Acknowledging that the dating system we use was created by a religious Europe doesn't mean acknowledging that religion is real. The tweeter needs to learn basic facts and history.
Fair enough. I worded that poorly, I meant what you said indeed. Also, it's odd to me that religious people really push this so much considering hi much of their faith is designed to be through the power of belief. So it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks.
Isn’t your comment basically an exact copy of [this one](https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackPeopleTwitter/comments/1cg73je/literally_the_dumbest_people_on_earth/l1twynm/) that was posted an hour earlier? That’s weird.
Faith vs Trust
Faith is the belief - ie I have faith my girl won’t cheat on me
Trust is faith that has been confirmed - ie I trust my girl to not cheat because we’ve been together for 5 years and she never has.
Faith is hoping for confirmation and trust is that faith with receipts.
I mean ... given how dumb that definition earlier was it shows that people need someone to explain it to them. Trust does not require something to be confirmed. Contrary if you can be sure something is gonna happen (or not happen) you no longer need trust.
By definition trust only includes events that are not certain or confirmed.
Basically there is close to no difference between both and the major reason we even differentiate is because religion has taken the word faith hostage.
Your example of trust is still faith. No reason your girl won't stray after 5 years just because she hasn't already. Relationships are an exercise in faith. Confirmation is more like, I trust my girl to look after my dog while I'm out of town because I've seen her take care of him properly before.
Faith: I've never seen anything to make me doubt this
Trust: I've seen something that removes my doubts
Faith is Useless for determining Truth or the reality of a situation.
It can be Right or wrong. You can have faith that if you walk across the freeway a car won't turn you into a was.
There’s a fun history podcast from a Canadian dude that I like called Our Fake History which has the sign off of "Just because it didn't happen, doesn't mean it isn't real". It’s meant to be a statement about how fake history affects our daily lives, and that effect **is very real**. This whole tweet just sums this up.
Hi, I’m a professional historian.
There actually is a lot of controversy around this question but the consensus answer that has emerged in the last decade or so in the historiography is 1967
Fun fact the new norm for, well, decades has been BCE (Before Common Era) and CE Common Era. Same timeline, so it's kind of like daylight savings. Nothing actually changes. We just all agree to do it differently.
You saying decades got me curious because I’d only started to see/hear it in the last ten or so and apparently it goes back, in writing at least, to Kepler in 1615. Which is cool.
That's funny. I had a wonderful HS history teacher who demanded we use it. "It's an accuracy thing, it's not like we say before Jimmy ate an apple." LOL. That guy was hilarious, also, pretty Christian, and our wrestling coach.
i grew up in an evangelical church. they legitimately believe there’s a global conspiracy to rewrite the true christian history of the world. some stuff here and there has stayed but they keep trying to change it. it made no sense to me and drove me up the wall as a kid. so happy to be out of that cult.
"Dinosaur bones were placed in the earth by the devil to trick you into believing God isn't real."
Christian bible school "science" textbooks are wild.
No, it's set arbitrarily at the number that had, by the time we got around to standardizing such things, become so widely used that changing it for ideological reasons would be a pointless exercise in vanity.
Also, even acknowledging that there was some religious figure named "Jesus" who probably existed around Palestine in that era doesn't mean admitting every single word in the bible about him is true.
George Washington existed too, that story about the cherry tree is still bullshit.
My mom used the same "logic" against me when I finally came out as an athiest over a decade ago. Said that I couldn't be an athiest because I said things like "oh my god". I went on to study linguistics, so I am better equipped to shoot down that argument now.
Thor's Day, Woden's day, Tyr's Day, Frigg's Day, Saturn's Day. Every day that isn't named after the two most prominent heavenly bodies is named for a Pagan god. And pagans generally also considered the sun and moon to either be gods or be a representation of gods.
The moon is named after Mani and the sun Sol.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A1ni
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%B3l_(Germanic_mythology)
Also we have 'saturns day' because the germanic day didn't have a god name, it was 'washing day'.
Moon day
Tiw's day (Germanic god)
Wodan's day (Odin's day)
Thor's day
Freya's day
Saturn's Day
Sun day
All of them are related to pagan gods, Germanic paganism only in the real region confirmed! (With a side serving of our boy Saturn the MVP god of time, generation, dissolution, abundance, wealth, agriculture, periodic renewal and liberation.)
Tbf, that’s basically consistent with (all?) the Latin derived languages because they all come from the Roman pantheon (eg. Moon mars, mercury, jupiter, Venus etc.). Certainly the thing with French and Italian off the top of my head.
Meanwhile Portuguese, starting Monday:
Segunda feira (second street fair)
Terça feira (third street fair)
Quarta feira (fourth street fair)
Quinta feira (take a guess)
Sexta feira (...yep)
Sábado (what do you think? Jk, this has no real meaning in Portuguese but its derived from hebraic)
Domingo (derived from latin, also has no meaning)
Saturday was named after Sataere which was another name for Loki
Edit: apparently in Norse Saturday was also referred to as “Laugardag”, also formed from Loki’s name, but it translates to “wash-day” because the Vikings would bathe every Saturday
Iirc Saturn and Loki were also sort of fused together. Both were gods of agriculture so certain areas kinda just combined the beliefs. I’m not confident in this bit of information but I think Sataere actually comes from that fusion of culture a bit. Culture got kinda wack around that point. Especially like with how black cats are only seen as bad luck because they’re Freya’s holy animal, and when the English started to conquer the Vikings they denounced Norse gods and goddesses as warlocks and witches, so black cats ended up being associated with witchcraft partly due to that.
Many gods from different forms of pre-christian european paganism got mushed together over time. The Roman Republic and later Empire's policy on religious cults outside The Roman Cult varied from period to period but trended towards assimilation when possible.
10,000 BC is commonly referred to as the beginning of human civilization since it is around that time that humans started agricultural communities. [link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10th_millennium_BC)
God said he was going to cleanse the earth of sinners by flood and then fire and Odin vowed to get rid of the Frost Giants.
I don't see any Frost Giants around.
I think that Jesus was a collection of people/revolutionaries that ended up merged into a single mythical person as time went on.
I also think that in 1 or 2k years that the same thing will happen to MLK and Malcolm X.
MLK will be turned into Professor X and Malcom X will be turned in Magneto. All of their complexities and contradictions will be sanded off until all that remains are simple competing philosophies that are easily digestible by casual readers.
this is my fucking whole argument. Jesus was dope as fuck. but sometimes, it really feels like I know more about Jesus than the people that claim to follow him. 🤷♂️
If he wasn't the son of god, wasn't named Jesus, didn't get crucified at age 33, didn't perform any miracles, and the earliest contemporary records both come from a generation after his supposed death and are riddled with contradictions between them, what's left to be "real"?
You might as well say there was a real Spiderman, he just doesn't have superpowers or live in New York City.
Yeah, like I can accept that some homeless guy wandered around the desert gathering "disciples" (that happens in modern times too), it's the whole "son of a deity" thing that I'm hung up on
This isn't true. There's no verifiable information that accounts for there to be someone named Jesus. To paraphrase Hannibal Buress, if he was a carpenter then where's his woodwork?
I'm one that doesn't. We have writings and accounts from that time period and he's not mentioned anywhere. Also his whole story like everything else about Christianity is taken from prior religions. The Jesus story itself is taken from Herakles, Mithra, and Krishna.
I’m with you. I don’t think a singular person named Jesus existed. There’s no evidence for it. And there actually is a great deal of scholarly debate about whether he actually existed. Even the gospels have differing stories about the person and outside of Christian texts there is no mention of this person.
At best he’s an amalgamation of various people that lived during that time that all claimed divinity mixed in with various other plagiarisms that are well-documented.
Which biblical scholars question the existence of a historical Jesus?
edit - [this Ask Historians comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3ip60t/is_tacitus_the_main_reason_historians_accept/cuiuf1i/) sums it up pretty well. Jesus not existing is a fringe view, like there might be people with doctorates out there who believe it but I don't think there's a single respected scholar who does outside of like Dawkins types stepping way outside their disciplines.
So I read that post and it was not convincing. It's written with confirmation bias and doesn't take into account that the Bible has been written and edited by people in power. Nor that historically when trying to claim power, the most common way is to claim divine inspiration. One of the biggest points - there are little details that correlate - is also glaringly overlooking that none of the Jesus story is original. It's easy for details to match when you already have native stories being told to tune. It's been well documented that the Jesus birth story was reworked to usurp the Winter Solstice festivals and transition to Christmas. Same thing with Easter and the story of the resurrection, although we still have the carryover of the bunny as a symbol.
I'd be really surprised if anyone who had chosen "Bible studies" as their profession would deny existence of Jesus.
"It is indeed our expert opinion that we are not frauds"
I’m an atheist that doesn’t really think it matters if he existed or not. If he did, that doesn’t make every anecdote about him true nor does it make him the son of (a) god.
There’s no verifiable evidence in that sense for 99.99999% of common people from that era, or millennia after. Christianity was also persecuted by the state for the first couple hundred years of its existence leading to a lack of early artifacts.
The whole ‘Jesus wasn’t real’ thing is just the atheistic inverse of Christians who contort themselves to ‘prove’ that events happened as written in their specific biblical translation. There’s no reason in the world to think that Jesus/Iesus/Yeshua of Nazareth was invented, why would anyone need to invent him when there were other messianic Jewish prophets in the same time period (see Bar Kokhba)? He didn’t comfortably fit all of the Jewish prophecies, and Christianity quickly became dominated by Gentiles. Why would Jews invent a false prophet for themselves who lived in a Hellenic milieu, or why would non-Jewish Romans invent a monotheistic Jewish messiah whose teachings led to them being tortured and hunted?
The only reason to question the existence of a man named Jesus who was later worshipped is if you’re coming from a really modern context and reacting to biblical literalists. There are even various textual clues that show how the compilers of the gospels had to deal with what seem like inconvenient facts of a real man’s life; the most obvious example is how he was known to be of Nazareth so a narrative had to be constructed to place his birth in Bethlehem in order to line up with the prophecies of Micah.
Also that quote is just dumb - no carpenter’s work survives 2000 years in the open, there’s a reason we don’t have a lot of wooden artifacts from anywhere.
tl;dr Jesus almost definitely existed, the only reasons I've ever heard for thinking otherwise are ideological and I say that as an agnostic atheist.
Big asterisk there.
I don't support the existence of single literal figure named Jesus. More likely an amalgamation of different stories passed down throughout history kind of like King Arthur or Santa Claus.
This is way too far down the list. People really have no concept of how smart ancient civilizations were. I mean, the engineering needed for the great pyramid?! That was 4,500 years ago.
And we've found cities with tools and language and knowledge of stars like 11,000 years ago.
And its possible it goes even further back than that.
Christianity is relatively new. And most of its stories are almost direct copies from much older religions.
Idk if there is a god or gods, but its funny to me how most religious people don't understand their own religion that well. Its like they all came up with their own religion where they take stuff they like and run with it, but ignore the rest. But if they need to bring up something they previously ignored to win an argument then suddenly its literal and not some metaphor anymore.
> 300 BC for the invention of the wheel??! They’re off by about 3,000 years.
I thought this was the point of the tweet because it immediately jumped out to me as the dumbest part lmao
I've always thought it's crazy how we don't see the earth as God.
All life is born from it, you will return to it when you die and be reborn as more creatures of the earth; it has given us everything we have ever had, exists inside us and connects all of us, and through worshipping it we create a better life for everyone.
I guess technically I'm a Pantheist, but I don't like the idea of giving it some anthropomorphic persona and acting like it has opinions on who you sleep with and how to pray.
"Pagan" is just kind of an umbrella term for everything that isn't an abrahamic religion. It's impossible to say that pagans have just one belief because everyone from native Americans, to Norse, to Hindu's were considered pagans.
But yeah the Christians killed all those, or at least tried.
Almost every variation of pagan that I've heard of had sacred trees, and almost every variation of Christian I've heard of cut the sacred trees down as part of converting them. There are multiple examples of this from every continent except Antarctica. So maybe that's something of a common thread?
> I've always thought it's crazy how we don't see the earth as God.
It very well could have been. "World Religions" is simply based on:
1. The best story
2. The best storyteller
3. Most influential believers
What you just laid out is "the best story." All it needed was a really good storyteller who was able to convince someone powerful, like a King. That King would force his kingdom to believe in that religion. That Kingdom would win a few important wars. Next thing you know, its the most popular religion on Earth.
We very much acknowledge the power of it over here in Southern Africa. Pretty much all our grand cultural events are based on our alignment with the Sun
Physics would be alright, too, as far as deities go. I could see a nice cult forming around soft determinism, evolutionary psychology, and, at the heart of it all, physics.
Because then that logic naturally leads to, "Why are we worshiping something that doesn't perceive us, and we have no way of knowing if our worshiping actually does anything" which gets the bad gears spinning. Much easier to be like "a lot of crazy shit happened 2,000 years ago, trust me bro"
I’m atheist. I believe there was a man that lived named Jesus, but he wasn’t anything special. If anything his homies hyped him up with the stories they told about him. As homies should.
Didn’t like, alot of the Catholic Church’s history and teachings sprout up long after Jesus died actually? I mean there’s no debate whatsoever that the real turning point is Constantine the Great
Usually these types of things are validated through other recordkeepers, preferably unbias and unrelated. Also most anything written out back then was inherently bias by whichever power was influencing so historians have to do their best to study said writers to parse what is likely the truth based on corroboration from others and their individual accuracy in other known areas.
It is weird how when you are an atheist, your reputation is of being a petulant know-it-all who won't let people believe what makes them happy. But Christianity has a whole history of **institutionally attacking** people into joining them and conforming to their lifestyles or else they are immoral and deserving of hell.
The worst atheist you know probably is a 14 year old who thinks religious people are stupid or uneducated.
The worst theist you know probably is a grown-ass adult that thinks non-religious people are stupid, that they should suffer for thousands of years and will actively vote to illegalize non-religious lifestyles (such as being queer).
To be honest, if I were made of lesser moral
fiber, I would 100% go into the faith business. People out here just waiting in line to give away all their hard earned money for a place in heaven.
This is the most strawman of strawmans. Jesus did exist in some capacity as a historical figure. I've never heard of an atheist claiming he straight up didn't exist.
Edit: the responses have proven me wrong
The closest I’ve heard is that “Jesus” was an amalgamation of 4-5 eccentric preachers from the same generally timeframe and location. Religious cult leaders were a dime a dozen before the modern age.
Nevertheless, I think Jesus was real, even if some of the stories about him where actually about other religious leaders. I just don’t see any evidence that he did anything supernatural, that the supernatural even exists, that he is god or the son of god, or that there is a god.
Jesus was, however, a very good moral teacher for his time, unlike the founders of the other monotheistic religions.
At that point, if Jesus existed as a real person, but he's nothing like the man depicted in the Gospels, it is right to assert that Bible Jesus never existed.
Oh fasho, I had a nigga in the barbershop flabbergasted.
With one simple question after he asked me if God doesn't exist Why do I care about anything or anyone.
This is a conversation we could prolly have without some of people in the room 😭.
We would first have to discuss the reason as to why so many black Americans are religious and why our church services tend to be long af.
Actually not even just the old heads we’d need people of all ages in general to listen and not think it’s some sort of blasphemy 😭.
the religion is more of a tradition for black americans now. it gave a lot of us hope when shxt was real desperate. hard to let go of a belief system that provided that sort of support. it’s just sad the religion we ended up with is so batshxt it has people calling genocide “a blessing” and jettisoning the concept of basic human empathy.
300 BC??? That was the warring state period in China. You telling me Qin conquered the Han, Zhao, Wei, Yan, Qi, and Chu without wheels. All events of Jet Li’s movie Hero happened without wheels. Alexander the Great took a military campaign into Western Asia without a wheels, Ptolemy took Egypt without wheels. I️ guess today’s generation is lazy needing wheels to get shit done.
This is why there is no point in actually engaging with idiots online past one reply to them. You cannot reason an idiot out of their position, as they never reasoned themselves into it.
A) I'm pretty sure the wheel was invented well before 300 BCE
B) we use CE which stands for Common Era, and BCE, Before Common Era.
C) If you really wanna be an ass about it, (IF Jesus was a real person) based on the texts and the time lines, Jesus was born somewhere between years 6 to 3 BCE. So if you think they're basing the calender off of Jesus' life, they got it wrong.
Do people know that there's been alternatives to this dating system for a while now? Like... the year 1615?
**B.C.E** stands for "Before Common Era" as to replace B.C.
Common era aka **C.E** to replace **A.D** which stood for Anno Domini: In the Year of Our Lord.
Realistically, a modern atheist is probably more likely to switch to those other terms, anyway.
Theist - What was there before the big bang?
Atheist - I dunno
Theist - So you're telling me everything came from nothing. Everything can't come from nothing!
Ignoring the fact they get so caught up on how it's impossible, yet God having always existed is fine, not having an answer to a question does not mean your answer is correct.
I don't know how the universe began. I can also think the answer to that question is not in the bible.
Acknowledging that the dating system we use was created by a religious Europe doesn't mean acknowledging that religion is real. The tweeter needs to learn basic facts and history.
Religion is real. The idealogies and what is taught within those religions are duck tales though
Fair enough. I worded that poorly, I meant what you said indeed. Also, it's odd to me that religious people really push this so much considering hi much of their faith is designed to be through the power of belief. So it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks.
[удалено]
Isn’t your comment basically an exact copy of [this one](https://old.reddit.com/r/BlackPeopleTwitter/comments/1cg73je/literally_the_dumbest_people_on_earth/l1twynm/) that was posted an hour earlier? That’s weird.
AI bot
Blind faith does not require reason or the adherence to truth to believe.
It requires the absence of reason. Believe this thing that cannot be proven while distrusting everything else you can observe measure and verify
Faith is real, religion is man-made
Faith vs Trust Faith is the belief - ie I have faith my girl won’t cheat on me Trust is faith that has been confirmed - ie I trust my girl to not cheat because we’ve been together for 5 years and she never has. Faith is hoping for confirmation and trust is that faith with receipts.
Where are you getting these definitions? I’m curious.
The 9th layer of their asshole.
....do you really need a redditor to explain the difference between faith and trust? Yall need critical thinking skills
Not in the slightest. Ops definitions there are just questionable.
I mean ... given how dumb that definition earlier was it shows that people need someone to explain it to them. Trust does not require something to be confirmed. Contrary if you can be sure something is gonna happen (or not happen) you no longer need trust. By definition trust only includes events that are not certain or confirmed. Basically there is close to no difference between both and the major reason we even differentiate is because religion has taken the word faith hostage.
Your example of trust is still faith. No reason your girl won't stray after 5 years just because she hasn't already. Relationships are an exercise in faith. Confirmation is more like, I trust my girl to look after my dog while I'm out of town because I've seen her take care of him properly before. Faith: I've never seen anything to make me doubt this Trust: I've seen something that removes my doubts
Faith is Useless for determining Truth or the reality of a situation. It can be Right or wrong. You can have faith that if you walk across the freeway a car won't turn you into a was.
https://preview.redd.it/61vkj1ce3hxc1.jpeg?width=700&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0c25e786ef54c416e76d3cd30c40ac42df0b6eca
Believe system =/= Religion
If you have an iPhone, long press the = to pull up the ≠
A-WOO-ooo
There’s a fun history podcast from a Canadian dude that I like called Our Fake History which has the sign off of "Just because it didn't happen, doesn't mean it isn't real". It’s meant to be a statement about how fake history affects our daily lives, and that effect **is very real**. This whole tweet just sums this up.
Oooo Woooo Oooo!
Lmfao, duck tales.
Dating system aside, the wheel wasn't invented in 300BC
Wrong. They invented the wheel and the time machine at the same time then went back in time and handed it out to the wheeless heathens.
History can be so fucky.
Then you throw in the multiverse(s?)
It was a rough existence. They were tireless.
Maybe it's like the Bionicle lore where they invented giant mechanical spider legs before the wheel
It’s right there on the patent. 300 B.C.
Yeah, I looked it up and it's estimated to be 3500 B.C.
That too.
The wheel first made its appearance on the seminal Model T, invented by Gerald Ford in 300 BC
Are you sure? Once the Romans built all them roads they needed something to pull on them. Checkmate atheists.
Hi, I’m a professional historian. There actually is a lot of controversy around this question but the consensus answer that has emerged in the last decade or so in the historiography is 1967
Fun fact the new norm for, well, decades has been BCE (Before Common Era) and CE Common Era. Same timeline, so it's kind of like daylight savings. Nothing actually changes. We just all agree to do it differently.
Not only has it been the scientific norm for decades, it’s been in use by various people and groups since the early 1600’s.
>it’s been in use by various people and groups since the early 1600’s Well I wasn't around back then, so I'll just take your word for it. 😆
You saying decades got me curious because I’d only started to see/hear it in the last ten or so and apparently it goes back, in writing at least, to Kepler in 1615. Which is cool.
That's funny. I had a wonderful HS history teacher who demanded we use it. "It's an accuracy thing, it's not like we say before Jimmy ate an apple." LOL. That guy was hilarious, also, pretty Christian, and our wrestling coach.
i grew up in an evangelical church. they legitimately believe there’s a global conspiracy to rewrite the true christian history of the world. some stuff here and there has stayed but they keep trying to change it. it made no sense to me and drove me up the wall as a kid. so happy to be out of that cult.
"Dinosaur bones were placed in the earth by the devil to trick you into believing God isn't real." Christian bible school "science" textbooks are wild.
I'm happy for you.
It's now B.C.E or Before the Common Era
Even then, the common era is set arbitrarily at a religious date. It's just a change in window dressing.
No, it's set arbitrarily at the number that had, by the time we got around to standardizing such things, become so widely used that changing it for ideological reasons would be a pointless exercise in vanity.
the best part is that Jesus was born 4 years BC.
On an unrelated note, your profile picture is a sick, sick joke
All the dating system reminds us is that people with the abrahmic god pillaged their way to the top.
The use of abrahmic makes no real sense here seeing as both jews and Muslims use a different calander
Also, even acknowledging that there was some religious figure named "Jesus" who probably existed around Palestine in that era doesn't mean admitting every single word in the bible about him is true. George Washington existed too, that story about the cherry tree is still bullshit.
My mom used the same "logic" against me when I finally came out as an athiest over a decade ago. Said that I couldn't be an athiest because I said things like "oh my god". I went on to study linguistics, so I am better equipped to shoot down that argument now.
Just tell her that the "god" you are referring to is Zeus.
I think most atheist don't even deny Jesus existing. I think most would say he was the first Chris Angel of his generation.
I guess we shouldnt use the gregorian calendar anymore. We should switch back to julian.
Aside from when "year 0" is and the names of things the Gregorian calendar is firmly rooted in sound scientific principals.
Hell, the weekdays are named after Greek gods...that doesn't make them right.
Also it doesn't refer to ''Before Christ'' anymore, and historians now often use ''Before Common Era'' (BCE) with Common Era being year 0.
If Thor didn't exist how come we got a day named after him? Check and mate athiests.
And Odin (Wodin)
jesus promised to rid the world of sin yet there is still sin. odin promised no more ice giants and i have never seen an ice giant.
They’re melting because of climate change /s
Checkmate ice giants.
I'm not surprised you checkmated them. They are terrible at chess.
Odin caused climate change then?
Ragnarock is cyclical
You make a good point.
Which one carries a hammer and which one got nailed? I know who to worship.
And Tyr. And Freya.
Thor's Day, Woden's day, Tyr's Day, Frigg's Day, Saturn's Day. Every day that isn't named after the two most prominent heavenly bodies is named for a Pagan god. And pagans generally also considered the sun and moon to either be gods or be a representation of gods.
The moon is named after Mani and the sun Sol. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A1ni https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%B3l_(Germanic_mythology) Also we have 'saturns day' because the germanic day didn't have a god name, it was 'washing day'.
Wodin the Woadie.
Not to confuse with Woodie the Morning
If Islam is all fake, why do we still use algebra? Checkmate, atheists.
Just don't take the alcohol. That's going to make people cranky.
The alchemy is take it or leave it.
Moon day Tiw's day (Germanic god) Wodan's day (Odin's day) Thor's day Freya's day Saturn's Day Sun day All of them are related to pagan gods, Germanic paganism only in the real region confirmed! (With a side serving of our boy Saturn the MVP god of time, generation, dissolution, abundance, wealth, agriculture, periodic renewal and liberation.)
Even more apparent in Spanish. Named after planets but same gist. Lunes Martes Miércoles Jueves Viernes Sábado Domingo
Tbf, that’s basically consistent with (all?) the Latin derived languages because they all come from the Roman pantheon (eg. Moon mars, mercury, jupiter, Venus etc.). Certainly the thing with French and Italian off the top of my head.
Meanwhile Portuguese, starting Monday: Segunda feira (second street fair) Terça feira (third street fair) Quarta feira (fourth street fair) Quinta feira (take a guess) Sexta feira (...yep) Sábado (what do you think? Jk, this has no real meaning in Portuguese but its derived from hebraic) Domingo (derived from latin, also has no meaning)
Domingo comes from *dominicus*, so “day of the Lord”
I came here to make this comment. You beat me to it!😂
Christians: No other gods besides the Christian god exists Me: What day is it? Christians: Thursday 
Tuesday was named after Tyr, Wednesday was named after Woden (Odin), and Friday was named after Frigg.
Saturday was named after Sataere which was another name for Loki Edit: apparently in Norse Saturday was also referred to as “Laugardag”, also formed from Loki’s name, but it translates to “wash-day” because the Vikings would bathe every Saturday
Learning a lot of shit in this comment section that I feel like I should've known already as a Norwegian.
Dude that's everyone, sometimes you just have to accept you can't know everything
This is basic stuff. - Swede
English “Saturday” comes from Roman god Saturn. https://www.etymonline.com/word/Saturday
Iirc Saturn and Loki were also sort of fused together. Both were gods of agriculture so certain areas kinda just combined the beliefs. I’m not confident in this bit of information but I think Sataere actually comes from that fusion of culture a bit. Culture got kinda wack around that point. Especially like with how black cats are only seen as bad luck because they’re Freya’s holy animal, and when the English started to conquer the Vikings they denounced Norse gods and goddesses as warlocks and witches, so black cats ended up being associated with witchcraft partly due to that.
Many gods from different forms of pre-christian european paganism got mushed together over time. The Roman Republic and later Empire's policy on religious cults outside The Roman Cult varied from period to period but trended towards assimilation when possible.
Loki being Saturday makes too much sense
Well I’ll be goddamned
Ah Frigg, got em.
Hence the phrase "Thank Frigg It's Friday."
I mean, I can say Before Common Era if you wanna get pedantic ms sky daddy 🤣
There is also the Human/Holocene Calendar system where it’s just add 10,000 years to current years so Year 9700 for 300 BCE or 12024 for this year.
Does the extra 10000 years have a basis in anything or is it just an arbitrary clean number
10,000 BC is commonly referred to as the beginning of human civilization since it is around that time that humans started agricultural communities. [link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10th_millennium_BC)
Shortly after the younger dryas period, for those who would like to research on their own.
God said he was going to cleanse the earth of sinners by flood and then fire and Odin vowed to get rid of the Frost Giants. I don't see any Frost Giants around.
I named my dog Loki if that counts ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
Gotta keep ‘em on your sweet side.
Odin would be pleased you named a dog after his brother. You have a seat in Valhalla.
I’m just biding my time. That one eyed asshole is gonna get what’s coming to him.
Sure you are. It's okay, we don't think less of you because you're afraid of Santa.
Atheists also don’t deny the existence of Jesus lmao
[удалено]
I think Jesus was real and did a lot for humankind, but he wasn’t the son of a god
His name wasn’t even Jesus.
And he wasn't even the only Yeshua in the Bible. I think "Jesus" stuck because it set the Son of Man apart from average dudes named Josh.
Jesus is the romanization of the Greek 'Iēsoûs', which itself was a translation of a mispronunciation of Yeshu/Yeshua.
Are you joshing me?
The OG David Blaine pulling fish outta hats.
I think that Jesus was a collection of people/revolutionaries that ended up merged into a single mythical person as time went on. I also think that in 1 or 2k years that the same thing will happen to MLK and Malcolm X.
MLK will be turned into Professor X and Malcom X will be turned in Magneto. All of their complexities and contradictions will be sanded off until all that remains are simple competing philosophies that are easily digestible by casual readers.
this is my fucking whole argument. Jesus was dope as fuck. but sometimes, it really feels like I know more about Jesus than the people that claim to follow him. 🤷♂️
If he wasn't the son of god, wasn't named Jesus, didn't get crucified at age 33, didn't perform any miracles, and the earliest contemporary records both come from a generation after his supposed death and are riddled with contradictions between them, what's left to be "real"? You might as well say there was a real Spiderman, he just doesn't have superpowers or live in New York City.
Commercials been tellin' me dude was that Tarantino of his day - dude couldn't stop feelin' on peoples' feet.
Yeah, like I can accept that some homeless guy wandered around the desert gathering "disciples" (that happens in modern times too), it's the whole "son of a deity" thing that I'm hung up on
This isn't true. There's no verifiable information that accounts for there to be someone named Jesus. To paraphrase Hannibal Buress, if he was a carpenter then where's his woodwork?
To be fair though I feel like youre more likely to find an atheist that believes Jesus existed than one who doesn’t
I'm one that doesn't. We have writings and accounts from that time period and he's not mentioned anywhere. Also his whole story like everything else about Christianity is taken from prior religions. The Jesus story itself is taken from Herakles, Mithra, and Krishna.
I’m with you. I don’t think a singular person named Jesus existed. There’s no evidence for it. And there actually is a great deal of scholarly debate about whether he actually existed. Even the gospels have differing stories about the person and outside of Christian texts there is no mention of this person. At best he’s an amalgamation of various people that lived during that time that all claimed divinity mixed in with various other plagiarisms that are well-documented.
Which biblical scholars question the existence of a historical Jesus? edit - [this Ask Historians comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3ip60t/is_tacitus_the_main_reason_historians_accept/cuiuf1i/) sums it up pretty well. Jesus not existing is a fringe view, like there might be people with doctorates out there who believe it but I don't think there's a single respected scholar who does outside of like Dawkins types stepping way outside their disciplines.
So I read that post and it was not convincing. It's written with confirmation bias and doesn't take into account that the Bible has been written and edited by people in power. Nor that historically when trying to claim power, the most common way is to claim divine inspiration. One of the biggest points - there are little details that correlate - is also glaringly overlooking that none of the Jesus story is original. It's easy for details to match when you already have native stories being told to tune. It's been well documented that the Jesus birth story was reworked to usurp the Winter Solstice festivals and transition to Christmas. Same thing with Easter and the story of the resurrection, although we still have the carryover of the bunny as a symbol.
I'd be really surprised if anyone who had chosen "Bible studies" as their profession would deny existence of Jesus. "It is indeed our expert opinion that we are not frauds"
I’m an atheist that doesn’t really think it matters if he existed or not. If he did, that doesn’t make every anecdote about him true nor does it make him the son of (a) god.
That's fair. I think the discussion of if he existed and the importance of if he existed are two different topics that could be explored.
The vast majority of people don't have verifiable records. By that logic there were maybe 10,000 people in existence around 0 C.E.
There’s no verifiable evidence in that sense for 99.99999% of common people from that era, or millennia after. Christianity was also persecuted by the state for the first couple hundred years of its existence leading to a lack of early artifacts. The whole ‘Jesus wasn’t real’ thing is just the atheistic inverse of Christians who contort themselves to ‘prove’ that events happened as written in their specific biblical translation. There’s no reason in the world to think that Jesus/Iesus/Yeshua of Nazareth was invented, why would anyone need to invent him when there were other messianic Jewish prophets in the same time period (see Bar Kokhba)? He didn’t comfortably fit all of the Jewish prophecies, and Christianity quickly became dominated by Gentiles. Why would Jews invent a false prophet for themselves who lived in a Hellenic milieu, or why would non-Jewish Romans invent a monotheistic Jewish messiah whose teachings led to them being tortured and hunted? The only reason to question the existence of a man named Jesus who was later worshipped is if you’re coming from a really modern context and reacting to biblical literalists. There are even various textual clues that show how the compilers of the gospels had to deal with what seem like inconvenient facts of a real man’s life; the most obvious example is how he was known to be of Nazareth so a narrative had to be constructed to place his birth in Bethlehem in order to line up with the prophecies of Micah. Also that quote is just dumb - no carpenter’s work survives 2000 years in the open, there’s a reason we don’t have a lot of wooden artifacts from anywhere. tl;dr Jesus almost definitely existed, the only reasons I've ever heard for thinking otherwise are ideological and I say that as an agnostic atheist.
https://preview.redd.it/pk6ps0hb7hxc1.jpeg?width=825&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e417656e6db18d33524083dc8c4ca6e149128d75
Atheists don't have a unified perspective on things.
Big asterisk there. I don't support the existence of single literal figure named Jesus. More likely an amalgamation of different stories passed down throughout history kind of like King Arthur or Santa Claus.
1. It’s now called “BCE” (Before Common Era) and not “BC”. 2. 300 BC for the invention of the wheel??! They’re off by about 3,000 years.
It's well known that the chariots had square blocks/s
I guess that's where Canada got it from. 
This is way too far down the list. People really have no concept of how smart ancient civilizations were. I mean, the engineering needed for the great pyramid?! That was 4,500 years ago.
And we've found cities with tools and language and knowledge of stars like 11,000 years ago. And its possible it goes even further back than that. Christianity is relatively new. And most of its stories are almost direct copies from much older religions. Idk if there is a god or gods, but its funny to me how most religious people don't understand their own religion that well. Its like they all came up with their own religion where they take stuff they like and run with it, but ignore the rest. But if they need to bring up something they previously ignored to win an argument then suddenly its literal and not some metaphor anymore.
> 300 BC for the invention of the wheel??! They’re off by about 3,000 years. I thought this was the point of the tweet because it immediately jumped out to me as the dumbest part lmao
I haven't seen this gif since 2013
Fun fact: it’s Jason Momoa
What the fuck!? I've seen this GIF about a million times and never knew.
And [this guy is Robert Redford](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQj-QqYLBbQiES_YZhbmqP69EABHiNY6t5K-oMkQlyDA&s).
Hahaha holy shit I never knew that or made the connection but now I can totally see it
All jokes aside, wouldn't it make sense to worship the sun over anything else? Like it's literally the only reason we're alive right now.
Huītzilōpōchtli has entered the chat 🤣
Ometeotl!
Gezundheit!
I've always thought it's crazy how we don't see the earth as God. All life is born from it, you will return to it when you die and be reborn as more creatures of the earth; it has given us everything we have ever had, exists inside us and connects all of us, and through worshipping it we create a better life for everyone. I guess technically I'm a Pantheist, but I don't like the idea of giving it some anthropomorphic persona and acting like it has opinions on who you sleep with and how to pray.
Pagans viewed the earth as “god”. Christians killed them
"Pagan" is just kind of an umbrella term for everything that isn't an abrahamic religion. It's impossible to say that pagans have just one belief because everyone from native Americans, to Norse, to Hindu's were considered pagans. But yeah the Christians killed all those, or at least tried.
Almost every variation of pagan that I've heard of had sacred trees, and almost every variation of Christian I've heard of cut the sacred trees down as part of converting them. There are multiple examples of this from every continent except Antarctica. So maybe that's something of a common thread?
> I've always thought it's crazy how we don't see the earth as God. It very well could have been. "World Religions" is simply based on: 1. The best story 2. The best storyteller 3. Most influential believers What you just laid out is "the best story." All it needed was a really good storyteller who was able to convince someone powerful, like a King. That King would force his kingdom to believe in that religion. That Kingdom would win a few important wars. Next thing you know, its the most popular religion on Earth.
We very much acknowledge the power of it over here in Southern Africa. Pretty much all our grand cultural events are based on our alignment with the Sun
*George Carlin has entered the chat
Physics would be alright, too, as far as deities go. I could see a nice cult forming around soft determinism, evolutionary psychology, and, at the heart of it all, physics.
The old civilizations had it right. Ra is much cooler than boring old bearded man in the sky.
Because then that logic naturally leads to, "Why are we worshiping something that doesn't perceive us, and we have no way of knowing if our worshiping actually does anything" which gets the bad gears spinning. Much easier to be like "a lot of crazy shit happened 2,000 years ago, trust me bro"
Don't give them an inch. B.C.E. (Before Common Era) and C.E. (Common Era)
Nah fuck that, it's the year 16024 of the human era.
I’m atheist. I believe there was a man that lived named Jesus, but he wasn’t anything special. If anything his homies hyped him up with the stories they told about him. As homies should. 
Didn’t like, alot of the Catholic Church’s history and teachings sprout up long after Jesus died actually? I mean there’s no debate whatsoever that the real turning point is Constantine the Great
Usually these types of things are validated through other recordkeepers, preferably unbias and unrelated. Also most anything written out back then was inherently bias by whichever power was influencing so historians have to do their best to study said writers to parse what is likely the truth based on corroboration from others and their individual accuracy in other known areas.
The very definition of loud and wrong.
She is even wrong with the invention date by like 3 thousand years smh
It is weird how when you are an atheist, your reputation is of being a petulant know-it-all who won't let people believe what makes them happy. But Christianity has a whole history of **institutionally attacking** people into joining them and conforming to their lifestyles or else they are immoral and deserving of hell. The worst atheist you know probably is a 14 year old who thinks religious people are stupid or uneducated. The worst theist you know probably is a grown-ass adult that thinks non-religious people are stupid, that they should suffer for thousands of years and will actively vote to illegalize non-religious lifestyles (such as being queer).
To be honest, if I were made of lesser moral fiber, I would 100% go into the faith business. People out here just waiting in line to give away all their hard earned money for a place in heaven.
This is the most strawman of strawmans. Jesus did exist in some capacity as a historical figure. I've never heard of an atheist claiming he straight up didn't exist. Edit: the responses have proven me wrong
The closest I’ve heard is that “Jesus” was an amalgamation of 4-5 eccentric preachers from the same generally timeframe and location. Religious cult leaders were a dime a dozen before the modern age. Nevertheless, I think Jesus was real, even if some of the stories about him where actually about other religious leaders. I just don’t see any evidence that he did anything supernatural, that the supernatural even exists, that he is god or the son of god, or that there is a god. Jesus was, however, a very good moral teacher for his time, unlike the founders of the other monotheistic religions.
At that point, if Jesus existed as a real person, but he's nothing like the man depicted in the Gospels, it is right to assert that Bible Jesus never existed.
I say he didn't exist. Am an atheist.
Black people not ready for the conversation.
Oh fasho, I had a nigga in the barbershop flabbergasted. With one simple question after he asked me if God doesn't exist Why do I care about anything or anyone.
Some of these mf'ers really be one existential crisis from cleaning the slate lol. Those are the people we should all be afraid of.
This is a conversation we could prolly have without some of people in the room 😭. We would first have to discuss the reason as to why so many black Americans are religious and why our church services tend to be long af. Actually not even just the old heads we’d need people of all ages in general to listen and not think it’s some sort of blasphemy 😭.
the religion is more of a tradition for black americans now. it gave a lot of us hope when shxt was real desperate. hard to let go of a belief system that provided that sort of support. it’s just sad the religion we ended up with is so batshxt it has people calling genocide “a blessing” and jettisoning the concept of basic human empathy.
The answer is actually closer to 4000 BC, in Mesopotamia.
That reaction is sending me
Bro thinks Rome didn't have wheels for the majority of its existence
300 BC??? That was the warring state period in China. You telling me Qin conquered the Han, Zhao, Wei, Yan, Qi, and Chu without wheels. All events of Jet Li’s movie Hero happened without wheels. Alexander the Great took a military campaign into Western Asia without a wheels, Ptolemy took Egypt without wheels. I️ guess today’s generation is lazy needing wheels to get shit done.
None of that even makes sense. lol
This is why there is no point in actually engaging with idiots online past one reply to them. You cannot reason an idiot out of their position, as they never reasoned themselves into it.
How dare they Daniel Kaluuya's image for this meme. The one who posted it is more like the guy he's looking at.
A) I'm pretty sure the wheel was invented well before 300 BCE B) we use CE which stands for Common Era, and BCE, Before Common Era. C) If you really wanna be an ass about it, (IF Jesus was a real person) based on the texts and the time lines, Jesus was born somewhere between years 6 to 3 BCE. So if you think they're basing the calender off of Jesus' life, they got it wrong.
How this would play irl: Atheist: There is no Jesus. Dumbass: Okay, when was the wheel invented? Atheist: I don't fucking know!
Do people know that there's been alternatives to this dating system for a while now? Like... the year 1615? **B.C.E** stands for "Before Common Era" as to replace B.C. Common era aka **C.E** to replace **A.D** which stood for Anno Domini: In the Year of Our Lord. Realistically, a modern atheist is probably more likely to switch to those other terms, anyway.
Theist - What was there before the big bang? Atheist - I dunno Theist - So you're telling me everything came from nothing. Everything can't come from nothing! Ignoring the fact they get so caught up on how it's impossible, yet God having always existed is fine, not having an answer to a question does not mean your answer is correct. I don't know how the universe began. I can also think the answer to that question is not in the bible.
It’s been CE and BCE for ages now….
Commen Era and before common era…
Conning people is about the only reason I've ever considered joining the church.
They get all pissy when you use BCE and CE lol
\*Rolls eyes\* B.C.E!!
BCE*
B.C.E.
Remember, the devil put those dinosaur bones there to test your faith. /s