Is god a shemale?

c4ts

Philosopher
C
Joined
Jul 17, 2002
Messages
8,420
Is God a shemale? A transvestite, perhaps? Why, the answer is yes, if you accept my premises to begin with. Here are my premises: 1.) There is a God 2.) God is a shemale 3.) 2+2=4
And of course, any mathematician can tell you that all my premises are logical and indisputably true. If God is a shemale, he/she must not be a non-shemale. According to my premises, God is a shemale, therefore Q.E.D.
 
Originally posted by jan in this thread, but it fits here too, more or less

Sorry to have to say this, but that doesn't convince me at all. According to the rules of this forum, if you want to prove the existence of God, you have to use weird sentences no other person can understand.

Since your argument is clear and easy to understand, it can't be a valid proof of God's existence, according to the forum's rules.

I may could give you some credit since your argument is not really an argument, but just an assertion, but that doesn't count either, since you didn't try to hide that fact.
Click to expand...
 
jan said:
Originally posted by jan in this thread, but it fits here too, more or less

Sorry to have to say this, but that doesn't convince me at all. According to the rules of this forum, if you want to prove the existence of God, you have to use weird sentences no other person can understand.

Since your argument is clear and easy to understand, it can't be a valid proof of God's existence, according to the forum's rules.

I may could give you some credit since your argument is not really an argument, but just an assertion, but that doesn't count either, since you didn't try to hide that fact.
Click to expand...

I disagree because I assert the Shemale is at least hot-looking and that would be good. If it's good, it must be God. Pretty simple to figure out, I dunno why you Randi people have so much trouble with the simple stuff.
 
God being hot and shemale, is a shemale, and therefore shemale. Nothing can be known about God, except for the hot shemale part. I now turn to the book of Queens 2:81 "And God spake to ye of ambiguous gender, and she sayeth: I am a she he, the he is she, that he is not the she, but also she, in being a he she. And it was good, and there was much cross dressing, and confusion of the gendered roles."
 
c4ts said:
Queens 2:81 "And God spake to ye of ambiguous gender, and she sayeth: I am a she he, the he is she, that he is not the she, but also she, in being a he she. And it was good, and there was much cross dressing, and confusion of the gendered roles."
Click to expand...
No, I think you're mistaken. That's actually Greenwich Village 2:81. :D
 
You smartasses don't know enough and don't know no logic.

God is life
Life's a bitch
therefore............

However we all know God has a beard. Therefore God is a bitch with a beard. I dunno where that leaves us. One of those divine mysteries I guess.
 
Waaaaait a minute... There's something wrong here...


I call SHENANIGANS!!
This can't be an actual poll! Planet X never agrees with anything or anyone!
 
A poll is democratic.

God created the rights that inspired the founders of America.

The democratic process, numbers of believers far exceed those who deny the existence of God.

Therfore, God exists through the inspired righteousness of democracy, which is God-given and God-maintained. See omniscience and omnipotence for further explanation.

Thank you.
 
I want to know why there's an "Indubitably" option but no "Elementary, my dear Watson" option.

I mean, if we're going to go all Victorian, old bean....
 
Wudang said:
You smartasses don't know enough and don't know no logic.

God is life
Life's a bitch
therefore............

However we all know God has a beard. Therefore God is a bitch with a beard. I dunno where that leaves us. One of those divine mysteries I guess.
Click to expand...

I thought God was supposed to be faceless.
 
Upchurch said:
According the book of Chick, isn't that just Jesus (when he's in heaven, that is)?
Click to expand...

I thought Jesus was the guy with the face. I'm confused, he doesn't seem to distinguish between the two very well. He also says Jesus was around before he was born or something like that.
 
Upchurch said:
According the book of Chick, isn't that just Jesus (when he's in heaven, that is)?
Click to expand...

Chick sticks the artistic convention of not drawing the face of Jesus....it was a convention followed by Muslim artists for centuries: they wouldn't draw the faces of either Mohammed or his mother.

It would have been a blow to medieval and Renaissance art if most Christians did that, wouldn't it?
 
You are right, Jesus in heaven is depicted without a face, but so is God! In this tract (page 16), you can clearly see that God and Jesus are represented as seperate entities, each without faces. God is the faceless figure on the throne, Jesus is the figure standing up:
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0033/0033_01.asp

But look at page 22 of this tract:
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0081/0081_01.asp

Here, Jesus is in heaven, with a face. The robed figure standing up which looked like what I assumed to be Jesus is now supposed to be God, I think. Are you confused yet?
 
jan said:
Click to expand...

If person x was able to always make predictions that came out true, would person x be a prophet? And if a person (that same person x or a different one, y) were able to always make those predictions of x happen, would that second or first person be a kind of god?
 
BeholdTheTruth said:
If person x was able to always make predictions that came out true, would person x be a prophet? And if a person (that same person x or a different one, y) were able to always make those predictions of x happen, would that second or first person be a kind of god?
Click to expand...

No, he'd just be Oedipus Rex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom