Satire about Theists and their God(s)

These are mostly (all?) from posts to alt.atheism.satire. Please be warned, it isn't all that hilarious...

There have been accesses to these pages!

From: (randall golhof)
Subject: Re: Foulish thiestgs!  WHEN YOU LEARN??!?
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 1994 07:42:14 GMT

In article <> Bob Lang 

>"If one were to imagine the necessity of concluding that,

What if I don't imagine that? Does the rest of the argument still hold?

>as a creature of not-infinite intelligence, residing in a
>not-infinite world in an infinite universe, there were
>beings the extent to which their greatness surpasses ours
>is greater than the extent to which ours surpasses that of
>the lowest life forms, 

So then the ratio of greatness GOD/MAN is greater than or equal to 
MAN/(LOWEST LIFE FORMS).  Do you have any figures? Is it say 1.5, or 10, or 
perhaps 1000000000000000000?

>                        one would be not unjustified in not
>concluding that a hierarchy cannot be arranged extending
>from the greatness achieved and not achieved, respectively,
>by that of the former and that of the latter, respectively,
>one would conclude that there must be a being which we call

Too many twists there, you lost me. It's like a bloody legal document.
Can you say it without using the word "respectively"?

From: (randall x)
Subject: Re: Is Athesism Wise?
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 1994 08:06:53 GMT

In article (Andrew.. ... ??)

>Though I consider myself an atheist, it's hard to go against the logic of 
>Pascal (well, i think it was him) who said the choice to believe or not 
>believe in god is simple: if you spend a little time in church and 
>believe in God, the rewards of heaven are a lifetime... if there is no 
>God, so you've wasted a little time. If, however, you chose not to 
>believe and there IS a God... 

God would see through a sham like that, wouldn't He ?

From: (randall g)
Subject: Re: Job Announcement
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 03:07:49 GMT

In article <33mt1h$> (Rian
Jensen) writes:

>    Fuck it then, unless you mean ALL religious hollidays off from ALL 
>religions (Which God would I be working for anyway?  Zues, YHWH, Allah, 
>Ahura Mazda, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Brahman, The IPU, or The Great Spirit?).
>    If I get all of them off from any religion that would be great!  (But 
>since I would never work I guess that would explain why pay and benifits 
>would suck, wouldn't it?).
>    While we're at it, are any Goddesses hiring?  I prefer a job where I 
>find the big boss attractive.  If you could get me a job with Luna that 
>would be great!
>    The Plasmatron

Well it turns out there's enough religious holidays in all religions to cover 
EVERY day of EVERY year forever! In fact every day is a holiday for 
MULTIPLE religions. Flitting from one service to another completely different 
one all day long, every day, forever!

It would be a very multicultural experience, for eternity!

Lot's of good ethnic food, too. A very few of the religions even have sex.

From: (randall g)
Subject: Re: if god ..
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 1994 06:53:33 GMT

In article <35gjes$> (Chris
Hughes) writes:
>Adrian Cybriwsky ( wrote:
>: if god were on the 'net, what would his address be?


Wouldn't that be .gov ?

Or perhaps .mil ?

From: (randall g)
Subject: Re: god how i love thee, let me count th-*GRRR*!
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 04:52:50 GMT

In article <36cfc3$> (Joe Tomasone) writes:

>In article ,
> (John Dixon) says:

>>Its a shame that after someones faith fails so spectacularly, people don't
>>seem to wonder why two thousand years of prayers have gone unanswered. 

>(Sigh..)   Again, for the last time in this thread, the man, reading the Bible,
>could have had no reason to
>believe that walking into a lion's cage was the right thing to do.  You do not
>test your own faith!  That's
>what you ignored out of my previous message.

I tested my faith, and it worked.  I jumped into the shark pool at the 
aquarium at the zoo here.  The sharks completely ignored me.  I'm convinced.

If you'd like, I'll ask God if he will protect you from wild animals.

[ pause ]

There, go ahead and try.  You'll be safe.  God won't be pissed.

[ please, I'm kidding, don't really do it. this is not to be taken 
seriously. ]

From: (randall g)
Subject: Re: another theological question
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 05:04:26 GMT

In article <369i3n$> (Marijane
White) writes:

>I'm new here, but I can't help asking....

>If god doesn't believe in me, do I cease to exist?

No, you cease to exist if YOU don't believe in GOD.  If God fails to believe 
in You then he will cease to exist.

From: (randall g)
Subject: Re: god how i love thee, let me count th-*GRRR*!
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 1994 04:40:27 GMT

In article <367vuj$> (Joe Tomasone) writes:

>In article <3609s5$sau@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA>,>(Richard Young) says:

>>        "If you've got faith then you can move mountains, but don't even 
>>        think about trying something like that, because that would tempt
>>        me, and you know what happened in Matthew, eh?  So smarten up, 
>>        fruity, or I'll have to come down there." 

>Just in case you forgot the point being made, I'll make it again.  Slowly.
>1.  You tempt the Lord when you challenge Him to prove Himself.

Uh oh, I did that a few times.

>2.  Tempting the Lord is a bad thing.

Well I knew that, they told me all the time in church.

>Putting yourself into danger to test the Lord's ability to save you is a bad
>Now, is there any part of that you DON'T understand or can discuss without
>resorting to nonsense?

They didn't make that clear in the church I went to. At least not in terms a 
child of 17 could understand.

>Gee, I miss Dribbs.

I've been worshipping him in my basement for some time now. I have a little 
shrine with a picture and some candles.  I'm hoping this one will work.

At least Dribbs doesn't say I'll burn in hell for making fun of him.