MovieChat Forums > Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008) Discussion > Chef dies to snake head he cut off long...

Chef dies to snake head he cut off long ago, corroborating God's Word


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/chef-cooking-snake-dies-after- 4088634

A chef preparing a dish from cobra flesh died when the snake's head bit him - 20 minutes AFTER it was cut off.


This news shows that just like Genesis says, the serpent is the most cunning creature, hence that is why satan possessed a serpent to trick Eve.

This incident also proves as true the murderous evil power of snakes, which corroborates their evil as described in Genesis and why God chose to curse them.

In other words, in this post I have provided a real-life example that makes ernie's mocking strawman posts against godly people, wherein he says things like "you believe in a talking snake!", look like the tomfoolery that they are.

Eat crow, ern.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

If the snake was possessed by satan, why did god punish the snake


I assume that the serpent was complicit in allowing satan to possess him.

Horses, cows, dogs, deer, bees and ants all "murder" more people each year than snakes. Why doesn't Genesis describe them as "evil"? Why doesn't god curse them?


Where is your evidence for that? Fail x1.

When have their heads bitten someone to death 20 minutes after he cut their heads off? Fail x2.

When did they do anything evil before the Fall of Man?

...hint: never! Hence, God had no need to call them evil, Fail x3, and God had no need to curse them - Fail x4.

Well, that sure backfired on you!


On the contrary: your response is so full of fails, that it is making my OP stronger than ever. This is like when Darth Vader (you) attacked Obi-Wan (me), foolishly thinking he had Obi-Wan beat, when really all he did was make Obi-Wan more powerful than he could ever imagine. So please, by all means, keep feeding me more fail, and oh by the way, that makes Fail x5!

Well, that sure backfired on you! []


On the contrary x2, for the reasons I've just mentioned in x1. Add that to your fail tally for Fail x6.


Debunked.



On the contrary x3, Fail x7.


Now run along and report this post.


Stop blaming me for what either your fellow darwinists or you yourself or your alternate personalities are doing. Fail x8.

Grand total: 8 fails in 7 sentences. Yup, that's an epic FAIL!

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

Animals can't consent to possession. Even a child knows that.


We aren't talking about animals as we know them today. Rather, we are talking about the pre-Fall serpent, which was probably much more sophisticated than any animals we have today...and that is especially and definitely so once satan was inside the serpent. In other words, you are comparing apples to oranges then saying apples are oranges. Fail.

Furthermore, you are neglecting the fact that satan has powers of communication that humans do not. Fail x2.


http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/events/department-news/1195/forget-sharks-cow s-are-more-likely-to-kill-you/


That link says nothing about any of those animals' heads having bitten someone to death 20 minutes after he cut their heads off. Repeat fail.

Nor does it say anything about them doing anything evil before the Fall of Man. Repeat fail x2

Where is your evidence for that?


Genesis.

Bearing false witness.


As a darwinist that's your job.

Debunked with ONE LINK


Your link didn't debunk jack. Got any link that addresses the points in my OP that your first fail link failed utterly to do?

Epic FAIL x2.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

You're such a tool Nav, do you even read this stuff or just go ape over the headlines and assume? The thing even says he wasn't bit, he just caught a fang with some venom, which is completely normal.




Panzer vor!

reply

[deleted]

You're joking.... right?

reply

You're joking.... right?


Not sure if you are addressing me, but in case you are, I am 100% not joking.

The OP provides real-life proof thousands of years after the events of Genesis happened and were written down, that the principles in it are just as true now as they were then. The evidence shows that God's truth always stands forever.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

Sorry, but I don't believe you. I think you're joking.

reply

Gee look, someone scraped a fang of some poisonous snake and got some venom, truly the work of god, because, you know, that would never be possible except that it is.

I wonder if that means native tribes that used the poison of dart frogs on their weapons were working for god's plan too




Panzer vor!

reply

Sorry, but I don't believe you. I think you're joking.


Believe what you want, but the facts stand for themselves regardless of your beliefs.

Fact: Genesis says that the serpent is the most cunning creature.

Fact: The severed head of a serpent murdered a chef which required great cunning on the serpent's part.

Fact: The truth God laid out in Genesis is still equally true today.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

Fact: The severed head of a serpent murdered a chef which required great cunning on the serpent's part.


Why it's almost like it did absolutely nothing and the chef grazed his hand on a fang, surely god at work. Next you'll claim people dying of disease and starvation are proof of god's love, right?




Panzer vor!

reply

Fact: The severed head of a serpent murdered a chef which required great cunning on the serpent's part.

See, this is the part that I don't think you can actually believe. You cannot honestly think that a chef accidentally stabbing his finger on a snake's tooth involved planning on the part of the snake. You can say that you do, but you're lying.

reply


*cough* Holy Righteous God Penis *cough*

*cough* Radiation speeds up evolution *cough*

----------
Evolution fails to explain one thing: why some creatures are tastier than others.

reply


*cough* Holy Righteous God Penis *cough*

*cough* Radiation speeds up evolution *cough*


Why are you "coughing" at the indisputable truth of God's Word? Doing so only makes you look foolish.

And I never said radiation speeds up evolution. What I did say was that since darwinists harbor the ludicrous belief that mutations are a good thing that cause "evolution," darwinists are hypocrites for not zapping themselves with radiation 24/7 in order to mutate and thus "evolve" into super heroes. That is not to say that I believe they will "evolve," rather, it is to say that if darwinists don't believe that, then they are hypocrites.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply


You must be pretty dense to think that radiation speeds up evolution. You wanna know what it actually speeds up? cancer.

Also:

Why are you "coughing" at the indisputable truth of God's Word? Doing so only makes you look foolish.


Excuse me, I have to go find somewhere where I can politely laugh out loud. Mister holy righteous penis still believes in his bunk.

----------
Evolution fails to explain one thing: why some creatures are tastier than others.

reply


Excuse me, I have to go find somewhere where I can politely laugh out loud. Mister holy righteous penis still believes in his bunk.


Only an idiot would call God's Word bunk. And only an idiot would laugh at God's Word. And the fact of God's penis is not "mine:" it is common knowledge that every godly person has known since the dawn of time. athesists/darwinists just further expose their idiocy when they attribute that common knowledge to me personally.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

But the biggest idiot of all would be the idiot that believes in a talking snake. []


This thread has utterly destroyed at great length that tired old strawman of yours. Yet you are still spouting it anyway. Must be the dishonesty of your soul that is infused atheist/darwinist evil that causes you to do that.

I'll take your dishonest reposting of that strawman as your admission that like graham, I have also defeated you in this thread.


/threadwin for God x2


"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

You defeat nothing. You're a fool.

"Don't drink that @$$hole, you'll get malaria!..."

reply

You cannot honestly think that a chef accidentally stabbing his finger on a snake's tooth involved planning on the part of the snake.


What you said is not what happened. What really happened was this:

The severed snake head spent 20 minutes pretending to be dead, then woke up and bit the chef to death at the exact moment when it noticed that it had the chance. The serpent, using only its long ago severed head, performed the ultimate in cunning ambush. It's like a scene from a horror movie except it happened in real-life, because the chef underestimated the cunning of the serpent.

I feel bad for the chef dying, but maybe if he paid more attention to the Bible he would have realized that screwing around with serpents is a bad idea, and underestimating their powers of evil and cunning are especially bad ideas, hence he would not be dead now.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

As a rule I don't care if somebody is a troll or poe - I'm happy to reply to arguments no matter what the motivation of the person making them.

But I have long wondered if you were a poe. Now I know that you are. Thanks.

reply


But I have long wondered if you were a poe. Now I know that you are. Thanks.


I see you cannot dispute the irrefutable truth of God's Word hence you have to ad hom me because you have no possible way to counter God's truth.

Your absence of any possible counter to God's truth just validates it further.

Btw graham, try not to murder any babies out of your anger at me having defeated you in this thread with logic, reason, facts, and the truth of God's Word!


/threadwin for God.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

You don't believe what you are saying.

reply

You don't believe what you are saying.


Look graham, I know you are butthurt because God and I have defeated you in this thread, and also because we call out your love for murdering babies for what it truly is. But despite you being butthurt about those facts, I'd appreciate if you could try to stop spamming up my threads. Thanks.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

I don't care if somebody is a troll


You are an atheist/darwinist who posts frequently on anti-darwinist, pro-God boards such as this one, and others like this one. Ergo, you are, by definition, a troll. How hypocritical of you to imply that godly people who post on pro-God boards are trolls.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

You've dropped yourself in it navvy...

Nothing but a Poe - a poor gamer-boy who spends his non-gaming times trolling these boards.

Probably got stuck on a level of Diablo, so vents his idiocy here....







"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free" - Goethe

reply

It kind of takes the fun out of it when you can't tell yourself it could be real any more, doesn't it?

reply

It wasn't fun before, just a reading of idiocy




Panzer vor!

reply

I'm pretty sure he is joking...or trolling.

reply

[deleted]

Now run along and report this post again.

OBVIOUSLY you were debunked and embarrassed. That's why you falsely reported my posts for deletion like a whiny little bitch.


Why would I waste time reporting a post that I'd already debunked and heavily quoted from (hence almost all the text from your post is still in my post wherein I quoted you) prior to when someone else reported it?

In other words, I have no problem with anyone seeing your comments, or else I wouldn't have quoted them. And reporting your posts to erase your words that are still present in the quotations in my posts anyway would be totally pointless.

I never reported your posts. Maybe you reported your own posts. I have reported exactly 0 posts in this thread. If you didn't do it, then someone else did.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

I'll tell you this, I've owned four snakes and two iguanas. By far those iguanas were mean, nasty little SOBs, the snakes were docile and calm




Panzer vor!

reply

That's exactly why you reported it


Except I didn't. Maybe you were so mad at my debunking of your post and at the fact that you had nothing else to counter my perfect debunking with, that you decided to report your own posts to scapegoat me.

For me to report a post that I've reproduced almost entirely through quotations in my own post makes no sense whatsoever.

As for the rest of your post, I've debunked all those "points" earlier in this thread.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

As for the rest of your post, I've debunked all those "points" earlier in this thread.
- What I said

LOL, not even CLOSE.
- What ern said

I noticed you failed to respond to my posts which debunked your posts near the start of this thread, ernie.

Instead of responding to my rebuttals to you, you whine about me having deleted your posts which I did not delete, and which I've pretty much quoted in full inside of my own posts which rebut your comments.

So ern, are you gonna man up and try again (i.e. feed me more fail posts to once again make my OP even stronger) by responding to the content of my posts which have rebutted your comments?...or are you gonna continue to run away from my rebuttal posts because you have no counter to them? What will he do, oh what will he do...LOL

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

There was no need to. Your "rebuttal" was self-refuting.


...plus "blah blah blah blah blah blah...."

In other words, you've got nothing, son.

Let's see your empirical PROOF that animals were any different before the flood.


Let's see your empirical PROOF that animals were evil before the Fall of Man.

It's clear from reading scripture that the snake was just a snake before satan possessed him.


The scripture says it was a serpent, not that it was a modern day snake. You can't find any evidence that proves it was akin to a modern day snake. God's curse of the serpent does, however, prove that before it got cursed, the serpent in the Garden was definitely not the same as modern day snakes. So we know for sure that it was different, the only question is to what extent?

Most likely, snakes we have nowadays are drastically inferior and devolved versions of the Garden's serpent.

Nevertheless, they still are the most cunning creature, as proven by the snake's ultimate act of cunning which allowed it to, with just its long ago severed head, murder the chef who chopped off its head. Thus Genesis is once again proven to be just as true today as it always was.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

Animals have always been exactly what they are.


No they haven't. But you are claiming they have been, so PROVE it!

If you believe they were different than they are NOW, then it's up to YOU to provide the proof.


Genesis proves it.

Where is your proof for your claim that "animals have always been exactly what they are?"

A serpent IS a snake, doofus.


Silly boy...a snake is one subset of the serpent kind, but that does not in any way mean that the serpent in the Garden is equivalent to modern day snakes...and you can't prove your claim that they are equivalent.

Let's see your empirical PROOF that snakes we have nowadays are drastically inferior and devolved versions of the Garden's serpent.


Let's see your empirical proof for your claim that the serpent in the Garden is equivalent to modern day snakes.

As has been already pointed out to you, this had nothing to do with the snake's cunning. It had to do with the chef's clumsiness.


That's not been pointed out unless it was from people on my ignore list like uther whose posts I never see.

But if they made claims like that, those claims are hogwash.

The chef didn't do anything clumsy, other than to underestimate the cunning and evil power of the snake.

The snake head played dead for 20 minutes, in order to give the chef the impression that it was dead. The chef accepted the snake head's false impression, thus picked it up, and paid for his mistake with his life when the snake head seized its opportunity to take the revenge it had been waiting for by biting the chef's hand in order to avenge itself.

That is the ultimate act of cunning on the part of the snake, and therefore it proves the truth of Genesis absolutely.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

YOU are claiming that they haven't. YOU prove it.


YOU are claiming that they have, so YOU prove it.

Genesis is a load of nonsense.


This thread proves otherwise, as I've proven at length via the chef-murdering severed snake head.

Snakes haven't changed radically for as long as we have been studying them


Have you been studying snakes from the beginning, with the serpent in the Garden, before the Fall of Man? If not, your point is irrelevant. "As long as we have been studying them"...but you haven't been studying them long enough to know anything relevant to this discussion.

No, serpent is just another word for snake.


Incorrect. A snake is a serpent, and a serpent can be a snake, but a serpent is not necessarily a snake.

Look it up in the dictionary.


Sure...right as soon as you point to me to a dictionary the adequately defines the serpent kind, including the serpent kind as it was before the Fall of Man. No such dictionary exists. But if I'm wrong about that, prove it.

You're claiming that it ISN'T. It's up to YOU to provide proof.


You're claiming that it IS. It's up to YOU to provide proof.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]

It's already been done.


No it hasn't.


You can't show me the changes in snakes, there is my proof.


Sure I can...right after you provide me with specimens of every variation of the serpent kind that has ever lived, including the pre-Fall serpent from the Garden.

If you can't pony up that evidence, that proves that you don't have the evidence required to make your claim that "snakes haven't changed." Fail.

You're like a superstitious old lady. Mosquitoes kill more people than snakes. Where's the warning in Genesis?


Got any evidence of a severed mosquito head playing dead for 20 minutes, then waking up at the exact right moment to murder the person who severed its head? Nope, didn't think do. This thread is not about "what animal kills the most." This thread is about what animal is the most cunning. Your examples are offtopic and irrelevant to the facts in the OP. Fail.

Yes I have. There have been no changes. Prove me wrong.


You don't have enough evidence to make that claim. Prove me wrong by ponying up the evidence that I asked for earlier in this very same post.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/snake?s=t


That dictionary fails to meet the necessary standards that I outlined in my previous post about this issue, i.e.:

point to me to a dictionary the adequately defines the serpent kind, including the serpent kind as it was before the Fall of Man


The link you have given does not do that, so that's right, you guessed it, that's another Fail.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply

[deleted]


I sometimes wonder if he's intentionally trying to make creationists look stupid.

He's giving Darkon a run for his money lately.

----------
Evolution fails to explain one thing: why some creatures are tastier than others.

reply

I sometimes wonder if he's intentionally trying to make creationists look stupid.


You deny and mock God's Word and thus, unless you repent, you are destined to spend eternity in Hell. Is anything more stupid than that? No my friend. So hop off of the "stupid caboose" of darwinism and hop onto the "smart train" of God.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply


Is anything more stupid than thinking radiation makes you evolve faster?

And that God has a holy righteous penis?

----------
Evolution fails to explain one thing: why some creatures are tastier than others.

reply

Is anything more stupid than thinking radiation makes you evolve faster?


I agree that that's a really stupid belief...but it's a darwinist belief, or if it is not, then darwinists are hypocrites. Moreover, that belief is no more stupid that is the ludicrously stupid darwinist belief that mutations are a "good" thing that cause lower forms of life to "evolve" into higher forms of life.

So why are you questioning me about your own side's stupidity?


And that God has a holy righteous penis?


What's stupid about that? That is common knowledge that has been known by every godly person ever since the dawn of man, starting with Adam.

atheists/darwinists who think that fact is funny show only that their own complete and utter ignorance of all things godly is hilarious beyond belief.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" - Gilman

reply


Creationists believe in a purple eskimo that saves kids with his perfumed farts. See? I can make up BS and claim you believe it. It's a bad sign when you have to make up *beep* because reality constantly embarrasses your arguments.

And seriously, please, I could easily ask other creationists what they think about God having a penis, and they'd answer that whoever believes that belongs in an asylum. Even amongst other creationists, you'd be a laughingstock.

----------
Evolution fails to explain one thing: why some creatures are tastier than others.

reply

It's a bad sign when you have to make up *beep*


I have no idea what you mean by that. That statement is incoherent. I made nothing up.

I could easily ask other creationists what they think about God having a penis,


There is no such thing as "creationists" as distinct from "Christians." All Christians believe the Bible, and therefore all Christians know that God is Male and has a Penis.

Anyone who denies those facts would be a denier of the Bible, and therefore, by definition, not a Christian.

they'd answer that whoever believes that belongs in an asylum.


No they wouldn't. If asylums came up at all, then they would say that Bible deniers such as yourself should be in them.

Even amongst other creationists, you'd be a laughingstock.


No I wouldn't. As I said, all legitimate Christians believe the Bible, and the Bible makes 100% clear that God has a Penis, therefore no legitimate Christian would deny that truth.

But let's pretend you did find people who profess to believe in the Bible whilst, in actuality, they deny it. And those people laugh at me. Would I care? No. Because God and I get the last laugh together as we are partying it up forever in Heaven, wherein the mocking Bible deniers of which you speak shall never enter.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

It is manna from heaven when Navaros opens his mouth lol


All Christians know that God is Male and has a Penis Navaros

reply

God has to use his penis in something, after all




Panzer vor!

reply

It is manna from heaven when Navaros opens his mouth lol


Well, at least it's the closest thing to that on these boards. The old guard like KiBL and OBW were capable of making posts as good as mine. truthy has stepped up his game and is also capable of making posts as good as mine, although I'm not exactly sure if he is a Christian now...AFAIK he didn't used to be, but maybe he is now.

But aside from us very few (some of whom aren't even around here any more...I have no idea what happened to our old pal OBW)...for the most part, this board and others like it are devoid of morality and godly wisdom.

So any time I post, you are indeed fortunate & blessed that I have come to give you the good stuff. For if not I or those other few that I mentioned, then who?

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

truthy has stepped up his game and is also capable of making posts as good as mine, although I'm not exactly sure if he is a Christian now


There are those here who are not sure what he is either, except presumably under 16 and self-taught lol. Good luck with him: no one else bothers.

All Christians know that God is Male and has a Penis Navaros

reply

Who's more of a pathetic ignorant coward than an ad hom ignoramus!??!?!

An INACCURATE pathetic ignorant coward an ad hom ignoramus!!!!!! HAW HAW HAW!!!!!!!

The clumsiest, weirdest bigots EVER stumble around these boards!!!! HAW HAW HAW!!!!!!

Not only does he advocate ignorance, but they STILL can't even express what they're opposing.... ugh..... heehee

WEIRDEST BIGOTS EVER!!!!!!! heehee

reply

they STILL can't even express what they're opposing.


True, they can't...but one thing is certain: they oppose everything and everyone who in any way questions the assumptions of their evolution story/religious belief system, instead of blindingly accepting it as an "indisputable fact" ...just like their previously "indisputable fact" fact that Pluto is a planet. 

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

under 16 and self-taught lol.


LOL! He was posting on this board since at least 2008, if not earlier. So you are saying he was 8 years old or younger at that time? 

Good luck with him: no one else bothers.


That's a shame. His posts are full of brilliance that can benefit everyone. I admit that they are written in a bit of an unusual style and it takes some getting used to, but it's worth the effort. 

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

It's a false claim anyway since I've made SEVERAL straight forward (so-called) "proper" posts to which ignorance was the "response" they chose AGAIN!!!!! HAW HAW HAW!!!!!!!

Heck, maybe I'll try again, but is just some ad hominem REALLY all they have!??!?!?! heehee

THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE ANY FREEKIN' CLEAR OPPOSITION ANYWAYS!!!!!! HAW HAW HAW!!!!!

Is spamming "mamma peepee" their idea of sophistication?!?!?!?! REALLY?!?!?! HAW HAW HAW!!!!

I post in this (so-called) "style" because I'm not concerned IN ANY WAY about appearances and this is how I express myself heehee

Ignorance is INCREDIBLY funny!!!!!!! HAW HAW HAW!!!!!

Mel Brooks put it brilliantly..... the LAST thing hitler wanted was everyone laughing at him heehee

....and so he does heehee

AWESOME!!!!!!!

I'm not afraid of these bigots.... I feel bad they can't even enjoy their own wonderful system heehee

Science is GREAT because it patiently clarifies what someone wants to be the truth from what they WANT to be the truth heehee

Ironically there's WAY to many people that just want science and science ONLY to be the ultimate authority BUT then add their own NON SCIENTIFIC personal preferences about stuff like God HAW HAW HAW!!!!!!

Science can't say one way or the other so they add their own personal preferred beliefs heehee

THAT'S FUNNY!!!!!!!! HAW HAW HAW!!!!!!!

As a final side note..... how hilarious is it to accuse someone of being "a simpleton" or "an imbecile" then NOT understand what they're saying HAW HAW HAW!!!!!!

For those few dum dums.... that would make you LESS then your derogatory fantasy heehee

Maybe think through your unfounded accusations before expressing them!??!?!? heehee

Just a thought........

reply

I'm gonna go with not just yes but hell Yes.

reply

Did you actually read the link? The guy grazed his finger on a fang of a dead snake. This happens with any poisonous animal. Hell, it's how natives in South America hunted for centuries by using the poison of Dart frogs. The snake didn't bite him.




Panzer vor!

reply

Look at the title of his post.

----------
Evolution fails to explain one thing: why some creatures are tastier than others.

reply

Look at the title of his post.


Look indeed, in awe and wonder!

This thread's title and OP are both part of a brilliant masterwork because the Holy Spirit made it so. That is God working through me to educate darwinists, destroy their evolution myth, and indisputably prove that His Word is true.

And the thread title is especially apropos for this board, because for years before I made this thread, a notorious darwinist poster named erniebane would constantly post strawman nonsense like, "you believe in a talking snake!" in order to try and discredit the Bible.

This thread title proves that ernie's years of darwinism-promoting were all wrong all along, and it also proves that in contrast, God's Word was always right.

This thread is like a microcosm of all the debates on this board that darwinists have fought against God and lost. It is the perfect finale. All the glory goes to God. Amen.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

That is God working through me to educate darwinists, destroy their evolution myth, and indisputably prove that His Word is true.




This is what the LORD Almighty says: "Do not listen to what the prophets are prophesying to you; they fill you with false hopes. They speak visions from their own minds, not from the mouth of the LORD". Jer 23:16



Suck an egg you filthy atheist jerk! kurt-2000

reply

This is what the LORD Almighty says: "Do not listen to what the prophets are prophesying to you; they fill you with false hopes. They speak visions from their own minds, not from the mouth of the LORD". Jer 23:16


Indeed. In that verse, the LORD is speaking of the pagan false prophet scammers who were rampant at the time, and who are the ancestors of the fake Christian kinds to which Iacton_Qruze alluded. Plenty of those kind of fake prophets are on IMDB.

But with me, I speak in 100% alignment with the LORD. I am not of the kind to which He referred in Jeremiah. I don't know what the point of you posting that quotation in this thread was supposed to be, FF. It seems as though you were trying to question me by way of taking Jeremiah out of context against me.

Is that what you intended? If not, what was your purpose for posting that quotation in this thread?

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

But with me, I speak in 100% alignment with the LORD. I am not of the kind to which He referred in Jeremiah .. I don't know what the point of you posting that quotation in this thread was supposed to be,


This is not the only reference to false prophets in the Bible. And a sinner would say that, wouldn't he? It would be better to be honest with yourself and admit your failings.

"Boast not thyself of to morrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth. Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips" Prov 27:1-2

"If you play the fool and exalt yourself, or if you plan evil, clap your hand over your mouth" Prov 30:32



All Christians know that God is Male and has a Penis Navaros

reply

It would be better to be honest with yourself and admit your failings.


What failings would those be, FF?

I'm one of the very few on these boards who has always fully and unashamedly defended God's Word. I may not be perfect, but at least I'm trying. And that work of trying is automatically better work than the non-existent work all those who do not even bother to try.

And it's certainly better work than the work of iniquity done by all those wolves in sheep's clothing who falsely claim to be Christian yet who preach a doctrine of demons that contradicts and/or denies the Bible.

"Boast not thyself of to morrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth. Let another man praise thee, and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips" Prov 27:1-2

"If you play the fool and exalt yourself, or if you plan evil, clap your hand over your mouth" Prov 30:32


How are those quotations in any way relevant to this thread? And how is your quotation from Jeremiah in any way relevant to this thread?

You seem to be attempting to make some kind of indirect, backhanded insults against me...but I'm not exactly sure, since you are not being clear about stating what your intentions with those quotations are. So what's up with those quotations? Are they are supposed to be your fancy way to try and ad hom me?

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

It would be better to be honest with yourself and admit your failings.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



What failings would those be, FF?


If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.


I'm one of the very few on these boards who has always fully and unashamedly defended God's Word. I may not be perfect, but at least I'm trying. And that work of trying is automatically better work than the non-existent work all those who do not even bother to try.

And it's certainly better work than the work of iniquity done by all those wolves in sheep's clothing who falsely claim to be Christian yet who preach a doctrine of demons that contradicts and/or denies the Bible.


For the Bible's view on false modesty, and false prophets see elsewhere on this thread.




All Christians know that God is Male and has a Penis Navaros

reply

This news shows that just like Genesis says, the serpent is the most cunning creature, hence that is why satan possessed a serpent to trick Eve.

How does a snake biting someone "show" that the serpent is the most cunning animal? What is cunning about a snake that just so happens to remain alive after being beheaded, then defends itself when picked up? Are you certain that no animal has ever done anything more "cunning" than this?

This incident also proves as true the murderous evil power of snakes, which corroborates their evil as described in Genesis and why God chose to curse them.

What is evil about a snake biting someone who just chopped its head off? Is a bee "evil" for stinging someone who tries to swat it? It's just self-defense.

In other words, in this post I have provided a real-life example that makes ernie's mocking strawman posts against godly people, wherein he says things like "you believe in a talking snake!", look like the tomfoolery that they are.

Call me crazy, but I don't think the snake in the news story said anything. Equating a talking snake to a beheaded snake biting someone is like equating micro-evolution to macro-evolution - something I'm sure you would object to.

Also, a Strawman fallacy occurs when someone misrepresent's someone else's views. As you, Navaros, DO believe in a talking snake (as you believe Genesis is 100% literally accurate), saying "you believe in a talking snake!" is not a Strawman. It's the truth.

reply

Also, a Strawman fallacy occurs when someone misrepresent's someone else's views. As you, Navaros, DO believe in a talking snake (as you believe Genesis is 100% literally accurate), saying "you believe in a talking snake!" is not a Strawman. It's the truth.


I was part of a disputation on this very point on the general religious board a while ago. Leaving aside the issue of whether it is meant to be taken literally at all anyway, and if I remember correctly, for many special pleaders the issue hangs on the bible verses which only talk of the snake "communicating". Clearly a telepathic snake can be thought to be more credible.



All Christians know that God is Male and has a Penis Navaros

reply

No, it's a strawman, contrary to what you (FF), my possible stalker (Zoo), and ernie have said.

Christians believe in a talking satan, not a talking snake. The serpent could talk because it was possessed by satan. That's strawman component #1 of your (FF), my possible stalker's (Zoo), and ernie's strawman epic fail of a failsauce strawman.

Moreover, the serpent in the Garden was almost nothing at all like modern day snakes [modern day snakes are a vastly debased version of the original serpent kind], yet you (FF), my possible stalker (Zoo), and ernie misleadingly conflate modern day snakes with the Garden's serpent as if they are the same thing. ernie "strawman" bane used to say things like "snakes don't have vocal chords!," yet he has no idea whether or not the serpent in the Garden had vocal chords. It may well have. [But, as I've said, even if it didn't, it would still be able to talk through the agency of satan inside of it.] So conflating modern day snakes with the serpent of the Garden is strawman component #2 of your (FF's), my possible stalker's (Zoo's), and ernie's strawman epic fail of a failsauce strawman.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

Whatever you say, lol and I must say I enjoy a fine dose of special pleading, for clearly either a snake talks or not, whatever the cause - else why mention it in the first place? Incidentally you may wish to communicate your views to those Xians who have been quite adamant to me that it was, indeed, a snake.

But as I said elsewhere, you do know that not everything in the Bible is to be taken literally, right?



All Christians know that God is Male and has a Penis Navaros

reply

for clearly either a snake talks or not, whatever the cause - else why mention it in the first place?


Yes, the serpent talks, but what's your point?

My point is that the serpent does not talk in the same manner as humans talk - which is the strawman that ernie, yourself, Zoo. etc. love to spread.

My point is also that the serpent does not talk absent being possessed by satan, which is not something that modern snakes typically have done to them, yet which your strawman, "you believe in a talking snake!" argument conveniently omits.

it was, indeed, a snake.


That may be because you are splitting hairs over an issue that is in some ways minutiae. It is minutiae in that both snakes and serpents are the same in terms of being charming, cunning & evil animals. So if Christians use "snake" instead of "serpent" in that context, it's not a big deal. But - I'm sure the Christians who told you it was a snake would not agree with your conflation of the Garden's snake as being exactly equivalent to modern day snakes. And they would not agree with your strawman argument's implication that the the snake in the Garden was a typical/normal snake who was not possessed by satan at the time when he spoke.

It stops being minutiae, however, when posters like ernie, yourself, Zoo etc. start to claim incorrectly that the Bible is saying that the Garden's serpent is exactly equivalent to modern day snakes and that the Bible claims it talked in the same manner as humans talk.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

Hey Zoopi, You seem to be following me around from board to board like a stalker. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but maybe not. Are you stalking me?

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

I'm not even sure if I should reply to your post since you might be stalking me, but I will for the sake of readers of this thread not receiving the wrongful impression that your post can in any way harm my rock-solid argument as laid out in the OP and in my glorious subsequent posts in this thread which have already, years ago, intellectually manhandled erniebane's failed counter-argument.


How does a snake biting someone "show" that the serpent is the most cunning animal?


That's a vast oversimplification of and erroneous description of what happened.

"A snake" did not bite anyone. Rather, the long ago severed head of a snake avenged the snake's life by murdering the chef who had long ago chopped off its head. And - herein is your vast omission of convenience - it did that by playing dead for a long while, until just the right moment occurred to avenge itself.

That is unquestionably one of - if not the - most cunning murders that an animal has ever committed against a human. It rivals the satan serpent's cunning temptation of Eve. Because as God said, the serpent is the most cunning creature in all the land. Ergo, as the thread title and OP prove and as this post does too: ernie is wrong, FF is wrong, graham is wrong, you (possible stalker Zoo) are wrong, and every other darwinist who has ever fought against God is wrong too...whereas, God is right and the Bible is true.

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

[deleted]

Hey Zoopi, You seem to be following me around from board to board like a stalker. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but maybe not. Are you stalking me?

I generally lurk on certain religion-related boards (the God's Not Dead movies, Saving Christmas, etc), but your posts tend to - ahem - "inspire" me to come out and respond.

However, looking back over my previous posts, it's true that the number of times I've responded to you is rather excessive. After this discussion, I'll try to stop doing it so often.

it did that by playing dead for a long while, until just the right moment occurred to avenge itself.

Let's go through this snake's actions from the beginning.

First, it was captured (presumably by a hunter of some kind), sold to a restaurant, and beheaded. Not very cunning.

Then, its head remained alive for several minutes while the chef was preparing a meal. This doesn't require cunning either. As explained in the article, it's a perfectly natural phenomena that sometimes occurs to snakes.

Finally, when the chef picked up the head, it closed its jaws and bit the chef. This is another natural response that you would expect a snake to do when grabbed, and still doesn't require any cunning.

In short, there is nothing in this snake's actions that suggests it premeditated the "murder" at all. In fact, if the chef had just picked up the head in a slightly different way, this supposed "cunning" snake's "plot" would've been entirely impossible. It's pure chance that the chef's finger just so happened to be close to its fangs. It's also pure chance that the snake was able to survive the beheading, because as the article explained, it's rare for a snake to remain alive after losing its body.

That is unquestionably one of - if not the - most cunning murders that an animal has ever committed against a human.

How do you know? Have you looked at every murder an animal has ever committed against a human and concluded that they are less cunning?

Because as God said, the serpent is the most cunning creature in all the land.

How do you know God said that?

God is right and the Bible is true.

Even if I accepted that the serpent is the most cunning creature in all the land, it wouldn't prove the Bible is true). At best, it would prove that one statement the Bible claims God made is true.

* * *

As for the whole Strawman issue, you say "Christians believe in a talking satan, not a talking snake. The serpent could talk because it was possessed by satan." That seems to be a direct contradiction. You say you don't believe in a talking snake, and yet you then say "The serpent could talk". So which is it? Do you believe there was a talking serpent or not?

Also, the modern snake/ancient serpent distinction seems irrelevant. I never said that you believe modern snakes could talk. I just said you believe in a talking snake (sometime, someplace).

reply

I am going to nominate this thread as one of the best original prophetic insights that God has given to me during the nine years long war on this board that I fought vs. His enemies.

In the original post here, I pointed out the truth of God and the Bible that no mainstream media outlet would dare to notice, admit, or publish.

I should have been given a few Noble Prizes for this insight or a similar type of reward. And then I would have thanked God and gave Him the credit for sharing the prophetic insight with me which I in turn shared with all of you.

*pats myself on the back*

Remember darwinists: don't be messing with any serpents' heads like the deceased chef cited in the OP did...or else you will probably be meeting the master behind their power long before you had expected. *pats myself on the back again for all the darwinists' lives who I've saved when I originally made the OP, and/or with the reminder I've just given*

By the way, I haven't seen our old pal, ernie "strawman" bane, for many years...is that because he failed to follow the serpent advice that I'd given him in this thread?

"Science creates fictions to explain facts" – Gilman

reply

Enjoy your Dunning Kruger Award! You certainly deserve it!!!

reply