(shiny, shiny mirror. Fundie hates Muslims in an ironic way)
Note: The average Muslim does not know that his arguments are logically erroneous. He is sincere in his beliefs. Thus you must be patient and kind in sharing with him why his arguments are invalid
55 comments
This is unbelieveable! Check this out...
When a Muslim argues that history or science "proves" the Qur'an, this actually means that he is acknowledging that history and science can likewise refute the Qur'an. If the Qur'an contains just one historical error or one scientific error, then the Qur'an is not the Word of God. Verification and falsification go hand in hand.
Insects with four legs? Rabbit cud? Pi = 3?!? And these are just the things we know are false AS FACTS !
Sorry... one more...
"It is logically erroneous to set up a parallel between Muslims killing people in obedience to the Qur'an and Christians killing people in disobedience to the Bible."
Cognative Dissonace at its finest.
Verification and falsification go hand in hand.
Unless, of course, we're discussing verification of the Bible. Which *of course* is the inerrant word of God case closed, the end, don't persecute me!!!
You-got-to-be-fucking-shitting-me!
It is not legal to be this stupid, it carries a minimum sentence of 30 years.
Hmmm... let's see:
Note:The average Christian does not know that his arguments are logically erroneous. He is sincere in his beliefs. Thus you must be patient and kind in sharing with him why his arguments are invalid.
It still works, I never thought I'd agree with anything written on Chick.com, I guess even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
OMFG
I regret we can't harness irony as a powersource 'cause this could light up Paris, Tokyo, New-York and Moscow for the next 3 millenia.
I agree with Headache, to be this stupid should bring you to be jailed AND castrated.
"When a Muslim argues that history or science "proves" the Qur'an, this actually means that he is acknowledging that history and science can likewise refute the Qur'an. If the Qur'an contains just one historical error or one scientific error, then the Qur'an is not the Word of God. Verification and falsification go hand in hand. "
I'm not made of irony meters, dammit!
You see, Robert, there is no evidence for God's existence. Even if He did exist, he would be logically impossible.
First, let's consider the Heaven-Hell doctrine...
When a Christian argues that history or science "proves" the Bible, this actually means that he is acknowledging that history and science can likewise refute the Bible. If the Bible contains just one historical error or one scientific error, then the Bible is not the Word of God. Verification and falsification go hand in hand.
That whole page could apply to fundie Christians.
Just reading their first point made me crazy. Because the Bible is older, it has authority by default? I mean wtf.
Oh wow, I read that and I think my neighbours irony meter exploded.
Did this guy send it in as a piece of satire, and Chick pulished it?
I suddenly have the desire to quote Edward Current:
We are a nation of faithful, who only want the Heavenly Father to fulfil his plan for the world.
They are a bunch of crazy religious fanatics.
We believe in God, the creator of the universe.
They believe in a made-up deity called "Allah", even though there's zero evidence that Allah even exists.
We follow the teachings of the Holy Bible, whose gentle wisdom has survived for thousands of years.
They follow the Koran, which isn't even mentioned in the Bible.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZRyXkZE9d4 )
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.