Good one:)

1tikih.jpg (click to show)
1rzg0e.jpg (click to show)
1rzfyi.jpg (click to show)

LOL! I always suspected it was a man! Thank you for the proof!

1yxyjd.gif (click to show)
Good work!

Excellent!
1wrffh.gif (click to show)

1tigr2.jpg (click to show)

Only a troll would say something so stupid. Eve gave birth. Since when can a transsexual MTF give birth to children?

You will have to never mind our resident snowflake MyrianWaffle here

LOL, it's okay, I've had run-ins with it before. I love triggering idiots.

She was made with the same rib that was used to make Adam.

Adam was the first of the race of Man (which includes male and female). God took the flesh of Man and created the female from the flesh. Only God can take the flesh of a man and make a real woman. No surgeon in the world can do the same. Someone who's had SRS will always be a mutilated man pretending to be a woman (MTF), or a mutilated woman pretending to be a man (FTM).

And if we took God out of arguments for a while?

1z5wtj.jpg (click to show)
Uh oh, here comes backup. LOL!
"If you take God out of the argument, they have nothing left. Their whole argument is a house of cards, with their fictitious God as its base."
I'd say the same about theoretical science. Their fictitious god is "science".

Science isn't a God. It's a process of discovering. If conservatives truly believed in the hard work of an individual, then actually studying and looking the science behind events up would be the hard work instead of always reciting a stone-age based book.
1oxlo9.jpg (click to show)

Putting a prosthetic on someone's amputated stump still makes him an amputee. A prosthetic limb is not "healing" anything.

Does God heal lost limbs?

Why don't you ask Him yourself?

He'll probably say no because he's lost interest in humanity after Sarah Palin's birth, but when I get the chance, I will.

You could ask him now, if you're not too chicken. Why wait?
Your last comment was hateful, btw. Maybe that's why you can't bring yourself to ask God now. Later may be too late. Just sayin'...

While we are created in God's image we can never attempt to fully understand his truth due to our limited life-span and our limitations in this physical world. Your argument that God does not exist because there is no proof is absolutely fallible because you attempt to apply physical measurements to a non-physical being. Now, consider that we cannot understand and control everything in the universe, and to think that we could possibly have absolute control over our fate is absolutely ludicrous, therefore we do our best to create false philosophies and ethics in order to cope with the fathomless void of chaos that we exist in. For everything we create to keep ourselves safe, there will be something that can smash our defenses and end us. So we delude ourselves, reassure ourselves, and pat ourselves on the back for a job well done. These delusions include the current "liberal" movement as well as the "conservative" movement. Religion itself is a fallacy, as it too is an attempt to understand the incomprehensible. The best we can do is to help our fellow humans and hope that we continue to be as lucky and fortunate as we are. If a greater power does exist, then it will accept our best efforts as good and give us a place of rest in the afterlife. If it does not, and instead gets hung up on petty differences, then it is not an entity that I will ever bow too, regardless of the cost.

Shit I meant never not ever.

Lets not waste time on our special snowflake Waffle here. I finally just stopped responding to her.

I love watching the tranny myrian have meltdowns. Thanks for that. <3
People like this will be laying on there death beds praying to God to save them. And he probably will.

LOL! I love triggering those meltdowns--priceless! I just keep responding so he can dig a deeper hole for himself and expose himself for what he really is, a troll.
Let's hope that for MW's sake (and that of his alter ego OM) that he actually has the humility on his death bed to pray, instead of blaming God for his wasted life.

Science isn't a god, but naturalists have certainly turned it into one. Most of the most significant scientific achievements were made by men who started with the presupposition of God's existence.

The bible being a " stone-age based book " is irrelevant to it's truthfulness and what's known in logic as an appeal to novelty logical fallacy.

Where is the evidence that science is completely based on assumptions? Also, ad hominem fallacy.

First Point: I make this "assumption" based on the knowledge acquired being used against God's existence.

Second point: I never said the world needs to be completely in atheist view. However, I see Christians trying to push their view to the government a lot, and complaining when something is "not Christian".

Third point: Actually, to ask that an immaterial be proven through naturalistic methods in philosophy is known to be a successful method.

If God does exist, then why do humans try to prove him?

Here is the evidence for the basal assumptions. ( Link below ) The rest I didn't bother with. I'm sure you're a good kid and mean well, but you don't have the capacity for this conversation. I pray the best for your life. Take care.

https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/basic_assumptions

The sources for science can be found through tests experiments repeated over and over again to be confirmed, and that being said is the basis of what science really is.

The Bible, on the other hand, requires its followers to have faith with no evidence whatsoever. While science comes up to date with modern day technology, the Bible still falls behind with the time it was written.

The source of science is based on basal assumptions which must be assumed. Even secularist will acknowledge this. So even from a secular point of view, you clearly have no clue what you're talking about.

In response to the second part of your post. Three points First point. You are assuming your naturalistic epistemology to be the sole epistemic means by which knowledge is acquired. On what basis do you make this assumption?

Second point. That anything can be evidenced at all presupposes the existence of God. An atheist world view can not account for the preconditions necessary for intelligibility to " prove " or evidence " anything.

Third point. To ask that a immaterial, supernatural God be proven or evidenced via a naturalistic method of inquiry used for investigating the material universe is what's known in philosophy as a categorical error.

Which is an ontological error which applies properties of one kind ( Naturalism and materialism ) to something ( God ) that does not and can not possesses those properties ( Supernaturalism & materialism )

We can see the work of God via naturalism, but we can't directly observe God or his supernatural works through it. .

That last part of my last reply should have said " ( Supernaturalism & immaterialism ) " Not " ( Supernaturalism & materialism ) "

Not necassarily. Scientific theories are exactly that, not established irrefutable facts. And while there may be empirical data that can infer indirectly if not directly the validity of a theory, it is a theory nevertheless, and ultimately falls to what is basically faith to give it credence, albeit an educated one.

For example: evolution displayed via fossils. Still theoretical. In addition to a progression in changes in fossils over time indicating evolution and that there has been observed evolution to a smaller degree in modern times (which evolutionists begrudgingly liken to a species acquiring a sun tan instead of admitting to mutations that can over time lead to new species), some interpretations are retroffitted to fit an ideal, a generally accepted notion which nevertheless may not be true. Take birds supposedly evolving from therapods. Problem is, birds existed at least 70 million years before them and there are significant differences with digits and pelvis shape (rendering the reverse unlikely as well). Any objections, however, are simply dismissed soley on the basis that they contradict the commonly held theory. That's faith, not fact.

Same with climate change. Data contradicting the theory merely lead to it being redubbed "climate change," broadening the meaning to allow for conflicting data which refutes it. That's not a thesis backed by facts, that's facts the recognition of which (or not) is backed by a thesis. Again, faith.

Physics is my favorite. A bunch of (granted, rather plausible) theories whose main proof is only that Einstein sez so. Who was he? A prophet of the religion of physics.

As for the Bible, implausabilty galore, yes, but then that' what makes them miracles and not everyday occurences. Disqualifying the validity of something solely because of age is disengenous, since the longevity of anything tends to be an indication of strength, fitness to an enviroment. Not saying that makes it true, just saying that that isn't grounds for dismissal.

Also, as addressed above, YOU brought religion into the conversation. To ask for it's removal from the debate it initiated hardly seems fair or logical.
And as there are certain groups of which slights against you take offense to (Muslims, Atheists, LGBT, etc), shouldn't you expect the same of yourself in terms of others (Christians, Jews)? You may not believe in the validity of Christianity and their God, but that doesn't mean they are not entitled to the same respect.

Richard Dawkins (head athiest).
"Nothing came from nothing."
What an argument!!

Freedom of speech includes being free to disagree, which is done here through downvotes. Suck it up, buttercup.
Nice hypocritical move though, to start the argument by mocking God and then to try to take God out of the argument. There is no taking God out of the argument; science will never find the answers they seek if they never factor God into their equations.
I've told you before that you need Jesus Christ. I still stand by that statement. It would be a shame if you ended up in the special place in Hell reserved for mockers of our Father and His Son.

Now, this is why I think Octavia_Melody and MyrianWaffleEV are the same person. I was talking to MW, and OM just pops up to respond as if I was actually addressing him.

Freedom of speech includes being free to disagree, which is done here through downvotes. Suck it up, buttercup. "

Not really.. over the past 1 and a half years I've been here, I've learned that the way through respectfully disagreeing is to not downvote, as plenty can censor one's opinion, as well as enforce it to the bottom.

"Nice hypocritical move though, to start the argument by mocking God and then to try to take God out of the argument."

If I mocked God, then why are Christian humans being the ones offended by it? Seems more like I've mocked them more than I mocked God.

"There is no taking God out of the argument; science will never find the answers they seek if they never factor God into their equations."

Unless we take God out to create a hypothetical conclusion. One can't always win arguments by saying "because God says so" all the time.

"It would be a shame if you ended up in the special place in Hell reserved for mockers of our Father and His Son."

Actually, it wouldn't be a shame. I'd end up with John Lennon, who once said that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus, and ended up getting shot by a Christian believer. Basically, Beatles concerts for all eternity!

"Not really.. over the past 1 and a half years I've been here, I've learned that the way through respectfully disagreeing is to not downvote, as plenty can censor one's opinion, as well as enforce it to the bottom."

What use is the downvote button if it's not to express disagreement (it's more civil than flagging)? Why else would someone downvote (unless they were just being petty and vindictive)? I downvote when I disagree, not because I want to be petty and vindictive. I give more upvotes than downvotes anyway.

"If I mocked God, then why are Christian humans being the ones offended by it? Seems more like I've mocked them more than I mocked God."

Christians are offended because you are mocking our Father. Wouldn't you be offended if a loved one were being mocked? Wouldn't you come to their defense?
By mocking our Father, you are guaranteeing a fate for yourself that is worse than death. Christians point out that you are wrong by mocking our Father because we are obligated to try to help you so you don't face that horrible fate. We actually care about you because you are our family, but even family members can be disowned if they continue to reject Jesus Christ, our Father, and the believers trying to help them. It's lonely without our Father, so you should seriously reconsider before you end up in a place where he will never hear (listen to) you, no matter how loudly you wail and gnash your teeth.

"Unless we take God out to create a hypothetical conclusion. One can't always win arguments by saying "because God says so" all the time."

A hypothetical conclusion will always be hypothetical, and never FACT, if you remove God.

"Actually, it wouldn't be a shame. I'd end up with John Lennon, who once said that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus, and ended up getting shot by a Christian believer. Basically, Beatles concerts for all eternity!"

Prove that the shooter was a true Christian.
I'm sure in your mind, Hell is all about partying and rockin' on, but you're going to be in for a big shock when you find out you will burning for all eternity with no relief, and that Satan tricked you. But, don't say I didn't warn you.

"What use is the downvote button if it's not to express disagreement (it's more civil than flagging)? Why else would someone downvote (unless they were just being petty and vindictive)? I downvote when I disagree, not because I want to be petty and vindictive. I give more upvotes than downvotes anyway."

It's more civil than flagging, but it still limits one's free speech by hiding comments and preventing one from commenting for minutes.

"Wouldn't you be offended if a loved one were being mocked? Wouldn't you come to their defense?"

Maybe, but they actually had evidence of existing.

"We actually care about you because you are our family, but even family members can be disowned if they continue to reject Jesus Christ, our Father, and the believers trying to help them."

That's a good belief. I think a good place to start as to actually follow Christianity would be to get out of people's personal lives. The Christians I know have never said anything that absurd to me. My Christian friend still knows me as his sister, even if we're not closely related.

"A hypothetical conclusion will always be hypothetical, and never FACT, if you remove God."

It'd still be a good place to go, because not exploring would reveal one's weakness.

"Prove that the shooter was a true Christian."

I wouldn't say he was a true Christian, but I wouldn't say that for many of the "Christians" on this site either.

"I'm sure in your mind, Hell is all about partying and rockin' on, but you're going to be in for a big shock when you find out you will burning for all eternity with no relief, and that Satan tricked you."

What about Hell isn't partying? It's got gays, other atheists, and Satan's probably tired of tormenting people by now. He's not as all powerful as God, so he definitely needs a rest from work (which God seems to be taking).

Yeah... It's got Nazis, Communists, Psychos, Serial Killers, Demons, Werewolves, (if you believe in hell it's not much of a stretch) Vampires, Zombies, and all that other shit but sure let's party! Hey Hitler, come here and do shots with me!

Ok, get me outta hell now.

20e6p1.jpg (click to show)
"What about Hell isn't partying? It's got gays, other atheists, and Satan's probably tired of tormenting people by now. He's not as all powerful as God, so he definitely needs a rest from work (which God seems to be taking)."

Satan is The Tormentor, so he doesn't rest from tormenting people because hates us that much. God doesn't rest either, but you do have to be humble enough to ask for his help. He gave you free will, after all, so that you would not be a slave. You choose what you want--slavery to satanic ways and ultimately Satan himself, or freedom through Jesus Christ.

Satan doesn't do nearly as much killing as God does in the Bible, however. If "Satanic ways" is slavery, then why are the ones who supposedly supporting freedom against LGBTQ+ rights?

1zsflu.jpg [image not found]

..right.

I have never seen a liberal do as such, whereas I have seen conservatives say they are smarter than liberals.

Well you live in a cave then.

Who are you to judge what I've seen in the past 1 and a half years I've been here..?

Past 1 and half years you have been where?

On IMGflip.

Hey, I'm a Liberal-Conservative, mutt-hybrid abomination and I agree with these guys, Myrian shut the hell up.

That man needs to put pants on, cut his hair, and stop wearing a dress and pretending to be a girl. I'm sick of trannies thinking they are more ladylike than real women. Or maybe it's a cowardly way to face other men, because real men won't hit a "woman". Kind of like putting on glasses when you're about to get in a fight, thinking no one would hit someone with glasses. I'd like to see this tranny try this stunt dressed as the boy he really is.