cough cough christians cough cough. not oc, still cool.. No , retard, Thomas Aquinas (aka the father of modern Christian theology) said that about Christianity Ibn Rushd said that about Islam Moses Maimonedes said it


Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #131 to #124 - koi (03/01/2013) [-]
i laughed way harder over this picture than i should have
User avatar #138 to #131 - rhiaanor (03/01/2013) [-]
just so you know.... THIS ISNT A JOKE, this is seriously what a man said(im pretty sure that it was real and not a comedy sketch)
#146 - BeardOfJesus (03/01/2013) [-]
come at us bro.
#149 - rza (03/01/2013) [-]
I'm catholic and believe that God made evolution.
#158 to #149 - thepalmtoptiger (03/01/2013) [-]
**thepalmtoptiger rolled a random image posted in comment #3135618 at My Little Pony fanfiction, backgrounds, songs, lyrics, and GIFs. **   
JK, I don't really care.
**thepalmtoptiger rolled a random image posted in comment #3135618 at My Little Pony fanfiction, backgrounds, songs, lyrics, and GIFs. **

JK, I don't really care.
#167 to #149 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
So did I, but then I woke up.
#193 to #149 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
I was catholic when I was a teen and (ok I was stupid) I thought that God just made the universe and left it just like that... humans came to existence and he/she was like: "Ok, ok cool... let's see how this goes" you know...
I used to think a lot about it....
User avatar #264 to #149 - thesovereigngrave (03/02/2013) [-]
And that's actually pretty much the Catholic Church's official position on the matter.
#155 to #149 - bakuraandmarik (03/01/2013) [-]
**bakuraandmarik rolled a random image posted in comment #36 at Buttplug? **
yay I'm not the only one, I also don't believe in the bible it's been translated into so many different languages it's hard for things not to get mixed up
#156 to #155 - rza (03/01/2013) [-]
Exactly, Such as David and Goliath. The average height back then was way smaller then it is now, David being average and Goliath being around 6'9 or 6'10 would be huge for them.
User avatar #153 to #149 - sketchE ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
ill allow it. we cant really explain how mutations occur so why not. also darwin was a devout christian
User avatar #162 to #153 - nimba (03/01/2013) [-]
Darwin reportedly lost his faith towards the end of his life, making a rift between him and his wife, Emma.

Just what I heard

Also he probably figured out the problem with marrying your first cousin.
#177 to #162 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
I believe he lost his faith right about the same time his daughter died, but don't quote me on that.
User avatar #165 to #162 - sketchE ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
well yeah when the entire religious community that tells you to be a good person is telling him to die in a fire because he presented a slightly differeny opinion who wouldnt. its like how i lost my faith after my dads family couldnt come together to remember him at his funeral. they let their personnal squabbel outwiegh remembering who they lost
User avatar #197 to #165 - nimba (03/01/2013) [-]
Dude, you've perpetuated the misconception that Darwin was completely ridiculed for his notion. His key work 'On the Origin of Species' was received fairly better than most people seems to think. Also many contemporary Christians including ministers etc accept the idea and work their material around it.
User avatar #217 to #197 - sketchE ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
hm well disregard then
User avatar #192 to #165 - mistercookie ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
I think thats on your family. You shouldn't lose faith in religion because your family couldn't get together for a funeral.
User avatar #220 to #192 - sketchE ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
i didnt have a lot of faith as it was but the entire affiar including how his service was more of a song and dance lead by people who didnt actually know him then a rememberence. it just all felt wrong
#270 - saturated (03/02/2013) [-]
get better soon op
#277 to #270 - anon (03/02/2013) [-]
he said "cool" not "cold" you *******
User avatar #279 to #277 - neokun (03/02/2013) [-]
He coughed in the title you cock juggling **** monkey.
#27 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
No **** , retard, Thomas Aquinas (aka the father of modern Christian theology) said that about Christianity
Ibn Rushd said that about Islam
Moses Maimonedes said it about Judaism

And they said it about 800 years before the Dalai Lama

You really need to start researching before you post your retarded ********
User avatar #223 to #27 - thedarkhavok (03/01/2013) [-]
St. Thomas Aquinas was a moron.
#35 to #27 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
Evolution was proven, and all three of those religions believe in Adam and Eve being the first humans created by god.
#36 to #35 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
No they don't, I'm a catholic, and i don't believe in the story of creation. Most catholic priests don't, and the ones who do are just really stubborn
User avatar #51 to #36 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
Actually, part of being a Catholic is interpreting the Bible as allegorical

I'm not Catholic, but I know many and to think the Bible is pure fact is a ridiculous concept to them
#90 to #51 - lilRican ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
**lilRican rolled a random image posted in comment #899630 at Friendly **

Damn, george you on a ******* killing spree
User avatar #48 to #35 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
The Pontifical Academy of Sciences acknowledges evolution as a fact

So does every moderate - reform Jew and every moderate - "westernized" Muslim
User avatar #170 to #35 - mistercookie ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
Im just pointing out that the catholic church has accepted both the theory of evolution, AND the big bang theory. However, we believe that someone was behind all of these things, and that being is whom we refer to as god.
User avatar #38 to #35 - doctorhaxonefour (03/01/2013) [-]
And how exactly has evolution been proven? Not necesarily trying to be a Christian douche, just wondering how you cover up all of the missing links.
User avatar #176 to #38 - mistercookie ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
Im just sayain here, the theory of evolution is actually accepted as scientific fact. It's name "Theory" does not actually mean it litterally IS a theory, just like the germs theory, which states that microorganisms exists, which HAS been proven but it is still called a theory.

Source: Wikipedias list over common misconceptions.
#46 to #38 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
The missing links arguments are the ********* arguments ever since no matter how many links are found you will keep asking for the other ones. I swear with this rational you would expect that for evidence to prove someone was shot people would want a picture of the bullet taken every .0001 seconds showing it flying through the air, then more pictures as it fragments when it enters the body.
#37 to #35 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
They can't prove evolution, only provide substantial evidence that makes it the most appropriate theory given the evidence. It has currently not been proven.
#76 to #37 - triszious (03/01/2013) [-]
If you're going by that standard then you could say that every theory and fact isn't proven as there's still more to be discovered within those fields. There's one thing though, I believe it's called... what was it again?   
oh right, COMMON SENSE. ^^'
If you're going by that standard then you could say that every theory and fact isn't proven as there's still more to be discovered within those fields. There's one thing though, I believe it's called... what was it again?

oh right, COMMON SENSE. ^^'
#79 to #76 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
To be honest common sense has little place in science anymore. Yes for most people it's a necessity but now when it comes to advancing science common sense gets thrown out the window with relativity and quantum mechanics
#44 to #27 - swiftykidd **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#92 to #44 - theinvisibletheift (03/01/2013) [-]
Protestants don't know what the hell they're talking about, though. Catholicism (Thomas Aquinas' theology) actively recognizes that evolution is solid theory. How the hell do we know how God created things? Evolution could have been the vehicle for the creation of life on Earth. The Big Bang, similarly.

I, personally, believe that there is no complete truth without elements of both. There is no science without God (after all, how could any of this started without a prime, original creator), and there is no God without science (for why would God have created a completely lawless and wholly mysterious thing only governed by Himself? The world has an order, the universe has laws. He operates outside the laws, but we still can observe things about our constrained universe).
#52 to #44 - misteryman (03/01/2013) [-]
i think you need to look up the definition of the word most in the dictionary before you use it again
User avatar #49 to #44 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
>as an excuse

To paraphrase Ibn Rushd: "When reason conflicts with Scripture, we must change our interpretation of the Scripture"

This is a mantra followed by all non fringe theists

That's like saying "The scientists say specific conditions produce this effect as an excuse to say they can't prove it"
#53 to #49 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
Nearly 50% of americans are fringe theists then
User avatar #54 to #53 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
Wow, I like that number that you pulled out of your ass

What other kinds of stuff do you have up there?
#58 to #54 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
Gallup polls have shown that 46% of americans believe the earth was created within the last 10000 years.
User avatar #59 to #58 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
In 1997

In 2010 it was 40% and the number is swiftly declining
#60 to #59 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]

Most recent gallup poll was 2012 with 46%
#67 to #58 - dwarfman (03/01/2013) [-]
Yes and Gallup stated Romney would come to power with a Red congress. Obviously a reliable estimate of the true opinions of the country.
Yes and Gallup stated Romney would come to power with a Red congress. Obviously a reliable estimate of the true opinions of the country.
#73 to #67 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
It isn't the most reliable source of information but even if it was only 30% that would mean there are still 100 million americans who believe that the earth is 10000 years or younger which is ridiculous.
#72 to #66 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
I would agree except that it's more than a "few" nut bags who do the whole religion vs science thing in America.
User avatar #89 to #27 - rifee (03/01/2013) [-]
true, still it doesn't matter because noone actually follows what Thomas said.
User avatar #96 to #89 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
All Catholics do, and that includes most Eastern Orthodox people as well

Only backwoods Protestants don't (not all Protestants, just the uneducated ones)

Consequently, America was founded so that Protestants could practice without persecution (literally and figuratively) which is why many Americans disregard his teachings and why it seems like most people don't follow it
User avatar #98 to #96 - rifee (03/01/2013) [-]
I learned something today.
I feel shame and joy
User avatar #100 to #98 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
You shouldn't feel any shame, the only reason I lashed out at OP was because the content, or at least its title was very derogatory.

I have no problem with defending your beliefs as long as you're not an asshole about it
User avatar #101 to #98 - breadnsteak (03/01/2013) [-]
America is very much pro-Christianity but very anti-Catholic always has and always will be,
We have only had one Catholic President and he was elected by dead people in the Chicago area
#40 to #27 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
the difference lies in that judaism and islam don't actually follow the belief, but i actually think the dalai lama meant it. And he is in a position to change it. So b efore you go calling people retarded, think of the implications of what you think you know.
User avatar #50 to #40 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]
>not considering reform Jews or moderate Muslims

Just because a small, uneducated fringe believes something doesn't mean the entire religion does
#88 to #27 - breadnsteak (03/01/2013) [-]
Yay I am happy to find someone who reads Thomas.
I have posted his stuff in the past in Science V. Religion debates and no one bothers to listen.

User avatar #99 to #88 - mynameisgeorge (03/01/2013) [-]

I don't really consider myself religious, but I believe that every religion has something valuable to teach, which is why I'm always trying to defend religion, whether it is theistic or non-theistic... It just so happens that Christianity is the religion that is most often under fire, due to its large following, so Aquinas is the one I quote most
User avatar #246 to #99 - buthow (03/02/2013) [-]
User avatar #250 to #246 - mynameisgeorge (03/02/2013) [-]
User avatar #253 to #250 - buthow (03/02/2013) [-]
So how are you? :D
User avatar #256 to #253 - mynameisgeorge (03/02/2013) [-]
Great, yourself?
User avatar #259 to #256 - buthow (03/02/2013) [-]
great, thanks! Just about to take a nap. Got on and saw your post, thought I'd say hi. <3
User avatar #260 to #259 - mynameisgeorge (03/02/2013) [-]
Yeah, I accidentally a *********

Well, if you're taking a nap, rest well.
User avatar #263 to #260 - buthow (03/02/2013) [-]
thats alright, if it makes you feel better, I completely agree with you.

Oh, and thank you!
#63 - matriarch (03/01/2013) [-]
technically it is impossible to prove or disprove god as you would have to be all knowing and be able to search the entire cosmos. It's comparable to trying to prove or disprove the multiverse (infinite universe) theory it simply comes down to if you believe in it or not.

not saying i believe in god, just saying that belittling christians wont get you anywhere.
#65 to #63 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
It's fallacious to say "you can't disprove it" because then you have to believe everything just because you can't disprove it, that's why we don't automatically accept things without evidence. So no, believers and nonbelievers are not on the same ground.
#127 to #65 - asderition (03/01/2013) [-]
No, this statement is wrong. If it CAN be proved and you believe otherwise, then that is being wrong and ignorant. If it cannot or has not yet been proved and you believe otherwise, that is called opinion. Its like if I say your favorite color is green. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I can believe what i want till you prove me otherwise and KungoFuZero (fag) can try and disprove me all he wants, but if he doesn't know, he is wrong too. Until you PROVE to me it isn't green. The point is that, if it CAN be proven it has to be to be accepted as right, or wrong. This is the basis of Christianity. It isn't in fact. It is on faith. So believers and nonbelievers ARE on the same ground. You are just so set on your own ideals that you judge more than actual believers. Which is ironic. And hypocritical. And funny. Keep it up.
#91 to #65 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
I can prove that you're a dumbass and we'll all believe that.
#74 to #65 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
Funnyjunk logic: I don't have a reasonable argument so I will instead thumb you down.
#87 to #74 - batwill **User deleted account** (03/01/2013) [-]
True, but I think nonsensical attempts at argument warrant red thumbs.
#114 to #65 - KungFuZerO (03/01/2013) [-]
You are absolutely right.
dont listen to the faggots who are thumbing you down
User avatar #104 to #63 - Deeticky (03/01/2013) [-]
The burden of proof is on those who make claims, not those who deny them.

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

-Christopher Hitchens
#135 to #63 - mikli ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
If what you are saying is true, then you must be god to disprove god. Oh me why.
If what you are saying is true, then you must be god to disprove god. Oh me why.
#236 - thedarkestrogue (03/01/2013) [-]
If everyone is made in God's image, then how come I'm such a huge faggot?
If everyone is made in God's image, then how come I'm such a huge faggot?
#276 to #236 - anon (03/02/2013) [-]
because the faggot part was up to you. Free will brah.
#314 to #276 - anon (03/02/2013) [-]
Or maybe... God is pretty flamboyant...

Also, free will is an illusion.
User avatar #134 to #130 - justinitforthecorn (03/01/2013) [-]
Shrek is love. Shrek is life.
#70 - dwarfman (03/01/2013) [-]
Always liked this dude.
Always liked this dude.
User avatar #115 - patrickmiller (03/01/2013) [-]
Actually the pope looked at evolution said "Yeah there is literally no one this is false, all the evidence is here." and Decreed to the whole Catholic church that evolution is fact and explained how it fits into the Catholic religion and that it does not contradict it's teachings, so They do change when Science proves them wrong.
User avatar #152 to #115 - slumberdonkey (03/01/2013) [-]
It took over 400 years for the catholic church to apologize for what they did to Galileo. Go **** yourself.
#128 to #115 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
Yeah because using condoms totally gives you AIDS.
User avatar #137 to #128 - patrickmiller (03/01/2013) [-]
No the Pope said you can use condoms if you use them to protect yourself from STDs and not mainly as a contraceptive
User avatar #142 to #137 - unggoy (03/01/2013) [-]
" Pope Benedict XVI explained that Aids is a tragedy "that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems". In May 2009,"

A quote from a guardian article.
User avatar #147 to #142 - patrickmiller (03/01/2013) [-]
"But Lombardi's comments show that the pope approves of condom use as a lesser evil where there was a risk of HIV contagion."
#148 to #147 - unggoy (03/01/2013) [-]
Seems like political backpedalling to me personally, but oh well, you win this round patrickmiller.
#150 to #148 - patrickmiller (03/01/2013) [-]
I finally did it. I finally beat someone!
I finally did it. I finally beat someone!
#123 - killerblue (03/01/2013) [-]
I use this picture a lot.....
#103 - gibroner (03/01/2013) [-]
somebody mentioned religion on the internet again
somebody mentioned religion on the internet again
#23 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
I'd like to just say maybe you shouldn't link all Christians together. LDS people believe in science as well as christ. Just saying.
User avatar #107 to #23 - pokemonstheshiz (03/01/2013) [-]
I read that as "LSD people." That was a scary though
User avatar #13 - Crusader (03/01/2013) [-]
It's sad, he might be the final Dalai Llama
User avatar #14 to #13 - satrenkotheone ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
How so? Cause of the Chinese?
User avatar #81 to #14 - Crusader (03/01/2013) [-]
The Dalai Llama is the head of Tibetan Buddhists, not all Buddhists.
The next Dalai Llama is born immediately, or soon after the previous Dalai Llama dies, much like the Avatar in the show series (the Avatar is based off of the Dalai Llama, airbenders and Buddhists, etc. FYI)
This child is Tibetan, he will be born and raised there, they won't know he is the Dalai Llama until he is a year or two old, at which point they will select a series of things belonging to previous Dalai Llamas and other random belongings of no importance and tell him to take his things.
If the child chooses the things belonging to the Dalai Llama, they believe he is the next incarnation and take him and raise him and teach him, separated from family and earthly attachments (much like with Aang in TLA)
Tibetan Buddhism is restricted to just a single area, Tibet (obviously)
Since Tibet no longer exists, having been taken over by China, the Dalai Llama has fled to India (much like Aang fled to the South Pole during the Air Nomad Massacre) and therefore, no more Tibetan children can be born, and therefore no more Dalai Llamas.

The Dalai Llama has spoken on the topic many times, usually saying things like "The teachings of the Buddha are no longer meant for one teacher to tell, and with Tibet no longer existing, the time of the Dalai Llama is coming to an end"
This has led to an uproar among Tibetans, Buddhists and Humanists, claiming that "It is your ancient duty to come back and enlighten the world. You can't choose to just leave" because the entire point of the Dalai Llama is to keep coming back to teach the world until everyone is enlightened. So many theorize that when Kundun (the current Dalai Llama) dies, the next incarnation will come form the Buddhist Belt that winds through southern Asia.

TLDR - China invaded, Tibet no more, Dalai Llama has to be born in Tibet
#95 to #81 - lilRican ONLINE (03/01/2013) [-]
**lilRican rolled a random image posted in comment #780875 at Friendly **   
Tis a shame...
**lilRican rolled a random image posted in comment #780875 at Friendly **

Tis a shame...
User avatar #93 to #81 - aussiepridevil (03/01/2013) [-]
i'm sorry but Tibet hasn't always been a sovereign nation, it has been part of other empires territory's before, the dalai lama will still be born as there will always be Tibetans, but on a legal document he will now be Chinese as Tibet is part of china, but this doesn't change the fact that there is still Tibet living there.

it's not like avatar where all the airbenders died, the chinese didnt massacre all the tibetans to "stop the dalai lama from returning"
User avatar #97 to #93 - Crusader (03/01/2013) [-]
Yes, but any given point in history, there has been some pocket that has evaded the invading force and remained a separate nation.
But other than that, the main problem comes from the Chinese government saying that only they have the right to choose the Dalai Llama now.
Not to mention that Tibetan Buddhism isn't even practiced in Tibet anymore due to the prolonged atheistic oppression by the communists.
User avatar #47 to #14 - revanmal (03/01/2013) [-]
I don't find it sad. Before he was exiled, the Dalai Lama was the head of a theocratic oligarchy. The priest class ruled over the peasant class like feudal lords, with a huge gap in power and no chance of it changing. It was like the Dark Ages over there. Tibet rebelled against China's oppression for a while, but when they offered to let the exploitation continue, the Dalai Lama gave up Tibet's independence for the sake of his own power.

It wasn't until Beijing stopped tolerating their theocracy that the Dalai Lama adopted a stance of democracy and equality, when he fled to India to escape the oppression of Tibet. Don't be fooled by his message, the Dalai Lama's not a saint by any means.
User avatar #77 to #47 - Crusader (03/01/2013) [-]
I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
The Dalai Llama was a religious leader, Tibet was not a theocracy, yes the Dalai Llama was at the head, but he was subject to a council that aided him, he was no more powerful in Tibet as the President is in the USA, he was a figurehead, with everything else decided by committees and councils.
There were no "feudal lords" that would imply that there was almost constant fighting for land and resources, but there wasn't, Tibet was quite peaceful except for the Chinese interfered.
China invaded and the Dalai Llama fled purely for the fact that he was the Dalai Llama, it would be like the Pope fleeing Italy if Russia invaded.
The current Dalai Llama has always supported democracy, to the point where he was actively trying to change Tibet into a democratic state with the Dalai Llama being the head of Religious affairs, equal to the President/Prime Minister.
You make the Dalai Llama out to be some tyrant bent on domination, when the entire teaching system of Buddhism is peace and equality.
#56 - anon (03/01/2013) [-]
Bit less of religious beating (christians here) and a bit more of tolerance. Atheist bigots are ruining this page for all of us that don't care for this kind of offenses and debates.
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)