If God suddenly appeared and said, “I have returned and I am very displeased!” and then he made all the televangelists and MAGAs burst into flames, I would say, “huh. I guess I was wrong.”
I don’t need much convincing.
I would assume I was mentally I’ll and having delusions. Is anyone else seeing this? :)
And then you would tell your son, who would tell their son and after around five generations or so God would have to appear and kill a bunch of people once again, because apperently your decendants don’t belive in him anymore. If I was a god that would start to annoy me pretty fast.
Or you know, don’t hide if you want to be a celebrity. God seems kinda stupid. Maybe he should have eaten from the tree of knowledge.
What part of don’t pray in public for attention makes you think the Christian God wants to be a celebrity?
I say christian, because that is in the new testament
He doesn’t want others praying in public for attention. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t demand attention, and he does. He expects to be worshipped and will burn people forever if they don’t.
Christian God implies God was a follower of his son. Little Christ God 😂
Why is God so petty? Sounds like human thinking to me.
after around five generations or so God would have to appear and kill a bunch of people once again, because apperently your decendants don’t belive in him anymore.
Well, yeah. Dude vanishes for a thousand years, and I’m supposed to believe the stories of the people who did see his work (people who all died before my most distant tracable ancestor was even born) that were written down by obvious agenda-posters? Seriously?
The quickest way to get more believers is just to show up and do a party trick every once in a while, but for some reason, God hasn’t done anything public and indisputable since cameras were invented. Weird for a guy who wants the whole world to worship him. All he’d have to do is just have a booming voice, audible everywhere on the planet, say “By the way, I’m God, I exist, and [insert holy book] is the correct one, so ya’ll better get on that.” Only the hardcore contrarians would still be non-believers.
The extra comma, though.
Literally unplayable
Oh, you don’t put, extra commas in as extra, flavor?
Your loss…,
It’s like people who use quotes instead of italics.
I’m reading it on startrek.website, so, I, just, read, it, like, Kirk.
This is the logical fallacy: Burden of Proof
The burden of proof lies with someone who is making a claim, and is not upon anyone else to disprove.
The upper right panel does not sit right with me
Are you going to tell us why, or leave us hanging?
can’t hang me, I can fly
==========
Why, can’t you fly like the rest of us?
Does it fly right?
I think the guy on the right’s eyes should be rounder, because he looks angry/sceptical still
Don’t rope me into you sick mind.
More importantly science isn’t afraid to admit when it’s wrong and change its working theories and models to fit all available data. Being wrong is just as if not more important to science.
Yeah, it’s a method - not an ideology
Exactly.
Being wrong means that we now can be right again by changing our views!
And also that we can discover new shit after changing our views that will probably improve our lives.
Absolutely not, science has a long history of ignoring and laughing at many new theories. Many of them were later found out to be true, sure, but it’s not like religion doesn’t change, reinterpret itself etc. along with the changing times.
All the while nowadays pendulum has swinged to the other side, and most of published papers are never peer-reviewed, as “science” working under a capitalist system must abide by its rules, and so quantity and shock value is more important than quality.
So while in theory “being wrong” sounds like something that would be useful for science in practice, no, it always was about being (or at least seeming) right.
(Established) scientists have a long history of ignoring new theories not science itself. But that’s because at the end of the day scientists are still human.
Science is not great at working on a very short time scales. But give it enough time so more evidence is gathered and possibly some stubborn influential people (that can’t accept a new theory) die and generally we get closer and closer to truth.
In this moment, you are euphoric.
Not because of any phony god’s blessing.
As opposed to the legitimate gods blessings?
That’s a wild use, of a, comma…
That fucking comma is changing the meaning of the sentence
That fucking comma is changing the meaning of the sentence
That comma changes the meaning of what you are trying to convey op. Just remove the comma. :)
Ah, the good old, tried and tested burden of proof switcheroo.
Unlike with religion, we could attempt to prove whether our flying friend is a liar or not… but they won’t like it.
Load them on a plane, boot them from the sky - if they can’t infact fly, then they shall die.
If only religion could be so easily tested as throwing someone out of a plane and watching if they splat or not.
I mean, you could try to prove their invisible friend can make them fly.
That would be tempting the Lord to save someone, just so he can prove you wrong.
Yeah, it’s a classic.
That’s why we needs Athiest to push unsuspecting religious people out of planes so their gods can’t claim this.
Does this look like Facebook?
The 125 downvotes is pretty remarkable.
You guys can see downvotes??
Some instances can, some can’t. Im on lemmy.ml and can see downvotes
I downvoted it because that use of a comma ruined my morning.
I agree with message though.
It’s no, it because this comic is cringey as heck. All it does is reinforces the notion that argument around God result in circular reasoning.
It ignores that many Christian would argue the existence of the universe is prove of God’s existence as it’s more likely an omnipotent being willed it into existence then everything happening solely by chance. Which is the prove that the punch line claims Christian screech about. Einstein himself proclaimed “God does not play dice with the universe” (Im not well read enough to debate this but I’m pretty such quantum physics disproves this quote)
How does the existence of the universe serve as anything other than proof that the universe itself exists?
It’s like somebody pointing at a random rock and claiming that because it’s there, a leprechaun must have put it there.
“I don’t understand why it exists, so it’s gotta be god.” (Pronounced jod, btw)
That’s pretty much it - the analogy used is if you find a stop watch in the wood, the stop watch doesn’t just appear out of thin air - someone must have placed it or dropped it there.
Makes more sense then the ontological argument (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument) - God must exist because intrinsically something omnipotent must exists.
It’s not quite the “You find prove to disprove my god” the comic paints Christian out to be.
it’s more likely an omnipotent being willed it into existence then everything happening solely by chance
It… is? 😅 I don’t ever remember gods showing up in the equations–not even the quantum ones–but go on
Many christians would be wrong :)
Also you absolutely misunderstood the “god” Einstein references XD
it’s more likely an omnipotent being willed it into existence then everything happening solely by chance.
The problem with invoking God is that you end up right back at the same problem. If God created the universe, what created God? Any answer to that question can just be applied to the question of the universe itself.
God does not play dice with the universe
Einstein’s quote is him voicing his displeasure about the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. He thought the universe must be deterministic, though I don’t know exactly why. It was probably just a gut level thing.
Even though quantum mechanics is fundamentally probabilistic (you can’t know the outcome of an event until you do it, you can only predict probable outcomes) there are still people who argue the universe could still be deterministic. Their argument is essentially that even though quantum appears probabilistic, it could actually be deterministic and there’s just some completely unknown variable we have yet to discover determining the outcomes that we see as probabilistic.
But, you know, until we discover such a variable or a way to prove that it must exist, the universe seems to be probabilistic on the small scale.
I was the 666th upvote. Going straight to hell.
Materialism here is dense
Yep
You got it wrong my fellow internet user.
Real Scientists don’t prove something.
Real Scientists try everything in their power to disprove it.
I tend to be a bit more religious, but I also love science, when I hear “religious” people say stuff like that, it gives me a headache. I don’t see how religion and science need to be at so much odds
