he has a point you know
Overly arrogant believers and overly arrogant atheists, they provide the same level of cringe.
Bigger cuck than Louis C.K.
>>76413113
Why does this bigot assume I'm monotheistic?
>>76413113
I don't know, sounds like heresy to me.
>>76413337
>>76413370
not an argument
How much influence does religion and the occult actually have in western politics today?
>>76413600
What is there to argue? I don't care what somebody else thinks either side.
>>76413113
Kek is the one true God.
>>76413666
>How much influence does religion and the occult actually have in western politics today?
>666
>>76413113
You should ask him if he believes in evolution above the neck.
>>76413666
You tell me, Satan.
>>76413113
I dislike the hate and prejudice that 4chan perpetrates agaisnt atheists.
I'm not theistic, does that really make me a bad person? I let religious people practice without judging them for believing, I don't shill my opinions onto to other people. I donate to charities and help the poor, specially I help collect food for the Old Folks.
Why do you persecute me so? It's not my fault I don't believe in theism, I can't just snap my fingers and convince myself. I don't want to pretend to believe in a higher power, I feel like that'd just be rude to pray but knowingly not mean it.
>>76414134
Kill yourself fedorafag
I don't care what you believe in, don't be a raging homo about it
>>76413113
A parallel argument:
All other theories about the world were false but not yours. You know how it works.
Incidentally, most actual scientists are more aware of the limits of modern science and our discoveries so far
I want to convert to atheism but I don't know everything about everything yet :(
>>76413666
>How much influence does religion and the occult actually have in western politics today?
What do you think, satan?
>good Christian
>turn 13
>cool atheist
>turn 19
>no longer atheist
Who else followed this path
???
>>76413666
>western politics today?
Probably none at all....
>>76415100
More or less. I stopped being an edgy fedora lord around 16 though.
>>76413113
I'd have more respect for him if he focused his attention on Islam instead of just crying about Christians.
He's a cuck. Fuck 'im.
>>76413113
the fact that he ignores is the bible is the most accurate history book the world has ever seen. no archeological discovery has ever contradicted a single biblical reference
>>76415131
DUDE ILLUMINATI LMAO
>>76413113
Atheism & Thiesem are fine but it should be legal to kill them in self defense if they bring it up to strangers. Agnostic master race here, live a good life, do good things, will have no problem dying and turning to worm food or answering for my life to some after life person. You have to love these threads for all the red pilling they do instead of getting people to dig in harder into their own position. Or wait is that the idea. Smells like a Jew thread trying to get WW3 religious wars going earlier then priorly planned. Nice try
>>76413113
>Christianity builds up Europe for 1500 years
>atheists take over for 50 and it's already been invaded by Muslims with minimal resources
>>76413113
He does have a point but he doesn't represent all atheists. It's not a problem for a rich faggot to speak out like a retard but the rest of us normal people pay the price for his shit. People like him and Seth MacFarlane make the rest of us normal atheists that simply don't believe in god look like fucking morons.
He looks like a fat woman.
>>76414134
> I can't just snap my fingers and convince myself.
Yes you can, it's literally that simple.
>b-but there's no evidence...
So? There's no evidence there isn't a God either, which makes belief vs. non-belief entirely a matter of personal choice. I guarantee there are a hundred other beliefs that you hold without evidence (your mother isn't a whore, your father's never sucked cock, you're going to wake up the next morning when you go to sleep, etc.) yet for whatever reason you just don't want to believe in God. I don't know why, maybe you just don't want to give up the tranny porn, but whatever the reason is, you don't believe in God because you don't want to, not because you don't have evidence.
>>76413113
he's absolutely right
There may very well be a god but we have no way of knowing what he is like and it is arrogant to assume he cares about us in particular in a vast universe
however religion is very useful as a tool to combat degeneracy in the populace and the people speaking out against it have no plans to replace it with something that has a similar effect, so it should be left in place for now
>>76413113
>3000 different religions all believing there's an all powerful God that created everything
>But they have different ways of showing your faith to that God and different smaller sub-stories.
Wow, 3000 religions stumped!
>>76413113
You could say that about almost any belief about anything.
>You believe x? There have been billions of beliefs throughout the ages but yours is right. Every other belief is wrong. But belief x, your belief, is right.
>>76413113
DAM DIS SHIT REALLY MAKKKES U THINK NA MEAN XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
>>76416186
No he doesn't he just has rhetoric.
Oh there were 3000 other gods? How many of those religions conquered and dominated the entire world? How many of those other religions put a man on the moon.
>Christianity didn't do that science did!
The America that put a man on the moon was a Christian nation that defined itself by it's opposition to Godless communism. Science is just a tool, a tool created by Christians I might add.
>>76415501
T-this is a coincidence! Christianity is not a viable defense against judeo-marxism, goyi-- guys! If we were all pagans or atheists, we'd be colonizing Uranus by now!
>>76416421
Most of them were polytheistic, very few religions prior to the Abrahamic ones believed in an all-powerful God that created everything
>>76413113
You're not real, Ricky.
>>76416785
>How many of those religions conquered and dominated the entire world? How many of those other religions put a man on the moon.
That has nothing to do with anything.
>>76413113
>reminder that this stupid cunt photoshops these himself and posts them on his own Twitter
>>76413113
>>76414019
He wouldn't be a liberal if he did. He's another crypto-Christian like all liberals.
>god is dead but let's keep practicing Christian morality! Love the weak, everybody is equal, we are all children of god even though he doesn't exist
Why do the most metrosexual males invariably come out of britain?
>>76417100
You're right it's not like fortune has ever been associated with divine favor or anything...
>>76417100
Yes it does, reterd. Christian civilisation dominated the world = Christianity must be the one true religion. Islam is now growing in power while Christianity wanes = the poles have flipped, God has taken a break and Allah is his temporary replacement. It has everything to do with religion.
>>76417297
The best part is when they assume that Muslims will allow them to pay the Jizya and live as "people of the book" despite the fact they're clearly not actually Christians.
>>76416201
Holy shit this is one of the most retarded post I have ever seen.
>you don't believe in flying pink unicorns because you don't want to,not because you don't have evidence.
>>76413113
>There have been nearly 30,000,000,000 jokes so far but only yours actually get laughs
>The others are silly made up nonsense
>But not yours
>Yours are funny
>>76416186
I'm not religious but that isn't actually a point.
It is pure nigger logic. The fact that there are other religions does not have any impact on the validity of Christianity.
It is perfectly plausible for one person to be right and many to be wrong.
It is literally not an argument tier.
>>76413113
I really, really hate Ricky Gervais.
>>76413337
>>76418100
>Personally, I find atheists and people who complain about atheists and fundamental Christians, as annoying as fundamental Christians.
Well, the important thing is you've found a way to feel superior to all three.
>>76417604
>le space teacup meme
More rhetoric that relies on misdirection and intellectual dishonesty.
There is plenty of evidence that flying pink unicorns and teapots in space don't exist. There is no evidence that God does not exist.
>>76413113
Quite often,
They laugh at the truth
And are serious when lying
Everything is backwards for them
>>76418277
I find people who complain about those who complain about both atheists and fundamentalist Christians as annoying as each group they complain about, times infinity!!!!
>>76417958
>It is literally not an argument tier.
Thanks Stefan.
>>76418303
>there is plenty of evidence that flying pink unicorns and teapots in space don't exist
Present some.
>>76418685
This
>>76418303
Unlike being gay, belief isn't a choice. How can you choose what to believe? Can you choose to actually believe something that isn't true?
My opinion is that Christian societies are superior but this is not based on feelings but documented historical evidence.
Or it could be that white civilizations are just better.
>>76413113
>implying all religion isn't just cultural interpretations of one universal truth
>>76415131
OMG WAT DUZ IT MEEN?!
>>76418685
Simple.
Unicorns do not fly because they do not have wings. They're just horses with a horn on their head and horses have no means of attaining flight.
There is no logical mechanism by which a teapot could find itself placed into orbit around the sun. It is conceivable that perhaps at some point a teapot could have been placed into orbit around the earth but we're not talking about plausible scenarios, we're talking about a deliberately implausible strawman argument that attempts to a priori equate the idea of a divine creator with the ridiculous.
>>76418943
>Can you choose to actually believe something that isn't true?
Liberals and communists do it every day.
>>76420262
Is there a logical mechanism for god's existence?
>>76420262
>flying horses and teapots in space are too illogical to exist
>a super-Jew with magic powers whose mother is a virgin and whose father is himself is believable
Furthermore none of that is actually evidence, just shoddy reasoning. In short YOU'RE A MESS.
>>76419399
This.
>>76413337
>>76418100
>>76418100
oh holy shit you are the ultimate fedora, just fuck off
is stefan religious?
>>76420460
Certainly.
Every known concept has a source, a point of initiation. Everything in the universe apparently obeys the concept of causality, so logically it is a safe assumption (and that's all science is at the end of the day, safe assumptions) that the universe obeys causality as well and was caused by _____.
It is unknowable what ______ is, due to the impossibility of peering back to "before" (time did not exist yet as a concept) the "Big Bang", so having an opinion on the nature of _____ is purely personal preference.
>>76420262
>no mechanism in which a teapot could find itself in orbit of the sun
sure, someone could have put it there
>unicorns don't have wings duh
someone could have put them there just as someone could have put a teapot there.
But those are small fish compared to
>sure you can just snap your fingers and believe it, it's that simple
That is some retarded shit. Before asking another person to do that, how many of your beliefs can you do that with? Tell me some of your most deeply held beliefs and then I want you to try to snap your fingers and not believe them. Not place yourself in a hypothetical position in which you don't believe them, I want you to try to do a complete 180 on something that is very core to your values. Try doing that with your own religious beliefs, for instance.
>>76420508
I don't remember talking about Christianity when I made that argument, why are you bringing it up?
Atheism makes the same fundemental mistake as theism
That we completly understand the inner workings of the universe.
God is an unproveable assertion, and no god is an unproveable assertion.
Only true neutral agnostisism is logical. Debate me.
>>76421432
> sure, someone could have put it there
Who?
When?
The moment you can provide a logically plausible explanation as to how a teapot wound up in orbit around the sun, the "Russell's teapot" argument falls apart as it relies on the audience believing the claim is logically implausible.
>hurp durp someone could just put wings on a horse and it would begin to fly
You have no business being an atheist if you're that biologically illiterate.
>Try doing that with your own religious beliefs, for instance.
That's literally how I came to my religious beliefs. I was an agnostic raised in an atheist household, and for the bulk of my adult life I was a strong "there is no God" atheist. Then at some point it occurred to me to ask myself WHY I didn't believe in God. Why exactly do I choose to live in a world in which there is no final judgement of worth or uniform basis for morality? As an atheist I already believed that life was absurd, it was a small step from there to accepting, what is from a materialist point of view, the ultimate absurdity.
>>76422197
You're right but it's far easier to just tell people you're an atheist because theists will take "I'm agnostic" to mean "I'm bent over and my virgin boyhole is lubed and ready to accept a hot steaming load of salvation".
"God's not real, fuck you" saves you a lot of time from avoiding stupid conversations.
>>76423941
>you are so biologically illiterate w0w nice try atheist
I'm not an atheist m8, but there's a bunch of junk in space. It is entirely possible that a shuttle could have jettisoned the teapot at an angle and velocity that would have it orbit the sun because a physicist inside misunderstood the argument as much as you do. You have no business arguing for or against the existence of God if you don't even understand the fundamental arguments against your position.
The crux of the teapot argument is that it is ridiculous to posit that there is a teapot orbiting the sun without evidence(as you yourself point out), and it is logically inconsistent not to hold the creator of the universe to the same standards of empirical evidence. You can sit there and reason(badly) there must be a creator because everything has to have a causal agent, but you're looking at the best case for a counterexample and ignoring it because it doesn't fit your worldview.
Which makes sense because you openly admit to believing in God on a whim because it makes the world seem nicer to you. If it made you happier to believe that you will get 10 million dollars in 3 years, despite having no empirical evidence, why aren't you doing that right now? It would probably make the world even nicer for you. You have no business being a theist when you are this fickle with your beliefs.
