Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu

brittenman    

brittenman Avatar Level 212 Comments: Comedic Genius
Offline
Send mail to brittenman Block brittenman Invite brittenman to be your friend flag avatar
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:1/08/2010
Last Login:5/10/2014
Location:England
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 9 total,  1 ,  10
Comment Thumbs: 1291 total,  1435 ,  144
Content Level Progress: 0% (0/1)
Level -9 Content: Sort of disliked → Level -6 Content: Sort of disliked
Comment Level Progress: 91% (91/100)
Level 212 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:0
Content Views:18
Total Comments Made:194
FJ Points:1281

latest user's comments

#21 - Here's the thread if you don't want to wait for OP to post mor… 04/05/2012 on Alpha as fuck 2 +6
#57 - I'm not trying to troll, I just like to know peoples opinions …  [+] (1 new reply) 04/03/2012 on /b/ and evolution +3
User avatar #74 - Ombra (04/03/2012) [-]
Alright, well in that case thanks for being so open minded and accepting of other peoples faith/beliefs. A lot of my friends are atheist/agnostic, and I tell them the same thing; I respect your right to not believe in my God, as long as you respect my right to believe in him myself. I think if the world followed that golden rule, things would be much better :)
#53 - How do you know which parts of the bible to interpret yourself…  [+] (3 new replies) 04/03/2012 on /b/ and evolution +2
#63 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #232 - biggieboy (04/03/2012) [-]
Can you help me? In Leviticus 18, 22 it says the following:


22Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination.

Is it to be taken literally, or "to be interpreted?"
#303 - nois has deleted their comment.
#44 - I would find it very hard to believe in both.  [+] (24 new replies) 04/03/2012 on /b/ and evolution +22
#547 - xxxsonic fanxxx (04/03/2012) [-]
Im christian catholic and I do believe in the big bang. I don't exactly believe in Adam or Eva, I rather believe that that lecture in the bible is a story with a deeper meaning. Just like many of the parables Jesus told.

I know many religious people that think this way.
#49 - HeartOfTheDL (04/03/2012) [-]
Why can't Faith and science go hand in hand? Must there always be opposition from one to another? Must we chose one or the other? Why not both as the young girl once said as the deciding factor for soft and hard tacos. Why not both?

Gif unrelated.
User avatar #332 - wiljones (04/03/2012) [-]
well the biggest reason is that scientific fact contradicts many of the bibles teachings. such as the age of the earth or the origin of man
User avatar #48 - Ombra (04/03/2012) [-]
Sometimes it is. In times of hardship I do tend to turn more to my faith to help me get through things, and I personally believe there is a God above and that his son died for our sins, but I also cannot dispute proven scientific fact. Sometimes it can really be a challenge to do decide between God or Science. I personally agree with those people who try to combine science AND Christianity. Oh, and I hope this isn't you setting up some sort of troll/flame. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt though and just assume you were curious :)
User avatar #69 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
Christianity and science go hand in hand, like mother and daughter.

Evolution isn't science though, it has nothing to do with it. Evolution is allowing people who do not or cannot believe in a god to feel secure, it has many, many holes and is far from scientific fact.
User avatar #57 - brittenman (04/03/2012) [-]
I'm not trying to troll, I just like to know peoples opinions and ideas. Although anytime people on FJ talk about religion everyone thinks its a flame war.
User avatar #74 - Ombra (04/03/2012) [-]
Alright, well in that case thanks for being so open minded and accepting of other peoples faith/beliefs. A lot of my friends are atheist/agnostic, and I tell them the same thing; I respect your right to not believe in my God, as long as you respect my right to believe in him myself. I think if the world followed that golden rule, things would be much better :)
#47 - nois has deleted their comment.
#569 - barnana (04/03/2012) [-]
what about the dark ages, when christians decided to fuck the concept of technology?
#685 - nois has deleted their comment.
#546 - xxxsonic fanxxx (04/03/2012) [-]
Wow, Nois, we were wrong about you. It looks like you really HAVE done your homework..
User avatar #395 - thegreatmateusbear (04/03/2012) [-]
I get your point. I know Christians like Plank, Schrodinger, and Newton did contribute significantly to scientific progress. However you have to remember science and atheism are not the same. One is a skeptical way of dealing with the world, the other is a philosophy with many branches and other theories parallel to it. I see the other man's point as well, it seems completely contradictory to take all of the bible's teaching and science as coexisting within the same reality.

In Gensis (I think, I read the bible once), it states clearly the Christian God created all the living things on Earth. Then again: n what way, it does not specify, but it does say in one day. But in more references, one in Psalm, another in Exodus, and another in Matthew - it references this event; stating God created each being for it's own purpose and that those Noah saved will be here forever in God's plan. We do know some of this to be untrue, natural selection is a deciding factor of extinction, and the average lifespan of a mammal species is 1,000,000 years (we have only a few thousand years left).

Regardless, the bible was not written down. It was past down orally. It was edited by the church at times. It can be interpreted differently. So there are many factors to consider. Regardless of which, I respect your religious affiliation. I would hope you respect my lack thereof. And we could work together to build a better tomorrow with science.

Species Lifespan:
[url deleted]

#680 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #715 - thegreatmateusbear (04/03/2012) [-]

A grammatical correction for myself:
"*However, you have to remember..."

Thank you. There is a video on the Big Think channel on Youtube where Neil DeGrass Tyson argues more descriptively with data how religion and science can go together. He looks a little bored in the video, as if he's been asked this several times already. Anyhow, I apologize the link was deleted - it was an article about the lifespans of species and a lot of interesting information on the subject, if you'd like I could send you a link in a message.

Here is the video of Tyson:
[url deleted]
User avatar #717 - thegreatmateusbear (04/03/2012) [-]
WHY DOES IT REMOVE MY URLS!?

Just search "Neil DeGrasse Tyson Science and Faith."
User avatar #192 - TheNewRavager (04/03/2012) [-]
Logic; you have it.
User avatar #241 - arsonance (04/03/2012) [-]
a rare thing among theists
#381 - aronorth (04/03/2012) [-]
>become athiest in order to become "less of a crowd follower and more intelligent"
>assume that the majority of theists are dumbasses

User avatar #734 - arsonance (04/04/2012) [-]
>Where the hell did i state that i became an atheist for that reason? i simply don't believe in gods. simple enough. if there were gods would there be half the problems there are?
>trust me if you've met half of the religious people i have you'd assume the same. though i know there are exceptions to that "rule"
#739 - aronorth (04/04/2012) [-]
you implied it with "a rare thing among theists"
User avatar #298 - fkelly (04/03/2012) [-]
Logic rare among atheists. You base your beliefs on a book that was written 2000 years ago. Frodo will be god in 2000 years then.
User avatar #316 - arsonance (04/03/2012) [-]
no. for one thing im an atheist.. and secondly base that view upon what i see today and what has already happened.
User avatar #245 - TheNewRavager (04/03/2012) [-]
A rare thing among humans.
User avatar #262 - arsonance (04/03/2012) [-]
Good point.
#42 - Why do you believe in evolution if you are a Christian? I'm pr…  [+] (69 new replies) 04/03/2012 on /b/ and evolution +62
#684 - xxxsonic fanxxx (04/03/2012) [-]
Christians don't disagree with evolution in its basis. we do not believe we came from monkeys. evolution and adaptation are scientific truths.
lizards have evolved hundreds of times into hundreds of different breeds. birds too.

monkeys =/= modern humans
User avatar #373 - meganinja (04/03/2012) [-]
It doesn't go against the bible, it's just that a lot of christian dumbasses think it does because it wasn't literally in the bible. They take shit too literal.
User avatar #349 - schrades (04/03/2012) [-]
Some Christians believe that evolution exists, but God is the reason why it happens.
#347 - xxxsonic fanxxx (04/03/2012) [-]
He's saying that Christians who claim that "they still believe in evolution even though they're Christians" are getting old. He's not saying that he's a christian who still believes in evolution. READ BETTER.
User avatar #286 - valabigballs (04/03/2012) [-]
I'm catholic and I believe in evolution..just not that we came from monkeys cause that's retarded.
User avatar #80 - nindogfellow (04/03/2012) [-]
No, it doesn't... necessarily.
User avatar #77 - yunablade (04/03/2012) [-]
The bible never says anything specifict that forbids you from believing in science or to use it.

The extremist and fanatics are always the ones trying to force their ways on others... and unfortunately they become the stereotype.
#46 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #142 - glasgowrangers (04/03/2012) [-]
why would God make a book that is hard to interpret lol?
#145 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #147 - glasgowrangers (04/03/2012) [-]
but no one interpreted it this way before Darwin proved it?
#151 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #66 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
the best way i can explain Evolution and Christianity as being incompatible is like this (please ignore any typos):

First off, the seven days (which the word for really means periods of time, yes) had mornings and evenings (and it was morning and evening the first day, morning and evening the second day, etc.) making it fairly clear the bible meant literal days. this portion also set up for the Jewish work week, six of work and one of rest, another good argument for it being seven literal days. ("and as God labored for six days and rested on the seventh, so too shall man labor for six days and rest upon the seventh")

Second, man's sin brought death into the world, according to the bible, a rather important point. yet with evolution, there was death, pain, and sickness before man was ever alive, so what was the evil in sin, and why did Christ have to die for it?

and third, how can a loving and just god allow for a 99.9% extinction rate to create humanity, and call it good all along? ('And god looked upon the earth he had created, and he saw it was good")

and how did man live to be hundreds of years older than any other natural creature, inside of a normal world and just after evolving from a monkey which lived to be twenty at most? ages were far too specific in genesis for poetry or anything other than a real record.

those are my views on how the two cannot coexist, though there are others with better arguments and who put it better. i simply believe there are far too many points in which evolution and Christianity cannot fit, one must be wrong, and for me that's evolution, and i have very good arguments against that, too.
User avatar #455 - wiljones (04/03/2012) [-]
where are you getting your infomation? man didn't just one day evolve from a monkey like a fucking pokemon. believe it or not that is not how it works. it takes billions of years for the change to occur. and as for your 'argument' for the age difference that was caused by modern medicine. hundreds of years ago most people didn't live past 30
#76 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #85 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
this is directed at the third paragraph beginning with "As for Adam and eve"

i was mainly talking about how the fossil record (which i believe is false, due to dating method inaccuracies and the like, evidenced by the fact that a 5 thousand year old tree was found in a 5 million year old rock, according to carbon dating and uranium dating, respectively) shows violence, disease, and starvation, these were all supposed to be penalties of man's sin, yet they came before man, so why were there penalties?

I believe Adam lived to be over nine hundred years old. my church has done several creationist-oriented programs, and it is their belief and mine that a canopy of water vapor existed high in the atmosphere (this is also mentioned in the bible, actually, Genesis 1:6-7 "And god said ' let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water. So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the' water above it. And it was so. God called the expanse 'Sky.' And ther ewas evening and there was morning---the second day") the vapor canopy blocked out the aging effects of UV radiation, and increased the air pressure, helping healing processes (like a Hyperbaric Chamber in hospitals.) When the flood came, this was a supply for about a fourth of the water, it was triggered by enormous volcanic eruptions, shooting sediment for fossilizing creatures and creating Condensation Nuclei high in the atmosphere, making it rain. this also triggered plate movement. At this point, i and many other creationists believe Pangea existed, and was broken up to form the current continents. The Ring of Fire was the coastline of Pangea, and the fuel for most of the seismic activity. it boiled the water and forced up the continents above sea level, and deepened the ocean basins, a perfectly logical process for the formation of today's world.

i hope i explained that pert well, too. i had similar thoughts, so i began to probe and these are the things i discovered.
User avatar #235 - biggieboy (04/03/2012) [-]
So you LITERALLY believe there used to be a man who lived 900 years? In an age before modern medicine, basic understanding of germs, lack of decent oral hygiene, plagues,...

And how nice of God to randomly choose who gets to live 900 years and who doesn't.

Don't try to mix your crazy belief with pseudoscience. Religion and science don't mix.
User avatar #237 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
he lived 900 years because he stayed young 870 years, or thereabouts. people age because of UV damage to our DNA that stops it from perfectly replicating itself, building up damage until we cannot repair it any further. he also lived in world like a chamber doctors put people in to triple their recovery rate if they have severe injuries. and you say i don't use science?
User avatar #240 - biggieboy (04/03/2012) [-]
Yes you use science, in a disgusting, extremely warped way. Please do me a favor: if you ever get really sick (I mean like cancer), please do not go to doctors, but pray to your god. And JUST your God. People like you don't deserve the benefits of what modern science has done for man.
#310 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #242 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
disgusting and extremely warped? please tell me what about what i said is incorrect scientifically. and you do realize that most of the great doctors and scientists who created "Modern Science" where christian, don't you? Louis Pasteur, inventor of Pasteurization and Vaccines was christian.
User avatar #504 - wiljones (04/03/2012) [-]
40% expressed belief in a deity


http://atheismexposed.tripod.(COM)/modernscientistand_god.htm
#87 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #90 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
well, for me the main thing is that, for evolution, it requires multiple assumptions. it requires Spontaneous Generation, and the odds of that are mathematically zero (anything with odds less than 1/ 1x10^100 is mathematically impossible, in this time and space and the odds of Spontaneous generation of a single protein are about 1/ 1x10^285, or something along those lines. it's 50 factorial.)

along with that, if evolution actually happened, wouldn't missing links be the standard creature, rather than the ones we have never found? and why would it take only fifteen million years for an ape to acquire fifty thousand encyclopedias' worth of purely beneficial information by random chance?

those are two of my main reasons for doubting evolution in itself, though i have a few more. i believe in Genetics and Natural selection, but i do not believe it can add up to create a new species, and i do not believe everything is getting more perfect, only more specified and less able to adapt.
User avatar #117 - dunworbouit (04/03/2012) [-]
Evolution does not require Spontaneous Generation. The concept of evolution is to explain the mechanism in place once things came to be, it is not the theory of Origin.

Your 1st reason for doubting evolution is nonsensical, 'missing links' imply they are 'missing' i.e. not there.

Your 2nd reason for doubting evolution is a gross exaggeration. It would take fifteen million years for an ape to experience a series of genetic mutations that allow for it to be more 'fit' than the other ape. It turns out that genetic mutation allowed for increased intelligence, and that intelligence allowed for it to pass along its DNA.

If you believe in Natural Selection, then you believe in evolution, as Natural Selection is the mechanism of Evolution. If you believe in Genetics but don't understand how a genetic mutation can result in a different species, then you are not grasping the concept.
User avatar #123 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
Evolution, i do not believe in, evolution i do. there is a difference. "big E" means tyrannosaurus to chicken, "little e" means wolf to chihuahua. i do not believe a new species can be made by natural selection. allow me to specify. Atheistic Evolution, the theory of how we are here, that requires spontaneous generation. there must have been a first life, and that cannot have happened by chance with the math we use to prove everything else.

by "missing links" i meant the life that fills the gaps between species, that perfectly transitions between the two, we haven't found a single one that is as equally monkey as man, for example. Evolution suggests gradual change, and we haven't found any animals in that state of change. there should be millions of species that cannot be classified, and yet there aren't any.
User avatar #139 - dunworbouit (04/03/2012) [-]
There is no scientific designation between Evolution and evolution, that is contrived. Atheistic Evolution is a term coined by Christians, and is once again, not scientific. There is just one word, evolution, and what it means is as follows.

Evolution is any change across successive generations in the heritable characteristics of biological populations. Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including species, individual organisms and molecules such as DNA and proteins.

Terms like 'little e-evolution' and 'micro-evolution' were coined by religious fundamentalists in order to skew the definition of the word and give them an escape to the argument.

User avatar #143 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
instead of "micro-evolution" i'll use Natural Selection, then. Natural Selection is proven and verified, by that so is Evolution. but, i do not believe massive genetic changes can take place to the extent that a wolf becomes anything fundamentally more than it is, or a cell either for that matter. i believe this because mutations are the least likely way to create new, beneficial data, and it's the only way for anything to add information randomly.
User avatar #156 - dunworbouit (04/03/2012) [-]
That is an understandable standpoint from someone like you or I that have done little to no hands-on research on the matter. The difference is that your thought patterns were discussed in the 1700's and there have been 300 or so years of scientific thought put into this matter since then.

In regards to the 'median point' or the 'life that fills in the gaps': The mechanism of natural selection is meant to be a brutal benchmark on what is 'fit' to continue passing its genetics to the next level. In the human condition there are plenty of 'sub-species' or species that are lesser than humans on the evolutionary ladder that have been found.

Current evolutionary theory is hinged on trends between species, and that took a foothold in the 1920's. I would recommend doing some research on "Evolutionary developmental biology" to see where current thought patterns came from and how they themselves have evolved. :)
User avatar #161 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
i mainly meant the fossil record shows nothing of what should be a majority of creatures, just to put that out.
User avatar #282 - dunworbouit (04/03/2012) [-]
Problem is that the fossil record is an incomplete data set and will always be incomplete. Does this mean I should discard it completely? I don't think so. Given the steady progression of time, it is unreasonable to think that we will be able to record every aspect of evolution by finding fossils/bones and reconstructing them. Scientists don't hinge everything on one data set, and science is meant to follow a strict method in order to weed out false data.

For example, carbon/uranium dating while not perfect, is still a solid tool. Your previous point of the 5000 yr old tree on a 5million yr old rock seems perfectly logical to me and could be explained in a scientific matter (if it actually occurred, I did not see a source and had difficulty finding any evidence online).

The issue with creationism is there are a high concentration of pseudo-scientists that expend all their energy trying to either dis-prove things already vetted, or trying to prove things documented in their holy book. This is flawed science and in my opinion a step backwards.
#129 - nois has deleted their comment.
#91 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #95 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
i am a creationist, yes. Previous species, i assume you mean creatures that are ancestors of others, or seem to be, correct?
#112 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #128 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
man is very creative, when we want to believe something we can find a way to make it true. if a species seems like it could have come before another, and you wish to believe evolution, you can easily make yourself believe it did. i believe they all existed at the same time. also, look up the Cambrian Explosion, it's when millions of species appeared suddenly and died off almost immediately, and it's nearly inexplicable. the tree that is the fossil record has been narrowing, not widening, and that is something evolution cannot explain. species are dying off, and new ones are not emerging.

yes, how we got here doesn't matter nearly as much as why we are here, but if we can't trust what we are told about how, we can hardly trust the why.
#131 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #134 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
i can only really remember one, and that partially. it has Icons of Evolution in its name, and it takes ten major pillars and topples them each. most of my stuff i leanred from my church's resident rocket scientist, Stew Turner. he has a DVD series, i remember, but not the name f it
#135 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #53 - brittenman (04/03/2012) [-]
How do you know which parts of the bible to interpret yourself and which to take at face value?
#63 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #232 - biggieboy (04/03/2012) [-]
Can you help me? In Leviticus 18, 22 it says the following:


22Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination.

Is it to be taken literally, or "to be interpreted?"
#303 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #43 - Ombra (04/03/2012) [-]
There are some of us who are Christian, but still believe in scientific fact.
User avatar #44 - brittenman (04/03/2012) [-]
I would find it very hard to believe in both.
#547 - xxxsonic fanxxx (04/03/2012) [-]
Im christian catholic and I do believe in the big bang. I don't exactly believe in Adam or Eva, I rather believe that that lecture in the bible is a story with a deeper meaning. Just like many of the parables Jesus told.

I know many religious people that think this way.
#49 - HeartOfTheDL (04/03/2012) [-]
Why can't Faith and science go hand in hand? Must there always be opposition from one to another? Must we chose one or the other? Why not both as the young girl once said as the deciding factor for soft and hard tacos. Why not both?

Gif unrelated.
User avatar #332 - wiljones (04/03/2012) [-]
well the biggest reason is that scientific fact contradicts many of the bibles teachings. such as the age of the earth or the origin of man
User avatar #48 - Ombra (04/03/2012) [-]
Sometimes it is. In times of hardship I do tend to turn more to my faith to help me get through things, and I personally believe there is a God above and that his son died for our sins, but I also cannot dispute proven scientific fact. Sometimes it can really be a challenge to do decide between God or Science. I personally agree with those people who try to combine science AND Christianity. Oh, and I hope this isn't you setting up some sort of troll/flame. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt though and just assume you were curious :)
User avatar #69 - Namezone (04/03/2012) [-]
Christianity and science go hand in hand, like mother and daughter.

Evolution isn't science though, it has nothing to do with it. Evolution is allowing people who do not or cannot believe in a god to feel secure, it has many, many holes and is far from scientific fact.
User avatar #57 - brittenman (04/03/2012) [-]
I'm not trying to troll, I just like to know peoples opinions and ideas. Although anytime people on FJ talk about religion everyone thinks its a flame war.
User avatar #74 - Ombra (04/03/2012) [-]
Alright, well in that case thanks for being so open minded and accepting of other peoples faith/beliefs. A lot of my friends are atheist/agnostic, and I tell them the same thing; I respect your right to not believe in my God, as long as you respect my right to believe in him myself. I think if the world followed that golden rule, things would be much better :)
#47 - nois has deleted their comment.
#569 - barnana (04/03/2012) [-]
what about the dark ages, when christians decided to fuck the concept of technology?
#685 - nois has deleted their comment.
#546 - xxxsonic fanxxx (04/03/2012) [-]
Wow, Nois, we were wrong about you. It looks like you really HAVE done your homework..
User avatar #395 - thegreatmateusbear (04/03/2012) [-]
I get your point. I know Christians like Plank, Schrodinger, and Newton did contribute significantly to scientific progress. However you have to remember science and atheism are not the same. One is a skeptical way of dealing with the world, the other is a philosophy with many branches and other theories parallel to it. I see the other man's point as well, it seems completely contradictory to take all of the bible's teaching and science as coexisting within the same reality.

In Gensis (I think, I read the bible once), it states clearly the Christian God created all the living things on Earth. Then again: n what way, it does not specify, but it does say in one day. But in more references, one in Psalm, another in Exodus, and another in Matthew - it references this event; stating God created each being for it's own purpose and that those Noah saved will be here forever in God's plan. We do know some of this to be untrue, natural selection is a deciding factor of extinction, and the average lifespan of a mammal species is 1,000,000 years (we have only a few thousand years left).

Regardless, the bible was not written down. It was past down orally. It was edited by the church at times. It can be interpreted differently. So there are many factors to consider. Regardless of which, I respect your religious affiliation. I would hope you respect my lack thereof. And we could work together to build a better tomorrow with science.

Species Lifespan:
[url deleted]

#680 - nois has deleted their comment.
User avatar #715 - thegreatmateusbear (04/03/2012) [-]

A grammatical correction for myself:
"*However, you have to remember..."

Thank you. There is a video on the Big Think channel on Youtube where Neil DeGrass Tyson argues more descriptively with data how religion and science can go together. He looks a little bored in the video, as if he's been asked this several times already. Anyhow, I apologize the link was deleted - it was an article about the lifespans of species and a lot of interesting information on the subject, if you'd like I could send you a link in a message.

Here is the video of Tyson:
[url deleted]
User avatar #717 - thegreatmateusbear (04/03/2012) [-]
WHY DOES IT REMOVE MY URLS!?

Just search "Neil DeGrasse Tyson Science and Faith."
User avatar #192 - TheNewRavager (04/03/2012) [-]
Logic; you have it.
User avatar #241 - arsonance (04/03/2012) [-]
a rare thing among theists
#381 - aronorth (04/03/2012) [-]
>become athiest in order to become "less of a crowd follower and more intelligent"
>assume that the majority of theists are dumbasses

User avatar #734 - arsonance (04/04/2012) [-]
>Where the hell did i state that i became an atheist for that reason? i simply don't believe in gods. simple enough. if there were gods would there be half the problems there are?
>trust me if you've met half of the religious people i have you'd assume the same. though i know there are exceptions to that "rule"
#739 - aronorth (04/04/2012) [-]
you implied it with "a rare thing among theists"
User avatar #298 - fkelly (04/03/2012) [-]
Logic rare among atheists. You base your beliefs on a book that was written 2000 years ago. Frodo will be god in 2000 years then.
User avatar #316 - arsonance (04/03/2012) [-]
no. for one thing im an atheist.. and secondly base that view upon what i see today and what has already happened.
User avatar #245 - TheNewRavager (04/03/2012) [-]
A rare thing among humans.
User avatar #262 - arsonance (04/03/2012) [-]
Good point.
#540 - Aah sorry, I read your post wrong.  [+] (1 new reply) 03/29/2012 on blind faith 0
User avatar #547 - roodtyboots (03/29/2012) [-]
It's cool, it happens
#347 - It says that god created everything ex nihilo (from nothing).  [+] (3 new replies) 03/29/2012 on blind faith 0
User avatar #451 - roodtyboots (03/29/2012) [-]
No I mean "man" specificaly...it said he created man from dust and breathed the spirit into his nostrils.
User avatar #540 - brittenman (03/29/2012) [-]
Aah sorry, I read your post wrong.
User avatar #547 - roodtyboots (03/29/2012) [-]
It's cool, it happens
#332 - Picture 03/29/2012 on blind faith 0
#329 - Although I understand that some people blindly accept things l… 03/29/2012 on blind faith 0
#318 - Then who played with legos to make god? 03/29/2012 on blind faith +1
[ 191 Total ]

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)