use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g.reddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
reddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
see the search faq for details.
advanced search: by author, community...
~83 users here now
About /r/comics
This reddit is for everything related to comics and webcomics. Artists are encouraged to post their own work. News and media for adaptations based on print comics are welcome.
How to make the Mods go Hulk Smash
Content that is not welcome here
How to find Original Sources
How to get Artist Flair
Do you draw a webcomic? Message the moderators with some proof and the name of your strip for some blue flair. The easiest way to provide proof is to post something on your comic's website that references your Reddit account.
Related Reddits
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 ›
SIN (i.imgur.com)
submitted 17 hours ago by JimKBJim Benton Cartoons
[–]egosumFidius 80 points81 points82 points 15 hours ago
i was expecting a math joke.
[–]safiire 10 points11 points12 points 14 hours ago
Me too. I was expecting that gif that shows sin(x) being traced out by a circle which gets posted constantly.
[–]calmlunatic 7 points8 points9 points 9 hours ago
Is it cos you're a fellow math geek?
[–]JordanBlythe 199 points200 points201 points 16 hours ago
Must... resist... urge... to... fix... theology.
My self-control has been tested today.
[–]Reaper666 78 points79 points80 points 13 hours ago*
Thank you for not rioting, burning things, and murdering people. I realize it took every ounce of strength.
edit: u
[–]JordanBlythe 37 points38 points39 points 13 hours ago
I'm glad that someone understands my inner struggle.
[–]mst3kzz 4 points5 points6 points 6 hours ago
There are 16 onces in a pounce.
[–]Reaper666 0 points1 point2 points 6 hours ago
Good point.
[–]lennon1230 4 points5 points6 points 5 hours ago
Sometimes I miss the days of rationalizing the absurdity of God so I could still dream of heaven. Then I remember how wonderful it is to be alive at all. Born of stardust, in this modern age, with the health and wealth to see and understand the wonder of a creator-less creation. This is all the mysticism anyone should need to get through life.
[–]ggk1 2 points3 points4 points 4 hours ago
not sure why people think that being made of stardust and being made by a creator need to be mutually exclusive.
[–]KyleFlowers 8 points9 points10 points 14 hours ago
'Cause fuck free will!
[–]aterner 1 point2 points3 points 2 hours ago
How it is 'free' will if it is supposedly forbidden by law of God?
Example: Does person free to stole from others? No, because it is forbidden by the law and he will suffer from the consequences.
TL;DR; Arent word 'free' applies only to that situation, where there is no consequences no matter what you choose? If somebody says you free to go both ways, but then hit you anytime you choose the 'wrong' way - would it be considered free will? But how is it free will if you being punished for one choice and rewarded for the other?
[–]cstaylor 138 points139 points140 points 17 hours ago*
Isn't sin just as tangible as, say, darkness? Like, nobody created darkness or anything, it's just the absence of light.
EDIT: Wow relax everybody, I know it's not a perfect analogy, I'm just saying darkness is another example of something that happens to not be tangible.
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 220 points221 points222 points 16 hours ago
yeah, you would think so, but there's the actual footage, so I guess not.
[–]R031E5 84 points85 points86 points 16 hours ago
The comic's premise isn't right, God gave its creation (the human) the ability to be free, but he can just impose rules; a sin is an inherent part of a human being because of their radical liberty, and thus, rules can be broken.
If you state that God should've made sin a physical impossibility, as in saying "thou shall not go faster than light" then you have to first define and create light in order to place the physical boundary, which would break the premise that God created sin, which he did not.
God did not allow sin, but he didn't forbid it either, because it would mess with the human's liberty.
(btw I'm not a religious person, I'm just placing an observation)
[–]Devz0r 32 points33 points34 points 15 hours ago
Since evil (caused by sin) doesn't exist in heaven, does liberty (free will) exist in heaven? If free will/liberty is better, and if heaven doesn't have that, is Earth better than heaven?
[–]R031E5 4 points5 points6 points 15 hours ago
It hasn't been defined since the bible doesn't say if people still have the original sin in heaven. Yes, the earth would be a better place to live, other than hell. It may be mayhem, but anybody who has ever been fun is now in hell.
Discussing about hell is very interesting because the old testament doesn't talk about it as some mystical terrible place, hell exists when God's not present, so hell is in every war, dispute and unfairness in the world.
[–]Mr_Zarika 0 points1 point2 points 10 hours ago
It's interesting, that even the "lake of fire" was only created for the rebelious angels who took sides with Lucifer. God never wants humans to go their.
At the end of the day, everyone who wants to be in heaven, will be there.And since the absence of God is darkness, worry and sickness, everyone who didn't want into heaven will be somewhere else, in that.
[–]futue_te_ipsum 0 points1 point2 points 14 hours ago*
sounds like this partly would be the devil's argument from Paradise Lost: "Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven."
the devil was an angel in heaven when he chose to rebel against God, so dunno. or maybe heaven isn't necessarily an inability to choose wrong, but more a perfect knowledge of good and bad and then willingly always choosing good.
[–]hellosexynerds 19 points20 points21 points 15 hours ago*
So is there freedom in heaven? Why not start humanity in heaven? If there is freedom in heaven then can humans rebel and sin again in heaven? If there is not freedom then why is it so important on earth where we are only living a tiny fraction of time?
Last why would a perfect and all loving god be failing so bad to satan? Less than 1 billion of the current population will go to heaven but 7 billion will go to hell to be tortured for all eternity. God created the rules, he created satan, he created the universe and he is still losing at his own game. Why would an ethical god create billions of humans knowing they will be tortured for eternity? Why not just leave the dirt alone? Is he that selfish that the angels weren't enough for him? Why not create an alternative place instead of hell for those who don't believe in him?
On that note do you believe that people who have never heard of Christianity will go to hell?
[–]Woolio 8 points9 points10 points 14 hours ago
Oh, God tried to start humanity in Heaven, with an entire race of angels... And that's what started this whole mess in the first place.
[–]coolstorybroham 11 points12 points13 points 13 hours ago
It makes for good mythology, at least.
[–]AntiMe -1 points0 points1 point 11 hours ago
First off, we're still at 7 billion, but 8 will happen soon enough. Second, there's no biblical reference to eternal damnation, the closest is that you're just destroyed, versus eternal life. Eternal damnation is made up by many of the churches.
[–]lancerevo98 6 points7 points8 points 15 hours ago
Yes but God punished Adam and Eve for committing a sin, a wrong act, something evil. Yet, if the tree was of the knowledge of good and evil, how were they to know that it was a bad thing to go against his will?
[–]R031E5 2 points3 points4 points 14 hours ago
Correct, they would never be able to know that going against God's will was a curse of their freedom, in that way, sin was bound to happen, breaking the rules is an inherent part of freedom. So mankind's eternal question is: is liberty's crudest form a way to liberate us from our own logic so we can make ourselves more human and less autonomous?
If you take freedom from a human, its no longer a human. And yet we've found ways to create new rules to impose to other people and making us less human.
[–]lancerevo98 1 point2 points3 points 14 hours ago
would it be taking freedom away from us by allowing us to live in peace with Him forever but actually letting us know it would be bad to eat from the tree?
[–]epsys -1 points0 points1 point 11 hours ago
relationship is all that really matters. Everyone and everything gets boring in the end, except for God, because he's infinite, which is why knowing him is ultimately all that matters in life. In my experience. Still working on actually hearing him. I expect it will take years. But everything else is boring and not "worth it".
Notice he never showed up the same way twice when talking with people in the old testament. Liked to change things up, keep it interesting. If he showed up a second time we might come to expect that he's predictable.
[–]Drewbix_Cube 0 points1 point2 points 12 hours ago
I think because God specifically told them not to. They heard God say that, they just didn't listen.
[–]epsys 0 points1 point2 points 11 hours ago
he didn't punish them, he informed them the result their actions would bring. actually that's not all true, he did curse the ground, but that was lifted after the flood.
[–]TheGoomba 48 points49 points50 points 15 hours ago
Sin is just a violation of "God's Rules". No rules, no sin. You can still have free will without rules, there's just no repercussions for actions. Which is fine.
[–]superwinner 17 points18 points19 points 15 hours ago
Ah but if they are his rules, can't he himself change them? Didn't he change those rules by sending himself down to be sacrificed to himself, during which he looked up at himself and asked himself, "Why have I forsaken myself?"
[–]FeepingCreature 7 points8 points9 points 13 hours ago
I wonder if God ever looked at Jesus and went "this isn't really me, it's just a copy! I can do whatever I want to it! "
Transhumanism topics crop up in the oddest places.
[–]superwinner 4 points5 points6 points 13 hours ago*
And since coming down and being sacrificed was all 'part of the plan' in the first place, why would jesus even ask why he had been forsaken? Thats the whole reason he sent himself here, so he should not have been surprised when it happened.
I'm starting to understand why they asked me not to come back to Sunday school...
[–]FeepingCreature 9 points10 points11 points 13 hours ago
Being nailed to a cross tends to change your perspective on things.
[–]Drewbix_Cube 2 points3 points4 points 12 hours ago
But the Bible says that he was fully human, and as a human if you're about to be crucified, you're probably going to be scared.
[–]CaptainFiddlebottom -1 points0 points1 point 11 hours ago
Was he never aware that he was God or something?
Because that kind of ruins the whole scared of death thing.
[–]AntiMe 1 point2 points3 points 11 hours ago
In my father's church (I'm a preacher kid), the forsaken part was when God left the presence of Jesus, to allow him to be only a mortal for the crucifixion, although a mortal that had never sinned, which allowed for a lot of rules to be broken when he died.
[–]Mr_Zarika 4 points5 points6 points 10 hours ago
God's law is intrinsic to himself. "The Law" was never designed to actually be followed, but it was requested by the Jews over and over.
"Tell us what we must do, and we will do it" got them the 10 commandments. Then they thought they were doing those well enough, so they said, "What ELSE should we do?" And to humiliate their self-rightousness, God dumped Leviticus on them. Thousands of strange rules and laws that were un-doable. Then the Pharisees think that they have attained perfection, and they ask Jesus, "What is the sum of the Law and the Prophets?" (thinking they will trap Jesus). He responds with the impossible. Love God with all your heart soul and mind, and love your neighbor as yourself. They are stunned as the ones who are present realize the impossibility of that statement.
Few people could argue that the 10 commandments or even "Love your neighbor as yourself" are anything but the highest level of human perfection. Unfortunately, modern Christianity has put their faith back into their ability to DO what God said. This is not where salvation lies, and not even where freedom from "sinful" desires comes.
Also: you're trying to make a 3 part God seem foolish by simplifying it to stupidity.
Anything can be made to sound stupid when you word it in such a way. "You travel at high speed in a steel cage, which you paid thousands of dollars for, but will oxidise into iron filings within a decade, just to get to work so you can pay for this cage? HOW RIDICULOUS!!" Buying a car to drive to work; however, seems more logical.
[–]esnaw 3 points4 points5 points 14 hours ago
Ahhhhh, I havn't read a good religion talk on Reddit in too long! It feels good!
[–]Mr_Zarika 1 point2 points3 points 10 hours ago
I usually find that a reasonable question or observation about religion will descend into childish "LOL HE DIED tO HIMSELF LOLLOL I AM 12" within about 4-5 replies.
[–]The_Doctor_00 2 points3 points4 points 12 hours ago
The concept of god being Jesus does not come from the original material, it was tacked on later by influence from pagan belief systems. (mainly because its easier to convert somone if you adapt their beliefs and yours to match) Kind of like making Jesus being born on the 25th of December. The trinity dogma is just another example of that, repeatedly Jesus said that he was sent from god, as well as being inferior to him.
Further still in one of the verses where Jesus says he and the father are one, (which trinitarian believers use as proof of the dogma) there are several problems. Namely that he also goes on to say he and his disciples are one, but further still it's conflictive with the original language. The Greek word used for one in this instance is the neuter form of one, that is that it means one thing, if the writers wanted to signify one person they would have used the one that has the masculine form. With using one thing and also being one with his disciples the context suggests they meant one purpose, that they had the same goal.
I believe he realized that since he bound Satan to the earth to play, he had to make some sort of counterbalance due to the external influences. It would seem he is unable to undo angels. None of it is explained in the bible, which doesn't help.
[–]buckeyemed 11 points12 points13 points 15 hours ago
But there are repercussions for actions. From a (primarily Christian) theological perspective, God does not simply make arbitrary "rules" to exercise his power. Being the creator of everything, he is in the best position to know what is good for us and what is harmful to both us and the world around us, and "God's rules" reflect that.
[–]esnaw 9 points10 points11 points 14 hours ago
Now, with the idea that God created everything, what about this idea: There are many things that I could do, but I will never do, because my internal programming is so powerfully against it. For example, I could cut off parts of my body, I could lie on the ground and never move again, I could close my eyes and never open them.
I choose not to do these things because I have an internal strong aversion to doing it. Similarly, God could have created humans so that the same aversion to cutting off parts of my own body would be applied to urges like killing another person, stealing from another, or talking bad about another. We could still have free will, but also an intense internal aversion to sinning. This is what makes me think that God did not create the world, it just happened, and that there is no reason for why people are the way they are.
[–]buckeyemed 5 points6 points7 points 11 hours ago
You don't think people have a strong inner drive not to do those things? Isn't that what a conscience is?
My belief is that for a variety of reasons, people who commit murder, or steal have a weakened sense of aversion to those acts, just like "cutters" have a weakened aversion to self-harm. Things like talking bad about another are unfortunately so common that I think most people have lost the aversion to doing it due to societal pressure/exposure.
[–]FeepingCreature 0 points1 point2 points 13 hours ago*
Oh, also: If God is unfathomable, then there is something in the Divine Plan that's worth the sacrifice of six million of His chosen people.
Such a deity can only be described as monstrous.
[edit] just killed, liek, ten billion jeeews! im so random lol --godbook
[–]TheGoomba 10 points11 points12 points 14 hours ago
You're correct. I can see the terrible repercussions and logic behind why we should not mix fabrics, or eat meat on certain days. I now also understand why homosexuals do not deserve equal rights. Religion, it turns out, makes perfect sense. Thank you for opening my eyes. hail satan
[–]buckeyemed 4 points5 points6 points 11 hours ago
From the Chistian standpoint (and possibly some Jewish scholars, I'm not sure) Old Testament laws fall into one of several categories. There are moral laws (murder, adultery, etc) and there are laws which were intended to separate the Jews from the other tribes living around them at the time, who worshiped other gods and practiced things like child sacrifice. Not mixing fabrics falls in the latter category as a reminder that the Jews were not to mix with the other tribes. There were also sanitation laws, which included things like not eating pork, since pigs at the time carried many diseases.
I'm not clear on why Catholics don't eat meat on Fridays, as I'm not Catholic. As far as I know, there is no command to do that in the Bible.
As far as homosexuality, I'm not sure I can make any comment on it, other than to say that whether it is or is not a sin, I believe homosexuals should enjoy equal rights to heterosexuals. It's a hotly debated topic, both outside of and within the church, and one I'm not sure there will ever be 100% agreement on.
[–]rytis 4 points5 points6 points 11 hours ago
the not eating meat part was a way to ask catholics to do a little self-sacrifice once a week to show their love of god. back in the middle ages, it made a lot of sense. today, we oh-so-smart catholics just order up a filet-o-fish or have a nice lobster or tilapia dinner. 99% forgot the point of it all.
[–]buckeyemed 2 points3 points4 points 11 hours ago
That was what I thought, but I didn't want to say it without knowing it was true.
[–]coolstorybroham 4 points5 points6 points 13 hours ago
Mmm yes. God's rules are certainly reflective of a supreme creator and not a desert tribe from centuries ago.
[–]TheGoomba 3 points4 points5 points 13 hours ago
Quite.
[–]johno456 8 points9 points10 points 14 hours ago
no you dont get it. we decided to skip over that part now, so it doesn't count
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 26 points27 points28 points 15 hours ago*
do any rules apply to the ominpotent? Doesn't omnipotence mean that you can say A is A and at the same time, A is not A and also, A is a walrus, and I need to mention that there is no A and also everything is A and this is all true at the same time and anybody who says I am wrong about this suddenly doesn't exist and never did.
[–]w4lter 7 points8 points9 points 15 hours ago
There are limits to omnipotence. Even the omnipotent cannot violate the law of non-contradiction or be otherwise illogical. For example, the answer to "Can God create a rock so large he cannot move?" is no. He cannot create something he has no control over.
[–]esnaw 4 points5 points6 points 14 hours ago
Why could God not create something he has no control over?
[–]w4lter 2 points3 points4 points 14 hours ago
Because that would make him non-omnipotent.
[–]epsys 1 point2 points3 points 11 hours ago
that's less a "can't" and more a "the question is flawed" like asking "can he make a circle that's also a square, 4 edges and all"? Such a thing does not exist within the defined limitations (properties of circles and squares).
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 11 points12 points13 points 13 hours ago
Oh yes he can. First, he creates the rock he can't move, then becomes even Godlier, and moves it. And then he eats it to proves that he's also Nomnipotent.
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 7 points8 points9 points 13 hours ago
oh. there are limits to omnipotence. THAT'S where I goofed.
[–]solidwhetstone 3 points4 points5 points 10 hours ago
Ya dun goofed.
[–]NipponBanzai 1 point2 points3 points 14 hours ago
You might want to read this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence
Just did. I'm not sure where exactly in that article you were referring but it pretty much states exactly what I said under the "Paradox" tab.
[–]Lighthat -1 points0 points1 point 13 hours ago
Part of omnipotence is it ability to strip yourself of that omnipotence - e.g. making a rock you can't move.
[–]R031E5 2 points3 points4 points 15 hours ago
Omnipotence means that you can define every rule, you can say A is A and A is ~B, but for that B needs to be defined, which are the main axioms of boolean algebra. Rules don't apply to the omnipotent, because he created those rules, which doesn't mean that because he can't break his rules, he's not omnipotent, thats a logical fallacy that every atheist knows backwards because infinite can only be compared with infinite in equality, not in quantity.
In the purest way, God can only love its people and nothing more, this helps every individual cope with his existence and live a happy life.
[–]browb3aten 13 points14 points15 points 15 hours ago
Why does B need to be defined? Why does an omnipotent being have to follow your rules of logic, or any rules of logic?
[–]R031E5 3 points4 points5 points 15 hours ago
That's correct, God doesn't need to follow the logic he created, which as I mentioned, he doesn't need to follow his rules. If God operates by another kind of logic that we cannot understand because its not an inherent part of our nature, then we won't ever understand his actions.
[–]esnaw 0 points1 point2 points 14 hours ago
I would like to see one of these religious discussions but with the starting premise that our universe is a computer simulation created by some other beings.
[–]AndrewKemendo 2 points3 points4 points 15 hours ago
Stop speaking like these are actual answers.
[–]Lighthat 2 points3 points4 points 13 hours ago*
If god didn't create death and disease and deceit..there would be no death, disease, or deceit. Who defined 'freedom?' God did, apparently. So if he created freedom, he created the bounds of it (we can't travel through different dimensions, we can't create and destroy, etc) It would be like giving us the ability to travel through different dimensions, but telling us not to. It just makes more sense to not give us that ability. IN the same way, it would just make more sense to not give us the capacity to kill another, or to steal, or to sin. We have freedom to do the things we're capable of. So if god didn't want us to sin, he could just take away our capacity to sin. This is part of omnipotence - you can do absolutely anything.
Instead of creating something and telling them not to do something when your apparent omniscience tells you they will do it anyway, just use your omnipotence to prevent it from happening in the first place. Kind of like programming. Using a rudimentary example, i don't like division by zero. So, being the intelligent being I am, i use my power to prevent division by zero, instead of letting it happen and then sentencing the program to an eternity of suffering because it divided by zero when it shouldn't be dividing by zero.
[–]Pxzib 1 point2 points3 points 12 hours ago
This is true, but if you give someone total freedom, their true selfs will be revealed. (Maybe in order to prove a point, I don't know).
Let's say you program a super-intelligent AI. Instead of preventing the division of zero, you can test the true character and performance of that program by telling it that dividing by zero will have serious concequences, and then see what it does.
I'm not a theologian, but maybe this is a likely answer to these sets of questions.
he didn't create those things, they spawned into existence when we took our authority and chose the wrong path. Fear, anger, hate, these things lead to the dark side. Evil is not your friend! :P
[–]massenburger 5 points6 points7 points 16 hours ago
This guy's got it right. You can't have free will without the freedom to choose (obviously...). And the freedom to choose includes the freedom to do what is (considered) wrong. The only way for "sin" to not exist would be to take away our free will, thus leaving only mindless robots (not sure if we would be that different anyway..... but that's beside the point).
[–]BoilerMaker11 9 points10 points11 points 15 hours ago
I believe the appropriate response is: Heaven.
Free will, no sin. Heaven exists, therefore a place with free will and no sin exists. God could have created us in that manner. (this is a theodicy, btw, which I don't follow)
The only way for "sin" to not exist would be to take away our free will, thus leaving only mindless robots
and part of that is true. The whole premise of the Garden of Eden is "you can do what you want, but don't eat that apple" i.e. the Advice God meme "I gave you free will, now use it as I command". You can't say "you have free will" and then tag on "but you can't do [blank]" and then continue to call it free will. The point of free will is that there aren't boundaries to your decisions.
[–]TyrialFrost 2 points3 points4 points 13 hours ago
My largest issue: omnipotence.
Imagine you could see the future, your about to buy your dog some pet food, and you KNOW the dumb thing will find the bag in three days time and scatter dried dog food across the house when your not looking. But you buy it anyway and do not secure it regardless, THEN punish the dog when it all plays out... Fucking bullshit.
time is the 4th dimension, if he's, metaphorically speaking, in the 5th dimension (or higher) then he's simply an observer of all moments. Doesn't change that you still could choose whichever way you wanted. But that raises the question of being nothing more but a chemical process, a biological computer. To truly have free will we must be something besides just our biological processes.
[–]infamia 0 points1 point2 points 12 hours ago
There was a rebellion (i.e. sin) in Heaven as well (e.g. Lucifer).
[–]massenburger 0 points1 point2 points 3 hours ago
You have a pretty one-dimensional view of heaven. Who says heaven is "perfect", and there is "no sin"? Heaven is just being in God's presence.
You don't have to be there if you don't want. If you don't want to go there, then you can (for a lack of a more appropriate place to use this term) go to hell! Hell isn't really all that bad of a place if you don't want to be with God for all of eternity. The reason we know hell as "hades" (basically the sewage dump of Jerusalem) and "gnashing of teeth" is because the person who used these these terms the most was Jesus, God's own fricken' son! Of course He would say that being separated from God would be the most torturous of ways to spend all of eternity! However, if you don't want to spend eternity with God, you don't have to. Just go to hell!
[–]lostmygravitas 2 points3 points4 points 14 hours ago
It's all made up anyway so I am not sure why people get so intense about debating the semantics.
[–]samcrow 1 point2 points3 points 12 hours ago
bullshit. the ability to make choices can still be present without the sinful nature. if jealousy, anger, greed, selfishness etc were not part of human nature, i'm pretty sure we would still be able to make choices
[–]Coool_Hand_Luke -1 points0 points1 point 15 hours ago
Mandatory "not a religious person" comment to avoid down votes! Agree with your point too.
[–]zmmillard 1 point2 points3 points 15 hours ago
What about Mary, who was born without sin?
[–]disgruntled_pilot 1 point2 points3 points 15 hours ago
he forbade it because you go to hell if you do it lol
[–]esnaw -1 points0 points1 point 14 hours ago
I dunno, I don't buy that explanation. It makes the assumption that there are things that God cannot do, or will not do, or wants to do. And all these assumptions just don't seem backed up by anything.
And yea, I see you don't actually believe this, so I too am just commenting on the idea.
[–]tctony 0 points1 point2 points 12 hours ago
If God is all powerful, there doesn't need to be sin. He may not have necessarily created it, but he can eliminate it if he is truly all powerful.
[–]The_Doctor_00 0 points1 point2 points 12 hours ago
There was one prohibition in he garden story, don't eat of the fruit from a single tree. As their creator he set this one limit, like when you set limits in their kids because they are not fully old enough to make choices for themselves.
[–]mindaika 0 points1 point2 points 10 hours ago
Sin is breaking of the "rules." In order to break the rules, you have to make the rules. God made the rules.
[–]RMcD94 -1 points0 points1 point 6 hours ago
Don't you think not giving us wings or the ability to breathe in space or travel faster than light messes with our liberty?
It's an odd kind of construed liberty don't you think?
If I created a being that could move up or down and claimed it was free because I let it do that when the first thing I did was limited what it could do.
[–]InjectThePoison 0 points1 point2 points 5 hours ago
Would've been nice if he didn't give us the trait of disobedience, either, eh?
[–]Tendie -1 points0 points1 point 13 hours ago
Man's got a point. No reason to argue about it.
[–]juggernaut1107 0 points1 point2 points 11 hours ago
Plus you're an educated scientist. No point in arguing. Checkmate Christians.
[–]phrakture 29 points30 points31 points 17 hours ago
Yes, because wearing cloth made of two fibers and working on Sunday is totally just like "dark"
[–]cstaylor 10 points11 points12 points 16 hours ago
I've never met a Christian who believes this is sin. Those laws were contextual and only for a specific nation in a specific time for specific reasons.
Also, the Sabbath was on Saturday.
[–]Calibas 41 points42 points43 points 16 hours ago
Who gets to decide which laws were contextual?
[–]cstaylor 1 point2 points3 points 16 hours ago
The Bible. If the old testament was speaking to Jews, it was speaking to Jews. If Jesus explained that as gentiles we non-Jews don't have to follow those rules, then that's pretty clear.
I'm all for not picking and choosing which parts of the bible I like, but context is pretty clear if you examine it carefully.
[–]Calibas 35 points36 points37 points 16 hours ago
It's interesting that people say "The Bible" like it has some universal meaning, which version are we speaking about? Protestant? Catholic? Greek Orthodox? Ethiopian? Coptic? Assyrian? All of those contain different books. I wont even get into the enormous number of different translations and interpretations.
[–]Lots42 1 point2 points3 points 8 hours ago
The one that I really, really like is the true one, duh.
[–]mibeosaur 8 points9 points10 points 15 hours ago
Yeah like that time Jesus was talking to that rich guy and told him that it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get to heaven. He totally wasn't talking about my wealth since, contextually, we can see that he was talking directly to the rich man.
Hahahahaha, ohhhhhh snap!!!! Savage bible burn, SON!
[–]mibeosaur 2 points3 points4 points 13 hours ago
Didn't really mean it as a burn, more of a tongue-in-cheek way to point out that what is contextually "obvious" to one person may not be to another. But I like your use of the word "savage." That one doesn't see enough use. You might also be interested in trying out "rad" - I'm trying to bring it back.
[–]esnaw 0 points1 point2 points 13 hours ago
Jawsome!
[–]lucisferre 14 points15 points16 points 15 hours ago
I suggest you examine it carefully.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
But do go on, christians explaining the dichotomy between their beliefs and behaviours always makes for some entertaining contradictions, excuses and back pedaling.
[–]esnaw 2 points3 points4 points 14 hours ago
And you forgot the part about "Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:19
So all these people who are saying it dosn't apply are going to be called the least! But seriously, I guess its not ok to make fun of Christians for believing this stuff. I mean, they take it seriously, we might actually make someone loose sleep because they think they are going to hell. It's like when a person has a phobia, just because you don't understand it dosn't make it any less real to them.
[–]Suttonian 1 point2 points3 points 11 hours ago*
That is not very specific, and open to lots of interpretation. There are also parts of the bible that appear to contradict this.
First I'd like to add more to the quote:
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Even considering the interpretation is correct, is everything accomplished? (Jews don't seem to think so).
[–]BoilerMaker11 5 points6 points7 points 15 hours ago
my favorite part of the Bible is when Jesus says that none of the laws will be changed or removed until the heavens and earth pass over.
and for those that construe that in any other manner than what the words themselves say, my other favorite part is where God is supposed to be eternal/unchanging/the same today as he was yesterday and will be tomorrow, but with the New Testament, he "changed his mind" so that only certain laws must be followed but not others (gay people? Abomination! Mixed fabric? That's cool, bro)
[–]true_grit 4 points5 points6 points 15 hours ago
Sigh. If we got this discussion in this subreddit now, at least I'd like to extract something out of it.
I'm with you until the last point, here's my question:
Is it really true that there's no mentioning of homosexuals in the New Testament? All I remember that no sources of Jesus quotes indicate he mentioned something about homosexuals - there's only a passage from a letter of Paulus which has been interpreted in more than one way.
Could you or so. else answer this? Thanks.
[–]samisbond 15 points16 points17 points 13 hours ago*
Okay this is far enough down that I can waste this subreddit's room. Here's an old response I wrote:
It's in there a few times:
The word arsenokoitai is the most argued over translation. It literally means "man-bedder" or "those who bed males" (arsen[male] + koite[bed]), and may be Paul's own coinage.1 Many translations transcribe the word directly as "homosexuality" or "homosexual offenders."2 I prefer the word "sodomite": simply because the idea of homosexuality is anachronistic. There was no “straight” or “gay” at the time as we might think of them now. The Greeks would partake in man on man sex. Then go home to their wives later that day. They were not defined as gay or bisexual, they just had some good ole man on man sex.
I've heard others somehow interpret this as Paul stating that he simply does not want straight men to take part in gay sex, as it would be unnatural for them, and in that same light it could be said Paul would have told homosexuals not to have unnatural sex for them (in this case: straight sex). This argument falls apart however when we stop looking at sexual identity as straight and gay. In a more historical context Paul was forbidding a sexual act that the men would take part in, and therefore was imposing Judaic sexual restrictions.
There is a reason the NRSV uses "sodomy" as the translation - which is an act which can take place between a man and a woman. It relates to the argument used to dispel the translation of arsenokoitai.
Disclosure: This is where my knowledge begins to end, despite it being crucial to the study. I still hold my conclusion with conviction with the help of supporting passages but I've yet to fully make sense of this.
There is a document written late 500AD, Penitential, ascribes to John the Faster,3 which contains the passage:
Some even do it with their own mothers, and others with foster sisters or goddaughters. In fact, many men even commit the sin of arsenokoitia with their wives.
In this context, arsenokoitia cannot mean man on man sex. I stand by the translation of arsenokoitia. I see no reason – I see an agenda, but no reason – why there would be such debate over “man-bedder”, especially with supporting passages speaking against man-on-man sex. This passage cannot be overlooked though. Yet I suspect most come to the same assumption when first reading the passage: John the Faster is using the word to mean anal sex. I’ve clearly lost any sort of formal voice but it’s certainly understandable. Even now there are people who would call anal sex “gay sex”. It’s a dangerous path to dismiss conflicting evidence, but there are supporting passages speaking against man-on-man sex and the idea of calling anal “gay sex” is by no means unusual in my opinion. I wouldn’t dismiss someone who is more skeptical than I on the matter; I do dismiss those who find this passage found 500 years later as enough evidence against arsenokoitai.
As for "male prostitutes", the word is malokois. Is has three degrees of definition: pansy,4 adolescent boys who had sex with older men,4 and the passive member of homosexual sex.5 Some interpreters try to read the passage as having to do with pedastry, a sexual act that should be condemned; arsenokoitai then referring to the older active partner is the act. However, this ignored Paul's condemnation of homosexuality in Romans, however.
Almost all respected modern translations translate arsenokoitai as sodomy or homosexual acts including the NRSV, NIV, NLT, ESV, NASB and the ISV.
Citations:
|1 H. W. Attridge, ed., p. 1939, annotation to 6:9.
|2 1 Corinthians 6:9, Parallel Translations.
|3 "John the Faster (?) (d. 595) Penitential." Internet History Sourcebooks Project. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Aug. 2012. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/johnnest.asp
|4 "Strong's G3120 - malakos", Blue Letter Bible.
|5 H. W. Attridge, ed., p. 1939, annotation to 6:9.
References:
|1 H. W. Attridge, ed., The HarperCollins Study Bible, (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 2006), p. 1939, annotation to 6:9.
|2 Mayhall, C. Wayne. "Is Arsenokoitai Really That Mysterious?" Christian Research Institute. Web.
|3 Dod, Brian J. "Paul, Homosexuals, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11." Catalyst: Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives. Web.
References with alternate conclusions:
|4 "Arsenokoites Was Never Used in Antiquity with Our Modern Meaning of Homosexual." Gay Christian 101. Web.
|5 Lynn, Gary. "Difficult to Understand and Ambiguous Scriptures Concerning Homosexuality." Is Homosexuality a Choice? Web.
|6 Robinson, B. A. "Homosexuality in The New Testament: Conservative and Liberal Views." Religious Tolerance. Web.
|7 Townsley, Jeramy. "Translations of Malakoi and Arsenokoitai Through History." Christian Gays. Web.
[–]true_grit 1 point2 points3 points 13 hours ago
Gold mine. Thanks!
[–]BoilerMaker11 4 points5 points6 points 15 hours ago
agghh....homosexuality was the first thing to come to mind because it's such a hot button issue in America, so maybe I should have said something else, like if you rape a virgin, you pay her father some money and marry her because she has lost her "value" otherwise.
But with regard to homosexuality and the New Testament, it's mentioned, but not in the gospels of Jesus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_New_Testament because there's details, ambiguities, etc that I can't be bothered to write out, from my understanding
The bible verse you are talking about is Matthew 5:17-19
[–]Bugsysservant 0 points1 point2 points 11 hours ago
Alright, the religious history/theology of this thread seems to have gotten sort of out of hand, but in all fairness, in the old testament, God said that he would establish a new covenant which would invalidate the old (this happens in several places, e.g. Jer 31:31, Heb 8:13). So there is a very compelling argument to be made both for God's consistency and for the irrelevancy of certain laws today: since they contained mechanisms for their own invalidation you aren't breaking them after they are invalidated.
For an analogy, imagine if a law was passed saying
Until someone named Joe is born, no one may eat bread. Afterwards, do what Joe says.
At that time, you would be breaking the law if you ate bread. Then, if someone by the name of Joe arrives and says "I'm not changing the law", strictly speaking you can eat bread. Since the original law invalidated itself at Joe's birth, and Joe didn't replace that law, he technically didn't set any rules for bread consumption. Basically, by endorsing the original law he was also endorsing its mechanism for invalidating itself.
Thus, the issue isn't whether God "changed his mind", it's what laws were presented after the coming of Jesus. There are new testament passages about gay people being bad, but not any new testament passages about mixed fibers, that's the (ostensible) reason for Christian homophobia. To present the theology of Christianity as so blatantly flawed is more than a little disingenuous. Some of the most brilliant people in the past 2000 years have worked on religious philosophy to make sure that, while it may be convoluted, it is still pretty consistent. There are plenty of problems with Christianity and the way it is practiced today, but the tired old criticism about consistency isn't really one of them.
(note: I'm not a theologian, and I'm not trying to make any pretense otherwise. If I'm wrong, I would welcome someone to correct me)
[–]hellosexynerds 1 point2 points3 points 15 hours ago
Really cause the new testament also says women should not speak in church or be leaders. Jesus himself says divorce is not permissible.
reference among others:
http://niv.scripturetext.com/1_timothy/2.htm
[–]oligobop 0 points1 point2 points 14 hours ago
So the word of god is relative and not absolute. Interesting.
[–]eyeamsam 5 points6 points7 points 16 hours ago*
I too have never heard a Christian believe this, but I have heard them make up what you just said.
The best part being the factoid makes about as little sense. How are Ultra-Orthodox Jews not more offended by these claims?
Get your reading of the bible out of here! You believe what your pastor tells you to believe, not what the bible says!
P.S. I just discovered /r/magicskyfairy and it is so funny!
[–]Quazz 16 points17 points18 points 16 hours ago
Sin isn't the absence of anything though.
[–]cstaylor 21 points22 points23 points 16 hours ago
I've heard it explained that sin is simply the absence of God. God gave Adam and Eve a choice: to follow him or not, because not giving them a choice (forcing them to follow him) would have been quite a bit less loving. They chose not to follow him, therefore choosing his absence.
I could be wrong, but that's just how I've come to understand the whole predicament.
[–]admiral-zombie 15 points16 points17 points 16 hours ago
I think you're thinking of evil, not sin. Sin is specifically certain acts.
There is uncertainty though, in philosophy there is a question of if good/evil are just different ends of a single spectrum, or if they're both their own spectrum.
And even then presumably god could create a world without evil/sin since he is suppose to be all powerful. But if somethign more specific is needed like "how do you create a world without greed/murder" but still retain free will, then god just does something simple like everyone is immortal, there isn't any scarcity of resources, etc. Immortal people can't be killed, no more murder. Remove scarcity of resources, you remove 90% of the reasons to sin in the first place, along with the obvious greed. Etc.
The only sin not easily removed in this way would be the "worship god" one
[–]cstaylor 3 points4 points5 points 16 hours ago
Wasn't that basically what the world was before sin and death came into the picture? Like, the garden of eden and stuff?
[–]admiral-zombie 0 points1 point2 points 16 hours ago
In some views yes. But it is still a matter of god creating the opportunity/reason for sinning by removing man from the garden.
[–]cstaylor 6 points7 points8 points 16 hours ago
I was under the impression that man sinned, and THEN he was taken out of the garden?
Maybe the garden of Eden is a metaphorical story that is trying to get across the point that if you do what God tells you not to you will be punished.
[–]Hypersapien 13 points14 points15 points 16 hours ago
If god is omnipresent, how can there be an absence of him?
[–]Jymotion 6 points7 points8 points 16 hours ago
Rejection of him.
[–]Hypersapien 10 points11 points12 points 16 hours ago
How can mere human will overcome god's omnipresence?
[–]Jymotion 4 points5 points6 points 16 hours ago
I don't want to get into a debate about it. I was just responding how I think a believer would respond.
[–]esnaw 1 point2 points3 points 14 hours ago
Maybe thats the whole free will thing, we become as powerful as God, there is nothing he can do to stop us! Maybe that is why there is evil in the world!
I am not a christian, but I think its a fun mental exercise to try and make their rules internally consistent.
[–]epsys 1 point2 points3 points 11 hours ago*
Hm, never thought of this, but I think Bible never said he was omnipresent, we just assumed it because "if I ascend to the heavens you are there, if I make my bed in the depths, you are there". We prolly got that wrong. Bad things happen when we take scripture and make sweeping generalizations.
God gives us the choice of decided how close we want to live with him. Hell is very, very, very far from him, which is why it is not a nice place-- because good things come from him. When he gives us bad things, is so that we come closer so that he can hurry up and give us the good things again :) Always about training, discipline. Never about punishment.
[–]SaturnSucksBalls 5 points6 points7 points 16 hours ago
You can't 'reject' something that is omnipresent...
[–]I_Will_Allow_This 3 points4 points5 points 16 hours ago
If you are an omnipotent being I'm sure you would be able to figure out a way to 'reject' this whole omnipresence business.
[–]remaker12 -1 points0 points1 point 13 hours ago
But first it has to be legitimate.
[–]Skitrel 0 points1 point2 points 16 hours ago
Just like confidence.
[–]silent_p 1 point2 points3 points 15 hours ago
Well, the idea is that God created the concept of sin by imposing a list of rules that we're meant to follow. If there were no rules, and nothing was taboo, there would be no sin. Alternately, this comic might be suggesting that God created us with the capacity to sin, and then told us not to. So maybe it's supposing that God then revoked humanity's ability to sin. I don't know which solution is being suggested.
In one, we would end up with a civilization with no concept of "wrong" so we'd probably have a lot of murder and theft and whatever, but people would be ambivalent and apathetic about it, I guess. In the other, there would be no free will.
[–]rimo 1 point2 points3 points 14 hours ago
You mean to say that an action of sin is actually an inaction?
That argument falls flat on its ass since the rules God made forbid certain actions, and sometimes inactions. But, in the case of an action being sin, it means refraining from that action, ergo inaction, is the same as obedience.
Basically, you are saying light is darkness.
[–]Lighthat 0 points1 point2 points 13 hours ago
Bad analogy. Darkness may be the absence of light, but sin isn't the absence of good. I have to do something to sin, so sinning still has substance.
[–]Karacent 0 points1 point2 points 8 hours ago
Yeah, but no one tells anyone else that if they close their eyes they will be sent to a fiery abyss to spend eternity in agonising suffering. :P
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 21 points22 points23 points 17 hours ago
I know: posted and deleted an hour ago. Spotted a goof I needed to fix.
[–]sirmoosh 9 points10 points11 points 17 hours ago
Is he drinking a budweiser? Blasphemy
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 36 points37 points38 points 17 hours ago
I would imagine it to be some sort of divine cup, different for each person, that alternated each sip between all of your favorite libations, and, you know, it runneth over and shit. Okay I maybe like drinking too much.
[–]peon47 20 points21 points22 points 16 hours ago
Bertie Bott's Every Flavour Beverage?
[–]michigandalf 6 points7 points8 points 16 hours ago
It's the Russian roulette of beverages
[–]Kredns 3 points4 points5 points 16 hours ago
Jesus drank alcohol in the bible, hell he even turned water into wine.
[–]thenewiBall 13 points14 points15 points 16 hours ago
Yeah but 'would God drink shitty beer?' is the real question here
[–]Naedlus 7 points8 points9 points 15 hours ago
To better appreciate the micro brew he'll crack open after that one.
[–]BeastWriter 3 points4 points5 points 14 hours ago
Yours is the funniest answer, therefore the correct one!
[–]sirmoosh 2 points3 points4 points 16 hours ago
This guy gets it
[–]Kredns 0 points1 point2 points 15 hours ago
ha!
Sometimes God just can't afford great beer.
[–]sandy_samoan 1 point2 points3 points 15 hours ago
It seems like a red solo cup.
[–]darkshy 46 points47 points48 points 17 hours ago
I love how God is just like "welp you got me" I'ma chill and watch TV
[–]peon47 31 points32 points33 points 16 hours ago
How boring would TV be if there was no concept of "sin"?
[–]Nodules 17 points18 points19 points 16 hours ago
"Today on the Jeremy Kyle Show, ...er, absolutely nothing. Have a good morning, all."
[–]Alex_C 3 points4 points5 points 13 hours ago
I'd watch that. Y'know, maybe one day I'd see puppies on TV, instead of seeing them on /r/aww , where I go for a mind bleach nowadays.
[–]bunglejerry 7 points8 points9 points 16 hours ago
It'd be non-stop Michael Landon.
[–]bronkula 4 points5 points6 points 15 hours ago
Well there would be a whole lot of man getting attacked by animals and nature. Which could still be interesting.
[–]peon47 3 points4 points5 points 15 hours ago
Crikey.
[–]Annieone23 0 points1 point2 points 1 hour ago
It would be even worse because you know these guys did literally nothing to prevoke it or karmically deserve it, since they cannot have sinned.
[–]SvenHudson 2 points3 points4 points 15 hours ago
It'd be about the same. Even if there's no objective concept of moral wrongness there are still things that effect other people on an emotional level and that equals drama.
[–]DeathToPennies 0 points1 point2 points 11 hours ago
I think sin would still be on TV. The point of TV is to show things that we normally can't see, isn't it?
[–]BeastWriter 0 points1 point2 points 14 hours ago
Who's to say we're not God's favorite reality TV show? Maybe sin is the equivalent of the obstacle courses in Ninja Warrior
[–]hackmiester 0 points1 point2 points 12 hours ago
I think it'd be awesome. Ever watch "How It's Made" ?
[–]Lots42 0 points1 point2 points 8 hours ago
TBS.
[–]ReadsYourComments 2 points3 points4 points 14 hours ago
Your Comment, Sir/Ma'am
[–]touchpadonbackon 4 points5 points6 points 16 hours ago
That's the part of the comic that I liked too.
[–]Warlaw 5 points6 points7 points 14 hours ago
What's on Heaven TV, anyway?
[–]esnaw 3 points4 points5 points 13 hours ago
Boobs I bet.
[–]cccjfs 5 points6 points7 points 13 hours ago
It's about choice.
[–]richie311gocavs 6 points7 points8 points 13 hours ago
I'm not religious but if I were I would say something along the lines of free will...
[–]rasputine 4 points5 points6 points 8 hours ago
Free will is incompatible with an all-powerful all-knowing creator god. He either knows what's going to happen, or there is free will.
[–]Annieone23 -1 points0 points1 point 1 hour ago
Knowing the decision you will make and not giving you a choice are two different things.
[–]touchmybelly 3 points4 points5 points 16 hours ago
He should have not made talking back!
[–]adremeaux 3 points4 points5 points 14 hours ago
Sin is Jecht.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd 1 point2 points3 points 11 hours ago
That shit blew my mind when I first played it. It was too deep for my teenage mind.
[–]_Auto_ 16 points17 points18 points 17 hours ago
guessing this is going straight to /r/atheism
[–]Lots42 5 points6 points7 points 8 hours ago
BRAVERY LEVELS RISING, CAPTAIN!
MAN THE LOGIC DECKS! WE HAVE A LEVEL 20 BASEMENT BREACH! PSUEDO-THEOLOGY-PHDS ARE EVERYWHER-- AUGUGH! intercom static
[–]arghdos 11 points12 points13 points 16 hours ago
JimKB you are consistently an excellent cartoonist! Keep up the good work! or else...
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 7 points8 points9 points 16 hours ago
thanks, arghdos.
[–]sonicon 0 points1 point2 points 13 hours ago
People can sin all they want, but until they're done sinning, they can't enter the sinless paradise. Unfortunately, once you start sinning, it's hard to stop. That's why religions have commandments and precepts as guides. They guide people out of the sinful state of being, it's nearly impossible to reach that state instantly, so it's best to practice living the sinless life. Here's the precepts from Buddhism Precepts~. Christianity share some of those, but half of their commandments were trying to fix the god issue people had at the time. You can simply focus on doing your best to be truthful, compassionate, and forbearing(self control, not vengeful, don't fall for desires). When you try this at first, you'll notice how much you want to go back to your old ways of desire and negativity. Everyone who is tired of sinning and the suffering it's causing them should try to live without sin. It doesn't need to involve any god or spirit; simply and truly be a good person no matter what.
[–]FoundPie 0 points1 point2 points 10 hours ago
The problem with omitting a God is that you have no infrastructure of determination regarding what is or is not sinful outside of your personal interpretation of reality.
[–]DoctorObvious 7 points8 points9 points 14 hours ago
It's a comic, it's funny. And it's true. All the armchair theologians are wrong: Sin isn't a thing, it's a judgment. And specifically, a judgment of God, in this case. To "stop listening to him" or "disobeying him" is only a sin if God says it is. So YES, God does indeed create sin by judging an action as such.
It's not something that exists independent of God, therefore he creates it. Get it? He could just as well say, "hey don't listen to me, I don't really care" and then sin does not exist.
[–]dcb720 3 points4 points5 points 12 hours ago
The Bible actually says that there is no sin without law. So if God gave no laws, there would be no sin. Of course, there would also be no courage or many other things, without the possibility of failure.
I suppose we could also petition congress to repeal all of their laws, then there would be no crime.
[–]deck_hand 2 points3 points4 points 13 hours ago
I'll bet a lot of what people call sin is actually fine with God. It's man's rules that we keep breaking. He even sent someone to clarify the issue, but we killed him.
[–]esnaw 2 points3 points4 points 13 hours ago
Thus creating the phrase "Don't shoot the messenger."
[–]MrEnglish 2 points3 points4 points 13 hours ago
Dat Eve.
[–]jordan314 1 point2 points3 points 14 hours ago
Amazing, is there a link to this on your site? I can't find it but would love to share the non imgur version
[–]tjhans 1 point2 points3 points 13 hours ago
making it that there is no such thing defeats the whole purpose of right. It's like being proud of a drug addict that "quit" because his only source was removed and was no longer capable of getting a fix.
I thought it was humans that created sin.
[–]nepidae 0 points1 point2 points 10 hours ago
Without sin we wouldn't have your funny comics :)
[–]ECoco 1 point2 points3 points 10 hours ago
If there was no sin, humans wouldn't have free will. There would be no point in us then, we'd just be robots.
[–]Zakiro 0 points1 point2 points 10 hours ago
This was funny until it reminded me I need to work on my paper about the problem of evil fucking ethics class ruining my Saturday on Reddit.
[–]FoundPie -1 points0 points1 point 10 hours ago
I cannot process how bad the theology is in this comic.
[–]Adam4d 0 points1 point2 points 10 hours ago
Ah yes. It's God's fault that we sin. That fits well.
[–]punchinginthefaceing -1 points0 points1 point 7 hours ago
This whole religious debate has turned into straw man on both sides
[–]SittingDuckNZ 0 points1 point2 points 7 hours ago
Jesus Christ
BENTON!
I like your comics good Sir.
[–]CitizenDickbag 0 points1 point2 points 6 hours ago
Guys, guys, guys... all this arguing is silly. God doesn't exist, so there's no need to have all this fighting.
[–]Scarjaka 0 points1 point2 points 6 hours ago
Silly religions with their stuff.
[–]Tiak 1 point2 points3 points 4 hours ago
Can we TAN and COSIN? If so, I think we're still okay.
[–]neutroscape 0 points1 point2 points 2 hours ago
When did /r/comics become /r/athiesm?
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
[–]egosumFidius 80 points81 points82 points ago
[–]safiire 10 points11 points12 points ago
[–]calmlunatic 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]JordanBlythe 199 points200 points201 points ago
[–]Reaper666 78 points79 points80 points ago
[–]JordanBlythe 37 points38 points39 points ago
[–]mst3kzz 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]Reaper666 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]lennon1230 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]ggk1 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]KyleFlowers 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–]aterner 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]cstaylor 138 points139 points140 points ago
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 220 points221 points222 points ago
[–]R031E5 84 points85 points86 points ago
[–]Devz0r 32 points33 points34 points ago
[–]R031E5 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]Mr_Zarika 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]futue_te_ipsum 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]hellosexynerds 19 points20 points21 points ago
[–]Woolio 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–]coolstorybroham 11 points12 points13 points ago
[–]AntiMe -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]lancerevo98 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]R031E5 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]lancerevo98 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]epsys -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]Drewbix_Cube 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]epsys 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]TheGoomba 48 points49 points50 points ago
[–]superwinner 17 points18 points19 points ago
[–]FeepingCreature 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]superwinner 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]FeepingCreature 9 points10 points11 points ago
[–]Drewbix_Cube 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]CaptainFiddlebottom -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]AntiMe 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Mr_Zarika 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]esnaw 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]Mr_Zarika 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]The_Doctor_00 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]AntiMe 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]buckeyemed 11 points12 points13 points ago
[–]esnaw 9 points10 points11 points ago
[–]buckeyemed 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]FeepingCreature 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]TheGoomba 10 points11 points12 points ago
[–]buckeyemed 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]rytis 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]buckeyemed 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]coolstorybroham 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]TheGoomba 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]johno456 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 26 points27 points28 points ago
[–]w4lter 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]esnaw 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]w4lter 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]epsys 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 11 points12 points13 points ago
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]solidwhetstone 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]NipponBanzai 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]w4lter 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]Lighthat -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]R031E5 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]browb3aten 13 points14 points15 points ago
[–]R031E5 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]esnaw 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]AndrewKemendo 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]Lighthat 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]Pxzib 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]epsys 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]massenburger 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]BoilerMaker11 9 points10 points11 points ago
[–]TyrialFrost 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]epsys 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]infamia 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]massenburger 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]lostmygravitas 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]samcrow 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Coool_Hand_Luke -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]zmmillard 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]disgruntled_pilot 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]esnaw -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]tctony 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]The_Doctor_00 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]mindaika 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]RMcD94 -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]InjectThePoison 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Tendie -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]juggernaut1107 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]phrakture 29 points30 points31 points ago
[–]cstaylor 10 points11 points12 points ago
[–]Calibas 41 points42 points43 points ago
[–]cstaylor 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Calibas 35 points36 points37 points ago
[–]Lots42 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]mibeosaur 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–]esnaw 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]mibeosaur 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]esnaw 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]lucisferre 14 points15 points16 points ago
[–]esnaw 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]Suttonian 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]BoilerMaker11 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]true_grit 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]samisbond 15 points16 points17 points ago
[–]true_grit 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]BoilerMaker11 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]esnaw 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Bugsysservant 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]hellosexynerds 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]oligobop 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]eyeamsam 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]esnaw -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]Quazz 16 points17 points18 points ago
[–]cstaylor 21 points22 points23 points ago
[–]admiral-zombie 15 points16 points17 points ago
[–]cstaylor 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]admiral-zombie 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]cstaylor 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]esnaw 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Hypersapien 13 points14 points15 points ago
[–]Jymotion 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]Hypersapien 10 points11 points12 points ago
[–]Jymotion 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]esnaw 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]epsys 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]SaturnSucksBalls 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]I_Will_Allow_This 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]remaker12 -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]Skitrel 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]silent_p 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]rimo 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Lighthat 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Karacent 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 21 points22 points23 points ago
[–]sirmoosh 9 points10 points11 points ago
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 36 points37 points38 points ago
[–]peon47 20 points21 points22 points ago
[–]michigandalf 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]Kredns 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]thenewiBall 13 points14 points15 points ago
[–]Naedlus 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]BeastWriter 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]sirmoosh 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]Kredns 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]esnaw 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]sandy_samoan 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]darkshy 46 points47 points48 points ago
[–]peon47 31 points32 points33 points ago
[–]Nodules 17 points18 points19 points ago
[–]Alex_C 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]bunglejerry 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]bronkula 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]peon47 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]Annieone23 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]SvenHudson 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]DeathToPennies 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]BeastWriter 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]hackmiester 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Lots42 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]ReadsYourComments 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]touchpadonbackon 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]Warlaw 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]esnaw 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]cccjfs 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]richie311gocavs 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]rasputine 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]Annieone23 -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]touchmybelly 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]adremeaux 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]_Auto_ 16 points17 points18 points ago
[–]Lots42 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]Annieone23 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]arghdos 11 points12 points13 points ago
[–]JimKBJim Benton Cartoons[S] 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]sonicon 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]FoundPie 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]DoctorObvious 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–]dcb720 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]deck_hand 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]esnaw 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]MrEnglish 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]jordan314 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]tjhans 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]nepidae 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]ECoco 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Zakiro 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]FoundPie -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]Adam4d 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]punchinginthefaceing -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]SittingDuckNZ 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]CitizenDickbag 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Scarjaka 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Tiak 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]neutroscape 0 points1 point2 points ago