Comebacks I wish I'd said

Tim the Skeptic · Post by **Tim the Skeptic** » Sat May 20, 2006 9:53 am

I believe it was Cephus who suggested the following:

Xtian: I will pray for you.

Xthiest: Thanks, I will think for you.

I was in an adult eduction class at church once when the pastor said:

Pastor: Theologians say that the opposite of rationalism is faith.

WISHS: That's funny, rationalists say the the opposite of rationalism is superstition.

Not soon after, I stopped going to church and have wisely used my Sunday mornings for sleeping, reading the paper and drinking coffee. And WISHS is my acronym for: What I Should Have Said.

Please add any other one-liner arguements. One can never have enough.

Tim the Skeptic · Post by **Tim the Skeptic** » Sat May 27, 2006 8:38 am

Here's a Xtian one-liner I'd really like a comeback to:

It says Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Sat May 27, 2006 10:27 pm

Tim the Skeptic wrote:Here's a Xtian one-liner I'd really like a comeback to:

It says Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

Here is an all purpose one.

[with as much sarcasm as you can muster]Oh, I haven't heard that one in quite a while. You mean people still fall for that line?

OR

Clever, now what do you really mean to say?

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Sat May 27, 2006 11:28 pm

There is a rummer that Adam tried all the other animals. To name some one is to know them.
Maybe Steve was slow?
Adam quit to soon?
Eve didn't know what she was getting into?
It is a good thing Eve wasn't doing the picking?
Who is Adam?
Steve is a nice guy?

Lotan · Post by **Lotan** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:32 pm

Hi Tim,
Maybe not exactly what you're looking for, but Funny Pics for Online Use might amuse you. For example...

Tim the Skeptic · Post by **Tim the Skeptic** » Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:49 am

I'm leaning toward:

"Lucky for us, I heard Steve didn't like fruit."

Bugmaster · Post by **Bugmaster** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 4:06 am

Tim the Skeptic wrote:It says Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

Actually, in case you don't recall, Adam and Eve weren't supposed to have sex at all. They were damned for even realizing that sex is theoretically possible. Maybe Adam and Steve would've been a better choice...

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 9:48 am

Bugmaster:

Actually, in case you don't recall, Adam and Eve weren't supposed to have sex at all. They were damned for even realizing that sex is theoretically possible. Maybe Adam and Steve would've been a better choice...

There are some that believe that the body parts demand they be used.
Why else would God give them to us?
Considering we are made like the other creatures it wouldn't be long before we would figure it out even with out the fruit.

Lainey · Post by **Lainey** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:15 pm

Actually, in case you don't recall, Adam and Eve weren't supposed to have sex at all. They were damned for even realizing that sex is theoretically possible. Maybe Adam and Steve would've been a better choice...

What do you think the "go forth and multiply" bit meant, then?

Cathar1950 · Post by **Cathar1950** » Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:24 pm

Ok Lainey that will be enough.
Don't be using reason and facts on us.

Bugmaster · Post by **Bugmaster** » Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:16 pm

Lainey wrote:What do you think the "go forth and multiply" bit meant, then? :blink:

My guess would be, budding. It's pious and wholesome !

Although, IIRC, God did not issue that command until after he exiled the humans from Paradise...