straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be “attacking a straw man”.
Calling somebodies god a sky daddy or invisible sky friend is not a fundamentally different thing than calling it god. It is disrespectful, but not a strawman. Nobody is questioning your belief in your god, they are just mocking it.
To give you an example of what actual strawman fallacy looks like, here is one from wikipedia again:
Another example of a strawman argument is U.S. president Richard Nixon’s 1952 “Checkers speech”.[13][14] When campaigning for vice president in 1952, Nixon was accused of having appropriated $18,000 in campaign funds for his personal use. In a televised response, based on Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Fala speech, he spoke about another gift, a dog he had been given by a supporter:[13][14]
It was a little cocker spaniel dog, in a crate he had sent all the way from Texas, black and white, spotted, and our little girl Tricia, six years old, named it Checkers. And, you know, the kids, like all kids, loved the dog, and I just want to say this right now, that, regardless of what they say about it, we are going to keep it.
This was a straw man response; his critics had never criticized the dog as a gift or suggested he return it. This argument was successful at distracting a number of people from the funds and portraying his critics as nitpicking and heartless. Nixon received an outpouring of public support and remained on the ticket. He and Eisenhower were later elected.
It’s a metaphor. The Abrahamic god is not technically in the sky, but he has been called the almighty father and heaven has been represented to be in the clouds enough times even if technically isn’t that everyone understands what “Sky daddy” means. It’s a derogatory term, sure, that’s the point. The term being derogatory doesn’t make it a strawman though.
It’s an insult and the Abrahamic god isn’t a protected individual so whatever.
Actually, supposing that God exists somewhere above us in the clouds physically makes much more sense than God living literally everywhere at once, while also living outside of our universe, and also living as a physical person 2,000 years ago, and also living in the past, and the future all at once.
“Sky daddy” is extremely charitable all things considered.
Cannibalism of zombie wizard. And before you dismiss it away as “strawman”, please carefully explain how transubstantiation during the Eucharist is not:
magic
cannibalism
We can use whatever terms you like. But I will draw a hard line at consuming human flesh and calling it anything other than cannibalism. Either it literally happens and that is pretty fucking gross, or it doesn’t in which case the whole point is moot and crazy to think it does happen.
we are eating the body of Christ and drinking the blood of Christ. Not in the cannibalism way tho, and “magic”, say, is anything supernatural right? God cannot be comprehended by us, and nothing happens that is supernatural, but just out of our understanding of nature.
and Jesus wasnt a wizard. He was and is the son of God
Jesus Christ proclaimed at the last supper “this is my body, eat”
because the crucifixion was nigh, and he was literally sacrificing himself for our sins so we may reap what we did not sow
You have not explained why eating the flesh and blood of another human is not cannibalism.
God cannot be comprehended by us, and nothing happens that is supernatural, but just out of our understanding of nature.
So does the transubstantiation happen? Does that little cracker turn into some Jesus liver pate? Does that thimble sip of wine turn into O-neg blood? According to catholic.com (a reputable source, right?), it literally happens.
and Jesus wasnt a wizard. He was and is the son of God
He wasn’t a wizard? Someone who exercises supernatural powers? You know who else was the son of a god? Hercules. He wasn’t really a wizard tho, so plus one to Jesus, I guess.
he was literally sacrificing himself for our sins so we may reap what we did not sow
For an immortal godbeing to be inconvenienced for a weekend doesn’t seem like much of a sacrifice. Let’s assume it actually happened. The whole torture, crown of thorns, spikes in the hands/feet (nevermind that wouldn’t actually pin a human to an actual crucifix), it was what? A day or two all together? If this was nearly 2000 years ago, that’s like 730,000 days ago. So let’s say five days total: 2 of the dying, 3 of being dead in a tomb (long weekend). Five days out of 730,000. Is it really a sacrifice?
“sky daddy” is a strawman, because youre perverting the belief to make it seem crazy
No, that is not an example of a strawman argument
it is, because its making a strawman out of the beliefs and arguments of the church to make it easier to attack
Look, I will quote wikipedia for you:
Calling somebodies god a sky daddy or invisible sky friend is not a fundamentally different thing than calling it god. It is disrespectful, but not a strawman. Nobody is questioning your belief in your god, they are just mocking it.
To give you an example of what actual strawman fallacy looks like, here is one from wikipedia again:
No it doesn’t
👁️👁️
🫎
It’s a metaphor. The Abrahamic god is not technically in the sky, but he has been called the almighty father and heaven has been represented to be in the clouds enough times even if technically isn’t that everyone understands what “Sky daddy” means. It’s a derogatory term, sure, that’s the point. The term being derogatory doesn’t make it a strawman though.
It’s an insult and the Abrahamic god isn’t a protected individual so whatever.
Actually, supposing that God exists somewhere above us in the clouds physically makes much more sense than God living literally everywhere at once, while also living outside of our universe, and also living as a physical person 2,000 years ago, and also living in the past, and the future all at once.
“Sky daddy” is extremely charitable all things considered.
Well, Duh, hes God. Hes not restrained to space and time
That’s what makes it more insane, not less.
omnipotence, please research it
Lol. I know what it means, I’m suggesting its more insane than a sky daddy.
It literally is crazy. What is ’god’ other than the father of everything (daddy) living in the sky?
Also, finally fucking research what a strawman is.
heaven is not “the sky” and the CREATOR and the Eternal Father, not daddy
Cannibalism of zombie wizard. And before you dismiss it away as “strawman”, please carefully explain how transubstantiation during the Eucharist is not:
We can use whatever terms you like. But I will draw a hard line at consuming human flesh and calling it anything other than cannibalism. Either it literally happens and that is pretty fucking gross, or it doesn’t in which case the whole point is moot and crazy to think it does happen.
we are eating the body of Christ and drinking the blood of Christ. Not in the cannibalism way tho, and “magic”, say, is anything supernatural right? God cannot be comprehended by us, and nothing happens that is supernatural, but just out of our understanding of nature.
and Jesus wasnt a wizard. He was and is the son of God
Jesus Christ proclaimed at the last supper “this is my body, eat” because the crucifixion was nigh, and he was literally sacrificing himself for our sins so we may reap what we did not sow
Nonsense response. What is the definition of cannibalism? Here, let me provide a link: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cannibalism
You have not explained why eating the flesh and blood of another human is not cannibalism.
So does the transubstantiation happen? Does that little cracker turn into some Jesus liver pate? Does that thimble sip of wine turn into O-neg blood? According to catholic.com (a reputable source, right?), it literally happens.
He wasn’t a wizard? Someone who exercises supernatural powers? You know who else was the son of a god? Hercules. He wasn’t really a wizard tho, so plus one to Jesus, I guess.
For an immortal godbeing to be inconvenienced for a weekend doesn’t seem like much of a sacrifice. Let’s assume it actually happened. The whole torture, crown of thorns, spikes in the hands/feet (nevermind that wouldn’t actually pin a human to an actual crucifix), it was what? A day or two all together? If this was nearly 2000 years ago, that’s like 730,000 days ago. So let’s say five days total: 2 of the dying, 3 of being dead in a tomb (long weekend). Five days out of 730,000. Is it really a sacrifice?