Memes

Who wants to be a millionaire

WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE

Advertisements

118 thoughts on “Who wants to be a millionaire

    • That would show balls. If you’re going to believe in this stuff, and sell it, then you should go all the way. As silly as all the flawed arguments go for a gods existence are it’s the excuses made for its impotence in matters of “reality” which i find most infuriating.

      Like

      • A, B and C contradict the dogmas of a omniscient and omnipotent god, so it must be D. Of course, god is supposed to be loving, so the traditional explanation is: caused it deliberately to punish the sinful people. The innocent victims got what they deserved because of original sin. The righteous among the victims where recalled to the heavens, where they are better of, so what is the problem? 🙂
        You can always explain the shit away in any ideology, if you want to. If you are not successful, you can still open the book of Job. Where have you been… The ways of the lord are not ours to understand and it is not ours to argue with the lord.
        Moreover, it is against the authority to open your mouth and sit among the mockers. Woe betide you!
        😉

        Like

      • My problem with that explanation as a kid was, “what about the puppies?” No one could ever answer that awkward quandary. Puppies, i soon realised, fucks up with omnipotence 🙂

        Like

      • Like the crumbling of bridges, the crumbling of ideologies starts with small cracks that open up in places where nobody is looking (except for children). As I always say, reality has more properties than our theories about it describe. This is also true for ideological theories. It is like the impossibility of the perfect crime, something is always overlooked.

        Like

      • Puppies? You’re doing cute puppies … oh! Meta for ‘innocents’. C’mon, John — have you ever seen an innocent animal? They were put on earth for us to use, dammit~!

        Like

  1. You think this is what they’re thinking about when they sing “Our God is an awesome God” on Sunday’s? Fear and trembling is necessary to convince the “faithful”, eh?

    Like

  2. I expect all Christians believe the god God was aware but willing to do anything. Why? The folks in that part of the world weren’t praying correctly. Ask any pastor’s wife looking for a car parking space how good her deity is when she needs him. That’s all the proof I need. 🙂

    Like

    • Violet, you can’t get that car park thing out of your head, can you? It was pouring rain! She needed gods intervention… and by Christ he intervened! Of course, while he was working that little bit of magic he missed the 9.1 earthquake, but hey, it was RAINING!!!

      Like

  3. Ah, my son, the Lord works in mysterious ways. Your tiny pea brain can’t possibly understand the infinite mind of the Lord as he kicks the anthill he has created “just to see them scurry.” Does the Pope scurry? He should, His Lord wants him to.

    Like

  4. Obviously D: either the folk who died were sinners (in which case, they’ve gone straight to Hell: result!) or they were saints (in which case, they’re now with the big guy upstairs: also result!). Go with Christianity. God is love.

    Like

    • Let me get this straight: God created people. He allowed those people to sin knowing full well that they would, he’s omniscient, and then punished them for doing what he knew they would do. He sounds like a bit of a sadist. I’m not sure I agree with notion that “god is love” when he displays such sadistic tendencies. In fact, by any conventional definition of morality, he’s immoral.

      There isn’t really any good human analogy because there’s no such thing as omniscience. However, here’s an attempt. God is apparently like a crack dealer or parent, who puts crack or chocolate chip cookies in front of a crack addict or child. He tells the crack addict or child here is some crack or chocolate chip cookies. I’m going to leave them on the table. I’m going to leave the room. You are not to touch them. I KNOW that you are going to touch them , but I want to punish you.

      Forget entirely that we are supposedly being punished for the fact that we had the audacity to seek knowledge. You see god is a maniacal control freak. He wants his subjects to be ignorant in a cloud of darkness.

      Like

  5. What ever the pope answers it has to be the right answer, because alledgedly he is inerrant. Is he not? Exept, if he says something embarresing, like he did a few days back, when he let it slip, that everybody even atheists are going to be let into heaven. Then of course the Vatican public relations department, that is even more innerrant, than the pope, has to correct him. So, the real question here is not what would the pope answer, but what does the Vatican public relations department think?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/22/pope-francis-good-atheists_n_3320757.html

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/shortcuts/2013/may/29/pope-francis-open-heaven-atheists

    Like

    • I thought that whole “You’re all going to heaven,” “Oh no you’re not!” business was hilarious. A small army of professional comedy writers couldn’t have penned a better sketch.

      Like

      • Hilariuous indeed! As an atheist it is of no consequense, if someone thinks I am going to go to a place, that does not exist, be it heaven, or hell. It is just as interresting as someone telling me what would I be, if I lived in the imaginary land of Narnia. However, as a person, I would find it less insulting, if the head of a major social movement would not actually preach, that I deserve eternal torture for not being a part of his particular movement.

        It is just the infallibility issue I find especially funny. Who is more infallible, the pope or the publicity office?

        Like

      • Pope Francis is a liberation theologist and I think he meant it from the heart when he said everyone is good not matter what they believe. Isn’t that your message too?

        Like

    • I don’t not have no problems with that. Actually that’s pretty well the definition I use myself, of good people. Simple but effective:
      # good people do good things
      # bad people do bad things
      ergo a good guy (atheist) has a better chance of getting into heaven than a bad pope. Yep, I’ll buy it …

      Like

      • (How the hell did that comment end up waaaaay down here~?)

        Anyway, you can’t say he lacks balls! Oops …That’s one of the essential qualifications for popehood, unless I’ve been led astray; the formulaic “Testiculos habet et bene pendentes” (oh gods, I hope I got that right).
        Is it true that the candidate has to sit sans knickers on a raised seatless stool so all the voting cardinals pass below to get a judgemental perve at his wedding tackle—or have I fallen for yet another old nun’s tale?

        Anyway, he has to impress the lot—next question: Why on God’s earth would a blasted pope need a toggle and two, of all people?
        Or does God’s rep on Earth get to let his hair down in the privacy on his own apartments, and none the wiser?

        Like

  6. Having thought about it — it IS a trick question.
    There’s two answers: B and D … all else violates the Law of Contradiction (if applied to the Big G’s three ‘omnis’).

    Like

  7. I still think we’re judging the Divine by our own standards.
    Don’t forget that according to the Clergy God is
    (a) omniscient (a know-all)
    (b) omnipotent (can do anything, and
    (c) omnipresent (did I miss any?).

    Ergo no point in phoning Him ‘cos He knows what it’s all about anyway (although out of pure good manners He should at least phone you back).

    It’s these three qualities that force me to opt for choices B and D in the post above; and why I conclude it’s a sneaky trick question … hah! You don’t catch this ol’ dog that easy …

    Like

  8. My guess is the Pope’s first response would be: “Ah…paenitet te posse repetere quaestionem?”, caught off guard thinking he was actually on the set for ‘The Price is Right’ 😉

    Like

      • Well yeah exactly. In fact who’s to say he doesn’t but just couldn’t be arsed to pick up the other line?!
        Maybe he does indeed play favourites. I’m sure he must have a roulette wheel up there, gambles a little in his spare time. The little ball probably ‘accidentally’ falls into the number 13 slot quite a lot, just so that he can call on superstition and claim plausible deniability!

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s