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.
Not narcissistic
I mean it’s hard to be more narcissistic than this
“Alpha Male”, “empath” and “no insecurities” in the same fucking sentence is some TRUMP level lying 😄
Nature lover
No EV
Guess he wants a cyclist girl?
Ooooo lucky pick.
Funny, because he looks like a basic bitch
Alpha male? Is it a furry thing?
I think it’s a toxic masculinity thing.
I’ve at least seen a crystal. Some of them even actually do things.
I try to hang out with them but my eyes keep rolling out of my sockets
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.
That’s my problem with the agnostic moderate who says “the problem is just organized religion”. They’re acting like the truth doesn’t matter, and fail to acknowledge the risk of a society that practices deluding ourselves like a sport.
It took me a while to deconstruct from Christianity because Catholic schools aren’t terrible at encouraging critical thinking (at least in my area). I’m still trying to wrap my brain around the existence of everything, and usually handwave from a non-christian perspective, but still not scientific.
Anyway, I’ve had tough conversations with my parents about it. They get upset that I don’t believe a virgin cis-girl (not woman, mind you - canonically Mary was 12) can be impregnated without sperm. Or that Jesus performed miracles or that he or Lazarus rose from the dead. But I don’t argue with them about whether a god exists anymore cuz idfk and likely never will
You know, we could even grant them that a virgin birth is not impossible, without conceding that it’s a miracle. Fish, amphibians, maybe reptiles, and a host of other life forms are known to reproduce asexually, even if many normally do engage in sexual reproduction. I don’t believe it’s been observed in birds, and I’m sure never in mammals. But that doesn’t mean it’s impossible!
Or miraculous.
Removed by mod
More likely intersex, though there’s no documented cases of completed pregnancies from one person impregnating themselves (I’m about to do some googling, but last time I did all I came up with were tabloids). I’d think it more likely the whole virgin part was a lie. Plenty of those kinds of cases with individuals and families trying to cover up a young child’s innocence, unfortunately
Jesus washes women’s feet with his hair.
TIL Jesus was into some weird shit.
TIL Jesus and I may have some things in common.
TIL2 WAM femdom is in the bible.
( Don’t look that up at work, or in public, or around anyone )
As far as I’m concerned, it’s a psychological disorder, regardless of the object of said faith.
Yeah, hard belief is manic.
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.
This part sounds kinda not very nice:
16 “You are not to leave even one person alive in the cities of these nations that the Lord your God is about to give you as an inheritance. 17 You must completely destroy the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, just as the Lord your God commanded you,".
Joshua 6 is basically:
God: here’s how to overthrow your enemy.
Josh: cool! oh, I’m just gonna kill everyone and everything in the town - man, woman, child, cow, grass - and burn it all down for fun because I hate these fuckers.
God: just don’t bring that foreign bitch.
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!
LMAO
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.
Bro, you can literally look at pictures of Vissarion. God lives in Siberia. 🙄
You almost had me, but his Wikipedia lists his profession as “spiritual teacher,” not “God.”
That was written by a heretic.
He’s Christ bruh, just look at him.
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.
I used to think that saying meant that revenge was ice cream when I was a kid. Mmm… Ice cream… 🤤
I guess you hadn’t seen Star Trek II…
And where’s God? Up in the sky. In space.
Mmm, tasty god
Yes, it’s the cold truth
God is just on the other side of absolute zero kelvin, right over there.
We need to liquefy God
And make him into the most artisinal smoothie in all of Portland!
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
, on toast.
That’s Costa
Holy mother Mary and Joseph! Do my eyes deceive me or is that the son of God etched into my sandwich!? Could it have been divine intervention that compelled me to put the cheese on the outside?! Literally no other explanation exists for why I might’ve done that!
That reminds me of a picture of “Jesus” that kept bleeding through the paint in one of my old landlord’s apartments. He tasked me with stripping the paint off the wall to find out what was actually below the white paint he had slapped up. Several layers of white paint below the surface, I found an absolutely gorgeous oil paint mural of Bob Marley.
God is like oxygen—highly volatile.
How does oxygen change on it’s own?
Well, we call it chemistry, but the forces at play existed long before we even knew to name them.
I understand. But if it’s isolated it’s considered non reactive. (I manage a hazmat DOT fleet)
Ok? That’s neat, I just fail to see the relevance I guess. A god would be harmless too, if it was isolated from the rest of the universe.
I’m asking how it’s going to react with stuff. In like a basic chemistry kind of way.
Seems like something a hazmat DOT fleet manager would already know though, so I guess I just don’t know why you’re asking that. And truthfully, I don’t particularly care, as, again, I fail to see the relevance. I mean like, if it’s real chemical kinetic information that you’re after, there are innumerable better sources than the comments section of a meme page on a fringe social media platform. If you’re trying to make a point about my original tongue-in-cheek comparison, feel free to make it.
Ok. You can just accept you’re wrong rather than double downing and sounding less educated than you originally did.
Freeze it.
Can’t say I’ve ever seen liquid oxygen.
Mixed with Hydrogen we have.
It’s amazing. Especially when you’re trying to chill and prime a pump, and there’s gallons of it flowing across it’s own vapor in puddles.
Just try not and think about what happens if it flows across that oil spill and you step in it.
Why? What happens? Legit too lazy to try and strong arm Google into trying to tell me…
Oxygen loves hydrogen. Hydrocarbons have lots of hydrogen. Oil is hydrocarbon.
Add enough energy to start the chemical reaction, and BOOM. Along with all the things that go with exothermic and expansion reactions (ie, your foot gets blown off, and anything that can burn in the area likely will be)
Also, get things hot enough with oxygen around, and things you think can’t burn, will. Including steel.
Look up oxygen compressor fires. It’s scarily interesting.
That’s…fun…and a bit spooky. Oxygen compressor fires…yeah, goddamn wow.
I realize I’m posting a complaint in my own thread so it’s my own fault, but I keep getting “Love is Like Oxygen” by Sweet stuck in my head since I’ve posted this.
Liquid oxygen is way too pretty for how dangerous it is
Ok, I’ll bite. Why/how is liquid oxygen dangerous? Doesn’t it just basically instantly boil into gas if it gets anywhere outside of its cryo chamber?
Not really, it stays liquid until it boils, so it can stay outside the cryo chamber for a few seconds. And since it’s pure oxygen, on top of the dangers with liquid gases being super cold, it’s also a potent oxidizer, so it can set fire to some fuels without a hear source
So… Mix with Florine for best results?
You don’t even need oxygen to be in a liquid or solid state to see it: oxygen is the reason the sky is blue. When you look through a large enough volume of gaseous oxygen, as you do when you step outside in the day time, you can see it just fine.
You could say it’s… triune!
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.
Oooh! We do? That’s awesome! We must have overlooked something. Thank goodness you’re here to clarify things.
So what’s this proof that we somehow missed, please?
You can do better than that. Plenty of arguments convinces people who already believe to stay in their faith, you could have used one of those.
No, that’s only proof om my existence, not your god’s.
I have a theological question, maybe for you or just in general. My understanding is that the definition of faith is a belief in the absence of evidence. If you were able to prove God’s existence, would you no longer have faith, and by seeking proof are you inherently questioning your own faith?
It’s oxygen not an entheogen
How cold do we gotta get God in order to see him?
Colder than absolute zero.
Oxygen is absolutely measurable, and your own body will quickly tell you something is very, very wrong if your 02 intake is too low, or even weird (which is why SCUBA mixes are a topic of their own.)
There is the matter that oxygen does affect light, which allows us to tell if an exoplanet has oxygen in the atmosphere, which means it’s not invisible, just very transparent. But when we look at other worlds we detect oxygen by analyzing the light that comes from them, so we see oxygen.
In the meantime, the human species as we know it (homo-sapiens) has been around for 250,000 years. The monotheistic version has been around for about 4,000 years (and even Adonai had others in His pantheon. The temple priests of Adonai murdered Asherah, His consort, by massacring all the Asheran desciples and burning Her temples down). For most of that time, ancestors, elemental spirits and animal spirits were central to our religious faith, not high-concept deities. For the vast majority of human existence, God did not exist as He is commonly regarded in popular religions.
AFAIK, we do not, in fact, have any biological system that detects oxygen in the air. What we use instead is detection of the things that are typically present when oxygen is not. Like CO2 concentration. This is what makes a room “feel stuffy”, CO2.
I don’t think this invalidates your point at all, of course you have a valid argument despite the biological misunderstanding here.
The only reason I know this is when looking into the whole, capital punishment by nitrogen hypoxia thing, I kinda stumbled into a lot of information. We don’t generally detect nitrogen nor oxygen in any way, shape, or form, since it’s quite plentiful in the atmosphere of the earth (78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen), there’s not much reason to. We’ve never needed a biological trigger to say “there’s oxygen here” because there’s never been situations where that hasn’t really been true until very very recently (eg. Closed systems like submarines, aeroplanes, vessels that go into high orbit/space, etc).
Looking at the evolution of it, any such space will accrue toxic/deadly levels of atmospheric gases, long before the oxygen is consumed. So we have biological processes to detect atmospheric toxin levels, with one example being CO2. According to some data I’ve read, CO2 freely is absorbed and expelled by the body through the blood via the alveoli (lungs), which makes the amount of CO2 in your blood a function of atmospheric CO2 levels, which may slightly waiver due to your physical workload. As you produce CO2 within your body from metabolic activity, either from regular metabolic tasks or through physical exertion, the rise in blood CO2 levels is expelled by the blood through equilibrium with the surrounding atmosphere. Simply, if you have higher CO2 concentration in your blood than there is in the atmosphere, it will diffuse towards the atmosphere (I’ll reiterate that the process works in reverse too).
High CO2 concentration in your blood affects your blood pH and can create an acidic environment, which the body can easily detect.
As far as I’m aware, there’s no similar biological process to detect oxygen levels, either directly or indirectly.
This is the danger of nitrogen hypoxia. If you’re in a low CO2 environment which is devoid of oxygen (or has very little atmospheric oxygen, not enough to sustain human life), with most of the o2 concentration being replaced by nitrogen instead, your body can still expel CO2, but cannot obtain the o2 required to survive. Since there’s no mechanism to detect this, your blood o2 levels drop to levels which are incompatible with living while you remain unaware that a problem exists.
Thus, you can easily perish when your o2 saturation drops to nil, with no indication that you’re at risk of dying.
Sorry for the dissertation, this is just something I find incredibly fascinating about biology. I hope I didn’t bore anyone too much.
Disclaimer: I’m not a biologist or scientist, I’m just some guy with ADHD, and I’ve hyperfocused on this subject a couple of times. If anything I’ve said is incorrect, I invite corrections. If possible, please link additional resources for further reading and my ADHD brain will thank you very kindly for the effort.
