T1B

RadioFan wrote:

battery chucka' one wrote:Another? The Cherokee nation accepted God and still got the stick by the US government. They relocated to Oklahoma and absolutely flourished there.

Can you be any more of an idiot? $10 says you've never even met a Cherokee.

"Flourished," if you count a few folks who only recently are making some money because of the National Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, also seen by some as a "stick" by the U.S. government.

Btw, since we're on the subject ...

Your pop music means nothing to me. And who's talking about casinos, you insane stereotype lobbing indian-phobe? I'm sure you'll gladly step over the starving corpse of a Native American on your way to grab a scotch and play some craps. I'm not talking about casinos, exclusively. Yes, the Cherokee nation invests in casinos. But there is so much more there than that.

I'm referring to a nation who were quite sadly relocated and started their own university.

cherokee nation

Check the link for yourself, you white bred bigot. No, they're not there for you to peddle your trinkets and sell your poverty, you ignorant piece of society's scrotal leavings. Now do more reading and post less.

BCO, check yourself. RadioFan has a better understanding of the Cherokee Nation than you currently do or probably ever will. He has written professionally on the subject of Native Americans. This will not go well for you.

PSUFAN wrote:BCO, check yourself. RadioFan has a better understanding of the Cherokee Nation than you currently do or probably ever will. He has written professionally on the subject of Native Americans. This will not go well for you.

Please check the link and tell me if you see a people impoverished. The guy is a bigot and went right to the 'casinos, beads, and firewater' card. The Cherokee got screwed over by the US government and prospered afterwards. This doesn't excuse what the govt did, but they were jobbed in the same manner as 1 Peter 2. They submitted themselves to human authority and still got screwed over. Use your own rational thought process on this one, bro'.

My rational thought process compels me to explain to you that you've totally mistaken his meaning. He merely stated that life for Cherokees is pretty grim in most cases, apart from a few who have been given an opportunity to make money with casinos. He's basing this on actual experience, living near and talking to native Americans.

If you understand any part of this, you need to understand that the last thing he was doing was simply spouting slurs. I'm not sure where you got that, but it appears that you didn't really understand his post.

PSUFAN wrote:My rational thought process compels me to explain to you that you've totally mistaken his meaning. He merely stated that life for Cherokees is pretty grim in most cases, apart from a few who have been given an opportunity to make money with casinos. He's basing this on actual experience, living near and talking to native Americans.

If you understand any part of this, you need to understand that the last thing he was doing was simply spouting slurs. I'm not sure where you got that, but it appears that you didn't really understand his post.

If he knows better, then that makes his comments all the more despicable. If he's supposedly an intellectual on this subject (something I have yet to hear him claim, btw), then perhaps he should be at least try to present a semblance of professionalism when discussing the topic. Just sayin'. My money's on bigot until he proves otherwise.

battery chucka' one wrote:You want the closest to PROOF that we'll ever get? Try the nation of Israel and their existence.

A welfare client state of the United States. Were we to yank our funding, Israel would collapse.

You want more? Try the fact that Islam was running roughshod over Africa and the Middle East until the Battle of Tours.

And in the intervening 1300 years, only the Iberian Peninsula and a portion of Palestine have been reclaimed from Muslim control.

Do you need a map?

Another? What about the fact that USSR had control and momentum in Europe at the end of WWII and they lost the Cold War.

Their economic system was not capable of sustaining itself. God had nothing to do with it.

Another? The Cherokee nation accepted God and still got the stick by the US government. They relocated to Oklahoma and absolutely flourished there.

If by flourishing you mean "are still on federal handouts" then yea, I guess they are flourishing.

http://kotv.com/news/local/story/?id=126981

f he knows better, then that makes his comments all the more despicable. If he's supposedly an intellectual on this subject (something I have yet to hear him claim, btw)

Which of his comments do you find to be despicable?

I never claimed that he was an "intellectual" on the topic - just that he had a demonstrable familiarity with Native Americans, and that he had written professionally on the subject of the lives of Native Americans.

I'm interested in hearing your explanation as to which of his statements are bigoted, because I feel that you've got the wrong read on him entirely.

Pearls before swine. The fact that a force that size was stopped from conquering europe is enough.

Israel would exist with or without the US. However, the fact that we backed them no doubt has probably served to bless our country. Also, why would we back them, assuming that we did. Why piss off the people from whom we need to buy oil?

[Sarcasm]The USSR was the 'perfect' no-God economic system. They didn't need Him. Surely you jest that it was doomed to failure on its own. [/Sarcasm]

Finally, what does a TV news story about an old man being beaten have to do with the Cherokee nation?

Again, we have gotten away from the original point. Atheism is a contradiction and all who claim it as their belief structure (such as MVS) are lying to themselves. End of story. I have no desire to evangelize to y'all (no idea how I ended up doing so) and pray you guys glean something from this and that you are all are well.

Din-sun, I haven't forgotten you, son. I'll get back to you with regards to your little video later. Patience, son. We never know when the adults might need to speak again. Thank you.

War Wagon wrote:And Lab Rat playing Devils advocate when he's a devout born and bred until he's dead Catholic?

What's going on here?

Actually, Wags, I left the RCC "team" officially almost a decade ago to become Episcopalian. In my parent's house, it's still "the topic we do not discuss." The fact that my brother left his PhD studies in chemistry to become a Carmelite monk balances things out for my mom.

As far as playing "devils' advocate," I sure am. It's that delightful time of year. I also am tired of my fellow Christians making the same goofy arguments to support "our" beliefs (e.g., people citing Scripture to non-believers to "prove" Jesus's divinity, delving into the scientific fraud known as "intelligent design"). Like i said before, I will be one of the first to admit that my Christian belief system is competely unscientific (or possibly even irrational). But, that's why it falls under the whole "faith" thing. Personally, I'm starting to think that folks who need to twist science to prop up and fit their religious beliefs aren't really as strong in their religious beliefs as they might think (hence the passion they feel when the literal "truth" of the Bible is challenged by scientific or historical evidence). My religious belief doesn't hinge on believing that the Earth was literally created in six 24-hour days about 6,000 years ago. Good thing...since it wasn't.

battery chucka' one wrote:Pearls before swine. The fact that a force that size was stopped from conquering europe is enough.

Enough to make you think that God had a hand in their defeat? If that's what you think, then mv has you pegged properly as a brain dead primitive. Seriously, you're not worth the time to bat around.

1. I am failing to understand how mid 20th century geopolitics can present some sort of evidence that God exists. If God was on the side of the United States, ensuring long-term wins over the USSR, then what about the Viet Nam debacle? If you're going to claim that the Godless Soviet Menace was countered at every turn by a Deity-aided US, then you're setting yourself up for an all-time epic plungering...and the air is already pretty dense from the smoke of your defeats in this thread as it is.

2. Atheism is not a contradiction. You're completely at a loss on that one. Atheism basically says, "I believe in what can be proven empirically...and I ain't convinced by anything I've seen".

3.

Israel would exist with or without the US. However, the fact that we backed them no doubt has probably served to bless our country. Also, why would we back them, assuming that we did. Why piss off the people from whom we need to buy oil?

I just can't make any sense of this...there are just too many portions that you appear to be heading down a wrong path with.

Among them - you refer to the "fact" that we backed Israel, and then in the very next sentence, the "fact" gets downgraded to an assumption"?

Jeez Louise...

battery chucka' one wrote: Earlier you said that your 'belief' is in evidence. That suggests 'something'. As an atheist, you are bound to believe in 'nothing'. Therefore, your beliefs are contradictory. Following me yet?

You continue to name call with me. Do you treat all people this way or just the ones that you worry are smarter than you? I guess it doesn't matter. I still love you and will pray for you further. God bless.

Dude, you're scaring me. Along with the level of ignorance that post portrays, it also carries a decidedly UN-Christlike appeal to it.

Just so's ya know. You might reconsider this forum and leave things to 'tart.

The absence of a belief in what YOU believe does NOT necessarily equate to a belief in NOTHING.

And a paraphrase: "since I am smarter than you I will continue to call you names, use dumbass arguments, and I will even pray for you and love you in spite of my disdain for you."

Great job advancing the cause for Christ, idiot.

rozy wrote:

battery chucka' one wrote: Earlier you said that your 'belief' is in evidence. That suggests 'something'. As an atheist, you are bound to believe in 'nothing'. Therefore, your beliefs are contradictory. Following me yet?

You continue to name call with me. Do you treat all people this way or just the ones that you worry are smarter than you? I guess it doesn't matter. I still love you and will pray for you further. God bless.

Dude, you're scaring me. Along with the level of ignorance that post portrays, it also carries a decidedly UN-Christlike appeal to it.

Just so's ya know. You might reconsider this forum and leave things to 'tart.

The absence of a belief in what YOU believe does NOT necessarily equate to a belief in NOTHING.

And a paraphrase: "since I am smarter than you I will continue to call you names, use dumbass arguments, and I will even pray for you and love you in spite of my disdain for you."

Great job advancing the cause for Christ, idiot.

Oh great. Here comes Rozy. I guess that makes a full house. Follow closely, Rose.

Atheism- n A doctrine or belief that there is no God

It's a belief that there is no God. It's a belief in no superior being. Nothing. Study MVS's comments, then get back to me. Until then, feel free to take a seat by din-sun.

And I have no disdain for mvscal. I have disdain for a belief structure that casually spits on my God while offering NO reason nor evidence for its own stance.

battery chucka' one wrote: Another? The Cherokee nation accepted God and still got the stick by the US government. They relocated to Oklahoma and absolutely flourished there.

Are you on drugs? Did you not get through Junior High social studies? Have you never heard of the "Trail of Tears", yeah they called it that because they were tears of joy right?


The Cherokee history has almost never had a time of peace and prosperity in its entire history.

Before the revolution the Cherokee lived in the Northwest until the Delware and the Iroquois decided to kick their teeth in and make them move south of the mountain ranges. The Cherokees may have even been part of the Iroquois nation pre white man in North America.

After they moved south the Catawba, Choctaw, Creek, and Chikasaw began to kick their teeth in while pinning them against Europeans to their north and east.

During the Civil War they sided with the Confederacy and their former enemies the fore mentioned tribes began to use this and their alliance with the Union to renew the brow beatings until Chief John Ross surrendered voluntarily to Union Soldiers just a year after siding with the South. Most Cherokees sought refuge in Texas and Arkansas during this time.

I could go on but I digress...

battery chucka' one wrote:

PSUFAN wrote:My rational thought process compels me to explain to you that you've totally mistaken his meaning. He merely stated that life for Cherokees is pretty grim in most cases, apart from a few who have been given an opportunity to make money with casinos. He's basing this on actual experience, living near and talking to native Americans.

If you understand any part of this, you need to understand that the last thing he was doing was simply spouting slurs. I'm not sure where you got that, but it appears that you didn't really understand his post.

If he knows better, then that makes his comments all the more despicable. If he's supposedly an intellectual on this subject (something I have yet to hear him claim, btw), then perhaps he should be at least try to present a semblance of professionalism when discussing the topic. Just sayin'. My money's on bigot until he proves otherwise.

As a card carrying member of the Choctaw Tribe of Oklahoma, you sir are a monumental moron on this subject. I think you and I need to take a nice little field trip to a couple of towns in Oklahoma such as Shawnee, Enid, Ada, or Tallequah and I'll show you just how prospurous the five civilized tribes have been in Oklahoma and these are the nicer communities where the schools aren't in portable buildings and have running water. RF pretty much stated the cold hard truth to you, accept it or not but you're only making yourself appear to be the one lacking education on the matter at hand.

mvscal wrote:

battery chucka' one wrote:I have disdain for a belief structure that casually spits on my God while offering NO reason nor evidence for its own stance.

I have presented my reasoning about five fucking times in this thread alone, you goddamn idiot.

I don't believe in God because there is no evidence that God exists.

Anyone capable of firing three or more neurons at once can immediately understand if not agree with it. There is no contradiction in that belief. Since you are evidently too fucking stupid to know what the word means I will provide you with the definition:

Main Entry: 1con·tra·dic·to·ry
Pronunciation: "kän-tr&-'dik-t(&-)rE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ries
: a proposition so related to another that if either of the two is true the other is false and if either is false the other must be true

Knock yourself out, you stupid fucking tard.

Umm, not wanting to get third grade english teacher on you, but the word contradictory is an adjective.

That said, the root of contradictory is contradict. That would be a verb. The noun is contradiction.

Contradiction- noun

1. the act of contradicting; gainsaying or opposition.
2. assertion of the contrary or opposite; denial.
3. a statement or proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically incongruous.
4. direct opposition between things compared; inconsistency.
5. a contradictory act, fact, etc.

You stated earlier, that you believe in nothing. We've gone over that this is impossible. You can have (as I'm shocked you have yet to assert) a disbelief in God, but still, without God, you have no belief. If you are a naturalist, at least you'd believe in that. But you believe in nothing. Therefore, you contradict yourself. It's laughable that you don't see this. You say that you 'believe' evidence, but any evidence given to you, you will discount as either false or unimportant. Therefore, though you ask for evidence, a mountain of it would make no difference. More an outright deception and lie than a contradiction, but you see where I'm going.

mvscal wrote:There is the root of your logical fallacy. There is no "then what." My "belief" is in evidence. You have no evidence therefore I do not believe your gay fairy tales.

There is no 'then what'. Therefore, there is nothing you believe in. You claim you believe in evidence (a contradictory statement right after the assertion that there is no 'then what', but we'll let that go). You say you believe in evidence that you still have yet to show. Show me the evidence of what you believe and I'll let you off the hook. If there's nothing there, then you don't believe in evidence. If there is something, then you don't believe in 'nothing' and, therefore, there is a 'then what'. Now get to finding some evidence for what you believe (or don't....or whatever).

standing before the unexplained...

bco: what's that?
mvscal: I'll be damned if I know.
bco: I don't know either...which means it must be GOD!!!!!!!!!!
mvscal: uh...I'm not really seeing that. I don't know what the fuck it is.
bco: IT'S GOD! You CAN'T PROVE OTHERWISE!!!!!!
mvscal: I can prove you're a dumbfuck.
bco: STOP CONTRADICTING YOURSELF! YOU CAN'T PROVE IT ISN'T GOD, SO THEREFORE IT'S INCONTESTABLE PROOF OF GOD's EXISTENCE!!!!!!
mvscal: go fuck yourself, etc.

Thanks for spending time up in here, bco. Quite the little show you've been putting on.

Ah, but PSU, you're missing the point. According to MVS, there IS no unexplained. If you show him evidence, then the evidence is bullshit and, therefore, there STILL is no unexplained. It's one thing to argue over what is the proper color of a sunset. It's a totally different discussion if one refuses to accept that there is a sunset to begin with.

What evidence have you shown him?

PSUFAN wrote:mvscal: I'll be damned if I know.

Get back to me the next time mvscal posts that.

I'm quite sure it'll be the first.

PSUFAN wrote:What evidence have you shown him?

That's the point. Look back at the post that started it all. I made a statement about atheists. I wasn't looking to prove God (can't be done). I just made a comment about atheism. Even if he gets evidence (which you can read throughout this thread), it doesn't matter. The onus has been on him to prove his refuting of my statement since the beginning. He has yet to do this. Pearls before swine.

So...what evidence was that, again?

PSUFAN wrote:So...what evidence was that, again?

I'm not reposting it. Re-read to re-know. Why won't you go back and see the posts that started this interaction?

I accept your surrender, MVS.

I still love and will pray for you. Peace, bro'.

battery chucka' one wrote:

rozy wrote:

battery chucka' one wrote: Earlier you said that your 'belief' is in evidence. That suggests 'something'. As an atheist, you are bound to believe in 'nothing'. Therefore, your beliefs are contradictory. Following me yet?

You continue to name call with me. Do you treat all people this way or just the ones that you worry are smarter than you? I guess it doesn't matter. I still love you and will pray for you further. God bless.

Dude, you're scaring me. Along with the level of ignorance that post portrays, it also carries a decidedly UN-Christlike appeal to it.

Just so's ya know. You might reconsider this forum and leave things to 'tart.

The absence of a belief in what YOU believe does NOT necessarily equate to a belief in NOTHING.

And a paraphrase: "since I am smarter than you I will continue to call you names, use dumbass arguments, and I will even pray for you and love you in spite of my disdain for you."

Great job advancing the cause for Christ, idiot.

Oh great. Here comes Rozy. I guess that makes a full house. Follow closely, Rose.

Atheism- n A doctrine or belief that there is no God

It's a belief that there is no God. It's a belief in no superior being. Nothing. Study MVS's comments, then get back to me. Until then, feel free to take a seat by din-sun.

And I have no disdain for mvscal. I have disdain for a belief structure that casually spits on my God while offering NO reason nor evidence for its own stance.

Then you are the cerebral equivalent of a banana slug on downers and are doing absolutely nothing in this thread that could even be remotely considered Christlike.

It is not the belief in no superior being, it is the LACK of a belief in a superior being. Semantics, yes, but important in light of the absolutely ignorant leaps you're making from there. Throwing the word "nothing" around accomplishes zero but making you look like a Pharisee. I've been posting with mvscal for a long time. I am well aware of his stance and need no further study in this thread to know what it is. And he is a far cry more respectable in his stance than you are in yours. I have disdain for a Pharisee that casually spits on the cause of Christianity to the level you have here. Read VERY closely. Who are you to think that YOU can write words in such a manner as you have here to try and ARGUE someone to change their beliefs and convert to your belief system? After reading your tripe here, Pharisee, who would WANT to join hands with you?

There's a reason why people prefer a humble Carpenter to a pompous Pharisee...

rozy wrote:

battery chucka' one wrote:

rozy wrote: Dude, you're scaring me. Along with the level of ignorance that post portrays, it also carries a decidedly UN-Christlike appeal to it.

Just so's ya know. You might reconsider this forum and leave things to 'tart.

The absence of a belief in what YOU believe does NOT necessarily equate to a belief in NOTHING.

And a paraphrase: "since I am smarter than you I will continue to call you names, use dumbass arguments, and I will even pray for you and love you in spite of my disdain for you."

Great job advancing the cause for Christ, idiot.

Oh great. Here comes Rozy. I guess that makes a full house. Follow closely, Rose.

Atheism- n A doctrine or belief that there is no God

It's a belief that there is no God. It's a belief in no superior being. Nothing. Study MVS's comments, then get back to me. Until then, feel free to take a seat by din-sun.

And I have no disdain for mvscal. I have disdain for a belief structure that casually spits on my God while offering NO reason nor evidence for its own stance.

Then you are the cerebral equivalent of a banana slug on downers and are doing absolutely nothing in this thread that could even be remotely considered Christlike.

It is not the belief in no superior being, it is the LACK of a belief in a superior being. Semantics, yes, but important in light of the absolutely ignorant leaps you're making from there. Throwing the word "nothing" around accomplishes zero but making you look like a Pharisee. I've been posting with mvscal for a long time. I am well aware of his stance and need no further study in this thread to know what it is. And he is a far cry more respectable in his stance than you are in yours. I have disdain for a Pharisee that casually spits on the cause of Christianity to the level you have here. Read VERY closely. Who are you to think that YOU can write words in such a manner as you have here to try and ARGUE someone to change their beliefs and convert to your belief system? After reading your tripe here, Pharisee, who would WANT to join hands with you?

There's a reason why people prefer a humble Carpenter to a pompous Pharisee...

You really should read closer. I'd go into it more, but I have a feeling that there is no way you'd ever get it.

Do I respect atheists? Yes. Well, moreso than agnostics, at least.

You judge that I am hurting Chritianity. I say you're wrong. You do this, then you pile on with the rest. I'm no pharisee, rose.

What about you, rose? Ever stood up to the crowd for your Lord? Ever taken up your cross and followed Him? I'm not pompous, rose. I've constantly, through this thread, turned the other cheek to mvscal. I didn't start the attacks. He did. I didn't escalate and stoop to personal insults. He did. I feel that I have yet to lower myself to his level.....

......and I won't. That's the difference between myself and you, Rose. That's the difference. Peace.

Keep telling yourself that, P. You're an embarrassment.

btw, Rose, since you've been posting with MVScal for this long and you are a self-professed Christian and you've known about his leanings for all this time, have you ever once asked him WHY he believes like he does? Have you ever once CARED enough to ask him about his spiritual well being? Have you ever stepped out and told him that you care about him? Since he's an old friend of yours, I should guess you have. Right, rose?

What about this (and this is one for yourself and yourself alone. I don't want to know the answer.): As a Christian, have you ever taken the time out of your day to pray for your friend MVScal? For his soul? For his salvation?

I won't call you a pharisee nor a cosmetic christian. Just ask yourself all of that. Then, ask yourself what Christ would have that you did and do your actions echo of faith or cowardice. Again, please keep your answers to yourself, rose.

Mvscal has a belief.
He believes what is absolutely verifiable.
That being, ...... we die, go into the ground, and cease to exist.

That said, his take that there is no evidence for God is among the silliest things ever posted on this board.

Mike the Lab Rat, for example, believes in God because evidence made it EVIDENT to him that God really exists.
If there was NO evidence of God, he would never have had any reason to consider God.

Nor would Abraham Lincoln, Sam Walton, Isaac Newton (not Juice), Joe Gibbs, and SO many other people who are/were much wiser than mvscal could wet dream of becoming.

Mvscal may think the evidence for God is entirely lacking, but alas, evidence there is.

Wow, Pharisee, now THAT takes strawman to a level I never dreamed possible.

Um, props on that...I guess.

You really should read closer.

The closer I read this thread, the more I feel it's one of the worst ass-kickings in recent times on the boards.



Pray for him.

mvscal wrote:

poptart wrote:Mike the Lab Rat, for example, believes in God because evidence made it EVIDENT to him that God really exists.

Maybe you can hook me up with this abundant evidence of God since cock chugga' one can't seem to do it.

Everyone has a personal journey and personal evidence. If I show you my evidence, as demonstrated, it will mean nothing to you. A holy grail to one is just a cup for wine to another. I'm sure your evidence is there, in your life. It's a matter of you recognizing and acknowleging the evidence presented to you, personally, by God.

mvscal wrote:There's no such thing as personal evidence, you fucking tard.

Yes, there is. A dog dying when a child is twelve, making them question their own mortality. One's mother overcoming her alcohol addiction. A college student's struggles with math class, just clicking into place one day. Just some examples, but all, if properly recognized, point in the same direction. This is evidence that more than likely, means nothing to anybody but the one affected. It's personal evidence. We all have it. It's neither abundant nor frequent. But it's there. It's up to us to either affirm or deny it. Then we take the leap and let God do what He does. The rest is up to faith.

this is truly one of the most entertaining threads I've read in a long time....

PSUFAN wrote:
it's one of the worst ass-kickings in recent times on the boards.

pretty much.....

battery chucka' one wrote:Yes, there is. A dog dying when a child is twelve, making them question their own mortality.

A dead dog is evidence of God's existence? That must mean Mike Vick is John the Motherfucking Baptist.

Jesus took on some rusty nails for your sins.

BCO took on a plunger.

You guys won't be laughing anymore when His Holy Father grants BCO a seat next to him in Heaven... three stalls down.

mvscal wrote:

poptart wrote:Mike the Lab Rat, for example, believes in God because evidence made it EVIDENT to him that God really exists.

Maybe you can hook me up with this abundant evidence of God since cock chugga' one can't seem to do it.

I'm not here to present evidence to you.
You're a bright man, and you know where to look to see the evidence.
The evidence is abundant.

This Jesus uniquely and overwhelmingly fulfilled prophecy.
This Jesus was witnessed by many following his resurrection.

Of course you don't, at this point, recognize those things (or anything else) as evidence.
That's your right, certainly.

However, if we assembled a mock jury and appointed a lawyer to state the case for Jesus Christ, we might have a jury come back with a verdict which says, "Yes, we the jury, declare our belief that this Jesus IS the said Christ."

That is entirely possible.

What would their verdict be based on?

EVIDENCE presented to them.

The fact that YOU don't want to view evidence as evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

All it means is you have your head up your ass.

I have a book that I'll gladly send to MVScal, free of charge. It's called Case For Christ by Lee Strobel. It practically does exactly what poptart just layed out. It provides evidence for affirmation of Christ's story and such. The author, if I remember correctly, began research for all this as a skeptic. His wife and he weren't believers. She became one. He wanted to find out why and, due to the evidence he found, he was saved.

I'll gladly send this book to MVScal. I bought it. I read it. I'll gladly give it to you, bro'. I'll even pay for the shipping.

If you are as you say you are, you'll gladly take me up on this and PM me your address.

If not.....

The ball is in your court.