First of all, it’s in Old English, like Shakespeare or Beowulf or something–“thou shalt” this and “thou shalt not” that–but it’s actually supposed to be way older than Shakespeare–shouldn’t it be in Babylonian or something like that? I don’t believe in any of it. I think King James just made the whole thing up so he could go around talking about the “Divine Right of Kings”. Besides, even if it were for real, and not a hoax made up by King James, it’s not like we have any of the original words in Babylonian or Hittite or whatever–first it was translated into Ancient Geek, then into pig Latin, then French or something, and maybe Etruscan somewhere along the way, and then Old English, so it’s like that old game of “Chinese whispers”–who knows what the Bible really said? For all anyone really knows, it may have said we should all party and have fun and stuff–“Thou shalt commit whatever feels good”. But then it got all changed. You know, by the priests and the Pope and stuff, so they could be in charge. Plus, since they never bothered to translate it out of Old English, who knows what it means now? I mean, what the hell does “begat” mean anyway? “Behold, thou shalt not begat to covet unto thy neighbor’s emerods, lest ye be smitten unto the LORD” or some damn thing.
Also, it’s full of contradictions–like, how can you have a LAKE of fire?!? A lake is made of WATER–water PUTS OUT fire. And it says you should rest on Sunday, but then you have to get up early and go to church–if we’re supposed to rest on Sunday, shouldn’t we be sleeping late?
So, what the hell is with the quality of creationist argumentation we’re getting right now? Granted, creationist arguments have never been what you’d exactly call intelligent, but c’mon–people asking for the “missing link” between fish and pigs, or dogs and “the primordial soup”, or amoebas and humans, and of course the ever popular “Them pointy-headed scientists are just big fat liars who’re gonna burn in hell!”–what the hell ever happened to “Look! Footprints of dinosaurs and humans, side by side!” or “The human eye is too complex to have possibly developed by ‘random chance’”. I mean, Jesus, those were at least semi-intelligent. It really would be a big deal if human and dinosaur remains were found together; the Argument from Design has a long and somewhat honorable history. Hey, how about the old “natural selection is just a tautology” bit–now there’s one we could sink our teeth into. “Can we be moral if we’re just animals and have no absolute standard of ethics?” Instead, we’re getting the Argument from “La-la-la-la! I can’t hear you! I’m sticking my fingers in my ears!”
Pig Latin, hmmm? THERE’S YOUR DAMN LINK RIGHT THERE, SPARKY! FROM PIGS, TO LATINS, TO MODERN HUMANS. AND IT’S BEEN IN THE BIBLE ALL ALONG. CASE CLOSED!
At the risk of derailing a perfectly good Joke Pit Thread :eek: I feel I should mention that while the main thrust of your Pitting – against the current crop of “Creationists” – is well-earned, the lead-in paragraph is a really bad argument. 'Cos, you know, the source of the bible (at least the Old Testament) is perfectly available to you.
What’s that? You can’t read Hebrew? Call yourself well educated… even I can read it…
So, not only is your Pitting a Joke Thread, it’s also an unacknoledged parody of someone else’s style? Dude, you are so going to be in trouble with the Mods here…
Yup. Not that I understand the Greek, mind you (it’s all Hebrew… er I mean Greek to me!), that part is just phonetic. Aramaic I can understand pretty well, though (it’s relatively close to Hebrew)
Perhaps these stupid arguments are a good sign; maybe the folks intelligent enough to put forth a non-retarded anti-evolution argument have to brains to eventually see the truth about their arguments.
Well, you’re correct to not believe in it. However, King James didn’t make it up. He simply had a translation done of much older versions that were Greek and Latin translations of even older versions written in Hebrew. Those original documents were the ones that were made up.
You’re laying it on with a trowel, friend MEBuckner. I sympathize, but this pitting, I’m afraid, hurts as much as it helps. The problem is that sarcasm and irony and analogy are weapons requiring tools of perception not in the shed of those at whom you’re aiming: if someone hasn’t the synaptical connections required to understand the concepts you’re promoting, they’re invulnerable to the rhetorical devices you’re using. So you’re preaching to the long-converted. Others will recognize your OP as derisive, but they’ll get nothing else out of it. This plays into a common problem – the tendency of people to dismiss the things they don’t understand, the mental leaps they can’t quite make, as mere tricks played on them by people who want to feel superior. The more you press forward with the superiority (they can understand that – they’ve had more of it than anyone needs), the quicker they’ll learn to hate the message.
But if all you want to do is express your contempt and make enemies who will teach their children to hate evolution and secular education too, have at it. Everyone needs an outlet.
of ever-ever land i speak
sweet morons, gather round
who does not dare to stand or sit
may take it lying down
[sub]Folks, it’s a parody thread, with the first two paragraphs as a parody of the lame arguments against Creationism, and the requisite links appearing in the final paragraph.[/sub]
:eek: I feel I should mention that while the main thrust of your Pitting – against the current crop of “Creationists” – is well-earned, the lead-in paragraph is a really bad argument. 'Cos, you know, the source of the bible (at least the Old Testament) is perfectly available to you.