https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8__UWuj8Do
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsMLqCIMKhY
>>77668972
"Religion is for those who cannot think for themselves." - Richard Dawkins
A more apt quote regarding religious belief does not exist.
/thread
A quick visit to reddit affirms this.
>>77668972
WLC's is incredibly intellectually dishonest. His belief in God doesn't come from arguments, it comes from faith, because it's a "properly basic belief," so for some reason he needs no arguments.
WLC's cosmological argument defies demonstrable laws of physics. He himself admits that it implies an objective reference frame, which is totally rejected under the theory of relativity. To justify this, he invents a term, the "neo-Lorentzian view," named after a person who later admitted they were totally wrong. This is basically a term for "all the evidence contradicts my idea but I'm going to believe it anyway."
In short, he comes up with intelligent sounding terms so he can ignore evidence or avoid having to prove arguments.
Fuck William Lane Craig.
>>77668972
>Someone finally posts based WLC
Thank God Anon.
>>77669039
not an argument
We are a nationalist board.
Do you think that christcuck gives a fuck about the white race?
>>77669513
Based WLC...
yeah nah hes a conman
>>77669039
FPBP
>>77668972
Atheism is for the sheep who want to rebel against their parents.
>>77668972
Most new athiests are manchild neckbeards who don't want to assume any responsibilities. Being atheist is a way to say I don't believe in God because I want to be degenerate.
>>77669039
Dawkins is an intellectual wannabe. As stated in the video, if you read his books, they are full of fallacious garbage. There is nothing in his books that are worthy of any respect.
>>77670061
Atheism is for people who cannot think critically. Rather than say "let's investigate further" it's "It does not exist." This is a lazy way of thinking. There is nothing logical about it at all.
>>77670221
>Being atheist is a way to say I don't believe in God because I want to be degenerate.
anon why are you projecting so hard? is the only thing keeping you from being a degenerate a spooky man watching you?
>>77670970
It's just for people to conform and be in their safe place, along with peer pressure and wanting to be part of the group.
Religious is inherently ingrained in the neurophysiology of the brain and new atheism replaces old religious doctrine for conformity to group think.
>>77670970
>Rather than say let's investigate further, it's "It does not exist"
Aree you talking about the idea that questioning anything in the bible is blasphemy? Or are you beating the dead strawman that is gnostic atheism
>>77669454
"To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible."
>>77668972
If meme magic is real, does it mean that Christianity is real?
>>77671193
I am talking about the atheists inability to think.
>New Atheists
>Alt Right
What's all this meme speak?
>>77671319
Great rebuttal man. Is that WLC himself typing at me?
>>77671196
It's not the fact that he believes that's the problem. You just don't get to be a condescending twat to people who disagree if your own beliefs aren't based on arguments.
You also don't get to call others pseudo-intellectuals when you make up terms to justify anti-scientific beliefs.
It's not the faith, it's the hypocrisy that gets me.
>>77671346
Categorization... divide and conquer. The illuminati have created these terms in order to furthermore divide the people from eachother, so that they won't collectively rebel against the satanic agenda being forced onto them.
>>77669039
Although I disagree with that particular statement I will admit that Dawkins is pretty based. I think his run in with feminism red pilled him about the left, since now he generally saves most of his vitriol for Islam and is often pilloried for it.
>>77671468
Well, this is common sense. If you cannot prove a universal negative, then why would you dismiss something as "nonexistent" when it is a self-defeating proposition. The lack of evidence does not mean something does not exist. After all, can you even prove the universal nonexistence of evidence? A belief does not really require evidence unless you want someone to prove that they believe in whatever it is that they claim to believe in. In other words, asking someone to prove that something exists when they stated that they only "believe" in it's existence is a straw man. This is because they are not claiming existence, but that they "believe" that it exists. Did I dumb it down for you enough?
>>77671897
So you're an agnostic theist. I'm an agnostic atheist. Great paragraph attacking gnostics I guess?
>>77671480
>You just don't get to be a condescending twat to people who disagree if your own beliefs aren't based on arguments.
Prove it.
>>77669039
>using a quote from an authority figure to express how others can't think for themselves
I dunno if this post was supposed to be ironic or you're just retarded
>>77670970
That is a fucking retarded summation. Atheism is not a belief system. Its a lack of one. Atheists would gladly "investigate further", if there was anything to even investigate.
You are the one that does not investigate further, as you believe simply what is written, and THAT is an extremely lazy way of thinking.
You want to talk about logic? You are the one that has none. It should be common knowledge that Theists bear the burden of proof, not Atheists. They literally have to do nothing. It is your job, and only yours, to prove whatever delusions you might have, and so far, all of you have failed.
>>77668972
I'm a Deist, so why should I believe in the Bible? I've read it cover to cover and certainly find pieces of it to be interesting and insightful, but many things in there are also objectionable. I'm a deist in that I've felt the presence of and believe the presence of something which is higher than we can conceive, but I see no way to fit a formal moral framework to that divine power. It seems indifferent to me, or am I wrong? I'm open to that, but just provide me with your views.
>>77668972
>Mispronounces "intelligentsia" 11 seconds in.
>close window
>>776731 Burden of proof? Okay, I will gladly prove to you that I believe in God.
>>77673465
>Doesnt even know what the Burden of proof is
>>77669039
wew lad I guess I better start thinking the way Dawkins tells me too
>>77673192
The problem resides in the fact that you do not know the definition of "believe" or "claim." Religion is about believing in something, and not about proving whether or not it exists. Otherwise, faith wouldn't even be necessary would it?
>>77673575
No, you are just an intellectually challenged asshat.
>>77668972
>(((michael coren)))
>ancient 4:3 video
>canadian christian cts television
>nothing but argumentum ad verecundiam
sage
>>77673575
You are too dumb to even know what the claim is. If someone says "I believe in little green men" they do not have to prove that little green men exist because that is not what their claim states. They only have to prove that they "believe" in little green men. You should slap all of your teachers or professors for not teaching you logic and common sense.
>>77673192
Proof of no existence of God or shut the fuck up. You retards are just as bad as the Christians in this country.
>>77673575
>>Doesnt even know what the Burden of proof is
Implying the belief that god doesn't exist doesn't require a burden of proof. Any belief requires a burden of proof you nutless teenager.
That's why you have philosophers like Descarte who claim the only think for certain is that they think. Everything else can be a deception.
You can be agnostic on the belief of god, but a atheist firmly believes that some principle known as god does not, for certain, exist.
>>77673669
Mmm, nothing but ad homs to my reasoned argument. And you call atheists illogical? Kek
If you want to boil it all down to belief without evidence, then you are already wrong. If there is 0 evidence to point towards something's existence, there is 0 reason to believe it.
William Lane Craig is a subject of ridicule among academic philosophers all over the planet
t. Oxford philosophy graduate
He is an embarrassment why do idiot Americans always parrot him? There are plenty of decent religious philosophers around who are actually worth listening to, not this fucking charlatan
>>77674312
>If you want to boil it all down to belief without evidence, then you are already wrong. If there is 0 evidence to point towards something's existence, there is 0 reason to believe it.
There's 0 evidence that life exists outside of planet earth. Does that mean there exists 0 reason to believe it?
No.
A lack of evidence cannot disprove something. Only evidence to the contrary would be a logical reason disproof.
>>77674135
Proof of existence of God or shut the fuck up. No one has to prove your imaginary fantasies besides you.
>>77670892
The Selfish Gene hasn't been significantly improved upon since he wrote it forty years ago and is still read all over the world today
>>77674499
The simple statement is that for you to not believe in god or for me to believe in god requires us to suspend reason and cause and effect. If you live in a rational world, and you believe if i mix this chemical with that chemical, as the laws of physics dictate, there will be a consistent product of the reaction, then you have to explain the fact that in a cause and effect world, there must be a first cause.
If there is a first cause, who caused the first cause? And if the first cause is causeless, how can you live in a rational world?
>>77673192
>Atheism is not a belief system.
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought some people believed the philosophies therein.
>>77674480
That is not a valid comparison. Nor is it correct. There is plenty of evidence to support life outside of earth. Simply because we do not have the technology to explore earth-like planets we have found to verify extraterrestrial life, does not mean you can use the same argument. Modern science indicates that literally any earth-like planet, with water, is nearly guaranteed to eventually spawn life.
>>77674312
>>77674312
So what? That does not mean that it does not exist, or that I am wrong for believing that it does. Is a detective wrong for suspecting someone of a crime? Not necessarily. It depends. He/she can say "I think this person committed this crime but I cannot prove it." That statement is perfectly fine as he/she is not making a direct claim. Someone can say "I believe in upright walking humanoid creatures exists on another planet in the universe." Is that person wrong for saying that? NO! They are not claiming that they exist, they are claiming that they believe that they exist. It does not make them wrong or right. In the case of a religious belief, it is all about faith. A person has "faith" in God or that a God exists.
>want to study philosophy
>no post-secondary near me has anything but fedora edgelard instructors
Fuck Kant in any case
>>77674933
There's 0 evidence that life exists outside of out planet.
>>77668972
>thread title
>posts craig
the ironing is delicious
>>77668972
No shit, it's why I hide the fact that I'm an atheist now a days, I don't want to be lumped in with the retards that treat it like a religion.
>>77668972
lane craig is usually an idiot but he isn't stupid he outclasses most of those new atheists in discussions when it comes to philosophy and he always drags the discussion to philosophy/theology and he wont let them stay in their respected fields of science etc. But he chooses his opponents wisely, while he likes to show off his superior philosophy knowledge against scientists (darwkins, kraus, harris) he never once debated with Daniel Denett, the philosopher of the four horsemen altough there was ample opportunity.
he's right in that some of the new atheists fail horribly when they step outside of their own field
He's right in his critique of the philosophical parts of "the god delusion" which is pretty shit. I too would like that experts stick to their field and argue from that perspective, but if your opponent comes from another perspective you have to try to defend that (same goes of course for a doctor of theology who has to defend against scientific arguments)
Dumb people are going to flock to whatever is popular. That's just how it works.
Religion used to be for dumb people because dumb people grow up surrounded by religious people, so they think ''well, duh, of course god exists, what are you, a MORAN??''
Now dumb people are surrounded by people who make fun of Christians, so dumb people think ''well, duh, of course god doesn't exist, haven't you heard about evaludion??? What are you, STOOPID?''
We see the same thing with politics. Being conservative is no longer popular or cool, so conservatives are getting smarter as dumb people flee to the liberal side.
If you ever meet a conservative in 2016 they're pretty much guaranteed to be fairly smart logical people.
20 years ago if you met a conservative they were guaranteed to be a bumbling retarded braindead fuckfaces like modern liberals.
>>77674933
Right. Also, "no reason to believe" does not somehow make it nonexistent That's what is so stupid about that statement. It's like dividing by zero. Unknowns are unknowns regardless of how people try to twist the logic or the meaning. They can say "I do not believe" or "I do not believe." Obviously, the "no reason to believe" idea was created to fill a void so that they do not have to say the forbidden phrase "we don't know."
>>77674306
Agnosticism is a true cancer on vocabulary. It has obseleted atheism and replaced it with pure autism. Agnosticism says nothing about your belief in God, only about the nature of that belief. Do you believe 100% that god must not exist (in the same way that some christians believe 100% god must exist) or do you believe that God does not exist, but there is some chance that "god" does exist. Another problem with Atheist vs. theist arguments is the word "God". It is thrown around as if all "Gods" are the same being. I believe that a universal creator is likely to have created the universe, but do I believe the christian god is this creator? No. Do I believe "God" does not exist? Well, maybe, but it depends on who "God" is. Are we talking about the Christian God? In that case, I am justified in calling myself an atheist, but Christians don't want to define what they mean by god, because then they can't weasel their way from an unlikely probability (The existence of a certain Christian god) to a much more likely one, The existence of Any being who's existence breaks certain universal laws.
>>77675333
>Religion used to be for dumb people
says the opinion of another dumb person
you know youre not really smart
>>77675488
The problem stems from retards who have defined ''atheist'' as being someone who claims to have absolutely undeniable proof that God doesn't exist.
It's a strawman gone wild.
>>77674135
Proof of no existence of unicorns, dragons, magic, fairies, etc or shut the fuck up. I obviously don't have to give any evidence that they DO exist, but you have to disprove them.
>>77674985
You do not have to be able to see something to have evidence of its existence, otherwise things like black holes could be deemed "fake".
Extraterrestrial life at this point comes down to mathematics and chemical kinetics. We know the origins of life now, and that the fundamental building blocks of life can arise from non-organic compounds. Given earthlike conditions, and a time. Life WILL arise.
Can we get back the the topic at hand now?
>>77674950
You are literally just pulling out the Argument from Ignorance. Congrats. Ya really got me there! Im not denying God COULD exist, you would be stupid to say so, But because there is just as much evidence to prove that he does exist as there is that he doesn't (0), Then it makes no sense to believe something without reason.
atheist = ultimate blue pill who hasnt researched anything ever and just does drugs and shit
i was just watching a christian broadcast where they could go on for hours debating the intricacies of 1 WORD in the bible
and atheist are still talking about how agnostic hijacked their term or something and philosophy
>>77675426
Hey look, I can post shitty memes too. Am I edgy now?
>>77671796
He wants to stay in the EU so fuck that lefty tosser.
>>77675597
It's also a straw man to say that someone must prove that a God exists when they only stated that they believe in a God.
>>77676048
How can anyone hate Dawkins on /Pol/? He grills ragheads like bacon.
>>77675953
this
>>77671196
That philosophical equivalent of "lalalalala I can't hear you God is totally real!!!"
>>77676081
It's also a straw man to say that all atheists are illogical and unable to think critically when you are literally admitting they have no reason to believe what you believe.
>>77676081
In my mind the purpose of religious debates is to determine which belief is more rational. If you "believe" 2 + 2 = 5, then I suppose I cannot say that you must prove it because it is only a belief. But if you want your belief to be taken seriously and spread throughout the population (as christians do, according to the bible), then rational discussion based on evidence is perhaps the best way to determine which belief system is more rational, atheism or christianity.
>>77675894
If you have evidence that life exists outside earth, like you suggest, you should win a nobel prize.
There is NO evidence that life exists outside earth.
For all we know earth is the first planet in the universe that has created habitable forms of life. Because there are trillions of stars and planet and a mechanism that explains how life began on earth, it is not proof of life outside of earth.
Sorry. There's still 0 evidence that life exists outside of earth.
>>77668972
Pseudointellectual neckbeard redditors aren't intelligent? I'm truly shocked OP.
>>77676136
He wants to stay in the EU so he's a traitor, and anyone can tear apart Islam it's not fucking hard.
Just gonna leave this here
The title of the video is correct, but the video itself is pure bullshit. It must be quite old, because he's referring to some of the genuinely intelligent atheists as a new breed of unintellectual atheists.
Fact is, these people represented the peak of atheism. It's the people who came after who are intellectually challenged. The new athists even went so far as to reject people like Hitchens and Dawkins, because they're "racist" for the using the same logic they used against Christian zealots against feminists and muslims.
Also, the guy in the video is a lunatic.
>>77676363
This.
>>77676487
I really dont care to satisfy your red herring any longer. That is not what this thread is about.
>>77668972
good videos, thx for sharing.
I think that most "atheists" are really agnostic but latched onto the "atheist" label because it was more recognizable.
I don't believe in God, but I wish I did. I am jealous of the communities around religion and the principles therein, and my inability to replace it with anything substantive makes my life worse.
But I'm equally as unable to subdue my annoyance with spending time looking for philosophical meaning in old outdated books that talk about events that I wholly doubt as ever taking place, whose values I appreciate but the investigation of them and the discussion of them is superficial in nature. I've never heard a homily that I enjoyed.
Maybe I just need to find a better church than the one I grew up at.
>>77668972
That's because the intellectual atheists are now Gnostic or Christian because of either
a) the massive Red Polling of the past 3 years or
b) /pol/ /x/ and antiNWO Facebook pages
>>77669039
>implying Dawkins hasn't already expressed wishes that he killed Islam instead of Christianity
>>77671558
>Based Sagan
A Demon Haunted world is a based book.
>>77676487
"0 evidence" How about the immense size of the universe? Following the logic of ocham's razor, it is logical to assume that in some planets that are like earth, we are likely to find life. Just because the evidence may not be what you want it to be does not make it disappear. You said "0 evidence" so here is some evidence for you.
>>77676751
>I think that most "atheists" are really agnostic
That's not how it works, idiot.
>I don't believe in God
Then you're an atheist. Period.
You're also an agnostic.
How dumb are you people? Is it the water? Is it the food? The air?
>>77676812
>That's because the intellectual atheists are now Gnostic or Christian because of either
>a) the massive Red Polling of the past 3 years or
>b) /pol/ /x/ and antiNWO Facebook pages
Do you just randomly pull shit out of your own asshole?
>>77676663
Agreed. Todays "New Atheists" are a bunch of pathetic tools. They have an extreme bias against Christianity for some reason, yet pardon literally every other religion.
>>77676607
Kek, except usually the Christians here are as "zealous" as that Athiest
>>77676688
Maybe you need a course in logic.
Earth has life
There are planets similar to earth in the universe
There is life in the universe
Does not pass any logical test.
>>77669039
But in the end, the Bible and Jesus are still right.
>>77676928
There is life outside of earth in the universe.
>>77676607
right
>>77673192
But you can notice what beliefs, ideas, and peers atheists tend to gravitate toward, like those who embrace the "Atheism-Plus" package
>>77676844
Oh, hey Latvia. You're probably too poor to afford a dictionary, so I'll forgive the lapse in understanding the nuance within these two labels and the connotations therein.
Atheistic generally means you deny the existence of all gods, and deny the possibility of their existence out of principle.
This stands in contrast to Agnosticism, which is the denial of any gods but you are open to the possibility of a supreme being in principle.
Hope your life gets better someday so you don't have to have things explained to you on 4chan.
Cheers.
>>77676928
Maybe you need a course in English, because you don't seem to know how to read.
>actually resorting to posting videos by William Lane Craig
>mfw
No one knows what the fuck happened to get to this point. Stop wasting your time and just live your life.
>>77677126
Ever get so BTFO you go full shitposting mode and pretend to have been trolling the entire time?
>>77677291
No, but clearly you have.
>>77668972
Look up Sam Harris you stupid fuck.
>hurrrrr muh world government
10000 years in the future after the Muslim menace is wiped out you stupid fucking piece of shit
>>77676607
Have you ever seen the Catholics and Protestants go at it with each other?
>>77677291
Maybe it's because you don't come from an English speaking country, but I assure you that these labels are well-defined in the Western world.
>>77675562
>WELL YOU'RE STOOPID TOO
>>77677102
Most atheists gravitate towards the left either because they have been ostracized for their non-beliefs by the religious right (This thread), or are ex-Theists, and likewise stay away from the group that has more religious folk (The right). Atheism itself doesnt hold any tenants.
Btw. Atheism Plus is cancer.
>>77677452
Not really, since this one
>Atheistic generally means you deny the existence of all gods, and deny the possibility of their existence out of principle.
is completely wrong. Where did you get the last bit from?
>>77674588
Exactly.
Damn right motherfucker.
My genetics professor last semester suggested it.
>>77677360
>>77677452
Forgot the proxy while trying to samefag?
Why so butthurt? You don't have to save face. Just admit you were wrong.
>>77676880
I was more or less born atheist and grew up among mostly atheist friends and family. It wasn't a political thing. Most people simply weren't Christian.
However, I never felt comfortable in the various atheist communities I had some sporadic contact with, because they were almost exclusively left wing. I've held conservative views since before I knew anything about politics, and it was the left-wing infestation that made me feel uncomfortable around other atheists. The idea that SJWs are a new phenomenon is nothing short of insane. There were plenty back in the 90s, but they didn't have social media.
I'm still an atheist or agnostic, but I'm not as one dimensionally against Christianity as I used to be. I still don't like the obsessive lunatics who base their entire life around Christanity and quote scripture, but I have found a cultural core in Christianity that is worth preserving. To me, it's mostly about culture, and it's actually become a term in Norwegian for people who aren't religious: culturally Christian.
Norway has been Christian for 900 years, and whether we like it or not, it's played a huge role in shaping our society. As a result of this, I think the Norwegian people, despite being largely non-believers, should keep Christian culture alive, and support the moderate Christians who still regularly attend church. Whether we agree with them or not is irrelevant, because they're keeping part of our culture alive. I'm just tired of the left-wing assholes trying to eliminate everything Christian from our society. The war is already won, so we should just let them be.
>>77677550
How about the first paragraph of the first thing that comes up when you google,
"Atheism"
From wikipedia:
Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence
of deities. Less broadly, atheism is the rejection of belief that any
deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the
position that there are no deities. Atheism is contrasted with theism,
which, in its most general form, is the belief that at least one deity
exists.
>>77677610
No, just responding twice because my first reply was not useful.
>>77677690
>From wikipedia
There's your problem
>>77677513
>Most atheists gravitate towards the left either because they have been ostracized for their non-beliefs by the religious right (This thread), or are ex-Theists, and likewise stay away from the group that has more religious folk (The right).
I thought they were freethinkers.
>>77677782
Yeah, I'm sure that the wikipedia article on atheism is just totally biased and full of errors. Philosophy tends to be something that attracts a lot of internet trolls willing to deface articles.
/s
>>77676363
That would be very cogent if Christianity wished to prove it was more rational. But we're not trying to be more rational than anyone. We're trying to overcome sin with the aid of Christ and to help others do the same.
>>77668972
I love how butthurt atheists get about WLC.
>>77677610
Hey Latvia, I want to apologize for being unnecessarily mean to you based on your flag.
I feel like kind of a jerk for saying that you come from a poor country. I take for granted how lucky I am to be born to an upper middle-class American family. I shouldn't. I am very fortunate to have that gifted to me, and I shouldn't joke about it. Even if just on 4chan. I don't feel good about it.
>>77677679
Interesting. My story is more or less the same as you. Its also the reason I got into music like NSBM. As they are one of the very, very few atheist communities that are right wing.
I do disagree about Norway tho. Bring back Odin god dammit.
But yeah, I really have no problems with Christians these days, only those who try to hypocritically impose religious beliefs on others via law. Thats why threads like this piss me off, we need to unite, not divide. When the impending WWIII comes against the mussies, i'll be the first damn one to side with the Christians and Deus Vult.
>>77677871
In any case, you still haven't explained where you got
>and deny the possibility of their existence out of principle.
from. I don't see it anywhere in that definition you posted
>>77668972
based william lane craig layin pipe to the atheists once more
the guy who stumped christopher hitchens so hard he died
>>77678108
Are you really this butthurt someone called you out on being dumb and ignorant?
You're not doing anything by calling me poor. I am richer than you'll ever be. I don't even live in Latvia. This is some low energy shitposting from a moron who doesn't even know what commonly used words mean.
>not just realizing you can't prove either side just chillin till you see some facts some day
>>77677856
Political views come first, and that is what obstructs free thinking. Atheism really isnt a defining characteristic of them, like i've said, there is no belief system of Atheism. They simply dont believe in a deity. They can be as retardedly leftist, biased, and as non free thinking as they want.
>>77678343
>not just realizing you are an agnostic atheist by definition.
>>77678157
Yeah. Dawkins had a good quote that sums up my view:
>I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse
I agree with this, because I believe old school Christians would never have accepted the massive waves of muslim immigrants that are flooding into Europe. I'd rather stand with my European brothers and live in a Christian nation, even if I'm an atheist, than live in an atheist society that invites muslim radicals and multiculturalism into our homes. Ironically, the narrowminded zeal of the Christians would have protected Europe better than any atheist.
It's the same with the nazis. I don't necessarily agree with them on everything, but they sure as hell would have prevented immigration, multiculturalism, communism and the degeneracy of modern society. It would be a small sacrifice to make, because the alternatives have proven to be infinitely worse.
>>77669039
This.
You faggots say what you will but he is the only one with the balls to constantly call mudslimes on their shit.
>>77678438
Well whatever it is how is that not the most logical conclusion?
Neither side can prove their argument at the end of the day.
I think it's all a simulation anyways, guess that makes whoever programmed it God then huh
>>77678718
Completely agree. Christians are one of the few groups that will stand up to the tyranny of Islam. And that is something that cannot be ignored.
>>77678169
How about the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy?
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/#6
These are well-established terms.
>>77678308
I genuinely mean everything I've said, and I've said it more to quell my own conscience than for you. I am content with what I've said, even if you think I'm trolling.
>>77668972
WLC is amazing. I don't even agree with him on most things, but it's great to see someone who actually takes things seriously.
He's such a great system-builder that he has built a very clever fortress around a set of beliefs that seem crazy to me. But he's impeccable, you'd have to go back to philosophical basics to even try to deconstruct his position.
People routinely think he's a huckster because he talks like one. He's actually a very good philosopher who happens to be an autist.
>>77674473
lol, butthurt that Dawkins ran away from a debate with this guy
ATHEISTS BTFO!
>>77678237
HAHA, i have long suspected it was Craig that killed Hitchens. the fedora tippers here are going ogre
>>77679685
its more that he argues like a philosopher. None of the guys he debates are philosophers, they are usually journalists, scientists, psychologists, etc. and so they inject debates with emotional statements. Craig never does this, he goes step by step. Dawkins doesnt lay out arguments he just goes "muhh canaanites" "muhh religious wars" "muhh teapot"
>>77679060
That has the denial of the existence of god or gods, not the denial of the possibility of the existence of god or gods, which is what your definition had.
Where did you get the latter part from, and do you realize that there's a significant difference between the two?
>>77671048
>is the only thing keeping you from being a degenerate a spooky man watching you?
Some prefer to think there is a spooky man watching. If anything it's disappointing to never know if they enjoy the show when you masturbate.
>>77668972
comments and ratings disabled on both videos, its like hes only pretending to be retarded
>>77681110
>Dawkins ran away
pretty sure he didnt want to debate him because craig thinks killing children is good if a god commands it
>>77668972
>atheists are wannabe intellectuals
No, I just want the least amount of authority figures possible.
I'd be extremely surprised if my IQ were higher than 110
>>77669454
Hah, I'd love to see you debate him.
You would look like a babbling babe. You are one.
>>77671263
Yes.
>>77668972
>worshiping a jew
>worshiping a sandnigger
fuck dat tho niggahhh
>>77670892
he literally invented memes
before the endless waves of newfags devoured this website he was literally worshipped here along with ron paul
and i thought summer was bad back then, oh boy
ive actually read his books aswell and i would really like to know what the FUCK you are talking about, you fucking retarded burgerfat
>>77682213
So what part of the phrase "his belief doesn't come from arguments" didn't you understand?
Its not possible to debate someone who makes shit up and claims they're right anyway. Its like arguing with a feminist tumblr kike
>>77682509
It was a baseless assertion that is blatantly false. Watch his videos. Read his book. Until you do that shut the hell up.
>>77681990
pretty shitty excuse Dawkins made up in the last ten seconds. fucking coward
>>77682509
you clearly dont understand what he is saying. He is saying that the primary reason for belief is the inner witness of the Holy Spirit. This is true for every Christian. He even says this isn't an argument, so you have to address his actual arguments you fucking leaf.
Canada must be the shittest place in the world. A prime minister who does fag kisses on live tv and sucks doggy cock. weedman taught you hoseheads well
>>77670892
Yeah, ofc he would care about your expert opinion.
>>77682933
what was he scared of exactly? he doesnt have any new arguments and hes been saying the same retarded and refuted shit in every debate he was in, the only idfference is that he thinks that killing children is morally ok while he preaches objective morality
>>77676607
>lol where is he going?
everytime
>>77676878
>not an argument
If you havent witnessed the massive undertaking of the few to Red Pill the masses, you're in denial.
>Philosopher
>>77683035
What fucking arguments are there if the reason for belief is almost entirely internal, and what isn't internal is just confirmation bias?
Britain leads the anglosphere in islamic cuckoldry right now Achmed. Our faggot PM hasn't implemented sharia zones yet.
>>77670892
>implying ever book he wrote is The God Delusion
Dawkins preaches that the different races be considered sub species, and regularly complains about the Atheism+ community. He's more /pol/ than you'd realize. Hell, accordibg ti the letter he wrote his daughter, Islam is what made him an Anti theist, not christianity.
>>77683515
According to*
Dammed auto correct
>>77683272
>If you havent witnessed the massive undertaking of the few to Red Pill the masses, you're in denial.
First of all, you seem to be confused about what the red pill entails. Second, I haven't seen any notable atheists change their stance.
>>77675894
We haven't got nearly enough variables to boil it down mathematically nor chemically, faggot, stop this pseudo-intellectual masturbation.
>>77683515
>different races be considered sub species
Dawkins said this?
>>77669513
this guy is a christian zionist.
>>77683121
Not an argment
>>77685962
fucking hell the atheist butthurt.
"muhh canaanite children!"
"britbong sharia zones!"
"muhh confirmation bias"
just kill yourselves guys.
>>77669039
>Quoting Richard "Fucking" Dawkins
>Claiming to be able to think for himself
Kek
>>77669039
You can't /thread your own post. You silly bastard.
Clown. He also has gayface.
>>77668972
The problem with "New Atheists" and that fucking joke of a "Reason Rally" and that guy who calls himself the Leader of Texas Autists I mean Atheists who has 3 people in his organisation is.
They're dumb as fuck and want Atheism to be a religion, they want a following, temples, gatherings and whatnot.
All these above are reasons Atheists hate religion. I don't want one more obligation, I don't want to pay the fucking priest for some bullshit burial speech or whatever, I don't want to go somewhere every Sunday.
Yet these fucking so called Atheists are just trying to make a new age religion that worshipes nothing.
>>77687245
Christianity is the original Christian Zionism.
Christians in Rome were aligned with the occupied Jews in open rebellion against Rome.
Christianity began as dumb goyim worshipping Jews pushing their usual jive about being better than everyone else and never havin dun nuffin, and it became "anti-Semitic" only after the Romans had put up with a century of wars and rebellion out of Jews, and even then mostly as a way to escape the scrutiny of good Romans who viewed Christianity (correctly) as a subversive ideology.
>>77668972
>William Gayne Crap
yaaaaaaaaaaawn
>>77687741
