Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In
1 2 3 4 5 10 12
Quote# 66528



A CHALLENGE TO THE MOST EDUCATED AND CAPABLE ATHEISTS In the above article, I have proved that atheism did not have an earthly and human origin, but had its origin from satan before this state of time. Out of all the responses I have received from atheists, not one has been able to intelligently and credibly dispute that fact. They are confounded that they cannot come up with a human author and earthly time of existence for their atheism. They are quick to erroneously claim that the TEN COMMANDMENTS were authored by a human, and some of them claim that Moses authored them, but they cannot name an earthly author and time of origin for their own philosophy.

Why are atheists so quick to try to attach a human to the TEN COMMANDMENTS when they cannot do so to their own philosophy? If Satan is not atheism’s author and atheists cannot pinpoint a human author, perhaps their atheism came into being by a cataclysmic explosion. LOL! Or perhaps atheism brought itself into existence by its own prior nonexistence. LOL!

So I have two bold challenges for atheists: If satan is not the author of atheism, I hereby challenge the most educated and capable of them to prove that satan is not its author and prove that it had an earthly origin. I also challenge atheists to prove that the TEN COMMANDMENTS were authored by a human. Before you try the latter impossibility, read my article titled: “God is the Author of the TEN COMMANDMENTS”.


atheiststooges, Atheist Fools 43 Comments [10/27/2009 2:46:33 PM]
Fundie Index: 33
Submitted By: Captain Klamydia
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66798

yes [Hitler] was baptised Catholic as an infant...but that's where it ends. Early in his career he used to church to gain influence among the Christian population of Germany but as his power was consolidated his true agenda came out and it was the destruction of Christianity...but face it: Naziism is a form of Marxist socialism which is built on atheism. Crack a book and stop reading atheist agenda websites and believing that is real history

wjb67ii, YouTube 39 Comments [10/27/2009 12:24:04 PM]
Fundie Index: 26
Submitted By: DevilsChaplain
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66794

No one really knows how the ancient Mayans got such accurate information that they could construct such a calendar without the modern observational equipment we have today. But we Christians mostly believe it had to be some kind of satanic or demonic influence.


yogi3939, Rapture Ready! 54 Comments [10/27/2009 12:20:50 PM]
Fundie Index: 33
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66791

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that 99% of gays are ideologically opposed to the military. And not only do they believe the military to be evil, wouldn't you also say the military doesn't fit into the carefully crafted stereotypes that GAYS have made up about themselves?

1. They tend to be extremely fashion conscious. (Don't deny it, you know it's true.) So how many gays do you know that would want to wear dark green in the spring, or wear their desert whites in the winter?
2. They tend to be lovers of fine cuisine. With that in mind, how excited would most gays be when they open their army ration kit and find out that stale crackers is what they will be eating, and that it will be washed down with a dirty canteen full of rain water?
3. They are more emotionally connected than most. Do you think they will like their Drill Sergeant screaming in their face while being forced to scrub a bathroom floor with a toothbrush?
Folks, the vast majority of gays have no desire to join the military in the first place, which is why this issue will never go away. If President Obama actually ended the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, then gays would move on to their next issue, but if this issue continues to exist, it serves as a distraction from the issue gays really care about; gay marriage.

But let me tell you another reason that Obama will NEVER give gays this issue; because the straight people in the military would have a fit. And would you blame them? Think about it for just a second. How many of you ladies out there would want to change clothes and shower in front of strange men? How many of you men would want to have to strip down in front of women who aren't your wife? Perverts aside, no one would. Which is why no man would want to shower in the same room with men who were openly gay, and the same would go for women. Simply put, it would be a HUGE distraction, and I'm guessing that people who are about to put their lives at risk need as few distractions as possible.

Here's the HardTruth.

Obama has zero intention of giving gays what they want because he knows the public doesn't want him to. Don't get me wrong, I believe if Obama had his way he would give gays more than want they want. He would probably make it illegal to criticize them if he could, but I can thankfully say, he can't. As he as shown time and again, he can't do anything, which is great for the country, but bad for those who see him as their savior, and that's the HardTruth.

Pastor Tom Estes, Hard Truth 51 Comments [10/27/2009 12:19:07 PM]
Fundie Index: 31
Submitted By: Tiger
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66775

[On Obama's winning the Nobel Peace Prize]

I agree with Bobbi Sanchez
If I'm reading and understanding it correctly, it's against the Constitution for him to accept it. Not that he cares about the Constitution.

"No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress,... accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.

United States Constitution, Article I, Section 9"

He should have declined it until his Presidency is over and then accept it, like Roosevelt.

Not that I believe he deserves it.

Heidi Elizabeth Heglar, One Million Moms on Facebook 38 Comments [10/27/2009 7:12:34 AM]
Fundie Index: 18
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66752



HackerOnHacker, Graph Jam 71 Comments [10/27/2009 1:20:43 AM]
Fundie Index: 28
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66714

"This is strictly for people who believe in the Big Bang.In order for something to be scientific it needs to be demonstrated.Now,with that being said,why is it that no big bang explosion(such as war bombings,911,etc..)has ever designed anything?Why is it that when bombs,firecrackers,etc.. go off that they cannot create things?Like another sun,moon,stars,planets,animals,people?
If the Big Bang is true then why do explosions only cause destruction?"

C, Yahoo Answers 63 Comments [10/27/2009 12:47:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 36
Submitted By: Bill_M
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66677

A conservative military watchdog says she disagrees with the recent recommendation by several high-level members of President Obama's defense team that the ban on women serving on submarines should be dropped.

Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, says besides putting women in a very confined area with dozens of male sailors, the constantly recycled atmosphere creates a health risk.

"In the very early days and weeks of pregnancy, the recycled atmosphere [in a submarine] includes elements that are very unsafe for an unborn child," she notes.

"So let's suppose three weeks out [to sea], a married sailor discovers she's pregnant. And the ship commander has two choices -- either [he] violate[s] the stealthy status of the submarine by surfacing for a dangerous evacuation, or he tells her that she will have to remain as she is throughout the deployment.

"This is an impossible dilemma that can and should be avoided," says the military watchdog.

Elaine Donnelly, OneNewsNow 53 Comments [10/27/2009 12:42:27 AM]
Fundie Index: 16
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66675

i think it's wrong for scientists to? define everything because they define humans as apes, and i don't want to be an ape because they are ugly and dumb.

scientists can have their definitions, and we normal people can have our own.

watergaia, youtube 55 Comments [10/27/2009 12:41:47 AM]
Fundie Index: 35
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66658

I Feel That I Was in the Generation Which Saw the Change

The answer to "why" do women dress provocatively?

My conclusion:

WOMEN'S LIB + THE BIRTH CONTROL PILL

Women's Lib came along in the sixties and taught women that to have sex outside of marriage and use birth control was their right. Women should be able to enjoy what men have always enjoyed (now that the pill was on the market).

Trouble is: The cost of behaving "loosely" is no self-respect at all. This is the complete opposite of what women's lib wanted for women. They wanted women to have respect, and the same enjoyment of sex without ties or commitment, but instead, we now have women who dress in such a way, that they are not respected at all. They sell the view of their bodies' for love and closeness.

IT WAS ALL A LIE. Women's Lib singlehandedly drove scores of women to have less respect for themselves, and to be respected as OBJECTS instead of for the talents they have. This was the exact opposite outcome that Women's Lib wanted. They wanted MORE respect for women

Trouble is, you sell your soul for sexual pleasure, and you get no respect at all from men. I guess the ideal for women's libbers is to leave men out of the equation entirely, IYKWIM?

Thank you women's lib and Margaret Sanger for your birth control pill. NOT. You have degraded women and we have you to thank.

IT WAS ALL A LIE. And you know who is the father of lies.

That's my opinion.


futurehope, Rapture Ready 51 Comments [10/27/2009 12:33:07 AM]
Fundie Index: 37
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66644


I've started sort of quizzing my friends and family about what Salvation is and how to obtain it. Here is an example: (I made it real easy!)

Why do you think a person needs Salvation?

A. To live a better life?
B. We are all wretched and fallen because of our sinful nature which condemns us to Hell. Without Christ's sacrifice, we are doomed to be lost forever.

They said "both", fair enough. But, I wanted to see which Gospel they had been hearing, so I said "you can only pick one". Well, they picked A.

I don't know, maybe I should have worded it better, but I thought I made it an obvious answer.

heart_changed99 , Rapture Ready 43 Comments [10/27/2009 12:21:11 AM]
Fundie Index: 29
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66635

Ok, this is one of what I hope will be several succeful debate topics.

What you do is tell whether you think dragons did exist or might still exist. Don't just put: dragons are cool so they must have existed. Thats lame. Give reasons, any historical/Scientific/Religious evidence.


My side of the debate:

Dragons did exist, but are now extinct. My reasons for this are: In the age of dinosaurs, there were flying dinos and fire-breathing dinos, how hard would it be to have a fire breathing flying dino? (Because I think that that is was Dragions were: dinosaurs, I do not belive they were sentient. They may have been smarter than other dinos, but the were not sentient or have higher thought functions. There have been dragon carcasses found. There is a history channel DVD titled: Dragons, a fantasy made real. That I am baseing this piont on. In the book of Revalations, in The Bible, there is a beast described as looking like a dragon-ish creature, When Paul talks about Armegadon, he talks of: Beasts that spat fire... The Bible often uses real-world examples of things, personally, I think that Paul was trying to describe a modern tank, using a dragon as a simile.

Wylfgard Warrior, Saber-Scorpion's Lair Forums 60 Comments [10/27/2009 12:19:54 AM]
Fundie Index: 39
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66620

"Deadly weapons

A loaded gun in the hands of a child or promiscuity in the eh-hem, arms of a promiscuous person spells harm to the innocent.

We should be rightfully terrified of "Bi-Sexuals." They should be required to be licensed through the State and register with the authorities.

Now that's change we can believe in."

(Note: this comment is located at the very bottom of the comments section)

askwhynow2day, Alternet 61 Comments [10/26/2009 10:20:36 AM]
Fundie Index: 46
Submitted By: Fompili
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66799

Also...just cuz the "scientific community" believes evolution doesnt make it true; the majority have been proven wrong many times...

[What "majority" was proven wrong many times?You mean when scientific theories were updated and improved, the way biblical science never is?]

The science of bleeding; the communists in the Soviet Union a century ago; the belief the world was? flat; the belief the earth was the center of the universe.....all majorities proven wrong and there are so many more.
"If it ain't broke, dont fix it." There are many "laws" in science that have been proven to be steadfast and accurate every time it is tested (i.e. gravity, laws of thermodynamics)....therefore, if biblical science has never been proven wrong...why would it need improved?

Andrew9651, Youtube comment 58 Comments [10/26/2009 3:56:25 AM]
Fundie Index: 50
Submitted By: Mithcoriel
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66792

(On the comments section of a news article about a man who shot and killed his fiancee the night before their wedding because he thought she was an intruder in his house)

God is punishing them for cohabitating before marriage

Vallandingham, KATU.com news website 69 Comments [10/26/2009 3:49:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 71
Submitted By: CLX
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66888

Rationalization is a powerful deception. I pray the Lord give us the strength to accept neither wrong and never rationalize such an evil concept as killing one innocent unborn child to just save its mother.

Dragoon68, Baptist Board 56 Comments [10/26/2009 1:46:06 AM]
Fundie Index: 47
Submitted By: Jodie
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66720

anyone that accepts homosexuality should be ashamed of themselves...they should protest, picket, boycott...whatever to end homosexual behavior. it is disgusting, spreads disease, and gays do target children! look at all the gay priests! you are delusional if you think gays should be allowed into normal culture...they should be shunned and exiled.

Mike D, Yahoo Answers 55 Comments [10/25/2009 9:20:47 PM]
Fundie Index: 50
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66704

Can I help it if I have kept all the virtues I got from Christianity that make me so superior to the rest of you?

Jack Musser, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/atheistvschristian/ 64 Comments [10/25/2009 9:19:31 PM]
Fundie Index: 61
Submitted By: Chad
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66691

The author's of Redeeming Halloween: Celebrating Without Selling Out are foolishly wrong to claim that Halloween used to be "INNOCENT." Halloween was never innocent, any more than the innocent tiger who ripped his owner and trainer, Roy Horn (of Siegfried and Roy) to shreds in 2003. Christians who take their kids trick-or-treating (or let their kids go on their own) ought to feel guilty because Halloween is the Devil's day. No Christian should support such a wicked holiday. Just because nearly everyone does it doesn't justify it. Most people have no problem going down to the beach to watch people walking around 98% naked. This is sinful. Likewise, Halloween is of the Devil and any Christian who celebrates it to ANY extent should feel guilty. The two women who authored Redeeming Halloween: Celebrating Without Selling Out suggest appropriate "costumes" for kids to wear on Halloween. They ought to be ashamed of themselves if they are indeed true believers.

David J. Stewart, Jesus is Savior 61 Comments [10/25/2009 9:19:17 PM]
Fundie Index: 42
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66684

[Justice Scalia debates lawyer Peter Eliasberg during the case Buono v. Salazar, regarding a cross on federal land.]

"The cross doesn't honor non-Christians who fought in the war?" Scalia asks, stunned.

"A cross is the predominant symbol of Christianity, and it signifies that Jesus is the son of God and died to redeem mankind for our sins," replies Eliasberg, whose father and grandfather are both Jewish war veterans.

"It's erected as a war memorial!" replies Scalia. "I assume it is erected in honor of all of the war dead. The cross is the most common symbol of ... of ... of the resting place of the dead."

Eliasberg dares to correct him: "The cross is the most common symbol of the resting place of Christians. I have been in Jewish cemeteries. There is never a cross on a tombstone of a Jew."

"I don't think you can leap from that to the conclusion that the only war dead the cross honors are the Christian war dead," thunders Scalia. "I think that's an outrageous conclusion!"

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, The Washington Monthly 43 Comments [10/25/2009 9:18:55 PM]
Fundie Index: 61
Submitted By: emau99
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66651

Baring the fact that you are not a Christian, but a satanic homolutheran/Cathylick, you're the last creature on earth to try and deride the T-man! Regarding your ilk, the second class citizen, a.k.a. the woman, God has made it quite clear that
they are put on earth to serve man, period. (1 Corinthians 11:9). Women exist
ONLY to be helpers of men (1 Corinthians 11:7). Women must be respectful and
submissive to their husbands, therefore, NO HEADACHES ON SATURDAY NIGHTS! (1
Peter 3:6 with Genesis 18:12). Women must always obey their husbands (1
Corinthians 14:34; Titus 2:5).

You are to be subject to your husband's, that is if you ever find a man foolish enough to marry you, every command, which may include leather and
rubber products. (Genesis 3:16; Ephesians 5:22, 24; 1 Peter 3:1). You are
NEVER to hold any position in which they govern or supervise men! (Isaiah 3:12).
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in
silence. (1Timothy 2:9-12 ) EMPHASIS ON THE TERM SILENCE!

In fact, your ONLY hope of Salvation is to become a real deliver in childbearing (1 Timothy 2:14-15). You only have two options here, woman, put up or shut up!

TIC

TIC, The Fighting Fundamental Forums 52 Comments [10/25/2009 9:16:52 PM]
Fundie Index: 66
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66629



McNaughton, http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/ 127 Comments [10/25/2009 9:14:37 PM]
Fundie Index: 97
Submitted By: The WHHAAAMMMM Burglar
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66790

Evidence of Jesus' resurrection from the dead was witnessed yesterday. Granted it happened in a church. Yet from a simple historical cause - effect relationship there is only one way to explain what was witnessed.

The effect - A new mother and wife of one of the members decided she wanted to become a Christian, to confess in front of the bunch (about 50 folk) that Jesus was her Lord and Savior.

Having done that, the walls were slid left and right and the preacher, her husband and she walked into a pool of water about waste deep.

She then was baptized, laid prone under the water (immersed) and caused to stand up again.

The picture is clear. She stood (alive as a sinner), laid prone (was buried in the water) and stood up again (born again, raised from the dead).

The cause - The event is testimony to a historical happening some 2000 years ago - the physical resurrection of Jesus. What other historical explanation do we have for the 2000 year old presence of baptism by immersion in the church?

Indeed, evidence of Jesus's resurrection was witnessed today.

Bill Belew, Examiner.com 80 Comments [10/25/2009 4:58:33 AM]
Fundie Index: 89
Submitted By: Nitsua
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66777

Poppy's girl, would you "empathize" with a woman who killed her 2-year-old child who was an extreme mental or physical defective? Would you refuse to condemn that? I guess I'm trying to get at what makes you think you are pro-life (or anti-abortion). Because if you wouldn't empathize with the mother of the 2-year-old, and would call that murder that should be punished, but not the killer of the unborn child, I hope you can see the problem with calling yourself "pro-life". Likewise, if you empathize with both of them, and wouldn't condemn either one, then you are pro-murder, it's just that you are selective about which murders are OK to commit. In other words, it's OK to kill babies that are judicially innocent, but it's a horrible crime to kill a man who has spent his adult life butchering babies and burning their bodies in an in-house incinerator whose smoke and ash has wafted through the breezes of Witchita for decades.

There we have it.

Watchman, Full Quiver Mission 42 Comments [10/24/2009 8:24:52 PM]
Fundie Index: 41
WTF?! || meh

Quote# 66741

Difference Between Liberals and Conservatives

If a Conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one. If a Liberal doesn't like guns, they believe no one should have one.

If a Conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy. A Liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a Conservative is homosexual, he quietly enjoys life. If a Liberal is homosexual, they loudly demand legislated respect.

If a Conservative is a minority , he sees himself as independently successful. Their Liberal counterparts see themselves as victims in need of government protection.

If a Conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation. A Liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a Conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church. A Liberal wants all churches to be silenced.

If a Conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it. A Liberal demands that his neighbors pay for his.

If a Conservative disagrees with a Liberal president, he is called a racist. When a Liberal disagrees with a Conservative president, it's patriotic dissent.

TED, Moonbattery 61 Comments [10/24/2009 8:08:12 PM]
Fundie Index: 47
Submitted By: DevilsChaplain
WTF?! || meh
1 2 3 4 5 10 12