use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. reddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
reddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
see the search faq for details.
advanced search: by author, community...
1,125 users here now
Welcome to r/atheism, the web's largest atheist forum. All topics related to atheism, agnosticism and secular living are welcome here. Please read our FAQ.
Please link directly to any images or use imgur to avoid being flagged as blogspam
Recommended reading and viewing
Thank you notes
Related Subreddits <--the big list
Chat: #reddit-atheism on irc.freenode.net
Watch: #/r/atheism on reddit.tv
Read The FAQ
Submit Rage Comic
Submit Facebook Chat
Submit Meme
Submit Something Else
reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›
Because I know Atheists love Jesus jokes! (i.imgur.com)
submitted 1 year ago by RaymondAblack
[–]yangx 36 points37 points38 points 1 year ago
Jesus is scoring tonight!
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 92 points93 points94 points 1 year ago
http://i.imgur.com/L8J1Z.png
[–]squeakyneb 23 points24 points25 points 1 year ago
WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THESE?
[–]grahvity 28 points29 points30 points 1 year ago
r/coffeewithjesus
Subscribed just now.
[–]squeakyneb 11 points12 points13 points 1 year ago
Thank you, my good sir!
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 38 points39 points40 points 1 year ago
http://i.imgur.com/YVbOx.png
[–]squeakyneb 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago
Noice :3
[–]burnsie 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
Subscribed Too! Laughed my ass off!
[–]giantPenus 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
subscribed TOO
[–][deleted] 1 year ago
[deleted]
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 8 points9 points10 points 1 year ago
I wonder what Jesus thinks about rape fantasy?
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
God and Joseph have dual custody. They switch off.
[–]JasonMacker 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Not for me! I am the 1% (of Redditors)!
[–]inferno719 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Holy shit, this stuff is GOLD!
[–]Jugemu 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
This was even funnier than the OP in my opinion.
[–]NoAtheismOnFrontPage -10 points-9 points-8 points 1 year ago
get this shit off the front page
[–]Malfeasant 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
want some cheese with that whine?
[–]TheRealSquiggy 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Might I recommend the blue vein...
[–]completedick 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
Not sure if worst novelty account ever, or pissed off Christian.
[–]nemofourteen 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
Or Hindu or Muslim or Jew or Zoroastrian or Sikh or etc.
[–]wachuppba -10 points-9 points-8 points 1 year ago
scumbag atheist
[–]Valek27 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
How is this relevant? did you mispost it or something?
[–]Capercaillie 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Ha ha! I downvoted your response, though.
[–]what_eye_see 16 points17 points18 points 1 year ago
This game doesn't make sense, you can't really have fallacies in a work of fiction. I mean that's like going through Harry Potter and drinking every time something magical happens.
Actually never mind that would be a fucking AWESOME drinking game.
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 7 points8 points9 points 1 year ago
I see you see the point. Everyone gets drunk!
[–]Antrikshy 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
Drink all the things!
[–]Uneducated_Christian 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
The fallicies are there because God talke d through multiple people! There interpritations are innacurate becuase they are full of sin....
[–]aG_Infamous 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Your name is accurate
[–]PinballWizrd 51 points52 points53 points 1 year ago
Genesis 1:1: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
SHOT!
[–]asdfman123 48 points49 points50 points 1 year ago*
That's not a fallacy, friend. That's a claim. Given that there's no argument yet, it can't be fallacious. Besides, if the Bible's logic is internally consistent (which it isn't, given the contradictions in it) then the whole thing can't be fallacious, even you could prove the claims are incorrect. If I said "my head is orange," it's not a fallacy.
A fallacy is an invalid argument that appears valid, or a valid argument with disguised assumptions. First the premises and the conclusion must be statements, capable of being true and false. Secondly it must be asserted that the conclusion follows from the premises
- wikipedia, argument
[–]fdtc_skolar 8 points9 points10 points 1 year ago
The first inconsistency I am aware of is with Genesis chapter 2 differing from chapter 1 on the order of creation. Chapter 1 has animals being created on the fourth day and plants on the 5th. Chapter 2 has the order reversed.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
Not a fallacy either.
[–]Devinm84 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
"Inconsistancy."
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Oh, silly me. Yes.
[–]fedja 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago
If I said "my head is orange," it's not a fallacy.
Boehner, is that you?
[–]PinballWizrd 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Hmm..so that would be a factual error by definition? Could you give me an example of a fallacy? I am having a hard time wrapping my head around this at the moment..
[–]asdfman123 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
No, a fallacy is an incorrect argument given your premises. For instance, I could say:
Premise 1: You're from Boston. Premise 2: Most people from Boston are criminals. Conclusion: You're a criminal.
The reasoning there is obviously wrong, because for that conclusion to be true everyone from Boston must be a criminal.
Here's a list of common fallacies.
Makes much more sense to me now, thanks!
[–]PinballWizrd -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago
Well, the idea that god created heaven and Earth, from the Christian standpoint, is preceded by the notion that the Earth is only 6,000 years old and that the universe was created in 6 days, both of which we know are false. Thus, a fallacy.
[–]asdfman123 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/m34z7/because_i_know_atheists_love_jesus_jokes/c2xr8ih
[–]arcadeguy -16 points-15 points-14 points 1 year ago
I usually hate this subreddit and enjoy when someone posts a comment disrupting the circle jerk, but your comment is just inane. The argument is that God created Earth. The presumption is that God exists in the first place.
I mean, come on. There are a billion comments in this sub reddit with arguments which are easy to pick apart. Why would you go and pick this one?
[–]BalancedOpinion -10 points-9 points-8 points 1 year ago
From a philosophical position, the point that God created the heavens and the Earth is not provable. The reason it is not provable is because God in the Bible is defined as the infinity of all things (alpha & omega). Therefore in order to prove God created the heavens and Earth, we would have to have evidence and in order to obtain evidence we would require an external point of reference to God, which by definition is also impossible.
It is my assertion that because God cannot be proved, then and therefore God cannot be disproved adequately either. It would be unfair.
Therefore all the atheists who claim God does not exist need to realize they cannot make that claim and still be fair and ethical. It is not an ethical claim because you have to mask assumptions in the claim to prevent others from finding out your true intentions.
If your intention is to be right all the time, you will be wrong more frequently.
[–]BlueParrot 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago
Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.
[–]BalancedOpinion -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago
Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them.
You do not understand my position. I am not asserting that a teapot is orbiting the sun. That is preposterous unless someone threw one out of one of the moon capsules but even then it is very unlikely.
The assertion of God existing when the definition only includes that God is alpha and omega (infinity); then we have a difficult problem here. I can prove philosophically that it is not provable and that it is not disprovable either by nature of the definition.
I am not asserting that God created everything; more like that by definition everything exists within the infinite definition of God. This explains more about our lives than it would if you were a scripture person who confuses morality with religion. You don't need religion to have morality and therefore morality can be easily corrupted by groups claiming to be religious. I have never met a truly religious group before.
I'm sidetracking a bit; your comments above are loaded with fallacy when you examine my claim. My claim is:
[–]BlueParrot 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
God is infinity; all things from the past, all things from the present, all things from the future: therefore God excludes the void (non-existence).
So god is Hitler?
“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’ ” Alice said. Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’ ” “But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected. “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master that’s all.”
You can't just define the word "god" to have a different meaning, and then expect to have a meaningful conversation with others. It would be like having "unemployment" mean "the opposite of slavery" and then argue that we should strive for high levels of unemployment in society.
You might think all this but you failed to understand. That's because you don't wish to understand. You started off this morning by being contrarian and you'll continue through your day being contrarian.
The failure is yours to enjoy.
If God is all things that were and all things that are and all things that will be then, yes he was Hitler for an infinitesimal moment of his life, compared to all things that exist, did exist and will exist.
That's like saying, if you got a 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% on a test you failed it.
For the most part people play a very insignificant role in the universe today. That may change but it also may not. Only God knows. My guess is that we'll go the way of the dinosaur because we are inherently foolish. Like you being foolish with your ascription to things like propagating Godwin's law.
Your Alice in Wonderland paragraph is nice, but you did not understand what I was saying and I must say that your excerpt does not apply here. Read the Bible, read the Quran, read about Buddhism... etc. None of these religions disagree that God is everything that was, everything that is and everything that will be, almighty. Those that deny this truth are either fools or scoundrels. Let God decide which!
It would be like having "unemployment" mean "the opposite of slavery"
To some extent if you are unemployed you are not committed to being someone's slave. I don't see how this is a bad example. Historical slavery is an oppression of a whole race by another race, which is different than how you're applying slavery here, however. But today we have the oppression of the rich against the poor... paying a pittance for any service or good compared to the value of the receipt of such good or service which is indeed evil and cruel.
In the end, if we do strive towards something where a society does not have any employment at all, that would be ASTOUNDING. Imagine your day as you learn about whatever you want, living on your own merit instead of at the beck and call of some depraved person that wishes your suffering? What of robotic armies of labor that could do everything for us at the will of the machine? Why not have such luxury and relax all our days in the GLORY OF UNEMPLOYMENT!?!?!?!?!?
But until such a place exists in such a way, unemployment is indeed very undesirable. We need money to pay for things or we starve.
Just because some conditions are not being met today does not mean that they cannot be met someday in the future. Jesus hoped one day humanity would make Heaven on Earth. I think the abolition of finance like on Star Trek is part of that future, but it's hard to say because we are about 20k years away from such a place if we survive.
I don't follow your logic about why it's great to have narrow vision, so perhaps you could go into more detail?
[–]1nf4m0uz -3 points-2 points-1 points 1 year ago
It's just plain silly to compare a flying teapot to a diety.
Indeed. A teapot in a solar orbit is perfectly consistent with modern science's understanding of the universe, and it is quite possible ( admittedly unlikely ) that NASA put one there without telling us.
Now the biblical stories on the other hand...
The reason it is not provable is because God in the Bible is defined as the infinity of all things (alpha & omega).
The problem with this is that the bible also claims its god interacts with the natural world. The moment you talk about one or more deities as existing within the natural world is the moment you can comment on their (natural) existence.
If you remove all natural claims on the existence of your gods, then it is as irrational to argue on their existence as the existence of Dawkin's teapot -- If something is asserted without evidence, then it can be rejected without evidence.
The problem with this is that the bible also claims its god interacts with the natural world.
The natural world intersects God and therefore this is somewhat like God interacting with himself, to put is plainly. Why debate this? If you would like to present scriptures we can challenge, then let's look at them.
Here I will start:
(Exodus 34:5-7 NIV) Then the LORD came down in the cloud and stood there with him and proclaimed his name, the LORD. And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation."
To me this means that Moses said that he saw someone standing over yonder, who proclaimed he was the LORD. (God?)
Then the specter speaks of punishment for those that do not obey. I see no evidence in this scripture that this was a real encounter by Moses to God himself, more like an encounter of Moses from some kind of hallucination or perhaps mental illness. If you ascribe to my assertion that God is infinite, than anyone claiming to be God is by default LYING. That includes Jesus.
Dawkin's teapot
I already threw this out as being irrational. My claim has nothing to do with some miniscule part of God. My assertion is that time does not exist and it is an illusion. It's a needed one, but between time and space and matter is where the universe is alive and well, and learning from these follies.
The natural world intersects God and therefore this is somewhat like God interacting with himself, to put is plainly.
I think at this point you've clarified your inherent bias, but I have no interest in continuing this further as you seem to have a very poor understanding of empirical thinking in general.
I find it funny you would bring Empiricism up when we are having a theological discussion. You also prove you have no understanding of what it is either, considering it is essentially the assertion that we learn things through experience.
Therefore my statements that all things in our experience are connected to one bigger thing that is connected to a bigger thing and so on, ad infinitum, is critically known as empirical thought. My statement that you cannot prove or disprove God's existence as "infinity" because of an accessibility problem is also related to strictly empirical thought also.
So you're way off base here in saying what you did and it's clear you've merely given up trying.
Empricism is what I described in my original comment, it was not an attempt at a theological discussion. Hope that clears things up.
[–]aidrocsid 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
You don't seem to know what the words fallacy and ethical mean. Get yourself a dictionary before you start writing several paragraphs of nonsense.
Not sure what ethics has to do with it however.
I'll explain. If something is unknowable, and someone claims it to be fact ("God does not exist."), then the person is lying or the person adheres to a belief, which is the same thing they accuse religious people of doing, and also faulting them for it.
The only ethical position regarding the existence of God is the one held by those who are agnostic.
In the Bible, it says to have faith. I therefore have the faith that if there is a God, that God will forgive me for being agnostic. I also have faith that if there is no God, then my actions on Earth will be serving my own purpose in a way that benefits myself and also those that I love, and therefore I must live an ethical and morally good life.
[–]BalancedOpinion 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
I believe in all these things in an imaginary and creative aspect such as through stories and movies. Life is not a movie however, so the fact as to whether these things exist can only be confirmed upon real inter-species contact. Another thing that might throw you off a bit is that even if the Loch Ness existed, which is entirely plausible since dinosaurs once roamed the world in abundance, there is no real way to know without tagging Nessy with a tracking beacon and following her around. Of course it's entirely possible that someone made it up.
I think the same thing is true in all these debates is that we lack the necessary vantage point to know for certain anything at all beyond our knee-jerk reactions to daily life. I'm still freaking out knowing that I am so small living on a tiny little particle in space that is orbiting a slightly larger particle with a different property and that together these two particles and the other particles orbiting the same star are acting just like atoms apparently do. Unfathomable. Insane, and yet totally plausible.
In such a place, who knows whether God could exist? Of course some super-being could claim to be "God" and rule us as if he was king of everything. That doesn't mean he's the alpha and the omega (as infinite as such is described)... only that he could appear to have such technology to do strange and marvelous things. That still does not change the fact that while he is standing on the beach staring at us and walking past us -- he is not in the heavens because that paradox is too hard to fathom... unless it were true somehow in which case we would all lose our minds collectively... (as did the early wise-men I am certain).
[–]asdfman123 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago*
Propositions – Propositions are statements which constitute the basic element in reasoning. Their distinctive character is that they assert that something is the case or that something is not the case. Their assertion may be true or false. Propositions are therefore statements that have a truth-value, that is, they have the property of being true or false.
http://blogphilosophy.blogspot.com/2007/06/proposition-and-argument.html
You can say that the proposition that God created the world is false, but not the argument. There is no argument yet.
The argument is that God created Earth. The presumption is that God exists in the first place.
"Aristotelian propositions take forms like 'All men are mortal' and 'Socrates is a man'" (source). By your reasoning, that would be fallacious because no one's proven that Socrates is indeed a man. For all we know, he could be a woman and that fact has been lost over time.
Because I saw this one and it's not quite accurate. You can say I'm being a Melvin, and you could also say I should look at pinball's implied meaning rather than his statement, but I'm not incorrect.
It just bugs me when people say "I disagree with this viewpoint so it's wrong in every way possible; there is nothing valid or useful or correct or interesting about it. That smacks of a total lack of objectivity, and how can you consider your viewpoint intelligent if you totally lack objectivity? Once again, pinball was just making an off the cuff remark and wasn't being formal, so I'm not getting on his case persay, but I just wanted to point it out.
[–]paolog 7 points8 points9 points 1 year ago
In the beginning
If, as some astrophysicists postulate, the universe has always existed, you'll need to take your first swig right here.
[–]joshbike 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
The universe has always existed? WTF
[–]xkcdfanboy 8 points9 points10 points 1 year ago*
The universe is above existence. Because we consider the universe to contain everything, nothing could have existed without the universe. Therefore, if the universe didn't always exist, then there was true nothingness but even nothing is something, isn't it?
Nothing=Something - these are the exact kind of equations which require axioms, they can't be proven. Based on whether you choose Nothing=Something to be true or false, different types of science will result.
Which brings us back to the existence of the universe - it's indeterminable whether it always "existed."
[–]something_not_taken 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago
Or alternatively - there was no time before the Universe had come into existence, and since "always" refers to time, the Universe has been in existence as long as there has been time.
[–]ConstipatedNinja 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
I've always hated how people say that time was created in the big bang. Time existed before as the same construct it had always been. The physics surrounding it was a lot more complex due to the energies referred to in the big bang, but that's as far as that goes.
[–]something_not_taken 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
That is why I did not use the term "big bang," but rather "the Universe" ;) And since our perception of time only comes from entropy, it's hard to define "time" anywhere where entropy does not happen.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago*
You're possibly talking about the "multiverse" there, or at the very least the "universe" into which our bubble of local space (local space being the space encompassed by the furthest distance that light has been able to travel since about, oh, 13.7 billion years back) has expanded.
[–]joshbike -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago
Then the universe is immortal? That's a religious view. Some people view God to be always existing, you view the universe to be always existing.
[–]aidrocsid 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
You don't know what a fallacy is either.
[–]paolog 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago
fallacy an idea or belief that is false but that many people think is true; a mistake in an argument or idea that makes it false
Care to explain what you mean? If the universe has always existed, then it is fallacious to think that it had a beginning.
[–]aidrocsid 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
A fallacy isn't just anything that's not true, it's an example of faulty logic. For example, cum hoc ergo propter hoc, or "comes with therefore is caused by", being an argument based on the idea that correlation implies causation. This is considered to be a logical fallacy because though it may seem true, it is not necessarily. In the same way, appeal to emotion and appeal to authority are logical fallacies. They are methods of trying to work things out that aren't based on fact.
[–]paolog 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
That's a logical fallacy, the second dictionary definition I gave. Another meaning of "fallacy" is as in the first definition.
[–]MinisterOfTheDog 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
That made me remember "In the beginning" and "Let there be light", Songs of Distant Earth by Mike Oldfield. Now I have to listen to it.
[–]fasda 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
OH gods there is a novelty account that's trying to kill us.
[–]absentbird -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago
How is that PC? Try: This is posing what is widely considered an allegorical text as factual.
[–]InappropriateQueston -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago
Was this shot a cum shot?
[–]Antrikshy 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
No. It's a drinking game. Not a fapping one.
[–]DARTH9999 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago
I would love to play!
[–]naker_virus 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago
There might be things that are wrong in the bible, but that isn't a fallacy is it? :S
Contradictions would have been a better choice.
[–]Eyshld21sn 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
This is possibly the funniest thing I've read all week.
[–]ErechBelmont 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
This made me laugh so hard. Thank you
[–]PossiblyTheDoctor 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
He'll just turn it into wine.
[–]ballzy 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Jesus walks into a bar and orders a glass of water.
[–]Stupidconspiracies 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
I as a "holy crap there are Christians on Reddit!" would love a similar game when you drink when the bible contradicts itself. Irish catholics would have to give everyone the usual handicap.
[–]guntfuddler 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
where do I get some of that steaming black Jesus beer?
If you haven't been drinking all these excellent new black lagers, you're really missing out--Shiner, Sam Adams, even Guinness. Life is good.
[–]guntfuddler 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
TIL Guinness is new, and is served piping hot.
This one is new. Regular Guinness is a stout, not a lager. It might be good hot, but it's not too bad cold. Both the Shiner and the Sam Adams are better, though.
[–]Pllatinum 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
No capitalization in atheist.
[–]Noodlearmor 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
As a Christian I find this joke to be quite offen........... wait i meant hilarious. Oh Jesus what hilarious shenanigans are you going to get into this week?
[–]OverwhelmedAnt 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
MOAR
/r/coffeewithjesus
[–]frycicle 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
I can't stop laughing. fffffffffuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
It's funny because athiests don't have logical fallacies.
I downvoted because of your non sequitur, then changed to upvote because of your awesome nic. But you're walking on thin ice, here.
In similar vein : http://www.hyperdeathbabies.com/index.php?dir=anomaly&comic=90
[–]jedifrog 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
go jebus!
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Jebus H. Crackers!
[–]ConstipatedNinja 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
One of my friends in high school was adamant that the H is Jesus H Christ stood for Hoctavio.
This is very unrelated but I have to say, thank you for this post. I sort of hit a wall today while writing a novel for the NaNoWriMo thingy. Seeing Jesus helped me. I guess I should be thanking Jesus, too, except I'm an atheist.
[–]Saerain 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Excellent double entendre.
fellacious shot
You'd die of alcohol poisoning before you got through Genesis.
[–]Turok1134 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Women, reading? Now that's hilarious!
[–]feebl 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Why can't Jesus walk on water anymore?
He has holes in his feet.
[–]Box-Monkey 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Why does Beer with Jesus have a coffee cup - presumably filled with hot coffee - underneath Jesus in the first panel?
TIL: Most people here don't know what a fallacy is, apparently.
[–]cumholio 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Jesus looks a bit like Chuck Norris in this one. I'm not sure this is a coincidence.
[–]RaveRaptor 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Haha... 777 karma when I read this.
[–]chilltem 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
It's alright, Jesus can just turn the alcohol into water... sneaky bastard
[–]Gustomucho 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
What, you are telling me some people didn't follow the god's instruction when they wrote the bible?
[–]technosasquatch 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
This belongs on a shirt, Shut Up And Take My Money!
[–]Myflyisbreezy 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Is that Jesus or Keanu Reeves?
[–]anusbomber 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
jesus jokes, jesús hoax
[–]kdar -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago
Did he turn the coffee to alcohol?
Clearly it was a fine porter served in its traditional "porter mug" or as we call them guia gilaeth gilaaado.
[–]Sergeantenjay 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Why do women love jesus? http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/80583679/
[–]nekrozion 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Where is the joke?
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago
Jesus was against a lot of what was said in the old testament and was killed in part because of that. Also, he loved drinking. This isn't an atheist joke but a joke about the fallacies of the bible. I love reddit but everytime I hear you share those types of jokes I can only think, poor people of the USA who always confuse the philosophical concept of God with the stories of one book...
[–]gaga_ooh_lala 11 points12 points13 points 1 year ago
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 1 year ago
no profit there, just had to say, and it's not about bashing the USA but about a debate which is long over in most nations that have thinkers, but, for some reason (probably because of Dawkins (which isn't american but fuels a debate between scientists and dogmatic christians), which in my mind isn't a scientist, even if I'm an anthropologist), in this nation this debate keeps on existing and I see stupids arguments from both sides, and a kind of melodramatic bashing of the concept of God but always from an angle that is related to such a limited definition of God that it just annoys me...
I have no idea what you're talking about, probably because english isn't my first language...
[–]thatpaulbloke 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
What Jesus was for or against depended on who was writing at the time; he had no opinions of his own because there is no "Gospel of Jesus".
Poor chromaphone who thinks atheists give a shit about the difference between the philosphical concept of God and the stories of one book.
fantastic, precisely my point, you guys are just against a certain dogmatic thing and are dogmatic about it, you don't think further then this, so, of course, I don't give a fuck about your opinions!
There's no need to think further about it. It's like arguing over when Harry Potter's dad's birthday is.
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago
I guess my opinion is that instead of being fervent atheist, a more scientific position is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism and that this section of reddit sounds like the dogmatic religion of atheist, CONVINCED that there is no God, although this clearly is something so hard to KNOW, that it is in my ears as annoying to you as a fervent theist probably is... you guys sound dogmatic, and this isn't about this specific post... can we block a reddit subsection from the main page for us not to see it?
as as scientist I'm an agnostic, as for my own personal experience through meditation, I tend to think there is 'something', so I don't reject the hypothesis... I guess you could say I'm an agnostic since I'm not sure how to define any of this, what I say is simply that I think atheist are as dogmatic as religious people, so to me, you're the same type of dumb shit... of course, you think I'm religious because I despise atheist, but that's because you see everything in black and white through a very limited mind...
[–]Perturbed_Spartan -6 points-5 points-4 points 1 year ago
the bible is a book of stories not a book of reason. saying there are lots of fallacies in the bible is like saying there are lots of fallacies in harry potter.
/devils advocate
[–]SgtFish 13 points14 points15 points 1 year ago
Ignoring how fallacies can happen within fiction, the bible is believed to be reason by plenty of dumbasses.
[–]paolog 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
Replace "fallacies" with "inconsistencies" and I think you'll find it's no contest...
[–]grahvity 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
Telling r/atheism that we shouldn't expect logic in the bible is like telling evangelic Christians that they should; you're preaching to the choir.
[–]admiraljustin 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
I've always liked the phrase 'preaching to the choir'
It conjures this mental image of this lonely priest in an empty church except for him and a small choir, and he's still preaching.
So sad.
[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 1 year ago
It's ironic that r/atheism doesn't know what the word fallacy means.
"In logic and rhetoric, a fallacy is usually incorrect argumentation in reasoning resulting in a misconception or presumption."
Unless the bible starts saying all people speak english because everyone I've met speaks english, it hasn't committed any fallacies.
Fallacious reasoning doesn't just mean "reasoning I think is wrong"
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 4 points5 points6 points 1 year ago
We were drunk when we made the game and Jesus knew what we meant
[–]Capercaillie 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
It's ironic that you pick one definition of fallacy out of several possible definitions, then bash the OP because he doesn't use your selected definition. It's ironic because your argument is fallacious (definition 2, above).
[–]HNIJTM -8 points-7 points-6 points 1 year ago
Atheism? More like Anti-Christian.
[–]duffdurfman -4 points-3 points-2 points 1 year ago
Christianity? More like butt brains.
I'm all for witty or funny comics and pictures, but can we make sure that they're actually witty or funny? This is just incredibly stupid.
[–]glandyover -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago
But I thought jokes were supposed to be funny.
[–]cinnamonandgravy -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago
i wonder how old the word 'fallacy' is.
id love to explain it to the authors.
all it takes is a username and password
create account
is it really that easy? only one way to find out...
already have an account and just want to login?
login
[–]yangx 36 points37 points38 points ago
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 92 points93 points94 points ago
[–]squeakyneb 23 points24 points25 points ago
[–]grahvity 28 points29 points30 points ago
[–]squeakyneb 11 points12 points13 points ago
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 38 points39 points40 points ago
[–]squeakyneb 10 points11 points12 points ago
[–]burnsie 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]giantPenus 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] ago
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–][deleted] ago
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]JasonMacker 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]inferno719 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Jugemu 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]what_eye_see 16 points17 points18 points ago
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]Antrikshy 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]Uneducated_Christian 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]aG_Infamous 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]PinballWizrd 51 points52 points53 points ago
[–]asdfman123 48 points49 points50 points ago*
[–]fdtc_skolar 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]Devinm84 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]fedja 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]PinballWizrd 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]asdfman123 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]PinballWizrd 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]PinballWizrd -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]asdfman123 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]paolog 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]joshbike 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]xkcdfanboy 8 points9 points10 points ago*
[–]something_not_taken 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]ConstipatedNinja 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]something_not_taken 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points ago*
[–]joshbike -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]aidrocsid 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]paolog 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]aidrocsid 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]paolog 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]MinisterOfTheDog 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–][deleted] ago
[–]fasda 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]absentbird -2 points-1 points0 points ago
[–]InappropriateQueston -2 points-1 points0 points ago
[–]Antrikshy 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]DARTH9999 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]naker_virus 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Eyshld21sn 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]ErechBelmont 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]PossiblyTheDoctor 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]ballzy 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Stupidconspiracies 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]guntfuddler 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Capercaillie 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]guntfuddler 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Capercaillie 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Pllatinum 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Noodlearmor 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]OverwhelmedAnt 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]frycicle 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]Capercaillie 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]jedifrog 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]RaymondAblack[S] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]ConstipatedNinja 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Saerain 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]ballzy 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Turok1134 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]feebl 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Box-Monkey 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]cumholio 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]RaveRaptor 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]chilltem 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Gustomucho 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]technosasquatch 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Myflyisbreezy 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]anusbomber 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]kdar -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Sergeantenjay 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]nekrozion 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]gaga_ooh_lala 11 points12 points13 points ago
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points ago
[–][deleted] ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]thatpaulbloke 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Capercaillie 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Capercaillie 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points ago
[–][deleted] ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]glandyover -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]cinnamonandgravy -2 points-1 points0 points ago