Wednesday, July 07, 2010


Posted without comment (other than the implied one...and that one...and that one....)
"Dont use all Gods blessing and say you dont believe him.

You think you dont need him, but you live on His dependency. That is

In next tv show, i would like that all of your members, create a sun
and give to all people that believes what you believe. Or create the
air, and give to them. Or create a land, and plant and give food for
them. Not just plant, but create a land where you can plant and give life.

If you dont believe him, dont use air, dont use food that come from
land you dont create. Dont use your car, or ur home, because man uses
raw material they didnt create.

We all depend on Him. We cant create air, or sun, or anything."


  1. Awww, isn't that cute?
    I mean, the idea of excluding us from using air, food etc. Good ol' Christian moralities.

  2. Christians are fucking SCARY. Seriously...

    Why can they not just believe their delusions and leave others to believe what they want?

    Just mind your fucking business already!

  3. I couldn't disagree more with this post. I would insist that we stop using all of Zeus's blessing(s) and say we don't believe in him.

    I got to get me an edumication

  4. I cannot make an amazing cake...but thats not going to make me stop eating one when I see it.

    ...and now I want cake. Thanks a lot Jesus.

  5. Of course I can create all those things: I can do anything you claim that your god can do.

    I just choose not to.

    I'm certainly not going to do it merely to prove I can. I guess you'll just have to take it on faith that I can do these things.

    So, here's the deal:

    Tell your god to take all these things away, and then I'll replace them. Then, assuming I'm still here by the weekend, I guess that'll prove that your god is not more powerful than I am.

  6. I took him up on his challenge and created a sun and air. He can go outside and see the sun. He's probably breathing the air right now. If he doesn't believe me then he needs stop using the sun and air I made especially for him. I mean it's not like these things grow on trees (I should know, I created those as well and if he doesn't believe that he needs to stop using those too).

  7. Just more of the 'without him we are nothing' crap... nothing new here...

  8. Thanks. I still get a huge kick out of things like this. There's something just so incredibly amusing about trying to figure out how someone can think this way.

  9. As bizarre as this email seems, it is probably not too far from what a lot of really indoctrinated xtians believe. Their premise is God exists (even if we don't know all the exact details), so their logic follows.

    My parents are good people, even scientifically literate, but I don't think they understand that someone can not believe in God. It just isn't within them to comprehend disbelief because they have always "known." So when I told them I didn't believe, it didn't really register. They thought it was a rebellion. In their opinion, of course I know there is a God, I just don't want to be held to his constraints.

    It is very odd, it took me a while to digest. I understood it a bit more when my wife (who never went to church or talked about God) was surprised when I told her I didn't believe. She said "what do you mean?" I asked if she did and she said "of course...I mean, yeah, of course" and then a few months later we were talking to someone else and she mentioned she didn't believe in God to them. She had never said it to me, but I guess she had just never really considered it until I brought it up.

  10. I always have the same question:

    WHO would be convinced by this argument?

  11. And this here is why it's vitally important for the premises of one's argument to actually be valid and accurate.

    Starting with "gawd made everything" a priori, the rest of his "logic" produces some bizarre conclusions.

    This is why I despise when a person demands "Let me finish! Let me get through the whole argument first!"

    No. There's no point after the first bad premise.

  12. So what's the name of this logical fallacy? The "fuck you I'm right" fallacy?

  13. If this quality of argument actually does sway people to become believers, then I begin to understand the level of intelligence that I frequently encounter with fundamentalists.

  14. Don't use apostrophes either.

  15. @Sparrow Something like that. It's about as snobby as the "I'll pray for you line." It basically says that "I'm right, you're wrong, and you should know better," while leaving no room for discussion.

  16. lol @ "fuck you I'm right fallacy" so funny. I literally laughed at this.

  17. So god's powers are limited to "atmospheric control, nuclear fusion, and teraforming"

    So God is about on level of power with a Vorlon?

    In seriousness, someone point out to that guy that we only NEED those things god gives us because he supposedly made us to need it. Breeding a kid to be a diabetic and then giving him insulin isn't all that altruistic.

  18. I think all animals that don't believe in God should stop using the Earth too! Well, that is a bit harsh. They should at least stop breathing.

    I said, "Stop breathing, panda! You too monkey! You too fish, well, I guess you're okay. You're not really using god's air."

  19. Boiling down Ravi Zacharaias's "Questions to Ask an Atheist" to bare essentials.

  20. Yeah, guys, on the next episode could you please create a sun and give it to me?

  21. Sem embasamento para tal afirmação, se não tiver sido ele que criou porque ela não para de respirar ou usar sentir o sol?

    Realmente talvez ainda não possamos criar o sol, mas já sabemos do que é feito, talvez daqui um tempo poderemos criar não só o sol, mas já podemos 'fazer' a agua(H2O) e o ar(O2) também.

  22. What exactly is the argument here? As far as I can tell, it's something like this:

    1) We can't create the sun, air, or land.
    2) Somehow conclude that therefore, god exists.
    3) Somehow further conclude that anyone who doesn't believe in said god should die (not use air).

    Perhaps this person should use a bit more of god's glorious air. I don't think there's any oxygen going to the brain.

  23. "Let there be Spell Check"

  24. For a second there I thought he's going to make you create trees.

  25. @Gio
    But the fish are using the oxygen from god's water, just like the pandas and monkeys are using the oxygen from god's air, so the fish should not get off the hook (pun intended)

  26. If you don't believe in Woden, that means you're not allowed to exist on a Wednesday. No exceptions will be tolerated.

  27. Apparently he's an atheist to apostrophes.

  28. @Ing, since you mentioned Vorlons, your example reminds me of the Jem'Hadar from Deep Space Nine.

    They were genetically engineered to be dependent upon a drug that the founders created, but no one else knew how to synthesize. So, not only do the Jem'Hadar owe everything, including their freedom, to their creators, but the founders are also generous for giving them the drug they need.

    "And I think to myself, what a wonderful world..."

  29. Creating a sun? It's been done...

    The atmosphere/terraforming? Well, enough work by the star will create the oxygen/iron etc.

    As far as domestic terraforming, is there anyone here who doesn't think that humans have extensively terraformed Earth already?

  30. Give me a Freebirds burrito and I can make plenty of wind ;-)

  31. I regret to inform this viewer that he is mistaken.

    While he is correct that God is the source of all light, planets, food, water, etc, he's mistaken in how it came to be.

    You see, I killed God and took his stuff.

    I just decided to share the sun, etc.

    You're welcome. :D

  32. I think it's more like:

    [Unspoken a priori understanding]

    1) Nothing can exist unless an intelligence creates it (whether mortal or immortal).
    2) We can't create the stuff in the universe.

    Therefore, god made everything.

    [Written Argument]

    1) God made everything.
    2) You are using what God created.
    3) You deny god.

    Therefore, you either
    1) Should stop using what God made, or
    2) You are a hypocrit, you bastards, and I can cast ad hominem on you, and barring a saving throw, dismiss anything you say.

  33. Hmmm... smoking too much of God's crack, I think...

  34. Another question

    The person believes in God yet is a ingratful hypocrite because he's only using a fraction of what God has given him.

    If he truly believes in God he'll start making good use of God's gifts such as putting a hornet's nest down his pants to enjoy all that venom God made for him.

  35. At least an "argument from the sun" is an improvement over the argument from trees.

  36. Andy_Dufresne said:

    "I always have the same question:
    WHO would be convinced by this argument?"

    And I ask, how can you argue AGAINST it?

    This isn't an argument, it's a person who has been indoctrinated berating us for flying against all of their lifelong assumptions.

    I think that the most effective argument against this thinking is letting them know that we atheists exist. Let that sink in and work its way into their heads.


  37. This person spewed so much ridiculous bullshit that it made my head spin. He should ask his god why he still makes homosexuals.

  38. It's because of people like this that I've lost faith in humanity. I mean, I doubt he's stockpiling nucular bombs or anything, but someone like him is. Have you seen North Korea's leader lately? Insssssaaaaane...

    Oh well, at least not everyone is this batshit-foaming-at-the-mouth-about-to-have-an-aneurysm crazy. So, you know. That's something at least.

  39. I have an argument for this guy:

    1) Advanced Technology comes from science.
    2) You are using science to use advanced technology to get on the internet.
    3) You deny science that gave you these technologies.

    Therefore, stop using technology, or be a hypocrit.

  40. Am I the only who realized that there's a startling deficiency here (and not just in logic)?

    Which god?

  41. Note that for all the silliness in this 'argument', its exactly the same rationale behind most presuppositionalist apologetics. This is nothing but a crude extrapolation of theologians who say "You cannot use logic to argue against god, when logic presupposes a god."

    I call it the "Rain dance gambit". It goes like this:
    -Rain dancing causes rain to come. -Even if you can determine a natural process for rain, you wouldn't have rain if it weren't for rain dances.
    -You cannot therefore discount rain dances, since rain exists, so I win.

  42. "Am I the only who realized that there's a startling deficiency here (and not just in logic)?

    Which god?"

    Theists really only struggle to have people believe a god exists. After that, Pascal's wager and other irrationalities take over.

  43. Caffeeine Addicted said: I call it the "Rain dance gambit". It goes like this:
    -Rain dancing causes rain to come. -Even if you can determine a natural process for rain, you wouldn't have rain if it weren't for rain dances.
    -You cannot therefore discount rain dances, since rain exists, so I win.

    Sort of like the old saying; "if you believe that faeries create rain, then every time it rains you have proof that faeries exist"?


PLEASE NOTE: The Atheist Experience has moved to a new location, and this blog is now closed to comments. To participate in future discussions, please visit

This blog encourages believers who disagree with us to comment. However, anonymous comments are disallowed to weed out cowardly flamers who hide behind anonymity. Commenters will only be banned when they've demonstrated they're nothing more than trolls whose behavior is intentionally offensive to the blog's readership.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.