• ocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I got to say this is pretty cringe. A good mix of millennial and militant atheist humor. Spending that much time making that needlepoint is serious commitment haha

    Edit: I apologize that my comment comes across as rude to OP. I was debating commenting it and thought my comment was more on the type of humor but I don’t want to make anyone feel bad.

    Not a fan of militant(!) atheists but I also shouldn’t be rude.

        • RadicalEagle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Sure there is. You can value evidence without requiring it for everything you believe. There’s no place for anything if you require evidence for everything. For example there’s no way to prove you are or aren’t just a brain in a jar. You can say “I think therefore I am”, but that doesn’t prove you are what you think you are.

          Science accounts for this by saying we should adopt the simplest and most probable explanations, but what is “probable” starts to become hard to define in an infinitely expanding universe or multiverse.

          The premise of any scenario we imagine or hypothesize can always be questioned. “God” is philosophically the circular logic that forms the basis for everything built on top of it. “God” is the “I am” that requires no justification or explanation (even if there might be one). “God” is the name people give to the “it is what it is” feeling that we fall back on when we start driving ourselves crazy thinking about free will or other seemingly paradoxical aspects of our observed reality.

          • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            42 minutes ago

            but what is “probable” starts to become hard to define in an infinitely expanding universe or multiverse.

            wut

          • PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Why are religious apologists always throwing gobbledygook around and acting like it’s logic?

            Why is everything a religious apologist shows as explaining how the religion “really works” actually has nothing to do with what the religions preach?

            (Spoiler: it’s an impossible position to defend)

            Christians don’t teach people that they are god.

            What religion works the way you described?

            None of them. Yikes.

            “God” is what idiots claim is behind everything good but not bad.

            It’s inane. Quit pretending otherwise it’s disingenuous and illogical on top of it.

            Religious people are superstitious fools. They cannot be trusted. They will be orthodox when it suits them and drop all the rules when it suits them.

            Because it’s made up bullshit yo be used as a weapon against other people and deep down they know it’s phony. Which is why they drop all belief when they want to.

      • ocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Don’t mean to make it more than anything. Just thought someone going to the trouble making this is cringey. Not an attack on you!

        Edit: You’re right. I’m sorry for making you feel bad.