Official SEB Use This Entry To Proselytize To Us So It Won’t Be Off-Topic Elsewhere Thread

Seeing as it’s become quite regular for the True Believers to show up with the intent of trying to reveal “The Truth” to the rest of us around here, often at the expense of taking a thread completely off-topic, I thought it was time to start an entry specifically for those folks so they can get it out of their system. So, if you’re a True Believer that hopes to show us the error of our ways or you just want to angrily defend your belief system or what have you then please feel free to make use of this thread to post your views/rants/thoughts/comments/sermons/arguments from authority/appeals to emotion/or whatever it is you think you need to say.

386 thoughts on “Official SEB Use This Entry To Proselytize To Us So It Won’t Be Off-Topic Elsewhere Thread

  1. This is a strong message to the idiot named Brock.
    The bible is NOT a pussy magnet as you once stupidly liabled it as, and if you EVER had any intelligence enough to read it, then you would know that Jesus clearly stated that sexually immorality is a great sin!!
    Maybe you were voicing the opinions OF YOURSELF onto him, was that it??
    The only whore I see—-IS YOU!!
    You probably screw around like one and after reading your blasmphemous comments, you also sound like one.
    If you want to burn in hell—-GO RIGHT AHEAD.
    But unfortunately, the Lord asked me to pray for your stupid soul, so I will—-even though you don’t deserve it.
    But I hope one of these days someone will come along and not only slap the taste out of your vulgar mouth, but also knock some sense into you.

  2. w00t!

    It appears that we have our first Proselytizer. All praise the mighty Brock for brinigng this bounty upon us. For Brock is a strong and mighty Brock; and all thanks be upon him smile

    But to the chase…

    The bible is NOT a pussy magnet as you once stupidly liabled it as, and if you EVER had any intelligence enough to read it, then you would know that Jesus clearly stated that sexually immorality is a great sin!!

    Can you quote the Gospel and Verse where he does this? I understand there are many passages in the New Testement that say sexual ‘immorality’ (whatever that is) is a sin, but they tend to be in Paulian letters, not in the indirect quotes from the mythical Jesus (i.e.: the four ‘gospels’). And the Bible most certainly is a ‘pussy magnet’ just ask a number of the Fundamentalist preachers who have used it for such… Baker & Jessica Hahn anyone?

    The only whore I see—-IS YOU!!

    You need to get out more often then. It appears by your comments you could use the services of one … which would you prefer male or female? Both?

    Whore is a word people use when they are jealous that someone is getting ‘some’ … and the person tossing the word around is not…. Don’t forget … keep doing what you are doing and God will Kill a Kitten—Please stop and think of the kittens…. no not while you are doing that… that’s just sick!

    If you want to burn in hell—-GO RIGHT AHEAD.
    But unfortunately, the Lord asked me to pray for your stupid soul, so I will—-even though you don’t deserve it.

    When did Jesus call you on the phone and ask YOU to pray for anyone? Seriously, with all the people in the world he could ask, why not ask someone a bit more stable?

    Wow! Mighty Xtian of you son. Judge not lest thou be judged an all… so you have Judged Brock’s ‘soul’ I thought only jesus and/or Anubis did that? Wow! We have a Judger of Souls among us!

    He also knows who’s souls are deserving of prayer! Wow! We have a saint here at SEB!

    But I hope one of these days someone will come along and not only slap the taste out of your vulgar mouth, but also knock some sense into you.

    Yep, that’s Christian Love for you! Either follow us of we will kill you. Fucking amatures.
    I could go on and on about how his own Bible preached pacifism, love, turning the other cheek, not judging others etc but unfortunatley I would be casting pearls among swine …


  3. Hey anonymous Servant, try READING Brock’s post and you’ll find it was quoted from VICELAND.COM.
    Oh and he’s a slapper, not a whore raspberry

    Blasphemy? You wanna stone him to death, Servant?

    “That piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah…”

  4. I am assuming that “Servant” is too fucking stupid to recognize good tongue-in-cheek humor.  I am also assuming he has no fucking balls as he trolls through with no e-mail address.

    And I am positive that Brock does not need your stupid prayers for the salvation of his delightful soul.

    Show yourself, you fuckin’ coward, or troll your way along.

  5. This is a strong message to the idiot named Brock.

    This is a great example of what’s really going on inside a Christian’s heart—hate, and lots of it.

    Again, homosexuals need to start working within these churches to *correct* these evil doers.  We can make these groups are own more-loving institutions, rather than these bastions of hate.

  6. What .Rob said; however, not just homosexuals need to start working – we ALL do.  Because whatever our little eccentricities are, we’re going to be next.

  7. “Pussy magnet” I love that phrase!  It just has a nice ring to it.  I’m going to have to steal it as my own and start saying things like, “I need a pussy magnet for my fridge”.  Yeah, that would be so good….

  8. Geeze, how come everybody is baiting the Christians and I’m the one who gets bitten?

    Servant, that is an apt name for you, I presume. Why would you pray for me if you don’t really want to? Are you a spineless, brainless coward? If you don’t want to pray for me, look up to God and say “This fool isn’t worth it!”. If he’s half the God he’s supposed to be, he’ll agree and release you from your obligation. I mean, what kind of all powerful entity turns the other cheek and says “We will not brawl. He scares me!” Any decent lord of all would at least strike me with lightening or cause my dick to shrivel and drop off.

    As for the piece you read above, I didn’t write it but someone who can’t even figure out how to complete his “strong” coding shouldn’t be expected to notice that I attributed it to VICELAND.COM and gave the author the credit he’s due.

    Pussies like you never include their email addresses but you shouldn’t worry. Your type are much more likely to email us than we to email you. If your god is so powerful, won’t he be able to protect you from malicious, insulting email?

    Still you gave me a chuckle and illustrate why the piece from VICELAND was appropriate. Sex scares you to death and causes you shame. It’s no wonder anyone who wants a nut would avoid your type. You guys take eroticism and turn it into a dark and desperate failing. You’re so uptight it’s tragic! Loosen up and explore your sense of humor. Lighten up and express your benign sexual desires.

  9. And here I was thinking that it would be Pop Tart’s argument that unbelievers are the chosen people that would bring down a Fundie’s wrath.

  10. I’m still trying to imagine what this prayer of Servants must sound like…
    “Lord in heaven, I would like to pray for that whore Brock’s stupid soul, and that you find forgiveness for his blasphemous comments in saying that the bible could ever get anyone laid.  Obviously, it never has for me.  Oh, and send someone to slap the taste out of his vulgar mouth, and knock some sense into him.  Amen.”
    Is that close, ya think?

  11. I’m now behind in my work today because of this thread of comments. Brilliant! It’s so unfortunate that we will likely never see nor hear from Servant again. I love him and want him to speak again. Pleas Servant, if you are reading this, PLEASE tell us more!

  12. Um, yup! You want to invoke the phlegm splattering wrath of fundies? Mix in some sex. Sex’ll reel ‘em in every time!

    Pussy magnet, eh? (…regards cat magnets on fridge. Goes to find bleach for brain…)

    (laughing in spite of her migraine…)

  13. Yet another entry that has taken on a life I never expected it to. How come when I THINK an entry is going to generate tons of comments all I hear are crickets, but when I toss something up on a lark you guys suddenly think we’re in some sort of Comment Arms Race??

    I suppose I should be glad no one’s doing that FIRST POST!!! I R0XX0RS UR B0XX0RS!!!1!! crap.


  14. And here I was thinking that it would be Pop Tart’s argument that unbelievers are the chosen people that would bring down a Fundie’s wrath.

    Probably b/c it required too much thought for them to decipher.  Servant couldn’t even read the first lines in Brock’s post that the article was from somewhere else. 


    I think the grammer skill level on this board scares off the majority of script kiddies.

  15. Haha, thanks for the compliments on my “God is an atheist” theory. I still trying to find a title for that argument. Still working on the argument. Trying to fit in story of 1) Wandering in the desert with the idol worship such that the wandering is the journey atheist go true and the idol worship the use of religion. 2) Also trying to fit in how it is better for one to do good because one feels it is so rather than doing good because one feels that one is going to heaven or avoiding hell.

    First of, elwedriddsche, sure you or anyone can post this. You could attribute it to “Pop Tarts” but it is not going to make much of a difference since I only use that posting name on this site. I do not usually give out any personal info about myself so as to allow my screen persona to comment on any issue without raising any potential ethical or legal issues. (Just as one who lets say someone who represents Microsoft or Dell or RIAA yyour position is the company’s position). Alright if you must know my secret messiah code is 0164696t2h7y5677406. haha. It will be our secret communication handshake.

    Just perhaps leave a note/trace/link back to this original site. Just in case I decide to compile all my arguments into a book and get a Christian fatwa on my head.

    Anywho, this form of argument, I have only tried it a few times. And someone or other it kind of stuns the other person into silence. The whole concept is kind of warped. You are not suppose to believe in God yet the non belief is the correct belief or actions. And you do not even need to believe in what you are saying since that is built into the argument itself of you acting out based on you own heart. The best thing is that you have seized the ground by allowing yourself to define God rather than the other side.

    This argument arised out of my Alternative To Hold Evangelist In Sin Theory (ATHEIST). Alright still working on the title.

    Basically I believe that using science to argue gets you no where and that you are placing yourself in a weaker position, when one is using science and he is using his concept of faith to debate. The problem is that since one does not believe in God you are effectively ceding the definition of God to the other side. And anyone who ever has to go up against another person to argue an issue, he who loses the battle of definition usually finds oneself in a weak position. They can define God to be out of time and space and what not. So this ATHEIST form of argument is to adopt the idea of pre-emptive strike. To bring the battle to them.

    The key to this is firstly to do an “Even If” kind of argument. This simple means that you do a conditional acceptance or a theoretical acceptance of the other side’s main argument. And that God exists. And from there you work to use his own words against him.

    The “God is an Atheist” argument is actually a Part II or follow up. There is an initial argument which is quite distinct and could stand on its own. It is actually made to counter some potential loopholes in the “Rapture: Who will go to Heaven?” argument.

  16. Rapture: Who will Go to Heaven?

    An argument that is part of the:
    Alternative To Hold Evangelist In Sin Theory (ATHEIST).

    This is actually a very simple argument and not as fantastic or funny as the above argument.

    For this argument, the assumption made is that there is a God and that again for the sake of argument let us make it such that there is only one religion in the whole world and that people either believe in it or is an Atheist or Agnostic.

    1) Good Samaritan Atheist v Fanatical Religious Bigot
    Let us picture two persons.

    The first is the atheist: She does not believe in God. But that she is truly lives and acts like Jesus and is as kind as Mother Theresa. She helps the poor and needy, never say a bad word to others and when she is slapped she turns the other cheek.

    The second is the fanatic: He believes in God. But for some reason or other his belief is warped, perhaps it is because of his upbringing. He has inherited the belief from his dad that it is religious duty to keep a slave, and that he believe in racial discrimination. Also he has shoot and killed many people for being in a religious marriage and have killed the offsprings of that marriage because he really believes that such an action is God’s will.

    2) Rapture has arrived.
    These two persons are standing before God. Where would they be sent? Let us operate on the assumption that God did not intend his words to be interpreted in the manner like the fanatic. This assumption obviously would not be met with much objection by the evangelist.

    2A) Atheist to Hell, Fanatic to Heaven.
    If this occurs, it would mean that God is only concern with people who worship him and less concern about the actions of the people. It would also mean that if Hitler believed he is doing the work of God truly then he would be in Heaven. So that could mean that heaven may be populated by a bunch of really nasty people. And that hell may not be populated only by evil. The question is, would you want to worship a God that could have sent Hitler to heaven? Would you want to rub you wings with Hitler? What then is one’s concept of heaven?

    2B) Atheist to Heaven, Fanatic to Hell.
    Well, well if this is the outcome, then one need not be religious to go to heaven. And that being religious even if one truly believes in what one is doing is the work of God, that person may still go to Hell. (Here is a good reference to idea of free will in other argument)

    2C) Both Atheist and Fanatic to Heaven.
    Heaven may not be too nice a place. But an Atheist can also go to heaven. And may have gone to heaven in a way more pleasing to God. Perhaps two angel wings for the atheist and only one for the fanatic.

    2D)Both Atheist and Fanatic to Hell.
    This means that being religious would not necessarily send you to heaven but being an atheist would definitely not send you to heaven. But if this variation is true it would mean really big things, which leads us on to the next part.

    3) The “Correct” Interpretation.
    Variable (2D) means that one must have the correct interpretation and also be religious go to heaven. So the first question is how do you know your interpretation is the correct one. One need not even focus on the multiplicity of religion in the world, for a simple look at one religion can generate a whole range of views.

    What makes your interpretation the correct interpretation? What makes you so special? Are you in effect saying that somehow you and the people sharing your belief is better than the rest because you are closer to God and know the correct answer? What about the fact that God created all being equal and that God loves each of his creation equally? Would not your suggestion that you are right and the rest is wrong be considered as the SIN OF PRIDE?

    How do you know you are so right and others who share the same strong belief as you so wrong? Are you in effect comparing yourself as an equal of God and being able to comprehend God?

    4) Can a Human Comprehend God?
    If the evangelist concedes that he does not have the answer either to 1) Where the atheist and fanatic would go, or 2) the fact that his interpretation may not be perfect. And furthermore, because God is all knowing and powerful, our human minds cannot comprehend or foretell all that he does. And that it would be futile to attempt to guess the intentions of God.

    However, the evangelist may then argue, it does not matter in your case since you are not even religious. The answer coming up.

    5) Unable to fully comprehend God’s plan for us all and his wonderous ways:
    If one has already conceded that as an evangelist or person one is not able to fully comprehend God’s intentions and plan, then how is one certain that God wants me or anyone to be a Christian or to follow any religion. And that if you yourself are uncertain about his intentions, how do you know that your plan is the ‘correct’ one. If one accepts either of the Variations (2B,C,D) to atheist and fanatic question, then your teaching could in fact be the wrong one. And that you in effect are not only not doing God’s work but is spreading sin and distorting God’s words. And if I follow your lead, you may in effect lead me not to Heaven but to HELL.

    Since, you are unsure of God’s intention how do you know his true plan is not for all to be an Atheist and that your religion may in effect be going against God’s will. (This is where my God is an Atheist argument start comes up. Especially if they ask why would God want people to be an atheist).

  17. Opp some big typos above. Point one with regards to the fanatic should read.

    “Also he has shot and killed many people for being in a racial marriage and have killed the offsprings of that marriage because he really believes that such an action is God’s will.”

  18. Well, come to think of it since the argument is that the fanatic is warped and the point is the belief that his actions are justified by God. The typo is not as bad as I first think it would be. Besides I think I made another typo in my correction.

    “Also he has shot and killed many people for being in a interracial marriage and have killed the offsprings of that marriage because he really believes that such an action is God’s will.

  19. I suspect the proselytizers find their way to specific threads via links from sites complaining about them.

    Looks like GeekMom may have been right after all. Apparently I’m “a man who needs prayer” according to Rick Brady over at Stones Cry Out. I happened to notice an up tick in referrers from that site and went to see what was up and found the small blurb with a link back to SEB. Rick doesn’t mention if he’s going to pray for me, but the more the merrier as far as I’m concerned. He and his friends are joining a very large, but so far ineffective, group. Still, doesn’t hurt to try I suppose.

    Needless to say, I’m very amused. grin

  20. Opps, Sunfell did not realise you wanted to post too. No problem, you can post. Since my initial reply was directed at elwedriddsche, (although I did say anyone can post) I think I will clarify it by saying anyone can post on their blogs or whatever.

    You could refer it to Pop Tarts but outside of this site it makes not difference (well except perhaps the makers of pop tarts). So just perhaps a link back here would more than suffice. Oh and mention of our secret communication: 0164696t2h7y5677406. No self respecting non-religious religion can exist without some secret number.

  21. Man, we’re just not getting enough proselytizers here.  Hey, proselytizers, Google this!:

    – Kent Hovind is a big ninny
    – “Is we descended from monkeys, or ain’t we?”
    – Jesus was bisexual.  There was Mary Magelene, and the disciple Jesus loved (thought by some to be John.)  Sometimes they did “three-way.”
    – Irreducible complexity means “I am too stupid to grasp the concept of geologic timespans.”
    – Gays are sent by God to rescue us all from heterosexuality.  It says so right in the Bible.
    – Armageddon already happened.  We’re all dead, and we’re wandering around like that movie, The Sixth Sense waiting for Haley Joel Osment to come explain it to us.

    There, (dusts off hands) that ought to do it.

  22. DOF – Could we squeeze a children’s book onto the list?  Something like ‘Jesus loves you but Spot is going to hell’ or ‘Why it’s okay for daddy to smoke weed on Saturday – and other things you don’t need to tell your pastor’

  23. …did you see what he tried to do to Aunt June’s leg last Sunday?

    Hmmm.  That could actually work for both books. wink

    Proselytizers won’t be around ‘til Monday, last Sunday has worn off by now.

  24. Hey, proselytizers, Google this!:

    Chum in the water!

    Proselytizers won’t be around ‘til Monday, last Sunday has worn off by now.

    They’re out getting their sin on. 

    Don’t forget these wonderful books:
    “When Mommy and Daddy Don’t Know the Answer, They Say God Did It”
    “Harry Potter and Kent Hovind’s foul wind”

  25. Decrepitoldfool,
    Actually, there is some scriptural reference to Jesus being at least bisexual: Mark 14:50 – 54 Note that it was cold, as Peter warmed himself by the fire. What were these 13 (or however many) young men doing in that garden all night? And howcome he was 33 years old and unmarried? (Or maybe married to Mary Magdalene at Cana, where he performed the first miracle at his own wedding?) As Alice would say, “Curiouser and curiouser!” Think this might bring a few responses from the proselytizers? wink

  26. Thanks for brightening my day, all.  Meanwhile, chew on this: I finally got so-called Les figured out.  He’s not really a Stupid Evil Bastard (an atheist, in other words), but a Stupi Devil Bastard.  A stupa is, of course, a monument to Buddha, so “Les” is actually the illegitimate offspring of one (or more) of those Buddhist devils who hang around those mounds.  Why he used an Italian plural for a Sanskrit word puzzles me, though…

  27. Les, I could be a wannabe conspiracy theorist or psychic, but I noticed ole Rick Brady calls himself “Servant” in his little top right corner profile. It’s the first word, actually.

    Any connection? IP match maybe?  hmmm

  28. That’s possible, though I would tend to doubt it. I’ve spent a little bit of time looking around Brady’s site and he doesn’t strike as the sort to leave a comment like that. He noticed the spike in referral traffic from SEB after I linked to his entry and has since written one about me and SEB specifically. Based on what he’s said there and some of the other entries I read through I’d be inclined to think the comment left by Servant isn’t quite his style.

    But I could be mistaken.

  29. J as in Justice? I’m a bit slow to catch on to these things today.

    Why bother catching one of them? I’m not particularly interested in finding out who they are, as opposed to what brings them here in the first place and particularly, if there is an element of collusion to it.

    Sometimes you get the impression that certain individuals are on a schedule – Monday, preach on SEB, Tuesday, …

  30. Yep. That’s me. I probably shouldn’t have been so lazy.

    Why bother catching one of them? Not only could it be a start in answering your own two wonders, but, . . well, it would have amused me greatly.

    I don’t have much appreciation for the rude and cowardly.

  31. David said:

    Gee, it couldn’t be wrong if it feels right and doesn’t hurt anyone.

    …the conceit of the world is that everyone can do what they want, without consideration of the Almighty.

    How very Puritan of you.

  32. Ragman’s quote from David agrees perfectly with my personal avatar.  I asked her if God loved me, and she replied “Only the weak-minded ignore religion.”  However, when I queried her specifically about Jesus, she said “Interesting, I worship the holy squirrel myself”, which might be a point of doctrinal dispute with David.  I was about to question her further about her beliefs, but she fragged me…

    (I hope this doesn’t appear twice…)

  33. hmmm-interesting thread.  Seems to be more proselytizers against Christianity.  Do any of you ever proselytize on a Christian site, or do you leave them to what you consider ignorance, as perhaps you wish they would for you?

  34. Sure, I do it all the time.  I go on Christian blogs and tell everyone there that they are superstitious sheep who forefeit human intelligence to myth.

    Oh, wait; no I don’t.  Because that would be obnoxious and rude.

  35. hmmm-interesting thread.  Seems to be more proselytizers against Christianity.

    That’s due in part because the Christians who come here to proselytize rarely listen to what we have to say so why should I expect them to actually use this thread for its intended purpose? I put this up as a half-joke anyway.

    Do any of you ever proselytize on a Christian site, or do you leave them to what you consider ignorance, as perhaps you wish they would for you?

    In order to proselytize one has to want to convert the other side to their viewpoint and, frankly, I don’t really care if believers continue to believe as long as they’re not forcing it on everyone else. I’ve said in many threads here that if it makes them happy, helps them to sleep at night, and keeps them from climbing the local clock tower with a high-powered rifle then who am I to take away their security blanket?

    Given that there’s not much point in my proselytizing to others on their sites and I rarely comment on said sites unless what I’m commenting to has some direct bearing to me (such as when they write an entry about SEB and/or myself).

  36. Well, on proselytizing, I feel encouraged by your answers, as you have shown to be fairly consistent & hypocritical in no way.  I would agree with your assessment of most of the “Christian

  37. I understand Atheist to know for 100% certain there is no God, so there is no discussion.  Agnostic means there may or may not be a God who doesn’t care enough or the agnostic doesn’t care enough to think about it much, in which case there can be discussion of related topics & their relative importance if s/he is willing.  These are actually some of my favorite discussions.

    When you start out by telling somebody who self-identifies as an atheist what his or her position is, you deservedly lose your audience right then and there.

  38. That was certainly informative and does a good job of giving us an idea of where you’re coming from. There’s a few points I wish to address, but I’ll have to wait till later in the day as I need to head off to work.

  39. Sometimes it’s helpful to start with getting definitions out in the open.  Ellie has a mistaken belief of what an atheist is. 

    Theism is the belief in a god.  Atheism is the lack of a belief in a god.  A person who does not claim to know, or who says it is impossible to know, is an agnostic.  Many atheists are also agnostics.  Some may claim to know there isn’t a god, but it’s some job to prove a negative.

    Here’s a discussion about it on Unscrewing the Inscrutable.

  40. That was one of the points I had planned to address. Ellie seems to spend a lot of time telling us how wrong our definitions of what a Christian are and yet she manages to flub the definition of atheist herself. This is part of what I find a bit annoying whenever she claims we’re “ignorant” about Christianity as it’s clear there’s a few things she may be ignorant of herself. Certainly there are some atheists who do feel 100% certain that there are no gods, but that is not a requirement to be an atheist. By the same token admitting that it could be possible for gods to exist is not the same thing as being an agnostic. Some other points I’d like to address:

    To hold a belief system or book responsible for wacko interpretations would be like holding the Constitution & Democrats responsible for Texas separatists.

    A poor simile at best as there is significant difference in the content of the Bible and the Constitution. One of them tells fantastic tales of miracles and infinitely powerful super beings and the other lays the basic foundation for a society.
    Hardly an apples to apples comparison. Additionally if the book or belief system in question promotes ideas that could be considered “whacko” as being absolutely true then it’s not an invalid question to ask if it isn’t partly to blame for whacko interpretations of it.

    Presumably as a Christian you believe that the Bible is full of good ideas and instructions on how you should live your life that are worth attempting to put into action. Yet here you claim that if someone were to interpret part of the Bible in a manner that you would consider “whacko” that you think the Bible isn’t responsible for that no matter what the content might be. What about someone who reads Leviticus 20:13 and then decides that they should kill homosexuals? That’s pretty much what it says you should do yet I’m willing to bet that you’d consider someone who followed through on that to be “whacko” based on what you’ve said so far. Yet there are plenty of Christians who use passages such as this one to justify their persecution of homosexuals if not engaging in outright violence against them. The passage is quite clear and it’s hard to imagine how you could call seeing it as an order to kill homosexuals to be a “whacko” interpretation.

    I still laugh when I see posts criticizing Christianity on the basis of what God “should

  41. Seem that Hitler was fighting the good fight.

    I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord’s work. [Adolph Hitler, Speech, Reichstag, 1936]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.