Religion is not just a preference like choosing to play soccer rather than tennis.
It evokes a negative impulse in them due to religion being so commonly used to justify bad behaviour.
So I see no point in trying to mock the responses.
It's not about fear of damnation but of God as an authority determining what's good while non religious people pull it out of their ass what's considered morally good
"through reason and human socializing we found the ultimate moral code" yeah that's meaningless bs
It's not fucking hard. If you would feel bad or be hurt if someone did X to you then don't do X to anyone else. That's literally all the morality that anyone requires, and the morality that anyone with more than two braincells can understand.
Damn who thought that it would be so easy? I guess all the philosophers arguing about morality are just stupid.
You figured it out with literally preschooler level of understanding. I'm jealous, truly
It's not my fault you're too dumb to understand at even child levels. Most everything worthwhile builds from the golden rule, and yes most philosophers filled books with fluff or deviated into rambling about fairy tales.
I guess what you consider fluff or rambling is the ultimate determination
If you figured it all out how why didn't you answer the other guys comment? Arguing about your children ass level views? I'm sure you could easily defend it.
I like how many mention the Golden rule championed by Christianity as if humanity always went that moral path and didn't need a religion to widespread that idea
Whats the original point? A yes how atheists pull their morality out of their ass. Sorry I should have said how they follow religious morality but wrongfully frame it as always existing basic understanding of human interaction
So, if you get conditioned to feel bad if someone defends themselves from you it makes you defending yourself from them wrong for example? Additionally your formulation only works if you share the same responses with the rest, which is just not true, but it gives very idiotic answers the moment the subject enjoys getting beat down or raped, as such would not prohibit to do such to them, but would for the rest. Moreover, it also gives freeway to wronging people if they are not informed of such, as given that you would not know someone personally set you up for disgrace it would not be prohibited under that heuristic. Morals are not supposed to be a feel good always tool, they are a tool to do the right thing, even if such means suffering upon your end, and such heuristics fall to account for such instances as it literally discards them as not-do’s… Which leaves us right at the need from an actual objective morality to start making progress, which is what religions offer, as common non-perspective-deduced morals (arbitrarily (religion) or not (Not yet discovered)) are a needed pillar for the golden rule to work, since it assures that your ethics are similar enough.
Okay but why do they need a book telling them what's moral. And you can claim its not about punishment but the only reason the rules are rules is because breaking them is a sentence to hell
They didn't need a book, God worked with many prophets and with others directly, only some people decided to write it down so why all could learn and not forget God's will.
They reason rules are rules because it's God's will and punishment a part of it but also the path to bliss.
The "good" is from God so how could being against that not lead to punishment.
I don't know how the existence of a punishment is such a big problem as if breaking the law in a country wouldn't be punished in a way. Are laws now also bad and it watered down its moral parts?
> realizes many of those core religious ideals existed as an attempt and explain the natural universe, most of which are now explained by science
> realizes there have been thousands of religions, with all competing and incompatible doctrines
> back to agnosticism
realises that christianity is not incompatible with modern science
realizes that there is physical evidence for the bible which automatically makes it more believable than every other religion except for *maybe* islam
back to christianity
Can't give you that directly other than the trove of contemporary accounts of the event. Jesus is the most well documented person of antiquity. However, I was more referring to the various locations mentioned in the Bible that we have discovered today (largely because the Bible said they were there). If you have the time, it is fascinating to look into for yourself. That was the start of the end of my skepticism.
Same. If there were one true God, there wouldn't be religions all claiming they were the right one. Just be decent to people, and treat other people the way you want to be treated. You don't need some big man in the sky to tell you that.
Funny how it never actually stops them since that imaginary thing God let them get away with so much, thus proving that if God exists then they are blessed by God and their desires fit perfectly with God's desires
Case in point, zionists, trump, every con man thief and war mongerer ever...
This is why I'm fine with religion, whether it's fake or not. For the most part, it's a net good. It's a scary set of rules and god is always watching, even when the cops aren't.
It's so obvious too, just read through the old testament. There's over SIX HUNDRED commandments, including things like don't make allies with 3 specific nations which I forget the name of, and don't build pointy fences. There's a large amount of commandments that would fit better in a HOA rule book. Basically it just boils down to follow god and don't be a piece of shit.
Sikhs have a huge terrorism problem too. Read about Khalistani terrorism and Kanishka bombing. A lot of drug smugglers and vehicle thieves in Canada are sikhs.
Ask any academic historian. The current war is between the Children of THE book.
Take a quick gander at European history. Women's rights, treatment of lgbt. The African Slave trade, or the "Indian Wars."
The Papal Bull of 1493.. Just off the top of my head. Too many Americans learn "History" in Sunday school.
Not just kill, its an extremely powerful manipulation tool. Evangelicism in brazil is being used by the far right to brainwash low income people into thinking theyll get rich of they donate to the church and vote for right wing politicians. Its called "prosperity theory/doctrine" or smth like that.
No, that is an ideal pushed by the religious. People generally just don’t want to kill innocent people, and it is because of the empathy built into most members in f our species, this empathy is then further supported by fear that of the retribution of the law.
Except the entire point of Christianity is that you are born bad and the only way you can be good is to accept Jesus, and once you do anything else bad you did is forgiven. It excuses misanthropic behavior more than it prevents it
"low watt gurglers" is fucking hilarious and I will be adding it to my shit-talking playbook. As thanks, please accept this gif of rotating cheese sticks w/ marinara sauce
https://i.redd.it/aac7zjqh06pg1.gif
Could you please explain to this non-native English speaker here what could it even mean? To me a "low-watt gurgler" makes no sense when characterizing a person
Low-watt in this case is referring to the subjects brainpower or intelligence, saying there isn't much electricity in those wires. Gurgler doubles up on this theme by implying the subject is best known for gurgling sounds, either by way of sheer stupidity or through being a subhuman cave creature.
A similar but perhaps more recognizable phrase would be to call someone a "brain-dead troglodyte".
My grandmother found out I wasn't Catholic and said, "Then how would you know to do good?"
Lady, if the only reason you do good is cause someone tells you to and you're scared of hell, you got a personality problem
They are indoctrinated into thinking man is inherently evil since they could understand words.
If we started raising children with better self esteem/ belief in themselves and morality, people might not think being a good person is something you can only do if god threatens to punish you in a lake of fire for eternity.
The stuff we are taught as children affects our worldviews in very deep and powerful ways.
God your right. That's why God was created. Most, and I mean most, people cannot control themselves without a promise of reward or threat of punishment. Moral reaoning is difficult Source Lawrence Kholberg
No one "needs" that. If someone feels the compulsion to hurt those around them, how does telling them "God sends people to heaven or hell depending on what they did in life" make things better in any way? Even if they believed you, they would just redirect their attention to people with different religious beliefs.
The bible allows those who sin to be forgiven and still get into heaven. Someone could eat babies, three meals a day, for their entire life, and just be forgiven on their deathbed and still get into heaven. It is not the deterrent people are claiming with such a huge loophole.
Not everyone refers to Christianity though.
Also that's hardly relevant. My point is people that go on murder sprees against atheists aren't doing so because Jesus told them to.
You're right about that. I know my Mother does. And people I know, prolly wouldn't be the people they would be without religion. I just hate it when people use it as a cudgel to beat down other people. Not every religion is like that, but I've seen it with some religious groups. Jesus wouldn't act this way, but people take his words and use it for malicious intent. Or they don't pay attention to it, but act self-righteous all the same.
If there is such thing as a being with the abilities we would attribute to God, I fully believe the very nature of it and it's wants and desires would be unfathomable to us. It feels like an act of massive hubris to think that we or anyone would be so special and enlightened to understand a being like that, or that it would take special interest in us.
I can fully believe in the idea of something that is well above our ability to perceive and understand, something that could even be a creator in the sense that they created this universe and shape it. But I don't believe a being like that would want to be worshiped, and it especially wouldn't care if it was.
I think of it like looking at a colony of ants through a one way mirror. And we're the ants. We may have a suspicion this environment was crafted, that's about as far as we've gotten.
Not having evidence for something is a good enough reason not to believe in it. I can say I know there no purple unicorn behind me, because there is no compelling evidence there is.
Same goes. And "some people said so" is not compelling evidence especially when those people also say "and uh he says if you don't do x y z you'll be tortured forever. It is a coincidence that you doing x y z also benefits me". Not particularly compelling.
That's just god. We can know for sure that religion, specifically abrahamic religions are not the word of a god of there was one because they are chock full of logical inconsistency and clearly evolve with what the people of the time want, not the desire of any cosmic being.
Saying "well we can't know because we could be really dumb in the grand scheme of things" is a weak move. We have information backed by evidence, and that is a great foundation to build on.
Man.... You know you really got us dum edgy atheists there....
You're right. Who are we do deny all the years of being terrified of solar eclipses, worshiping the sun, moon, and lightning, and praying to trees.
Get that peewee 2k year new age nonsense out of here. You think some youth pastor from Oak Hill Alabama knows more than the COMBINED HUMAN EXPERIENCE SPANNING 3 MILLION YEARS? please.
So see you at the next sun worship! You're convinced, right?
From:
>no you can't possibly be smarter than thousands of years of experience!!!! Egotistical atheist!!
To:
>Well it's all subjective so I can't talk about it...
Cope is a heck of a drug
If we're dealing with a being that is extradimensional then no, we wouldn't ever be able to understand it no matter our mastery of this dimension. We aren't 4th dimensional. And attributing some phenomena to an outside force we don't yet understand isn't stupid, a better example would be the concept of gravity to someone from the 5th century. There is a real force being exerted but the very nature of it is indecipherable without a few hundreds years of scientific progress happening first. Finding out there's a 5th dimensional entity capable of manipulating time, space, and matter itself doesn't feel like an impossibility, even if the concept might be a placeholder to something more.
What evidence do you have that anything is unknowable to us.
Not that we don't know it, there's lots of stuff we don't know. That it is unable to be known by us.
I understand that you're positing that something existing in a dimension beyond us would be unknowable to us... But how do you know that? What evidence do you have for that? We've already have techniques to visualize things in lower and higher dimensions. Physicists already do plenty of math in much higher dimensions. Now these are real dimensions and not sci-fi "dimensions" but still.
Also, if you brought say newtons laws of universal gravitation, the explanation, examples, and the math behind it to the 5th century Indian astronomer and mathematician Aryabhata, then yeah barring language differences, you could most likely teach a 5th century person what gravity is and the reasons for why we use it to explain how falling objects, orbiting objects, eclipses, etc work.
The reason is, you're showing evidence to a person who understands that evidence is a good reason to believe things.
If you showed all of that information now to some percentage of Christians they wouldn't believe it. And it's 2026.
What you are missing is that it's fairly easy to get someone to have confidence in what you're saying if every last piece of evidence you provide and that can be seen in the world supports what you are saying.
When what you are saying is "Yes, sure there's literally no evidence for this other than some people say so but that's part of it? And there's not allowed to be evidence? You just have to have faith, or you'll go to hell. Now tythe me 10% of your income". That's a much harder sell to anyone who is using their brain.
You're on a whole other planet of discussion to what I'm talking about dude. The whole back half of that comment is just atheism slop and that's not what I'm trying to talk about all.
Goodbye.
The peoblem with this is that to be decent or good is contextual and subjective. Good and bad is defined by your culture, which is shaped in large part by local religion. Its a moral judgement.
There are, and forever have been, very complicated debates happening, by people who are MUCH smarter than either of us, whether morality that defines good or decent can even exist without religion.
the basic premise here is not necessarily true
just because there are many religions claiming their god is the right one doesnt mean there couldnt actualy be a "one true god"
it just seems less likely as you encounter more and more religions like this that one of then is completely correct and the rest are completely wrong
It's funny because the top 3 biggest/most notable religions ✝️✡️☪️of all time deeply hate each other for their interpretation of God when they technically worship the same guy
If there was one true God, then there would be a hell lot of wannabees pretending they were him, either human or otherworldly creatures. The desire for power over others is one of the stronger desires in a human.
There is a car that nobody has ever seen, groups of people have been saying that the car is red, or black, or white, or green, etc...
Your conclusion : The car doesn't exist because nobody got the color right.
What evidence do you have that there is a car no one has seen?
Btw there is a purple unicorn behind you. It moves when you do to stay out of your line of sight, can't be seen in mirrors or photographs and everyone is in on the joke so they will deny it's there. Evidence: a person said so.
Honestly this makes the most sense. Historically speaking, you can't really take Religions seriously when we actually know the ins and outs of their development, leading to the only conclusion that they are man made.
An anthropology scholar told me that most religious beliefs were invented by economists for population management. Like in India the milk from a cow was more beneficial than the meat so they just made cows sacred because explaining economics to starving uneducated rural Hindus was too difficult.
Believing that god doesnt exist because all shitty religions claim he does has the same energy as "person I dont like said they like this thing so I hate it".
Sure, deny the existance of god, but don't do it cause you're a edgy religion hating atheist, do it cause you exist and breathe tenets of nihilism and the ideals of the ubermenschen. Do it cause you suffer from the delusion that you physically curbstomped gods face.
No sir, I was advocating for deism as I suffer from the illusion that we are all God having a human experience and anyone who tells me different is just finding their own path.
Is that where I'm at? I recognize that sentience is something special that nothing else seems to have. So that had to come from somewhere. Call it God, or whatever you want. But there was something that sparked the first thought. Something that allowed us to say, "I am." And whatever that is, is God.
You may or may not be joking, but just in case:
The animal kingdom shows a sliding scale of sentience and sapience, depending on brain complexity. Humans are not in any way unique except in the *degree* of our intelligence.
This is strong evidence that sentience and general consciousness is merely a biological function.
Religious people who lean on sentience as a unique human trait as evidence for God are actually therefore, amusingly, proving how stupid and close to animals humans can actually be.
Advanced in what regard and by which standards ? There surely are a lot of things we are better at than other animals but there are others where we are just as easily beaten by other life forms
It’s largely a matter of specialization. Humans are animals that specialize in brain power. As a result, the brain consumes as much as 20% of our body’s total energy. It just so happens that maximizing brain power also gives us the ability to process complex and abstract issues.
Other animals specialize in different traits. Animals that specialize in raw strength have much stronger muscles than we do. Some animals specialize in venomous defense and possess venom sacs or organs that we don’t have at all. Others have far more advanced hearing, vision, or sense of smell than humans.
Humans simply evolved by investing heavily in brain development, often at the cost of other physical abilities.
We went to the moon and split the atom for starters. We also created the Internet. We can fly to the other side of the planet in a day. Also all the infrastructure that made those things possible. We are the dominant species on the planet.
Just because a tiger can eat us doesn't change that.
There is no reason why. The "why" you're looking for is the result of innumerable random genetic mutations over innumerable generations. The most capable organisms live, those less capable die. Somebody has to be on top of the dog pile, and humanity is it. Lucky us that we rose to total global dominance before some other species did and then snuffed out our genetic line by turning our natural habitat into an oil refinery
To be honest I'm not "sure" of it. I think it's impossible to be sure of anything on this topic. I just think we're unique and if consciousness was something that could come naturally, why not with anything else? Why are we so special that we could split an atom.
I think we're just incredibly unlucky to be the only species so deeply aware of our own mortality. By some fluke of genetics we've breached into this realm of self awareness and horrifying ourselves every day with it.
But realistically nobody knows I suppose. We could just be unlucky space dust or perhaps theres some divine plan. So far theres no evidance of divinity thats convinced me, but hard to tell if that evidence doesnt exist or just hasn't been found yet.
Yeah. I don’t believe in any of the religious stuff, but could some all-powerful being beyond our comprehension have created our entire universe l? Sure, why not.
But it's only pushing the origin a step further back, because what then created the all-powerful being? And if he existed all along, why then could the universe simply not have existed forever in a different arrangement to what we have today?
A claim like that doesnt explain anything, so why make it?
At a certain point you have to weigh that deity down with so many qualifiers that it becomes pointless - he's clearly uninvolved with the universe, he is uncaring, or else not omniscient or all powerful, he may not even be conscious and is merely some sort of primal mover.
Etc, etc.
Point being, at a certain point you have to ask yourself *why* you're even bothering to put so much mental bandwidth into trying to justify the existence of this unprovable, unknowing thing.
Sure, we can't disprove it, so it's technically possible.
But it's also utterly meaningless, and is basically just a way for people to skirt the entire issue and pretend to be more wise than they actually are.
Just have some balls and admit that you don't actually think there's a deity. Don't invent a completely impotent one to logic pretzel your way to its possibility.
The existence of a creator deity and human soul/afterlife is a very soothing idea for me, so while I think it's very unlikely I'm not gonna deprive myself of the faint hope just so I can say I'm certain in my beliefs.
That's why I out garlic up all over my house, along with some wooden stocks and a well stocked silver tipped crossbow. Not going to deprive myself a comforting defense against fictional forces.
If the thought of vampires existing is that scary to someone, there would be nothing wrong with hanging up a little garlic in their house if it makes them feel safer.
everyone indulges in a little superstition in some form or another, like if you wish someone good luck, it's not gonna help, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't do it if it makes you or the other person feel better.
I hear this a lot, and it seems lazy.
There aren't many stories or ideas in the Bible that seem aimed at explaining features of the physical universe.
You've got the serpent being cursed by God to crawl on its belly and lick the dust.
You've got the rainbow.
There's the tower of Babel.
I'm sure I'm missing a few, but the list of examples is not very long or impressive.
The Bible is a more “modern” version of religion. Yes it’s ancient in terms of our current civilization, but early religions from the Stone/Bronze age (which constitute 99% of humanity’s existence) employed the logic that the gods are in control of the weather, seasons, tides, the movement of the planets, starts, moon cycles, etc.
The Bible may be old to us, but in the grand scheme of humanity, it’s a new publication.
It's true that the Bible was written relatively recently in human history. I admit I don't know much about the religious beliefs of stone and early bronze age peoples, so I don't know whether what you're saying is true.
I will say that the idea that religion is an inferior way of explaining the world that was supplanted by science is an enlightenment myth. When I say myth, I don't mean a necessarily or fully false story. I mean an origin story that people tell because it supports their identity or values. There are myths of the American founding that you may have learned as a child if you're an American of a certain age. Examples might be the first Thanksgiving and Paul Revere's midnight ride. They have some historical basis, but the reason we tell them is not because they are historically terribly consequential. It's more because of what they say about us as people. They form part of the foundation of our identity.
A myth about science and religion arose during the 19th century, primarily due to the work of two men, John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White. Their views came to be called the conflict thesis by historians of science. The gist of the conflict thesis is closely related to what you said. Science has triumphed over religion by explaining a lot of things about the world that religion tried to explain but got wrong.
They wrote books to defend this view, which were very popularly received and influential at the time, but which contained a lot of exaggerations, incorrect information, and outright lies. Practically no historian of science these days thinks that the conflict thesis is the best way to understand the relationship between religion and science.
The real history of science is a lot more complicated than the triumph of rationality over irrationality, or of true explanations about the world versus false ones. For one thing, it's not a coincidence that science most strongly took root and flourished in Christian Europe.
Agreed. When I hear people say stuff like that it just tells me they’ve never read the Bible or they did and they really don’t understand what they read
For me, I read the Bible cover to cover in highschool.
That made me an atheist.
LotR and Harry Potter are more believable as historical events.
Nowadays I'm agnostic, because I want to believe something is out there, but I need evidence before I would be swayed in any way.
All of the prophecies predicting Jesus’s coming were the building blocks that helped my bridge my way to God, but by His intelligent design the last step will always be a leap of faith. There is no way to use only your human reasoning to accept Him, but if you ask for signs and trust that they will come if He is real (even if you don’t believe He exists), He will reveal Himself to you. Then whether or not you follow any further is up to you.
>realizes that agnosticism is just an epistemological fallacy
realizes that for all thing in life, when no evidence shows that it exists, but there is plenty of evidence that it is a fabrication, I just admit it doesn't exist until proven otherwise
back to atheism
The issue with total atheism is you cannot actually have true evidence of it either - anything science can perceive or discover as ‘evidence’ could easily be by design within the laws of a created universe. I will agree with the no evidence it exists point, besides the common feeling of spirituality we can experience as humans, which could indeed be simply chemical reactions within the brain but then as with my first point - that could just be as far as we can measure, and the question is what purpose does that have on a simply biological level. Therefore agnosticism is based but pure atheism is as ignorant as organised religion
Because in most other cases it’s known what is true and what is false about a given thing, and/or there are comparable things to use as benchmarks for whether a story is reasonable. Not so much with the origin of the big bang
I feel like this is only true when it comes to the question of whether God exists or not, but for Religion, we actually know how they formed and developed, we know what people had what influence. This is evidence that, while god might exist, at least the Religions are man made
I think you are missing the point a little by asking what purpose it serves. It is a non-harmful (reproductively speaking) extension of the very evolutionarily beneficial pattern seeking present in humans.
Which is basically all atheists.
The qualifier of "agnostic atheist" is just something people say to distance themselves from fedora wearing neckbeards.
But the bottom line is that all of these people inventing new names for themselves are, at the end of the day, atheists.
Yes, probably most atheists are agnostic atheists. The term communicates that a. you don't believe in a god, and b. that you acknowledge you don't know whether the god in question exists. Most theists would probably also describe themselves as agnostic if they understood what the word means.
For me, religion is much too obviously a human creation to genuinely believe in it. And they generally have rules from like 2,000 years ago that are completely outdated now. Or were pointless to begin with.
>nooooo don't eat le pig it's totally le unclean!!!!
Honestly that one's out of date with the invention of fire so I don't know what they were fucking up back then.
It was legitimately unsanitary back then to eat pork because there was no way to safely prepare it. However, I’m pretty sure that only Muslims and Jews still have dietary restrictions in this day and age. Christians haven’t had any since, well, Jesus.
I have no obligation to consider the validity of the insane tweaker screaming about how the world is run by lizardmen. You’re free to keep an open mind and say “I don’t know, maybe the world *is* run by lizardmen”, but there is no logical imperative to put any credence in his words; they can be dismissed out of hand for being completely baseless.
In the same vein atheism is an entirely reasonable stance, but agnosticism is also fair.
There are perfectly logical arguments which support the existence of a deity or creator. Not that we could know anything about such a being except that reason can imply the existence of one.
There are no arguments for your strawman but there are many arguments for the existence of a nondescript god. For example, the prime mover argument. If everything has a cause then so does the universe, if we are in a strict physicalist construction of the world then whatever kicked off the universe has inadvertently (or intentionally it doesn’t matter) caused everything else, as in these constructions every effect is strictly determined by its cause and every cause has a cause.
Whatever caused the universe is thus god, it may not be a willful god, or even a conscious god.
Except nothing about this argument requires a god, nor does it imply a god. It isn’t even a *good* argument. There is no actual reason to require a creator except we want one. The universe exists independent of us and has no obligation to have been created by any particular being. If you would instead argue the fundamental laws of reality (physics) constitute a god then you are just arguing sophistry, and have *decided* it means there’s a god.
I won’t say atheism is the *only* rational position, but it’s both entirely rational and more rational than deism.
Yes, which is just sophistry. You are playing with word definitions to try and force the world view that a god exists instead of admitting you’re an idiot. The strong, weak, electromagnetic and gravitational forces are not any singular construct to call “god” nor are they seperate “gods”.
Just because a person has a different concept of what constitutes a god doesn’t make the argument sophistry. You just have a western conception of what a god should look like whereas there have been many religions without personified gods that still are. But for further argument if your idea of god requires a human like will (which it shouldn’t but whatever), if the universe is strictly physical and thus deterministic, then the will we possess would be no different than the mechanism which caused the universe. This system is entirely workable for theistic thought.
Theism is "Some insane deeply psychotic cult that you base your entire life on"
Atheism is saying "hm no that's weird"
Agnosticism is an enlightened centrist "let me consider both sides" take that somehow pretends they are equal.
Choose the one that is least insane.
Please explain to us all then why ancient humanity invented gods to explain the weather, day/night cycles, tides, stars, planets, seasons, etc. Religion is rooted in these ideals, whether you like it or not. Shit, even modern religions like to do this. The first book in the Bible explicitly states how material reality was created. That’s supposed to be the infallible word of God. If you don’t believe the world was made in 7 days, you are saying the Bible is incorrect.
Sorry kiddo. Sadly, I do. Catholic school for 8 years, read the Bible cover to cover, studied history of Religions during college, dabbling in all sorts of theologies. Hell, I even have a close family member who is a tenured Professor of Religious Philosophy at a university. Nice try though.
This is an argument against organized religion, not against faith or belief in a creator. And no lol a lot of things haven't yet been explained by science. SO MUCH is unknown to us, on Earth and beyond.
The concept of supernatural creators and godly deities are rooted in organized religion dating back to the Stone Age. Even if it wasn’t, faith in a supernatural creator without any evidence to support that claim is parallel to organized religion anyway.
And you are correct in that there is still much we have not figured out yet. But, the fact remains that many many many many things that were once supposedly under the influence of the gods have been explained by the laws of nature.
Science shows us that there is plenty we don’t know, but it also gives humans a physical explanation for natural events in the universe without the need of supernatural deities.
For me it was more, I realised that organised religions have a lot of human added elements of control, but they draw on spiritual feelings and perception which can be felt by anyone. The actual existence of a god or higher power cannot be disproven, as it could easily exist beyond the reach of science, so it just comes down to what you think is more likely or comforting. Therefore I think agnosticism is based, I lean towards believing in more but accept we can never truly know
I was pretty religious growing up, moreso than my parents. We went to church most weeks, a pretty milquetoast Midwestern Methodist Church that featured exceptionally boring doctrine. No evangelical nonsense, though a few of the hardliners tried, no fire and brimstone. And I wasn't into any of that either, but I stridently believed in God, and that Jesus was literally his son. I got re-baptised when I was 17 and I cried, it might be the most deeply moving moment of my life.
When I left home and my brain developed a little and I stopped looking outwardly for meaning so much I realized that it was probably all meant to be metaphorical, but I still despised the online, surface level atheism that seemed to be what a lot of my friends were into. It just seemed so cynical and one dimensional. And this was in the early 2010s when it was in its heyday. I arrived at the basics pretty unceremoniously: that virgins don't give birth, that people don't come back from the dead, that most of the parables were fables more than anything. But it didn't leave me feeling lied to, it just felt like a necessary step in the process of understanding human nature. We can refute most tenets of the core religions with scientific fact, but the more we unlock about the universe the more I think we can identify with why religion started in the first place.
There is only so much we, as simians, can perceive because we are primates. Even with the most advanced brains on earth we are not equipped to understand the vastness of everything. There are things in the universe that would seem to be supernatural. Eventually we may develop the tools to help us explain these things, but then you run into an infinite regress problem. The further we push the boundaries of our understanding, the more we encounter things that we need more tools to understand.
Which lands me in the agnostic camp. If the universe is in fact infinite, then the infinite regress problem is real, and eventually I think we will reach a point where we cannot explain things scientifically. The idea of an infinite universe is arguably supernatural, our brains are not equipped to compute something like that. We visualize it in ways that make sense, but the true scale is ultimately unknowable. So while there is not an omnipotent, om I present God calling the shits, there is some power at some point that we will find ourselves incapable of computing. I guess that's what I'd call God.
Realizes that all the behaviors for the good of the community, like alturism, can be explained with game theory and evolution of selfish genes.
Back to Atheist.
After being agnostic considering multiverse theory, consider the vast majority of universes in the multiverse have no complexity, they eradicate themselves instantaneously, there are universes filled with clouds of gas and nothing more because dark energy is too strong. Yet only with a specific set of constants you see hierarchical emergent complexity.
Go back to being religious
Why do you seem to have this idea that complexity = existence of god?
If there weren’t sufficient complexity, you wouldn’t be around to realize it. Just like the billions of other opportunities on other planets that didn’t meet the requirements for life.
I’m going back and forth for the meme personally I’m agnostic but you’re arguing the strong anthropic principle. It doesn’t consider the universes innate ability for emergent hierarchical complexity (even without changing values of physical constants this underlying possibility is there). But the strong anthropic principle is like sitting in front of a firing squad of 60 men and who all empty their magazines and you stand there alive and say “Of course they all missed, otherwise i wouldn’t be here to consider why they missed!”
To me there’s clearly some teleology for the universes particular structure, not necessarily a god or creator, but some fundamental reason why don’t know about yet
I’m going back and forth for the meme personally I’m agnostic but you’re arguing the strong anthropic principle. It doesn’t consider the innate ability for emergent hierarchical complexity. Like sitting in front of a firing squad of 60 men and who all empty their magazines and you stand there alive and say “Of course they all missed, otherwise i wouldn’t be here to consider they missed!”
I get what you're saying but I think it's wrong. There were dozens and dozens of competing ideas for chemistry, then the western ideas around elements were refined and prevailed.
Just because 100 people disagree doesn't mean one isn't right
The difference is that given enough time, you can disprove the incorrect ideas for chemistry using the scientific method. This does not apply to religion, which is based solely on faith in what cannot be proven. The laws and facts of the universe don’t change.
Yep, that's correct regarding chemistry but then the bit on religion starts to veer off: religion isn't based solely on faith, each is distinct. Christians and Muslims both make claims to the truth of their religion on historical events. With a time machine, you could see the lives of Jesus and Mohammed and verify the truth and falsehood of them. Unfortunately we don't have that ability
Yes and no in a few ways.
So theoretically if you could appear 2027 light years away you could see Mohammad or Jesus's actions on earth.
There might be some eventual way to determine period facts concretely.
Obviously this is a practical no.
But science often finds a way. Young earth creation has practically been falsified with scientific advances.
Also to me this is where historical analysis starts to have to take place, because it's the best thing we have for determination. It has proved narratives or events true and false before (such as the previously mythical city of Troy being shown to exist)
Realizing I AM GOD, as everything only exist because I believe they do. If shit doesn’t seem tasty it’s only because I don’t believe hard enough.
Realizes I am a shitty God that can’t decide what I believe.
Finds out WE ARE ALL GOD
Not sure what comes next for me 🤷🏻
Yep, going back to religion is just a weakness of rigorous rational thinking, or because social conditions/surrounding people makes it easier to just be believing if you would be alone in that kind of environment
But it's the easy anwser to existential questioning, but not the rational one out
I think there was a lapse in logic when the OP had attributed the good parts of religion to a supernatural being. Or do you have to believe in God to be a good person? I just don't get it.
Nah, I grew up atheist in a largely atheist country. Still atheist, but I stopped being a dick about it after I turned 20.
I do still find the abrahamic notion of my whole existence being a purity test, forced upon me by an almighty entitt, who created and planned out every aspest of my character and life story to be rather illogic and demeaning.
I want to be more than a plaything in someone else's world, but I realize that's a big ask when billionaires exist.
Is your existance a purity test when forgiveness is constant and generously given? Christianity is not legalistic like Judaism or Islam.
Also, God does not plan out your life in advance, you have free will in Christianity (unless you are five point Calvinist or hold to Augustinian theology)
The inherent variance in free will murks future predictions, creating diverging timelines and whatnot.
If the outcome and path to get there are known, there isn't any space for variance.
Accepting both as true as requires doublethink, in my view.
It links with my thoughts on simulation theory as well.
Thinking of myself as an AI in someone else's simulation is a crippling thought. It robs me of worth and agency. Made worse by the programmer already knowing the outcome and running the simulation anyway, for the love of the game, one might assume. The world already feels enough like a bad game of europa universalis.
Well, in the end there is one reality, which ends up exactly like it is because of every single action in history. An omniscient entity would know this reality, even with free will. He would also be able to see every possible future but still know which will be the real future. I don't see a contradiction at all
Who says there's only one universe or reality? It's unknowable.
If we're talking about the universe's end as a collapsing and starting over with another big bang or something, yeah, that's necessarily a terminus point for the current universe and every other possible universe, but the universe's end is guesswork, much more than it's beginning.
Forgiveness requires that you agree with an absolute nonsense story* and live in a more or less constant state of contrition for your basic human drives and emotions, since it not just enough to act correctly, you must also feel and think correctly and perpetual gratitude for the opportunity to be "saved". It's definitely a purity test.
Everything that occurs is preordained and fully known by God, including every choice that you will ever make; the only sensible explaination is that God intentionally chose to have things play out this, including choosing that some souls be destined for damnation. In fact, the Bible lays this idea out fairly clearly: "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?" - Romans 9:21
*God, in his infinite power chose to sacrifice himself to himself, to save us from himself, otherwise he was required to punish us for an ancestral transgression that he in his full knowledge of the outcome still chose to set in motion, all of this because this all-powerful entity is incapable of forgiving humanity without a blood sacrifice, but to receive this forgiveness we need to be baptized, a process ranging from dunking us in water to dribbling water on our forehead and psychically acknowledge the sacrifice of his son who was also himself who was fully human and fully God, who also got better shortly after.
Casual atheistic as a child. Questioning atheist as a teen. Finish college as an atheistic agnostic, but recognizing the importance of religion. Convince my Christian [now wife] that it is important that we get a pastor to officiate our wedding even if it makes it harder to jump through the hoops to meet the requirements for a pastor to agree to officiate.
You didn't loop back around to believing in God. You looped around to believing in prosociality. That we can hold a set of tenets that help us treat others well and grow our society in positive ways, some of which were figured out by other people and written down a while ago. God has nothing to do with it.
If you have to believe that god is gonna punish you eternally to be a good person then you're not a good person.
I've literally had conversations with Christians who ask me "Bro whats stopping you from raping and murdering everyone if you dont believe in god??" And I said "Wait, do you *seriously* think if you knew god didn't exist you'd just run around raping and murdering people?..." and they say "Yes!"!
Blows my fucking mind. Some people *literally* need to believe a god exists to act like normal people. They're too dumb to properly control themselves like a normal person.
Yeah that's the conclusion I reached. I'm not a good person because without consequences I'd be doing some shit. When people call me a good person I try to explain to them that there is a difference between being good people and being good to people, and that I am good to people because it benefits me, either directly such as they give me stuff or do me favors in return, or indirectly such as I enjoy their company and want them to continue being around me, but am not good by nature. I had to decide that good benefitted me more than indulging my actual natural desires, and would probably go back if the math ever stopped checking out.
That's some enlightened analysis. I've never considered it that far.
I just *try* to be a good person in the way of just doing things as I'd want done to me. So in most situations that's what I try to consider. How would I want to be treated? I could never commit many awful things because I imagine myself in other people's shoes too easily, all the time. Even animals.
But I am human and I do fail doing this sometimes. No one is perfect and I have acted in ways and exhibited treatment that I wouldn't want to be treated.
And when I do I carry these things in my heart as a moment to learn from. I don't cast them aside and think "oh Im forgiven by the great forgiver in the sky! I have no reason to worry about that anymore. I'm clean and no one can judge me."
No. I judge myself, and another could judge me, and I try to remind myself to do better in the future.
The problem is that not everyone has the same concept of being a "good person" as you. Thats where religion and thus laws come in to place, to sort of create a general standard for "good person"
When you understand that there is a great quantity of people who are violent pieces of shit that do not follow rules if they think they can get away with it, is when you understand that sadly religion is required to force them into submission. The same way that you trick a bad behavior low impulse control kid that Santa is not gonna bring them any gifts into stop being a little shit.
Religion was not made for people who are good nature with proper morals like you. It was made as a control mechanism for that offset of people who can't behave properly in society without a punishment they can't get away from.
It’s not a well written post but the thought pattern he has was interesting, how you can swap your view back and forth as you accumulate more knowledge
But his current set of knowledge shouldn't loop him back to believing in god. It should make him appreciate the role religion has played historically and the values they espoused but he should appreciate those values themselves rather than believing in a god that would command them.
But they can only become universal values with God and religion. Without an objective foundation they just preferences, and nobody's preference would be more it less valid than another's. Then it's just a matter of who can enforce their preferences. Exactly what religious standards avoid.
In the end we are all irrational beings who need something to believe in if we want to stay sane. To make that something divine is the most simple effective and fulfilling solution. Pure rationalization tends to overcomplicate things. Mere appreciation will not lead you to giving the right amount of weight and value to some of the ancient wisdoms and practices that are encapsulated in religion(s), which unified civilizations through a common narrative and set of values and rules that even the most simple minded person in the room could agree upon. The point is that it's simple at the surface (symbols / memes have to be simple too). Even for intelligent people, strong belief can reduce unnecessary doubt and save mental energy, or help you in your own irrational moments. The point of faith is not to prove it. The proof is in the pudding, after all. Literal belief in deities can be a functional advantage through that lens. That is my most rational explanation for what anon is talking about.
>how you can swap your view back and forth as you accumulate more knowledge
Thats not what happened tho. He just thinks Christianity is the most beneficial. Not that he learned more
An objective standard, God, has everything to do with it. With no objective mural standard we only have preferences, and if you just prefer something without a foundational backing, why should I adopt your preference over someone else's, or over own? If all preferences are equally valid, then mutuality just comes down to who had the ability to enforce their preferences. That's why God matters, even if you don't believe in Him. Christian ethics are shown to result in better outcomes than subjective secular ones for this reason, even if you didn't actually believe in God.
It is certainly written in a lot of religious texts people have historically believed in. It does play a role in giving rules to society. As a ruler you can control unfaithfulness as much as you can control its divine punishment, so you can say it outsourced some of the law enforcing work.
Well yeah, if you can put the fear of eternal damnation into someone then they will follow your rules.
The issue is when those rules start getting twisted by a religious leader for personal gains.
It's possible that believing in god (or gods) and religious tradition/worship were a key part of establishing a community capable of achieving the goals of prosociality.
I'm not about to start going back to church anytime soon, but I can also see society falling apart at the seams because we have no sense of community anymore, and I can acknowledge that shared religious experience was one of the things (not the only one of course) holding that together.
Same except I just realized regards need religion to behave themselves in a civilized manner in a good society and that I can still do all that good community/societal stuff without actually believing. If you need God to tell you to be nice to your neighbor then you’re a shit ass person or a moron.
Proceeds to have different versions of what it means to do good and be a nice person instead of having a shared definition through the same source
Starts fighting each other
I mean most of them preach the same underlying messages, as long as you aren’t a moron you can see that. Unfortunately, most people are fucking stupid. Higher thought tribalism (e.g. religions and most politics/nationalism) mixed with billions of years of animalistic evolution is a hell of a drug. We are a violent species.
Only about as violent as other social species tbf. Potentially less so depending. We’re like thiiiiss close to eating the babies of rival males I think maybe we’re there in spirit. “Evil” step-parents are definitely a thing… (As are Awesome Non Evil Ones)
It’s funny because unlike animals we COULD rationalize ourselves out of it but. Yknow. Often it can be detrimental to the populations of those social animals, and we got off so well because of more willingness to create larger communities and less hostility, imo.
But, yknow, whatever. I think that animal instinct is actually God Communicating with me directly because surely what else could it be. If I feel something it must be true and intended by God and not just things that happened to evolve.
I guess on the reverse side people will say its natural so surely its good but also we have to keep in mind that something that comes naturally isn’t necessarily good for the collective, nor necessarily good for the individual, its just good enough to keep you alive for long enough to reproduce.
Like, having no mouth and not being able to eat and dying after having a bunch of babies is what evolutionary worked “the best” for several types of bugs because it meant they got to reproduce the most.
Not that they got to live the most fulfilling, stress free, healthiest best lives. I would figure the starving to death at sexual maturity isnt that great for them healthwise. And it was definitely just some bug that happened to ruin that for every other bug in its species because it was able to make way more babies, overflowing the gene pool with said babies.
Once we stop viewing the way things currently are as the best possible solution, maybe we’ll actually want to get up and move to a better one.
We don’t eat the babies of our rivals. We just run them through with spears or dash their heads against rocks or bomb them to oblivion or cut off food supplies so they and the rest of their family slowly starve to death.
I don’t not believe we are bad creatures, and our violence in and of itself is not unique. What is unique is our ability to industrialize violence. It’s also sad that as much as we’re able (and probably should) rationalize our way out of violence conflict we are just as susceptible to rationalize our way into violent conflict.
I think the only thing we differ on is I do not think our animal instinct talking to us is God. I think our high consciousness, rational ability to think at a different level is our gift from God, and it’s our duty to overcome our baser animalistic instincts. Our animal instincts are what attract us to earthly, devilish desires.
Idk what to believe, God may or may not exist. All I know is that treating my neighbor well makes my community a better place and both of us happier than if we disrespected each other. I don’t need a God watching over me to make me nice to my neighbor. I can do that on my own.
Oh no, I was being Sarcastic on the Animal Instinct being God thing. Just on reflecting some of the Bible, it comes off sometimes as the author viewing core instincts as Godly Communication/assigning Godly Weight to stuff like an impulse or intrusive thought.
Honestly I don’t think we’re particularly special or Graced by God in any way. I think viewing our specialty as something God assigned is very… Human-Centric? When it was more just luck / coincidence if anything. We just happened to be able to get a footing before other species and also actively suppress many other species from development so it’s not like they could get on our level if they wanted to…
BUT… We also can’t communicate on the same level with other animals so its naive of us to assume none of them are anywhere near our levels of intelligence.
Especially when there’s already animals that do have communication structures, that build, that have agriculture, that use tools. We just assign greater value to ourselves and reinforcing that we’re chosen by God helps ease any accountability we might have towards treating other animals as lesser. Animal instinct is not devilish to me bit simply impulsive, it bares no inner evil. It can simply create destruction without impulse control (which is something many animals can learn as well).
Ants for example have had agriculture long before we ever did!
If there is a “God” to me it would be the equations that create the world around us, which is frankly uncaring and often happenstance. Things like the fibonacci sequence are everywhere… there is a math to how the wind scatters clouds, and how light shows through the atmosphere and creates the colors of the sky. Many things are pure chance, and not intentional. Maybe things such as the seasons… There is a math behind that too.
Math would be the only all powerful god I could think of but there would be little intent for good or evil there, especially with so many variables.
To me, written religion is purely the word of humans, and contaminated by human perspective. I think they often share similar things because humans have similar experiences around the world. They can be an important window into historical thought processes at the time and to understand the motivation behind wars.
Unlike those organized religions of course.
The common text dictating "good" is what the purpose of government and the law
People kill in the name of their religious texts constantly. Christian and Israeli nationalists are actively committing genocide as we speak.
That's one road to take. The other road is realizing that religion was made to control ignorant peasants and slaves to stop them from killing each other and/or killing those in power.
I mean, until you get told by those in power to kill for God, queen, and country, of course.
That’s kind of a weird way to think about it. I feel like the evidence is pretty strong that religiosity evolved as a trait in humans through natural selection.
There are a lot of schisms that form from persecution yes but often the canon can favor the rich with other schisms being suppressed.
It’s truly a winning man’s history and the oppressed are definitely the “losers” so to speak.
Like, why does conquering peasants feel so good if I wasnt gods chosen one, duh?
I personally doubt that they were invented as a means of control. However, people observing that others like or believe in something and subsequently using it as a means of control is still quite valid - which is to say that they were appropriated as means of control. Religion is inherently not properly organized when it starts.
Definitely not invented as, but appropriated depending on the religion.
It’s funny because people speak so nebulously about religion being a means of control but what they’re mostly thinking about is Christianity and Related Religions, and not religion as a whole. IE. Anything stemming from Yahweh/El.
Although I guess it’s easy to forget about other religions when most of the non-Yahweh-root ones were the ones that got colonized and conquested all over to the point that only scraps remain of their history. Oops.
Whether for control or not, we still know how many Religions came to be, how they developed and how they were influenced. One might disagree over the why but it was still man made
Counter argument: religion is a man made set of rules and laws. As such, just like any man made rule it can be changed and improved for a better future for society.
Slavery was considered normal in religious text. Now currently in the Christian side of the world is considered abhorrent. Whatever interpretation or use of it changed to fit the society's needs and thoughts of its time. It is malleable, just like any law.
TBH I’d say “slavery is abhorrant” depends on where you are in Christianity because theres plenty of fundies who think we’re worse off without it.
The fact that its man made is why I don’t trust it however. Its ultimately adjusted to personal preference of human individuals, its the words and perceptions of humans. There is no god involved in it.
Although I think they are historically and culturally important to understand and get a window into common conceptions over history. But there’s also a lot that gets excluded from canon. To try to fix it would ultimately still taint it with human influence and perspective.
Yeshua / Jesus was a literal person. Which, I mean, Mary Magdalene was around, but the Bible Canon itself did purposefully exclude her because contributions such as ones from Paul. We got a lot of anti-women stuff from Paul. Mary Magdelene suggests Yeshua at least was at least pretty cool about women for the time but he’s a figure in the religion, not the religion as a whole. And ultimately human, and not perfect.
A loooot of the canon was developed before and after him. IIRC a decent chunk of the canon about HIM specifically was made a decent while after his death LOL. But He’s A Person out of the entire canon that Yea Does Tend To Suppress Women. And also people of color for a while there… anyone with different interests… so on.
There was that whole period of history where they barred anything but Yahweh/El worship including worship of Yahweh/El’s wife, to the extent that the concept that he even had a wife is foreign now. Asherah ring a bell? She used to be worshipped alongside El, often by women, and her worship was actively suppressed and her idols removed. And then also that whole thing with her being literally demonized alongside the other female gods on the road to the development of El into Monotheism.
And I mean. Theres that whole thing with Eve and Lillith.
Fun times.
The climb into monotheism as a whole was messy in general too.
I mean it is theoretically better than complete anarchy. Back when the religions were founded, non deity based ideological explanations for morality (social contract, etc), were not really developed in those regions. Also we lived in a world where people could die WAAAAY easier, and women dying were worse for population recovery than men dying. So they were suppressed purely for pragmatic reasons. Now that we have a much longer life expectancy, there's no real reason to suppress women outside of bigotry or desire for control
I think the real reason i was atheist is because the Christians around me where just mean all the time. Same goes for the orthodox. Once I learn they weren't practicing what they preached I realized they were just delusional. Ligitimently couldn't understand why you'd believe and yet take out all your pain on others you care about. Made no sense made me agnostic in the end. I dont want to disrespect believers but the fake ones annoy me the most
"Universal Value"?
It's just scaring the masses so that they'll follow whatever one guy is saying.
It's not about morality. They just made it "moral" to do the bidding of someone who will make shit up to make others do what he wants.
It's no coincidence that "God says X" happens to coincide with what the guy saying it actually wants to happen.
"God wants to give me a luxury sports car".
"God wants you to forgive all the pedo priests"
etc.
Yes, but surely we can find better ways to build community than performing rituals for a nonexistent God, and defining our morality by what some random people wrote down in a book two thousand years ago.
In *general*, most religious traditions are rooted in some kind of societal need. For example, abrahamic religions all ban shellfish and pork (even if Christians generally ignore it) because shellfish is a common, deadly allergen and pork is prone to parasites and spoilage when not stored and prepared correctly. 2000 years ago, no one understood why some people would puff up and die when eating shrimp, or why pork lead to parasites, but they did "know" that their god really didn't want them to eat pork or shellfish and would kill sinners who didn't respect the edict.
Meanwhile you have pig roasts in the South Pacific that honor the gods because nothing will be alive after roasting for 9 hours in an underground oven.
That said, any religious rules today that use the "because god" argument is just manipulation. If you can't justify a religious rule without leaning on the ineffable workings of God, it's just manipulation and usually to get your money.
Look into the prophecies predicting the coming of Jesus. For example, in the book of Daniel they predicted the coming of their messiah 700 years in advance to the exact day. The angel said 483 years after the order to rebuild the temple is given, then an anointed one will be revealed, and this date is the exact day He came riding in to Jerusalem on a donkey (which was another prophecy, albeit easier for someone to fake). This is just one of many, and theologians and historians alike agree that it is statistically impossible for any one man to have fulfilled all of them, because some of them involved what family He would be from, what city he would be born in, etc. Also I beg you to read Isaiah chapter 53, it talks about Him pretty in detail ~700 years before. If Christianity isn’t true, the people writing down the scriptures would have to be the luckiest sons of a gun the world has ever seen
I mean. Jesus/Yeshua was Aware of the book of Daniel and started to believe of himself as the Messiah so he did kind of start intentionally acting out what the prophecy said.
It didn’t make the prophets omniscient.
Likewise, what we see now in Israel and the middle east… its not like this stuff is happening by circumstance, they are intentionally going out of their way to follow predetermined scripts with actions that are also pre-described. It would be different if they had no knowledge on the texts, it is Intentional. Yeshua was not uninformed about the bible, so of course he started reflecting it in his actions haha.
Especially when he had the motivation of ending oppression of his people.
Predicting that someone will arise to rescue those in a time of need isnt prophetic, it’s simply what would need to happen for those people to get out of that scenario, and the reality that there would be backlash, etc.
The whole israel situation historically back then was already them facing conflict on and off all the time anyways, yes pre-Jesus. Often it was a documentation of conflict and conquest at the time from the perspective of whoever was writing it. It was made during a time where religious persecution was rife, and at several points a bunch of the texts were also just poetry and battle hymns as well, or even adapted from poetry from previous gods such as Ba’al.
Take it a step further: If they do both exist in the same universe then we need to find and kill god because it's an existential threat to the species.
If there were no God, these things would still exist, we just wouldn’t give a shit about them.
You think lions get upset when a cub dies? No, they eat the fucker: free protein.
Our capacity for seeing bad in things is the same that allows us to see Good in an empty and indifferent universe.
That’s not what I said.
“God” and “religion” are aspects of the human mind. The same bit of our consciousness that thinks “things should be good” and “bad stuff should not be”.
Animals don’t have this. The lion does not worry over the moral considerations of killing.
We have this. It’s a product of our intellect. It’s why we believe in spirits and ghosts and the great other. It separates us from the beasts.
If he were capable of performing literal miracles.
Which I hold he cannot do.
God is a function of our mind - a way to comprehend the world. It cannot physically interact with the world.
Is it though? Free will exists as a potential explanation for the problem of evil, but there are many points in the Bible where it explicitly rejects free will. Think of God "hardening" the pharaoh's heart.
Having an omniscient god kind who gives prophecy also would contradict the idea of free will
Prophecy does not contradict free will. You are free to do whatever you want, and make any decision you wish. The omnipotent part allows prophecy to be made as He already knows what you will pick. It was your decision, you’ve already made it
That sounds an awful lot like a paradox.
Obviously we can't make a decision contrary to prophecy, no matter how you spin it. If all of our decisions are known before time even began, they aren't really decisions. Saying "you made it" like we are some sort of timeless, cosmic entity ignores every part of what actually makes us human.
Not complaining, I'm becoming partial to determinism anyways. But it creates some interesting paradoxes when dealing with a religion who claims an all powerful god
It's not paradoxical though. If you have a futuristic, 100% reliable mind-reading machine, and you use it on your friend while he's thinking of choosing between soda or juice, did you take away his choice of choosing soda because you already knew what he wanted before he opened his mouth?
God merely has a better understanding of what we'll do beyond immediate options, but it doesn't take away our ability to choose. Similarly, a prophecy isn't what makes one choose something, it simply has information about what the writer correctly guessed (or got that information from a higher power that correctly guessed), but the guesser didn't make the choice, he simply knows us that well.
Do you not realize how absurd it is that you're trying to lawyer your way through how obviously illogical the Christian conception of God is?
I don't blame you. I was doing the same thing when I was 11.
But at a certain point you have to realize: if God really did exist, you wouldn't need convoluted and nonsensical arguments to explain his illogical behavior and biblical contradictions and paradoxes.
Just ask yourself: if you were the all powerful creator of the universe, would you allow childhood cancer to exist?
Would you arbitrarily decide that the only way to save the people you created from the hell you created was to kill your own son? It's absurd.
You don't need to be condescending to me, I'm atheistic. That doesn't mean I enjoy reading criticizing from a point of ignorance, or am unable to argue from a point I don't necessarily agree with.
Nothing you pointed out is paradoxical or contradictory. Hell isn't meant for humanity, god doesn't want any human there, it's not a punishment created for us, yet we can choose to end up there by ignoring his teachings, it is the absence of god. And people always say "well, if god wanted to make sure we believed in him he should make an obvious miracle or smth" and yet when he shows one of the greatest miracles ever it's suddenly "illogical". Obviously, it's a miracle, it's supposed to appear grand and impossible.
No, because you're not inducing his choices. You're conflating his perfect knowledge of us with making choices for us.
Sure, god didn't create us with wings so we can't fly for example, that is not an issue of free will, even in an atheistic view you couldn't say someone doesn't have free will just because he wasn't born with dove wings. Free will is about making choices with what we have available to us now.
God didn't project us with the intent that Mark would drink soda one day, but he did make us while knowing Mark would drink soda one day. His knowledge isn't because of a programming he did to us, but because of his perfect insight.
If I give soda to Mark and I know he's going to drink it because I'm his friend and know him very well, I didn't take away his choice of drinking or not. I may be wrong because I'm not perfect, maybe Mark wasn't feeling like drinking soda that day, but my level of knowledge (perfect or imperfect) doesn't take away his choice.
That was a mistranslation, Hebrew doesn't have a passive verb form of words so God allowing Pharaoh's heart to harden was translated as him making it happen.
No, the whole point in *Satan* is to give us free will.
The Garden of Eden was paradise because there was no knowledge of good and evil and no capacity to choose.
God didn’t want us to leave. He’d have been happy with us as pets. The Snake gave us free will so be thankful to him.
No. The whole point is that humans chose to eat from the Tree because they already had free will, and the capacity to choose. The choice was between obedience and disobedience, and they chose the latter after being deceived by Satan (a name which translates to 'The Deceiver,' or 'The Adversary'). The point is that it was a perversion and misuse of our free will.
Just because the masses are cattle who need to religiously believe in things they don't understand doesn't mean you go to a cloud dimension when you die.
Its cool bro im sure there are support groups for [Shit Eaters]( shhttps://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/9a4b1af1-1da6-482b-95a3-d38fd96985eb/gif?__cf_chl_tk=gBQ4PLp1nCMfdlCfAW.h3VcN9Et4AO7TnDmdbfVtizY-1773643969-1.0.1.1-._elLEI.UlBkYQi6GZ3oEJnrPSUG3Ifzd7Bt7NkQ.wo#4_KAes_f.copy)
It may make you feel more comfortable. It doesn't make it true.
Hell, I wish I could believe in eternal life and God and angels. But it's just obviously not true, and I'd rather confront reality than hide from it in comforting fairy tales.
Besides, the universe is amazing enough.
Like what?
I've confronted and I accept the fact that the universe doesn't give a shit about me, that nature is often cruel and random, that humans are animals and often act like it, and that life is unfair and no one is coming to save us.
But also that there is beauty in the brevity and complexity of life.
Meanwhile you pretend a magic man in the sky gives a shit about you, while failing to prevent childhood cancer. I find that a bit pathetic.
That isn't anywhere near as clear cut as you're making it out to be, there's nothing in scripture that says they will, but also nothing in scripture that says that they won't.
Catholicism - Traditional theology influenced by Thomas Aquinas states that animals do not have rational, immortal souls, and so therefore don't participate in the beatific vision or eternal life in the same way that man does, but theology is not something that's set in stone. John Paul II stated that animals have souls in a sense, and Francis comforted a child by saying that paradise is open to all creatures. Fundamentally it comes down to individual belief (or the belief of your Pastor, famously Pastors can disagree on the intricacies of belief)
Eastern Orthodoxy - Largely believe that animals do go to heaven or will participate in the restored creation. It isn't formally believed (meaning derived from a synodal decree), but many pastors and believers do believe that animals will be present in the afterlife, based on God's love for all creation.
LDS/Mormon - Much clearer teachings, J.Smith taught that animals have spirits and will be resurrected through Christ's redemption, and will therefore enjoy immortal life.
Anglican - Very close to Catholicism on this one, nothing doctrinal or formal, but many members of both the clergy and the laity will express hope that animals will be present in the afterlife, similarly to E.Orthodoxy based on God's love for all creation. Ultimately though, it's a topic open to debate.
I could go on, but I think that illustrates the point. FWIW, I'm not a believer myself, but I am sympathetic to Christianity. It undeniably forms the foundations of 1) my culture, and 2) my personal morality, and for that I feel that I owe it a debt.
Religion is a pacifying force. If a society has a fundamental issue you need revolutionary forces to change it, and so religion ends up being counter revolutionary- thus bad, specially during the liberal democratic revolutions and socialist revolutions
I have become a bit agnostic. I don't believe in god, if it exists, it's impossible for humans to comprehend, identify with, or speak on behalf of it, which means that to believe in it is almost the same as not believing it.
"God is the name of the blanket we throw over mystery to give it shape" — Barry Taylor, AC/DC Road Manager
The enigma that is the Universe is too mind blowing for our monkey brains to comprehend. Religion is a collection of morality tales born from trumped up half truths and wild fever dreams that are ment to capture the imagination and spred through word of mouth so that we will behave ourselves and live with each other
I realized that „God“ means something different to everybody so in a sense, yes. I‘m still agnostic but I believe in something unspecific. Not a creator but some sort of good force, call it love or hope
My whole idea of a god is simple:
If God does exist, it's pretty clear they do not care about humanity, so worshiping them is rather pointless, since there's no material benefit to it. If God existed and cared about humanity, the cruelty and suffering so present would simply not exist
It's actually scary how close this is to me except for the last sentence. Although now I lean into the theory that if there's a god, it's nothing like what's in the bible or in any other religion. Been dwelling on between that concept and traditional agnosticism a lot lately.
- realize there is no objective meaning and no god actively participates in the world. If you want to be a good person and make the world a better place, it’s up to you to actually do something.
I didn't grew up with religion outside of school, used to an edgy teenage atheist and some day decided to believe in God. I feel better with my faith, it helps me in tough times and made me more resilient against the nonsense from others I have to endure with composure and continued friendliness
I focus on the positive values and aspects that no one can deny are there, faith/believe and knowledge are separate aspects that do not exclude each other and as such, my faith is strong
Universal value is an overstatement.
There is a value to them that relates to a specific segment of the populace for a particular set of socio-historical conditions. But considering that even in the Bible (I'm taking a leap and assuming anon isn Christian) these rules are not applied universally, e.g. thou shalt not kill is handed down shortly before the Israelites go off and do a whole shitload of God-sanctioned killing, it seems that even the source of these laws doesn't seem to carry strong convictions regarding their universality.
I do believe in God, but it's all-encompassing and nothing can exist contrary to it, making it something beyond good and evil, as everything is equally of it.
Oppose religion because you realise it is all lies meant to manipulate gullible people and scam them through false promises.
Give up on others and decide to just scam them.
Live long enough to see yourself become the villain…
Uh oh, OP, you mentioned religion on Reddit.
You should know anyone on Reddit would be way too smart to believe in any religion and because they are so smart they will refuse to have any intelligent conversation with anyone that has religious values because clearly those who believe in a religion are completely immoral, brain dead, and provide zero contributions to society.
>Never was indoctrinated by my parents
>Hence never had edgy religious phase
>Still don't know who are agnostics
>Don't care about history or sociology to learn what are the tenets and what were they for.
Well, I don’t think that there is some kind of omnipotent, omnipresent, all knowing, all seeing entity like the Abrahamic God, I think the vast majority of what religion teaches is generally good for society. Taken care of one another, being in good stewards of the Earth, responding to hate with kindness, giving to charity, practicing temperance. Further, I think spirituality can do a lot of good for a lot of people’s mental health.
> Implying being agnostic and atheist are mutually exclusive.
One is a statement of belief, the other is a statement of knowledge.
I do not believe in a god/gods = Atheist.
I don’t *know* if a god/gods do exist = Agnostic.
Agnostic Atheist.
Like choosing to think something is real and defend it because you like the community that comes with it is the epitome of being a dispshit with no critical thinking skills.
If you need religion to beba good person thats kind of scary
Hilarious how a simple post has set off reddit atheists so much. It's actually pathetic the way the simple mention of religion actually makes this app implode
Yeah ?
I'll concede that its provocative but my point still stands. Just because you think it's useful doesn't mean that God or Allah or whatever suddenly starts existing.
It would be like saying:
- I'm sad and having difficult time in life
- I read a cool quote from Gandalf about how we can't complain about it and instead what to do with the time granted to us
- that quote is useful and I feel better
- therefore Gandalf exist
Like, what?
Ignorance is bliss. If you never wonder how anything works or research the motives behind geopolitical conflict throughout history, or how/why countless people get dealt a horribly shitty hand, you never come to the conclusion that
a) religion is the root of all evil, and it’s virtually imposible that there is a god
b) if there is, every modern religion in existence is wrong, as god clearly does not care about us
c) which means that all these monuments, buildings, paintings, rituals, etc, are just a waste of time and a bunch of nonsensical wishful thinking
d) which means that mankind does not NEED belief in god in order to be good with each other, but you can believe in god and have it be your motivator to strive and be a better person
In conclusion anon is either a blithering fool or baiting.
Same
I do believe god is real, not in the sense of the existence of some omnipresent entity, but in the sense that anything that has an effect on reality, is real.
"Praying" (or at least my version of it) and other god-related stuff has helped me through some things, so yeah, ill lean on it if it works
the core tenets like slavery. Yes slavery, actual slavery is a core arabic religions value. We got past religious values because they are just wrong.
Also agnostics are weak and pathetic. "I will make no decision and keep every possibility open just in case I need to argue my way into heaven if it is real"
I also do not want to have sex with children so religion is kinda out for me.
For me it’s simple. If no one had ever told me about God, I would never have believed in him even given an infinite lifespan. It’s different from things like gravity, which people could discover on their own.
See, I take a very different view.
Our minds run a kind of ragdoll physics simulation to help us understand the world. You can throw and catch a ball because you learn intuitively how stuff falls and arcs through the air.
You intuitively learn shit like energy and momentum when you learn to walk and to run and to fall over and fuck up your knees.
You start building makeshift shelters and you learn about forces and stress and breaking strain of various materials.
And you also learn about life and love and hopes and fears and free will and consciousness and death.
And that last few need some pretty unusual concepts in your ragdoll physics engine to understand.
All people everywhere have independently created systems of spirituality and belief. If you had never been told about God you would still have created something a bit like it.
Even if you never heard of God, then you'd something else to afix ideas like almighty, mysterious, and ethical into something comprehensible. Eventually they all distill down into Father=Power and/or Mother=Shelter. Different words, but same primal belief in the end: Good Life=Reward, Bad Life=Punishment.
If you asked 10 people what God is, I'm sure you'd get distinct descriptions of the same underlying principle.
If you asked 10 people what's in a soup, then you'd probably get 10 unique answers. That doesn't mean that soup doesn't exist. Nor would it ever makes sense to say you do or don't believe in soup.
The core issue is that you don't enjoy the idea of believing in someone's else's version of God. Just because someone else makes terrible soup doesn't mean that soup is inherently bad.
Finding a version of God that you can admire and accept will bring you unimaginable peace. That's why it's often referred to as 'a personal relationship with the Divine.' The real sin is trying to organize that personal belief into some official that can be administered. It's like when kids try to create rules for their games of make-believe. It ruins the magic, and it's no longer fun.
Posting anything pro-christ on reddit. These people are animals dude, you'd have an easier time preaching the good word to a pack of hyenas. If it's not what a loser would do, reddit will at best only ridicule you for it. God be with you op.
"do research," lol.
No shit that many of them are attempts to articulate behavioral guidelines for the benefit of society. We're talking about people who didn't know what germs or galaxies are.
And we're doing the same thing today, but without needing to believe in fairy tales.
I mean I looped back to even if I don't believe in a higher power that organized religion can have a positive impact in many people's lives. It's true that in America, many rural places are organized socially around church or churches and that can often be a positive element. I've volunteered with churches doing inarguably good work like free special needs care days and such
I did a lot of research when I turned to agnosticism and found much of the same, just that I still choose to be agnostic, but still open to introduce religion to my children despite myself not being open to it any more
So he believes in morals not god. I dont go around preaching that mr rogers is god because he teaches manners. I also dont go around preaching that mr rogers doesnt exist if he was evil.
One can accept the possibility of a supernatural power that may have created the universe. One cannot accept the same supernatural power giving a shit about the human race.
Same, but mostly the first part was because reddit was new and everyone was anti-religion so I was young and ignorant and followed the herd.
When I started asking questions, reading the bible, and getting answers, is when I started believing in a higher power.
The fact that atheism's main argument against religion is "If god, why bad thing happen", which can be answered with a 2 second google search, isn't a winnable position.
The average Reddit Atheist doesn't know anything more about religion than the elementary understanding of Christianity + mixed with their own internalized hatred and lack of control in this world, this entire comments section shows that once again
actually my belief in god was restored once i learned that the earth is irrefutably flat and theres no experiment you can do to prove we're spinning on a ball
Oh, that's not how it works. God isn't external to you, so it would be more like a fed/spy/hacker situation than a peeping Tom at your window. That's why people say not to be judgemental; not because it's wrong or anything but if you cultivate that level of critique, you lock yourself in your head with that asshole lol.
Lately, studying gnosticism from the perspective of a psychologist, it's surprisingly on point. Imagining you have this cosmic infant hanging out behind your eyes watching everything you see is a pretty good way to regulate your subconscious, since it doesn't process language and takes everything you see hear or think literally, and then makes alterations to your daily autopilot programming accordingly.
Yep, I went from Christian to Buddhist, then Agnostic. After a few years I realized how revolutionary Christ is, and now I’m back.
Christ is really cool, the problem is the fandom
Nah, metaphysically i ve never had certainty about its existence, nor its characteristics.
Now I believe it exists, but I'm not certain about any of its characteristics.
And its relevance to society order is unquestionable.
The problem lies in the amount of evil done in the name of god. Almost all terrorism, so many historical wars such as:
The Spanish Inquisition, the pogroms, world war 2, the crusades, the thirty years war, the wars literally dubbed "The Wars on Religion" in France, wars of the three kingdoms; The fact that I can go on for another paragraph JUST listing the wars that people murdered hundreds of thousands in some, and millions in others, where religion was either the main reason or a supporting one, make me hesitant to believe that religion is done for the good of humanity, and that god exists.
In my mind, if there was a god, he is more of a observer rather than anything else. created the background energy that allowed for the big bang to occur, and then just observed forever. Nothing else.
1. The spanis inquisition being violent and horrible is a myth made by protestants. It has been debunked long ago.
2. Ww2 was not done in the name of God.
3. The crusades was defensive wars against islamic invasions.
Religion's valid historical purpose being a simple way to explain the world, scare people into behaving and encouraging in-group mentality isn't a reason to believe in God. It may well be a reason to encourage new types of organised belief and co-operation fit for a modern age though. The loss of community that came with religious decline is a shame.
I grew up pretty non-religious after the age of 6, we just stopped going to church. Didn't know what was going on while in church anyway, so it never absorbed. Never had an "edgy atheist" phase growing up, just was never religious. Still not christian as an adult, not out of resistance against it, but a lack of exposure. Honestly though I think Mysticism is not the only way people can be spiritual. Nature is cool, physics is cool, and I work as an electrician.
I go to church because I enjoy making my mom happy, singing hymns, listening to the Priest's sermon (90% of it is him ranting against Israel), volunteering at the soup kitchen with hot Filipina migrant workers, and having a purpose to wake up on Sunday.
I don't even care about spirituality. Christianity gives me happiness.
Good morals are acquired through reason and an understanding of what values lead to a healthier society. Having a holy book dictate a set of morals that you’re required to subscribe to leads to moral stagnation and makes your morals arbitrary. That’s how we get nonsense like “being gay is sinful”
477 Comments
MattVincentUK@reddit
Terbario@reddit
liquifed_waffles@reddit
alienartissst@reddit
matt_Nooble12_XBL@reddit
alienartissst@reddit
Omnizoa@reddit
SsjDragonKakarotto@reddit
Qloudy_sky@reddit
2ndRandom8675309@reddit
Qloudy_sky@reddit
2ndRandom8675309@reddit
Qloudy_sky@reddit
AxVxA@reddit
SsjDragonKakarotto@reddit
Qloudy_sky@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
No-Sector-933@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
No-Sector-933@reddit
SS370N@reddit
Okamana@reddit
wavs101@reddit
coltrainjones@reddit
xinorez1@reddit
Electronic_Run_169@reddit
Oklimato@reddit
windowpuncher@reddit
hadukenski@reddit
Accallonn@reddit
SquirmyBurrito@reddit
hadukenski@reddit
SquirmyBurrito@reddit
windowpuncher@reddit
Serendipity_Visayas@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
windowpuncher@reddit
Not_Just_Any_Lurker@reddit
ClockworkSalmon@reddit
CloudySpace@reddit
Brave_Championship17@reddit
Virtual-Pollution584@reddit
SquirmyBurrito@reddit
korc@reddit
gnarlyhobo@reddit
AGTS10k@reddit
gnarlyhobo@reddit
AGTS10k@reddit
EtteRavan@reddit
Abc123rage@reddit
OuroborosIAmOne@reddit
billytheskidd@reddit
wavs101@reddit
Serendipity_Visayas@reddit
notsuspendedlxqt@reddit
SpaceBug176@reddit
notsuspendedlxqt@reddit
SquirmyBurrito@reddit
SpaceBug176@reddit
SquirmyBurrito@reddit
Okamana@reddit
StopConsooming@reddit
BannedSvenhoek86@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
deathandtechno@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
deathandtechno@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
deathandtechno@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
deathandtechno@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
BannedSvenhoek86@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
BannedSvenhoek86@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
Wide-Screen-650@reddit
MrwalrusIIIrdRavenMc@reddit
CloudySpace@reddit
Altruistic-Local-541@reddit
Ora3le@reddit
mrcheese324@reddit
FreshFromNowhere@reddit
commentsandopinions@reddit
tarmagoyf@reddit
godsslayer54@reddit
Spectus1@reddit
Maddogenes@reddit
General-CEO_Pringle@reddit
almostasenpai@reddit
jtoeg@reddit
Maddogenes@reddit
StormR7@reddit
MisterBobAFeet@reddit
BullyHunterIII@reddit
MisterBobAFeet@reddit
The_Law_of_Pizza@reddit
MisterBobAFeet@reddit
Sir_Bebe_Michelin@reddit
telorsapigoreng@reddit
Sir_Bebe_Michelin@reddit
MisterBobAFeet@reddit
swingin_dix@reddit
AI_Slopper@reddit
vladmashk@reddit
MisterBobAFeet@reddit
vladmashk@reddit
MisterBobAFeet@reddit
vladmashk@reddit
PixelSpy@reddit
Lord_Gladon@reddit
MisterBobAFeet@reddit
-DoctorSpaceman-@reddit
bumpmoon@reddit
The_Law_of_Pizza@reddit
Floug1@reddit
ajax3006@reddit
Floug1@reddit
OmgJustLetMeExist@reddit
deathandtechno@reddit
anthony200229@reddit
Rostin@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
Rostin@reddit
FB-22@reddit
GooGoo-Barabajagal@reddit
BardicInnovation@reddit
StopConsooming@reddit
BardicInnovation@reddit
FB-22@reddit
VitruviusII@reddit
Friendly-Target1234@reddit
DoJ-Mole@reddit
Insane_Unicorn@reddit
FB-22@reddit
General-CEO_Pringle@reddit
Waffleworshipper@reddit
Puntley@reddit
lichtblaufuchs@reddit
The_Law_of_Pizza@reddit
Raesong@reddit
lichtblaufuchs@reddit
vjmdhzgr@reddit
StopConsooming@reddit
vjmdhzgr@reddit
StopConsooming@reddit
vjmdhzgr@reddit
StopConsooming@reddit
Lone-Frequency@reddit
von_Roland@reddit
The_Knife_Pie@reddit
von_Roland@reddit
The_Knife_Pie@reddit
von_Roland@reddit
The_Knife_Pie@reddit
von_Roland@reddit
The_Knife_Pie@reddit
von_Roland@reddit
IGuessYourSubreddits@reddit
von_Roland@reddit
Converzati@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
Converzati@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
MrwalrusIIIrdRavenMc@reddit
zbgs@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
zbgs@reddit
M0rgr0m@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
M0rgr0m@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
Sleep-more-dude@reddit
lil_kott@reddit
skull_fucker79@reddit
PapaMoBucks@reddit
DoJ-Mole@reddit
Lvl4Toaster@reddit
DarkScorpion48@reddit
harbourwall@reddit
K1llerG00se@reddit
OGOngoGablogian@reddit
Simple-Reporter9102@reddit
Zermist@reddit
Cueadan@reddit
Zermist@reddit
KymbboSlice@reddit
Zermist@reddit
Zermist@reddit
SS370N@reddit
kikikza@reddit
AusCro@reddit
AlexanderTox@reddit
AusCro@reddit
Neghbour@reddit
AusCro@reddit
HorrorCranberry1796@reddit
Prancer4rmHalo@reddit
intbah@reddit
Luke22_36@reddit
hairyballsinmybutt@reddit
TurretLimitHenry@reddit
Ok_Independence_2630@reddit
Mirdclawer@reddit
Limp-Temperature1783@reddit
NinpoSteev@reddit
LeopoldZoup@reddit
NinpoSteev@reddit
LeopoldZoup@reddit
NinpoSteev@reddit
LeopoldZoup@reddit
NinpoSteev@reddit
DialecticCompilerXP@reddit
LeopoldZoup@reddit
PalpitationOk1553@reddit
NinpoSteev@reddit
PalpitationOk1553@reddit
Vast-Conference3999@reddit
NinpoSteev@reddit
MrBingly@reddit
baltinerdist@reddit
Rikkushin@reddit
whitestguyuknow@reddit
TraditionalDegree540@reddit
whitestguyuknow@reddit
Alexander_Russo@reddit
whitestguyuknow@reddit
artificialdeatheast@reddit
TraditionalDegree540@reddit
BipolarMadness@reddit
Alexander_Russo@reddit
Zermist@reddit
Oppopity@reddit
TraditionalDegree540@reddit
MisterARRR@reddit
Zermist@reddit
hansuluthegrey@reddit
TraditionalDegree540@reddit
bisky12@reddit
Rebelbot1@reddit
ActualWeed@reddit
EnterpriseAlien@reddit
aure__entuluva@reddit
TraditionalDegree540@reddit
lk_22@reddit
RodjaJP@reddit
lk_22@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
lk_22@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
lk_22@reddit
Itchy-Beach-1384@reddit
Ver_Nick@reddit
hiddenbyrags98@reddit
Ver_Nick@reddit
AxVxA@reddit
hiddenbyrags98@reddit
-PM_ME_UR_SECRETS-@reddit
Greencheezy@reddit
RunInRunOn@reddit
FB-22@reddit
poopcockshit@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
FrankSinatraCockRock@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
JakeVonFurth@reddit
General-CEO_Pringle@reddit
Perfect-bang@reddit
JakeVonFurth@reddit
Vast-Conference3999@reddit
freecodeio@reddit
C_Werner@reddit
lordxebec@reddit
sloothor@reddit
BipolarMadness@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
Odinskriger@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
TheTwistedHero1@reddit
Th0rizmund@reddit
JakeVonFurth@reddit
_Tal@reddit
Tommy2255@reddit
humancocainer@reddit
TLGJ0K3R@reddit
0cc1dent@reddit
NighthawK1911@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
Ok-Lynx3444@reddit
nofoax@reddit
ender89@reddit
TheBionicleApple@reddit
JakeVonFurth@reddit
Makelithe@reddit
CipherBagnat@reddit
VitruviusII@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
RunInRunOn@reddit
2ndRandom8675309@reddit
Letters_to_Dionysus@reddit
Vast-Conference3999@reddit
General-CEO_Pringle@reddit
RunInRunOn@reddit
Vast-Conference3999@reddit
Letters_to_Dionysus@reddit
Vast-Conference3999@reddit
Comfortable-Room-545@reddit
Vast-Conference3999@reddit
Substantial_Bet_1007@reddit
ryanpn@reddit
TheSpoty@reddit
Patroklus42@reddit
TheSpoty@reddit
Patroklus42@reddit
kdhd4_@reddit
nofoax@reddit
kdhd4_@reddit
Moblin81@reddit
kdhd4_@reddit
Optimal-Success-5253@reddit
NoScrying@reddit
Deb_99@reddit
Loaf_Baked_Sbeve@reddit
Vast-Conference3999@reddit
PussyDestrojer@reddit
Prestigious-Fig1172@reddit
WhiteSepulchre@reddit
surferos505@reddit
WhiteSepulchre@reddit
surferos505@reddit
Lamuel_J_Sackson@reddit
surferos505@reddit
mudlark092@reddit
Ok_Caterpillar7710@reddit
surferos505@reddit
Ok_Caterpillar7710@reddit
nofoax@reddit
surferos505@reddit
nofoax@reddit
surferos505@reddit
nofoax@reddit
Mythun4523@reddit
Fenrir-The-Wolf@reddit
sssometimesss@reddit
surferos505@reddit
sssometimesss@reddit
surferos505@reddit
PixelSpy@reddit
Mythun4523@reddit
StopConsooming@reddit
Complete_Gazelle4363@reddit
dazednconfused555@reddit
SageoftheForlornPath@reddit
MGx424@reddit
delet_yourself@reddit
Additional-Term3590@reddit
13ame@reddit
kindredisthicc@reddit
TheTwistedHero1@reddit
DanteThePunk@reddit
stillphat@reddit
Substantial-Cat2896@reddit
PsychedelicAwakening@reddit
KD-1489@reddit
Luther_Manning@reddit
PapierStuka@reddit
Medford@reddit
DialecticCompilerXP@reddit
vitringur@reddit
beado7@reddit
aBastardNoLonger@reddit
-Shlim-@reddit
lowrads@reddit
aczkasow@reddit
MangoAtrocity@reddit
xd3mix@reddit
WoldyR@reddit
crwrd@reddit
xX_SkibidiChungus_Xx@reddit
Avocado_with_horns@reddit
awispyfart@reddit
SillyMidOff49@reddit
AttakZak@reddit
CeraRalaz@reddit
Patroklus42@reddit
Neomataza@reddit
hansuluthegrey@reddit
1tiredman@reddit
Anzire@reddit
Jesper537@reddit
NoSoyVerde1@reddit
2benomad@reddit
Glum_Perception_5766@reddit
2benomad@reddit
Glum_Perception_5766@reddit
2benomad@reddit
Glum_Perception_5766@reddit
2benomad@reddit
RGBespresso@reddit
luckylegion@reddit
idlickherbootyhole@reddit
Suspectful-Aspect-53@reddit
RawardHoikes91@reddit
Nvenom8@reddit
ChromaStorm@reddit
Outrospect@reddit
tato64@reddit
OGOngoGablogian@reddit
perfectVoidler@reddit
Noamias@reddit
Vast-Conference3999@reddit
Toxicotton@reddit
vechroasiraptor@reddit
icepickjones@reddit
nofoax@reddit
Xenu66@reddit
Desert_Aficionado@reddit
white_equatorial@reddit
gknight702@reddit
TSiQ1618@reddit
Prestigious-Fig1172@reddit
SuspiciousPine@reddit
Roadkillgoblin_2@reddit
-Moxxi@reddit
Anguscablejnr@reddit
DongDingleton@reddit
YourLocalSnitch@reddit
Smokinglordtoot@reddit
FrenulumEnthusiast@reddit
dumbassthathasreddit@reddit
eat_my_bowls92@reddit
OfficialSandwichMan@reddit
_NOT_SO_PRECIOUS_ROY@reddit
loscapos5@reddit
UPVOTE_IF_POOPING@reddit
depersonalised@reddit
MisterBobAFeet@reddit
BlurredSight@reddit
Friendly_Beginning24@reddit
yewny@reddit
BananBosse@reddit
Samurai123lol@reddit
SaltIsMySugar@reddit
Sen-oh@reddit
SaltIsMySugar@reddit
Sen-oh@reddit
SaltIsMySugar@reddit
Sen-oh@reddit
obsolete_broccoli@reddit
SaltIsMySugar@reddit
gtepin@reddit
iSailor@reddit
Total-Jicama7563@reddit
Laxhoop2525@reddit
TheDankYasuo@reddit
TheMysticGraveLord@reddit
ReturnRadio@reddit
CaterpillarLoud8071@reddit
Beerbonkos@reddit
Drafo7@reddit
ace_violent@reddit
AngusLynch09@reddit
Friendly_Beginning24@reddit
iMac_Hunt@reddit
hornwalker@reddit
Natasha_Gears@reddit
flow_guy2@reddit
pisowiec@reddit
_Tal@reddit
Accurate_College_864@reddit
WeirdInteriorGuy@reddit
Eledridan@reddit
Weener69@reddit
i__dont___know@reddit
Darrow497@reddit
TheBionicleApple@reddit
Darrow497@reddit