this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2025

195 points (93.7% liked)

Not The Onion

17963 readers

1199 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

195

Catholic church canonises its first gamer saint, and one of his favourite games was Halo (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 1 day ago by kennedy@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 45 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club 8 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (3 children)

Huh, seems it's like ~~an attraction~~ a pilgrimage site:

They've added 15 saints in 2024? Usually less per year tho.
wiki/List_of_Catholic_saints

[–] Nangijala@feddit.dk 3 points 23 minutes ago

They made merch, omfg 🤣 I despise this shit.

Also:

Acutis also created a popular website documenting miracles as a means of spreading the Catholic message, which is what led to the nickname of "God's influencer."

I can't.🥲

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 hours ago

good god that makes me gag

[–] kennedy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

cant remember where i saw it but young people are joining less and less i guess its their way of trying to connect to the "youths". Its such a spectacle.

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club 4 points 3 hours ago

By using the exact same model as for non-youths.
Yeah.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 hours ago

how do you do, fellow kids?

[–] Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

Our destruction was the will of their god, and he was its instrument.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 points 9 hours ago

How is this strange? It was going to happen eventually and it will continue to happen

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 78 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The kid spread religion online. God killed him for it. Pope makes him a saint. God facepalms and says "How many more kids do I have to kill to show you that you should stop wasting time in church and just be a good person".

[+] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -8 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Then that god stops existing because there's no evidence for a god which acts like that

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 7 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

There's no evidence for God period, so your "because" doesn't support your statement. Of course you also don't seem to understand basic logic. The lack of evidence never "proves" anything. The presence of evidence "may" prove things.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Plenty of evidence for god killing whoever the fuck he wants because he feels like it.

Source: the bible

[+] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Okay, and? God creates, He can destroy what He made as well.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 7 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

You moved the goalposts lol.

You said "there's no basis for that" I countered with "yes there is" You countered "so"

So, you're wrong. Also,

My partner and I made our son.

We now have a moral basis for killing him whenever we feel like it.

[+] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -10 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

No, you're not reading the whole message. What I was referring to was "you should stop wasting time in church and just be a good person"

My partner and I made our son.

No you didn't. God gave you a son.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 6 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes, I know what you were referring to, I know how nested comments work.

Now, what I was referring to was:

there's no evidence for a god which acts like that

Now, you want to claim that God would not kill people for not going to church.

Cool, but even if he DID. It STILL wouldn't be on the top 10 most fucked up things which HIS OWN BOOK says he did, or has plans to do. Not even including the moral imperative to kill whoever the fuck he wants because 'he created them' (what even is this argument...)

But i digress;

God gave you a son.

No, bro, I'm almost certain I was the one who got my partner pregnant.

My partner and I did make our son lol, ive got DNA evidence.

If you want to claim God gave me a son, then you'll first have to convince me God exists.

Can you do that?

[+] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -7 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

God wouldn't kill people for going to church. That's what I said.

wouldn't be on the top 10 most fucked up things which HIS OWN BOOK says he did,

Yeah because such a list would be empty

My partner and I did make our son lol, ive got DNA evidence.

So you drew out the schematics? decided what hair to put where? Pieced each bone into it's place? Set the colour of his eyes? Drew out his fingerprints? Laid down each muscle and wired each nerve?

Can you do that?

Can you be convinced? What evidence would you expect to have to convince you? Some people cannot be convinced that the earth is round, that climate change is real, evolution is a real observable process of nature or that vaccines are safe and effective.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 4 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Yeah because such a list would be empty

Empty? You’ve clearly never read your own book. Here’s just a taste:

The Flood – God drowns almost every human, animal, and child on Earth (Genesis 7).
The Plagues of Egypt – including killing the firstborn of every Egyptian family (Exodus 12:29).
Ordering Genocide – wiping out the Amalekites, including infants and animals (1 Samuel 15:3).
Lot’s Wife – turned to salt for the crime of looking back (Genesis 19:26).
Killing Kids for Mockery – sending bears to maul 42 children for calling Elisha “baldy” (2 Kings 2:23-24).
Hardening Pharaoh’s Heart – deliberately making him resist so God could “show His power” by killing more people (Exodus 9:12).
Jephthah’s Daughter – forced human sacrifice of his own child to fulfill a vow to God (Judges 11:30-39).
David’s Census Punishment – God slaughters 70,000 Israelites because David counted them (2 Samuel 24:15).
Job’s Torture – God lets Satan kill Job’s children and ruin his life as part of a bet (Job 1-2).
Eternal Hellfire – condemning billions of people to infinite torture for finite “sins” (Matthew 25:46).

So you drew out the schematics? decided what hair to put where?

No, and neither did God. That’s the point. I provided DNA, biology did the rest. By your logic, I didn’t "make dinner" unless I forged the cutlery and mined the iron for the stove. Dumb standard.

Can you do that?

Can God? Unless you can prove he exists, you’re just putting a holy sticker on a process we understand down to the molecule.

Some people cannot be convinced...

Yeah, flat earthers, climate deniers, anti-vaxxers... and theists.

Here's the thing though, if I cannot be convinced, whose fault is that?

Because I don't believe in god that means I'll go to hell, right?

Why is it that the benchmark for being accepted into heaven is throwing away epistemic and logical foundations?

Why is it fair to throw me to down to hell because those specific qualities are universally valuable EXCEPT for when we use them to evaluate whether its reasonable to believe in God without evidence?

Doesn't God know the future? Doesn't God know that every condition that led me to this moment would cause me to reject any answer you've got for me?

Doesn't that mean he set me up to fail?

That is REALLY fucking stupid. Like, literally, definitionally stupid.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Everything you've listed are instances of God punishing evil. Are you suggesting God should let Hitler reign free in heaven without punishment? If that's the casewould you then complain that God isn't punishing evil? In many cases, you find instances of Atheists both complaining that evil currently exists, and then gets mad when it is punished! What a contradiction.

I provided DNA, biology did the rest

Where did DNA come from? Who made biology?

You made dinner with your creativity. You designed it. Is it cruel to the dinner that you will eat it and boil it in your stomach acid?

Unless you can prove he exists

One can prove, but if you're unwilling to accept proof, then that's a different story.

on a process we understand down to the molecule.

Who designed that process? And do we really understand it? Atheists cannot even answer at what point human life begins.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 6 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Everything you’ve listed are instances of God punishing evil.

Flooding babies.
Killing firstborns.
Sending bears to shred kids for saying "baldy"
Torturing Job to win a bet.

That’s not "punishing evil". that’s cosmic tantrums.

If a human did it, you’d call it evil.

You only excuse it because you slap "God" on the front. That’s divine command theory. might makes right. Which isn’t morality, it’s just fear dressed up as worship. Ironically, its the same logic which fascists like Hitler use.

are you suggesting God should let Hitler reign free in heaven?

Strawman. Nobody said "let Hitler into heaven".

But drowning toddlers and nuking towns isn’t "justice", it’s indiscriminate slaughter. If God’s only two settings are "do nothing" or "kill everyone" that’s a design flaw, not justice.

Where did DNA come from? Who made biology?

Same tired "who made X" game.

Who made God?

If you say "He always existed", then congratulations, you just admitted things can exist without being created. Which means biology doesn’t need your sky-dad either.

You made dinner with your creativity. Is it cruel to the dinner that you boil it in your stomach acid?

False analogy.

My dinner isn’t a conscious being. If I invited you over and drowned your kid in my soup "to punish evil" you wouldn’t call it dinner. You’d call the cops.

(Furthermore, I'm vegan, so my meals don't include anything which is/was a conscious being)

One can prove God exists...

Then do it.

Stop dodging. Show reproducible, testable evidence that distinguishes your God from imagination. Until then, you’re just asserting.

Who designed that process?

Nobody "designed" it. Evolution by natural selection explains complexity from simplicity, no designer required. If you think complexity requires design, explain who designed God, who is infinitely more complex.

Atheists cannot even answer at what point human life begins.

Wrong. Biology is clear: human life is a continuum, not a single magic switch. What’s disputed is when rights should be granted, which is a moral and legal question, not a scientific one. You’re just mixing categories.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Flooding babies.

Killing firstborns.

They were going to be evil otherwise.

Sending bears to shred kids for saying "baldy"

They were essentially telling Elisha to kill himself. And he used God's name in vain.

Torturing Job to win a bet.

Job is now in heaven. I don't think Job cares about the distant point in time when things were bad. That's like calling your parents cruel for banning you from videogames as a kid - although even that is more significant than what happened to Job.

You only excuse it because you slap "God" on the front. That’s divine command theory.

That's because God is God. If a pig slaughters another pig and eats it, then pigs would find that evil. Yet it's okay when a human does it.

But drowning toddlers and nuking towns isn’t "justice", it’s indiscriminate slaughter. If God’s only two settings are "do nothing" or "kill everyone" that’s a design flaw, not justice.

Oops! You didn't mention any nuking of towns 🤔

Stop dodging. Show reproducible, testable evidence that distinguishes your God from imagination. Until then, you’re just asserting

Finally, there's your goalposts. It has to be "reproducible" and "testable". Can you show me reproducible and testable evidence that Napoleon existed?

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 2 points 43 minutes ago* (last edited 37 minutes ago)

They were going to be evil otherwise.

Pre-crime executions of babies? You’re justifying mass infanticide with Minority Report. That’s not morality, that’s thought-policing unborn futures. By that logic, God should’ve killed you before you typed this comment.

They were essentially telling Elisha to kill himself.

They yelled "baldy." You’re the one rewriting it as "kill yourself" to excuse bears mauling children. Imagine standing in front of a grieving parent and saying "don't worry, your kid had it coming for making fun of a prophet’s haircut."

Job is now in heaven.

So torturing someone is fine as long as you reward them later? If I broke your legs today but promised you a PS5 in ten years, would that make me moral? This is abuse with a consolation prize.

If a pig slaughters another pig and eats it, then pigs would find that evil. Yet it's okay when a human does it.

Wrong twice.

First, might doesn’t make right. If God orders genocide, it’s still genocide. slapping “God” on it doesn’t turn evil into good.

Second, your pig analogy fails with me because I'm vegan. It isn't okay when humans slaughter pigs. You just admitted your morality boils down to "the strong can do whatever they want to the weak."

That’s not morality, that’s predation.

That’s because God is God.

Congratulations, you admitted it: divine command theory. If God ordered you to skin your child alive, you’d call it good. That’s not morality, that’s just worshiping raw power.

Oops! You didn’t mention nuking towns

Jericho, Sodom, Gomorrah. Ring a bell? The Bible is full of God wiping out entire cities. Pretending otherwise won’t erase the body count.

Reproducible and testable evidence... Napoleon.

Strawman.

We don’t need to "reproduce" Napoleon, we verify him through multiple independent sources: letters, accounts, artifacts, battlefields. If you have comparable evidence for God, written by neutral parties, corroborated by archaeology, contemporaneous, and consistent, then put it on the table.

Spoiler: you don’t.

All you’ve got is one internally contradictory book written by believers.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 61 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

if a bishop watched me code I could be the first programmer saint. There are times only god knows how my software works. Or not, in case cursing disqualifies candidates.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

TempleOS guy would be so angry

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 5 points 9 hours ago

If you pray to him and miracles happen, we can have Saint Terry the Terrible

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 10 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

My code comes from the bad place

[–] Opisek@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Let's not be so pessimistic. I'm sure it's from the middle place at least.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 48 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Candidates for sainthood require two distinct miracles attributed to them: Acutis was first beatified in 2020 after a Brazilian boy with a pancreatic defect was cured, following his mother's prayers to Acutis to help her son. The second miracle involves the reported healing of a Costa Rican girl who suffered a serious head injury after falling off her bike in Florence: her mother prayed for the girl's recovery at Acutis' tomb in Assisi, and her daughter made a full recovery.

Quite, uh, remarkable "miracles".

[–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago

I feel like maybe Acurtis 360 no scoped that girl off the bike, then came back in as a healer and brought her back to full health.

...kind of cheating.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

wait isn't it the mom who should be a saint then?

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 5 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Nah, basically, the logic is that since he allegedly healed her, that he is apparently alive in heaven and no longer in purgatory. Thus becoming a saint as his salvation has been "proven"

[–] Opisek@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

A blind study should be performed for a proper empirical proof. Sample size of two is not going to cut it either. Pump those numbers up to reach statistical significance.

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Feels like we could get two miracles attributed to that famous painter, just for shit & giggles, having a Saint Hitler would be funny (if not for the distress caused to the survivors). Other satins have a much lower kill ratios (up to a few thousand only??).

(And ofc /s, choosing saints is a completely political process addressing Church's needs.)

[–] jwt@programming.dev 7 points 1 day ago

According to Carlin's theory, 4 prayers to Joe Pesci (PBUH) should suffice for sainthood.

Joe Pesci: patron saint of smashing things with a baseball bat.

[–] PattyMcB@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I knew religion was a joke. Anyone who still refuses to admit it is a total moron

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago

Except there are still 1.4 BILLION catholics in the world, and that's just catholicism.

We may not like it, we may not get anything from it, but we should very much be concerned with what happens in the world of organized religion and what it's representing because 3/4 of the world still believe in some kind of religion.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 13 points 23 hours ago

[–] Bot@sub.community 2 points 16 hours ago

Dota 2: “God like” Dude: “Jesus helps me killing you bitches!”

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 7 points 23 hours ago

Seems like rich territory for jokes about saint Luigi