My favorite is when you give a Christian evidence of any sort and they block you because they lack any counterargument. God is good? Here's a Bible passage about smashing babies on rocks. God hates prostitutes? Here's that part where Jesus washes women's feet with his hair. Nobody understands electricity? Then why don't you stick a key in an outlet? The eyeball is proof of creation? Here's a literal demonstration of how they have evolved multiple times from simple light-sensing cells. Blocked, blocked, blocked, yelled at then blocked.
I could go on all damned day, but you get the point. Blind faith is antithetical to logic, full stop. As far as I'm concerned, it's a psychological disorder, regardless of the object of said faith.
Not only that, but delusions needed to support religion and basically hard coded into these people since birth. Makes them susceptible to being controlled by others.
That's my problem with the agnostic moderate who says "the problem is just organized religion". They're acting like the truth doesn't matter, and fail to acknowledge the risk of a society that practices deluding ourselves like a sport.
It took me a while to deconstruct from Christianity because Catholic schools aren't terrible at encouraging critical thinking (at least in my area). I'm still trying to wrap my brain around the existence of everything, and usually handwave from a non-christian perspective, but still not scientific.
Anyway, I've had tough conversations with my parents about it. They get upset that I don't believe a virgin cis-girl (not woman, mind you - canonically Mary was 12) can be impregnated without sperm. Or that Jesus performed miracles or that he or Lazarus rose from the dead. But I don't argue with them about whether a god exists anymore cuz idfk and likely never will
You know, we could even grant them that a virgin birth is not impossible, without conceding that it's a miracle. Fish, amphibians, maybe reptiles, and a host of other life forms are known to reproduce asexually, even if many normally do engage in sexual reproduction. I don't believe it's been observed in birds, and I'm sure never in mammals. But that doesn't mean it's impossible!
Or miraculous.
Jesus washes women’s feet with his hair.
TIL Jesus was into some weird shit.
TIL Jesus and I may have some things in common.
TIL2 WAM femdom is in the bible.
( Don't look that up at work, or in public, or around anyone )
As far as I'm concerned, it's a psychological disorder, regardless of the object of said faith.
Yeah, hard belief is manic.
My favourite is when an atheist tries to quote the Bible and completely fails. Found a bible passage about smashing babies on rocks? Let's now read the context. THEY (the Babylonians, who incidentally weren't following God's law at the time) did that to US (Israel). The song is a song of mourning and loss, and imagined revenge, as if that would make it better (it doesn't), but it isn't sanctioned, so we can't.
So how exactly is that a counterargument to God being good? Or am I bashing my head against a brick wall here, talking to an atheist with unshakeable blind faith in his demonstrably incorrect position.
This part sounds kinda not very nice:
16 “You are not to leave even one person alive in the cities of these nations that the Lord your God is about to give you as an inheritance. 17 You must completely destroy the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, just as the Lord your God commanded you,".
Joshua 6 is basically:
God: here's how to overthrow your enemy.
Josh: cool! oh, I'm just gonna kill everyone and everything in the town - man, woman, child, cow, grass - and burn it all down for fun because I hate these fuckers.
God: just don't bring that foreign bitch.
Oxygen is measurable. We can detect even tiny amounts of it, we know its makeup, we have well characterized its behavior, and we can make it work for us.
We have no evidence for the existence of any gods. Seems like we can exist without them just fine.
wb the Quran? The only book uncorrupted in its existence. In it God says He will preserve the book, and if it is a fabrication He challenges you to produce even a single Suraht (chapter) like it. Also neither God nor the angels will appear until the Day of Judgement, so asking for either while you persist in disbelief is kind of a bad idea.
Bring on the downvotes, it’s the worst/best you can do.
Look at you, bringing this thread back from the dead.
First of all, even if we take what you're saying at face value, how does it being an original text in any way prove that its contents are true? If I made up a completely original story today about a stuffed animal that eats pickles and poops diamonds, would that mean that such a thing exists?
Secondly, we can't take what you're said at face value because Qur'anic and Muslim scholars are very divided about the origins of the Quran.
So you're saying we just need to freeze god to see him?
We need to liquefy God
And make him into the most artisinal smoothie in all of Portland!
Ask and you shall receive - Toast
That's Costa
Holy mother Mary and Joseph! Do my eyes deceive me or is that the son of God etched into my sandwich!? Could it have been divine intervention that compelled me to put the cheese on the outside?! Literally no other explanation exists for why I might've done that!
That reminds me of a picture of "Jesus" that kept bleeding through the paint in one of my old landlord's apartments. He tasked me with stripping the paint off the wall to find out what was actually below the white paint he had slapped up. Several layers of white paint below the surface, I found an absolutely gorgeous oil paint mural of Bob Marley.
Can't say I've ever seen liquid oxygen.
Mixed with Hydrogen we have.
It's amazing. Especially when you're trying to chill and prime a pump, and there's gallons of it flowing across it's own vapor in puddles.
Just try not and think about what happens if it flows across that oil spill and you step in it.
I realize I'm posting a complaint in my own thread so it's my own fault, but I keep getting "Love is Like Oxygen" by Sweet stuck in my head since I've posted this.
Liquid oxygen is way too pretty for how dangerous it is
Ok, I'll bite. Why/how is liquid oxygen dangerous? Doesn't it just basically instantly boil into gas if it gets anywhere outside of its cryo chamber?
Drink it and you'll see him.
Probably not. If you can pony up some testable proof of his alleged existence I'll reconsider my stance. In the meantime I refuse to believe that any good, as described, is worse at keeping their followers in line than the gods invented by Gary Fucking Gygax.
It’s oxygen not an entheogen
You don't even need oxygen to be in a liquid or solid state to see it: oxygen is the reason the sky is blue. When you look through a large enough volume of gaseous oxygen, as you do when you step outside in the day time, you can see it just fine.
You could say it's... triune!
God is a gas because he's not cool enough
How cold do we gotta get God in order to see him?
Colder than absolute zero.
Oxygen is absolutely measurable, and your own body will quickly tell you something is very, very wrong if your 02 intake is too low, or even weird (which is why SCUBA mixes are a topic of their own.)
There is the matter that oxygen does affect light, which allows us to tell if an exoplanet has oxygen in the atmosphere, which means it's not invisible, just very transparent. But when we look at other worlds we detect oxygen by analyzing the light that comes from them, so we see oxygen.
In the meantime, the human species as we know it (homo-sapiens) has been around for 250,000 years. The monotheistic version has been around for about 4,000 years (and even Adonai had others in His pantheon. The temple priests of Adonai murdered Asherah, His consort, by massacring all the Asheran desciples and burning Her temples down). For most of that time, ancestors, elemental spirits and animal spirits were central to our religious faith, not high-concept deities. For the vast majority of human existence, God did not exist as He is commonly regarded in popular religions.
AFAIK, we do not, in fact, have any biological system that detects oxygen in the air. What we use instead is detection of the things that are typically present when oxygen is not. Like CO2 concentration. This is what makes a room "feel stuffy", CO2.
I don't think this invalidates your point at all, of course you have a valid argument despite the biological misunderstanding here.
The only reason I know this is when looking into the whole, capital punishment by nitrogen hypoxia thing, I kinda stumbled into a lot of information. We don't generally detect nitrogen nor oxygen in any way, shape, or form, since it's quite plentiful in the atmosphere of the earth (78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen), there's not much reason to. We've never needed a biological trigger to say "there's oxygen here" because there's never been situations where that hasn't really been true until very very recently (eg. Closed systems like submarines, aeroplanes, vessels that go into high orbit/space, etc).
Looking at the evolution of it, any such space will accrue toxic/deadly levels of atmospheric gases, long before the oxygen is consumed. So we have biological processes to detect atmospheric toxin levels, with one example being CO2. According to some data I've read, CO2 freely is absorbed and expelled by the body through the blood via the alveoli (lungs), which makes the amount of CO2 in your blood a function of atmospheric CO2 levels, which may slightly waiver due to your physical workload. As you produce CO2 within your body from metabolic activity, either from regular metabolic tasks or through physical exertion, the rise in blood CO2 levels is expelled by the blood through equilibrium with the surrounding atmosphere. Simply, if you have higher CO2 concentration in your blood than there is in the atmosphere, it will diffuse towards the atmosphere (I'll reiterate that the process works in reverse too).
High CO2 concentration in your blood affects your blood pH and can create an acidic environment, which the body can easily detect.
As far as I'm aware, there's no similar biological process to detect oxygen levels, either directly or indirectly.
This is the danger of nitrogen hypoxia. If you're in a low CO2 environment which is devoid of oxygen (or has very little atmospheric oxygen, not enough to sustain human life), with most of the o2 concentration being replaced by nitrogen instead, your body can still expel CO2, but cannot obtain the o2 required to survive. Since there's no mechanism to detect this, your blood o2 levels drop to levels which are incompatible with living while you remain unaware that a problem exists.
Thus, you can easily perish when your o2 saturation drops to nil, with no indication that you're at risk of dying.
Sorry for the dissertation, this is just something I find incredibly fascinating about biology. I hope I didn't bore anyone too much.
Disclaimer: I'm not a biologist or scientist, I'm just some guy with ADHD, and I've hyperfocused on this subject a couple of times. If anything I've said is incorrect, I invite corrections. If possible, please link additional resources for further reading and my ADHD brain will thank you very kindly for the effort.
In high school, there was a minor tradition of trolling the chemistry teacher during his talks about air. One student would say, “If I can’t see it, I don’t believe it.”
Of course the teacher would fall for it hook, line and sinker and the rest of the hour was spent arguing for air while the student would just repeat the same line again and again.
Good for me to remember that trolling and the resulting flame wars were around even before the internet. :-)
მორწმუნენო
Here's my attempt at a theoretical response, please don't kill me
"Oxygen's state is modified by temperature. God's is modified by time. If you can't see him, you're in the wrong time."
The only right time to see God: 23rd of February 893 CE, noon-ish
I thought that was 2038
Theories are based on evidence. What is your evidence?
I feel like that would be a cool terrible sci-fi movie where we make a Time Machine but it only works on small scales and discover a new element or something idk
why are internet atheists so bad at making arguments
I’m pretty sure this is a response to a bad argument.
first of all what it's responding to is not an argument, it's a motivational quote of some sort. it's cringe trying to counter argue that to begin with.
like do you see people write something like "you only fail when you stop trying" and go "ummm actually the dictionary definition of failing is ..." and go to stupid technicalities about how one can actually fail despite insisting on trying? well this is atheist memes so don't answer.
second of all the main counter argument used for proof of oxygen is that it can be seen in certain situations. which is entirely dumb, because obviously we know stuff can exist and not be seen, so "where's your god photo" is not even a weak counter but an invalid one. ok i guess love doesn't exist because i cant post a photo of it on facebook, checkmate valentine.
The microscopist Walter McCrone found, based on his examination of samples taken in 1978 from the surface of the shroud using adhesive tape, that the image on the shroud had been painted with a dilute solution of red ochre pigment in a gelatin medium.
the shroud's linen material was produced between the years 1260 and 1390 (to a 95% confidence level)
Seems legit
