Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – an impotent and evil god

not so polite dinner conversation 1 Minute

Unsurprisingly, the Christian god does nothing, just like it doesn’t exist.

https://ffrf.org/news/news-releases/item/39890-yet-another-report-of-widespread-abuse-and-cover-up-by-the-catholic-church

“The Roman Catholic Church has abused more than 300,000 French children since 1950, according to an explosive report that an independent commission has just released. The Freedom From Religion Foundation applauds the work of the investigators and once again urges the U.S. Department of Justice to initiate a similar, long-overdue investigation.”

Our Attorney General here in PA did a great job of investigation in the state. Unsurprisingly, the abuse of religion aka cults is everywhere. And unsurprisingly, it’s conservative Christians who block legislation and investigation into this abuse.

I do know that quite a few Christians follow me. Some will try to claim that Catholics aren’t Christians. That doesn’t solve the problem since plenty of protestants, etc also abuse others and this god doesn’t do anything at all, when it had no problem killing people for doing the “wrong” thing in the bible.

And do forget about using the “free will” lie you often use. This god could allow the thought of abuse to exist, thus preserving free will (which the bible doesn’t even mention), and then kill the abusive assholes after that.

Published by clubschadenfreude

intelligent, female, atheist, science fiction fan, great cook, excellent alewife, cat lover

Published

93 thoughts on “Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – an impotent and evil god”

  1. I think of it more along the lines of the (in)action of people, Christians in this instance, and not along the lines of metaphysical affirmation.

    Like

    Reply

      1. Not at all, but rather that drawing a metaphysical conclusion from the (in)action of people is unwarranted. Agnosticism seems more befitting. Are people not responsible for their actions? Perhaps god and people share responsibility? What are the terms and conditions of human agency, of human freedom, of volition – and what may this mean of divine agency (if we can speak of such)?

        Like

      2. There is no evidence for any god, so there is no reason to think that there maybe one. Being an agnostic is rather silly in this case since there is no reason to pretend that there *could” be something. There *could* be a worm under a rock on Ceti Alpha V, but that isn’t a god.

        There is no divine agency or gods. Humans are responsible for their actions in most cases. Brain injury and disease take that agency away from them. Humans also dont’ have free will. We have an illusion of it since we cannot be aware of all of the things that influence us.

        YS, are you a theist?

        Like

      3. Likely a theist would deny the worm analogy as committing a serious category mistake – it is not a physical object but rather a metaphysical cause that is the point of inquiry. Such a transcendental cause many surmise is a coherent explanation for whatever is is. Plato comes to mind, for one. My simple point is that I don’t think one can leap to metaphysical conclusions based on the action of people, that’s all.

        Like

      4. So, it appears you are a theist but want to deny that for some reason. You use all of the failed nonsense of a theist, including the lovely “category error” claims.

        There is no evidence of anything being “transcendental”, and the bible god is certainly not that. Theists have had to invent a new version of their god to get away from the ignorant petty, and very physical, being that the bible claims exists.

        Your god doesn’t do anything at all, YS. It cannot be shown to exist. People are the only way one would know it exists by their actions, and its. You end up with the usual vague claims of many supposedly “sophisticated” theists.

        Like

      5. At least no one can accuse you for failing to be sure of yourself not one to hold back punches, my goodness 😉
        I do surmise there *could* indeed be a transcendental cause of all that is, which I do not think is a vague claim at all; but yes we agree at least on this, this cause is definitely not a worm under a rock on Ceti Alpha V.

        Like

      6. No, I don’t pull my punches when someone tries nonsense like yours. Are you a theist, YS? Are you an agnostic? It seems you are quite loathe to take a stand in any case.

        I always enjoy someone who tries to use a 3 dollar word when a simpler word will do, as if they are trying to be impressive.

        There is no evidence nor need for some “transcendental cause” aka magic for anything at all. Many humans want there to be such a thing. Want doesn’t make things exist.

        The claim of “transcendental cause” is very vague, since it has no defining factors at all. All you have is handwaving, trying to insist that there simply must be *something* and when I say it could be just a worm on ceti alpha V, you are quite sure it can’t be that.

        Like

      7. Club – I don’t expect you to agree, but try at least to understand this 3 letter word, I use it for good reason. No it can’t be a worm because, contrary to your charge of vagueness and hand-waiving, “transcendental” does have a very particular meaning, especially in the context in which I use it, such that objects and causes in the cosmos (which includes worms and such things) are by definition and categorically precluded. This also means, that, yes a need for a cause beyond the cosmos is necessary. Again, I don’t expect you to agree given your prior metaphysical commitments. No big deal, just putting it out there – there are those with a radically different perspective than yours, and they have good and intelligent reason to do so. Peace out – your blog, have the last parting shot. 😉

        Like

      8. You can call me Vel. You’d know that if you would inform yourself about me and my blog.

        I know what the term god means. I also know that there is no evidence for one in any form. Many theists, like you, want to make vague claims about their gods, aYou can’t define it, so it could be just a worm under a rock for all it matters.

        You can use the word transcendental all you want. No evidence for this state at all.

        There is no evidence that a first cause is necessary either. That is invented by theists who need a job for their gods.

        Now, I get to see you try to play the martyr card too. How typical. There is no good reason or intelligent reason to play pretend there is magic.

        Like

      9. If there is no first cause, the it is by definition, in the mathematical sense, transcendental. In other words, it’s turtles all the way down unless you suppose an eternally pre-existing unmovable which at some finite time in the past caused the first action, and was preceded by some infinite time in which the action was neglected. The initial state is thermodynamically impossible and unstable and could never have been unless material existence was caused to be in that state and then only for the most brief of moments. One could assume a dynamic equilibrium always existed, but we know the universe does not possess the density required to produce a cyclically expanding and contracting universe. Hence, the simplest and most reasonable assumption is that God did it.

        Like

      10. Unsurprisingly, you can’t show one bit of your nonsense to be true, and demonstrate your ignorance of basic physics. And it may indeed be “turtles all the way down”. There is no problem with that.

        Do show where you know that the universe does not posses the density needed for a cyclical universe and show how you know.

        as usual, a Christian’s willful ignorance and need to appeal superseded information fails them.

        https://www.space.com/universe-had-no-beginning-time

        https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html

        No god can be shown to be needed, much less existing.

        Like

      11. I happen to be a physicist, almost, just a thesis shy, so if you have a better understanding of the physics mentioned man up and state your case. If the singularly at the beginning of the universe were not unstable then nothing as we know it would exist. Entropy dosen’t allow that state to exist, it’s never going to reassemble itself into that state. The universe as we know it most certainly did have a beginning of time. It’s funny that you demand I demonstrate my nonsense and then cite an article based on non-peer reviewed science based on a theory of quantum gravity that is not generally accepted by the physics community. Why, because general relativity tells the story so well and it has not played well with quantum mechanics so far, and it says the universe had a beginning. There is something wrong with turtles all the way down, that is, and infinite chain of causes. We can never test it or verify it in any way. It’s pure conjecture after conjecture after conjecture. Generally the idea is to make as few assumptions as possible. God, the pre-existing unmovable, leads to the fewest number of assumptions.

        Liked by 1 person

      12. No reason to believe you are a physicist at all, Varner. You’ve already shown you have a poor understanding of physics.

        If you are so stupid to think you can declare that the universe had a beginning of time, something that physicists are still debating, you further damage your claim.

        The research mentioned in the articles I linked to is indeed peer-reviewed. You seem to have not read the articles since they do indeed mention the paper and where it was published “Ali and coauthor Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have shown in a paper published in Physics Letters B” here is the link to the journal: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/physics-letters-b It is a peer reviewed journal. and here is the paper https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269314009381

        Now, do show how its wrong. You should be able to, right?

        It’s hilarious to see a supposed “almost physicist” saying such nonsense as “t’s funny that you demand I demonstrate my nonsense and then cite an article based on non-peer reviewed science based on a theory of quantum gravity that is not generally accepted by the physics community. Why, because general relativity tells the story so well and it has not played well with quantum mechanics so far, and it says the universe had a beginning.”

        You are a fraud. And gee, if it is such a horrible thing to have no way to test or verify something, then you have quite a problem with your claims about a god.

        Occam’s razor is not always right, and tah-dah, you fail.

        Like

      13. To be frank, I don’t give a rats ass what you believe. You are still wrong. The article you posted said clearly the paper was published in a non peer reviewer journal. From https://www.space.com/universe-had-no-beginning-time. “Their work appears in a paper published Sept. 24 to the preprint database arXiv. (The paper has yet to be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.)”. Did you even read it? who’s the fraud, backpedaling on your one bullshit.

        Liked by 1 person

      14. and here goes the whine of “almost a physicist” when his lies aren’t accepted. The article was wrong since I have provided tht it was indeed from a peer reviewed journal. Varner is found out to the the liar he is. It’s always great to see Christians get caught.

        Like

      17. the articles were based on a peer reviewed one. Or do you want to keep lying and claim that Physics Letters B isn’t a peer-reviewed journal?

        The research mentioned in the articles I linked to is indeed peer-reviewed. You seem to have not read the articles since they do indeed mention the paper and where it was published “Ali and coauthor Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have shown in a paper published in Physics Letters B” here is the link to the journal: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/physics-letters-b It is a peer reviewed journal. and here is the paper https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269314009381

        Now, do show how its wrong. You should be able to, right?

        Still waiting.

        Like

      20. I didnt claim the letters b wasent peer reviewed, I said the article I initially read from space.com was not peer reviewer, the one that I quoted that said it was not peer reviewed. That is clear from the conversation history.

        Like

      21. And there we go, Varner aka “almost a physicist” showing he was too ignorant to know what he was doing.

        you have tried to claim that the research wasn’t peer reviewed. YOu never even tried to look for the actual research. I presented you the research, and you still tried to cling to what little you could find supposed wrong about those articles.

        That ended up with you showing just how ignorant you are.

        Like

      22. What is interesting is watching you get bent out of shape and making the accusations you make, calling the names you call, and not knowing the first thing about what you are talking about.

        Like

      23. do show where I’ve called you names, dear. I’m still waiting for evidence for your claims.

        Unsurprising that you are doing all you can to avoid that, my dear “almost a physicist”.

        Like

      24. Your condescending prick. Don’t act like you’re not at least own it. If you acted like that in person I’d probably punch you in the f****** face.

        Like

      26. Devil’s been trying to get under my skin for 5 years now, you’re going to have to do better than that Belial. Coward of cowards calling someone a coward It’s rich.

        Like

      27. Now I get to see how a typical Christian must claim that he is of such importance that boogeymen attack him.

        Sorry, no, just one middle aged human has demonstrated you as a failure. Belial doesn’t exist either.

        Like

      28. No there’s no there’s no man on the other side of this conversation where you are concerned. You behave in an inhuman manner because you’re not human. There was once a man in there, but he has been completely taken over by a very dark and wicked spirit.

        Like

      29. Yep, no man, but a woman who has shown that yet one more Christian has failed in their claims. Poor Varner, he has nothing to support his claims about being “almost a physicist”, that some god is needed for the universe to exist, etc. His tantrum threatening to punch me wasn’t found impressive so he must graduate to claims that I am not human.

        I’m very human. No spirits, no devil, no god. I do love this need to accuse me of being some magical powerful being so poor varner can salve his ego for failing.

        Like

      31. And Varner continues to lies, ignoring what his God supposedly say in the Bible. No magical being here, just me watching Varner take a tantrum

        One also has to wonder, if this God is all powerful, and I just a magical beastie, why doesn’t it do something? Poor Varner, he can’t even get it up for a good ol’ get thee behind me Satan or belial, or Scooby-Doo doo or whatever.

        Like

      33. I’m just saying explicitly what you’re trying to do to me subtly. Right? Dehumanize. Isn’t that the goal. You aren’t a human being. You are more demon than human at this point.

        Like

      34. Now, that varner has demonstrated that he has nothing to support his claims and has said some very pathetic things, he now finds he must try to cover up his nonsense by accusing others of being just like him. He can’t take back his words so he doubles down on them.

        Happily, we are not like varner at all. I have not once tried to dehumanize this demonstrably ignorant man. He knows this since he tries to claim I’m somehow being “subtle” about it meaning he cannot show one instance. Showing him repeatedly wrong is not dehumanization. He is the only one accusing others of being less than human here.

        Like

      37. You know when you’ve run into him when it becomes the basest of the base And there is no possible angle to have intelligent respectable discourse. Just like the exorcist when he says so try to use all of your fears and insecurities against you right That’s what belial is doing here in this particular. The father lies, that is what you are confronting when you confront this irrational atheist.

        Like

      38. ranting on about imaginary beings isn’t very healthy, varner. I agree, there is no way to have intelligent respectable discourse with a man who thinks that magic works. However, I do like to engage in people like you to show just how religion fails.

        Belial? Oh darn. Why not Sammael? Asmodeus? Pazuzu? Your fairy tales aren’t impressive. No magical beings here, just a 50 something gal who finds it important to expose the lies and failure of various religions and those people who follow them.

        Like

      40. See he can’t stand that I made a sound argument. So the first thing that he does is dismiss it as nonsense and suggest I am unable to provide any evidence. In actually it is a very simple argument based on the simplest explainations of physics that one can Google quite easily. Type, is the universe open or closed, what is the shape of the universe, and somewhere in the article that pops up the writer will tell you that a flat universe precludes the idea of a pulsating universe. I explained this and our host conveniently ignores this in order to continue his ad hominem. At this point his goal is to avoid getting into any sort of debate where he might have to defend physics. A ground on which he knows he cannot win. Not that I want to have a debate about physics. Even after quoting his article showing that one was based on a non peer reviewed article, and even after explaining the paper he posted to him, he still relentlessly beats down on me as a liar, as one not knowing what he is talking about, and in the lowest of low move, he uses the information about me that I have given him to attack myself and my character. And all of this because i suggested their was a God. This man and his kind are the most bigoted, hateful people ever to have existed. They care only about being right, and they will go to any length to declare themselves right, even when they are dead wrong. They will censor, they will attack, they will rewrite knowledge and history in order to make themselves appear right. All of his chest beating is simply a means to shut down the conversation. He is no longer speaking to me, only talking down about me. It’s because he has lost and he dosent have anything else to say. It all stems first from his hatred of Christians, and then from the embarrassment of having it pointed out that his first article was not peer reviewed.

        Like

      41. And make sure not to use “3 dollar words”! 😉

        What would be of interest is a decent, respectful, and civil exchange about perspectives – atheist, theist, agnostic. But this is quite evidently not the place……

        moving on…..

        Like

      44. Whereas you have all the evidence for of a universe without beginning…. yeah right
        Demonstrate that, using your own standards. Not holding my breath, instead I say to you
        Good luck and good night.

        Like

      45. oh my poor sweet summer child, you are funny. I do love how you try to gather your skirts and try to pretend to be the poor martyr. Like Varner, you have no evidence for your claims.

        As for my points? I can show that there is no reason to think that a beginning for this universe based on current physics. The article I cited does that nicely. No evidence for your god and no reason to think that it is needed.

        The gaps are closing, poor Christians. Your cult and its many variants are dying since it does not reflect reality. Not at the beginning of the universe nor at the end.

        Like

      46. Again, you don’t show any evidence for your position either. Hand-waiving towards an article which itself states is merely a theory (a speculative one at that!) does not count as evidence, not even as the standard of proof you demand from your detractors! So much for facts, hard evidence, empirical proofs. And this from someone who claims to stand on evidence, and on evidence alone. What a charade.

        I’m joining the club though! I take freude in seeing you making a schade of yourself.

        Like

      47. Yep, it’s a theory, that has evidence to support it.

        Quite a bit better than the myths invented by humans a couple of thousand years ago that have no evidence to support them at all.

        I’m doing quite well. You theists? Well, not so much. It’s nice to see you try to take joy in something, and having no clue on what both parts of schadenfreude mean or how to use them. Freude: joy and schaden: damage or harm. So, your little attempt to be clever shows your ignorance once again. Do tell how anyone can “make” a “damage or harm” of themselves.

        Like

      49. And still Varner can’t support his claims about physics or his god. I don’t have to suggest you can’t provide any evidence. You’ve done that quite well yourself Varner aka “almost a physicist”.

        Alas, poor Varner can’t show that anything he claims is true. I’m still waiting for him to support his claims. He has not. I have provide him with the original article from a peer-reviewed journal. He can’t do anything with that, so he still must beat the dead horse of the articles mentioning the original research. Poor dear, he has evidently no idea that papers are often presented before peer review and then are peer-reviewed. now, how can an “almost physicist” be that ignorant of how things work in academia?

        You are a liar, Varner “almost a physicist”. You claimed that the only answer was was your version of some god, evidently the Christian one. You can’t show that exist or is necessary and now try to play the martyr.

        I’ve censored nothing at all. I’ve just shown your claims false. No one has rewrote anything. Nice to see you doubling down on your lies.

        Do your research. You can start with about me. I’m not a him 😀

        Like

      50. I didn’t say I was a physicist, I said I was almost one. You have everything you need to know about be to verify it for yourself. I only read the first article. Having presented an idea in a journal does not mean their idea has gained wide acceptance or has replaced general relativity. Exactly noone is debating if the universe had a beginning.

        You call me stupid and say I have no idea what I am talking about and need to defend my nonsense, yet you don’t even seem to have the slightest clue that the opening of the article you posted is saying half of what I said. The fact that one cannot assume an eternally expanding and contracting universe stems from the fact that the universe spatially flat. There is not enough mass in the universe to cause a big crunch, there is too much for it to expand forever. There is just enough for the expansion to come to a stop at some point in the future. This is what he says In the first line when he says the universe is flat. Hilarious is the idea that I need to defend myself to you.

        Liked by 1 person

      51. So, “almost a physicist” here still can’t show that he knows anything about physics and he still can’t figure out one can be a physicist long before one gets a doctoral degree.

        You have nothing to show you are a physicist at all, or even an “almost” one. Your ignorance about physics is just one bit of evidence throwing your claims into doubt.

        We already know that quantum physics works and exists along side general relativity. You are also trying to claim that physics depends on popularity. Alas, it doesn’t.

        Exactly many physicists are debating on how the universe began, if it began, etc. No, dear, not everyone agrees with you. You are caught as a liar again. The mere existence of the paper shows that.

        The universe may be spatially flat, Nothing about that indicates that there can’t be a pulsing universe. At this time, there is plenty of debate on what will happen to the universe in the future, and surprise, not one physicist thinks that some god will come and change reality. All poor “almost physicist” here has is a god of the gaps argument. Alas, not one bit of evidence for poor ol’ Yahweh can be offered by him.

        Like

      52. Yes, a flat universe precludes a pulsing universe. You talk big but it’s you showing your ignorance the more you speak.

        Like

      54. I have all I am going to. I have given you enough key terms that Google will explain it all to you if you just bother to do a little research. Even whether my background is true or not. You can lead a turd to water but you can’t make him float.

        Like

      55. and yet more fail from Varner aka “almost a physicist”. He can’t actually explain himself and hopes that he can claim I must do this for him.

        It doesnt’ work like that. I do love when a Christian tries to throw shit at a wall and hope that some of it sticks.

        I’ve done research. Unsurprisingly, it does not support what Varner tries to claim. And since he cannot explain himself, he has no idea what to cite to try to save himself.

        Like

      56. Well, you showed me, except to anyone who actually reads the conversation. You look just like the piece of waste you are.

        Like

      58. Your paper is simply stating that under a certain set of assumptions the big bang singularity vanishes from the Friedmann equations. It dosent show that these assumptions are representative of the actual universe.

        Liked by 1 person

      59. and our “almost physicist” is still failing. It’s hilarious that he wants to be so offended that there is no evidence for these equations and still has no evidence for his god.

        we have nothing that shows his assumptions and notably baseless claims are representative of the actual universe. We also have that christians themselves can’t even agree on what they want to claim as true.

        it will be fun to see if you ever get your PHd, since you will have to be lying either in your religion or on your thesis.

        Like

  2. I like your quote about life being unfair vs. fair, because of what would await us if we got all that we deserved if life were fair. That’s the crux of our complaint against the wickedness of the predator in your post: when will he get his just desserts? Why didn’t God stop him from committing such evil? But if God were fair, he would have wiped every one of us off the face of the earth millenia ago. He’s not fair. He’s just. He’s self-sufficiently holy and righteous to a standard we can’t attain, yet we judge him by our pathetic standards? We, who claim to have morals but deny the only moral being in the universe. Once we have rejected the truth of God, we lose our claims to moral high ground completely, for we are only on slippery slopes, comparatively better than one another, while utterly falling short of God’s glory.

    Humankind is free to pursue what it will. The ones that are bent on evil will pursue it. The ones that are freed from that pursuit to pursue God will pursue God. Anyone that does evil and claims to know God is a liar. Anyone that does evil and claims to be acting on command of God is a liar. Anyone that acts contrary to the revealed word of God but claims to love God is a liar and the truth is not in him/her. Neither Protestant nor Catholic can claim Christ and live like the devil without being a liar. The abuse of children by priests or pastors or by anyone else–or of anyone else–is evil, and they earn their condemnation. Anyone else that refuses to bow to the lordship of Jesus Christ for any other reason also earns their condemnation. That’s another ‘not-so-polite-dinner-conversation’ topic. It is only by the grace and mercy of an omnipotent and good God that we escape such condemnation.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Bill, you offer a common set of excuses for your god. First we have the nonsense of how supposedly just and merciful your god supposedly is, and the same nonsense that this god supposedly should have committed genocide on humanity for some action since we are supposedly ever so evil. The bible has that this god failed in Eden, intentionally refusing to give morals to humans, and then either intentionally allowing Satan in to the garden, and not warning Adam and Eve *or* being too stupid to know that Satan was there. You get to choose between them so we can see just how idiotic your god is. Then this god takes a tantrum, kicks Adam and Eve out, rather than forgiving them right then, and proceeds to fail repeatedly to correct its mistakes. The flood didn’t work, the laws didn’t work, and finally it comes up with a blood sacrifice by torture of itself to itself to make poor god feel better.

      This is not just (acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good) or fair (marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism) this is ridiculous. Punishing someone for something that someone else did is never just or fair. Your god is just one more petty god invented by humans. There is nothing “holy” or “righteous” about it.

      Yep, I judge your petty god by my standards – that, if it exists, and does nothing to stop harm from befalling people from its own supposed chosen ones often in building dedicated to it, then it is simply evil. It is not benevolent. I only need to know that I would save such people if I had the power. I have that as a morality. Funny how your god doesn’t. And gee, funny how that even per your bible, your god never gives morality to humans. Per it, humans have morality thanks to Eve and if you want to go a step back thanks to Satan. Now how does that work, a god that doesn’t want humans to know what is good and evil, but just wants blind obedience.

      Even in your bible, there is nothing showing your god to be any kind of moral at all. It kills children, it mind controls humans to get what it wants, including wanting genocide. It says that slavery is fine and that no slave should ever seek their freedom. I’m quite happy to not have a morality as crappy as that.

      You also have the problem that Christians don’t agree on what this god wants as morality, so no reason to think such nonsense exists at all. You simply make up a god in your own images.

      Humans are indeed free to pursue what they will, within the boundaries of our illusion of free will and physics. Humans have invented laws that make civilization work better, and enforce them, no pathetic god needed at all. No Christian knows what their god wants, nor can show it exists so they pursue a figment of their imagination.

      Christians can’t agree on who are Christians and who aren’t, aka you can’t agree on what “lordship of Jesus Christ” even means. You all accusing each other of not being the right kind of Christian, and not one of you being able to do what your supposed messiah promised his followers to do. You all call each other “evil”. It seems you are all frauds.

      No one is condemned by your petty god, Bill. It does nothing at all, being imaginary. Christians must constantly make up excuses for their god and themselves.

      Like

      Reply

      1. I’m impressed by your inability to prove that God doesn’t exist. I’m also impressed by your insistence that your frantic insistence that your worldview, your version of facts of life, also known as your truth, cannot be equated to making you religious. In fact, having decided that you are the arbiter of the Christian God, you have set yourself up as a god. Am I to worship you now, as the arbiter of truth?

        Like

      3. Bill, the utter lack of your version of the Christian god doing anything and your utter inablity to do what Jesus supposedly promised in the bible to his baptized believers does all I need to come to the conclusion that this god doesn’t exist. Christians can’t even get their act together among themselves.

        If a god exists, it isn’t yours.

        Yep, facts don’t make me religious. I have no belief in some magical being.

        I am indeed arbiter of what I survey, based on me and civilization’s rules. No need to worship me, every human does this. Including you.

        You just try to pretend your opinion is shared by a god so you can try to claim that everyone should agree with you and only you. I’m quite happy to know I don’t need such a thing.

        Like

      4. Thankfully, my fellow blogger, I feel it unnecessary to claim that everyone should agree with me and only me. That is your own statement about me and not my own belief about me.

        God does what he wills to do, nothing more and nothing less. He is not a magical being. He is not a genie in a lamp that does the bidding of humans. He is the creator of the universe, and the universe answers to him, not the other way around.

        He doesn’t belong to me; I belong to him, by his grace. I will never convince you of the truth of God; only God can do that. What I observe on this thread is that it doesn’t actually matter to you, though. You seem to enjoy more that approval of those that agree with you, and the opportunity to attempt to tear down the existence of someone you don’t believe exists, even though the Bible clearly teaches in Romans 1 that all people know, deep down, that God does exist, and we are beholden to him for the very breath in our lungs. But no matter. You will write your beliefs to your heart’s content, putting words in my mouth, painting with a broad brush and blah blah blah. It means nothing. It is vanity; a chasing after the wind.

        You believe that I realize I have no answer for your logic, and that makes me sad for your eternal destiny, not that I actually have sorrow in my heart for your lostness of soul. That, too, is vanity and emptiness, but no matter. You don’t have to believe me. I do pray for Satan’s hold on you to be broken, and for the Holy Spirit to forgive you the blasphemy you write, speak, and believe, that you may, like the Apostle Paul, meet Jesus and have life. You don’t want that; neither did Saul of Tarsus. God reached him anyway. May that happen for you, too, for God’s glory and your enjoyment of God for all eternity.

        Like

      5. I’m amused that Bill likes so many of my comments. Like means approve of and/or take pleasure in. Hmmm.

        Bill, you claim that only your version of Christianity is the right one. You are sure that other Christians are wrong. Christians are all like this and this is why there are hundreds, if not thousands of different sects. You are sure that the KJV bible isn’t correct. There are millions of Christians who are sure you are wrong. It’s rather like watching a bucket of crabs when it comes to Christians and their claims of having some “truth”.

        I do wonder who you think are the real Christians. Roman catholics? the various orthodox claimants? Mormons? Jehovah’s Witnesses? Calvinists? Southern Baptists? Those all have wildly different ideas on what this god wants, what it does, etc.

        Your version of your god, and all versions of all gods, do nothing at all. This god is a magical being, magic: an extraordinary power or influence seemingly from a supernatural source (merriam webster), aka a supernatural being. Christians do get unhappy when their god is no more than any other supernatural being, an imaginary bit of nonsense.

        Per your very own bible, this god answers prayers and your Jesus says that *anything* asked in his name will be granted, no exceptions (John 14). We also have that promise in Matthew 7, Luke 11 etc, that prayers will be answered with what is asked for and answered quickly. So yes, your god is indeed claimed to be the “genie in the lamp”. Unsurprisingly, the bible promises are false and an entire industry of “apologetics” was invented to give excuses why this god always fails.

        The universe does not answer to this god at all. We can see that from the utter lack of miracles, miracles promised to be done by believers.

        This god is indeed your god, since you have made it up in your image. You reaffirm the nonsense of the bible, that there is no free will, only “grace” aka this god choosing who it will allow to accept it and then damning the rest for no fault of their own. You can’t even convince other Christians about your supposed “truth” since you have no evidence supporting you, just like they won’t convince you of their version. That’s what happens when you compare imaginary friends.

        You make another common Christian excuse. When you realize you’ve failed, then it becomes this god’s problem to “convince” others. It’s a great way to run from your failure, Bill. You then try to claim that I’m not being honest, which is a lovely example of the common bearing of false witness against others when their arguments fail.

        What I enjoy is showing how the harmful claims of most religions are false and doing my best to eliminate them. Most, if not all, supposed “holy books” try to claim that everyone “really” agrees with them, and they are all lying. Romans 1 is just as much of a false claim as anything else in the bible. I do not agree with you or it, and I certainly am not “beholden” to some imaginary being for anything at all.

        I’ve not once put words in your mouth, nor have I painted anything in a “broad brush”. You make vague claims like this since you have nothing else.

        I’ve already pointed out that the only sadness you have is that I don’t agree with you. You have come to a atheist blog and have hoped that I would and didn’t get what you have wished for. I’m not lost in any way, Bill. You only hope I am, since your religion depends on a rather sadistic hope that everyone but you is unhappy. You need to pretend you are right and ever so important that a god agrees with you.

        So, since you are claiming to pray for me, you need to explain why your prayers fail now, Bill. You pray to your god that I will agree with you. Since I don’t, why is that since your god promises to answers the prayers of its believers with whatever they ask for, no exceptions? Your prayer demands that I lose my free will to your god, destroying your claims about that free will. You want me to be like Paul. Why isn’t your god answering your prayers?

        Liked by 1 person

      6. I am saddened for you, and frightened for your eternal destiny. You have decided that you have it all figured out, and you have made yourself the arbiter of truth. All Christians must submit to your superior intellect–by your reasoning–because we cannot satisfactorily explain the supernatural or what you see as the inaccuracies of the Bible. The Bible itself says that the message of Jesus crucified for sinners is a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles. I cannot even fathom trying to undertake addressing all of your grievances, but I know that Jesus died on the cross for my sin, and that by calling on his name in repentance and faith, I have forgiveness of my sin and life eternal with God. Mocking me, as you have and will no doubt continue to do, is mocking the one that saves me. It is of no account to me. God have mercy on me, sinner that I am.

        Like

      7. I’m not the blog owner, but your response most definitely demonstrates what a “good job” Christian leaders did to indoctrinate you into a fairy tale that has NO evidence to back it up except for that which you have “in your heart.”

        Like

      8. No, Bill, you aren’t sad or concerned about our “eternal destiny” other than to realize that your nonsense isn’t being lauded by us. You need that external validation and you aren’t getting what you want.

        You can’t even get other christians to agree with you, so you try to get what you want from atheists, since we are often the adults in the room.

        Nope, no Christian has to submit to anything, not even me. And no one has to listen to your lies claiming how you and you alone “really” know what this god wants, or what the bible “really” means.

        Yep, the bible says many things, even that it is true, and surprise, it isn’t. No evidence supports its claims. So, the false claims with in it about how its fairy tales are “stumbling blocks are any more true than the rest of it.

        Unsurprisingly, it is not that you can’t “even fathom” addressing my points, it is that you *can’t*. You are one more ignorant christian who doesn’t even know what is in your bible, much less be able to do what that bible promises to you.

        You believe a myth, just like any Jew, Hindu, Muslim, etc, all with myths that you can’t agree on even within your religions. You have no forgivenness since there is no such idiocy as “sin”, yet one more concept Christians can’t agree on. You are just one more human being who wants to pretend he and only he is the TrueChristian(tm). There are billions of people just like you.

        Mocking you is mocking you and that which you have invented. And it is very obviously of “account” to you with your continued whining.

        Like

      9. “I’m not the blog owner, but your response most definitely demonstrates what a “good job” Christian leaders did to indoctrinate you into a fairy tale that has NO evidence to back it up except for that which you have “in your heart.”

        Nan, What evidence do you possess that I’ve been indoctrinated? 🙂

        Like

      10. Everything you just wrote in your comment. People don’t believe –or even know about– these things unless someone has enlightened them. Even if you respond by saying you found it all in the bible, what evidence can you present that the information is valid … or even plausible?

        Like

      11. I am the blog owner 🙂 and you are so very indoctrinated, Bill. Indoctrination is a thing, humans do it all of the time. It’s only pathetic when it is being indoctrinated to believe imaginary nonsense that causes harm.

        As Nan has asked, can you show that your version of your bible (and I’m guessing you are a KJV onlyist) has any truth at all in it?

        There is no evidence at all for any of the essential events e.g. the two contradictory creation stories, the magic flood, babel, exodus, the battles of supposedly hundreds of thousands of participants, the supposed fabulous palaces and temples with literal tons of gold, etc, a magic man wandering around Roman-occupied Palestine being followed by a literal legion’s worth of men, healing miracles and other kinds happening, the dead rising and wandering around Roman-occupied Jerusalem on the same day of the sky darkening and a major earthquake, a resurrection (yet one more place that the story is hilarious contradictory), a new guy who can’t keep his origin story straight and who doesn’t know much about this Jesus at all, etc.

        The weakness of this cult is amazing. it does speak to just how ignorant, greedy and gullible humans can be.

        Like

      12. I am indoctrinated by the Bible, I admit it. The King James Version of the Bible has some lovely poetic phraseology, but it has been shown to have many inaccuracies in its translation, especially since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. So, no, I am most certainly not a “KJV-onlyist,” as you surmised.

        Like

      13. No, Bill, you are indoctrinated by other humans. The bible is just a pile of books containing stories that have no evidence that they are true.

        You are right, the KJV is rather nice poetically. It is also rife with all sorts of contradiction, translation errors and false claims. Just like every other translation of the bible. There is no one true bible.

        Like

      14. Bill M wrote this on his latest blog post:

        “If you wish to do so, you may follow that conversation here: https://clubschadenfreude.com/2021/10/06/not-so-polite-dinner-conversation-an-impotent-and-evil-god/. If you share Christian beliefs with me, please do not be inflamed by the rantings of this lost soul and thusly respond in kind! I issued some challenges that were met with mocking, as I had expected, and so I have shaken the dust off my sandals and moved on, but not without pleading at the throne of mercy for the writer’s soul to be pierced through by the mercy and grace of God for his glory.” – Bill M “What to say when God lets evil rear its head?” October 6, 2021

        Happily, I am not a lost soul nor am I “ranting”.

        Bill, you’ve claimed to have ” I have shaken the dust off my sandals and moved on” when you are still on my blog commenting. How curious.

        As for this, your supposed “pleading at the throne of mercy for the writer’s soul to be pierced through by the mercy and grace of God for his glory.” since this hasn’t happened and won’t happen, what will your excuse be since your god promises to answer every prayer from a true Christian with what is asked form and given quickly: “7 “Ask, and it will be given you; search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened for you. 8 For everyone who asks receives, and everyone who searches finds, and for everyone who knocks, the door will be opened. 9 Is there anyone among you who, if your child asks for bread, will give a stone? 10 Or if the child asks for a fish, will give a snake? 11 If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good things to those who ask him!” Matthew 7

        We see this repeated in Luke 11, John 14, etc.

        Now, what will your excuse be? That your god loves me as I am? That your god doesn’t like you? Or that your god is imaginary?

        Liked by 1 person

  3. I’m afraid that won’t happen–after all, it’s been barely twenty years since the last flare-up, in Boston and other cities; that’s barely enough time to warp more minds. Also, the concept of “overlapping magisteria” will not apply here. Ecclesiastics guard their turf as fiercely as the North Koreans do!

    Like

    Reply

  5. I believe the point here, minus the useless, contradictory babbling of Bill M., is that this vast problem provides some evidence supporting the conclusion that a god who gives a shit about his children might not, or probably does not, exist.

    Saying that anyone who (this, that, the other thing) “is a liar” seems to be more a matter of opinion than of religion. And if thou dare to disagree with me, I shall return and pronounce thee a fucking liar. 🙂

    Like

    Reply

  6. Whenever I read glurge like the steaming heap that Bill M. just dropped on the rug, I’m filled with disgust and pity: Disgust that someone could have let himself fall for arrant mythological nonsense, and pity that he has debased his own humanity to the breaking point by seeing himself as a sinner.

    Pro tip, Bill M.: You’ve never done anything that would merit eternal punishment, and you can’t fix the things that you have done by claiming that a fictional undead rabbi has forgiven you. You need to get your head out of Jesus’s ass and go around apologizing to real people, making material restitution if applicable. They’re the ones whose forgiveness actually matters in the real world.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. I disagree re: not needing forgiveness from God and about not having done anything deserving eternal punishment, but that’s because I know me and you don’t. That being said, I have a regular habit of apologizing and making restitution in this life, thanks. Forgiveness of sins by God isn’t a get-out-of-here-and-now-consequences-free card.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Bill, please think this through: How could infinite punishment for finite actions in a finite lifetime ever be just? I see it as infinite injustice.

        And if you see the actions of mortals as “crimes against God,” that’s even more risible. How can a mere mortal ever cause injury to a god?

        Please stop beating yourself up with the idea that your belief is the only thing keeping you out of the eternal flames. You were never in danger of that. Ever.

        Like

  7. Sin is not just prevalent within those that are not followers of Christ but is a part of the fallen Creation. It affects those who believe as well. Yes, an all-powerful God could stop the sin. In fact, an all-powerful God could remove it by simply wiping out all of Creation. A merciful God, which is the God we worship, seeks to offer restoration and redemption. The “problem of sin” is not a problem of God, but you are a part of that problem. “Free Will” is just a construct that is utilized to explain sin. We are a bound people. Bob Dylan offered a great line, “It may be the Devil or it may be the Lord but you know you gotta serve somebody.” That is the problem of sin. The greatest issue we have is that we like to believe that we are good and this does not only affect those that call themselves followers of Christ. We are all just depraved sinners in need of a Savior, the great lie that we tell ourselves is that we are good and can do it on our own. The issue of child abuse and child molestation is just another sign of the groaning of all Creation. Is there abuse within religion? Of course, because it is full of sinful humans. Your religion is just as guilty, you just give your god another name, self or freethinker or whatever you call yourself. Your posts, however, reflect one that has been hurt by the faith and cannot forgive. If you were truly happy with what you believe, why would you waste your time attacking that which you care nothing about? The greatest lie that you tell is the one you tell yourself, that you are good and have no need of God. Yet your heart yearns to truly know something greater, which you have obviously not found. That is the irony that I find in much of your dialogue. As a sinner in need of a Savior, I am just a beggar telling another where the food is.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. “SIN,” does not exist EXCEPT in the minds of believers.

      The word is defined as a “transgression of God’s will.” When an individual does not believe that a god exists, for that person there is NO SIN.

      Like

      Reply

    2. oh surprise, Chris is back, and gee, after he gathered his skirts up in a huff with this “I, also, don’t see much point in holding a discussion with you about the faith or seek to understand your views.”

      As Nan pointed out, sin is nothing important since it is based on nonsense. Unsurprisingly, Christians all make up what they want to pretend their god considers “sin”, and not a one can show that their version is the correct one, much less show that their god even exists.

      This god can’t do anything, including wipe out reality, so Christians have to invent reasons why it doesn’t. They try the lie of “mercy” when this god could have been merciful to Adam and Eve right at the start, rather than it taking a tantrum in the myth. Then the whole bit of nonsense never has to have happened.

      The problem of sin doesn’t exist without the nonsense of a god.

      No need to serve anyone, especially imaginary beings. Humans are generally good, no god or Chris needed. That’s the problem for you Chris, you want everyone to be obeying *you*. And we don’t care.

      No one needs your supposed “cure” for a sickness that doesn’t exist. You are just one more fraud and charlatan, trying to spread your cult.

      There is abuse within religion since there is no god involved. Gee, “once upon a time” this god smited (smote?) anyone who got out of line. And now poor ol’ God can’t even get it up to do that anymore.

      Atheists have no religion, my dear Christian. We happily aren’t like you. We don’t need to pretend everyone “really” agrees with us like you do in your desperation for validation.

      I happily haven’t been hurt by the nonsense of religion. Others have and I stand with them. You sadistically hope people have been hurt to give you something to salve yourself when someone doesnt’ agree with you. You can’t stand that someone may have simply reached the conclusion that they don’t need your god or you by simple reason. That’s too hard to ignore isn’t it?

      I attack the lies that harm others, Chris. I do care about that harm being done.

      Do try again with your false claims. These ones fail. I’m good and far far better than your petty little god. I dont’ need to kill children just because I’m butt hurt that no one is agreeing with me. My “heart? yearns for knowledge, not your lies. But I do love to have you here as an example of how crappy religion is.

      Like

      Reply

    3. Revcbyars, you have a lot of fucking nerve calling us liars just because we haven’t fallen for the same disgusting “everyone’s a sinner” claptrap that trapped and lobotomized you.

      Your so-called “food” is poison to humanity. It has set us back hundreds, if not thousands of years. It needs to fade from human experience until it’s just another story in the mythology books.

      If your god feels otherwise, it is at liberty to drop in at any time to attempt to convince me. Your services in that regard are not required, mortal.

      Like

      Reply

  8. Wow. “Varnersd” has completely lost the plot – “You aren’t a human being. You are more demon than human at this point”? I’m now imagining a physics thesis that completes the Standard Model by adding succubi and pixie dust.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Varner has been found wanting. Having no ability to discuss physics, he now resorts to that which most Christians fall back to, impotent threats and bearing false witness against others, ignoring his bible as he finds convenient.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a Reply (depending on current posters, posts may be moderated, individually or en masse. It may take a day or two for a comment to be released so don't panic). Remember, I control the horizontal, I control the vertical. And also realize, any blog owner can see the IP address and email address of a commenter.)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.