I personally think some of the comments on this site can get pretty ridiculous at times, more importantly, they can utterly obliterate an otherwise important message. However, you know what is said about opinions and how they are like a particular body part (everybody’s got one, and they all stink). The thing I have seen that truly ruins credibility is when atheists/agnostics/whatever pontificate about the Bible, yet they don’t believe in it in the first place.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (193)
sorted by:
If you don't believe in big-foot, your comments on big-foot lacks credibility.
Your argument simply means that your measure for credibility is not factual, but fictional, and represent s the antithesis of free thought and logical thinking.
It exemplifies the above.
Let's reason about this shall we. So, there is a guy who is building a temple, and,for some reason, thinks it a good idea to slaughter tens of thousands of animals. Although, this factoid alone may trigger people of a certain persuasion, the real question is: where are the ashes. What was the supply chain? How were the fires maintained, etc.
The closest experience in mass slaughter of animals of certain races was the Mad Cow disease. If you wish, you can still read what is needed to dispose of a carcass by burning. You'll be amazed.
These same believers also have a hard time questioning the logistics of the holohoax.
A whatever-person may think logically on this, with the capabilities of them days in mind, and think: this is a bunch of hyperbole. When reading the same book, pontificating the seed of Israel, such a person may very well question the validity of an a priori: the indispensable, and all that is connected to it.
Should such a person be berated for not having credibility due to a lack of belief?
And what do you know. Such a whatever is not the first, and surely not the last. It would be quite enlightening to peek in the book written by Douglas Reed.
But by all means. As per your pontificated reasoning, you can simply disregard ANY argument by positing: you are not a believer.
Now, where have I heard that thought-stopper before ..... Ah. ..you did nazi that coming ....you conspiracy theorist right wing domestic terrorist, now did you?
“Holohoax.” I wish I had my reading glasses on the first two times I suffered through your nonsensical diatribe. I was assuming you were just not very bright, possibly retarded, so I was doing my best to be patient and loving, and formulate sentences even the simplest among us could understand. Had I caught your “holohoax” reference on first reading, I would have realized, while you still may very well be stupid/retarded, your main problem is you are a scumbag, not worth trying to reason with any further.
hahahaha, typical!. Indeed, it is not your reading glasses but your mental filters, rendering the potential for discussion demonstrably neither historical nor intelligent or reasonable..
It simply shows where you are coming from. I can respect that. Yet, pontificating your righteousness in the way you do negates what you purport to stand for. Belief systems and emotions are a powerful thing. Greatawakening is a bitch as it requires the let go of a lot of preconceptions. Your choice to make.
Cheers.