LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+14 14 0
Published 3 years ago with 13 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • staxofmax
    +3

    So basically, the creationist argument is superior because while the evolutionist couldn't possibly be there at the moment of creation, God was! And we know God was there because he said so in his autobiography! And we all know that God would never ever tell a lie because he tells us about how super nice and awesome and great he is in his autobiography! God is truthful and great and perfect because he says so in the book that he wrote!

    • spaceghoti
      +3

      I think you've got it in one.

      • staxofmax
        +3

        What's fascinating to me is not so much their unshakable belief in God, its that it never occurs to anyone that even if God exists, there is a real possibility that he's an unreliable narrator. If his perfection is so absolute, what's with all the self promotion?

        • spaceghoti
          +3

          Well, he's got a plan. He can't just make us follow his plan, of course, because of "free will." But he wants us to know this plan and it's so important that he didn't communicate this plan to people who developed writing and had wide influence but instead made sure that an isolationist tribe of nomads heard it and were bullied into following it (punished whenever they strayed) until finally, thousands of years later, it could culminate into events that would take another thousand years or more to spread out to the rest of the globe.

          And if this doesn't make sense, that's okay. He has "mysterious ways."

          • staxofmax
            +2

            What possible plan could he have that would be derailed by homosex?

            • spaceghoti (edited 3 years ago)
              +2

              Whether or not we choose to condemn ourselves, apparently. The latest apologetic I'm hearing is that it's okay to be gay or otherwise attracted to the same gender. What's not okay is to act on it. Even though this is refuted by Jesus' introduction of thought crimes.

              “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

            • staxofmax
              +2
              @spaceghoti -

              Sometimes I wonder that if the biblical literalist theory of reality is the correct one, if hell would not be preferable to heaven. Probably better company down there.

            • spaceghoti
              +2
              @staxofmax -

              I don't know, literal Biblical verses paint Hell as a literal place of eternal torture. But as Twain put it, go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company.

            • staxofmax
              +3
              @spaceghoti -

              And again, it's God that tells us "hell is bad" in his book, but he could be lying to further his agenda.

              How hilarious would it be if Lucifer is God, and he wrote the Bible as a test to weed out the assholes?

  • a7h13f
    +2

    Isn't this the standard creationist tactic for every debate? Instead of answering questions, just keep dodging and moving goal posts until you can talk about the Bible again. If the accuracy of the Bible is questioned, then you take offense, storm off, and complain about how "angry" atheists are.

  • FistfulOfStars
    +1

    You know... I live in Texas, grew up in a small town, lots of baptists.

    I've literally never met a single person who didn't believe in evolution and the 'long' geological history.

    I feel like the 'young earth' demographic is extremely small, and gets far more play than is warranted. The vast majority of theists do not fall into this category.

    I'd like to see some real numbers, but that's what my personal experience tells me.

Here are some other snaps you may like...