this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2023
683 points (100.0% liked)

196

16503 readers
2730 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 78 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (11 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_hypothesis

I love that. "GOD created them that way to FOOL the unbelievers! He also created the universe to appear older than it is, but we knows better!" The laws of time, space, reason, and logic bend to fit their narrative.

[–] GamesRevolution@programming.dev 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If that's the case god might as well have created everything last Thursday

[–] Andonno@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It was last Tuesday you sauceless heretic!

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 year ago

Last Thursdayists are a schism of Last Tuesdayism, and believe the universe is remade every Thursday.

[–] n3m37h@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago
[–] spicytuna62@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

I kind of subscribed to that line of thought before my deconversion. That if we believe in a god with unlimited power, he has the power to create a universe that's already 13 billion years old. But if God did that, then he'd be presenting a 6,000 year old universe as a 13 billion year old one. And doing so would make him a liar. But God doesn't tell lies? And a god capable of lying is not a god worth following. But a god that is incapable of lying is limited in his abilities. And a god limited in his capabilities is not worth following.

[–] candybrie@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Why is a god simply being capable of lying not worth following? If he's capable and chooses not to, isn't that a better god than one who can't lie?

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago

Well this god installed thirteen billion years of red-shifted light from the furthest visible stars. Last Tuesday.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Nelots@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Man, I sure do love it when our all-loving God does everything in his power to trick non-believers into further doubt so they burn in hell for eternity!

[–] Holzkohlen@feddit.de 6 points 1 year ago

What a swell guy

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 year ago

And God did all this last Tuesday.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I will not stand for Lilith erasure

[–] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago

neither will I

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 27 points 1 year ago

Not as funny as pictures of Jesus wearing a cross.

[–] smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I have a theory, but I'm betting nobody truly wants to hear it.

[–] Sabre363@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I bet it has something to do with Adam and Eve being fictional characters in the mythological texts of a bunch of hokey religions.

[–] smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Then it's more of an imagining than a theory isn't it?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Masimatutu@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] not_that_guy05@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Johanno@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago

I was the alien. I can confirm

[–] smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Humanoids already existed (think slightly more advanced Neanderthal types). Adam and Eve were both of these, but they were changed (flash of inspiration, touch of God, random mutation, take your pick) effectively elevated them above that level. (God evolved his Pokemon. LOL) So, while they were "created" as many and woman, they had a standard mammalian birth, and thus each have a bellybutton.

Just a hypothesis, nothing more. Do with it as you will.

[–] SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 year ago (8 children)

As an evolutionary biologist I promise you that this makes way more sense in your head than it makes in actual reality. This is not how evolution works.

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Well it’s a theory on divinity not evolution

[–] SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

My point is that it makes no sense in the framework of reality and that you might as well go with the literal story of Adam and Eve or whatever mythology you want, because throwing Neanderthals into the mix does fuck all in terms of making anything believable. It’s literally as scientifically justified as the Norse creation myth about a giant cow licking salty ice to uncover the gods.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Masimatutu@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The closest thing scientifically that we'll ever come to Adam and Eve is probably Y-chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LazyCorvid@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago

The labour was 7 days long. After that He invented the epidural.

[–] essellburns@beehaw.org 20 points 1 year ago

And yet when I think about it, it really doesn't seem that mad. If god is real and can make people he's certainly capable of making people with belly buttons.

[–] hrosts@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There was actually a 19th century guy who noticed this and made up a hypothesis that the reason we see so many signs of long-term natural development of Earth's features (canyons, mountains, etc.) is because God intentionally put fake evidence there, like he did with Adam and Eve's belly buttons. I think he named his book Omphalos, which means navel in Ancient Greek.

[–] rollerbang@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

Interesting, instead of acceptance, simply invent another hypothesis to "confirm" the likely uncomfirmable.

I get the "scientific" method of it though.

[–] rikonium@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 year ago

They were beta testing them, EZ

[–] dvoraqs@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

god must have hatched them from his vagina

[–] helmet91@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (7 children)

At this point I'm kinda afraid to ask, but why the hell does nowadays almost every post title on Lemmy end with "rule"?

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 26 points 1 year ago

Not lemmy, /c/196.

[–] Syrc@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s just the “196” community, which already existed on Reddit. From what I understood, the only rule is you have to post something before you leave, and put “rule” in the title. As for the reason, or why is it called like that, I’m not sure either.

[–] ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago

the titles are tradition but not a rule. it's called 196 because it's a descendent of 195. why was it called 195? 195 was created by a college student as a social experiment, and 195 was their room number. they shut down 195 when they graduated, so 196 was created

[–] soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"almost every post title on Lemmy".

I counted my feed and it was 2/30. Apparently that means "almost every" in 2023 lmao

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] velovix@hedge.town 4 points 1 year ago

The rule is that you have to post before you leave

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't the easy answer that God just created them that way?

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The paintings? Nah, those were made by people.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

Well that's even easier to explain, people are flawed and do flawed representation

[–] spicysoup@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

you know what's funny? not Charles Schulz

[–] CyberTailor@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And Jesus Christ is caucasian on european paintings, so what?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›