Paradox. . so THE FATHER BUT THE SON WANTS TO SAVE ME... AND THEY' RE THE SAME DUDE:?.... This one is what confused me before anything else. Its not the worst, but so many people think it happened that it blows my mind.
x
Click to expand

Comments(333):

[ 333 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#190 - connorsg (06/29/2012) [-]
just gonna leave this here
User avatar #268 to #190 - urbanvibes (06/30/2012) [-]
if god prefered kind athiests over hatefull christians, then it wouldnt say in the bible that were saved by our grace, not by our works. meaning were saved by believing but not what we do...but im an agnostic
#359 to #268 - luluwho (09/19/2013) [-]
But GOD abhores Cruelty most of all.
#283 to #268 - connorsg (06/30/2012) [-]
it does, jesus says it multiple times and in the letters of paul he, paul, constantly says that one does not make it to heaven by faith alone. you must also do good works and be a good person....somehow many christians today dont actually act on it. Protestants are the ones who believe that you are saved by faith alone. after the great schism this was one of the main differences that made protestants, well protestant. martin luther believed that people were saved by faith alone because we were so geared toward sin. so even tho we sinned god would still forgive us and we would be saved. im not trying to be a douchebag by saying this either just thought you wouldnt mind knowing.
it does, jesus says it multiple times and in the letters of paul he, paul, constantly says that one does not make it to heaven by faith alone. you must also do good works and be a good person....somehow many christians today dont actually act on it. Protestants are the ones who believe that you are saved by faith alone. after the great schism this was one of the main differences that made protestants, well protestant. martin luther believed that people were saved by faith alone because we were so geared toward sin. so even tho we sinned god would still forgive us and we would be saved. im not trying to be a douchebag by saying this either just thought you wouldnt mind knowing.
User avatar #192 to #190 - donatboy (06/29/2012) [-]
that's what i call good Christians. They understand that religions is about love and tolerance.
#195 to #192 - hoban (06/29/2012) [-]
If jesus was gods only son, Does that mean that we are all female in his eyes? so therefore while we think we are in a straight marriage or so on we are actually in a gay one.   
And if being gay is considered a sin and god sees us all as females yet makes us need to mate to reproduce does that mean god wants us to sin so that we all go to hell?   
By this logic no matter what we do, if being gay is a sin we are all going to hell for it.
If jesus was gods only son, Does that mean that we are all female in his eyes? so therefore while we think we are in a straight marriage or so on we are actually in a gay one.
And if being gay is considered a sin and god sees us all as females yet makes us need to mate to reproduce does that mean god wants us to sin so that we all go to hell?
By this logic no matter what we do, if being gay is a sin we are all going to hell for it.
User avatar #228 to #195 - ultrarobbie (06/30/2012) [-]
Dude, just stop, that argument wasn't even called for.
User avatar #235 to #228 - hoban (06/30/2012) [-]
Aw i posted it to the wrong comment my.bad
User avatar #238 to #235 - ultrarobbie (06/30/2012) [-]
Oh, bad times
User avatar #212 to #195 - connorsg (06/29/2012) [-]
no, thats not at all what it means.
#272 - hwarangyo (06/30/2012) [-]
I call 			********		 on this content, Black people cant read.
I call ******** on this content, Black people cant read.
#2 - ivandude (06/29/2012) [-]
This one is what confused me before anything else. Its not the worst, but so many people think it happened that it blows my mind.
-2
#114 to #2 - TheAnonymousRebel **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #116 to #114 - ivandude (06/29/2012) [-]
What diffrence does this make? Its still to wild of a story to have any truth to it
-4
#118 to #116 - TheAnonymousRebel **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #120 to #118 - ivandude (06/29/2012) [-]
Now im sure you're reading to much into that picture. Either way, even if fitting 2 of every animal was possible, there is no way to sustain it for a year.
-4
#122 to #120 - TheAnonymousRebel **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #125 to #122 - ivandude (06/29/2012) [-]
depending who you talk to you get a diffrent answer, same as jesus being god instead of the son of god. Or better yet, how water errupted from the earth as such a speed it flooded it in moments aswell as causing the craters in the moon. Honeslty who can keep up with these wild claims
User avatar #199 to #2 - theist (06/29/2012) [-]
Well to be fair the Bible says "one of each", meaning cow, cat, dog, lion. Not every species, every kind of animal. Also, only land mammals animals (no fish) and no insects (they breathe through their skin I believe.

justsayin.jpg
#205 to #199 - whatthenugget (06/29/2012) [-]
That's still a **** load of animals, though.
User avatar #230 to #205 - theist (06/30/2012) [-]
Well do you know how big the ark was? Pretty big. It's not a **** load of animals if you count all the kinds rather than the species. And thumbs down? Really? I was just stating a fact.
#256 to #230 - whatthenugget (06/30/2012) [-]
Even if you narrow it down as you have, it's still a **** load of animals on one boat. It wouldn't go down too well. There are a lot of animals which tend to kill off other animals and with only two of each, they wouldn't last long.
#296 to #256 - theist (06/30/2012) [-]
hmm good point
hmm good point
#293 to #199 - anon (06/30/2012) [-]
[url deleted]
User avatar #292 to #199 - ivandude (06/30/2012) [-]
Okay say i grant you that point, can you be more specific as to how only "one of each" were on the ark? I do want you to clarify because you make it sound as if they had 2 of they same kind of dog on the ark? Well that doesn't explain the diverse amount of dog species, unless from those 2 dogs there was a rapid line of adaptation/evolution. Now sure i might be taking what you said out of context, so can you elaborate what you mean?
User avatar #297 to #292 - theist (06/30/2012) [-]
Sure no problem. The Bible defines a "kind" as an animal that can bring forth offspring. A dog, wolf and coyote can reproduce and give offspring. They are the same kind of animal, but different species. So yes, just two of the same type of dog brought forth all the species today... according to the Bible.
User avatar #300 to #297 - ivandude (06/30/2012) [-]
Now correct me if im wrong, but doesn't that give some evidence to evolution?
User avatar #304 to #300 - theist (06/30/2012) [-]
Well I suppose it does show a variation like evolution. Creationists will call it "micro" evolution rather than "macro" because it's only a change in species, not in the kinds of animals.

And since the Bible says "living things will bring forth after their kind" and not their species, I don't see a contradiction in the two.
User avatar #308 to #304 - ivandude (06/30/2012) [-]
I got to say that is a way of looking outsite the box, while leaning up agaisnt it hahah. I do thank you for this conversation. I dont think the creationist have it right at all, but i will respect their possition and right to have it.

But i still think noahs ark was a methaphor and nothing more lol
User avatar #309 to #308 - theist (06/30/2012) [-]
To each his own. Good convo, friend :)
#347 to #15 - luluwho (09/17/2013) [-]
GOD made man out of "physical mass" and "in his image" ... using his own DNA as a blueprint in part. Then inverted half ( Adams side) the formula (DNA) and made woman out of Adam (The "rib" myth is born of confusing the rib and "side" and the observation that men are indeed lacking a rib somehow). Anyway, latest best theory that I know of
User avatar #348 to #347 - slumberdonkey (09/17/2013) [-]
There are two creation stories in the bible. In one god made Eve out of Adam's rib and god makes adam out of clay.
Btw, this is very old why are you commenting on it?
#349 to #348 - luluwho (09/17/2013) [-]
'Cause I tend to wonder around, following conversations and just turning pages in my sleep in the middle of the night Thanx for reply.


Oh, the translations ... in Hebrew the Bible says side, only translated to English is it Rib (Source: YENTYL or YENTEL spelling is not my forte')
User avatar #350 to #349 - slumberdonkey (09/17/2013) [-]
That had nothing to my post. "dirt" in my original comment referred to "clay" in the bible. Had nothing to do with the rib/side thing.
User avatar #351 to #350 - luluwho (09/17/2013) [-]
I know it didn't, I just said I wonder on and on about the whole story Sorry to bother you.
User avatar #87 to #15 - satirev (06/29/2012) [-]
Biblical expressions were accommodated to the understanding of their original audience. Correct interpretation of either Scripture or nature requires the assiduous exercise of reason. We have some more plossible theories of how we came to be and we can use our reasoning to conclude that the Bible is not to be taken litterally. The audience of the time would not understand all the theories of exsistance and it is up to us to use our reason to see this. To a Chrisitan(mostly Catholics, Protestants are the guys big on the litteral thing) the big bang / evolution are meerly possible ways God created us; the paintbrush to this painting we call reality
User avatar #144 to #87 - iisammehii (06/29/2012) [-]
If it's not to be taken literally, then how can you even believe in it's message? For instance people persist that Jesus brought people back to life but then protest that Noah's ark was just a metaphor.
User avatar #265 to #144 - bloodseel (06/30/2012) [-]
Have you ever heard of the story, The Tortoise and the Hare? That story is not literal but the message behind it is
User avatar #280 to #265 - iisammehii (06/30/2012) [-]
That's really not a good comparison, what I'm saying is that people say some things in the bible are obviously real, ridiculous things, yet they claim others to be false. My point, how can you interpret what is a metaphor and what is not? Saying something within the bible is a metaphor is quite frankly just a cover up when something can't be proven.
User avatar #286 to #280 - ivandude (06/30/2012) [-]
I agree with you, for exemple the bible mentions a flat earth multiple times and a circular earth once. Yet i'm sure at the time it was writen the circular earth would of been the methaphor. Nowadays the flat earth is the methaphor. Its a book of stories writen to try to make sence of things with the knowledge of the times. This book can't be taken seriously and if it is taken seriously, why do some people get to nit pick the parts they like?
User avatar #288 to #286 - iisammehii (06/30/2012) [-]
Exactly.
User avatar #322 to #286 - satirev (06/30/2012) [-]
You're falling into the oppisite of taking everything litterally. If some isn't true how can we belive any of it? In one of the psalms it says that God set earth on its place and it does not move(i'm paraphrasing) proponents of Gallileo used this as a means to denounce his theories, but he told them of St. Augustine's warnings of taking everything litterally. The psalms were talking about a different kind of moving not litterally, and Gallileo was right here( but he said the planets moved in circles not elipses, so this is why couldn't prove his theories. Pope John Paul appologised about it though btw) here we used our reasoning to determine that this was not litteral, but lets look at Jesus's mircale on the mountain.

In short Jesus split five loafs of bread and two fish to feed thousands and they were full. Some say that this was no miracle, but simple an act of sharring. This however is not reasonable because looking back at it historically it wouldn't make sense for all those people to be carring around bread and fish espcially not so much that it would fill 12 baskets afterwars. True you evetually take it on faith(but hey you do that with any theory) but it is easly reasonable that that was a miracle.

It takes a historian and expert studie of the scriptures or theologist to find the truth, so don't rely on your own interpretations.

User avatar #175 to #144 - xXthabeastXx (06/29/2012) [-]
Because some things have historical evidence, such as other reliable documentations of word spreading that a prophet named Jesus did, indeed, commit "miracles".
User avatar #352 to #175 - luluwho (09/17/2013) [-]
"commit" miracles, lol I like that.
#291 to #87 - anon (06/30/2012) [-]
The flood part was upgraded at the new testament, the part of eating the flesh of Jesus, the part of resurrecting was not meant to be taken literally. Sure, it all fits now!
#284 - azusa (06/30/2012) [-]
#85 - CopiousConcept (06/29/2012) [-]
Do you smell that?   
   
The smell of religious debates a brewin'
Do you smell that?

The smell of religious debates a brewin'
#94 to #85 - getott (06/29/2012) [-]
This image has expired
#209 to #94 - whatthenugget (06/29/2012) [-]
That cartoon in your gif... Do you remember the name?
User avatar #298 to #209 - EpicXInfected (06/30/2012) [-]
Osmosis Jones
User avatar #226 to #209 - cornypasta (06/30/2012) [-]
Ozzy + Drix :)
#294 to #226 - alienfreak (06/30/2012) [-]
You're right, why're you being thumbed down?
#254 - saladtongsofdeath (06/30/2012) [-]
This image has expired
**saladtongsofdeath rolled a random image posted in comment #39 at Quite a lot of us are going through this ** fake, black plp can't read
#258 to #254 - anon (06/30/2012) [-]
#200 - donatboy (06/29/2012) [-]
"Religions are about love, you cuntholes!"

~Gotthold Ephraim Lessing
#232 - noschool ONLINE (06/30/2012) [-]
What he was actually thinking
#198 - dvdstvns (06/29/2012) [-]
I figured the paradox was going to be the black guy reading.


I was dissapoint.
+6
#194 - espegaa **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#193 - hoban (06/29/2012) [-]
Its a father thing a black person wouldnt understand
Its a father thing a black person wouldnt understand
User avatar #7 - semisane (06/29/2012) [-]
everything is possible with doublethink
#197 to #7 - donatboy (06/29/2012) [-]
MFW I'm reading it right now
#8 to #7 - makman (06/29/2012) [-]
Join the party!
User avatar #31 to #8 - drakesblood (06/29/2012) [-]
Bellyfeel IngSoc or commit thoughtcrime.
#91 - AkatsukiNekoJr (06/29/2012) [-]
My teacher explained it to our class this way;   
There are three Holy Figures; God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.    
Everyone points out that we Christians are mono-theist, so this is contradictory, unless you think of it this way.   
The three Holy Figures are like an egg; there's a shell, yolk, and whatever the hell that white stuff is. They're different things but make up one egg.   
tldr; God is an egg.
My teacher explained it to our class this way;
There are three Holy Figures; God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
Everyone points out that we Christians are mono-theist, so this is contradictory, unless you think of it this way.
The three Holy Figures are like an egg; there's a shell, yolk, and whatever the hell that white stuff is. They're different things but make up one egg.
tldr; God is an egg.
User avatar #166 to #91 - soneka (06/29/2012) [-]
What about the saints that many christians(mainly catholics) worship?
#173 to #166 - AkatsukiNekoJr (06/29/2012) [-]
That's Catholicism, I was raised Lutheran so I don't know anything about how the whole Saint thing works.
That's Catholicism, I was raised Lutheran so I don't know anything about how the whole Saint thing works.
User avatar #176 to #173 - soneka (06/29/2012) [-]
Same here.
Well, it's worshipping something other than god and I wouldn't let them get away by saying that the saints are a part of god or something like that.
But if they wanna do that they can, I just dislike contradictions.
User avatar #177 to #176 - AkatsukiNekoJr (06/29/2012) [-]
Agreed, not that Saints aren't good people, they just don't deserve the status of God.
Thumbs for you,
#223 to #166 - dubmaster (06/30/2012) [-]
Saints aren't worshiped like God would be in Catholicism. They're like super-duper church leaders.
User avatar #225 to #223 - soneka (06/30/2012) [-]
Well I've seen saints being thanked for miracles, prayed to by whole churches at the same time and have monuments built in their honour.
How is it different?
#231 to #225 - dubmaster (06/30/2012) [-]
They don't thank the saints for being an omnipotent being that saved their souls.
User avatar #233 to #231 - soneka (06/30/2012) [-]
Thanked for saving them? Yes that is actually what they thank them for (and guiding them on the right path etc)
What does omnipotent have to do with it? I asked how the worship itself is different. Plus a god doesn't have to be omnipotent to be worshipped like a god.
#239 to #233 - dubmaster (06/30/2012) [-]
omnipotent is an adjective used to describe an all-knowing being. The difference is the "mental worship" or the "thanks" given. The physical worship is pretty much the same. Saints are thanked for guidance, God for salvation.
User avatar #243 to #239 - soneka (06/30/2012) [-]
Fair enough, thanks for the enlightenment.
#245 to #243 - dubmaster (06/30/2012) [-]
Any time beautiful.
User avatar #170 to #91 - dreamthrow (06/29/2012) [-]
The more accurate term is "The Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost"
User avatar #172 to #170 - AkatsukiNekoJr (06/29/2012) [-]
Thank you, I could not remember how it went.
#121 to #91 - anon (06/29/2012) [-]
so each part of god is a fraction of god smells like christian ********
#184 to #121 - anon (06/29/2012) [-]
I was told the example of comparing God to water. Water ( or God) come in three forms: liquid ( God the Father), Ice (God the Son), and gas( God the spirit). They are all different forms but there all still water.
#132 to #91 - nobodyhere (06/29/2012) [-]
But they appear to be 3 separate consciousnesses that are individual of each other, which makes them 3 different people. Besides that, I cannot see how a God impregnating a virgin with himself to sacrifice himself to himself so that he can save us from himself makes any sense to a rational person.
#174 to #132 - AkatsukiNekoJr (06/29/2012) [-]
Not trying to start a war, just trying to provide a semi-logical explanation
Not trying to start a war, just trying to provide a semi-logical explanation
#323 to #174 - nobodyhere (06/30/2012) [-]
Neither am I but that explanation does not really make any sense. For example, Jesus prayed to God when he was on Earth. This does not make sense because if Jesus was on Earth then God would no longer be God in the same fashion that an egg without its yolk is nothing more than an egg shell. I mean we have all these religions with no evidence to support them and yet all contradict each other. They can't all be right but they can all be wrong. *Take a look at this link, it shows a lot of the flaws and contradictions with the Trinity argument(http://www.biblecodeintro.com)./intro39.html)
User avatar #127 to #91 - hagletrough ONLINE (06/29/2012) [-]
If God is an egg, then can I safely assume the egg came first? If not, who's was chicken?
#92 to #91 - anon (06/29/2012) [-]
Egg white. Glad I could help sir
#93 to #92 - AkatsukiNekoJr (06/29/2012) [-]
Thank you! I did not know if there was a technical term or not.
Thank you! I did not know if there was a technical term or not.
User avatar #148 to #92 - umaya (06/29/2012) [-]
*Albumen
#229 to #92 - anon (06/30/2012) [-]
Egg white generally is compromised of protein, the protein is used to feed the yolk, or the actual egg. Now you know how eggs work.
#287 - nofightingdos (06/30/2012) [-]
God: I'll beat a ************ ... BECAUSE OF ANOTHER ************ .
#270 - boomdady (06/30/2012) [-]
Why is this in the atheism channel? It has nothing to do with atheism...
Why is this in the atheism channel? It has nothing to do with atheism...
#255 - anon (06/30/2012) [-]
First part, Adam and Eve disobeyed God, thus they got disciplined for it, thus he sent his son to pay for our sins and offer us a way out (second part). Third part, they are not the same people, God is God, and the Son is Jesus Christ. It's funny how people make fun of the Bible but know 			****		 all about it. But I did laugh, because a lot of Christians believe that and it makes no sense.
First part, Adam and Eve disobeyed God, thus they got disciplined for it, thus he sent his son to pay for our sins and offer us a way out (second part). Third part, they are not the same people, God is God, and the Son is Jesus Christ. It's funny how people make fun of the Bible but know **** all about it. But I did laugh, because a lot of Christians believe that and it makes no sense.
#278 to #255 - anon (06/30/2012) [-]
I love how all of these replies don't go together. You see this is what Christians believe:
God is God.
There is one God.
Jesus is God.
Jesus is the son of God.
The holy spirit is God.
There is one God.

NOW: They are all God, like having three brains that fight.
"But Jesus doesn't fight with God!!"
God wants to condemn us Jesus wants to save us? Alright, then maybe He just thinks this is a joke, because that makes no sense. God is God, Jesus is God, The holy spirit fits his head somewhere in there to be God.
Yet there is one God.

THUMBS UP.

And this is why I'm Muslim.
THUMBS DOWN
User avatar #355 to #278 - luluwho (09/19/2013) [-]
OK dude, in all fairness: God the Father/ Jesus sits on the right hand of God as his only begotten son/ the Holy Spirit is really the "party line" to god, and the means and way prayer works (perhaps google synchronicity or the Galapogos Islands Sweet Potato Experiment with baboons I think it was) Holy Spirit can also refer to the collective conscienceness of all Christians, thought and state of mind and deed. Hard to explain that one OK ?
#279 to #278 - wesam (06/30/2012) [-]
This is my comment, I forgot to log in. If you want to reply, reply to this so I get the notification.
User avatar #356 to #279 - luluwho (09/19/2013) [-]
reply ;)
User avatar #260 to #255 - tacticalpuppy (06/30/2012) [-]
Jesus was more or less the Avatar of GOD. If you are going to attempt to say people know **** all about the Bible then maybe you should read a few scriptures yourself.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.

John 10:30-31
I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

1 Timothy 3:16
God was made manifest in the flesh.

I'm agnostic and even I can use the Interwebs .........
#264 to #260 - anon (06/30/2012) [-]
In the King James Version, John 1:1 reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God [Greek, ton the‧on′], and the Word was God [the‧os′].” This verse contains two forms of the Greek noun the‧os′ (god). The first is preceded by ton (the), a form of the Greek definite article, and in this case the word the‧on′ refers to Almighty God. In the second instance, however, the‧os′ has no definite article.

To illustrate, Hewett uses 1 John 1:5, which says: “God is light.” In Greek, “God” is ho the‧os′ and therefore has a definite article. But phos for “light” is not preceded by any article. Hewett points out: “One can always . . . say of God He is characterized by light; one cannot always say of light that it is God.”

User avatar #358 to #264 - luluwho (09/19/2013) [-]
I get the end line there, the anti-christ will come as "an angle of light" and fool everyone.
#274 to #264 - anon (06/30/2012) [-]
(has no reply, thumbs it down)
User avatar #269 to #255 - cullenatorguy (06/30/2012) [-]
It's called the trinity, and it's a very common Christian held belief. Secondly, why did God make it so that sin passed on through the generations for 4,000 something years until he sent Jesus? Why couldn't Adam and Eve have paid for their sins and then everything moved on? God lied to Adam in the first place, he has no right to punish Adam and Eve. Eve didn't know better, and neither did Adam. How could Adam know that eating it was wrong if he had no knowledge of good or bad? Or why would he be afraid of death, he had never witnessed it before. The whole story makes no sense.
TL;DR you have no room to talk if you actually respect the Adam and Eve story as truth.
User avatar #275 to #269 - tacticalpuppy (06/30/2012) [-]
Sigh: All it takes is a little searching.

"You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." Genesis 2:16-17

again I'm Agnostic and know that Google search is my best friend.
User avatar #277 to #275 - cullenatorguy (06/30/2012) [-]
does that not prove my point?
User avatar #267 to #255 - deesdee (06/30/2012) [-]
I ******* love this GIF lol at the end we he almost regained his balance, the horse says " **** " lol
#273 to #255 - skrubadubdub (06/30/2012) [-]
God is Father, God is Spirit, God is Son.
but the Father is not the Son, and the Spirit not the Father etc.
but they are all God.
User avatar #357 to #273 - luluwho (09/19/2013) [-]
Yes, the Holy Trinity (I wish that anon #278 could be summoned to this)
#191 - donatboy (06/29/2012) [-]
Best atheist argument.
User avatar #208 to #191 - satoshileex (06/29/2012) [-]
Not sure if this is a joke or not but i felt the need to say this, "All truths in general are true only if you choose to believe them" What i'm saying is that its true if you believe it to be true.
#219 to #208 - frostbrownie (06/30/2012) [-]
You're the second person i have heard saying this. First one was Bill o'Reilly.
User avatar #325 to #219 - satoshileex (06/30/2012) [-]
Well i don't know anything about Reilly and i'm not against atheism this is just what i believe.
User avatar #3 - arearea (06/29/2012) [-]
"i didnt know a darky could read"

-psalm 15:12
User avatar #159 - megaton (06/29/2012) [-]
split personality syndrome's a bitch aint it. especially when one of them has a god complex
[ 333 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)