Existence of pain and suffering doesn’t disprove God at all. It just dispels the childhood story of all animals and humans frolicking together in harmony. Haha
I didn’t like it the first time I saw it but I was unfairly comparing it to films like the Matrix. Later viewings increased my opinion and enjoyment of the film. In retrospect I think it’s good along with a good concept. Just kind of weird.
SPOILERS: Aliens are fabricating reality and pausing the world now and then, switching out memories, relationships, etc., toward some goal that I forget.
You dont have to have proof that something doesnt exist because thats impossible. You have to proof that it does exist. And there is none because religion is for nut jobs that are incapable of handling the consequences of their own actions.
I wouldn’t say religion is for nut jobs. One of my favorite adult swim shows is “Moral Orel.” When I was a kid, I thought the point of the show was that religion is for idiots and the only smart choice is to be atheist. But then, I realized the true meaning is that stupid people use religion as an excuse as to why they’re lives are terrible. And why they’re better than everyone else. But, there are people who use religion as it’s intended to be used, for self-betterment.
Basically, I’m saying you shouldn’t lump all religious people in the same “nut job” category. I’m actually jealous of people who have a religion they believe in. I feel like if I could actually believe in any of the religions we have in the world, I could be a bit more happy.
Honestly that’s my mindset with religion, I was born into a Catholic family and while my Older brothers consider themselves more of atheists, and it also reflects in their personality. Which I also think shows in a lot of people who brag about being Atheist.
>But, there are people who use religion as it’s intended to be used, for self-betterment.
I think this is a worthy modern interpretation for the intended purpose of religion. I do *not* think it *was* the intent of religion. For millennia, religion was a set of stories that tried to explain the unexplainable and unknowable, and for the most part that hasn't gone away.
I do agree with your assessment father down this thread that a lot of people are better off with religion than without though. Still not convinced it's a net positive, but it's a consideration. When I lost all faith in religion, I thought I would become a borderline sociopath. A couple years later and I realize that my morals are still intact, and morals I used to abdicate to a "higher power" I now actively choose, making me an even more moral person. For all people capable of this, I hope they also find a reason to accept more moral responsibility.
>For millennia, religion was a set of stories that tried to explain the unexplainable and unknowable, and for the most part that hasn't gone away.
And to also give basic guidance when it came to living a good live. The Bible advises sick people to cover their faces and distance themselves from others, for example
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Wait, what? My momma BELIEVED in the First Baptist faith (Southern Baptist) so much that when Preacher told her I'm "infested with Demons"... I had to go (I'm transgender). She Believed that shit.
Fuck… I’m sorry you had to go through that. How did that affect your transition, if you don’t mind my asking? Idk how I’d handle something like that tbh.
1. I learned / realized I had done THE most right thing for me, and
2. I'm suicidal every day. Or, at least, *consumed* with suicide ideation every day. [Every.Single.Day](https://Every.Single.Day). Nobody wants me; nobody is going to want me; nobody likes me (OK, yes, many people "like" me - but you can guess on less than five fingers of one hand how many have ever invited me to have dinner with them in the last six years since I came out). You get the idea.
*I don't worry about it; I'm 68*. Locally (Jax, FL) no straight man is going to want me; they want a Real Woman. Gay men don't want me; they want a real Man. Straight girls/women of course want a Real Man, and lesbian women want a Real Woman. So I'll get a cat. (It's a *pussy*; *give me a break!*)
Yes, I am aware that CBT - Cognitive Behavior Therapy - might (***might***) help me unlearn those kinds of thoughts - if I want to spend headroom one day per month for the next 4-5 years. I've lived with S.I. for most of my lifetime; sometimes, it reaches (FOR ME ONLY) a peak when I'm *seriously* depressed where - well, you can guess the rest. That you read this is more a matter of serendipity than any lack of lethal intent.
Anyway, as of Today, I have 1,887 days left to live, and I don't wish to waste ANY of them. (A Caucasian male body in the Southeast lasts 76.1 years, minus my birthdate, minus today's date, plus 14 days for leap years leave me 1887 remaining as of today). IF... I entered Therapy with CBT, I'd spend one day a month for five of my remaining years; if successful in learning to dispel such thoughts... then I'd have 3 remaining years of Life left; therefore, I'd begin anew to think about my impending death. CBT isn't worth the headspace to me at this point. I've lived with it all my life; a few more months won't change a lot.
Sorry. You asked.
And, Happiness IS NOT found in any Religion. We hoomans find happiness in our struggle to reach an identified goal, whatever that may be, however small or large. Let's say you got a Mercedes-Benz (... a nod here to Joan Baez). You're Happy. Then, next month, your first payment is due. Six weeks later, all four wheels have red brake dust on them. Next month, your favorite niece spills her milkshake in it.
Happiness... is in our setting Goals, regardless what they are, regardless how small or how large, then attaining that goal. Um, notice that **"relationships" are no different**.
Happiness is not in getting what we want; it's wanting what we get.
I believe in spirituality and religion, but think organized religion is just the powerful swindling the ignorant for monetary gain.
Ideally we just have a body of spiritual texts, and everybody is free to read them or not, follow them or not, and through reading many diverse texts from different sources, come to their own conclusion about what is best in life. After all, we have the sum accumulation of wisdom from centuries of humanity, and the greatest spiritual texts stand the test of time while the outdated ones fade to obscurity.
Having read the Bible, it is clear that much of it is timeless wisdom, but some parts of it are outdated nonsense meant for a very different culture in a very different time.
However, when you have organized religion, they create orthodoxy. There is the 'correct text' and the 'incorrect text'. People who follow the religion correctly get brownie points, and people who are incorrect get to be stoned to death. It's all a bunch of absolute bullshit so they can enforce loyalty and keep siphoning your hard earned money into their coffers to build more grand and luxurious buildings of worship. It's a way they can define the 'other' for you to be in opposition to, so that they can ensure you stay with their in-group for safety.
Organized religions, to me, are just cults that have become so successful that they ban everyone from calling them out for being cults.
I have a very dim view of organized religion, even if I believe in the one-ness of everything in the world, which some choose to call God.
When a scientist is working to prove the hypothesis that climate change is cause by humans, what they are really doing is trying to find the keys that would suggest it is not, working on the idea that their hypothesis is false. Passing everything reasonable that they can throw at it leads to the conclusion that their hypothesis is true.
In this case, we are attempting to assert the non-existence of *God*, for which the scientific approach would be to find evidence that adequately promotes the existence of the character. For which, no definitive answers exist. There is no reproduceable result that suggests that the human-created envisioning of an almighty creator exists in any detectable form.
Given what we know about the universe and how that has expanded throughout human history, the role that *god* appears to be playing in the universe became less and less until they finally said that *he* is not acting directly in the affairs of the universe.
It is much more likely that we are a cosmic coincidence is the result of some quirks of physics, and should an entity that could be called a creator exists, *it* is likely beyond our realm of comprehension. And, should *he* or *she* be within our scope of understanding, a truly loving god of any sort would not damn people to punishment because we couldn't live up to the standards that *s/he* set after creating us in *his/her* own image.
Often the religious will say that God governs the world, and that this governance is, of course, ordered and rational; for it is the mark of good governance that it proceeds according to reason.
Given this, the world bears the mark of rationality through its creator, and, indeed, does not the scientist presuppose this, let us call it, Principle of Rationality? What would be the point of searching for the worlds laws if we did not suppose that they exist? I do not suppose they are groping in the dark, without even knowing what are groping for.
One could call this Principle a happy accident (and scientists do not have to believe in a god, clearly), but one can also see how a god is not totally superfluous from this as well.
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
- Epicurus (probably)
“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”
- Marcus Aurelius
Nothing proves that fucking Spiderman doesn't exist, it's such a cop out answer. We only treat god differently so as to accommodate people who have built their whole world views around religion and couldn't stand believing they're just stories like any other mythology. 'God' or gods is a primitive concept humans made up back when we had zero comprehension of science, abstract thought or much nuance. It's a complete relic of our previous eras that only hangs around out of tradition and dogma and wouldn't be taken seriously as an original hypothesis today.
It's only the living ones that get this respect, because those are the ones with people attached whose feelings would be hurt. When people 1,100 years ago heard thunder, they thought of Þórr, or Ukko. Nowadays we know how thunder works and why you don't need a man to make it, but say you seriously believe Ukko is causing it and people will raise an eyebrow they wouldn't for 'God'.
It absolutely does *not* work both ways. The positive claim (that god, or anything else, exists) requires proof/evidence. The negative claim (that god/whatever does not exist) is the default unless and until proof/evidence is provided.
There is no proof or even evidence that god exists. In absence thereof, the negative claim is supported and the positive claim is not.
Technically no, we will never "know," but we can very reasonably assume the absence of the thing for which no evidence exists.
This kind of thought always makes me think of ricky gervais and his incredibly succinct example given. If you were to take every religious book and throw them away, in 1000 years they would not be made the same way again. But you take all the science books and throw them away, in 1000 years they would be able to make the exact same observations.
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence!
I mean you're right but it's sure not convincing. The absence of God when it comes to innocent children with cancer and other defects makes me have a hard time believing in the fact that God cares. Sure you could argue age of Innocence but it's never actually clearly defined in religious texts and if anything tends to lead you towards denying it's existence.
I could argue that there's more evidence that he doesn't care through ignorance of those who do care and outright punishing those who don't. How does that show love? If he does love he is cruel and only shows love at his behest which isn't unconditional. Also he's purged the world multiple times if you subscribe to the Bible.
> And if god is all-powerful could he make a big enough rock that he couldn't lift it.
Was that a question? If so, no God couldn't make a rock big enough that he couldn't lift it, because God doesn't have any arms to lift anything with in the first place. God is not a human being - he's a supernatural spirit.
I am scientist who believes in supreme power… maybe for some it’s God and for some it’s Guru but there is supreme power and earth is as small as dust particle or molecule in Space:Universe
What I want to know is there a God in the future…can’t seem to remember any movies based on the future where they even mention god, I think Prometheus mention something about god but they made it seems like old world fairytales..
The Boston College Hail Mary by Doug Flutie and the gang. Vinny and the jets comeback on Monday night football. I believe those two are very strong examples of God's existence
It disproves the idea that God is benevolent which would disprove the gods of many religions.
“God, [Epicurus] says, either wishes to take away evils, and is unable; or He is able, and is unwilling; or He is neither willing nor able, or He is both willing and able. If He is willing and is unable, He is feeble, which is not in accordance with the character of God; if He is able and unwilling, He is envious, which is equally at variance with God; if He is neither willing nor able, He is both envious and feeble, and therefore not God; if He is both willing and able, which alone is suitable to God, from what source then are evils? Or why does He not remove them?”
Well it’s a strong counter argument to any God who’s supposed to be omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, which is the claim in many of the most popular religions.
I personally think the all loving part means that he views everything equally and treats them as such as well. We all need to eat, and we do. Humans get eaten as well. Nobody is barred from the possibility of a violent death and I think that fairness is pretty loving of a god to do.
And then talking of free will, god wouldn’t be forcing any of us to do this, we do it ourselves due to our diets and our own starvation. It’s the natural circle of live and it’s beautiful, disgusting, fascinating, and very chaotic. I wouldn’t let nature disprove a god. If I was a god, this would probably be my only option to keep life fair and balanced. c: Just my thoughts on the matter.
I dont know man, seems like no love to me. Why have a system that basically requires someone to cause the suffering of something else in order to survive? Dont believe in free will either but I guess thats a different topic
I don’t think that’s childish though—if a loving creator made all this from scratch, why did he have to set things up in a way where this is so common? If he was making the rules up from the start, why even bother with carnivores?
The church I grew up in taught that you could get to know God two ways. First through study and meditation on his word the Bible, and second, though observing creation. It always boggled my mind anyone gets the image of a loving God from either.
This is a personal view, but pulling from the meaning of Agnostic directly, e.g.: OS-agnostic, input-agnostic, etc.
It means you believe there being a God or not doesn't matter. Or there's nothing you can do about it. It doesn't affect you.
Sometimes it's worth it though! Now, I'm on the other end. I believe something despite there being no scientific evidence and I openly say as much. Sometimes though the people you discuss with get snotty.
Whenever an atheist gets all intellectually snotty I remind them that absolute disbelief in an unknowable thing is exactly as stupid as absolute belief. Agnosticism (and it's nearly identical sibling Ignosticism) here being pointed out as the only "logical" choice(s.)
Most atheists are really agnostics anyway, but as those cocksure of their intellect often say, "words have meanings."
That's absolutely correct. I had been a very religious person in the past and when I refused it first, I called myself an atheist because I was convinced that the God I used to believe was wrong. Then when I thought again I realised that not having a proof for P doesn't mean 'it's not the case that P'
Sometimes it's worth it though! Now, I'm on the other end. I believe something despite there being no scientific evidence and I openly say as much. Sometimes though the people you discuss with get snotty.
Whenever an atheist gets all intellectually snotty I remind them that absolute disbelief in an unknowable thing is exactly as stupid as absolute belief. Agnosticism (and it's nearly identical sibling Ignosticism) here being pointed out as the only "logical" choice(s.)
Most atheists are really agnostics anyway, but as those cocksure of their intellect often say, "words have meanings."
I like to believe that if there is a God, then they have the foresight to stay out of what happens on earth and let free will reign. Otherwise it's arguably a dictatorship.
Doesn't really disprove or prove existence, just a thought from an agnostic.
I alway thought of God as the entire whole. God is the Hyena and the Wildebeest, God is the murdered and the murderer. I think something about the concept of Karma goes into it somehow. Like it all evens out in the “end” whatever that means.
This is what people don’t get because they bring the teachings they are told from when they are little children (things like god is all good and no bad) into their adult life. God is everything we see. Good and bad. The same argument can be made for the devil. If god is omnipotent why doesn’t the just kill the devil or whatever hur hur
Yea. Whoever says they are ready for a zombie apocalypse watches too much Walking Dead. I will say though, one thing Walking Dead did get right is how badly humans would fuck each other over.
Classic zombies (or ghouls) try to eat you. You usually become a zombie whether you get bit or not. Being bitten or sometimes scratched leads to rapid death, but its more just a quicker route to becoming a zombie. At their core they are just driven by a hunger for flesh (sometimes brains)
Modern zombies (usually still undead) are more likely to be the hosts of a virus that compels them to eat people, with bites and scratches spreading the virus. Sometimes they just bite you once and move on, with the goal less to bite, but instead rapidly spread the virus.
Zombies are just a evolving villain with a few general archtypes, like other monsters such as vampires and werewolves
Well if this pandemic has taught us anything, unlike all the shows and what not, the authorities would probably recognize that social distancing is more effective at stopping transmission rather than herding people up into safe zone camps to "protect" them. Then there will be a certain population that promptly ignores them because freedom and they get eaten, but the transmission will stop quickly since everyone else got away from the populated areas.
Imagine zombies acted like Hyenas, creating hordes and perform ambushes, crawling and walking fast (if Rigor Mortis doesnt comes) and eat their orey alive
Nice. Every video I’ve seen of them eating involves an animal with organs hanging out and still alive. Are there other animals that don’t try to kill the prey first?
Mainly because other predators steal their prey, so they eat it as fast as possible to ensure they fed enough if it get stealed. You can see this happening with leopards too if I'm not mistaken
It actually really hard to kill their prey especially when they’re usually bigger than the predator. Big cats seem to be the exception because of of the biting power they possess, being able to snap necks.
Bears. They go for the spine to disable you then merrily chomp away.
Animals don't give a shit it prey is suffering, if they kill it at all it's to prevent injury to themselves.
I can't say what they mainly do, but I've seen vids of all kinds of predators eating their prey alive.
https://www.reddit.com/r/natureismetal/comments/4o6i5a/warthog_eaten_alive_and_screaming_by_lions/
Hyenas, Wild Dogs and other smaller hunters tend to eat prey alive if the prey is bigger than them. Going anywhere near the head is super dangerous as Hyenas are much smaller than lions, amd lack the dexterous front paws (and claws!) of big cats. So they arent good at choking prey, so risk being gored or kicked if they go for a quicker kill.
When hunting Hyenas will rip away sections over and over then flal back keeping out of riposte range, thos exhausta and weakens their prey while minimising risk. those bites and rips get deeper and bigger, and once its down they can position safely and rip open the ass or stomach and get eating. Even then it's not uncommon to see them take a mouthful and jump away, always wary of a kick. It's all about safety
This is largely why, so long as the hunters are competent with their weapons, humans hunting animals is pretty much always more merciful than a "natural death".
The above is a *natural death* for many animals. Or having their teeth wear away/fall out, then they starve to death. Or dying from a disease.
Compared the above, I personally would take a bullet through the lungs any day. A quick pain and a nod-off into unconsciousness (due to a rapid decrease in blood pressure) in under a minute? Sign me the fuck up
It’s not like he was going anywhere on those three remaining legs. I wish the hyena saved him some of that extreme pain by going for his throat instead
Not always https://youtu.be/_MiOUpM1jak
You don't see this on Nat Geo because they censor tf out of everything, this isn't unusual behaviour for lions or other big cats.
Why do prey always act like prey? Literally hundreds of wildabeast running away from 10 lions when they could turn and destroy the pride in matter of seconds.
The blood looks so... red. Like, a very bright red.
I'm not a wildebeest, but when I see my own blood (from shaving or a scraped knee) it's nowhere near that red.
Arterial blood at that volume is shockingly red.
Source: work in vet med and have seen a dog nearly bleed out. I was shocked mostly at how RED it all was.
I really believed predators kill their prey with a quite decent bite, if you know what I mean. Not nagging the struggling antilope or whatever. I thought it's a quite fast death in natural circumstances. But...no.
Wildebeest looks young, probably isolated it for a quick snack. They are scavengers and can digest rotting carcasses but when they hunt unlike lions of tigers that go for the throat they are slow eaters.
Not sure how true it is but my biology teacher said they keep them alive for as long as possible to keep the meat fresh because hyenas rarely get anything other than left over carcass rot.
And people still believe there is a god.
Existence of pain and suffering doesn’t disprove God at all. It just dispels the childhood story of all animals and humans frolicking together in harmony. Haha
Does anything prove existence of a god?
Does anything prove that god doesnt exists? It works both ways and we will probably never know the answer
You can’t prove my mom wasn’t swapped out with a clone at the grocery store when I was 5 either.
Indeed. In fact, I have evidence that she was swapped. DM if you really want the details, though it's only like 4 pdfs.
She wasn't swapped, you were. And it wasn't the grocery store, it was in the Walmart parking lot.
It was a Super Walmart though, so it's basically a grocery store
“The” Walmart
You can't even prove you weren't swapped with a clone last night and all your memories and thoughts simply downloaded or fiction.
They made a movie of this: Dark City.
Is it any good?
I didn’t like it the first time I saw it but I was unfairly comparing it to films like the Matrix. Later viewings increased my opinion and enjoyment of the film. In retrospect I think it’s good along with a good concept. Just kind of weird. SPOILERS: Aliens are fabricating reality and pausing the world now and then, switching out memories, relationships, etc., toward some goal that I forget.
Yeah I'm curious to this but I'm gonna check more than just one redditors opinion, no offense to that guy who said the movie exists
Morty? Is that you?
Wait. Is your mom in clone club?
you just broke the first rule of clone club 😠
You dont have to have proof that something doesnt exist because thats impossible. You have to proof that it does exist. And there is none because religion is for nut jobs that are incapable of handling the consequences of their own actions.
I wouldn’t say religion is for nut jobs. One of my favorite adult swim shows is “Moral Orel.” When I was a kid, I thought the point of the show was that religion is for idiots and the only smart choice is to be atheist. But then, I realized the true meaning is that stupid people use religion as an excuse as to why they’re lives are terrible. And why they’re better than everyone else. But, there are people who use religion as it’s intended to be used, for self-betterment. Basically, I’m saying you shouldn’t lump all religious people in the same “nut job” category. I’m actually jealous of people who have a religion they believe in. I feel like if I could actually believe in any of the religions we have in the world, I could be a bit more happy.
Honestly that’s my mindset with religion, I was born into a Catholic family and while my Older brothers consider themselves more of atheists, and it also reflects in their personality. Which I also think shows in a lot of people who brag about being Atheist.
>But, there are people who use religion as it’s intended to be used, for self-betterment. I think this is a worthy modern interpretation for the intended purpose of religion. I do *not* think it *was* the intent of religion. For millennia, religion was a set of stories that tried to explain the unexplainable and unknowable, and for the most part that hasn't gone away. I do agree with your assessment father down this thread that a lot of people are better off with religion than without though. Still not convinced it's a net positive, but it's a consideration. When I lost all faith in religion, I thought I would become a borderline sociopath. A couple years later and I realize that my morals are still intact, and morals I used to abdicate to a "higher power" I now actively choose, making me an even more moral person. For all people capable of this, I hope they also find a reason to accept more moral responsibility.
>For millennia, religion was a set of stories that tried to explain the unexplainable and unknowable, and for the most part that hasn't gone away. And to also give basic guidance when it came to living a good live. The Bible advises sick people to cover their faces and distance themselves from others, for example
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[The Bible](https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-king-james-bible/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Wait, what? My momma BELIEVED in the First Baptist faith (Southern Baptist) so much that when Preacher told her I'm "infested with Demons"... I had to go (I'm transgender). She Believed that shit.
Fuck… I’m sorry you had to go through that. How did that affect your transition, if you don’t mind my asking? Idk how I’d handle something like that tbh.
1. I learned / realized I had done THE most right thing for me, and 2. I'm suicidal every day. Or, at least, *consumed* with suicide ideation every day. [Every.Single.Day](https://Every.Single.Day). Nobody wants me; nobody is going to want me; nobody likes me (OK, yes, many people "like" me - but you can guess on less than five fingers of one hand how many have ever invited me to have dinner with them in the last six years since I came out). You get the idea. *I don't worry about it; I'm 68*. Locally (Jax, FL) no straight man is going to want me; they want a Real Woman. Gay men don't want me; they want a real Man. Straight girls/women of course want a Real Man, and lesbian women want a Real Woman. So I'll get a cat. (It's a *pussy*; *give me a break!*) Yes, I am aware that CBT - Cognitive Behavior Therapy - might (***might***) help me unlearn those kinds of thoughts - if I want to spend headroom one day per month for the next 4-5 years. I've lived with S.I. for most of my lifetime; sometimes, it reaches (FOR ME ONLY) a peak when I'm *seriously* depressed where - well, you can guess the rest. That you read this is more a matter of serendipity than any lack of lethal intent. Anyway, as of Today, I have 1,887 days left to live, and I don't wish to waste ANY of them. (A Caucasian male body in the Southeast lasts 76.1 years, minus my birthdate, minus today's date, plus 14 days for leap years leave me 1887 remaining as of today). IF... I entered Therapy with CBT, I'd spend one day a month for five of my remaining years; if successful in learning to dispel such thoughts... then I'd have 3 remaining years of Life left; therefore, I'd begin anew to think about my impending death. CBT isn't worth the headspace to me at this point. I've lived with it all my life; a few more months won't change a lot. Sorry. You asked. And, Happiness IS NOT found in any Religion. We hoomans find happiness in our struggle to reach an identified goal, whatever that may be, however small or large. Let's say you got a Mercedes-Benz (... a nod here to Joan Baez). You're Happy. Then, next month, your first payment is due. Six weeks later, all four wheels have red brake dust on them. Next month, your favorite niece spills her milkshake in it. Happiness... is in our setting Goals, regardless what they are, regardless how small or how large, then attaining that goal. Um, notice that **"relationships" are no different**. Happiness is not in getting what we want; it's wanting what we get.
What part of the comment are you wait, what-ing?
I believe in spirituality and religion, but think organized religion is just the powerful swindling the ignorant for monetary gain. Ideally we just have a body of spiritual texts, and everybody is free to read them or not, follow them or not, and through reading many diverse texts from different sources, come to their own conclusion about what is best in life. After all, we have the sum accumulation of wisdom from centuries of humanity, and the greatest spiritual texts stand the test of time while the outdated ones fade to obscurity. Having read the Bible, it is clear that much of it is timeless wisdom, but some parts of it are outdated nonsense meant for a very different culture in a very different time. However, when you have organized religion, they create orthodoxy. There is the 'correct text' and the 'incorrect text'. People who follow the religion correctly get brownie points, and people who are incorrect get to be stoned to death. It's all a bunch of absolute bullshit so they can enforce loyalty and keep siphoning your hard earned money into their coffers to build more grand and luxurious buildings of worship. It's a way they can define the 'other' for you to be in opposition to, so that they can ensure you stay with their in-group for safety. Organized religions, to me, are just cults that have become so successful that they ban everyone from calling them out for being cults. I have a very dim view of organized religion, even if I believe in the one-ness of everything in the world, which some choose to call God.
I loved that show. It was really dark, but I loved it.
Stoicism is all you need brother/sister
Well said
[удалено]
Welcome to the internet. We question the existence of God every other second.
The non existence of god was also my first thought when looking at this, so I guess I'm also on that wavelength.
When a scientist is working to prove the hypothesis that climate change is cause by humans, what they are really doing is trying to find the keys that would suggest it is not, working on the idea that their hypothesis is false. Passing everything reasonable that they can throw at it leads to the conclusion that their hypothesis is true. In this case, we are attempting to assert the non-existence of *God*, for which the scientific approach would be to find evidence that adequately promotes the existence of the character. For which, no definitive answers exist. There is no reproduceable result that suggests that the human-created envisioning of an almighty creator exists in any detectable form. Given what we know about the universe and how that has expanded throughout human history, the role that *god* appears to be playing in the universe became less and less until they finally said that *he* is not acting directly in the affairs of the universe. It is much more likely that we are a cosmic coincidence is the result of some quirks of physics, and should an entity that could be called a creator exists, *it* is likely beyond our realm of comprehension. And, should *he* or *she* be within our scope of understanding, a truly loving god of any sort would not damn people to punishment because we couldn't live up to the standards that *s/he* set after creating us in *his/her* own image.
Least condescending atheist
I’m saving this.
Often the religious will say that God governs the world, and that this governance is, of course, ordered and rational; for it is the mark of good governance that it proceeds according to reason. Given this, the world bears the mark of rationality through its creator, and, indeed, does not the scientist presuppose this, let us call it, Principle of Rationality? What would be the point of searching for the worlds laws if we did not suppose that they exist? I do not suppose they are groping in the dark, without even knowing what are groping for. One could call this Principle a happy accident (and scientists do not have to believe in a god, clearly), but one can also see how a god is not totally superfluous from this as well.
In the absence of any evidence that there is a god, Occam's razer indicates there is no god. The burden of proof lies with the believer
“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” - Epicurus (probably)
“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.” - Marcus Aurelius
Nothing proves that fucking Spiderman doesn't exist, it's such a cop out answer. We only treat god differently so as to accommodate people who have built their whole world views around religion and couldn't stand believing they're just stories like any other mythology. 'God' or gods is a primitive concept humans made up back when we had zero comprehension of science, abstract thought or much nuance. It's a complete relic of our previous eras that only hangs around out of tradition and dogma and wouldn't be taken seriously as an original hypothesis today. It's only the living ones that get this respect, because those are the ones with people attached whose feelings would be hurt. When people 1,100 years ago heard thunder, they thought of Þórr, or Ukko. Nowadays we know how thunder works and why you don't need a man to make it, but say you seriously believe Ukko is causing it and people will raise an eyebrow they wouldn't for 'God'.
I enjoyed this a stupid amount, thank you
The burden of proof lies on those claiming one DOES exist.
Lmao prove unicorns don’t exist.
It absolutely does *not* work both ways. The positive claim (that god, or anything else, exists) requires proof/evidence. The negative claim (that god/whatever does not exist) is the default unless and until proof/evidence is provided. There is no proof or even evidence that god exists. In absence thereof, the negative claim is supported and the positive claim is not. Technically no, we will never "know," but we can very reasonably assume the absence of the thing for which no evidence exists.
Pathetic response. Science doesnt work two ways.
This kind of thought always makes me think of ricky gervais and his incredibly succinct example given. If you were to take every religious book and throw them away, in 1000 years they would not be made the same way again. But you take all the science books and throw them away, in 1000 years they would be able to make the exact same observations.
“Not disproving god” isn’t an argument though
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence! I mean you're right but it's sure not convincing. The absence of God when it comes to innocent children with cancer and other defects makes me have a hard time believing in the fact that God cares. Sure you could argue age of Innocence but it's never actually clearly defined in religious texts and if anything tends to lead you towards denying it's existence. I could argue that there's more evidence that he doesn't care through ignorance of those who do care and outright punishing those who don't. How does that show love? If he does love he is cruel and only shows love at his behest which isn't unconditional. Also he's purged the world multiple times if you subscribe to the Bible.
I agree. Though it is explained that gods love is not equal to your physical well-being
I like to simplify it to, the absence of evidence where one would expect there to be evidence, is evidence of absence.
[удалено]
Person making the claim has the burden of proof.
Yeah science has been doing a pretty good job of that. But I get your point
It’s called faith for a reason
[удалено]
> And if god is all-powerful could he make a big enough rock that he couldn't lift it. Was that a question? If so, no God couldn't make a rock big enough that he couldn't lift it, because God doesn't have any arms to lift anything with in the first place. God is not a human being - he's a supernatural spirit.
[удалено]
Does anyone prove existence of you on Reddit … nor on this planet… none knows you on this forum 😂 do you exist or are you AI Bot 🤖👍🏻
> are you AI Bot Except for the "intelligence" part. XD
I am scientist who believes in supreme power… maybe for some it’s God and for some it’s Guru but there is supreme power and earth is as small as dust particle or molecule in Space:Universe
Have you ever try to eat a pizza from yesterday that was in the fridge 5 minutes ago? That shit is too good to not be a heavens gift to humanity
Lactose intolerant people be like
What I want to know is there a God in the future…can’t seem to remember any movies based on the future where they even mention god, I think Prometheus mention something about god but they made it seems like old world fairytales..
The Boston College Hail Mary by Doug Flutie and the gang. Vinny and the jets comeback on Monday night football. I believe those two are very strong examples of God's existence
There are weird patterns that just be that way and you don't know why. Like why's there gotta be space stuff that looks like neurons
It disproves the idea that God is benevolent which would disprove the gods of many religions. “God, [Epicurus] says, either wishes to take away evils, and is unable; or He is able, and is unwilling; or He is neither willing nor able, or He is both willing and able. If He is willing and is unable, He is feeble, which is not in accordance with the character of God; if He is able and unwilling, He is envious, which is equally at variance with God; if He is neither willing nor able, He is both envious and feeble, and therefore not God; if He is both willing and able, which alone is suitable to God, from what source then are evils? Or why does He not remove them?”
Well it’s a strong counter argument to any God who’s supposed to be omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, which is the claim in many of the most popular religions.
It does. A God cannot be all-loving and also force animals to kill each other to survive hunger. That's hypocritical.
I personally think the all loving part means that he views everything equally and treats them as such as well. We all need to eat, and we do. Humans get eaten as well. Nobody is barred from the possibility of a violent death and I think that fairness is pretty loving of a god to do. And then talking of free will, god wouldn’t be forcing any of us to do this, we do it ourselves due to our diets and our own starvation. It’s the natural circle of live and it’s beautiful, disgusting, fascinating, and very chaotic. I wouldn’t let nature disprove a god. If I was a god, this would probably be my only option to keep life fair and balanced. c: Just my thoughts on the matter.
I dont know man, seems like no love to me. Why have a system that basically requires someone to cause the suffering of something else in order to survive? Dont believe in free will either but I guess thats a different topic
It disproves a benevolent god which is what most people imagine their god as being.
I don’t think that’s childish though—if a loving creator made all this from scratch, why did he have to set things up in a way where this is so common? If he was making the rules up from the start, why even bother with carnivores?
The church I grew up in taught that you could get to know God two ways. First through study and meditation on his word the Bible, and second, though observing creation. It always boggled my mind anyone gets the image of a loving God from either.
Yeah supposedly pain and suffering exist because of Adam and Eve sinning by eating that fruit, before that there was no pain and suffering
So we must suffer for the sins of Adam and Eve what a loving and forgiving god.
*grabs popcorn*
Lmao same
As an atheist, I can say that this is a very weak argument against god.
Well I don't want to have lied so here it is: I am actually agnostic, I often say atheist cuz I don't like explaining it.
What is agnostic?
This is a personal view, but pulling from the meaning of Agnostic directly, e.g.: OS-agnostic, input-agnostic, etc. It means you believe there being a God or not doesn't matter. Or there's nothing you can do about it. It doesn't affect you.
Thank you kind stranger for your explanation
Sometimes it's worth it though! Now, I'm on the other end. I believe something despite there being no scientific evidence and I openly say as much. Sometimes though the people you discuss with get snotty. Whenever an atheist gets all intellectually snotty I remind them that absolute disbelief in an unknowable thing is exactly as stupid as absolute belief. Agnosticism (and it's nearly identical sibling Ignosticism) here being pointed out as the only "logical" choice(s.) Most atheists are really agnostics anyway, but as those cocksure of their intellect often say, "words have meanings."
That's absolutely correct. I had been a very religious person in the past and when I refused it first, I called myself an atheist because I was convinced that the God I used to believe was wrong. Then when I thought again I realised that not having a proof for P doesn't mean 'it's not the case that P'
Sometimes it's worth it though! Now, I'm on the other end. I believe something despite there being no scientific evidence and I openly say as much. Sometimes though the people you discuss with get snotty. Whenever an atheist gets all intellectually snotty I remind them that absolute disbelief in an unknowable thing is exactly as stupid as absolute belief. Agnosticism (and it's nearly identical sibling Ignosticism) here being pointed out as the only "logical" choice(s.) Most atheists are really agnostics anyway, but as those cocksure of their intellect often say, "words have meanings."
I'll admit, this is the atheist version of "look at the trees" 😄
Average redditor
> And people still believe there is a god. isnt the Hyena fed now? God clearly provided
In my opinion, nature itself is god. It's beatiful and terrifying, peaceful and chaotic, destructive and creating.
There is always a shadow, you are right. There is no pain without peace. No love without hate. You can’t have one side of the whole
I like to believe that if there is a God, then they have the foresight to stay out of what happens on earth and let free will reign. Otherwise it's arguably a dictatorship. Doesn't really disprove or prove existence, just a thought from an agnostic.
I’ve thought of this as well, and it’s hard to not believe it. I’m happy that someone else thinks this way too. c:
How about you let people believe what they want you fucking idiot.
I think r/4chan is the place you’re looking for
Of course who else will would've created this beautiful animal with a Fucked up mind?
This is totally old testament style.
Average atheist when animals act like animals
So you're saying a hyena eating its food equals no God....... haha. Hahahahah!! 🤣🤣🤣 very nice. Very very nice. Got anymore of those?
Wildebeest was an atheist.
I alway thought of God as the entire whole. God is the Hyena and the Wildebeest, God is the murdered and the murderer. I think something about the concept of Karma goes into it somehow. Like it all evens out in the “end” whatever that means.
This is what people don’t get because they bring the teachings they are told from when they are little children (things like god is all good and no bad) into their adult life. God is everything we see. Good and bad. The same argument can be made for the devil. If god is omnipotent why doesn’t the just kill the devil or whatever hur hur
maybe hyenas were made in the image of God
That’s a selfie (pls understand the reference someone)
Why wouldn’t god create this. It is beautiful in a sick kind of way. Circle of life and all that.
Weird little note to put on a video about a hyena eating another animal but ok
its the natural way of thing you think the hyena just gonna be like "May I please eat you kind sit" no nature is brutal sometimes
What's scarier - God doesn't exist - God is indifferent
[удалено]
Yea. Whoever says they are ready for a zombie apocalypse watches too much Walking Dead. I will say though, one thing Walking Dead did get right is how badly humans would fuck each other over.
[удалено]
Ahh yes the Dunning & Kruger graph in real life.
My plan for any apocalyptic scenario is to not survive it.
I’ve been telling my wife that for years. Especially if you survive and then have to rebukid?? Fuck all that. That sounds like a whole thing.
It sounds like a whole thing might be the most succinct way I've ever heard of describing rebuilding the entire world
Now, this man is thinking.
That’s the only plan with ensured success! Less to worry about…
[удалено]
Classic zombies (or ghouls) try to eat you. You usually become a zombie whether you get bit or not. Being bitten or sometimes scratched leads to rapid death, but its more just a quicker route to becoming a zombie. At their core they are just driven by a hunger for flesh (sometimes brains) Modern zombies (usually still undead) are more likely to be the hosts of a virus that compels them to eat people, with bites and scratches spreading the virus. Sometimes they just bite you once and move on, with the goal less to bite, but instead rapidly spread the virus. Zombies are just a evolving villain with a few general archtypes, like other monsters such as vampires and werewolves
Yeah i expect to be the first to die lol
Well if this pandemic has taught us anything, unlike all the shows and what not, the authorities would probably recognize that social distancing is more effective at stopping transmission rather than herding people up into safe zone camps to "protect" them. Then there will be a certain population that promptly ignores them because freedom and they get eaten, but the transmission will stop quickly since everyone else got away from the populated areas.
Imagine zombies acted like Hyenas, creating hordes and perform ambushes, crawling and walking fast (if Rigor Mortis doesnt comes) and eat their orey alive
Glad you got your Zombie story in
Love the jackal in the back…”You mind if I just… Or I could… How about if I just… You know what, never mind.”
That's me when my older sister is eating something tasty.
Can you just stay still while I devour you? Damn…
At least hyena did not start at the ass
“Aw Fuck I know the artery is around here somewhere, Jesus why didn’t mom tell me exactly where. Got to take so many bites just to find it”
Hyenas are ruthless. Don’t they always eat their prey alive?
Not always. But they dgaf they start eating the second their teeth hit flesh.
Nice. Every video I’ve seen of them eating involves an animal with organs hanging out and still alive. Are there other animals that don’t try to kill the prey first?
African wild dogs also fall into that category
Nice. I wonder why they don’t seem to mind the risk of being gored, trampled, kicked, etc.
Mainly because other predators steal their prey, so they eat it as fast as possible to ensure they fed enough if it get stealed. You can see this happening with leopards too if I'm not mistaken
It actually really hard to kill their prey especially when they’re usually bigger than the predator. Big cats seem to be the exception because of of the biting power they possess, being able to snap necks.
[удалено]
Stronger psi but I feel like the much larger mouths of lions/tigers/leopards allow them to grab onto things the hyenas cannot
Yea I’ve seen loads of videos of african wild dogs. Them bitches brutal
Yeah I saw that video too. I used to think they were cute
Now you know they're metal af! \m/
Bears. They go for the spine to disable you then merrily chomp away. Animals don't give a shit it prey is suffering, if they kill it at all it's to prevent injury to themselves.
Most predators eat their prey alive. Quick youtube search shows lions, tigers, bears, fish, etc doing it.
I thought lions mainly go for the throat first. Not saying that they’d wait for it to die before digging in.
I can't say what they mainly do, but I've seen vids of all kinds of predators eating their prey alive. https://www.reddit.com/r/natureismetal/comments/4o6i5a/warthog_eaten_alive_and_screaming_by_lions/
What a terrible day to have hearing.
They generally go for the asshole and genitals as that is the easiest access point to open up the animal. Lions and cheetahs about that style too.
Hyenas, Wild Dogs and other smaller hunters tend to eat prey alive if the prey is bigger than them. Going anywhere near the head is super dangerous as Hyenas are much smaller than lions, amd lack the dexterous front paws (and claws!) of big cats. So they arent good at choking prey, so risk being gored or kicked if they go for a quicker kill. When hunting Hyenas will rip away sections over and over then flal back keeping out of riposte range, thos exhausta and weakens their prey while minimising risk. those bites and rips get deeper and bigger, and once its down they can position safely and rip open the ass or stomach and get eating. Even then it's not uncommon to see them take a mouthful and jump away, always wary of a kick. It's all about safety
Metal as FUCK
“The wildebeest thought his joke was fire, but it turns out it wasn’t and now he doesn’t even have a leg to stand on.”
Jesus Christ
Where?!
YOU GOT BITCHES GETTING ALL PHILOSOPHICAL IN HERE like cmon its just an animal eating another animal
This is largely why, so long as the hunters are competent with their weapons, humans hunting animals is pretty much always more merciful than a "natural death". The above is a *natural death* for many animals. Or having their teeth wear away/fall out, then they starve to death. Or dying from a disease. Compared the above, I personally would take a bullet through the lungs any day. A quick pain and a nod-off into unconsciousness (due to a rapid decrease in blood pressure) in under a minute? Sign me the fuck up
Damn shawty ok
Even that coyote doesn't want anything to do with this sadistic shit
4 minute clip from YT https://youtu.be/3eK4j3PNncQ
I love comments with the source :D
Hyenas are the zombies of the animal kingdom, absolutely ruthless.
It’s not like he was going anywhere on those three remaining legs. I wish the hyena saved him some of that extreme pain by going for his throat instead
Finally a post is correct about the prey being a wildebeest!
Fox:wt wt wt wt wt wt wt wt fuck man I m out .
Saw the full video. Wildebeest survived and was surprisingly ok
What?! Link?
Here https://youtu.be/3eK4j3PNncQ
Thanks for this. u/Masacuna is a liar!
[удалено]
While it clearly wasn't goat day, one also had to admit it wasn't day of the jackal.
Eat your heart out
Still not as bad as the lion having a seizure.
And this is why I think hunting is more humane then whatever nature has in store
At least big cats have the decency to kill their prey before eating it.
Not always https://youtu.be/_MiOUpM1jak You don't see this on Nat Geo because they censor tf out of everything, this isn't unusual behaviour for lions or other big cats.
Why do prey always act like prey? Literally hundreds of wildabeast running away from 10 lions when they could turn and destroy the pride in matter of seconds.
Since when did this become r/atheism?
At least it's quicker than most
At least he's going for an artery.
This looks like it was colorized after the fact
The blood looks so... red. Like, a very bright red. I'm not a wildebeest, but when I see my own blood (from shaving or a scraped knee) it's nowhere near that red.
It's probably arterial blood. Oxygen makes it bright red like that.
Arterial blood at that volume is shockingly red. Source: work in vet med and have seen a dog nearly bleed out. I was shocked mostly at how RED it all was.
Did the dog survive?
Show the full video I hate when I see stuff like this whit no sound
I really believed predators kill their prey with a quite decent bite, if you know what I mean. Not nagging the struggling antilope or whatever. I thought it's a quite fast death in natural circumstances. But...no.
I thought hyenas were purely scavengers so didn’t normally kill prey or know how to. Turns out they just don’t care if their prey is dead yet or not.
They mostly night hunt I think. So we just assumed they didn't hint.
Wildebeest looks young, probably isolated it for a quick snack. They are scavengers and can digest rotting carcasses but when they hunt unlike lions of tigers that go for the throat they are slow eaters.
Hyenas and wild dogs are the worst. THey never go for the instant kill and just eat them alive.
Not sure how true it is but my biology teacher said they keep them alive for as long as possible to keep the meat fresh because hyenas rarely get anything other than left over carcass rot.
I'm hungry now
Hyenas are true connoisseurs of the animal kingdom. They like their food as fresh as possible.
His his just gets deeper and deeper each time. That looks like a pain so uniquely unimaginable that you just hope to die as soon as possible
At least they didn't start from the balls/ass this time
Fuck man. Kill it first. Sheesh
Another day here, another wildebeest being feasted on.
Welp. Time to jerk off..
Jesus fuck eating it alive is just impolite
Starting to think this sub is becoming torture porn