Profile

Cover photo
Reynold Hall
46 followers|10,686 views
AboutPosts

Stream

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Hah.  Those bullshit artists at Creation Ministries International have an article out about the Ankor Wat picture....the very thing that you shoot down at the  28:41 mark!

http://creation.com/angkor-saw-a-stegosaur
1
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Thing is:  Libby Anne here has a perfect response to Ham's complaint as to why they are losing people.   Guess what?  It has nothing to do with doubling down on the religous b.s. as Ham would advise:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2012/05/rebutting-ken-hams-response.html
1
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Time for a few history lessons?

--http://valerietarico.com/2015/01/20/religions-dirty-dozen-12-really-bad-religious-ideas-that-have-made-the-world-worse/

--atlantablackstar.com/2014/04/30/10-biblical-scriptures-that-sanction-slavery-rape-and-genocide/

--http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/1000years.htm

As far as rape goes?  The bible commands the rapist to buy the father off and to marry the woman.   You are cherry-picking verses.  Big surprise:
Deuteronomy 22:28-29

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. -- Numbers 31:15-18   <--Yeah, this is god saying that here it's ok to do this!

And you want to talk about atheism and rape, "valueoftruth", you tosser?
1
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Speaking of the consequences of the so-called "biblical ideas" of marriage, you may be interested in creationist John Mackay of Creation Ministries International:

http://www.fstdt.com/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=100664
1
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Hello?   I can't seem to get in.   Mind you, I don't have a lot to say...
1
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
When that fool said that "I understand that you've abandoned your atheism to argue for a door", that was pretty much it for me.
3
MikeHonchoHisself's profile photoohyeaawell's profile photo
2 comments
 
The "abandoned your atheism" quip is from the sye ten script, but he misapplied it here.  Biblethumpingmoron either completely missed mikes point about omnipotence, or he didn't have a prepared response for it so he just defaulted to "abandoned your atheism".  This is actually really funny.
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
46 people
Qamar AL Nile's profile photo
Elijah Lees's profile photo
The Definition of Atheism's profile photo
Tor-Andre Kongelf's profile photo
Helena Handbaskit's profile photo
Ray Walston's profile photo
NephilimFree's profile photo
Wayne Hudson's profile photo
Karen S's profile photo

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Uh huh.   No.  Hovind's stuff was refuted years before he tried to screw the gov't over.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/

Even Answers in Genesis had problems with the man before his son took over the ministry:
http://creation.com/maintaining-creationist-integrity-response-to-kent-hovind

Hovind isn't a nightmare, he's comic relief for atheists.

As for Hitler being an "evolutionist"?  You need to learn some basic history:
http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=4209.msg160283#msg160283
17
Reynold Hall's profile photoFree Kent Hovind's profile photoPluto Dog's profile photo
19 comments
 
And finally, one of the Christian sites that debunks Hovind garbage:

http://www.christianforums.com/t796091/

I could go on, but Erin-type Hovindicators can't digest facts anyhow.
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
So at around the 5 minute mark, Ham starts about how the "serpent" or the devil tried to attack "god's word" eh?   Problem:   Genesis 3:1-5 has the serpent saying that if they eat of the fruit, they shall be as gods; knowing the difference between good and evil   Verified by what god said in Genesis 3:22, that they became like him, knowing the difference between good and evil.

So what, you ask?   Look at what Jesus said in John 8:44:  The devil is the father of lies, and there is no truth in him.

Compare that with god admitting that what the serpent said to adam and eve was accurate earlier!
1
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Here's a weird idea....at the end of the final sequel movie, there IS no more "jedi" OR "sith".   The reason being that the events in the sequel  movies have led to everyone being able to tap into the force.

Hence:  "The Force Awakens".
1
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Uh, shouldn't this be about what the DAUGHTER wants?   Why is this addressed to the father as if this was an arranged marriage?

For another view of the religious ideas on marriage, get a load of John MacKay, a creationist with Creation Ministries International:
http://www.fstdt.com/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=100664
1
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
Ok.   Two problems here:

1) To me, ANYONE who says anything like "the atheist has no moral basis for objecting to (things like) murder, rape, etc" are the true sociopaths.

All they are doing is admitting that if they ever became atheists, that there would be nothing stopping them from doing those things.

Statements like "Why Does an "atheist" Condemn The Murders of Three "Evolved Bags of Protoplasm"? is just another example of the same thing.    Why should atheists value life less just because there is no "god" out there telling us to?

So what if we are just physical beings?   Why should that negate the fact that we have minds that can think and feel?   Studies in neurology through things like examination of those with brain injuries or diseases have their thinking and emotional abilities compromised.

Why do you people suppose that there is some "immaterial" soul? 

As for arguing about morality (and lots of other stuff!) in my huge "debate" with Jason Lisle. he kept outright dismissing any non-xian reason I could give as to why a non-believer would find those things like murder and rape to be wrong.

That's kind of why I gave that thread the title it has:
http://www.wearesmrt.com/bb/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=12286

Xian morality seems to be defined by obedience to god, and NOT by anything like: empathy, thinking of consequences to other people, or caring for society in general.

An example:
http://www.fstdt.com/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=95965

Even worse is when I brought that quote up to Jason Lisle, the owner of the blog, this was his reaction:
http://www.jasonlisle.com/2012/11/09/deep-time-the-god-of-our-age/comment-page-2/#comment-7376

(Lisle says, quoting me at first:
Remember Joseph saying that it would be immoral to NOT kill a baby if god commanded it?

[Dr. Lisle: Joseph is right. What God commands is necessarily right. Any other definition of morality is ultimately arbitrary and therefore logically unjustified.])




2)  I'm sorry...what?   Using the "laws of logic" as evidence of your god?   Why?  Just because they are "immaterial"?   So what?  They are ideas.   They are mental tools that people have figured out through observation and experience to notice general ways in which reality around us runs. 

The laws of logic are NOT some magical being who can physically manifest into our world.  

One could use that piece of evidence to show the existence of any so-called "god/goddess", or ANY imagined being.  In fact, since it was the Greeks who first enumerated the laws of logic perhaps their pantheon is the one that exists?


I'm not going to join...I don't think I could stop from swearing at your presupp stupidity in a verbal format.  

Instead I'll just give a link to a site by an actual philosopher who has dealt with presupper Sye TenBruggencate many times:
http://stephenlaw.blogspot.ca/search/label/sinner%20ministries%27%20%22proof%20of%20the%20existence%20of%20god%22

Come to think of it, he does have a post or two about the "moral argument for god" which basically says one of the things that you people are saying in this video:
http://stephenlaw.blogspot.ca/2011/12/glenn-peoples-moral-argument-for-god.html
4
CronicX007's profile photoReynold Hall's profile photo
4 comments
 
+CronicX007
You bet.   Thanks for the compliment, by the way!
Add a comment...

Reynold Hall

commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
 
I don't know if it's been posted yet, so I'll just post this link to a rebuttal of this partcular argument where the fallacies that Lisle commits here are shown:
http://unbelieversradio.com/2014/09/dr-jason-lisle-mathematics-proves-god/
1
Add a comment...
People
Have him in circles
46 people
Qamar AL Nile's profile photo
Elijah Lees's profile photo
The Definition of Atheism's profile photo
Tor-Andre Kongelf's profile photo
Helena Handbaskit's profile photo
Ray Walston's profile photo
NephilimFree's profile photo
Wayne Hudson's profile photo
Karen S's profile photo
Links
Basic Information
Gender
Male