AllFiredUp; Irony be thy name

This is possibly the most ironic and hysterical comment ever posted at Atheist Central.

AlFiredUp is talking to Iago about Luke 16:19 - 31 which, I guess, talks about people watching Hell from Heaven.

Iago pointed it out and AllFiredUp tries to dodge it by saying it was a parable. He then expands on his new favourite word by explaining to us poor, hapless atheists how a parable - a story - is different to reality.

You have to read the whole thing to really enjoy the mind-bending stupidity, so here it is in its entirety. I've italicized the word 'parable' for ease of reference and the bolded part is just because, well, just because!

On it's way to FSTDT as we speak, I give you: ALL FIRED UP!

AllFiredUp said...

"Iago said "I can answer that one. Luke Chapter 16:19 - 31.
Again try and actually read your Bible and learn to look things up."

Iago, obviously you've never heard of parable.

Why don't you try that again.

Who told you that this was an actual event?

Where do you draw the line between the parables that Jesus was just telling and this parable? Why would you infer that all of the sudden, this parable was an actual event?

Jesus had been speaking to the crowds with parables, and this is yet another parable, in a line of parables - illustrations to prove a point to the people.

A parable is a story told, specifically to illustrate a spiritual point.

The point of the parable of the rich man and Lazarus?

"Social status and material possessions are no guarantee of ones standing with God. The only thing that matters is a right response to the Word of God."

Just because the wealthy man had lots of treasures and riches, made no difference in the afterlife. What made a difference was the humility of heart to hear the words of God and obey them.

And you must do the same.

Ray also uses parables, many many times.

Yet you atheists, who are ultra literal, cannot tell the difference between an illustrative story that is intended to prove a point, and reality. That's how messed up you are."

There it is. It doesn't get any better than that.

Cheers,

Matt

To save you the trouble...

This is Ray's latest bit of bait on the end of his never-ending line of bullshit:

"Proof of Evolution

It’s been right under our noses all this time. We have finally found the missing link. The tadpole evolves into the frog in a matter of weeks ("Fish Gets Legs").

Of course, a true evolutionist believes that the tadpole isn’t a true fish.

The caterpillar evolves into the butterfly ("Bug Gets Wings"). God speeds up the process from millions of years to just 21 days, so that you can actually see the transition."

The rest has been snipped because it's just evango-speak and is of no use to anyone.

Please, please, please, please don't fall into the trap of feeling like you have to rebut or refute what may seem, at first glance, to be an argument against evolution. It's not. It's bait and it's only meant to keep you posting. Actually, reading it again; it doesn't make any logical sense at all. I mean: "Of course, a true evolutionist believes that the tadpole isn’t a true fish." is a true statement, so is he refuting himself now? He may have totally lost it!

To be crystal clear;

Ray knows that what he has described is not evolution (and he doesn't care)
Ray knows that no 'evolutionist' thinks this is evolution (and he doesn't care)
Ray knows that his flock don't care either way and that it annoys the fuck out of anyone with a functioning brain to read this crap.
Responding to posts like this only feeds Ray's massive ego (this, he does care about)

Perhaps an effective tactic when Ray posts nonsense like this would be to introduce a new topic in one of the first comments and essentially hijack the thread - it'll annoy him and we might get somewhere with some of the more open-minded fundies (there's an oxymoron for you!).

PS. - I say 'we' but I'm still on strike so by 'we' I really mean 'you', and by 'Ray Comfort' I really mean 'Cunt'. Glad to clarify that for y'all.

Cheers,

All Dogs go to Heaven?

"Name one feature about humanity that can be demonstrated as unique." Mudley

Atheism.

This is Ray's latest post. Uhg. I assume from the question, that this discussion was about the unique status of humans in nature. Mudley, the atheist, is asking what it is that sets us apart from other primates, and indeed all of life. Ray Comfort responds, "atheism". Now, are we to assume that other animals are religious? What god do ants worship, I wonder? Do all dogs really go to heaven?

Brilliant, Just Brilliant

From the "Is God Guilty of Murder?" post over at the Dumb Fort:

Jesus Will Save said...

"Jesus will kill us all in the end."



If that doesn't perfectly sum up the way these people think, I don't know what does. Made me chuckle anyway.

Ray has started to increase his traffic again, I think it's time for something new....perhaps we bombard him with comments that all say " Great post, Ray!" ?

Fun with Analogies

Bing McGhandi over at Happy Jihad's House of Pancakes* coined the following in his post of yesterday:

"Ron Carlson is to evolution what Paris Hilton is to circumspect modesty; they know nothing of one another."

This inspired me to come up with similar formulations:

"Vera is to science what aphasia is to speech: The greater the effort, the more complete the garblage."**

"Sye's logic is like a cow shitting in a hurricane: Produces something potentially useful while simultaneously wasting it."


Hmm. Okay, that second one is lame. But the first ain't bad.


Anybody else wanna play?



(*if you haven't read it yet, what are you waiting for? It's here.)
(**nope, not a typo, I'm a poet, I live to create neologisms and comma splices, so sue me)

Once An Apple is Eaten, Ethics Don't Matter!!

Good evening, fellow Raytractors. Ray has posted one of his "100" atheist comments and provided...well, nothing but an unfounded claim. Ray is as predictable as an atomic clock, ain't he?

"What do I mean when I express the hope that my ethical code is better than that espoused by the religious? I mean that I hope my ethics have the practical results of causing less harm to life and liberty, and dealing justice as humanely as possible, than any ethical teachings of any church." Weemaryann

The Christian’s eternal salvation (the fact that he has eternal life) has got nothing to do with him being "good," or having an ethical code. If a criminal is shown mercy by a good judge and his case is dismissed, it wasn’t dismissed on the basis of the criminal’s goodness or his standard of ethics. It was entirely on the basis of the goodness of the judge. And the sinner (a criminal in God’s eyes) has his case dismissed (has his sins forgiven) because of God’s goodness, not because of anything he has done.

Then, if the criminal has truly seen the kindness of the judge, he will leave his criminal life behind. This is done entirely out of appreciation for the judge’s goodness in dismissing his case. And that is the gospel in a nutshell. I was guilty of violating God’s Law--which says that He sees lust as adultery, hatred as murder. His ethical standards are so high, lying lips are an "abomination" (extremely detestable) to Him. Yet, His amazing grace (mercy) dismissed the case of a wretch like me.

I now live an ethical life out of an appreciation for mercy. This ethical life may or may not be as ethical as that of an atheist, but that will have no bearing at all on Judgment Day. God will judge the world in perfect righteousness, and only those who have called upon His mercy will be saved from His terrible justice


Notice that the religious regard themselves as the pinnacle of creation, but yet these same people regard themselves as the most lothesome creatures imaginable. Look at the cartoon for Ray's post, it reads, "I am a Sinner". Even the swinish pig is left out of all this degradation, which is left to God's climax of perfect design! We are told we are born sick due to the continuous punishment of all the progeny of a non-existent man for a mythical crime-of eating a ripe fruit. We are constantly reminded that by the religious that we are “criminals”, no matter what our personality, our history, or our deeds. This shows only one thing: the celestial dictator that Ray claims exists has demands that are impossible to adhere to...being born is nothing less than a crime. Notice, Ray even concedes that our basis of ethics and morals may be better than his; clearly if this was obviously not the case, he would quickly point it out. He bases his superiority strictly on his own belief-his faith both lacking evidence and in spite of evidence to the contrary. What, again, was the point of this post? To tell Christians and non-Christians alike that deeds don’t mean anything to God? What a validation of Weemaryanne’s point!