Christians are so cringe.
I’d rather hang out with the crystal people.
Idk some of them are this bad.
> Alpha male
> no insecurities
Hmm.How is someone into Reiki this big of an asshole? I’m not saying I am into Reiki, but it sure doesn’t jive with the rest of him.
“Alpha Male”, “empath” and “no insecurities” in the same fucking sentence is some TRUMP level lying 😄
Alpha male? Is it a furry thing?
I think it’s a toxic masculinity thing.
My favorite is when you give a Christian evidence of any sort and they block you because they lack any counterargument. God is good? Here’s a Bible passage about smashing babies on rocks. God hates prostitutes? Here’s that part where Jesus washes women’s feet with his hair. Nobody understands electricity? Then why don’t you stick a key in an outlet? The eyeball is proof of creation? Here’s a literal demonstration of how they have evolved multiple times from simple light-sensing cells. Blocked, blocked, blocked, yelled at then blocked.
I could go on all damned day, but you get the point. Blind faith is antithetical to logic, full stop. As far as I’m concerned, it’s a psychological disorder, regardless of the object of said faith.
Not only that, but delusions needed to support religion and basically hard coded into these people since birth. Makes them susceptible to being controlled by others.
My favourite is when an atheist tries to quote the Bible and completely fails. Found a bible passage about smashing babies on rocks? Let’s now read the context. THEY (the Babylonians, who incidentally weren’t following God’s law at the time) did that to US (Israel). The song is a song of mourning and loss, and imagined revenge, as if that would make it better (it doesn’t), but it isn’t sanctioned, so we can’t.
So how exactly is that a counterargument to God being good? Or am I bashing my head against a brick wall here, talking to an atheist with unshakeable blind faith in his demonstrably incorrect position.
I think they’re making a general statement about all the crazy shit in the old testament, not basing their whole point on that one interpretation. What do you think about the other stuff they mentioned?
Whataboutism is a game we can all play, but I can’t be arsed at the moment.
“Trust me, I could totally answer your question and it would blow your mind and totally convert you. I won’t, but trust me I could if I cared to.”
Seems like the bible says you’re not a very good Christian in that case:
1 Peter 3:15
15But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.
Sure, but we’re not in a gentleness and respect situation here. There’s me, and there’s a bunch of rabid fundamentalist atheists present. And no doubt some calm and rational ones too, but they’re not making themselves known at the moment. For example just look at the strawman (the bit between quotes) and judgmentalism (the prefix to your bible quote) in your own post. I think a good debater could and would avoid both those potholes.
Not my quote but I like it nonetheless: when asking WWJD, remember that turning over tables and chasing everyone round with a whip is an option.
What do you think whataboutism means?
I’d probably DuckDuckGo it. I based that comment on the use of the words “what” and “about”.
/me visits DDG…
Eh, maybe it’s the wrong word. This sort of reminds me of a discussion I saw on YT a few months ago between a Christian taking the eye argument, and Prof Dawkins giving his best response: lots of mights, maybes, could’ves, topped off with billions of years, which doesn’t appear to satisfy the former who then follows up with “what about…” I can’t remember what, but I do remember the gist of Dawkins’ response which was something along the lines of: you led with your best; I answered that; I’m not going round in circles at this point. So I’m with Dawkins now (and in fact as a Christian I actually agree with a lot of what he says. We do need to think things through and not take them on blind faith.)
So in other words I’ve given a sound explanation for the dashing babies on a rock question and I’m going to leave it there.
Right but God does so much cruel stuff in the old testament that it’s weird to miss and dispute that overall point.
Sure. But there’s a process.
- Patience.
- Send prophets to try to correct behaviour.
- More patience.
- More prophets.
- Patience and prophets, over and over.
- OK fine, you won’t have it any other way. Judgment.
We see prophets actually work. Jonah didn’t want to go to Nineveh, he wanted to jump straight to 6, but God had other plans. When God finally got him to go to Nineveh, the people listened, repented, and judgment was avoided. The reason Jonah didn’t want to go is that he thought there was a strong possibility of that outcome and he wanted the Ninevites to suffer judgment.
Hmm… just noticed the sidebar. This defence of the OT probably violates Rule 1. Forget the above, yay God, what a dick, punishing people for being evil!
Please get fucked
Thank you for your carefully crafted contribution to the conversation.
Oxygen is measurable. We can detect even tiny amounts of it, we know its makeup, we have well characterized its behavior, and we can make it work for us.
We have no evidence for the existence of any gods. Seems like we can exist without them just fine.
wb the Quran? The only book uncorrupted in its existence. In it God says He will preserve the book, and if it is a fabrication He challenges you to produce even a single Suraht (chapter) like it. Also neither God nor the angels will appear until the Day of Judgement, so asking for either while you persist in disbelief is kind of a bad idea.
Bring on the downvotes, it’s the worst/best you can do.
Look at you, bringing this thread back from the dead.
First of all, even if we take what you’re saying at face value, how does it being an original text in any way prove that its contents are true? If I made up a completely original story today about a stuffed animal that eats pickles and poops diamonds, would that mean that such a thing exists?
Secondly, we can’t take what you’re said at face value because Qur’anic and Muslim scholars are very divided about the origins of the Quran.
So you’re saying we just need to freeze god to see him?
It’s worth a try. We need to get some revenge and revenge is a dish best served cold.
Ask and you shall receive - Toast
This looks like someone who has used a soldering iron to draw Jesus on a piece of toast and then countersunk it into a second larger piece of toast.
Which I doubt was easy.
The “image” is on a piece of cheese.
Cheesus Crust
Drink it and you’ll see him.
Probably not. If you can pony up some testable proof of his alleged existence I’ll reconsider my stance. In the meantime I refuse to believe that any good, as described, is worse at keeping their followers in line than the gods invented by Gary Fucking Gygax.
You already have everything you need in the way of proof.
The microscopist Walter McCrone found, based on his examination of samples taken in 1978 from the surface of the shroud using adhesive tape, that the image on the shroud had been painted with a dilute solution of red ochre pigment in a gelatin medium.
the shroud’s linen material was produced between the years 1260 and 1390 (to a 95% confidence level)
Seems legit
That and a shroud that had the impression of a 3D face would look a lot more like this-
why are internet atheists so bad at making arguments
I’m pretty sure this is a response to a bad argument.
first of all what it’s responding to is not an argument, it’s a motivational quote of some sort. it’s cringe trying to counter argue that to begin with.
like do you see people write something like “you only fail when you stop trying” and go “ummm actually the dictionary definition of failing is …” and go to stupid technicalities about how one can actually fail despite insisting on trying? well this is atheist memes so don’t answer.
second of all the main counter argument used for proof of oxygen is that it can be seen in certain situations. which is entirely dumb, because obviously we know stuff can exist and not be seen, so “where’s your god photo” is not even a weak counter but an invalid one. ok i guess love doesn’t exist because i cant post a photo of it on facebook, checkmate valentine.
If you don’t think “you can’t see air just like you can’t see god” isn’t an argument religious people make, you haven’t talked to many of them. I’ve heard that one a lot of times.
well this dumb comment should’ve been under one of those arguments then.
I’m atheist and I agree with you.
I think neither the inspirational post nor the answer were too smart. God and oxygen may be as invisible as each other most of the time but I think most people can survive 20 minutes without god.
Then again I don’t know what god does in the different religions that is so important to life… If he’s important for the creation of life then I guess it makes sense even though he just had to be there 2000 years ago for his week of creation, we don’t need him now to keep living. But maybe he is out of time and either always exists, or never does. In that case I guess he would need to exist to be able to have done what he allegedly did back then to give us life.
I know I’m overthinking a quote that’s just supposed to … Well I’m actually not sure what it’s supposed to do except convert people to believe in god now that I think about it. But then again I’m high
Here’s my attempt at a theoretical response, please don’t kill me
“Oxygen’s state is modified by temperature. God’s is modified by time. If you can’t see him, you’re in the wrong time.”
The only right time to see God: 23rd of February 893 CE, noon-ish
