this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
744 points (95.7% liked)

Atheist Memes

6419 readers
110 users here now

About

A community for the most based memes from atheists, agnostics, antitheists, and skeptics.

Rules

  1. No Pro-Religious or Anti-Atheist Content.

  2. No Unrelated Content. All posts must be memes related to the topic of atheism and/or religion.

  3. No bigotry.

  4. Attack ideas not people.

  5. Spammers and trolls will be instantly banned no exceptions.

  6. No False Reporting

  7. NSFW posts must be marked as such.

Resources

International Suicide Hotlines

Recovering From Religion

Happy Whole Way

Non Religious Organizations

Freedom From Religion Foundation

Atheist Republic

Atheists for Liberty

American Atheists

Ex-theist Communities

!exchristian@lemmy.one

!exmormon@lemmy.world

!exmuslim@lemmy.world

Other Similar Communities

!religiouscringe@midwest.social

!priest_arrested@lemmy.world

!atheism@lemmy.world

!atheism@lemmy.ml

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 51 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Well, God in his infinite wisdom counted the day & night, obviously. One Mississippi, two Mississippi. Ah ah ah! Three Mississippies!

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 42 points 10 months ago (10 children)

Granted, it’s just a fictional book we’re talking about, but it does start off with:

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day. [Genesis 1:3-5 ESV]

So, within the fiction of the book, there was some sort of other light created before the Sun, doesn’t really make sense that there would be words for day/night/morning before the Sun existed, but maybe there was a temporary light and that created day cycles, whatever. Nitpicking the bible about literal interpretations of things in Genesis seems almost pointless though. It’s stuff that’s easy to dance around and can be hand-waved away.

The bible is probably supposed to be interpreted metaphorically in alot of parts, so pointing out semantic things like this is the equivalent of responding to a long political post with

“You’re”

As if pointing out a single grammatical flaw somehow destroys their entire argument. This was probably meant to be fluff, just someone speaking poetically about an event that nobody would ever know anything about anyways.

[–] Batman@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Also there is a an antiquated meaning of day which just means a period of time.

The Hebrew word yom translated into the English “day” can mean more than one thing. It can refer to the 24-hour period of time that it takes for the earth to rotate on its axis (e.g., “there are 24 hours in a day”). It can refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk (e.g., “it gets pretty hot during the day but it cools down a bit at night”). And it can refer to an unspecified period of time (e.g., “back in my grandfather’s day . . .”).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

So, within the fiction of the book, there was some sort of other light created before the Sun

Ah, the Silmarillion.

[–] deo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The Two Trees of Valinor were my first thought as well.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sordid@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

just someone speaking poetically about an event that nobody would ever know anything about anyways

Kinda makes me wonder whether he'd feel foolish about what he wrote if he were still alive today and had modern scientific knowledge.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 29 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There was still a directional lighting system, but it wasn't tied to an animated skybox yet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ech@lemm.ee 20 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I mean, technically, a day passing doesn't explicitly need the sun as it is a measure of the rotational speed of the Earth (ie time), not the position of the sun in the sky. The latter was/is simply used to measure the former.

[–] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago (2 children)

That's not really a fair/honest argument when the concept of a day existed long before humans knew the earth was rotating. Originally, a day was defined as the rising and setting of the sun

[–] ech@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm not really arguing anything, just pointing it out.

[–] Psychodelic@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I know. I saw it as a funny akshually moment. I used argument, for lack of a better word

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

To humans, before we discovered the concept of rotations around the sun, you are correct. But for an advanced being/race that had the power to create universes… I’m sure they understood far greater concepts than the rising and setting of the an orange fireball in the sky. 😊

[–] astrsk@kbin.run 9 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Without a reference frame, there would be no way to tell when one rotation had been completed.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What if you were omniscient?

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

then wtf were you doing wasting your time on this bullshit.

[–] Hawke@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

What about the other stars?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago (8 children)

Logic has no place in religion just like religion has no place in logic

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I read a Rabbi’s take once, that he believes Genesis 1 is based on a vision that YHWH gave to one of the prophets (it was added later than the second creation story). He argued that it’s not supposed to be envisioned from a cosmic perspective, which is something of a modern take, but a terrestrial one, as if “figuratively standing on the earth - a cloud of dust - as God forms everything around it.” So the creation of light is the sun, but the sun isn’t visible unless the sky begins to clear.

Just thought I’d share that take. I always thought it was an interesting one.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

The great thing about rhetoric is that any smart enough person can do any number of mental gymnastics to create a semi-plausible argument. But as a society we need to move away from things which aren’t grounded in reality

[–] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

this is part of what moved me from agnostic 50/50 to athiest decimal to 99decimal. Its like yeah you can rationalize and tinker and whatnot no matter what the base stuff you start with is. Granted though most of the change for me was qanon.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Marthirial@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Before the sun was created, a day was 4.97 billion years, and then the sun came up and a day was 24 hours. I see no issue with this superstition.

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

except apparently air, earth, and plants existed before the sun too.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The first day without sun the “day” was timeless so was actually say 1000000 days while the earth was formed 😂

[–] RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I know what you're aiming for but you're off by a couple of orders of magnitude still.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zloubida@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Atheists 🤝 Evangelicals

Thinking that the Bible

should be read literally

More seriously, did you know that there are two Creation stories in the Bible (in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2) and that these two stories are contradictory? But the people who added the second story did not replace the first with their own. They did not mind that the two stories contradicted each other because they knew perfectly well that these stories were allegories and were not to be read as historical accounts to be interpreted literally. Those who insist on a literal reading do not respect the will of the authors, whether God exists and is the inspiration or not.

[–] Rayspekt@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He just looked at his watch smh

[–] PrimeErective@startrek.website 2 points 10 months ago

He's got a watch with a minute hand, millennium hand, and an eon hand

[–] Zip2@feddit.uk 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I once heard that it was thought in some circles that “day” was just a mistranslation, and that the original meaning was “a period of time of unspecified length”.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)

First of all, a literal reading is not required but let's read it literally.

  1. God is all powerful. God could have made light circles (days) without the sun.

  2. If days means the time unit... Then... Where is the issue.

This is embarrassing. Like even for a meme.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Literally made light and dark and called them day and might on day one too lol.

[–] rdri@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (12 children)

God could have made light circles (days) without the sun.

For what reason was the sun created then?

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 10 months ago (10 children)

Dude, your meme is about logical consistency of the bible. To test for logical consistency, you have to assume it is true to test it against itself.

Also I am not a believer, so I don't believe it is true... But I can argue in favor of something that I am not believing. A basic skill that people need for scientific process.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] LaterRedditor@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Pale Blue Dot was such an amazing read.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Never read it. But I have read Contact. It was really good. 👍

[–] Persen@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›