insane

That was Jesus. Ever read the bible? God made the world, Jesus was the son of God. Ever read the Bible? Jesus was God. How can he be God and the son of God? If he were both, wouldn't that make him his own father and his own son? Just curious. The first verses of the gospel of John state that Christ is God. It's weird for me to think about too. Also, every English translation has God saying in Genesis 1:26 "Let US make man in OUR own image", I think this implies or at least helps, the trinity argument. Also, in Micah 5, there is a prophecy for Christs' birth and Micah states that Christ has existed before the creation of the world.

That was Jesus. Ever read the bible? God made the world, Jesus was the son of God. Ever read the Bible? Jesus was God.

I wish guns were banned. I'm not talking about it because that's not part of this topic. Maybe if you would explain this a little more it wouldn't look like you're forcing words into my mouth. A few hundred million Catholics would disagree with you there. Unless you're saying that recreation is inherent in the definition of sex? Because I'm not a moral relativist. You're arguing too...? I always thought that logic was absolute, irrefutable. If someone believes 2+2=5 when I can logically/mathematically prove that it equals four then I think I'd be apt to say that their opinion is wrong. Why not skip all the chat and say that Hitler's opinion is his opinion and that his choices should be left to him? Don't get me wrong - I'm not going to go to a mother who is getting an abortion and criticize or judge her - it's just in a debate when I actually debate things. I'm not the type of guy that goes around looking for arguments irl.

If this topic isn't spam, please repost it in a manner we understand.

Snow in march isn't that odd...

There's supernatural ghosts that can injure natural beings :) You can hold over 1 billion coins in your sack without ever increasing weight or space ;) And for those saying "it's just a game!"... the author said that! This is just for fun! It's not a criticism.

I'm pretty sure it was iron platemail.

So true, so true :D Party hats look real ugly compared to masks. I didn't get used to halloween masks when they switched RSC to RS2, but now they seem more cooler :D I thought the halloween mask was one of the best looking items before RS2... afterwards, I think they're brutally ugly. I think party hats are the best looking item in the game, aside from possibly last years Christmas drop.

Reverse psychology works for me: "Just stay awake; don't fall asleep, don't fall asleep..." *Zzzz*

Yea we've already got ~ one of these going on right now.

Apparently he made a few slips, like Tomato (CastleCaster) caught him saying that "she" could bench 190 or something :lol: I just believed "her" because I never knew him/her, just saw them post every now and then so it's not like it would have taken much to fool me.

Without food we wouldn't be here. According to you, its primary 'purpose' is just to be eaten for sustenance. Do you never eat food when you're not really hungry, just because it tastes nice for instance? Assuming you do like to eat candy from time to time, or drink some soda, why can people not have sex just for the good feelings? They can, it's just not its primary purpose. Heck, I eat because it tastes good all of the time - but if food didn't taste good, I'd still eat it!

The problem with Jagex is that they're much too slow to get anything done. The official fansite problem has been brought to their attention years ago... they just "haven't gotten around to it yet". How hard can it be to edit the fansite page saying "these are trusted sites"? Honestly now...

How about you start attacking people's logic rather than their choice of words, then maybe you can expect to be afforded the same respect. I'm sorry, I don't understand. Maybe I'm a "half-wit", as you said to the other person. How am I not refuting logic? In your case, you picked only one part out of my whole argument that was really irrelevent and picked on that - in my case, his entire logic is based on that. Calling him "sick" is not refuting his logic, it's attacking his choice of language. That is the exact same thing you're complaining about me doing. If you don't realise that then yes, you are a halfwit. Ah - I understand now. In that post I was sort of asking him, "are you comparing getting pregnant to a car crash?", and then I said that in my opinion, that's kind of sick. The actual logical refutation came after that, which is what I have been debating about in other posts - it's just seperated from this one isolated incident.

That's not an answer, it's a cop-out. Even most creationists have realised this and have decided to start spreading lies as "proof" over the internet, in schools and in churches. While I agree creationist science is dumb, the claim that science can refute God's existence is also dumb. The natural cannot refute the supernatural. So if you dislike God, you do not choose Him - that is what the definition of "hell" is... seperation from God - so you're getting exactly what you want. If you choose *not* God during your life on earth - you're choosing *not* God for after - all of this physical pain and suffering is located in the book of Revelation and that is most likely the most symbolic book in the Bible. So I don't see it fair for atheists who think they should be able to choose *not* God during their life on Earth - and then find it unfair when that's what they get afterwards - to expect God to put them in heaven (which by defintion, is the presence of God - the very thing an anti-Christian would abhorr), seems ludicrous to me. The only difference between Christianity and other religions is that Christianity is faith-based, and other religions are works-based. Where other religions say "just be good enough and you'll get heaven", Christianity just says "hey, we know we suck, and we know that we're going to screw up time and again, and we need God to save us, not anything that we can do". That's the difference.

How about you start attacking people's logic rather than their choice of words, then maybe you can expect to be afforded the same respect. I'm sorry, I don't understand. Maybe I'm a "half-wit", as you said to the other person. How am I not refuting logic? In your case, you picked only one part out of my whole argument that was really irrelevent and picked on that - in my case, his entire logic is based on that. The rest of your post is again, where we're just going to keep disagreeing - I believe purpose is not determined by the user. If the creators of calculators realized that all people were going to use them for was for frisbees, they would make frisbees instead, they wouldn't make calculators. Bolded the word that weakens your argument. Without reproductive sex we WOULD NOT be here, without recreational sex we MIGHT NOT be here.

That wasn't very kind...

Please, enlighten us with your knowledge of this heaven you speak of - you obviously have tons of experience there.

Can you think of any other reasons that people might have sex? Are they necessarily less 'primary'? Of course - but one cannot deny the reproduction is the main function of it. If sex didn't reproduce we wouldn't be here... There can't be more than 1 "primary" function, for anything. It's like having two "favourite" flavours of ice cream, it just doesn't work. Okay, so worst thing in the world wasn't a great choice of words. How about "worst plausible outcome in a certain circumstance?". Way to attack my choice of language, instead of my logic. You really destroyed my straw man... If does if they compare getting pregnant to a car crash. I disagree with relativism, but that's another argument for another time. Quick one: if I use a calculator as a frisbee, it doesn't change the fact that a calculator's main purpose is to calculate mathematical equations. If I use sex for fun (which I have absolutely no objection to, btw), it doesn't change the fact that sex has a primary function of reproduction. Take away the function of reproducing and BAM! There goes the human race. Take away the function of pleasure, and yea, life would seem much less enjoyable, but at least there's still life :| As the rest of your post deals with subjectivism again I'll just leave it at this.

Yea, there was this one spell "Fear", that would make an NPC disappear. So in the banks, we'd "Fear" off all of the guards and attack people bringing money in! Also, there was no friends list; you could use the "tell" feature to talk. So like tell Bubsa hey there! Would act like the friends list would. There was up to adamantite armour, except only up to mithril for plate mail. Also, tons of pk battles in the cabbage patch so you could run quickly into lumbridge for safety.

If you're comparing a baby to a car crash then yea I guess... if you really think having a kid is the worst thing in the world, which is kind of sick. Actually on second thought, maybe not. The primary purpose of sex is to reproduce, to have that child - the primary purpose of walking is NOT to trip, the primary purpose of driving is NOT to crash. So the parallel you're trying to draw is I don't want to get somewhere, so I shouldn't turn my car on and put it into drive...

Maybe I'll make my first TETE appearance ever... it's been a while since I went to an event like this, I think I haven't since scapeboard... but Pi[e]..

Don't bump old topics.

Finding a job during the school year in a rural area would be tough. During the summer, farmwork is a good way to go - it's really tough, but it will teach you hard work, you'll get stronger, and you'll get a nice tan. Any grocery stores nearby? They usually hire young...

This was just recently posted, and in a much more intriguing manner.