Tattoo Of The Day With A Hidden Message [Pic]

Submitted by: Fatninja01 5 years ago in Funny

You my have to blurr your eyes to see this one.
There are 180 comments:
Male 255
@dan007:`Careful, when you assume you know what someone believes you are usually wrong.` I apologise for assuming that you followed the dogma of Christianity
0
Reply
Male 255
@dang007: So, in your evidence for belief you must discount the bible as being an unreliable source. After all, how do you know what god expects of you today and what is only meant to be adhered to in the specific age it was written. Does that mean `Thou shalt not kill` may be irrelevant now?
For a supreme being who`s omnipotent, omnipresent and infallible, it`s a pretty poor guide for life that hasn`t been kept up to date for 1000 yrs.
0
Reply
Male 255
dang007: `I would extend by previous statement to other religions as well`. So your belief struture can accomodate Christianity where belief is in a single supreme being the creator of everything, shintoism where belief is in a number of deities two of whom created Paradise now called Japan and buddhism which completely denies a creator. And you cant see a contradiction?
0
Reply
Male 438
"In the strict sense of how we normally define Science yes. But my whole point is that Science in NOT everything."

Science is not everything, it is however the best way we as humans have figured out what is actually true, instead of believing other peoples assertions. Science whittles away fiction from fact to get the answer. Religion just makes up answers that feel good at the time and the proof of this is all the different religious viewpoints just in Christianity, you say that this is god reveling himself differently to different people when the most likely answer is people just make it up as they go along.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>I was pointing out that your description of voodoo does appear to break one of the ten commandments yet you say it does not contradict your beliefs.<<

The ten commandments were given to a group of people that had just escaped slavery in a foreign land. It was what God expected of those people at that point in time. Careful, when you assume you know what someone believes you are usually wrong.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>Yes, you said that - `I believe that the experiences that others have with other religions are possible and do not contradict my beliefs` and you cited voodoo as a religion where a supreme being is worshipped. From that, I assume<<

So No I did NOT say that you assumed it. I would extend by previous statement to other religions as well.
0
Reply
Male 255
@dang007: `I know what I understand that God wants me to behave. I really do not know what he expects from others.`
I was pointing out that your description of voodoo does appear to break one of the ten commandments yet you say it does not contradict your beliefs.
0
Reply
Male 255
@dang007: `Did I say that somewhere?`
Yes, you said that - `I believe that the experiences that others have with other religions are possible and do not contradict my beliefs` and you cited voodoo as a religion where a supreme being is worshipped. From that, I assume that you dont think religions which don`t recognise a single supreme being aren`t possible and do contradict your beliefs.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>What if the true believers of the ones you have tried were to say "you didn`t do it right", how would you respond? When you understand why you reject every other religious belief as false you will understand why I reject yours.<<<

I would respond that it is certainly possible. But then again I have more than one data point as I repeat the experiment every day. AND AGAIN I am open to the possibility that God is reveling himself differently to different people.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>Because science is a process of observation, testing, re-testing, peer review, re-testing again. In science there is incentive to get the answer right, and if the science is wrong there is incentive to correct it. The mass of a proton which has been scientifically proven through tests and re-tests, peer reviews of the evidence is not even comparable to just accepting someones experience AND their perception of said experience because they said it was true, especially when that experience is supernatural. <<<

Again you miss my point. YOU did not do all these experiments yet YOU believe you know the mass of a proton. You base that BELIEF on what OTHERS told you. Thus you are supporting your belief on the reports of others, some of which are contradictory. I am saying that this is similar (exactly like no) to the "evidence" that caused me to initially accept my faith, actually perform the experiment myself.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>I would also point out that evidence that can`t be shared is not really evidence.<<<

In the strict sense of how we normally define Science yes. But my whole point is that Science in NOT everything.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>So as long as the religion is monotheistic, you`re ok with it, but any polytheist (Shinto, Mormonism, forms of Hinduism) or atheist (forms of Buddhism) you`re not?<<<

Did I say that somewhere?

>>>Also, how does the worship of Iwa sit with `Thou shall not make unto you any graven image..Thou shall not bow down thyself to them` I thought that was a fundamental tennant of Christianity?<<<

I know what I understand that God wants me to behave. I really do not know what he expects from others.
0
Reply
Male 438
"I do not know why or even if it is true, that God revealed himself differently to these people, but I am open to the possibility."

I am open to the possibility as well, but my experience tells me that when humans don`t understand something (especially primitive humans) the tendency is for us to make up an answer (religion) rather than to say `I don`t know` and figure it out (science). The point that there is no religion that can prove they are superior to the others tells me that it is most likely made up.
0
Reply
Male 438
"But I have tried some of the others. At least to the extent possible. My experiences are that the faith I have provides results to me that others do not."

What if the true believers of the ones you have tried were to say "you didn`t do it right", how would you respond? When you understand why you reject every other religious belief as false you will understand why I reject yours.
0
Reply
Male 438
"However, many of the facts of science I believe because others have told me they conducted an experiment. The mass of a proton for example. Why would I believe them, when I have not done the experiment myself, and not believe others about their experiences?"

Because science is a process of observation, testing, re-testing, peer review, re-testing again. In science there is incentive to get the answer right, and if the science is wrong there is incentive to correct it. The mass of a proton which has been scientifically proven through tests and re-tests, peer reviews of the evidence is not even comparable to just accepting someones experience AND their perception of said experience because they said it was true, especially when that experience is supernatural. Extrordinary claims require extrodinary evidence.
0
Reply
Male 438
"Let me be clear. You can not have my experience."

You are correct and I cannot deny you have had them, however I was referring to the anecdotal evidence you accept from others that agree with you religious view. First you indicated those peoples experiences were part of the evidence for your faith and then said the evidence cannot be shared.I would also point out that evidence that can`t be shared is not really evidence.
0
Reply
Male 255
dang007: `I believe that the experiences that others have with other religions are possible and do not contradict my beliefs. Voodo for example`
So as long as the religion is monotheistic, you`re ok with it, but any polytheist (Shinto, Mormonism, forms of Hinduism) or atheist (forms of Buddhism) you`re not?
Also, how does the worship of Iwa sit with `Thou shall not make unto you any graven image..Thou shall not bow down thyself to them` I thought that was a fundamental tennant of Christianity?
0
Reply
Male 663
One final point about other religions. I believe that the experiences that others have with other religions are possible and do not contradict my beliefs. Voodo for example:

Vodouisants believe in a supreme being called Bondye, but also worship many lesser spirits, as the lwa. This belief is held in several West African religions, such as that of the Yoruba, Odinani, and Vodun. When it came in contact with Roman Catholicism, the supreme being was associated with the Judeo-Christian God, the lwa becoming the saints.

I do not know why or even if it is true, that God revealed himself differently to these people, but I am open to the possibility.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>There are many people who swear by their personal experiences and those they are associated with the voo-doo is real, or Islam is the only path to god, or that the Hindu religion is correct. Do you think those beliefs are just as valid as yours? If not why, they are making the same arguements for their beliefs you make for yours.<<<<

But I have tried some of the others. At least to the extent possible. My experiences are that the faith I have provides results to me that others do not.

>> Does that mean god failed me and countless others. It is not honest to give him credit for the converts if you don`t give him blame for the failiers.<<<

We agree and this is still a big issue for me as I grow to understand my God`s will. There are many many things I do not fully understand. However, I do not fully understand quantum mechanics and I do not claim to understand everything there is to know about chemistry, but I believ
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>You are contradicting yourself, in an earlier post you said part of the reason you believe was because of other people expiriences they shared with you as well as your own, now you are saying the evidence can`t be shared.<<<

Let me be clear. You can not have my experience. I can tell you what my experience is or was. In science one can go the next step and demonstrate the effect. "See look if I turn the switch the light bulb lights up." With God these experiences are internal. I can tell you all day long that I feel different, etc. but you can not see it only take my word, or not, for it. It is this is the difference to which I was referring.

However, many of the facts of science I believe because others have told me they conducted an experiment. The mass of a proton for example. Why would I believe them, when I have not done the experiment myself, and not believe others about their experiences? When faced with conflicting rep
0
Reply
Male 255
@dang007: `However, I can point to others, many many others, that report a different result from their experiments.`
And I can point to approximately 350 million people who believe in budhism due to their `experiments`. Why don`t you believe their evidence?
0
Reply
Female 235
Nice tattoo...and if you don`t like what it says you can just put your own words in with the leaves. I like it as is, though :)
0
Reply
Male 438
"What I am saying that it is hard for me to understand that given that millions of people have reported their experiences, many atheist have converted, and that most people at least believe they have free will, that anyone would reject the idea out of hand."

There are many people who swear by their personal experiences and those they are associated with the voo-doo is real, or Islam is the only path to god, or that the Hindu religion is correct. Do you think those beliefs are just as valid as yours? If not why, they are making the same arguements for their beliefs you make for yours.
0
Reply
Male 438
"Now who is being intellectually dishonest. "I don`t understand so it must not be true."

By the way some atheists have "converted" and do now believe. So apparently God does now what it takes to make an atheists beleive....."

First, I am not saying its not true, I am saying there is no solid reason to believe it is true, there is a large difference.

Second, there are many people who have been devote theists that de-converted, many of whom were preachers. Does that mean god failed me and countless others. It is not honest to give him credit for the converts if you don`t give him blame for the failiers.
0
Reply
Male 438
"This data could be shared and looked at by others. The evidence for god can by its very nature can not be so shared. It is a personal experience."

You are contradicting yourself, in an earlier post you said part of the reason you believe was because of other people expiriences they shared with you as well as your own, now you are saying the evidence can`t be shared.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
dang007:

I think the underlying flaw in your argument is that you are attempting to apply the scientific method to religion. It doesn`t fit.

The scientific method is a superb tool for obtaining reliable explanations of how natural things work. It has saved many millions of lives and vastly improved billions more. It is far and away the most beneficial idea humanity has ever come up with.

And it`s irrelevant to religion because religion deals purely with the supernatural. The "experiments" you refer to are not experiments in a scientific sense. None of it has any relevance to science.

No doubt some people feel better when they have a clear master to serve (which makes life simpler) and think they will be rewarded with blissful immortality if they serve their master correctly. Probably many people. That`s why the Abrahamic religions are so popular. It doesn`t make it science and it doesn`t make it true.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Wait, are you saying atheism isn`t an absolute certainty? You have no faith in a god, but you`re not 100% certain that one doesn`t exist?[/quote]

Yes, that`s exactly it.

If I was 100% certain that one doesn`t exist, then either I would have to have compelling objective proof of that non-existence (and I don`t see how such a thing could be possible) or I would have to be 100% certain of it without such proof - which would be faith. I don`t do faith.

My position is that there is no evidence at all of any particular god, no evidence for any kind of divinity in general (the fact that we don`t know how some things happened is not evidence that a god did them) and therefore no reason to believe any such thing exists.

I refered to undetectable magic pixies that are what hold up anything that flies - I class them in the same way I class gods. No reason to believe in them, no certainty that they don`t exist (of course you can`t detect them - they`r
0
Reply
Male 663
After thinking a little more about what you said below. I think that you mean the following.

Those that found evidence for Y can not just claim that those that failed to find evidence for Y are wrong. It could be that the second group is correct and the first wrong. I agree. However, you can not assume that the group that failed to find evidence for Y is correct. In fact both may be correct, i.e. under some conditions Y and other conditions not Y, or both could be wrong. And if you read my posts below you will see that I understand that and am open to the fact that it may be those that found evidence that are incorrect.

What I am saying that it is hard for me to understand that given that millions of people have reported their experiences, many atheist have converted, and that most people at least believe they have free will, that anyone would reject the idea out of hand.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>If there is a god then he knows exactly what it would take for atheists to believe, therefore he either does not care or does not exhist.<<

Now who is being intellectually dishonest. "I don`t understand so it must not be true."

By the way some atheists have "converted" and do now believe. So apparently God does now what it takes to make an atheists beleive.....
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>This is exactly the point, the claim is falsifiable, the god claim is not, and by saying that those who "experiment" with the god claim and come up with no proof are therefore doing the experiment wrong is intellectually dishonest. <<<

I do not think so. Recall that the first attempts to validate relativity "proved" it to be incorrect, or at least that it made some incorrect predictions. Did we toss relativity in the trash? no we continued to conduct experiments and learned that some of the initial data was incorrectly evaluated.

This data could be shared and looked at by others. The evidence for god can by its very nature can not be so shared. It is a personal experience.
0
Reply
Male 438
"But, if you require more then I hope you get it."

If there is a god then he knows exactly what it would take for atheists to believe, therefore he either does not care or does not exhist.
0
Reply
Male 438
"Case one: a few random people that I do not know reporting that they saw Elvis at the local mall, omthing I can investigate myself by driving down there."

This is exactly the point, the claim is falsifiable, the god claim is not, and by saying that those who "experiment" with the god claim and come up with no proof are therefore doing the experiment wrong is intellectually dishonest. Yes I do require more, there are all kinds of people who believe in all kinds of gods, they can`t all be right but they can all be wrong.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>Why do you not believe based on their experiences and reports?"

The same reason I don`t believe it when someone says they saw Elvis alive or they were abducted by aliens, according to the logic you presented I should believe them. Now I may believe that they actually believe what they are saying and are not lying but that is no reason to believe the claim itself.<

I think there is a difference.

Case one: a few random people that I do not know reporting that they saw Elvis at the local mall, omthing I can investigate myself by driving down there.

Case two: People that I do know that report there personal experiences with faith and demonstrate that they are willing to act on that faith. What they are telling me is reinforced by reading what others have written and what I have experienced myself.

But, if you require more then I hope you get it.
0
Reply
Male 438
"How could someone ever demonstrate that their life is better when they have faith in God vs. when they do not for example, or vice versa."

Believing in something without evidence may be comforting to some (not those interested in truth however) but it does not make those beliefs real or rational, an alcoholic will tell you they are happier with alcohol than without it.
0
Reply
Male 438
"Why do you not believe based on their experiences and reports?"

The same reason I don`t believe it when someone says they saw Elvis alive or they were abducted by aliens, according to the logic you presented I should believe them. Now I may believe that they actually believe what they are saying and are not lying but that is no reason to believe the claim itself.
0
Reply
Male 663
I think part of the confusion is that we all try and equate science and facts. I think science is the current state of knowledge about facts that can be demonstrated to others. But has nothing to do with other "truths." How could someone ever demonstrate that their life is better when they have faith in God vs. when they do not for example, or vice versa. You only have their word for it. It is NOT a demonstrable fact. On the other hand it maybe a fact to those that believe. In the same fashion we can only teach the observable behavior of the world. The creation story does not fit this requirement.
0
Reply
Male 663
@aikiman

Then it is hard for me to argue with your personal experience. However, I can point to others, many many others, that report a different result from their experiments. Perhaps, they performed the experiment wrong or failed to remove confounding effects, etc.; or perhaps you did. I really could not say only speculate, and all speculation is based at least in part on one personal paradigm, so I will not here.

>>Atheists view god or gods in that catagory and that is why it is such an anathema to some atheists that creationism is taught as a science when it falls in the same catagory as say the earth being laid by a giant turtle.<<

I could not agree more.
0
Reply
Male 255
@dang007:Now I ask you have you ever done an experiment about God. For example follow the Christian teaching of inviting Christ into your life?
Yes, I have. My father is a lay preacher and I was brought up as a part of the church. I loved the community, the singing hymns, went to sunday school, read the scriptures etc. did everything a good christian should but never felt anything. I desperately wanted to and even went to christian youth rallies and a Billy Graham `concert`. So yes, i`ve experimented long and hard for about 15 years of my life. I still like `the church`. still like singing hymns and love the spectacle of mass in my local cathedral. But that`s where it ends. From my own personal view and extensive research and experimentation, I do not beleive there is a god.
0
Reply
Male 255
@jadoig:`By extension, assuming you`re an atheist, would you say that even though you don`t believe in God, it doesn`t necessarily mean he`s not there?`
In the same way that just because you believe in god, it doesn`t necessarily mean he`s there. The reason why it`s not a relevant extension is that beliefs are a conscious decision made from experience, knowledge etc. and disbelief is the default position for everything else. Atheists view god or gods in that catagory and that is why it is such an anathema to some atheists that creationism is taught as a science when it falls in the same catagory as say the earth being laid by a giant turtle.
0
Reply
Male 663
I have faith that when I sit down in my chair it will support my weight. I base this faith on the fact that every time I sit down in the chair my weight is supported. The act of faith is that I sit down in it without first checking the bolts, measuring the mechanical strength of various parts etc. I can also extend my faith to the belief that other chairs will support my weight when I sit in them even if I have never set in them before. Experience with chairs has resulted in faith in my expectations. In the same way someone that has experience with a God has evidence to themselves with regard to the behavior and predictions of future behavior of the deity.
CONT.
0
Reply
Male 663
Now I bet that you believe in electrons, have faith that when you apply an electric field across a conductor electrons move, etc. But have you ever seen an electron or done experiments to validate their existence or behavior? I doubt it, perhaps you have so just think about another example. Yet you have belief in their existence and their qualities. Why because others that you respect that DID do the experiments, tests, etc. have told you what they found, and I doubt that you go around sticking your hand in the light socket to check for yourself. In the same way there are thousands of people that will tell you about their own experiences with their God. Why do you not believe based on their experiences and reports?
CONT
0
Reply
Male 663

In the field of science we often come across ideas and results that seem absurd to us; run counter to what seems at the time logical. Often initially the tests we perform give contradictory results, check the initial attempts to verify relativity. However, as we learn how to do the tests and interpret the results we get more and more consistent results and the inconsistencies help us refine our understanding. Now I ask you have you ever done an experiment about God. For example follow the Christian teaching of inviting Christ into your life? If you have not done the experiment you would surely be ready to listen to those that have wouldn’t you?
CONT.
0
Reply
Male 663
I will end with this I have known people that have left a faith, usually about the time they move away from home, other that joined a faith much later in life, and some of the first group that came back later. To a person the ones that joined or came back have told me that there lives are better in their faith than out of it. The ones that left but never came back never seem to be better off.
But that’s just me.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>without reasonable evidence of such a being is very different.<<<

Define reasonable?
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]I bet you have faith that you will wake up tomorrow, even though you don`t have any evidence to know that with certainty. [/quote]
I`ll refer you to my comment concerning rigorous testing and baseless speculation.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]Faith does not reject reason, nor is it absurd to accept a belief. [/quote]

Perhaps I should clarify, by "absurd" I`m not necessarily meaning it in a derogatory sense, rather, I`m advocating the premise suggested by Soren Kierkegaard. Faith by its own nature HAS to be a belief in the absurd. Faith requires that one submit oneself to something that could not rationally be so. You aren`t basing your belief on tangible evidence, rather anecdotal experience. Faith requires that one embrace the absurd, and I`m sure you don`t feel belief in God is a belief in the absurd Crakr, but it`s your passion of faith that makes the absurd *not* absurd for you.
0
Reply
Male 434
Aikiman, I`m seeing the distinction now. By extension, assuming you`re an atheist, would you say that even though you don`t believe in God, it doesn`t necessarily mean he`s not there?
0
Reply
Male 946
Damn, who pissed in her Cheerios?
0
Reply
Male 255
@jadog: `It seems to me though that all atheists have faith(1) that there are no gods.`
No, faith is a complete conviction whereas atheism is simply a disbelief or lack of belief. There will be atheists who have a complete conviction therefore they have faith that there is no god (much the same way as a scientist can have faith in a hypothesis)and there are atheists who just don`t believe or have a lack of belief, which includes those who don`t know of god, have some other non-deity based belief or just haven`t really thought about it.
0
Reply
Male 505
If people believe in something and have faith in it, then something, no matter how abstract exists. To many others, that does not however fit their criteria of what is real and exists. Roll on thousands of years of arguments about how real it is...
0
Reply
Male 505
I love people who just keep arguing until everyone else gives up then claim they have won the argument.
0
Reply
Male 438
Crakr

We have past experience to draw on when it comes to waking up in the morning or the healthy respect for a deadly weapon. Comparing that type of faith to the faith in a personal god, without reasonable evidence of such a being is very different. That is more like having faith you will wake up tomorrow with 6 fingers on each hand, you have no solid reason to think you will, but you believe it anyway, that is religious faith.
0
Reply
Male 438
"Speak up, atheists: Are you 100% certain there is no god to speak of? Many of you talk as if you are."

No I am not, though some athiests may say they are,I doubt most would. I have no problem saying `I don`t know`. I find it a lot better than going around saying I know there is one when there is no reason to think there is. Most do not claim knowledge, where as many thiests do claim there is a god and even go so far as to think they know what that god wants.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Patchgrabber: [quote]Faith is rejection of reason and acceptance of the absurd.[/quote]

I bet you have faith that you will wake up tomorrow, even though you don`t have any evidence to know that with certainty.

Faith does not reject reason, nor is it absurd to accept a belief.

Perhaps I have a pistol, it may or may not be loaded, I believe it isn`t, but none-the-less I treat the firearm as if it`s loaded at all times.
Is that beyond reason ?
0
Reply
Male 434
Speak up, atheists: Are you 100% certain there is no god to speak of? Many of you talk as if you are.
0
Reply
Male 434
"If you go by the theist redefinition of atheism, most theists are far more atheist than most atheists. There are hundreds of gods that most theists absolutely believe definitely do not exist. Most atheists are nowhere near that certain about it, even the ones who believe no gods exist.

That`s more evidence that the theist redefinition of atheism is wrong - how can a theist be more atheist than an atheist?"

At a glance, that`s just silly. The theist by definition cannot be more atheist.

Say there are 1000 gods. The atheist doesn`t believe in any of them. 0:1000. If the theist is a monotheist, they believe in one of them. 1:1000.If a polytheist, x>1:1000.

"Most atheists are nowhere near that certain about it, even the ones who believe no gods exist." None I`ve met on here. LOL.

Wait, are you saying atheism isn`t an absolute certainty? You have no faith in a god, but you`re not 100% certain that one doesn`t exist?
0
Reply
Male 916
really nicely designed.
A+ tattoo.
0
Reply
Female 956
I want to eat her pussy.
0
Reply
Female 4,086
not getting into the discussion. just think its funny and a pretty nice looking tat.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Not even gonna join in on the tardfest that happens any time IAB is stupid enough to include anything against/for religion.[/quote]

Aha, but now you have joined in by declaring yourself in opposition to everyone else.
0
Reply
Male 434
"That fallback position from your original ludicrous statement is still misleading, presumably deliberately so."

Not deliberate, I was simply taking the wrong definition of faith.
0
Reply
Male 434
"It`s very clever the way the religious community has combined the different definitions of `faith` to try and prove that faith in a god is something we all should naturally have."

I think I see my error.

Aikiman helpfully pointed out the oed definition of faith.
1. Complete trust or conviction in someone or something
2.Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof

I`ll change my stance now to: All atheists are without faith(2).
It seems to me though that all atheists have faith(1) that there are no gods.
0
Reply
Male 51
You think she`ll still get into heaven with that? The wings should cover it up, right? lol
0
Reply
Male 2,690
Not even gonna join in on the tardfest that happens any time IAB is stupid enough to include anything against/for religion.
0
Reply
Male 1,093
lol, to see it, i just removed my glasses
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Also...is anyone who agrees with the theist redefinition of `atheism` up for a go at answering this?

[quote]If you go by the theist redefinition of atheism, most theists are far more atheist than most atheists. There are hundreds of gods that most theists absolutely believe definitely do not exist. Most atheists are nowhere near that certain about it, even the ones who believe no gods exist.

That`s more evidence that the theist redefinition of atheism is wrong - how can a theist be more atheist than an atheist?[/quote]
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Atheism is something different to everyone, just like any theism.[/quote]

That fallback position from your original ludicrous statement is still misleading, presumably deliberately so.

So you`ve dropped the explicit statement that atheism is theism, although I wouldn`t be surprised if you went back to it later and/or elsewhere, when I`m not there to repeatedly point out how obviously wrong it is.

You`ve now softened it a bit, to saying that atheism is almost exactly the same ("just like") as any theism.

Your "reasoning" behind that is that there can be differences between the position of different atheists.

According to your "reasoning", EVERYTHING is just like any theism. Different Republicans can have different positions on some things - republicanism is just like any theism! Different people can like different books - writing is just like any theism!

Bollocks.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Sigh, these are just semantics Angillion and I tire of the circles we are running.[/quote]

Or, of course, you can acknowledge that it`s not going to work here and move on.

You will probably succeed in your campaign of disinformation. It`s much easier to spread untrue statements online than it is to track them down and refute them. You can just say "this is true". Even if I were to follow you around the net, it wouldn`t be enough for me to just reply "that is untrue". I have to explain why it`s untrue and I have to do so over and over again until you get tired of it and move on. Obviously, that takes far more time and motivation than just making the untrue statement. You will inevitably win. Just not here, not right now.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I see now where you`re getting confused and I`m shocked you`re getting hung up on that error.[/quote]

Your only error was in assuming I wouldn`t stick with pointing it out after you repeatedly made untrue statements about it.

It is unlikely that you will beat me by repetition on IAB. It`s too transient for that. Your faith may well give you the motivation to continue for years with an untrue statement regardless of how often it is proven false, but IAB is so transient that I only have to outlast you for a few days.

You can keep redefining words, changing the meaning of words on an ad hoc basis (sometimes even in the same sentence) and making untrue statements about what people (including yourself) have written. You can use all the other underhanded tricks dishonest theists use in lieu of a real argument against atheism. I can`t stop you. But it won`t pass without challenge on IAB.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"the definition that fits with the etymology"
As you stated, the etymology translates literally as godless. Not faithless. An atheist isn`t necessarily faithless.[/quote]

What set of circumstances are you imagining in which a person could have faith in gods and be godless at the same time?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"You want sources? [for what atheism is] Look on any atheism site. There`s no shortage of sources." No, this is like me using the bible as a source to show why the bible is right.[/quote]

No, it`s like you using the Christian bible as a source for what `Christian` means. Not whether or not it`s right, just what it is.

You`re really fond of changing the meaning of words on an ad hoc basis to suit your own ends, aren`t you? You do it with `atheism`. You do it with `faith`. It`s your default position.

[quote]Looks to me like atheists are the ones doing the redefining.[/quote]

You see what you want to see, regardless of how much you have to ignore or make up to do so.

[quote]I haven`t seen a (non-atheist specific) source that says atheism is the lack of faith.[/quote]

Try a good dictionary, especially an older copy because the theist redefinition is more recent.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"Then you should agree that faith in the non-existence of all gods cannot be considered the definition of atheism."
?! How so when you just quoted me as saying Some" atheists have faith that no god exists". Are you even reading what you`re writing?[/quote]

I`m becoming increasingly convinced that you`re trolling me. Still, I`m off work this week so I`ll reply anyway.

What atheism is depends on what is common to *all* atheists. Not *some* of them. Your increasingly bizarre line of argument is the same as someone insisting that "USA" means "Idaho" or that "Christian" means "Evangelical Baptist" or that "theist" means "Jain".

*All* atheists are without faith in the existence of gods. That is the defining feature of atheism.

*Some* atheists have faith in the non-existence of gods and some don`t. That is not the defining feature of atheism.

Damn, this
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]I think faith is a human trait. Whether it`s faith in a God or faith that my TV will turn on every time I press the power button, faith exists. If you tell me you have a complete dearth of faith, I say you are a liar. [/quote]

This is nonsense. Faith is rejection of reason and acceptance of the absurd. If rational, reasonable evidence shows something, it`s not faith to believe in it, that`s just called belief. I have faith in nothing, because I only believe in reason and knowledge. I don`t have faith that my TV will turn on, rather, I have the results of fairly rigourous testing, and to assume that holds less value than baseless speculation is insulting. Since faith is belief in the absurd, an atheist is one that believes in reasonable evidence that there is no God, and thus is not believing in the absurd.
0
Reply
Male 663
>>>HAHA. I love this argument. "Clearly, if there is no god, there can be no evil. That`s what you`re saying, right Atheist? Everything is allowed!" No douche, morality isn`t relegated to the existence of Big Brother. Evil exists regardless of omnipotence.<<<

Way to read between the lines and find something that is not there. I will try again. IF everything in the Universe is deterministic, for the sake of this argument lets simplify that and say that everything follows the same laws, then do you or anything or anyone else really have free will. Do you really have any control over what you do or say? If you do not then what is suffering? I do not think that it could have anything to do with wants or needs or behavior or morals as these all imply that an organism has a choice. Again, if everything occurs because it is behaving, ultimately, as the physical laws dictate is there free will?

I am not accusing you or anyone else of ANYTHIN
0
Reply
Female 52
Is "imaginary" actually spelled incorrectly or is that supposed to be an A next to the R?
0
Reply
Female 2,525
Pretty. Not something I would have tattooed on me, but I like it.
0
Reply
Male 255
Therefore I would qualify your statement to say that
no atheists have faith in the religious definition of the word but certainly all can have faith in the secular definition.
Suprisingly Hebrews 11:1 as an excellent definition of faith as: `Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen` unfortunately, this has been corrupted by the religious to suggest that `true` faith can only be based on the word of god
0
Reply
Male 255
@jadog: The only people that see atheists having faith as a bad thing are atheists, so they change the definition.
No, it is because there is more than one definition of faith which you are confusing to further your arguments. as the OED states:
1. Complete trust or conviction in someone or something
2.Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof
The faith I have in things or people is from definition 1. I have no absolutely no faith that conforms to definition 2.
0
Reply
Male 622
cool idea of a tattoo. but God is real.
0
Reply
Male 434
Sigh, these are just semantics Angillion and I tire of the circles we are running. I can agree that some atheists have no faith. But certainly not all or even most.
And you know what? The only people that see atheists having faith as a bad thing are atheists, so they change the definition. They expand it to make themselves feel better. And idiot "christians" use this fact to cut them down, or try to and so. Also human nature. We thrive on semantics apparently. Have a great day!
0
Reply
Male 434
"You`ve just done it again, in the very paragraph in which you claim you aren`t doing it."

I see now where you`re getting confused and I`m shocked you`re getting hung up on that error. Kindly drop the erroneous "other".
Atheism is something different to everyone, just like any theism.
0
Reply
Male 434
"Then you should agree that faith in the non-existence of all gods cannot be considered the definition of atheism."
?! How so when you just quoted me as saying Some" atheists have faith that no god exists". Are you even reading what you`re writing?

"You want sources? Look on any atheism site. There`s no shortage of sources." No, this is like me using the bible as a source to show why the bible is right.

"the definition that fits with the etymology"
As you stated, the etymology translates literally as godless. Not faithless. An atheist isn`t necessarily faithless.

"The redefinition is faith in the non-existence of gods" Looks to me like atheists are the ones doing the redefining. I haven`t seen a (non-atheist specific) source that says atheism is the lack of faith.





0
Reply
Male 255
It`s very clever the way the religious community has combined the different definitions of `faith` to try and prove that faith in a god is something we all should naturally have. Yes, we all have faith or can show faith in something or someone but that cannot realistically be extrapolated to a conclusion that we are all predisposed to beleive in a god. For example, I have faith in my sons ability to pass his exam because i know him and know his ability. What religious faith expects is to have a so called `leap of faith` where I am expected to beleive in a God before i have knowledge and experience.
0
Reply
Male 132
I can`t imagine hating something so much that I would get a tattoo referring to it.
0
Reply
Male 505
Angilion.

Proof god has a sense of humour. How else could you rationally explain it?
0
Reply
Male 2,841
0
Reply
Male 1,754
I love the keyboard warriors that feel the need to display their intelligence in a meaningless debate about atheism. Nut bags I tell ya.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
But my TV power button has nothing to do with atheism and my views on it working also have nothing to do with my atheism. Atheism is about gods. Not TV buttons. Not radishes. Just gods.

My lack of faith in a TV`s power button is an example of my agnosticism, not my atheism.

Can I say that I can objectively prove that my TV will always turn on when I press the power button? No, for the reasons I gave in the last post.

Can I say that I can objectively prove that my TV will turn on when I press the power button, as long as it is plugged in and there isn`t a power cut and there aren`t any faults with the TV, the plug, the mains lead or the supply of electricity to the mains socket? Yes, at least with a sufficient degree of proof for day to day life, based on knowledge and previous experimental results (i.e. pressing the power button has turned it on before, many times).

No faith required.

Actually, I don`t have a TV. But the point remains
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I think faith is a human trait. Whether it`s faith in a God or faith that my TV will turn on every time I press the power button, faith exists. If you tell me you have a complete dearth of faith, I say you are a liar.[/quote]

I certainly try to have a complete lack of faith in anything and everything. I probably don`t completely succeed.

I don`t need faith that my TV will turn on every time I press the power button. Firstly, I have some knowledge of how a power button works. Knowledge makes faith irrelevant. Secondly, I am sure that my TV *won`t* turn on every time I press the power button. TVs don`t last forever - at some point, my TV will break in some way and won`t come on when I press the power button. Also, power cuts happen sometimes and pressing the button won`t turn the TV on then. Or it might be unplugged. Or the fuse in the plug might have blown.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I think I`ve demonstrated through logic and the root words how atheism DOESN`T necessarily imply a lack of faith. Your turn to use something other than your opinion on why it does.[/quote]

A lack of faith in the existence of gods. I`ve already explained, in some detail, why that`s what it means.

If you`re arguing that atheists have faith in gods, you`re being silly.

If you`re arguing that atheism is not about lack of faith in everything...who are you arguing with and why are you doing it in reply to me rather than in reply to them?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"So you`ve stated that the lack of theism is the same as any other theism." No, reading comprehension fail. As you quoted, what I said was :
Atheism is something different to everyone, just like any other theism.
I clearly did NOT say the lack of theism is the same as a theism, I stated it had something in common. i.e. the way they are practiced differ[/quote]

You have stated, repeatedly, not just that atheism is the same as a theism but that atheism IS a theism. You`ve just done it again, in the very paragraph in which you claim you aren`t doing it.

"X...just like any other Y" includes an implicit statement that X is a type of Y. That`s what the word `other` means in that context.

e.g. "Football...just like any other sport" makes sense, but "Football...just like any other motor racing" doesn`t.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]"theist redefinition of atheism.." What BS is this? Show me both versions with sources before making preposterous claims.[/quote]

The original definition, the definition that fits with the etymology, the definition still used by atheists, is the lack of faith in the existence of gods.

You want sources? Look on any atheism site. There`s no shortage of sources.

The redefinition is faith in the non-existence of gods. This redefinition is beneficial to theists and is being promoted by theists. It is a stretch to call it a theist redefinition, but theists are certainly at least the main driving force behind it.

You want sources? Look in a mirror for starters.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Pretty fine distinction, why bother make it? Isn`t the end result the same? An atheist thinks/knows/believes that no god exists.[/quote]

It`s the distinction between faith and knowledge, which is not a fine distinction at all. It`s a large and important distinction.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I think we`re better off just saying:"Some atheists have faith that no god exists, and some have no faith. "[/quote]

Then you should agree that faith in the non-existence of all gods cannot be considered the definition of atheism.
0
Reply
Male 1,313
What a load of filthy crap! I didn`t have to squint at all.
0
Reply
Male 434
I think faith is a human trait. Whether it`s faith in a God or faith that my TV will turn on every time I press the power button, faith exists. If you tell me you have a complete dearth of faith, I say you are a liar.

"How about what it actually does mean? "
I think I`ve demonstrated through logic and the root words how atheism DOESN`T necessarily imply a lack of faith. Your turn to use something other than your opinion on why it does.

0
Reply
Male 434
differently amongst those who call themselves atheists.
0
Reply
Male 434
"Atheism is the absence of faith in the existence of any and all deities.
It is not faith in the non-existence of them.
Two different things. Obviously."
Pretty fine distinction, why bother make it? Isn`t the end result the same? An atheist thinks/knows/believes that no god exists.

Atheism is something different to everyone, just like any other theism. I still hold this up as truth, because, again, you said yourself, some do it differently.

"theist redefinition of atheism.." What BS is this? Show me both versions with sources before making preposterous claims.

"So you`ve stated that the lack of theism is the same as any other theism." No, reading comprehension fail. As you quoted, what I said was :
Atheism is something different to everyone, just like any other theism.
I clearly did NOT say the lack of theism is the same as a theism, I stated it had something in common. i.e. the way they are practiced differ
0
Reply
Male 434
"SOME. Some is not all. Some is not indicative of the defining feature of something."

Of course not, but you have to consider the state of the "some" when defining the whole group. I think we`re better off just saying:"Some atheists have faith that no god exists, and some have no faith. "

0
Reply
Male 434
The `a` in `atheism` denotes a lack. Standard prefix for a word with Greek roots (e.g. amoral, etc).

Congratulations on your understanding of the language. I would assume a lack of theism considering the suffix of the word. Lets see how that`s defined..
"belief in the existence of a god or gods; specifically : belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world"
Lack of belief in a god. But not a total absence of faith.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]You yourself just said "Some atheists have faith in the non-existence of all deities".[/quote]

SOME. Some is not all. Some is not indicative of the defining feature of something.

For example, some Americans live in Idaho. Does that mean that living in Idaho is what defines the word "American"?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Pretty bold statement. How do we measure that? What people think it should mean or what it has been accepted to mean?[/quote]

How about what it actually does mean?

If someone started a campaign to get "Christianity" redefined to mean "sacrificing dogs to Satan" and was somehow successful in getting that definition into a dictionary, would that mean that Christians sacrifice dogs to Satan, that that is what Christianity is?

[quote]Because it`s true.[/quote]

It`s nonsense. I described why it is nonsense. It has no connection to reality. The absence of green is not a shade of green. The absence of money is not a currency of money. The absence of football is not a type of football. The absence of religious faith is not a sect of religious faith. It`s nonsense to claim the absence of something is a form of that thing.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]And Angilion omg are you seriously arguing EVERY comment?[/quote]

Only the ones that are untrue statements.

If I was to write something like "Christianity is human sacrifice and cannibalism", would you object to a Christian arguing against that statement on the basis that it isn`t true? OK, Christianity does have a human sacrifice as a key theme and the biggest Christian sect does practice ritual cannibalism, but it`s really not the same thing.
0
Reply
Male 434
Then Webster is wrong.

Pretty bold statement. How do we measure that? What people think it should mean or what it has been accepted to mean?

"You don`t seem stupid enough to believe that statement, so I`m curious as to why you wrote it."

Because it`s true. You yourself just said "Some atheists have faith in the non-existence of all deities". So some have faith, and some claim to have none, seems like being different things to different people to me, not to mention your issue with the actual definition of the word.
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"are you seriously arguing EVERY comment"

Why shouldn`t he?

If I grab ten people and they`re all "The narknok`s of planet triffleton are made of crystal" "no they`re made of orange" "no they`re made of liquid" "no, it`s salt" WHY exactly shouldn`t I step in and say "Shut the frak up. You`re all idiots. You don`t even know if there are any narknok`s on triffleton. How about you focus on, say, Ethiopians. You know those exist."?

Yeah, frak all this PC bull, religion is idiotic. God is idiotic. Fairies are idiotic. Narknok`s are idiotic. Douchebags telling me love and compassion don`t exist without God is idiotic.
0
Reply
Male 771
@ShamaziaV2, spoken like a true believer.
0
Reply
Male 11
"Agnostic = non-believer (will smile and walk away from a conversation about religion)

Atheist = anti-believer (will argue to no end that there is no such thing as God)

School is now over."

Not true, Agnostics neither confirm nor deny the existence of a deity believing that there is no proof to support either claim.

While atheists are non-believers they are not defined as a group that will argue to no end about the non-existence of a deity. To say that is like saying all Muslims are terrorists or all Mormons are polygamists. Most atheists, like myself, simply let the topic drop and don`t argue either way.

School is never over.
0
Reply
Male 236
Anyone who gets permanently inked with a phrase just to put down other people`s beliefs is obviously a raging arsehole. And Angilion omg are you seriously arguing EVERY comment?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Agnostic = non-believer (will smile and walk away from a conversation about religion)

Atheist = anti-believer (will argue to no end that there is no such thing as God)

School is now over.[/quote]

Thank you for the excellent example of why religion shouldn`t be taught in schools as if it was fact.

Agnosticism is the general principle that a person shouldn`t treat something as objectively true without objective proof of it. It applies to everything, not just religion. Science is essentially the application of agnosticism. Literally, it means "without knowledge".

Atheism is the absence of faith in the existence of gods. It literally means "without gods".

They`re not two different positions on the same subject. They`re positions on two different subjects that have a small area of overlap and they`re not exclusive even in that area.

I`m an agnostic atheist - I don`t know and I don`t believe.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Atheism is something different to everyone, just like any other theism.[/quote]

You don`t seem stupid enough to believe that statement, so I`m curious as to why you wrote it.

The `a` in `atheism` denotes a lack. Standard prefix for a word with Greek roots (e.g. amoral, etc).

So you`ve stated that the lack of theism is the same as any other theism. That makes no sense. It`s like saying that the lack of green is the same as any other shade of green, or that having no money is the same as having money in any other currency. It`s utter nonsense.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I never try to push my lack of it on anyone and feel it`s wrong to ridicule others for their faith.[/quote]

Why?

It`s a serious question. Why do approved religions uniquely get a free pass to respect?

People freely ridicule the sillier conspiracy "theories", which have a very great deal in common with religion.

People freely ridicule unapproved religions. If, for example, I decided that planes were held up by undetectable magic pixies and worshipped them, people would ridicule me for it.

People freely ridicule other similar mindsets, e.g. a belief that vampires and werewolves are real and that Twilight is a disguised true story. Or even the much less extreme position of just being obsessed with Twilight.

So why should approved religions get such a huge free pass?
0
Reply
Male 1,949
Agnostic = non-believer (will smile and walk away from a conversation about religion)

Atheist = anti-believer (will argue to no end that there is no such thing as God)

School is now over.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
If you go by the theist redefinition of atheism, most theists are far more atheist than most atheists. There are hundreds of gods that most theists absolutely believe definitely do not exist. Most atheists are nowhere near that certain about it, even the ones who believe no gods exist.

That`s more evidence that the theist redefinition of atheism is wrong - how can a theist be more atheist than an atheist?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]According to Webster, an atheist is "one who believes that there is no deity".[/quote]

Then Webster is wrong.

There is an ongoing campaign by theists to redefine atheism in their own image. Maybe because they know that corrupting it is more effective than honestly opposing it, maybe because they are incapable of understanding that some people don`t require faith. It has had quite a bit of success. It`s still wrong.

Atheism is the absence of faith in the existence of any and all deities.

It is not faith in the non-existence of them.

Two different things. Obviously.

Some atheists have faith in the non-existence of all deities. Some don`t. Some consider it an irrelevant idea that`s neither useful nor interesting to speculate about.

And no, it doesn`t clash with agnosticism (before anyone brings that up). That`s another different thing.
0
Reply
Male 910
"atheism is just faith in the opposite direction"

^ lol, really? Last i checked atheism was (lack of belief) in a deity, not belief there is no deity.

Lern haw 2 use werds, sir
0
Reply
Male 6,070
Hate tattoos. Agree with the message but don`t agree with the display. I have no problem with people of faith until and unless they try to push their faith on me. I never try to push my lack of it on anyone and feel it`s wrong to ridicule others for their faith. The artwork on the tat is well done, but it`s still in poor taste.
0
Reply
Male 164
You should need to pass an IQ test in order to get a tattoo.
0
Reply
Male 39,614

I didn`t see `Vagina` until you pointed it out.
Now that`s all I see.
And from my perspective, that`s a bit "eww"
0
Reply
Male 434
Oh, thanks for the reminder Dixxy. I, as well, saw vagina first.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
I also saw vagina.
0
Reply
Male 434
"Atheism is just faith in the opposite direction."
-SCfan
Correct. That statement, while a clever observation, does nothing to invalidate or detract from atheism, if that was your goal.
0
Reply
Male 434
Faith is simply COMPLETE TRUST. Are you saying that you have nothing you trust completely? If so, it alone does not make you an atheist, but being an atheist is an effect of having no faith in anything. OR
All faithless people are atheists, but not all atheists are faithless people.
0
Reply
Male 434
"SCfan, atheism is the lack of faith, not faith that God doesn`t exist. I really can`t believe we`re still having this conversation."
-vVvBrock
Lack of faith causes atheism, but there is NOTHING saying atheism is more than lack of belief IN GOD. According to Webster, an atheist is "one who believes that there is no deity".
Atheism is :"a disbelief in the existence of deity". I note the word disbelief but argue that this does not imply a lack of faith. Lack of faith in a God yes, but not lack of faith. Do you not have faith in the Scientific Method? (I don`t need faith, I have fact, you will say). Atheism is something different to everyone, just like any other theism.
0
Reply
Female 269
@tyger9575

Agreed. Doubtful it`ll eve happen 100%, but here`s working towards it.
0
Reply
Male 1,793
very true but why did she have to hide the message...
0
Reply
Male 297
Hey, here`s a thought: When we all die, or the world comes to an end, some of us will be proven right and some will be proven wrong. So, can we all just shut the f*ck up and get over ourselves, already? How about we all just stop treating each other like trash dependent on beliefs, lifestyles, race, size, et cetera and just live our lives.
0
Reply
Male 438
@JetPink

I know you did not call me a non-nice individual, that is why I put "(see Sathon below)" in my post, you need to read it again. I was answering your question by basically saying the belief in god does not offend me, it is the actions that some thiests take that is offensive. Gas can be scientifically proven and demonstated, god can not. Science puts god in the same classification as invisible pixies, unproven.
0
Reply
Female 61
@otto67 I never said you were a "non-nice individual." I am a firm believer in Jesus Christ and never once did I ever call you a name. And invisibility is a science... what about glass? gases? That`s all scientific ;) Don`t be offended.
0
Reply
Male 2,085
Faith is belief not based on proof. I can`t prove to an atheist there is a God, and an atheist can`t prove to me there isn`t.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Neat tattoo, neat message
0
Reply
Male 1,754
Love it. Very cool tattoo and couldn`t agree more.
0
Reply
Male 177
SCfan, atheism is the lack of faith, not faith that God doesn`t exist. I really can`t believe we`re still having this conversation.
0
Reply
Male 346
Oh good, more posts bashing religion!

Cool tattoo, though. Whoever did it did a good job.
0
Reply
Male 438
"Atheism is just faith in the opposite direction."

No, atheism is the rejection of the claim that there is a god. There is no faith required. I would change my mind if there was any proof of god, faith is needed to believe something without proof.
0
Reply
Male 1,292
lulzy
0
Reply
Male 663
The message is kind of lame, but the concept of the tattoo is superb.
0
Reply
Male 2,855
i thought it was the santa claus of grown ups
0
Reply
Male 2,085
Atheism is just faith in the opposite direction.
0
Reply
Male 1,196
It is undeniable proof that God exists. This moron cannot be right.
0
Reply
Male 1,754
Amazingly tatto and very creative. Love the message in it.
0
Reply
Female 19
It also says vagina, right in the middle.
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"Or that the idea of an invisible being should be taught as science"

I`ve been an atheist since birth. It was about nine years (rough estimate) from birth till I started to believe in something I couldn`t see (Don`t remember if it was magnetic force, gravity, cells or atoms). I was taught this by a public school teacher, and loved the idea. Yeah, teaching creation at public schools is a horrible idea.
0
Reply
Male 438
"if God doesn`t exist, why do people get so offended?"

I am not offended that people believe in god(s), I am offended when people that believe in god(s) say that those who disagree are non-nice individuals and that by extension those who do believe are nice(see Sathon below). Or that athiests shouldn`t be considered citizen`s (1st Pres. Bush) Or that the idea of an invisible being should be taught as science, ect., ect., ect.
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"I`ll be honest, kids believing in Santa Claus doesn`t really bother me."

You`re not a kid anymore either though. If you didn`t at least know of a couple of kids who argued the existence of Santa Claus, you didn`t know many kids growing up.
0
Reply
Female 1,203
yeah that`s cool
0
Reply
Female 61
I only have one point... if God doesn`t exist, why do people get so offended? I`ll be honest, kids believing in Santa Claus doesn`t really bother me. What gets me mad is people saying Optimus Prime isn`t real. Because he really is :) I think he is hot!
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]This should be at least as annoying as someone tattooing something religious on themselves. I see no difference in those two mentalities...[/quote]

I do.

Any specific god is made up by people. The statement in this tattoo is therefore demonstrably true for almost every possible meaning of `god` and definitely true for `God` because the capitalisation turns it into a name and therefore into a specific god.

You can get away with an undefined divinity as creator and claim that as being a possibility that can`t be disproven, but once you start assigning things humans made up to your god, you`re making an imaginary friend.
0
Reply
Male 1,197
oh btw, that is a sweet tat!
0
Reply
Male 1,197
Sathon
Male, 18-29, Canada
177 Posts Sunday, February 5, 2012 12:38:45 PM
Congratulations, you`ve permanently ingrained the fact that you`re an athiest into your skin! I hope you enjoy publicly displaying the fact that you`re an non-nice individual!

and how do those two go together? athiest and not nice individual? there are plenty of not nice god botherers but i am not taring you with the same feather ... now thinking that you are a dickhead after making a comment like that, is another matter
0
Reply
Male 554
@Sathon.. please tell me how many wars have been started by athiest.

You are a shallow person to think atheism has anything to do with being nice or not so nice. I`ve know plenty of "believers" and "people of faith" to think religion=nice.

Please go back to your fairy tale dreams and magical wishes.
0
Reply
Male 50
@Sathon
If you don`t believe that a supernatural entity created all of mankind, the universe, life as we know it, then you`re a non-nice individual? What does your religious belief have to do with whether your kind to others or not? Furthermore that makes the assumption all who believe in god `are` nice people. Sincerely disagree with that one.
0
Reply
Male 1,745
This should be at least as annoying as someone tattooing something religious on themselves. I see no difference in those two mentalities...
0
Reply
Male 248
Congratulations, you`ve permanently ingrained the fact that you`re an athiest into your skin! I hope you enjoy publicly displaying the fact that you`re an non-nice individual!
0
Reply
Female 1,181
it`s cool i guess, but the message is no big deal & has been said better.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
I like it. I`m not a fan of tattoos but I`d go out with her just to find out her story.
0
Reply
Male 25,417
I thought it was awesome
0
Reply
Male 3,908
0
Reply
Female 833
lol, same here honkeylips.
0
Reply
Male 9,526
Look here is the deal:

1. There is a loving God
2. God has complete and total knowledge and power
3. There is pain and suffering of innocents

You can pick two out of three. All three can not exist.

(Personally I only think one exists)
0
Reply
Male 340
I only pretend to be a good person because Priest Joe promised me I`d go to happy candy land when I die. (I`m still actually kind of an non-nice individual anyway.)
0
Reply
Male 1,586
It took me a bit to read it. At first I thought imaginary said vagina; goes to show where my mind is.
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"then what is "suffering""

HAHA. I love this argument. "Clearly, if there is no god, there can be no evil. That`s what you`re saying, right Atheist? Everything is allowed!" No douche, morality isn`t relegated to the existence of Big Brother. Evil exists regardless of omnipotence.
0
Reply
Male 2,513
Love it
0
Reply
Male 663
>>Don`t worry, heaven is imaginary too. It`s a brainwashing device to keep people tolerant of suffering and to permit the commission of atrocities.<<<

If there is no god, no supreme being, and everything happens due to the laws of the physical world; every atom moves and reacts with neighboring atoms only based on the four primary forces of nature, electrons and other subatomic particles are similarly only obeying the laws of nature, molecules, and cells, and even higher order life just behaving exactly as dictated by the laws governing the physical universe, then what is "suffering"
0
Reply
Male 153
"She better hope God doesn`t try to have sex with her like he did with Mary."

I`m betting God only does it missionary position (seems to follow, right?), in which case he wouldn`t see it, so she`s fine
0
Reply
Male 1,623
"Later, in heaven:

God: Oh hey there! whats that on your back?

Girl: Uhhh....nothing"

That is assuming humans keep their physical form in the paradise when the thin thread theists hold on to is that neither the god entity nor the paradise is physical, which has other implications I will not go into now.
0
Reply
Male 4,859
She better hope God doesn`t try to have sex with her like he did with Mary.
0
Reply
Female 676
I love it :D
0
Reply
Male 148
lol you think a girl with a tat like that would go to heaven
0
Reply
Male 15,187
I first read "God is a vagina own up"
0
Reply
Male 15,187
"Later, in heaven:

God: Oh hey there! whats that on your back?

Girl: Uhhh....nothing"

Don`t worry, heaven is imaginary too. It`s a brainwashing device to keep people tolerant of suffering and to permit the commission of atrocities.
0
Reply
Male 464
Later, in heaven:

God: Oh hey there! whats that on your back?

Girl: Uhhh....nothing
0
Reply
Male 6,070
@ nettech98,
I saw "vagina" too. Thought it was because I`m a Gynecologist.
0
Reply
Male 148
my eyes must be busted because I saw it right away

looks cool though
0
Reply
Male 61
Nah, it wasn`t that obscured, although I dunno why she`s gotta hide her love of Foster`s House... No, wait...
0
Reply
Male 1,057
While I did figure it out and won`t spoil it for the rest of you, I have to admit the first thing I saw was the word vagina in the center... lol
0
Reply
Male 45
very true.
0
Reply
Male 955
That`s awesome.
0
Reply
Male 612
god is an imaginary friend for grown ups
0
Reply
Male 25,417
Link: Tattoo Of The Day With A Hidden Message [Pic] [Rate Link] - You my have to blurr your eyes to see this one.
0
Reply