Re: btw there is no god
Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 11:45 am
SultanOfSurreal wrote:just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this
Actually, that statement doesn't clear up anything.
Conquer Club, a free online multiplayer variation of a popular world domination board game.
http://www.tools.conquerclub.com/forum/
http://www.tools.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=89586
SultanOfSurreal wrote:just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this
Simon Viavant wrote:How can we be sure your motives are pure though? Under the "interests" section of your profile you wrote "Jesus, my wife and daughters, word origins, etc.
You lump wife and daughters as the same "interest"
Are you a child molester? Not to mention Jesus.
Martin Ronne wrote:Simon Viavant wrote:How can we be sure your motives are pure though? Under the "interests" section of your profile you wrote "Jesus, my wife and daughters, word origins, etc.
You lump wife and daughters as the same "interest"
Are you a child molester? Not to mention Jesus.
Woh there Simon! That's really uncalled for! I don't care if you flame, but that went a bit far don't you think? You just accused a man of molesting his own daughters! Why? Not because there's any truth to it. No, you accused him of molesting his daughters because you differ with him on another subject. That's really low.

Martin Ronne wrote:Simon Viavant wrote:How can we be sure your motives are pure though? Under the "interests" section of your profile you wrote "Jesus, my wife and daughters, word origins, etc.
You lump wife and daughters as the same "interest"
Are you a child molester? Not to mention Jesus.
Woh there Simon! That's really uncalled for! I don't care if you flame, but that went a bit far don't you think? You just accused a man of molesting his own daughters! Why? Not because there's any truth to it. No, you accused him of molesting his daughters because you differ with him on another subject. That's really low.
Martin Ronne wrote:Woh there Simon! That's really uncalled for! I don't care if you flame, but that went a bit far don't you think? You just accused a man of molesting his own daughters! Why? Not because there's any truth to it. No, you accused him of molesting his daughters because you differ with him on another subject. That's really low.

Dancing Mustard wrote:Martin Ronne wrote:Woh there Simon! That's really uncalled for! I don't care if you flame, but that went a bit far don't you think? You just accused a man of molesting his own daughters! Why? Not because there's any truth to it. No, you accused him of molesting his daughters because you differ with him on another subject. That's really low.
Martin Ronne wrote:I love to fling shit just as much as the next guy.
Simon Viavant wrote:Martin Ronne wrote:Simon Viavant wrote:How can we be sure your motives are pure though? Under the "interests" section of your profile you wrote "Jesus, my wife and daughters, word origins, etc.
You lump wife and daughters as the same "interest"
Are you a child molester? Not to mention Jesus.
Woh there Simon! That's really uncalled for! I don't care if you flame, but that went a bit far don't you think? You just accused a man of molesting his own daughters! Why? Not because there's any truth to it. No, you accused him of molesting his daughters because you differ with him on another subject. That's really low.
Well he has his "interests" section of his profile with Jesus, Literature, word origins, etc, and then "wife and daughters" as one catagory, as though it's the same "interest". I have informed the authorities already.
Simon Viavant wrote:Martin Ronne wrote:Simon Viavant wrote:How can we be sure your motives are pure though? Under the "interests" section of your profile you wrote "Jesus, my wife and daughters, word origins, etc.
You lump wife and daughters as the same "interest"
Are you a child molester? Not to mention Jesus.
Woh there Simon! That's really uncalled for! I don't care if you flame, but that went a bit far don't you think? You just accused a man of molesting his own daughters! Why? Not because there's any truth to it. No, you accused him of molesting his daughters because you differ with him on another subject. That's really low.
Well he has his "interests" section of his profile with Jesus, Literature, word origins, etc, and then "wife and daughters" as one catagory, as though it's the same "interest". I have informed the authorities already.
daddy1gringo wrote:Ok, make sure we're clear. Like you said. I'm still waiting.SultanOfSurreal wrote:btw, there is no god...just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this

daddy1gringo wrote:Ok, make sure we're clear. Like you said. I'm still waiting.SultanOfSurreal wrote:btw, there is no god...just wanted to make sure we were all clear on this
jay_a2j wrote:*Walks in room![]()
*Reads a little![]()
"Oh, another troll thread"![]()
*Walks out of room
Martin Ronne wrote:Simon Viavant wrote:Martin Ronne wrote:Simon Viavant wrote:How can we be sure your motives are pure though? Under the "interests" section of your profile you wrote "Jesus, my wife and daughters, word origins, etc.
You lump wife and daughters as the same "interest"
Are you a child molester? Not to mention Jesus.
Woh there Simon! That's really uncalled for! I don't care if you flame, but that went a bit far don't you think? You just accused a man of molesting his own daughters! Why? Not because there's any truth to it. No, you accused him of molesting his daughters because you differ with him on another subject. That's really low.
Well he has his "interests" section of his profile with Jesus, Literature, word origins, etc, and then "wife and daughters" as one catagory, as though it's the same "interest". I have informed the authorities already.
my god is really despicable.
Dancing Mustard wrote:Gregrios wrote:If you're so sure, why start a thread about it. You should be humbled in knowing you've got it right and the opposition has it wrong.
Bullshit.
The fact that he's so sure means that he absolutely should start a thread about it.
Why? Because it'll give him the ideal opportunity to point out how deluded, irrational and incapable of rational argument people like Gregrios are.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Timminz wrote:Maybe this is a subject for another thread, but I have never seen any definitive proof of any sort of personified deity. If anyone has some, I would love to see it.
Gregrios wrote:Timminz wrote:Maybe this is a subject for another thread, but I have never seen any definitive proof of any sort of personified deity. If anyone has some, I would love to see it.
At the present time all we got for proof is the Bible itself. But if you don't believe the Bible to be legit then I guess you'll just have to wait and see.
Timminz wrote:Gregrios wrote:Timminz wrote:Maybe this is a subject for another thread, but I have never seen any definitive proof of any sort of personified deity. If anyone has some, I would love to see it.
At the present time all we got for proof is the Bible itself. But if you don't believe the Bible to be legit then I guess you'll just have to wait and see.
Is that a "No, but..."?
