in reply to a reply to an article inspired by @prudencelouise1's article asking if god exist's.

3 50
Avatar for AnonSunamun
1 year ago

I experienced the article HERE from @PrudenceLouise1 to feel an Angry and condescending towards at least myself. That somehow pissed me off at first.

At first, I wanted to knee-jerk an answer that systematically addressed and disassembled every single argument or point she tried to make in her angry and condescending reaction to my article.

But even that wouldn't have taken me such a long time. I in fact spent most of the intervening time on NOT responding, Knowing that if I had responded sooner, it might have led to one blocking another and/or vice versa after the drama had ensued and a fittie had blossomed. It worked, I could eventually breathe through my nose again and looked at the three articles in another light (because of the RGB-led lighting here).

And after some thinking and philosophizing (oh w8, I wasn't very good at that right? Sorry, I will try not to do it too much) this is what I have to say on the issue:

My sponsors make content that's nothing like mine. They actually make quality proffessional grade articles and other content that nobody would be worse of with.

Sponsors of AnonSunamun

But that's not the only thing I have to say about the whole damned holy shitstorm-ish situation.

This is:

It has taken me an uncharacteristically long time to come up with this article, which, this time, IS a reply to the reaction to the report that was inspired by @PrudenceLouise1.


 The original article asked in its title if there was evidence for the existence of god. In it we were provided some rather… let’s be nice and say “unscientific” reasoning which referred to links to other articles by the author which was claimed to have the verbose and scientific why, for the author at least, evidence for the existence of god was everywhere. The links would then reveal previous articles, by the author, that indeed hold a lot of information. Information referring to and quoting from works of less unknown authors than us, with actual printed books published. 

Besides not what I want to spend any time on, I think that the articles here are only to generate more medium traffic for her articles there. I wasn't very happy with the thought I was writing something that'd eventually earn her money.....

Because the reply of @PrudenceLouise1 came across as aggressive and condescending I hunkered down to take on each point in the referenced articles and address them one by one using the huge volume of text and videos and debates that are available on the net in the category: “How to answer apologetics”.

But as I was working through the second article, the one in her reply article, I suddenly realized that in this linked article there were two more links to articles, by the author. And each article she linked to had, at least, one link to another article. Twenty minutes later I wanted my time back. I am the one who wants to live without any god, so i shouldn't have to put in so much effort to get to know religion in general and the debated ones specifically.

It is futile anyway!

Me, you, no one including Jezus, the holy spirit, or YHWH will ever change a single thought even when the holy trinity showed up together and proved they had nothing to do with the creation of the universe, the earth, or anything upon it. The way she writes gives me the feeling that she’s on a crusade to prevent theists from getting caught by the claws of the always-prowling evil monsters that call themselves Atheists. Monsters that exist only for the moment they find a believer they can maul, mutilate and shred away from religion into the dark pits of debauchery, evil, and decadency that is Atheism.


Well, that monster is not me. Most Atheists are nothing like the Atheists that most believers think are the standard for “the Atheist”

Some Atheists go out on youtube and podcasts and became viral super hits for a while. And I suspect that those are The Atheists she’s so angry with (for some reason). But folks like Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, Matt Dillahunty, Seth Andrews, or AronRa are very few and far between.

Ok, ok, I must take the time and effort to give Bart Ehrman a shoutout in this list too, even though he teaches the gospels and early Christianity at a baptist university (If I’m not mistaken).

Funny enough, at least to me, is that the best of them (Atheists who publicity and vocally speak against Religion, and try to deconvert theists) who has studied at University on the subject and can be called a scholar in this subject matter never mentioned by the others.

The others are the ones that publish and produce videos, podcasts, and books. Richard Carrier is possibly one of the most qualified persons to refer to or quote. Somehow he never is. Which, knowing a few details about America and its educational system in relation to professors getting jobs teaching or researching, is a disgrace all scholars in the field should be ashamed of. I think even Bert Ehrmann is not speaking completely free, considering where he works.

Not think of, having to consider, having it influence in any way, or being forced to tolerate anything even close to a god-like somehting.

But if you get down to what Atheism means, and what it means to the average Atheist you’d realize that they’re nothing like the “True” Atheists. For the everyday person, yes we’re the norm these days in many countries (In mine a little under 35% of the population identifies as Atheists), Atheism isn’t something that is consciously thought about.

We never consider or think "what would god think about this?" Or "what would god/jezus do?"

An Atheist does not consider or think about religion or the lack of it at all in the course of his(her/it/them/whatever) normal life. Only when confronted with religion, or religious, causes the Atheist to alter their intended course through the day by religion or religion. That is the only time religion, god, and whatever has something to do with that enters the mind of an atheist, irritates the atheist, and causes the atheist to do whatever needs to be done to get that religious irritation out of his path.

To reply to a huge ass article, written angrily and with a snobbish, condescending (patronizing even at some point) by writing article after seeking empirical evidence and more to counter every single point made, and hours in Grammarly's grip to get the grammar right, staring at the computer's screen vomiting the letters that my hurting fingers keep ramming on despite the pain... Ah hell no! I am the atheist, you go and do shit to dig up information and insight and knowledge about religion, its origin, and the horrible consequences it had. (genocide, death murder, rape, slavery, more death, destruction, racism (god was the first racist, and only the Jews got the chosen people package. Others (Moabites and so on and on and on) got the "extinction if you're lucky" package,

No, don't worry, we like to debate religion (with people that actually can stand hearing other people's opinions and not knee-jerk because they decided to take offense! We love the back-and-forth bouncing off each other. Knowing that worst-case scenario, we'd come to the concluding agreement that we disagreed.


The last thing an Atheist wants to do is go through tens of articles by a very prolific and determined lady, then type his fingers blue on an article refuting or at least replying to every single argument she makes for god’s existence knowing full well it is futile, and the lady will never concede a single word even if unrefutable proof would be right in her hands. It is the opposite of what an Atheist wants. An Atheist wants to be able to live life without religion playing any part in it. An Atheist wants to be free from religion. 

Right everyone enjoys it except for... *drumroll* Atheists!

 But the highly valued pillar of our modern democracies “Religious Freedom” apparently only applies to religious people. Because for an Atheist it is still not possible to live our lives without being confronted by religion in our daily lives. Religions still get tax exemptions, have laws that protect their “god-given” rights, and generally enjoy a position other organizations cannot. 

Ah Hell no!

After realizing all that I quit writing the article I had started (7000 words in, so you better believe that it’s going to get edited and published at some point!!) and decided that its better to just explain what is important to an Atheist and what an Atheist wants, and explain that the article I wrote was in no way, shape or form meant as an attack on @PrudenceLouise1 or her article. 

Reply to, or Inspired by?

Significant difference.,

It was, as the title said, inspired by her article. I wanted to write an article with my beliefs, opinions, and views on the question if there was evidence that god exists. I admit I referred to her article here and there and at some points seems like a direct response to her article but that wasn’t the intent. That is not the level I think is worth my time, effort, or attention anymore. I’ve done the listening, learning, reading, researching, compiling, analyzing, and, most importantly, drawing my conclusions decades ago. 

@PrudenceLouise1 seemed to think I had little knowledge and should go and learn before I spoke. That really chafed... no, let me be honest:

that pissed me the fuck off!

I think that I’ve gone beyond the call of duty or reason by spending the time and effort reading, actually reading and understanding what I read, the scriptures of the major religions of the world today, and one that, while ridiculous and too stupid to take seriously, does show that when something is packaged as a religion and perceived as being taken seriously there is nothing you can make up that will not be acceptable by “believers”, even if it’s a creation of a science fiction novel writer). 

I should have wound this down 3 paragraphs ago.

Just to be clear, here’s the scripture journey I took. Please keep in mind that most of this journey was during the late 80s and throughout the early 90s. So no internet, only the churches, synagogues, Mosques, and other sources for scripture I had access to. Yes, I am talking about a LIBRARY! (jump scared you?)

Not the LBRY one but that building filled with actual paper books




These are the scriptures I consumed on my journey and in the following order:

The Bible (The English translation of the greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (the Tarah so just the first 5 books they attribute to Moses)

Paul’s letters.

The four gospels John Mark Luke and… them…. That fourth one I keep forgetting the name of… I have no energy for google or duckduckgo right now so I am going to go with….. James!  (?)

Then I continued with

The English translation of the Qur’an. (in the original order, not the logical order)

I read a shitload of Hadith

I followed this up with (i didn't know alright! If it helps, i was part of Chanology later okay!!!!)

Taking a wrong turn and I read Ron L Hubbard (Laughing all the way) before I thought something like “I’ll do three more and if they turn out to be duds I’m not gonna waste my time anymore” 

Hinduism is..... a lot!!!!

and complicated!

just before I hit the brick wall that Hinduism turned out to have for me. I wanted to read the core scriptures and enthusiastically went looking for the “Veda and Upanishads” I had been referred to thinking they’d be something like the old and new testaments together, in volume and extent. 

Demotivation in pure uncut form.

Well, you can imagine the disparaging feeling I had when I found out that the “Veda and Upanishad” were 24 books and not even close to being the only “core scriptures” that Hinduism had in their reading list. There were the Ithishaasa, the Agama, the Dharmashastra, the Shamita, and the Purana. (don’t you dare think that word you’re thinking now!). 

Sigh, i knew it!

HOLD IT!!! Noooo, no no no no no…. You’re jumping the gun again!!! Yelling and screaming and getting all pissed off prematurely! 

And you ain't even Hindus, what's it to you?

I knew a couple of you’d be shouting at me at this point! 

But I wasn’t going to forget mentioning the Purañas the Satras! You know I’m trying to make a point here without obviously trying to make the point! Because not making a point of making the point is the only way to make the point doesn’t seem like you’re trying to be an irritating know-it-all that wants to show he knows… it all…… 

Wut? Huh? 


Move along, Move along....

So just give me a chance here! 

If you do you will notice that I will make mention the fact that besides those top-tier and second-tier scriptures there are also scriptures that are considered supplementary (the Bhakti Sãstra), poetry (Kãlidãsa being the most prolific with 6 titles) and (finally) the lowest tier being the social sciences scriptures (which counts the Kama-Sutra among its members) on topics Erotics, Politics and Economics, Astrology, Moral/Ethical philosophy, Tales of the Buddha, moral guidance and good counsel.

(ssssht... don't tell Christians about that hidden link!!)

So instead of pushing myself through the Samhita, I called Hinduism quits when I was only halfway through Samaveda. Partially inspired by finding the Tales of the Buddha in the holy scripture list of Hinduism. I was going to save Buddhism for last but when the tales of the Buddha are part of the holy scripture of another religion, the oldest one no less (so it claims), then those tales must have been at least very impressive.

And off into Buddhism, I went. It was, in my experience the most friendly and welcoming experience out of all the religious tastes and brands I looked into. 

But it too wasn’t convincing enough for me to consider shaping my life to its “wisdom” soon after I had started looking into it. By that point, I’d spent so many hours devouring scriptures (which at the best of times aren’t too immersive or captivating to a twenty-something-year-old kid.) I didn’t even want to keep the goal I’d set and ditch the last on my “to check out” list and just move on to the fascination that came out of the disappointments that religion(s) turned out to be (The origins and evolution of religion and early Christianity (the latter one leading eventually to the fascinations of the Abrahamic phenomenon))

But I wanted to have the broadness of having done my due diligence and beyond on all the most influential religions (or life views or whatever you’d call them if you’d not consider them religions.) and I could hardly do that without having at least an overview look into Confucianism. It is taught at pre- and elementary schools throughout China to this very day, as well as has had a great influence on China and the Chinese ever since Confucious himself was around. 

Maybe i should have started with that old Chinese dude!!

And I had to conclude that of all the mind-numbingly long and boring texts I ground through, Confuscious made the best impression and the most sense of all of them. I see him as a person that looked around him and saw the things that prevented people from being happy or that brought people sorrow. He saw causes and tried to come up with solutions. Did he try to simply answer the question: How to make life better?

I haz smart grey squishy stuff too!!

He was smart enough to have an answer to an impressive amount of the questions he and others put before him. 

For me Confucianism isn’t a religion at all, not even close, but merely an independently developed ancient school of philosophy.

So back to the 800 BCE's i guess....sigh... some more eeh... reading.....

When I’d drawn that conclusion I decided to broaden my philosophy foundation and went off on a tangent that I guess is still going today and read works of people like 




Theodorus (the atheist),




Seneca the younger, 

Marcus Aurelius (Remarkably applicable to life today I think),

Sexts (no, not SMS messages about sex)


John of Damascus, 

John the Scot (I know, I’ve read way too much Plato and/or Neoplatonists), 

Al Ghazali, 

Francis of Assisi, 

Fibonacci (Getting rediscovered these days, incomprehensible to me for the most part),

Roger Bacon (because there is nothing in life that isn’t better with bacon!!), 

Ockham (famous for the razor), 

Erasmus (my boy! Hardcore Dutch Represent!), 



Galileo Galilei, 



skipped Voltaire on purpose,

then skipped almost all modern philosophers because quite frankly I’d found things to occupy myself with other than reading and computing, like Gabber and Multiplayer Gaming Local Area Network events. 

I shall deny forever that it has anything to do with German Philosophers!

German philosophers cannot exist. Law of quantum physics!

I’ll be the first to admit that there was a lot that, at the time, went over my head and that I didn’t understand or didn’t understand correctly. That’s why you can still catch me revisiting the classics from time to time. I’m rereading the republic as we speak, after having read through the apology. (I know. Some say that’s the wrong order to read them in. Shut up.)

So no. thank you. I will not be spending my precious time on any topic related to religion. It forces me to interact with people i, in the end, will not take seriously. If that is bad??? Then I am proud to be bad and will endeavor to get worse.

Because if I enter a debate, I want it to be open, civilized, respectfully, and between people that aren't easily fooled.

Final words on this:

But I do know that my interest in science, (Astro)physics be it theoretical or practical, and Technology fueled by my tendency to let my brain off the leash on difficult topics and combined with my love for forum form discussions taught me that having an opinion other than that of “main-stream” (what has come to be called scientific consensus) means you either get good at typing or stop giving shits about what others write about your writing or you personally. It’s gonna get nasty at some point, and more points than you’d want!

Moving this article to its conclusion I guess I should mention that I’d rather engage a theoretical quantum physicist than a Theist apologist. The former is at least willing to consider the evidence and adjust their thinking accordingly, even though they’re as of yet still very stubborn about how their whole wave potential, virtual particles, and double-slit nonsense is the height of arrogance and hubris in thinking.

Just because we have not found a method of observation and/or measuring that does not affect the observed or measured doesn’t mean that there isn’t a way and that therefore particles exist at all possible places at the same time until it’s measured. And don’t even get me started on that damned Cat Shrödinger came up with! Aaah…. That can piß me off to no end, but its not nearly as grating as hours and hours and hours of debate and presenting facts, scientific evidence, and common sense and throwing in the whole compendium of Atheist videos or Atheist-Theist debates for good measure while the theist puts their fingers in their ears when they hear things they’ve got no answer readily available for. 

So again I want to apologize to @PrudenceLouoise1 if I gave her the impression that I wanted to attack her or anyone/thing with my article. I was inspired by your article, and particularly the title, to provide another point of view and the corresponding other opinion and views on the matter. 

The reason I have unusually long articles is most of the time because I’m afraid that what I wrote will be perceived differently than I had intended. That makes me over-describe and explain things most of the time I write in English (not my native tongue). When I do that I sometimes achieve the opposite and I am truly sorry for that every time it happens. Specifically in this case, for which I again apologize to @Prudentlouise1!

Thank you for reading this.

Stay safe and stay happy!



1. I still intend to finish that point-by-point rebuttal at some point, be prepared…. (he said ominously trying but failing not to laugh out loud)

2. I’m sorry Arend but there was no way I could put this into a talk between me and you kind of format. The next one is going to be one though! I promise.

And you know when dad says the word promise out loud…. He’s going to keep it or die trying!

$ 0.10
$ 0.05 from @Jane
$ 0.05 from @Unity
Sponsors of AnonSunamun
Avatar for AnonSunamun
1 year ago


As always, i think my life's motto applies: It is okay to disagree with me! Everyone has the right to be wrong!

$ 0.00
1 year ago

As for me, I believe God exists. I am a living proof. He is my present help in time of need. Add long as we call upon Him, He'll always hear us. He doesn't want people to suffer or perish. In short, God is good

$ 0.00
1 year ago

Have you read any books by Swami Vivekananda? Swamiji's sayings are very realistic and science-based. Nicola Tesla met and discussed with Swami Vivekananda science and philosophy when Swamiji visited the US.

BTW, I read that there is no mention of the word "Hindu" in the Veda, Upanishad, or any of the ancient Sanskrit scriptures. The people living on the East side of the ancient river Sindh were called "Sindhus." Unfortunately, the ancient visitors didn't know the S pronunciation. They dubbed H for S. That is how the word "Hindu" was gradually invented. If there were any religion in ancient India, that was "Sanatan Dharma," i.e., the only and original "dharma." And that was probably without any name!

My personal and humble guess is that "religion and politics are the two sides of the same coin." Both want to control the people - the common mass.

$ 0.00
1 year ago