this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
1762 points (97.4% liked)

Microblog Memes

5792 readers
2640 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Shizrak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In the simplest possible terms: people do not come back from the dead. That is an impossible thing.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Shizrak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Logic and reason from billions of people's shared experiences on the earth.

Feel free to die and return and prove me wrong.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So, you're saying Jesus didn't rise from the dead because it's impossible. And that we know it's impossible because nobody's risen from the dead, which should include Jesus because you reject that he rose from the dead because it's impossible.

Isn't this circular reasoning?

[–] Shizrak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sure. Whenever discussing religion one will fall into circular reasoning, because faith itself is circular reasoning. One cannot use logic or reason to get out of a position that logic and reason did not get them into.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

How is faith circular reasoning?

[–] Shizrak@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And forgive me for my use of "impossible" earlier, that's not my position.

"Highly improbable" is a way better qualifier.

Not going to edit it because it ruins the context.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well, it is highly improbable, because only a few people have, either by this aforementioned person or himself. And it requires supernatural powers.

[–] Shizrak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Right, and it's much more likely that some true stories about a great dude got exaggerated a little bit over 2000 years, and vanishingly less likely that magic is real.

But both are absolutely possible.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 1 month ago

The Jesus we believe in was written about 2000 years ago. Our beliefs haven't changed.

[–] Shizrak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You believe because you believe.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Then our belief in anything can be put to circular reasoning

[–] Shizrak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not exactly. Some things can be proven. But regarding things that happened thousands of years ago? Yeah that's just everyone's best guess and personal beliefs.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We can't prove that anne frank existed though. Those videos of her could have been an actress. The story could have been an elaborate rouse. Etc, etc

You believe that anne frank existed because you believe that she existed, etc, etc

[–] Shizrak@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Odd example but correct, we cannot know with absolute certainty. But her story doesn't feature magic, so it's much easier to believe.