Why Thank God For My Car?

107 posts / 0 new
Last post
HumbleThinker's picture
"One a further note. I have

"One a further note. I have to completely agree with Old Man, if you don't want your religion attacked, then don't be such a dick about it."

Ohhhhhhh the irony.

arakish's picture
@ HumbleThinker

@ HumbleThinker

Why do say such things about yourself. We all already know the irony you throw out without checking and thinking about you are saying.

Here is a list of how one can spot a Religious Absolutist and they only need match just ONE:

Ones you have matched so far have a bullet (•):

  1. • They LIE without ever thinking about the veracity of their statement.
  2. • They LIE without ever providing any evidence of their statement.
  3. • They LIE by believing inexorably everything they state, regardless of how inaccurate.
  4. • They LIE by being absolute in their statements (either I believe you or I am worthless scum).
  5. • They LIE by using beguiling dialectical semantics.
  6. • They LIE by using distorted and perverted data.
  7. They LIE by creating irrational excuses.
  8. They LIE by utilizing whiney-ass pleas.
  9. • They LIE by not realizing why they need to defend their beliefs.
  10. • They LIE by utilizing presupposed conclusions with no evidence.
  11. They LIE by making accusations they never apologize for even when they are proven wrong.
  12. • They LIE by changing the subject.
  13. • They LIE by taking text out of context and twisting and perverting said text to fit their presupposed confirmation bias.
  14. They LIE by shifting the burden of proof.

Now those items are irony since no Religious Absolutist can pass all of them. And they only need to match one to prove they are Religious Absolutists who do nothing more than speak through FAITH — Falsehoods Assumptions Innuendos Treachery and Hogwash.


Grinseed's picture
Your God seems to hate dogs.

Your God seems to hate dogs.

I imagine because the dog is the one animal mankind made from wolves which it is claimed your God did make.
And the relationship between our two species is adequately stated in the old phrase 'man's best friend.'

That relationship appears to be that which your God would want of us: Loyal, faithful, obedient, funny - no, not funny - that would be irresponsible.
So, funny aside, I have always considered God to be extremely jealous of dogs be cause they behave better towards humans than we apparently do to him.

And there is that curious anagram dog, God.

So I think I understand how someone, some group of pious priests perhaps, noting the unique relationship between man and dogs got jealous of such fidelity on God's behalf and made it a tenet of belief 'No dogs allowed' in heaven. And no souls for good measure.

But how hard is it to realise wolves are savage wild beasts and dogs not?
But you really seem to think this is for real.

I don't suppose I can hope to see my pet kangaroo I had as a kid if I go to heaven...God has to hate them even more as they don't even rate a mention in the bible. Not to mention the echidnas and platypi.

HumbleThinker's picture
Not sure what any of this

Not sure what any of this means to be honest.

"Your God seems to hate dogs."

Honestly surprised how upset people are getting over my comment that dogs don't have souls. geesh.

Grinseed's picture
Calm down HT. I am not in the

Calm down HT. I am not in the least upset. You forget I have no belief in your god or your assertion about dogs and their souls. You missed the sarcasm...the echidnas and platypus?..did you even read that far before replying? The kangaroo was real.
I now regret mocking your belief if only because it went right over your head. Sheeshus.

PS All the best with your children. My grand daughter is a little older than your daughter.

HumbleThinker's picture
Sorry Sorry. Even though I

Sorry Sorry. Even though I added that in my reply to you, I didn't mean it directly at you. You were just the last comment in like 3 or 4 in a row that mentioned the dog. Just thought I would say it, but I didn't direct it towards you.

P.S. Thank you, they are wonderful little shits, aren't they?

LogicFTW's picture
Let me also add, I also do

I also add, I also do not believe dogs have souls.

Of course for me; it follows that I do not believe humans have souls eithir. Souls as a concept is way to problematic with too many conundrums and holes in the concept for me to believe humans, (or anything,) has souls, let alone the whole issue that the concept is completely unevidenced.



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.

SecularSonOfABiscuitEater's picture
You should thank yourself for

You should thank yourself for the work you have done to successfully buy a car. You should also thank your loan officer too. I've been a loan officer for a long time and not once is the notorious G O D mentioned in our guidelines.

SeniorCitizen007's picture
When Arnold Schwarzenegger

When Arnold Schwarzenegger voted (for himself) in the California Governor's election he said to the assembled press: "We've done all we can … now it's up to God to decide."

No doubt God whispered in lots of people's ears: "Vote for Arnie … he's my choice."

Empedocles's picture


I myself have often wondered about this. Even among the Jehovah's Witnesses, whom I consider to be the closest there is to "real" believers. Why, for example, would they pray for Jehovah to deliver their loved ones from death? It is Jehovah's will that we all get sick and die. I knew a JW couple who were pioneers (spending 60 or more hours a month in field service, or the ministry). He was the Presiding Overseer of the local congregation. They were both well informed believers. They wanted a red convertible and they prayed to Jehovah regarding the matter and decided that Jehovah wanted them to get the car. After a while the payments got to be too much of a burden so they prayed to Jehovah whether or not they should get rid of the car, and decided that he wanted them to get rid of it.

He had nothing whatsoever to do with it. And the thing is there is nothing to suggest that that is ever the case. Bad things happen and good things happen. To "good" and "bad" people. Sometimes it amounts to hard work and sometimes it's just fortune or misfortune.

But, with people in general this seems to be a thing. With the unbeliever and believer alike "luck" rather than God is the answer given without a thought.

Nyarlathotep's picture
HumbleThinker - It is in my

HumbleThinker - It is in my opinion that animals don’t have souls.

Earlier, it seems you stated it as a fact.

HumbleThinker's picture


Here is something interesting to note that I just read on my commute into work this morning; from the book 'Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking', by Susan Cain.

She writes, "...psychologist Dan McAdams calls a redemptive life story--and a sign of mental health and well-being. At the Foley Center for the Study of Lives at Northwestern University, McAdams studies the stories that people tell about themselves. We all write our life stories as if we were novelists, McAdams believes, with beginnings, conflicts, turning points, and endings. And the way we characterize our past setbacks profoundly influences how satisfied we are with our current lives. Unhappy people tend to see setbacks as contaminants that ruined an otherwise good thing ("I was never the same again after my wife left me"), while generative adults see them as blessings in disguise ("The divorce was the most painful thing that ever happened to me, but I'm so much happier with my new wife"). Those who live the most fully realized lives---giving back to their families, societies, and ultimately themselves--tend to find meaning in their obstacles. In a sense, McAdams has breathed new life into one of the great insights of Western mythology: that where we stumble is where our treasure lies."

I know this is not a new concept, and you hear it in such phrases as "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger." But this paragraph, to me, highlights the benefit individuals receive when they attribute a more positive reason to a 'negative' event, even if that reason isn't true. It uses real data to demonstrate how your life can be dramatically improved when you believe "it happened for a reason", or "God must know what's better for us."

Is it so wrong, then, that your mother thinks this way?

Grinseed's picture
"But this paragraph, to me,

"But this paragraph, to me, highlights the benefit individuals receive when they attribute a more positive reason to a 'negative' event, even if that reason isn't true."

To me, it highlights 'delusion' and the third of the five stages of grief - bargaining.

Delivering all problems to a deity and assuring oneself there is purpose and reason to justify even the most tragic event imaginable, maybe one way, I suppose, to deal with it, for those without the heart to face reality.

Another is to accept that living guarantees hardship, tragedy, pain and death. But the troubles also give meaning, depth and measure to the joys, beauty, happiness, and achievements we can also experience.

I am not a 'tough' guy, but I have suffered like anyone else traumatic events that have left me physically and emotionally devastated and my experience showed that rationalising the tragedy and pain by attributing it all to the whim of a capricious god felt nothing more that just closing my eyes and abandoning the true significance of those events.

A German friend of mine introduced me to the word "Hühnerstallrampe" which means a 'chicken coop ramp'. It is used as a euphemism for 'Life' because the Hühnerstallrampe is short, uphill and covered in shit.
The best we can do, other than to be kind to each other, is to find the joy in our selves and in our lives despite the hardships and I am not convinced we lack the strength, courage and intelligence to do that ourselves.

HumbleThinker's picture
Well it seems you fall into

Well it seems you fall into the category of negative thinking... Jk

I admire your honesty. It goes to show there are many ways to cope with adversity. But since this is a ‘debate forum’ and not a ‘feel good’ forum I must ask. My statement was not a subjective one, but an objective one. Yet you still shrugged it off as silly. Why is that? Merely because your anti-religious bias compels you to do so?

Grinseed's picture
The article only stated that

The article only stated that those people with fully realised lives found meaning in their misfortunes. It in no way implied that their ability to do so produced meaningful lives for them. Their ability to endure troubles was already a feature of their personality that produced such behaviour.
I can only agree that keeping a positive and balanced outlook on life can minimise the harm misfortune brings.
There was no indication whether these people relied on reasons that were untrue or not, to deal with those misfortunes, and faith beleif and god were not mentioned at all.

I can't agree with the "data", you introduced, shows that if I start thinking every misfortune I endure is because "God must know whats better" for me that I will start living a better life.

I don't recall thinking your statement was silly. I just disagree with it.
And from my point of view it seems you fall into the category of tragically optimistic. jk

HumbleThinker's picture
Fair enough

Fair enough


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.