this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
561 points (95.3% liked)

Atheist Memes

5631 readers
4 users here now

About

A community for the most based memes from atheists, agnostics, antitheists, and skeptics.

Rules

  1. No Pro-Religious or Anti-Atheist Content.

  2. No Unrelated Content. All posts must be memes related to the topic of atheism and/or religion.

  3. No bigotry.

  4. Attack ideas not people.

  5. Spammers and trolls will be instantly banned no exceptions.

  6. No False Reporting

  7. NSFW posts must be marked as such.

Resources

International Suicide Hotlines

Recovering From Religion

Happy Whole Way

Non Religious Organizations

Freedom From Religion Foundation

Atheist Republic

Atheists for Liberty

American Atheists

Ex-theist Communities

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Other Similar Communities

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fisk 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, it actually makes no sense that a relgion can simultaneously believe that the earth is 6000 years old AND that it’s billions of years old based on how they interpret canon.

Again, to you. That makes sense to the people who do believe that. It's just simply that you have - literally - different ways of making sense.

The OP on this thread only says "That’s a 100% true observations. Most religions can’t even agree with themselves." and I'm (being a giant pain in the ass and) responding specifically to your emphasis that it is this disagreement that invalidates religious thought. I still hold that there's no issue with disagreement within or among religious groups, in terms of the validity of their worldviews.

Religions have come up with ways of determining who is "right" under various conditions of dispute, just as science and other fields (like law), have. I am by no means a Catholic scholar, but I am very much under the impression that the religious texts Christianity are based on require translation efforts, and that those translation efforts can lose meaning in translation, not just between languages but between historical contexts - like many other historical texts. As such, they require study and interpretation - something that even those most fervent and uneducated of followers seem to understand.

[–] ArcticCircleSystem 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What evidence is there for the fundamental assertion within Christianity that the Christian god exists in the first place? What room is there for questioning that assertion? And don't give me that "intelligent design" bullshit either. That argument has been debunked a thousand times already. ~Strawberry

[–] fisk 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What evidence is there for the fundamental assertion within Christianity that the Christian god exists in the first place?

None, as far as I'm aware! I'm not defending the religion.

What room is there for questioning that assertion?

In some factions, plenty. In others, not so much. I've met plenty of Christian folks that don't believe in intelligent design, and it's not like they're immediately ejected from the church - and this appears to even be true among Catholic leadership. It's a controversy.

And don’t give me that “intelligent design” bullshit

I think you have the wrong idea about me, which is understandable, given how annoying I'm being.

[–] ArcticCircleSystem 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fair enough.

None, as far as I’m aware! I’m not defending the religion.

I think that's the main problem people are pointing to. Not 100% sure though. ~Strawberry

[–] fisk 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah I legitimately understand - I'm being critical of the arguments for science here, and normally the only people who do that are not arguing in good faith.