Reply)
