Knowles: Worst Atheist of the First Decade of the Second Millennium

1. 57

   creepyposted 14 years ago

   "like the transvestite who tries to disguise as a woman but can’t seem to shake that Y chromosome and the little aussie man who follows him around like a lost puppy."
   
   i wonder who that little aussie man is

   report
2. 81

   skyfireposted 14 years ago

   Submissive as in ? (Read-it)->(believe-it)-(preach-it) ?
   If failed then it's not submissive and interpretation is flawed ?

   report
   1. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      ....Submissive as in...it's not just about US.   The Scripture is about God.  It's the story of God and what He wants and what He wants from us.

      report
      1. 60

         Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         According to your book, he "dislikes" women preachers. LOL

         report
         1. 0

            Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            No.  He (God) dislikes it when women (or anybody) is disruptive with silly questions or outbursts when the Word of God is being preached.   
            By the same token, He expects those (mostly-MEN) preachers to actually preach the Word correctly!

            report
      2. 61

         Hokeyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Its mans story about "God"

         report
3. 81

   skyfireposted 14 years ago

   Well this is never ending debate from Christians that they think god wants something from humans. If that entity exist and looking at the vastness of universe this must be the first flaw in bible. It's like group of ants writing a story book for huge-human-god with expectation of love and returns.

   report
4. 81

   skyfireposted 14 years ago

   Question, how you know all about god's mood swings ?
   
   1. Lie
   2. Human written book's references
   3. Your own assumption
   4. False claim about god to win argument.
   
   now which one from this ? ..

   report
   1. 60

      Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      You forgot "self certified Holy Scripture Interpreter."

      report
   2. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      His "mood swings"....?
      
      haha
      
      well, I guess it could be called that.
      
      
      Answer:  the Bible tells about His "moods" (His feelings, His heart, His mind)....

      report
5. 81

   skyfireposted 14 years ago

   One thing i failed to understand that why that entity will ask his own creations to pay attention to him ? is he bored to the core that he needs to waste time on such activities ?

   report
6. 0

   Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

   And I'm gonna stop bumping this thread.
   Mark might be totally irate to see that it has veered off into a discussion about me...and about....GOD!   LOL.    two "things" he dislikes.....

   report
7. 61

   Hokeyposted 14 years ago

   GOD'S EMAIL
   One day God was looking down at Earth and saw all of the evil that was going on. He decided to send an angel down to Earth to check it out. So He called one of His best angels and sent the angel to Earth for a while. When she returned she told God, yes it is bad on Earth, 95% is bad and 5% is good.
   
   Well, He thought for a moment and thought maybe He'd better send down a second angel to get another point of view. So God called another angel and sent him to Earth for a time too. When the angel returned he went to God and told him "Yes, the Earth is in decline. 95% is bad and 5% is good." God said this was not good.
   
   So He decided to send e-mail to the 5% that were good. He wanted to encourage them, give them a little something to help them keep going.
   
   Do you know what that e-mail said?
   
   ---
   
   ---
   
   ---
   
   ---
   
   Oh, you didn't get one either, huh? Bummer.

   report
   1. 60

      Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Ask Brenda what it said, I'm sure she got one.

      report
      1. 61

         Hokeyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         That's why I posted it. So she could tell us.

         report
8. 0

   Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

   My anti-SPAM must've caught it! haha
   
   or else....there really was no e-mail!   'Cause that one is unfactual.   There are no "SHE" angels.   Angels are non-gender or else referred to as "he", just as God is.
   Angels aren't sexual creatures.

   report
   1. 61

      Hokeyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Then if angels and God are non sexual than they should be called it. Have you done it's will today? Hmmmmmmm.......

      report
   2. 61

      Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yeah, I've never understood the whole 'divine penis' thing, either.

      report
9. 0

   Brenda Durhamposted 14 years ago

   And STOP it now, you guys!  haha
   I've determined to stop bumping "Knowles's" thread.
   
   Gimme a break, ya hear? 

   report
   1. 61

      tantrumposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      !!

      report
10. 0

    Stevennix2001posted 14 years ago

    wow, mark is a very popular guy on hubpages.  in a way, it kind of reminds me of michael moore. he's popular even when you like him or hate him, as he manages to get his views across anyway.  not that im comparing mark to michael moore, nor am i suggesting they're anything alike.  I was just saying in that particular aspect of being popular either through people hating on him or liking him, there seems to be a similarity there.  However, I have nothing against the guy personally, as I barely even  know him that well.  i just find it interesting.

    report
    1. 61

       Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Yeah, if you stir a lot of sh*t forward, a lot of sh*t stirs back.  It is simple 'media magic'...and it works like a charm. 

       report
11. 61

    Hokeyposted 14 years ago

    I haven't seen him sice this all started.
    
    It's probably Him!   

    report
    1. 87

       IzzyMposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Hmmmmmmm!

       report
12. 61

    Daniel Carterposted 14 years ago

    Mark Knowles doesn't act any differently than a lot of card-carrying, God's-love-their-hearts Christians. He is just their antithesis. He is the counterbalance. That's all.
    
    For those who are middle of the road, and don't like the extremes and find the cook as hot as the spicy food, you do have the choice to leave.

    report
    1. 0

       Stevennix2001posted 14 years agoin reply to this

       i agree.  well said.

       report
    2. 81

       skyfireposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Perfect Daniel.

       report
13. 69

    Beth100posted 14 years ago

    Sock puppets and trolls...do they appear everywhere?!?  As for Mark, each man and woman is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs.  In return, you are allowed your own opinions and beliefs.  However, no one person has the right to critize or judge another based on his/her expression of their beliefs much less open a thread that outwardly speaks against another.  If you don't like him or what he has to say, then stay away and right out of it.
    
    I wonder if sock puppets get paid overtime since it's still the weekend??? 
    
    
    Hey Earnest! 

    report
    1. 80

       earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Hi Beth!

       report
       1. 69

          Beth100posted 14 years agoin reply to this

          @ Steven -- Hello!!!
          
          @ Earnest -- How are you?  Seems we're watching another puppet show!    Cheap entertainment, right? lol

          report
          1. 0

             Stevennix2001posted 14 years agoin reply to this

             hows it going beth?

             report
          2. 80

             earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Yep! Mark will be amused if he sees it.

             report
             1. 61

                Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                I wonder if some sensitive individual got him banned for 3 to 30 days or more?  It seems he is on a forum hiatus, by hubtivity stats.

                report
14. 0

    Stevennix2001posted 14 years ago

    hi beth!

    report
15. 59

    Jeramiposted 14 years ago

    Has anyone thought that if Mark had objected this; thread would not have gotten of the first page.

    report
    1. 60

       Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Why would he possibly care what opinion these types of OP's have?

       report
16. 0

    Crazdwriterposted 14 years ago

    It's disgusting how ppl attack others on here especially someone who obviously started a enw account just to attack the person. The OP has no class and definietly won't be getting any respect from me!

    report
    1. 0

       Stevennix2001posted 14 years agoin reply to this

       i agree. personally, i think if this person really had a problem with mark, then he/she should just e-mail him directly.  that's what i would do if it were me.  not saying i do have a problem.  just saying what i would do is all.

       report
       1. 60

          Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          It was obviously started to cause turmoil, but was funny instead.  It did draw a few approving comments though.  They were even funnier!

          report
17. 70

    Cagsilposted 14 years ago

    This thread simply shows ignorance of some who claim righteousness over civility. It also shows a complete disregard of any form of respect and lacks integrity.
    
    When I first noticed this thread, I reported it as a personal attack against Mark. As did others.
    
    Why it still exists and open for posting is beyond reason.
    
    As for people attacking people, "personal attack" are very subjective. This thread is a blatant attempt by a friend of one hubber who apparently was badly shown up by Mark. Whether or not, Mark actually insulted this so-called "friend", is another story, since the other hubbers Name hasn't been given.
    
    It's obvious from the beginning, that the person who posted the thread, could not possibly know Mark from a whole in the wall, unless he/she/it is either another hubber(sockpuppet) or is actually a friend of a hubber, who had words with Mark, before this newbie signed up for HubPages.
    
    With that said, I still think it should be taken down, however, I don't think Mark cares all that much about something so petty in the overall scheme of things. But, who knows.

    report
    1. 61

       Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Agreed!  That's why many of us has made a big joke of it by talking about random subjects and whatnot!  Hell, there is no need to let a thread go to waste, so why not exploit it?

       report
       1. 70

          Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Because, there are plenty of reasons for the negativity to go away, but not one reason to make a positive effect.
          
          Manipulating the thread and keeping it at the TOP of the forum page or active on Hubtivity is foolish and simply gives off more attention to the thread.
          
          Thus, you push a negative, while you claim doing something positive. The truth in the end is that the negative outweighs the positive you think you're creating.
          
          I see no common-sense being used, never mind anything else. But, that's just me.

          report
          1. 61

             Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I'd push my negative any day to raise the positive of this asininity, simply for publicity of this insanity!  But, that's just my opinion... 

             report
    2. 0

       Stevennix2001posted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Yeah, I agree with you there.  This is why I think Hubpages really needs to reformat their site a bit.  As it stands now, any user here could easily create multiple accounts to one e-mail for various purposes like this for instance.  Personally, if it were up to me, I think it should be limited down to one account per e-mail OR there should a grace period where the hubber that opens up an account needs to wait at least a month before they're even allowed to participate in forums.   This way it'll at least help deter the amount of fake sock puppet accounts used to insult others on here.

       report
    3. 54

       (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Agreed. But, since the thread was created by those who lack respect and integrity and who claim righteousness over civility, the thread actually stands as a shining beacon not just for Mark, but for those who stand up against the intolerance of the righteous.
       
       This thread shows great praise for Mark and is a reminder of the intolerance and desperation of the righteous.
       
       I say keep it open and make it a sticky.

       report
       1. 70

          Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Yeah, I can see how you could want to see it become a sticky, but as I said already- it's not worth it and a waste of energy, when other things could be a valuable use of the energy spent here.
          
          That's my point Q.
          
          You talk about how people can permit themselves to believe in the "GOD" thing, even when they cannot define it.
          
          Yet, you rationalize meaning into this thread, as though it has meaning, when it actually doesn't.
          
          It's not a praise to Mark and to see it as one, is simply a fool's game. Something to occupy the small-mindedness of those who are intolerant of others.
          
          So, in essence, you and many others have showed how limited you are really, by keeping/acknowledging this sad thread.
          
          That's my thoughts and with that, I'm no longer wasting my time here.

          report
          1. 61

             Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I'd have to agree with "Q" on this one.  Some of us don't see it as a sad thread; I find it to be hilarious!  It has nothing to do with open or narrow mindedness...  I bet if Mark was here, he'd be performing some "LOL" action as well...  Ha-ha! LOL!

             report
          2. 54

             (Q)posted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Sorry you feel that way. You reported this thread and it is still open so it would appear the admins don't agree with you either.
             
             
             
             If I find meaning in a thread and you don't, that might mean I've looked at it from a variety of alternatives, perhaps.
             
             
             
             Usually, if believers call me names and tell me I haven't got a clue, I consider that praise, considering the source from which it originates.
             
             
             
             Again, sorry you feel that way, but don't take this thread too personally, after all, it's about Mark.

             report
18. 70

    Cagsilposted 14 years ago

    Interesting reply. Thank you for stating your opinion.

    report
19. 70

    thisisoliposted 14 years ago

    Maybe he is too upset after the OP's post

    report
    1. 70

       wyanjenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       
       
       MK doesn't strike me as a wilting flower. 

       report
    2. 61

       Obscurely Diverseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       The "OP" is dead, the rest is a funny thread...  Ha-ha!

       report
20. 80

    earnestshubposted 14 years ago

    Hubpages TOS states clearly that one may not use a sock puppet to abuse other hubbers or make personal attacks. I would suggest that not only is the sock puppet gone, but the hubber who made it will have been tossed of hubpages all together if they were here with another ID.

    report
    1. 60

       Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Now he has a hole in his sock!

       report
       1. 80

          earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          As well as his head.

          report
    2. 0

       china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Shame a couple of other sock puppets don't get washed out.  Where is Mark anyway?  I miss his slash and burn defence of no faith!

       report
21. 80

    Tom Cornettposted 14 years ago

    Wouldn't he have to be a certain high percentage of a believer to be the "Worst Atheist.?"
    
    Worst Atheist = 99% believer.
    Best Atheist= 0 % believer.
    
    

    report
    1. 80

       earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Good math there!

       report
       1. 80

          Tom Cornettposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          I have a GED in Quantummy Calculus. 

          report
          1. 80

             earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             No shortage of humour here!

             report
       2. 59

          Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          if you divide 99% by 0%, you will experience true enlightement.

          report
          1. 0

             china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             You may be joking but actually that is why the catholics (when they were the only christians) fought tooth and nail against the introduction of zero.  They said that it was a gateway to the 'unknown' - they were right of course, look what we have learned since its introduction, all of science for a start.

             report
             1. 80

                earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Yes zero blew it all away.

                report
             2. 59

                Ron Montgomeryposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Sooooooooo, they had the 9+1 commandments? 39ish days in the wilderness?

                report
                1. 0

                   china manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   Absolutely - having no zero screws the whole calculation thing completely. For a start you cannot admit numbers below zero so your 99%-0% doesn't work - nor does any sum that does not produce a positive number.

                   report
    2. 60

       Randy Godwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I considered this also!  How about who is the "worst believer?"

       report
       1. 80

          Tom Cornettposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          That would have to be Mark Knowles.
          
          Worst believer 0 %

          report
22. 93

    habeeposted 14 years ago

    What's the difference in a worst atheist and a best atheist? I'm confused...

    report
    1. 70

       wyanjenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I know, right?
       If there is a trophy, maybe I would try harder....

       report
    2. 80

       Tom Cornettposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Oh...oh..oh...I think I've got it...He is the best of the worst atheists! 

       report
23. 93

    habeeposted 14 years ago

    OR, Tom, is he the worst of the best??

    report
    1. 80

       Tom Cornettposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Crap...back to the drawing board. 

       report
24. 61

    Daniel Carterposted 14 years ago

    Oscar night is over.
    Maybe the grandstanding and drama should be saved until next March....

    report
25. 78

    BDazzlerposted 14 years ago

    What I think is disgusting and cowardly is that the originator of the thread created a new user account, for only the purpose of a personal attack.
    
    Yes, I've said some "not nice" stuff about Mark and to him, both in private messages and in public forums, but he knows my real name and my primary email address.  I am accountable to him for my words about him and to him.
    
    To create an attack thread under a new user account on anybody, no matter how much you dislike them or disagree with them is very low thing to do.

    report
26. 73

    myownworldposted 14 years ago

    And yet the OP managed to get 307 responses to his thread! Stop feeding the sock puppets please........

    report