Why can’t we prove there isn’t a god?

82 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nyarlathotep's picture
Jo - Do you have proof that

Jo - Do you have proof that nothing has the properties ascribes to, or indicative of God?

Evidence? Sure.
A proof? No way.

But remember, my comment was a reply to your statement: "proving some claims about God are false, does not prove God does not exist".

Jo's picture
@ Nyarlathotep

@ Nyarlathotep

I think we may be talking past each other, or maybe I am missing our point.

Recently you said:
"I tell you the god Azathoth has property A. You have a proof that nothing has property A. Your proof is a proof that Azathoth (at least as described by me), does not exist."

Did you mean evidence instead of proof?

What proof or evidence do you have for a property of God, like you said for Azathoth?

Nyarlathotep's picture
Jo - Did you mean evidence

Jo - Did you mean evidence instead of proof?

No. Reread it:

Jo - Proving some claims about God are false, does not prove God does not exist.

Nyarlathotep - ...the god Azathoth has property A. You have a proof that nothing has property A. Your proof is a proof that Azathoth (at least as described by me), does not exist.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jo - What proof or evidence do you have for a property of God, like you said for Azathoth?

I could discuss this if you want; but it is unrelated to my objection to your statement.

Jo's picture
@ Nyarlathotep

@ Nyarlathotep

Yes, I would like to discuss what proof or evidence do you have for a property of God, like you said for Azathoth.

LogicFTW's picture
@Jo

@Jo
The lead in water analogy is a terrible one.

You can find lead, (we know it exists!) Already this destroys the analogy. To be a similar analogy we would have to have easy obvious definitive proof that "god" exists, but wanted to test and see if god exists say in the US instead of just.. say.. Jerusalem. Which is obviously silly on many different levels.

Lead content in water is a very very different test with very different parameters then god. Get sensitive enough equipment and I can probably almost guarantee I can find some trace amount in the last gulp of water you or any person had most recently taken. Really we just test for lead in water to make sure they do not reach toxic levels that can harm us. Even "distilled" water will likely have trace amounts of lead, perhaps in parts per trillion, perhaps in such low numbers even the most sensitive equipment we have available yet cannot pick it up, but it is still there, and we can easily "add" lead at any time. Can't do that with the god concept.

Claims/proofs against god in general oftentimes come up unfalsifiable, why? Because the god concept itself has been made (by humans,) made to be not falsifiable.

 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Jo's picture
@ LogicFTW

@ LogicFTW

I agree that my lead in water analogy is not that great. Is there any analogy that works when discussing God?

"Claims against god in general oftentimes come up as unfalsifiable, because humans made the god concept not falsifiable".
Is your above claim falsifiable?
Some unfalsifiable claims are really falsifiable?
Something can be made to be unfalsifiable, but is really falsifiable?

Please explain your claim that some concept can be unfalsifiable because it was made to be not falsifiable. I feel like a pretzel :-).

LogicFTW's picture
@Jo

@Jo

My base claim is actually:
"humans are capable of fiction and/or lying. Something anyone can verify as true or false easily enough with themselves, 1000 times a day if they wanted to.

Back to the subject at hand, is my claim that: humans made the god concept not falsifiable. First you may noticed I avoided absolutes, adding in words like "oftentimes" something that is distinctly missing in much of the god claims.

2nd my claim is falsifiable if anyone could actually "prove" their god or prove some part of their god claim is falsifiable.

3rd. It should be plainly obvious that humans made the god concept. No humans no god. It is not like we can go to mars, or even the moon, or even some never before seen spot on earth and find signs of god where there was no humans. Pretty falsifiable in my book.

With words on a concept that exist only in human heads it is actually quite easy to make it unfalsifiable.

 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Jo's picture
@ Logic FTW

@ Logic FTW

You said "my claim is falsifiable if anyone could actually "prove" their god or prove some part of their god claim is falsifiable."

You make a claim (humans made the god concept not falsifiable), then say it is the responsibility of someone else to produce evidence against your claim. Because no one has produced evidence (acceptable to you) against your claim, than it is valid? I don't think that is how logic works.

You cannot say your claim is valid because no one has falsified it. Is your claim actually falsifiable?

LogicFTW's picture
@Jo

@Jo
Lets see if I can clean this up and simplify this.

I make the claim that some people define their god in a way that makes it "unfalsifiable." This based on my observation of many various religious ideas I have been exposed to.

A short summary of claims that led me to this conclusion:
-"god exist outside space and time" (Makes god unfalsifiable to any possible real "evidence", would you agree?)
-"God is so complex and greater than us we can not possibly understand his methods and reasoning. (An attempt to stop any reason/logic argument pointing out contradictions etc.)
-"You cannot know god until you "embrace" god and "take a leap of faith" or similar language. Pretty much right there in the sentence, you must abandon any skepticism, and simply believe because someone told you to, (humans told you to, not even "god" says this.)
-"You are not interpreting the phrase/line/book/scripture/etc correctly. Making even a bible (written/edited/translated/printed/distributed/etc by humans) not open to criticism or falsifying of any type.

There is more like this if you want me to list them.

There; I pointed out ways religions make their god concept unfalsifiable. How can we test this? Well, I can start by saying I just made up a religion that we both agree I just made up and is extremely likely to be completely false. Then I apply the above rules to it. And wham now I, just shown a made up on the spot god idea we hopefully both agree IS FALSE, to be un-falsifiable using the very same techniques religions use.

------

You make a claim (humans made the god concept not falsifiable), then say it is the responsibility of someone else to produce evidence against your claim. Because no one has produced evidence (acceptable to you,) against your claim, than it is valid? I don't think that is how logic works.

Brilliant! If only you applied this thinking to your own particular god concept!
------

Is your claim actually falsifiable?

My claim that god is unfalsifiable, is that claim it self unfalsifiable? Well it can be made false simply by stating some part of your original claim that god is real, in a way that could be tested and shown to be false. SImple as that.

If you claimed, "my god(s) is/are real, go to Mount Olympus and find them in a temple and have a chat with them and have them show you their godly powers." I would say "great, your god is falsifiable," I could make that journey and find out for myself. Just like that, wham suddenly god concept is falsifiable.

My claim is falsifiable because every religious idea in the world has the opportunity to present something about their god that could be falsifiable, but I have yet to see a major religion do this. (Hmm I wonder why??? Oh I can make a good guess to why!) Humans have, being painted into a corner, have defined their god out of existence in effort to keep it above any sort of criticism or real inquiry to actual study that might find results contrary to what the people invested in a particular god idea would like.

 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Jo's picture
@ LogicFTW

@ LogicFTW

Are you saying that falsifiability equals truth?

Is the claim that there is no God falsifiable?

LogicFTW's picture
No and no.

No and no.

I think that something that is not falsifiable is a powerful indicator that it could be bogus, made up, a lie etc. And the opposite, something that is falsifiable, can be an indicator of truth, but sadly is not a cure all "truth" indicator. We humans struggle a lot with what is true or not, and the "falsifiability test" can be a helpful tool but it does not give us immediate answers, just a good starting point. A way to quickly filter out the likelihood of any claim being true or not.

I gave an example of a god idea that was falsifiable with like gods sitting on mount Olympus, a real mountain I could go climb to the peak of myself! (a reference to greek gods incase you missed it.) Did you ignore that example because you do not consider greek gods to be real? Why not?

God is a human made concept, a word humans made that I am increasingly finding has a very fluid definition with many people switching around the definition to suit them. Is the underlining broad concept of god behind the word god real? Well so far all indications say "nope!"

 
 

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

I am an atheist that always likes a good debate
Please include @LogicFTW for responses to me
Tips on forum use. ▮ A.R. Member since 2016.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

Jo's picture
@ LogicFTW

@ LogicFTW

I asked "Is the claim that there is no God falsifiable?" You said "no".

Are you also saying that the claim "there is a God" also not falsifiable?

Trying to see where we agree/disagree and if my understanding of your statements are correct.

Cognostic's picture
@Jo.

@Jo.

"There is a big difference between believing in God and believing in gods." No there isn't. It is all unsubstantiated fantasy.

"Claiming there is a God is non-falsifiable." Depending on the definition. Most gods are defined out of existence. Those attempted to be explained within existence fail.

"Evidence of absence only applies if your test can actually test for God." NO! It applies when I can test for the absence of god. Any assertion made by the religious that can affect the world we live in is testable. Prayer studies are a perfect example. Absence of evidence is in fact evidence of absence.

"Using your line of reasoning I could say that life did not originally occur through natural processes on the earth. Thousands of brilliant scientists have been trying to figure out how life occurred through natural processes for decades." (You are literally correct. We do not know how life came to be on the earth. We do have actual evidence for "natural processes." It seems the most likely candidate. We have no evidence at all for magical creator beings. I happen to like the idea that the universe itself is a living thing. (Like... not believe.) "Belief is allocated to the degree of evidence." Best evidence suggests a natural causation to life.

Proving some claims about God are false, does not prove God does not exist. "Some." How many claims? 6000 years of claims. All asserted by the theists about all gods. All shown to be false or non-falsifiable. Insane babbling, outrageous claims, complete bullshit, and con artists raping the general public over and over and over. I would say the naysayers are on very solid ground. Belief is asserted to the degree of evidence available.

You have not given any positive test that can be performed for the non existence of God. (You clearly have no uderstanding of evidence for non-existence. Reference the cave analogy once again. A completely valid and respected way of demonstrating no bear has been in the cave. ) Clearly, you are allowing your dualistic black and white, religiously motivated, absolutist thinking to impose on your reason and logic. You can not grasp the concept that belief is allocated to the degree of evidence. Go back and read the cave analogy again. NO ONE MADE THE ASSERTION THAT THERE IS NO GOD. / BEAR in the cave. What was the assertion made? "Absence of evidence is in fact Evidence of Absence." If it were not, scientists would simply continue doing the same experiment over and over and over while expecting a different result. The Absence of evidence is a completely valid scientific finding and it can lead us to completely valid scientific conclusions. "There is no reason to believe a bear was ever in the cave and there is no reason to believe a God or gods ever actually existed." (Are you unaware of the idea that nothing can be actually known with 100% certainty?) You can prove there is a God by producing him. So what have you got? When you give me nothing, I am completely justified in telling you that you have nothing. Whatever you are talking about is nothing. Non-existent.

Get off my lawn's picture
""There is no reason to

Cog: ""There is no reason to believe a bear was ever in the cave and there is no reason to believe a God or gods ever actually existed." (Are you unaware of the idea that nothing can be actually known with 100% certainty?) You can prove there is a God by producing him. So what have you got? When you give me nothing, I am completely justified in telling you that you have nothing. Whatever you are talking about is nothing. Non-existent."

...or, flippantly, the accumulation of the total lack of evidence for god(s) amounts to a strong indication of non-existence of a god/gods.

LogicFTW's picture
Don't forget there is also

Don't forget there is also LOTS of evidence that the various god ideas were made up by man.

While not directly disproving any possible god idea, showing the mountains of evidence that god was made up by man further weakens the already extremely weak argument that god (of any type really) is real.

Jo's picture
@ Cognostic

@ Cognostic

You said in response to my statement "Jo- There is a big difference between believing in God and believing in gods."Cog- No there isn't. It is all unsubstantiated fantasy."

Your statement about God and gods being the same is like an anarchist saying that democracy and dictatorship are the same. It is just one less, and all government are equally bad.
It is also like saying monogamy is the same as group marriage. Two very different things.

I did not respond to your bear in the caver analogy because it was not a close comparison. A bear in a cave is similar to God in a cave? But you are right with the bear. With the test you devised you could provide great evidence that there is, or is not a bear in the cave. But how do you test for the presence or absence of God in the cave? That is the real question. Is God a large furry animal? Will he show up on your camera or leave scat?

Your claim that ALL claims by theists about God have been shown to be untrue or not falsifiable, is not accurate. Many have not. Here is one - God exists. Has that been shown to be false? Yes, it is not falsifiable, but so is the statement, God does not exists. Are you saying that if something is not falsifiable that it does not exist?

When you say ALL claims have been shown to be false, that is your opinion. When you say the evidence is heavily in your favor, that is also opinion. All your evidence is circumstantial. Your claimed evidence of absence is very subjective and relies on your categorical claim that all have been shown to be false.

Cognostic's picture
@Jo: Political and Marriage

@Jo: Political and Marriage analogies are complete failures. You are attempting to compare real things with actual definitions to a fantasy. God and Gods are both fantasies. DEFINE YOUR GOD. And try again.

RE: A bear in a cave is similar to God in a cave? YEP! Exactly the same. Both will leave behind evidence for their existence. If they do not, there is absolutely no reason what so ever to believe they were ever in the cave. NONE. The analogy is "SPOT ON." Unlike the garbage you posted. If there is no evidence for your god, there is no reason to assert existence. It's just that frigging simple.

RE: "ALL claims by theists about God have been shown to be untrue or not falsifiable, is not accurate." WELL WTF..... Why are you posting all this bullshit then. Just give us your accurate God claim and then go and collect your Nobel Prize. If there was a God claim that was shown to be true, don't you think someone would have heard about it by now? Don't you think the site would be inundated with the claims? Don't you think the atheists would simply admit that they have been wrong? Stop posting all the bullshit and just give us the one and only substantiated God claim that you seem to know about but is apparently a mystery to everyone else in the world.

RE; God Exists: Has that been shown to be false? YES. That is what we are talking about. Please define your god. If you can not define your god, there is no reason to assume existence. If you define it beyond human comprehension, there is no way you could know about it so how in the hell do you claim existence? That which is asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence. Once again you are not proportioning belief to the actual evidence. "God Exists" is not even a coherent idea. I have already conceded that some gods exist. The Sun god, Water Gods, Crocodile God, The Mountain God of Moses, and more. You have engaged your ignorant black and white, all or nothing thinking once again. You define your version of god and I will be happy to demonstrate to you why it either does not exist or does not matter.

RE: God Exists is not falsifiable. WRONG AGAIN. Of course the statement "God Exists" is falsifiable. All you have to do is show me your god. It is completely falsifiable. You are confusing the idea that most gods are defined as non-falsifiable. "Gods beyond time and space bullshit." If it was beyond time and space how in the fuck would you know anything about it? How do you know what is beyond time and space. This is just an inane assertion and unless you can demonstrate that you have an ability to understand what is beyond our time and space you are just making a moronic statement.

RE: "When you say ALL claims have been shown to be false, that is your opinion" Then define your god and make one true statement about him. One of us is certainly operating from "opinions," it's not me. All I am doing is requesting that you validate your opinions with facts and evidence. I have clearly outlined my position with the cave analogy and the FACT, that a lack of evidence can be used as evidence of absence. This position is scientifically sound. (AGAIN: were it not, the same scientists would continue doing the same experiments over and over and over while expecting different results.) Evidence is clearly in the favor of non-existence. There is nothing at all circumstantial in the fact that you can not and have not provided evidence for your claims. There is nothing subjective about an absence of evidence.

RE: "all have been shown to be false." "Or defined outside of existence. Useless." If you think you have something that is not.... lets hear it.

YOUR VERSION OF GOD IS NOT EVIDENCED BY KNOCKING DOWN MY POSITION. YOUR VERSION OF GOD IS EVIDENCED BY *PRODUCING EVIDENCE.* IF YOU VERSION OF GOD IS REAL, STOP FUCKING ABOUT AND JUST PRESENT IT. WHY IN THE FUCK ARE YOU ENGAGED IN ALL THIS NONSENSE. PRODUCE YOUR GOD OR SIMPLY ADMIT THAT YOU HAVE NO IDEA AT ALL AS TO WHAT THE FK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

Jo's picture
@ Cognostic

@ Cognostic

You said "A bear in a cave is similar to God in a cave? YEP! Exactly the same. Both will leave behind evidence for their existence."
What evidence would God leave behind?

You make the claim "ALL claims by theists about God have been shown to be untrue or not falsifiable." I ask for evidence and your reply is that I must define my God. I must substantiate my God is the evidence that your claim is correct? I thought the one making the claim had to provide convincing evidence. You are making a claim, saying it is true because I cannot supply evidence to the contrary. Isn't that what theist are accused of doing? Saying God exists, now prove me wrong.

You make the claim that "Of course the statement "God Exists" is falsifiable." How do you falsify it, but requiring me to "show me your god." You evidence your first claim (God is falsifiable) by doubling down with another claim (God can be produced in the way you require). Can you describe how God could be produced in the way you require?

You ended by saying "YOUR VERSION OF GOD IS NOT EVIDENCED BY KNOCKING DOWN MY POSITION. YOUR VERSION OF GOD IS EVIDENCED BY *PRODUCING EVIDENCE.* IF YOU VERSION OF GOD IS REAL, STOP FUCKING ABOUT AND JUST PRESENT IT. WHY IN THE FUCK ARE YOU ENGAGED IN ALL THIS NONSENSE. PRODUCE YOUR GOD OR SIMPLY ADMIT THAT YOU HAVE NO IDEA AT ALL AS TO WHAT THE FK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT."
Wow, are you shifting the burden of proof? You make many overarching claims and then it is my responsibility to provide evidence against your claims. Based on that reasoning when a theist says God exists, that claim is true until someone provides evidence, to the satisfaction of the theist, that there is no God. What evidence could I provide that you would accept? I have the sneaky suspicion that nothing I could provide would be satisfactory to you. Unless God is a large furry animal. But then he would not be God. But not surprisingly, you would get the answer you desire (there is no God).

You are attempting to get the answer you want, by making the rules so only that answer is possible.

arakish's picture
Pirate Jack: "The Bible tells

Pirate Jack: "The Bible tells us many times that anyone with faith can have prayers answered! That is a fact. Jesus says he wants a relationship with us!"

They how come none have ever heard of any Christian praying for a mountain to be moved so they can build a church? Heysoos said anyone with enough faith could do so. Why do they have to rely on man and machines to move it for them?

Does this mean no Christian actually has any faith?

NOTE: May respond more. Say the citation part and immediately this popped into me head.

rmfr

Tin-Man's picture
Re: OP

Re: OP

Because God is "mysterious", and he won't prove he is real to you unless you believe he is real... (or some stupid shit like that). Remember, though, he loves you unconditionally... (Unless you don't believe in him and love him in return. In which case it's a one-way ticket for you to the eternal pool of fire. But he still loves you, nonetheless.)

Jo's picture
@ Pirate Jack

@ Pirate Jack

If the candle or curtain had flickered or moved, what would you think of that now? Now that you are older and wiser would you conclude that the most likely explanation is that there was some air blowing? Not that God was confirming himself to you?

At the time you were making an honest attempt to answer the question. An admirable mindset. But maybe in hindsight it was not the best way to test God. Would your test, if it had been successful, created a relationship with God? Or would it have been more like a pet that does tricks. Next time don't ask for a candle to flicker, ask for a billion dollars. :-)

When God does not appear when and how we want him to, one possible reason is because he does not exist. But is that the only possibility? If he had done what you wanted when you were a child it might have only temporarily proven God. But when you got older you probably would have doubted. So maybe that is why he did not cause the candle to flicker. Maybe he wanted to have a real relationship with you.

God is not answering all our prayers and making heaven on earth in the way and time frame we would like. "On earth as it is in heaven" But maybe his will is being accomplished? When we look over the last 8 thousand years we can see it slowly coming to pass. I know these are massive beliefs, but through the research and experimentations that is possible for the subject, it is what I have found.

We think we know what should happen, when, and how it should happen. But if God exists, he might know a little better than us, and do a better job of creating the heaven that our prayers desire. Because God does not do what we want when we want it, is not proof that he does not exist.

Maybe the reason you cannot prove there is, or is not a God, is because the tools you are using are inadequate for the task.

I am sure my fellow bloggers will skewer me for this post. But it is my honest, heartfelt, and genuine response to your question.

Cognostic's picture
@Jo: EXPERIMENTATION? I

@Jo: EXPERIMENTATION? I call bullshit! Please cite any experiment you have done to prove the existence of a god.

ex·per·i·ment
.
a scientific procedure undertaken to make a discovery, test a hypothesis, or demonstrate a known fact.
"I have tested this by experiment"
동의어: test, investigation, trial, inquiry, demonstration; 더보기
verb
/ikˈsperəmənt/
1.
perform a scientific procedure, especially in a laboratory, to determine something.

Tin-Man's picture
@Cog Re: To Jo - "Please

@Cog Re: To Jo - "Please cite any experiment you have done to prove the existence of a god."

Ummm... I'm gonna make a stab in the dark and take a swing at cracking this nut out on a limb here...

Jo prayed to God to get him a purple pony for his tenth birthday. But Jo did not get that purple pony, which means God answered Jo's prayer with a big, "NO!" So, obviously, if God did not exist, then how could God have refused to give Jo that purple pony? Simple logic. Duh!

Jo's picture
@ Tin Man

@ Tin Man

I have not done, nor do I know of any scientific experiments, that would prove or disprove God.

How did you know about the Purple Pony? Has God been telling on me? :-)

Tin-Man's picture
@Jo Re: "How did you know

@Jo Re: "How did you know about the Purple Pony? Has God been telling on me?"

Wellllll.... Maybe indirectly in some way. Can't say for sure, though. I actually heard it from the Ginormous Invisible Blue Universe-Creating Bunny that lives in my garage. And supposedly he heard about it from the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Pasta be unto him). And knowing FSM, there's no tellin' where HE heard it. But, hey, you know how these god characters are always gossiping. They all think they always HAVE TO KNOW everything.... *rolling eyes*... So, yeah, it is very likely your god was hanging out at the Gods Club one night and started bragging to some goddess about how powerful he was by denying you that pony. And, naturally, from there word got around.... *shrugging shoulders*...

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ TM

@ TM

So, yeah, it is very likely your god was hanging out at the Gods Club one night and started bragging to some goddess about how powerful he was by denying you that pony. And, naturally, from there word got around.... *shrugging shoulders*...

No, No Tin Man, that is supposition, Eric the Rainbow Farting Unicorn Who Lives in MY Garage told Walter, the Purple Wombat who does Square Poops that they were all in the God Club...(You know the one) when an unholy row broke out because Pegasus, Balaam's Donkey and that weirdo horsey thing that flew that pedo arab guy around the middle East found out that the Jesus' character's donkey was coveting her neighbour's ass who was married to the Purple Pony in question....well you can imagine. There was hoofticuffs at dawn. Naturally Eric tried to intervene but got thrown at the dartboard where he impaled the double top and just hung there dangling while the mayhem continued. It was Ishtar who sorted them out by pointing out they would all be as Thor as fuck the next day and, Woden they just all calm down? Do you feel Loki? she was heard to say.

Anypoo that's what happened , I have it from the horses mouth,,,via the wombat of course.

Tin-Man's picture
@Old Man Re: Fight Club in

@Old Man Re: Fight Club in the God Club

Ooooooh..... Okay! I get it! It wasn't that God was REFUSING to give Jo a purple pony, it was just that the purple pony was already betrothed and - judging from all the hubbub - likely going to be tied up in divorce court for a few years. Well now, that actually makes way more sense than my speculation. After all, when you think about it, the idea of any self-respecting goddess taking time to actually listen to God does seem rather far-fetched. Hope Eric is okay, at least. Too bad he couldn't have gotten the bullseye ring, though. Still, all things considered, you would think God would have at least had the common courtesy to send Jo a note or something to explain the situation. I mean, that whole "works in mysterious ways" excuse gets rather old after awhile.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Tin Man

@ Tin Man

Nah mate, jeez, talk about getting the wrong end of the stick. That "God" bloke (you know the one with the indivisible son and the ghostly detachable dick) as opposed to all the other sad sack masculine gods that hang around the Loser's Palace (aka God Club) has got fuck all say in the disposition of Purple Ponies.
He can pretend and blah blah about omnipotent but when it comes to cats, dogs and horses or horse type animals he is useless as tits on a bull. Mate, according to him, none of them have souls so he has no hold over them at all. Nothing, They just laugh at him, right to his face. He can't even demand a sacrifice anymore as the smell of burnt meat turns him right up (so he says, but read on for the real reason). Offends his nostrils or some such shite, fekkin bullshit.

Anyway Poseidon (Pegasus's Dad) heard about the Abrahamic pretender trying to give away ponies, and the Big P got well pissed, so he gathered the posse of Celtic horse gods like Rhiannon, Epona, Etain and Gontia and went looking for Him. They got him in the back room and, well the jewish guy, his son and the detachable holy dick got well fucked up. Hoof marks and bites all over. The mane thing is, that the tail was told or hocked all over , not a bit left out.
So, hearing this, Bast and the rest of the Feline entities including the fucking Sphinx for crissakes also paid YHWH a visit, and well, scratch that...he's knocking back all requests for livestock now, even puppies.. He was promised a visit by Khnum and Banebdjedet and they are a couple of psychos being egyptian sheep gods so he just went "noo" and gave up even the pretence of answering prayers, they still have a beef with the old Fart for demanding lambs in exchange for a rape or some such shite, and burning their firstborn at the altar. 4000 years and the boys are still pissed off about that. . .

Now he just leaves it to his 'faithful' humans (and they're falling by the wayside) to interpret random happenings as Him answering prayers. Fuck me, once Eric and Walter start with the gossip there's no stopping them.

Oh Walter, sends his regards..he has a sack of poo cubes for you..you needed to grow some Stinking Helibore?

Tin-Man's picture
@Old Man Re: "Nah mate, jeez

@Old Man Re: "Nah mate, jeez, talk about getting the wrong end of the stick...."

Awwwww SNAP! The plot does thicken! Well, THAT certainly explains plenty. Thanks for the info. As you may know, the Ginormous Invisible Blue Universe-Creating Bunny isn't much of a talker, so it would seem he DEFINITELY left out many details of the incident. Sure, he's all cute and cuddly, but his conversation skills are quite lacking. Oh, and tell Walter I said thanks. My supply is getting uncomfortably low. Ask him to please send them to the usual place, and I'll have a box of his favorite treats waiting for him there.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Tin Man

@ Tin Man

the Ginormous Invisible Blue Universe-Creating Bunny isn't much of a talker, so it would seem he DEFINITELY left out many details of the incident.

Well, that's another whole story according to Eric. Your mate BUCB doesn't so much create universes as gossip! Yep it was him that alerted the horse mob to YHWH's "commandment" ( as if it mattered) about coveting and asses... and that just pissed them off and got the whole thing started. BUCB is noted for causing trouble "stirring up shite" as it is known in the club.

They may well be blackballed at the next AGM, after all, lets remember what happened to that pedo guy...what was his name? Got chucked out? Ummmm...oh come on...the arab fella? Mo? Curly? Had a horse thing to heaven? Nah...its gone...never mind I will ask Walter, he is Membership Secretary now, so he will know.

Oh yes, after all the turmoil there has been a reorganisation at the very top of the God Club....some of the older members are experiencing a resurgence of believers (Or at least those who pretend to believe). Odin and Thor are back on the committee, Sauron is Off.... old "Untouchable Mary" has gone...total lack of faith in that one....BUCB is now Hall Porter. The "White Jesus" is now in charge of the english speakers only,( that's a BIG demotion from his previous position) Eric is Doorman ( he loves the tips, they put them on his horn)
Walter is in charge of valet parking and Membership ID...except for Santa's sleigh (Walter hates snow and reindeer) and Loki is now in charge of the Winter Pageant. That is going to be so much fun.
Mars stays where he is, in charge of war but he reckons if its is all going to be about oil in future he is resigning at next AGM. He hates grease...or did he mean Greece? Fuck these gods they never can lie straight in bed...everything a double entendre,
Oh Venus and Aphrodite send their love and hope you enjoy the present they sent you this weekend...ask your missus. Apparently its something to do with scaffolding? The leaning Tower of Pisa? Ah bollocks I give up its all fucking allegory with these dudes. Even Eric gets in on the game...

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.