this post was submitted on
1,721 points (53% like it)
13,045 up votes 11,324 down votes
shortlink:

funny

subscribe2,234,586 readers

No posts with their sole purpose being to communicate with another redditor. Example.

Welcome to r/Funny:

You may only post if you are funny.

Please No:

  • Screenshots of comment threads. Post a link with context to /r/bestof instead.

  • Posts for the specific point of it being your reddit birthday.

  • Politics - This includes the 2012 Presidential candidates or bills in congress.

  • Rage comics - Go to /fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu instead.

  • Memes - Go to /r/AdviceAnimals or /r/Memes instead.

  • Demotivational posters - Go to /r/Demotivational instead.

  • Pictures of just text - Make a self post instead.

  • DAE posts - Go to /r/doesanybodyelse

  • eCards - the poll result was 55.02% in favor of removal. Please submit eCards to /r/ecards

  • URL shorteners - No link shorteners (or HugeURL) in either post links or comments. They will be deleted regardless of intent.

Rehosted webcomics will be removed. Please submit a link to the original comic's site and preferably an imgur link in the comments. Do not post a link to the comic image, it must be linked to the page of the comic. (*) (*)

Need more? Check out:

Still need more? See Reddit's best / worst and offensive joke collections (warning: some of those jokes are offensive / nsfw!).

Please DO NOT post personal information. This includes anything hosted on Facebook's servers, as they can be traced to the original account holder.

If your submission appears to be banned, please don't just delete it as that makes the filter hate you! Instead please send us a message with a link to the post. We'll unban it and it should get better. Please allow 10 minutes for the post to appear before messaging moderators

The moderators of /r/funny reserve the right to moderate posts and comments at their discretion, with regard to their perception of the suitability of said posts and comments for this subreddit. Thank you for your understanding.

CSS - BritishEnglishPolice ©2011

a community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

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 ›

1720
1721

Now Listen Carefully (imgur.com)

submitted ago by therm

top 200 commentsshow all 268
sorted by:
best
hot
new
controversial
top
old
best

[–]ukiyoe 131 points132 points ago

"Why isn't anyone taking notes?"

[–]TSILF 26 points27 points ago

besides that one guy named athe

[–]LordAthe 27 points28 points ago

I lost them. Didn't think it was that important at the time, sorry. I mean, it was a carpenter talking to some poor people... shrug

[–]Dreamwaltzer 9 points10 points ago

later

oh fuck I can't remember shit.

Guess I gotta make this stuff up.

[–]aHumanMale 0 points1 point ago

Not to ruin the joke, but hey, here's a TIL for you all. The Jewish philosophy of education, particularly around the time of Christ, hugely focused on repetition. Repetition in general was a big deal, which is one reason why you'll see Jesus repeat crap like 3 times if it's important. Along those lines, the "Sermon on the Mount" isn't 4 accounts of one sermon. It's almost definitely a message Jesus was teaching his followers all the time, over and over--so often that all 4 gospel writers were like "Hey, that's probably a big deal. I'll write it down." But it was also probably not repeated verbaitim, so it's totally natural that it appears differently in all 4. The main concept is there in all 4, phrased to match the agenda of each author.

[–]poo-poo 154 points155 points ago

50 years later, "hey I should write that down!"

[–]christianjb 64 points65 points ago

Should have used a tablet. Like Steve Jobs, or Moses.

[–]Areo_Hotah 5 points6 points ago

just for clarity, jesus died in 33-30ad it hink the first gospel was written around lates 50s to 60s, and the reasont hey didnt bother writing it down (besides the fact only one of the apostoles had a formal education) is because they though he would be back soon.

[–]virusdotexe 6 points7 points ago

Also they were busy being fed to lions and getting molten lead poured down their backs.

[–]drodjan 5 points6 points ago

Yeah I am pretty impressed Christianity survived in the Roman Empire given the Roman inclination for feeding their lions a steady diet of Christians. :P

[–]NiteShadeX2 6 points7 points ago

There's reports of lions being fed convicts and prisoners of war, but I have never seen a documented case of lions being fed christians from a reputable source. Usually less costly methods of torture were used, like crucifying them and leaving them in the sun to die.

[–]poo-poo 1 point2 points ago

Why is that more expensive than feeding meat to a lion?

[–]knowpunintended 1 point2 points ago

Lions aren't native to Italy and the Romans didn't exactly know a whole lot about exotic animal care. It was prohibitively expensive to ship lions across from Africa, expensive again to find a place to store them and it usually wasn't too long before they sickened and died.

Meanwhile, Christians were off causing trouble and annoying the neighbours all over the place.

[–]drodjan 0 points1 point ago

Oh, I like it, those Romans had a flair for irony!

[–]virusdotexe 0 points1 point ago

I only said that because I read it Tacitus' Annals.

[–]evermo 0 points1 point ago

survive? it rose to imperial sponsored dominance :P

[–]drodjan 1 point2 points ago

That wasn't until Emperor Constantine made it so in 303 A.D. You are missing a good 300 years of history where it was originally a very persecuted religion.

[–]evermo 0 points1 point ago

actually around 303 is when the "great persecution" began and lasted for about 10 years. i just thought your choice of words was pretty funny, like christianity barely made it through.

it came full circle and the pagans were very persecuted as well.

[–]drodjan 0 points1 point ago

Well yeah, I never said the Romans only persecuted Christians. My choice of words was supposed to be funny because I was trying to make light of people getting eaten by lions. :P

[–]Bloodfeastisleman 80 points81 points ago

You don't need the read the thread:

First the theists complain about being oppressed on reddit.

Then the antitheists complain that their religion is nonsensical and something about Scandinavia.

Then the antiantitheists post about how /r/atheism sucks and that you can be an atheist and not be an asshole.

Then an atheist asks when was the last time they have been on /r/atheism because assholes get downvoted.

Then someone post something about /r/atheism leaking.

Then someone post that just because it involves atheism doesn't mean it only belongs in r/atheism.

Then I shoot myself.

[–]GoldLegends 11 points12 points ago

How many times have you shot yourself man D:

[–]holyerthanthou 4 points5 points ago

14 times, 14 times has he shot himself.

[–]The_Poop_King 4 points5 points ago

You'd think he'd eventually shoot the other leg but nope... right in the thigh every time.

[–]BigAza 0 points1 point ago

he doesnt really even shoot himself anymore, the bullet just keeps on going straight through the hole from a few days ago

[–]Dread_Pirate 2 points3 points ago

Best TL;DR ever.

[–]seeandwait 5 points6 points ago

I see that you have figured out the typical "atheism thread on reddit" format...but you forgot one key ingredient

[–]holyerthanthou 2 points3 points ago

Multi color walpaper?

[–]MrConfucius 1 point2 points ago

No, Token. Everyone needs a Token.

[–]NiteShadeX2 0 points1 point ago

Not every post needs Morgan Freeman.

[–]SAP_in_RL 1 point2 points ago

Of course Blood Feast Island Man does thirst for blood.

[–]giveer 1 point2 points ago

I'll accept the first few steps, even just for argument's sake.. But there's no way an atheist would wait until Step 4 to say something.

I also find my shooting myself happens much sooner than Step 7.

[–]Nefarious_Lobster 191 points192 points ago

INITIATE ATHIEST HATE CIRCLEJERK

[–]alcaron 72 points73 points ago

Hi, um, I'm here for the circle jerk...

[–]IAMGodAMA 38 points39 points ago

SO BRAVE!

[–]dontneedyourkarma 22 points23 points ago

Ok God,

What did Jesus actually say that day?

[–]weyand1 16 points17 points ago

Let's get hammered?

[–]NeuxSaed 8 points9 points ago

Well maybe something like:

Hey guys, check out this wine I made.

[–]Arthean 0 points1 point ago

Why was he always pushing that stuff so much anyway? It's like a little kid and his first meth lab or something.

[–]NeuxSaed 8 points9 points ago

http://i.imgur.com/TOFlr.jpg

However, I've always thought that Christianity's one saving grace was how it helped keep alcoholic beverages legal and culturally acceptable throughout history.

[–]seeandwait 1 point2 points ago

Gay people should be accepted by mainstream society, we evolved from the same ancestors as gorillas, and birth control should be utilized whenever possible.

[–]AintYaGotEyes -1 points0 points ago

If you had the chance to change your fate...

Would you?

[–]IAMGodAMA 0 points1 point ago

if what you're talking about is Jesus' fate on the cross- then the answer is no because it would have damned all of humanity to it's own fate.

[–]The_Poop_King -1 points0 points ago

Doesn't really seem like a big deal if you know you'll be back in three days. That being said why is my gspot in my ass?

[–]druam -1 points0 points ago

SO POOPING WOULDN'T COMPLETELY SUCK AND TO BALANCE OUT WOMAN HAVING MULTIPLE ORGASMS

[–]Gamand 7 points8 points ago

THIS

load more comments (1 reply)

    [–]Apf4 108 points109 points ago

    I LOVE ATHEISTS I JUST DON'T LIKE THEIR VIEWS ON GOD

    [–]Psythik 39 points40 points ago

    I LOVE ATHEISTS VIEWS ON GOD I JUST DON'T LIKE THEIR ATTITUDE

    [–]VirtualAnarchy 30 points31 points ago

    WHY CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG

    [–]Tipper213 4 points5 points ago

    You username describes it exactly.

    [–]Humble_Link_Guy 5 points6 points ago

    came ready for a fight, instead.

    [–]VirtualAnarchy 0 points1 point ago

    Find me. Somewhere. Somehow. Find me in a thread, and we will have a gif battle. And I will win.

    [–][deleted] ago

    [deleted]

    [–]rocier -1 points0 points ago

    I HATE BOTH

    [–]SparklepireBETCH 8 points9 points ago

    Imma let you finish, but r/atheist had the best circlejerk of all time.

    [–]dheinzen2 3 points4 points ago

    Every subreddit is a circlejerk. /r/funny is a circlejerk about semi-funny things. /r/starcraft is a circlejerk about starcraft, /r/gaming is a circlejerk about gaming.

    [–]Well_Torn 5 points6 points ago

    /r/circlejerk is a circlejerk about circklejerking?

    [–]dheinzen2 -1 points0 points ago

    yes

    [–]JabbaWebb 1 point2 points ago

    What did the comment say???

    [–]Tashre 21 points22 points ago

    This is the only atheist comment here.

    [–]Nefarious_Lobster 2 points3 points ago

    I think I scared them all off...

    [–]coolstorybroham 1 point2 points ago

    Nope. HAVE FUN WITH YOUR FAIRY TAILS HAHAHA.

    [–]NotaMethAddict 44 points45 points ago

    As a Swede, I don't need to worry about you and your silly religious people; because everyone in Sweden is an atheist and a scientist.

    [–]csolisr 31 points32 points ago

    Wasn't it Norwegians?

    [–]IleaveComments 35 points36 points ago

    Silly person, they are the same thing.

    [–]okmkz 41 points42 points ago

    BORK BORK BORK, BITCH

    [–]Kenny_TE 7 points8 points ago

    HOW DARE YOU COMPARE ME TO A SWEDE?!?!?

    [–]IleaveComments 8 points9 points ago

    At least I didn't call you dutch.

    [–]rockerode 7 points8 points ago

    HEY, DON'T YOU THREATEN THE DUTCH. THEY HAVE LOTS OF GOOD BEER.

    [–]doedipus 13 points14 points ago

    1 IN 6 CHILDREN ARE KIDNAPPED BY THE DUTCH. THE BEER DOESN'T FACTOR IN TO IT

    [–]DreadOfGrave 1 point2 points ago

    AND COFFEE SHOPS

    [–]IleaveComments 0 points1 point ago

    Dutch.

    [–]nomlah 2 points3 points ago

    Such a SCANDal.

    [–]Raymond890 1 point2 points ago

    HOW DARE HE COMPARE ME TO AN ATHEIST AND A SCIENTIST?!?!? Wait a second... I think I'm liking the scientist part.

    [–]csolisr 0 points1 point ago

    Sorry, I spelled "Scandinavians" wrong

    [–]jabedude -1 points0 points ago

    I got my phd in the mail yesterday for owning a fundie on FB!

    [–]hustlermmxi 0 points1 point ago

    I blocked atheism so I wouldn't have to deal with this euro trash bullshit.

    [–]_haters_gonna_hate_ 4 points5 points ago

    I'm a atheist and this made me laugh out lout.

    [–]Nefarious_Lobster -1 points0 points ago

    Haha, what I probably should have said was "r/atheism circlejerk," i've got nothing wrong with totally rational, level headed atheists xD

    [–]kier00 8 points9 points ago

    You spelled "atheist" wrong. I believe this is intentional. My neckbeard, being of super size and strength, determines you are a fundie theist who is literally worse than Stalin and Hitler combined.

    I was at a funeral for my dad, who was a diehard atheist. Some religious fundie cunt started singing amazing grace. I normally would have ignored this, but since the fundie cunt drove a Range Rover that got literally 2 miles to the gallon, I knew I had to do something. I ripped off my black jacket and exposed my tee shirt of NGT (thats neil le-smokedegrasse tyson). Immediately three people in the crowd started to cheer. As the rest of the party was slowly realize what was happening, I recited a few lines from God Delusion (peace be upon this book) and converted the crowd. A huge uproar from the crowd left me in tears as I waved over my head knowing I had truly done Sagan's (PBOH) work.

    [–]alexanderlmg 7 points8 points ago

    I'm an atheist and i drive a Range Rover, there is no need to associate us (Range Rover drivers) with fundies.

    [–]kier00 4 points5 points ago

    You are literally worse than Hitler for driving that car.

    [–]krayish 1 point2 points ago

    Really? A Hitler comparison over a car's MILES PER GALLON? They get 12-18 MPG depending on the model. Are you going to hate all people who drive cars that get worse mileage than your car? Yours only gets 18-22 MPG btw.

    [–]CitizenPremier 3 points4 points ago

    Wait a minute. Hating the atheists is the circlejerk now? You mean to tell me that circlejerk has come full circle? Jerk?

    [–]spicymadness -1 points0 points ago

    Athiests on reddit love bashing on Christians

    [–]CakeLicker -4 points-3 points ago

    Am I too late for the jerking?

    load more comments (14 replies)

      [–]Wholesaletrash 56 points57 points ago

      And please please, don't take everything I say literally.

      [–]Proxenus 28 points29 points ago

      Or make any "artistic" additions during the translating.

      [–]ASquishyJollyRancher 3 points4 points ago

      It's only literal until proven wrong. Then it's symbolic.

      [–]Hamlet7768 1 point2 points ago

      Unless I am very explicit in that I am being literal.

      [–]christianjb -1 points0 points ago

      If you're going to call yourself the son of God then don't be surprised if people take you literally unless you expressly say otherwise.

      load more comments (1 reply)

        [–]oldmonkmgm 10 points11 points ago

        Blessed are the cheesemakers

        [–]NeuxSaed 2 points3 points ago

        What's so special about the cheesemakers?

        [–]koopaatroopa 5 points6 points ago

        Well, obviously, this is not meant to be taken literally. It refers to any manufacturers of dairy products.

        [–]oldmonkmgm 2 points3 points ago

        Well, obviously it's not meant to be taken literally; it refers to any manufacturers of dairy products.

        [–]SkullyKitt 0 points1 point ago

        Paraphrased from SMBC, but the idea is this:

        The meaning of human life is cheese.

        Think about it! To make it, you need the right kind of milk - better make cows over billions of years. You'll also need the right bacteria to ferment it - oh, and different flavors will require different environments, different plant diets for the cows, etc.

        Then, to top it all off, you need an organism smart and complex enough to combine all these things in the right way to result in cheese.

        God made people to make cheese.

        [–]llawne 33 points34 points ago

        As a christian, I find this genuinely funny! Wish /r/atheism posted more of their jokes in this fashion instead of the more standard offensive circlejerk ones.

        [–]Cheap_Ass_Sunglasses 10 points11 points ago

        Things similar to this are out numbered by Facebook screen caps saying "SOME GUY SAID GOD BLESS YOU, SO I SAID GO FUCK YOURSELF"

        /r/atheism used to be more about atheism back when they were a smaller subreddit. It all started going down-hill and just became more about bashing Christians with the very rare meaningful post when they had around 250,000 subscribers

        [–]rhubarbs -2 points-1 points ago

        Things similar to this are out numbered by Facebook screen caps saying "SOME GUY SAID GOD BLESS YOU, SO I SAID GO FUCK YOURSELF"

        Never happened, not even close. Hyperbole is fun and all, but here - are - some - examples of actual posts.

        As you can see, the difference is that they are all in response to a specifically religious sentiment, and while a voice of dissent isn't explicitly invited, it is implicitly invited by engaging in communication. I don't think you can make the case for why it's inappropriate to the point of condemnation.

        So, it's really just about the content being shallow (i.e. Facebook screen caps), which is a fair criticism. But I think the way you phrased your comment is implying some malicious intent to the userbase at /r/atheism which is just untrue, at least to any kind of significant degree. I mean, this is still the internet, of course there are assholes everywhere.

        /r/atheism used to be more about atheism back when they were a smaller subreddit. It all started going down-hill

        Like every other large subreddit. This is a very well known and understood problem of the Reddit algorithm. Banal, lowest common denominator content just wins over anything insightful because of how Reddit works, and because it's much more work to produce, take part in, or even appreciate something with more depth -- and let's keep it real here, most people are completely incapable of doing any of that.

        [–]TheHated[!] -1 points0 points ago

        What you are describing is exactly what hipsters complain about.

        While yes it is a bit disconcerting, this is not a problem that is exclusive to this subreddit, it happens to every single group of like minded people that becomes popular. Next time you find yourself pining over the good o'l days, imagine if wearing a pair of lensless glasses would make what you're saying more appropriate.

        [–][deleted] ago

        [deleted]

        [–]TheHated[!] 0 points1 point ago

        You showed me, lol.

        [–]crowseldon 0 points1 point ago

        offensive

        Yeah well... If people need to base what they do around what others consider offensive (even if it's accurate) we won't get very far.

        Steve Hughes on being offended

        load more comments (1 reply)

          [–]arenaceusmaga 19 points20 points ago

          4? 4?! >.> It'd be pretty awesome if there were only 4

          [–]tllnbks 46 points47 points ago

          He's talking about the 4 Gospels, not 4 different translations.

          [–]joifullnoyses 25 points26 points ago

          I think he's talking about the fact that there were more then 4 Gospels, there just 4 that made the final cut.

          [–]tllnbks 14 points15 points ago

          Yes and no. The non-canonical "gospels" are not the same as the 4 canonical gospels. I could go into the differences, but this really isn't the place.

          [–]trixter21992251 10 points11 points ago

          This could be the place

          [–]druam 0 points1 point ago

          This could be the time

          load more comments (9 replies)

            [–]altCognito 0 points1 point ago

            Who said the comic was talking about gospels?

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha

            [–]hedgehogboy5 4 points5 points ago

            it's implied by the 4.

            [–]VirtualAnarchy -2 points-1 points ago

            http://i.imgur.com/lyHcN.gif

            [–]occams_krzr 1 point2 points ago

            can you explain it in the appropriate place and then copy your explanation and paste it into a private message to me?

            [–]apmechev 1 point2 points ago

            I'm pretty interested too. As far as I know, the "canonical" gospels are that because of popularity ( RE: John...)

            [–]aHumanMale 0 points1 point ago

            You're not entirely wrong. The notion of canon developed as an attempt to weed out all the exaggerated or otherwise misleading texts being developed in the first few centuries. The ones "chosen" (nobody ever really chose them for quite some time) were developed through tradition, with the idea of trying to get the most accurate and meaningful accounts. Accordingly, the texts people gravitated toward were the ones that were written the soonest after Christ's lifetime and by those who had the best access to his life and ministry, etc.

            The notion of a flawless and perfectly complete text from God direct to us came much later, largely as a polarized reaction to accusations about the validity of Scripture (Christians have had a terrible habit, when faced with an idea that threatens faith, of espousing the complete opposite idea without strong objective reason.) Naturally, I think the current general Christian understanding of Scripture is too strong. But I do think the texts we have are good, and although there may be more truth elsewhere, it becomes obvious upon examination why a lot of other Gospels, etc, aren't considered very trustworthy overall.

            [–]kashodi 0 points1 point ago

            TIL, Canonical.

            [–]dont_press_ctrl-W 0 points1 point ago

            Still, the fact that there have been other versions than the four canonical ones of most of the events of the life of Jesus remains true. Of course most of the known apocrypha are collections of sayings or stories of the infancy of Jesus, but the Gospel of Marcion for instance relates conversations of Jesus in his adulthood, and that is enough to bring the number to at least 5. And surely more versions have existed that didn't survive to this day.

            [–]aHumanMale 1 point2 points ago

            Marcion's Gospel, though, was written very late, and from the accounts of various Christian and secular contemporary figures, he had a very clear Gnostic agenda. I understand where you're coming from, and it's very possible that Marcion's gospel contains some factual information that the others lack (and any serious biblical scholar will have given it some close attention). However, if you're trying to argue that Marcion's gospel belongs on par with the others, it's pretty clear that the theology he espouses in his text doesn't flow with the roots of Christianity or Judaism--not least because his teachings were openly rebuked by the general Christian community of the second century.

            [–]dont_press_ctrl-W 0 points1 point ago

            on par with the others

            I would never embark on such a slippery argument on the internet. I was only talking in reference to the "I don't want to end up with four different versions of this" joke :P

            [–]aHumanMale 1 point2 points ago

            What I'm driving at is that regardless of whether one considers the Gospels to be viable, or full or contradictions, or complete crap, or what-have-you, the 4 texts that people tend to go by contain a general strain of theology that they more or less have in common, and which is reflected in some of Paul's letters and a lot of early Christian writings. Marcion's text takes a very different road. I wasn't trying to make a pro- or anti- Christian argument. Just saying that Marcion is clearly distinct and much further removed from his subject matter, so it's little wonder his account is seldom taken seriously even with regard to its historical worth.

            [–]Ochikobore 1 point2 points ago

            Technically only Mark and John are the only unique canonical gospels. Matthew and Luke both used Mark as a model (as well as the hypothetical Q Gospel).

            I still got a pretty good laugh from the comic.

            [–]Supertrample 2 points3 points ago

            I thought he was talking about variations on the Judeo-Christian faith.

            [–]raffytraffy 0 points1 point ago

            wooshed over my head, too.

            [–]firstroundko108 0 points1 point ago

            Why did I have to scroll so far down to find this?

            [–]dhp1161 2 points3 points ago

            u forgot to add "lol" at the end

            [–]OceansofLotion 0 points1 point ago

            Another re-post, I hate how they get so many upvotes...

            [–]Nothingtotalkabout 0 points1 point ago

            Did I click r/all again?

            [–]CoyoteStark 4 points5 points ago

            You'll be happy to know it is much, much more than 4.

            [–]Areo_Hotah -2 points-1 points ago

            the gospels arnt versions, they are different viewpoints, so while there are only 4 canocal gospels (the ones that held up best against scrutiny) there are many gospels because many people observed jesus.

            [–]servohahn 2 points3 points ago

            You wish there were only four versions.

            [–]Severok 0 points1 point ago

            "Gospel of Judas".. now THAT would be worth a read.

            [–]chibling 0 points1 point ago

            It IS worth a read! It was only put together and translated a few years ago, but it's a very interesting Gnostic writing. If you like that, you'll probably also be interested in the Gospel of Mary.

            [–]koopaatroopa 0 points1 point ago

            "Blessed are the cheese makers!"

            [–]bjanos -1 points0 points ago

            Sorry man but repost

            [–]rillegas08 1 point2 points ago

            Assuming this is the Sermon on the Mount, there are only two versions, Matthew's and Luke's. Matthew wrote his gospel by topic, whereas Luke wrote his more chronologically (assumably) and separates Jesus's teachings that Matthew compiles into a few chapters. That's why Luke is considered the most accurate of the four gospels.

            tl;dr: there aren't four versions

            [–]TheMagicStik -1 points0 points ago

            Thats what they all said to their followers and what their followers' followers said and so on and so forth.

            [–]TheBlackAngelsDeath 1 point2 points ago

            Scumbag brain: "Don't worry about taking notes, I'll remember this for years"

            [–]Areo_Hotah 0 points1 point ago

            well most people couldnt read and write

            [–]carpediem6655 0 points1 point ago

            I'm not a Christian and even I know their is only one version of the sermon on the mount. (I'm an art history buff the painting is The Sermon on the Mount by Danish artist Carl Heinrich Bloch)

            [–]doog201 -1 points0 points ago

            Its funny and ironic because the sermon on the mount (feeding of the 5000) is the only story to appear in all four gospels.

            [–]don_jon -1 points0 points ago

            Took a break from reading Bart Ehrman's "Jesus, Imterruped" and clicked on this. Laughing myself to sleep...

            [–]takemehomeimdrunk 1 point2 points ago

            I came here to see atheists.

            [–]ltomatosaucel 0 points1 point ago

            wow genuinely funny post

            [–]patefoisgras 0 points1 point ago

            Haha, this one is actually funny.

            [–]holly2680 0 points1 point ago

            I saw this on FB yesterday and someone's comment was
            "This sure explains all this other crap out there..."
            LMAO, I fucking died.

            [–]PeeInTheShower 0 points1 point ago

            "...when you see your father, relay these words: prepare for unforeseen consequences."

            [–]austincarnivore 2 points3 points ago

            Was Jesus Illiterate? Seems like it would have saved a lot of grief if he had just written some stuff down.

            [–]Gravesh 1 point2 points ago

            Jesus was illiterate. No proof, obviously, but commoners at the time rarely were literate. Actually, it is possibly he could read Hebrew, but I'm not a historian on Judaism so I couldn't say.

            [–]slow56k 4 points5 points ago

            According to one of those four versions, he found a specific passage in Isaiah and read it at the temple.

            [–]Maxtortion 0 points1 point ago

            So God can't read? So much for omnipotence.

            [–]Gravesh -1 points0 points ago

            That's assuming your a religious person. If you are, then yeah he probably could. If not, then most would say probably not. I'm just stating something that is factual. I mean yeah, the Son of God is usually an exception.

            load more comments (2 replies)

              [–]crumbleater -1 points0 points ago

              I shall say zis only once...

              [–]archfapper 0 points1 point ago

              I was the 666th upvote O_o

              [–]christianjb 2 points3 points ago

              You do realize that on every post with >= 666 upvotes someone will be the one to bring the score to 666? It's really not that remarkable and yet I see Redditors all the time remarking on this quite ordinary fact.

              [–]Exaskryz -1 points0 points ago

              But archfapper did it! He's the ONE... for this thread... of many thousands...

              [–]shrtstck -1 points0 points ago

              ahaha i saw this a while back and lost the link and could never find it again

              tyvm!

              [–]4LostSoulsinaBowl 1 point2 points ago

              Of course, the account of the Sermon on the Mount was actually only in the Gospel of Matthew.

              I'll leave now.

              [–]chaos122345 -2 points-1 points ago

              i think my favorite book about religion has to be dan browns "the lost symbol" that book alone opened my eyes to alot of points that all religions make. and pretty much it disproves atheism, and all religious views, by expanding you're mind to the larger picture. i would recommend it to r/atheism but as soon as i say it disproves atheism i would get down voted to hell

              [–]darkneo86 4 points5 points ago

              How does it disprove atheism? Atheism is more about what can be proved, which a god cannot be. So you are saying Dan Brown's book proves the existence of a god? I am intrigued.

              EDIT: I know atheism is the disbelief, but our disbelief arises from the fact that we believe in what can be proven.

              [–]DisapprovingSeal 2 points3 points ago

              Just going out on a limb here, but I think… let me repeat that: think… that he means that it provides an argument for both to exist/not exist. i.e., the whole "Absence of proof is not proof of absence, but an absence of absence of proof is not proof of absence of an absence" thing. Umm… I'm not entirely sure what I just said, but yeah.

              [–]darkneo86 0 points1 point ago

              I see what you are saying. As I said in a comment to OP, I don't agree with what Dan Brown writes, but it is intriguing.

              I am a conspiracy theorist as much as the next guy, but I believe in what is proven. Just because something hasn't been unproven doesn't make it real, to me.

              Dan Brown writes to sell books, and make a profit. Thus, his books have a bit of sensationalism and conspiracy to them (DaVincia Code).

              I'll read it, like I have his other books, but I doubt I'll take away anymore from it than the fact that he can write a good book.

              [–]DisapprovingSeal 0 points1 point ago

              I get it. I was just trying to help clarify OP's statement, though I feel I royally screwed that up.

              [–]darkneo86 0 points1 point ago

              You did a fine job, don't you worry.

              [–]chaos122345 -2 points-1 points ago

              atheism is a very large and expansive universe. different atheist's beilive different , but all agree that there is either no after life, or no god. they dont beilive that the bible is anything more than a book. this is what ive gathered from talking to my atheist friends and going on r/atheism. but this book proves that there are secrets in the bible, that scientists over the years have spent years trying to translate and understand. It also translates the proper version of the bible in which god is described as plural, and that the churchs misinterpretation of the bible has made god and the bible out to be more than man. when god is man himself. the bible says that "god is in all of us" which means we are no greater than god. But their are still many mysteries that atheists feel are fabricated stories within the bible, that we still dont understand. the book is a huge eye opener and really tosses your mind around about history.

              [–]icamefrom4chan 4 points5 points ago

              Dan Brown writes fiction. That book is fiction. It is even labeled fiction. How in the World does a fictional book show proof of anything? Silly what people will BELIEVE just because it is in a book. Do some research for fucks sake. Please.

              [–]chaos122345 0 points1 point ago

              i did if you read my comments. alot of the stuff is fiction but it has alot of fact to it. the book, like most fiction, is based off of real events, people, places, and has some truth behind it. in this case everything involving religion and everything else came back to be true and this isnt from wikipedia. all im saying is if you like reading, and want to learn about religions and some history and expand your thought on the topics to read the book. im not here for a debate

              load more comments (1 reply)

                [–]icamefrom4chan 0 points1 point ago

                Dan Brown writes fiction. That book is fiction. It is even labeled fiction. How in the World does a fictional book show proof of anything? Silly what people will BELIEVE just because it is in a book. Do some research for fucks sake. Please.

                [–]darkneo86 1 point2 points ago

                Hey, I'm down with that. I haven't read the book, so I wasn't aware. It makes me want to read the book.

                Be aware, though, that a lot of what Dan Brown writes about is sensationalist fiction at the best. I would rather read scientific writings regarding this, than something Dan Brown wrote.

                That is my personal opinion, but I will still give it a read. And I appreciate you throwing that knowledge my way.

                Thanks!

                [–]chaos122345 -1 points0 points ago

                yeah that is true which is why i did alot of backround research about apotheosis and the "why moses has horns" and all the other stuff mentioned within the book and it all added up to be true. i understand there is alot of science fiction gathered inside of his writings, but all the things about religion all turned out to be accurate. still for me the book was a great read

                [–]darkneo86 0 points1 point ago

                Most of what he writes is a great read, true. Still, you say something along the lines of the "true interpretation of the bible". I don't see anyone, in this day and age, giving us a true interpretation. I just don't think that will happen, because, at this point, there is too much bias and wishy-washyness.

                Again, though, I'll give it a read. Thanks for the heads up!

                [–]3030threat 0 points1 point ago

                You can't "prove" or "disprove" atheism, unless a god(s) directly show themselves to humans.

                Also, don't think that all atheists are atheists because we don't find the Bible useful. There have been thousands of gods that humans have believed in throughout the years, there is no reason to believe that the Bible or any "biblical secrets" are any more feasible than all the others.

                [–]blazingitem9 0 points1 point ago

                each book was tailored for a different audience designed to prove the existence of Christ to each form of skeptical. Very well thought out at the time. Also, the books were written as Christ spoke it, I'm not sure where someone got the idea of 50 years after.

                [–]Toph__Beifong -1 points0 points ago

                Historians and stuff.

                [–]mark_wooten -2 points-1 points ago

                Is Jesus throwing the metal horns in that picture?

                [–]greym84 0 points1 point ago

                I really hate it when cops take down accounts from multiple witnesses, because you end up with four different versions and then we can't use any of them in court, though they may not have any major inconsistencies.

                [–]hyperactivedeer7 -2 points-1 points ago

                Only 4?

                Nope. More flavors of christianity than Jelly Belly jelly beans, bro.

                [–][deleted] ago

                [deleted]

                [–]spaz0tr0n1c 1 point2 points ago

                Ironic how you unsubbed from r/athiesm to see less of Jesus.

                [–]darktemplardude -4 points-3 points ago

                /r/atheism is leaking.

                [–]xiregulatorix -4 points-3 points ago

                r/atheism is leaking again

                [–]ermahgerdhertdergs -4 points-3 points ago

                lol. There's a helluva lot more than four. Think of all the different languages it's in....

                [–]Hamididdy 0 points1 point ago

                http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations

                just a few more

                [–]ColbertsBump -2 points-1 points ago

                This would be better with a Samuel L. level of foul language.

                [–]BronsonAlcott 0 points1 point ago

                Or, you know, 74 different versions... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_gospels

                [–]Areo_Hotah -1 points0 points ago

                a gospel is a written account of someones view of jesus, not different versions

                [–]PR3CiSiON 0 points1 point ago

                First, there were more than four gospels, the others just weren't canonized into the scripture. Second, Jesus never said anything resembling that. I don't get this at all...

                [–]Axle-f -2 points-1 points ago

                This post is 7 hrs old and I'm really surprised that noone has picked up the double entendre.

                This is in fact a repost of very similar images that continually appear on reddit. That fact that there are multiple images of jesus with the same text provides an additional layer of irony.

                [–]Goshey 0 points1 point ago

                i'm pretty sure there are more than four. a LOT more than four.

                load more comments (29 replies)

                  Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

                  REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

                  π Rendered by PID 4196 on app-86 running fc22e53.