Hello World!
I think they have to merge organization and go to Mars.
>implying only radical Muslims oppose homosexuality, promiscuity, and secularism
You leftists love to preach diversity and freedom of religion, but the second you come face to face with an ethnic group with opinions you disagree with you try and sweep it under the rug.
>>77171674
they also disagree about many things
>>77172013
Hello! Sir.
I am not communist.
I don't deny calm and peaceful religions.
Yeah, all sane societies oppose degeneracy
Doesn't mean they have to get along
>>77171674
Because there are far more fundamental Muslims than fundamental Christians. Because to make a "melting pot" like America you have to have a less fundamental nation.
>>77171674
>sending the shittiest people to humanities newest hope
fuck that force them to stay here this planet is fucked
>>77171674
If you don't repent and put your trust in Christ, you will be held accountable to a just and holy God for your sins
>>77173312
If you don't repent and put your trust in The flying spaghetti monster, you will be held accountable to a just and holy flying spaghetti monster for your sins. Ramen.
>>77173542
Do you believe in the flying spegheti monster?
>>77173656
Yes, he boiled for our sins.
>>77173927
Would you die for this belief?
>>77171674
Death to extremists!
>>77174100
That's pretty extreme ;)
Deus Vult !!
>>77171674
OP. Hate the sin not the sinner. This is not a Muslim teaching.
Also all sin will land you in hell. None are righteous. It is why we all need Jesus Christ.
Why are you so afraid of prayer if you believe its ineffective?
>>77174004
See, unlike many other religions, The flying Spaghetti Monster does not require you to fight and die for him. No one knows what the afterlife really holds, however we are told Heaven has a Beer Volcano and Stripper Factory.
>>77174333
And do you have a holy Book about this monster, any eye witness accounts of his existence?
>>77171674
>oppose secularism
that's not true, Christians created secular nations.
The amount of "radical Christians" that oppose secularism is small. Even true radicals like the Amish exist in their own communities and don't poke holes into national politics or protest.
Islam on the other hand flat does not allow secularism.
>>77174494
The texts were transcribed to us through the holy PFD. There are many sightings, you just need to open your eyes.
http://www.venganza.org/category/sightings/
Someone please post the comparison chart between Christian extremism and Islamic extremism. You know the one.
A number of posters are starting to point out that most religions have a fundamentalist problem. In any religion, there always seems to be at least one pack of assholes that turn religious belief up to 11. When God is shouting into one ear, they don't hear reason and common sense talking into the other one.
The only real difference between Christian and Islamic fundamentalists is the beards and turbans. They are both a blight on the human race.
Stuff you left off the Muslim list
>forbid the consumption of alcohol
>death penalty for adultery
>death penalty for blasphemy
>death penalty for heresy
>death penalty for apostasy
Oh and those aren't even "radical" Islamic beliefs unless you want to characterize entire nations as radicals.
Here brothers and sisters, I do my service and provide the Holy PDF! Spread it far and wide, and allow his noodly appendages to enter your heart!
http://www.klps.pl/pliki/gospel_fsm_eng.pdf
>>77174963
You have no idea what you are talking about
>>77174333
>I was only pretending to be retarded
>the religion
>>77171674
More like Radical Christians - Average Muslims
>>77174766
Romans 1
You know God exists, and your Blasphamous activities will be brought up on judgement day, if you do not have Christ, you will be cast into the Lake of fire.
>>77175326
Well, Islamic heaven has Virgins, I'll take the beer Volcano and strippers anyday.
>>77174963
Ignorance: the post.
>>77171674
yeah, but they're describing the difference between mainstream islam and fucking wacky backwoods baptists.
where's this supposed pro-choice, pro-birth control, pro-pot, pro-homo, pro-porn, pro-sex muslim majority?
oh, that's right, they're 99% far right nutters who get pissed at the existence of dogs and pork, let alone fags and sluts.
>>77175340
This. Those are not extreme views for a Muslim at all
>>77175866
Sex is quite difficult when your in hell, you know all that torment, salvation is a free gift, what's stopping you from accepting it
>>77171674
Because christianity isn't intrinsically radical, whereas islam is.
And this is coming from an atheist that used to loathe christianity because I'm a lapsed catholic that felt betrayed.
Feminism, on the other hand...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecJUqhm2g08
>>77176019
he'll figure it out eventually if he's made his way here
Christians: if you do this bad thing you won't get into heaven, but repent and you will be saved.
Muslims: do this bad thing and we will kill you.
That's the difference
>>77176093
But I have accepted the one truth path of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. He boiled for our sins for this exact reason. What's stopping you from understanding the noodle?
>>77176144
Yeah, it happened to most of us. You can see he's trying to hold onto his last shred of PCism -- he thinks it's ok to criticize Islam as long as he lumps in Christianity. He doesn't realize that any criticism of Islam is completely forbidden by the PC police.
As an aside: it's fascinating to me that the left wing threw women and then gays under the bus in order to apologize for Islam.
>>77176118
Catholics don't practice biblical Christianity, if you put your trust in Christ alone, you will be saved.
Read these passages
Romans 1
John 3
Romans 10
>>77171674
Because Christians don't support the death penalty for any of those.
Because most Christians don't give a fuck about those issues. Most Muslims (globally, not US, but globally) do care.
Christians don't blow shit up and kill civilians and say it's for God. Muslims do.
>>77176294
Because it's false and it pales in comparison to the Bible. It might have a chance against Islam, but has none against 66 Books that coorispond with each other written over the course of a thousand years.
>>77171674
Because Christians are taught to beware of false prophets, and Muslims are taught to behead nonbelievers. It's really not actually that complicated, japan.
>>77176546
Christians are supposed to be obedient to the government. Romans 13
>>77174963
>The only real difference between Christian and Islamic fundamentalists is the beards and turbans. They are both a blight on the human race.
And that's where you go wrong. Beards are not a defining characteristic - there are MANY non-muslim men who wear beards, and even muslim men who don't wear beards as well.
The biggest difference in practical terms right now is that the 'western powers,' as we euphemistically call our shadowy overlords, chose to give a group of the worst fundamentalists in Islam control of the Hejaz, and most of Arabia, including a huge amount of oil.
That dispensation was predictably used to solid effect, the pilgrimage itself bringing great prestige (and making traditional muslims around the world loathe to denounce the Sauds in terms that might cause them or their family and associates trouble there) and much of the money being used to open these Madrasas from whence so many terrorists have come around the world, and from which their tenants have been preached in milder form to the general populace.
At the same time the same actors usually do not encourage their fundamentalists, but often actively discourage them, at best one party of their two may treat them a bit less badly than the other, for their votes.
>>77176118
>Because christianity isn't intrinsically radical
Are you stupid?
>>77176408
I lapsed because I got confronted by the epicurean paradox when I learned about the inquisition during adolescence.
In other words, belief on a benevolent, omnipotent being simply makes no logical sense.
I have read the bible a bunch of times though, and I stopped hating christianity when I read Jung and understood that religion is a defense mechanism.
Hey, be a christian and spouse your values. Feel proud. You're not a muslim who kills those who don't spouse their values or a jew that scams those who don't spouse theirs - and hey, that was one of the reasons why christianity exists in the first place - the new testament is full of text against the practices of jewish subterfuge.
But I can't be one, sadly. It just doesn't make sense for me. But you go ahead.
>>77171674
are you literally retarded?
>>77176888
Nope. Just educated.
It pretty much amounts to this >>77176167, Alberto Barbarossa.
>>77176972
I'm familiar with the epicurean problem, but that hedonist forgot one thing, without God, there can be no objective morality, I don't see anywhere in the bible that God is benevolent, he is just holy righteous, but also merciful and gracious, I'm only telling you this because I care, God's wrath is upon you, and unless you change mind and put your trust in Christ, you will stand guilty before him without excuse. Please reconsider,
>>77177573
m8, I've been an atheist for about 18 years.
Also, when I mean the I got confronted by the epicurean paradox, I don't mean the paradox itself. I didn't learn about Epicurus 'til like 10 years later. I just mean that I came to the conclusion that a benevolent and omnipotent god makes no logical sense.
And if I could reconsider, I would. Christians are happier, and the holes that my psyche got when I lost religion got filled by weeabooism and I find myself in a point where I'm actually worshiping underage japanese girls (idols. As in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_idol , though the thing from the exodus actually kinda fits) instead.
But I can't reconsider. I work by solving problems (I own a software company where I'm the main programmer, engineer and security auditor, not to mention I used to work as a mathematical logic teacher), so my thought process just can't accept what is not logically sound, and the very concept of faith means exactly that.
But see, that's the thing. You, as a christian, won't kill me because I'm saying this. You'll just worry about my soul and try to change my mind or whatever. Unlike a 'slime who'll stone me to death.
>>77177573
>objective morality
>Implying our morals are static and unchanging to knew science and understanding.
>>77178399
So you don't believe in objective morality?
>>77171674
That image is a false equivalence.
All that matters is that Christians tolerate sinners or people they disagree with, but Muslims are totalitarians who want to make a perfect world by murdering people they disagree with.
>>77173927
Go home, McFarlane.
>>77178286
Romans 1: 18-22
You know God exists, but you suppress this truth in your unrighteousness, when you deny the God that you know exists, you give up knowledge
>>77176974
Yes! I am peaceful lazy dreamer!
I wish you came to Japan and enjoy good food and peaceful civilization.
>>77178705
Sure. Thanks.
>>77178723
I love Japanese culture, I was thinking of doing a mission there if possible.
>>77178798
Show me how you can know anything to be true in your world view?
>>77171674
Abrahamic religions are a cancer of our species, more at 11
>>77179064
If that's true, than atheist are Ebola
>>77179158
>Anyone who doesn't have a belief is Ebola.
Christianity everyone.
>>77178919
I can't. That's one of the bases of science. We know something to be true 'til the opposite is proven. We're 99.99999% sure of what we hold as true, which approximates to 100% while not being 100%.
Look, I'm not trying to change your views. If you believe in God, hey, props to you. But your post is kinda pushing me on the direction of discussing Rusell's Teapot... so I'll do that, but again, I'm not trying to proselytize or anything. You be a christian if that makes you happy.
With that said, one of the concepts used to explain atheism and scientific aproximation is termed Rusell's Teapot. The concept is more or less like this: Let's assume the belief that there's a teapot in orbit around the sun. As we stand, with the current advance of science, we can't be sure if said teapot actually exists. We can't measure it. It's too far away, and our best telescopes can't detect it. So we assume it actually doesn't exist. It might exist, and if it's proven to exist we'll change our point of view, but meanwhile, we'll assume it doesn't exist. We're 99.999999% sure it doesn't exist.
>>77179573
Everyone knows God exists, so not having a belief in something you know is called absurdity
Psalms 14:1
Romans 1
>>77179615
So you can't know anything to be true than, in your world view?
>WBC hurts people's feelings
>ISIS is openly committed to genocide and slavery
>>77178480
Only retards do
>>77179838
That's correct.
That's called being openminded, and not having blind faith. Even though blind faith feels better.
As an example, again, japanese idols: I choose to believe the ones I like are not whores. And a bunch of times, I've been proven wrong. But it feels better to have blind faith in them, even if one can't be sure. But if I wasn't part of this cult of underage japanese girls, I'd see it as absurd.
>>77179716
>Everyone knows God exists
No, there is absolutely no proof god exists.
>>77180030
Is it always wrong to tortoure babies for pleasure?
>>77179716
What.
>>77180082
Do you know that you can't know anything to be true?
>>77171674
yes but Muslims also want the penalty for defying those to be death
>>77180187
Start with Romans 1 and you will understand
>>77180291
"It says it in the bible so it must be true"
Wew lad.
>>77171674
One likes to help people, the other likes to kill people.
>>77180393
Read it so you can understand my position
>>77176972
The (so-called) Epicurean Paradox is not insoluble, but solving it does require you to look beyond any of the common forms of Christianity.
It can be stated thus:
If G-d is Omnipotent AND G-d is Omnibenevolent AND G-d is Omniscient THEN Evil could never exist.
Therefore the existence of Evil proves the non-existence of G-d.
One way to escape the logic is to deny omnipotence and/or omniscience - this is applicable in some cases for polytheists who may worship an omnibenevolent deity who is nonetheless not expected to be omnipotent and/or omniscient as there are other deities against which he may be less than completely successful. This is a very ancient solution to the conundrum.
Another is to deny Omnibenevolence. This is also an ancient solution, and probably most typical of pantheists. Their G-d may well be both Omnipotent and Omniscient, but not always 'Good' at least in the sense that meaning normally has for us.
The last solution is to deny the existence of Evil itself.
>>77180150
According to you and our society it is.
>>77173312
Cool bro. I hear Hell is great during the winter!
>>77180549
So if the majority of people in our society says it's okay, than its okay?
>>77171674
The reason they don't get along is because of the Jew-controlled media. If they would join forces, they would wipe out the Jews and SJWs in a matter of days.
>>77171674
>radical Christians
Haven't seen a suicide bombing by radical Christians in a while.
>>77171674
>why are radical
>radical
There's that word again
>>77180626
I don't know if the fire is real, but the true punishment is eternal separation from God.
>>77171674
Two sides of the same Jewish coin. Paganism is the one true European religion.
>>77180452
muslims are charitable
>>77180688
Well, yes? Your actions are solely done to please our ingroup. We live to please others.
>okay
What do you mean with this?
Hi everyone I need that one graph with a bunch of Muslim states on it ASAP. the one with all the numbers about how many muslims want sharia law.
>>77171674
Do radical Christians support religious beheading, torture, unprovoked holy war, execution of homosexuals, the complete suppression of women, and a destruction oft he greatest civilizations on earth?
And even if they did, do you think the 51% of Muslims that support this kind of shit are mirrored by an equally large portion of Christians believing in even HALF as much radical shit?
>>77179573
It might sound declarative, but it's mostly true. Most atheists are leftist retards.
>>77180906
Not when they go to Europe.
>>77180906
Then you can't really say something is good or Bad, just that it's something you either like or dislike.
>>77180953
>torture, unprovoked holy war, execution of homosexuals, the complete suppression of women
judging by the posts here, yes
>a destruction oft he greatest civilizations on earth
This one is subjective. By the point of view of muslims, islam was the greatest "civilization" on earth, so this point can be true.
>>77181032
They are charitable amoung themselves, not to the outgroup
>>77181059
You can say, but it is subjective. It's good according to you and the ones that share your beliefs. But you can't say that one moral system is "superior" to the others.
>>77181350
So you can't condemn polpot for shooting people for wearing glasses then?
>>77181490
I can, because i find wrong to murder people indicriminately, so as do all people on earth.
So what is your stance? That killing is always wrong? That you can kill in determined situations?
>>77171674
Fuck Mars, we should send them all to the sun.
>>77178286
>You, as a christian, won't kill me because I'm saying this. You'll just worry about my soul and try to change my mind or whatever.
That's only because his secular nation would prosecute him if he tried to kill you. Look at history - that first commandment goes straight out the window when they know they'll get a Christian jury.
>>77178641
>All that matters is
...that one goat-fucking sand nigger's hallucination is as good as another's, and your goat-fucking sand nigger religion has never had any more claim to the moral high ground than their goat-fucking sand nigger religion.
Go back to church and learn more about what a sick fuck you would be if Jesus wasn't personally holding you back from murderfucking every man, woman, child and animal that crosses your sight
>>77182094
Murder is wrong, but there is a time to kill. Ecclesiasties 3
Self defense/ protecting family
Government punishing wickedness Romans 13
War Romans 13
the main difference is that the Muslims come from countries where they're lives are worse so they have less to loose.
>>77171674
convert or die..
do both agree on that?
>>77171674
Keep Yahwist cults out of your country Japan.
>radical Christians
>every Christian country has programs to help minority
>pope washes Muslim feet
>international charity highest from Christian countries
>every majority Islam country has sharia law
Okay
>>77182923
No it's more of Repent or perish, but we mean being cast into hell on judgement day, we're not gonna physically kill you
>>77182212
>hat first commandment goes straight out the window when they know they'll get a Christian jury
I am the lord thy god?
Don't you mean sixth commandment?
And that's a thing with forcing a religion (or lack of it) on a land, not a thing with the religion itself. Mao did the same in the name of atheist communism.
>>77183019
>he says years after Aso, a christian, served as a very famous prime minister
>>77183109
Yes, sixth. I forgot what a relentless egotist Yahweh is.
I'm not sure what state imposition upon private religious expression has to do with jury nullification though.
>>77172519
Do you deny the rape of Nanking?
>>77176888
>Who are thinkers who were in the christian faith and were able to have dialectic and discussion of it, scientific and philosophical
>Immanuel Kant
>Rene Descartes
>Martin Luther
>St. Thomas of Aquinas
>Gregor Mendel
>Franz Diebel
>Soren Kierkegaard
>The list goes on
Islamic thinkers worth a shit and fall within being able to dissect their faith and actually make a fucking impact on the earth
>Averroes
>Al Ibn
>Alhazen
>none else worth a fuck
Christianity is the better religion. Western culture is the better culture.
get bent please
>>77183768
>obligatory post with chritians scientists
Back then non chritians authors were not published.
And i don't even know if those are chritians, not will i check any of them
>Western culture is the better culture.
Yes
>>77184001
Um David Hume and Rene Descartes were both non Christians in that time period!
>>77184001
>he doesn't know who Kant, Descarter, Luther, Aquinas, Mendel and Kierkegaard are
Jesus fuck, Alberto.
I can't say I agree with many of them (I actually actively dislike Kant), but fucking crack open a book.
>he doesn't know the author of Give Her The D
>>77180291
you arrogant and, at the same time, stupid motherfucker
>>77184456
Did you read it?
>>77173542
Why do you say Ramen to an Italian Pasta Diet-ee? Isn't Ramen that really oily Japanese dish that Americans buy for $1?
>>77176624
The FSM has a million+ (cook) books about him that all tell a cohesive and real story. That, and famous FSM prophets include - Ainsley Harriott, Guy Fieri and that old bitch on Great British Bake-Off.
>>77184208
I know who they were, but i don't know if they were christian or not.
But whatever suits your strawmen right?
>>77184918
Can you quote some verses for me?
>>77184988
How is that a straw man, by definition, a straw man is when you make a fake version of their position and destroy it
>>77184001
>>77184208
I'm just gonna leave this here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1A_CAkYt3GY&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdYldNkMybYIHKR
>>77185190
Strawmaning my person
>>77185205
I forgot: the god stuff starts at #9.
>>77185249
Elaborate?
>>77184208
I, too, actively loathe Kant. His ethics completely discounts anything done from self-interest, including engaging in mutually beneficial actions even if one could have done even better personally through forcing a zero-sum situation. Furthermore, his analytic/synthetic distinction is completely artificial.
I also hate Rosseau. He actively abandoned his children, which makes him personally a piece of shit. Philosophically, his beliefs essentially boil down to "nature is good, civilization is bad", which is essentially anti-human and only harms our species.
I am a fan of Hume. Furthermore, there are a ton of other great philosophers that weren't listed: Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, Francis Bacon, and others.
While I am an atheist, I respect the Christian/Western intellectual tradition. Furthermore, radical Christians work to do things like ban gay marriage, whereas radical Islamists kill gays. Hell, being gay carries the death penalty in most Islamic nations, so killing gays isn't even a "radical" proposition for Muslims.
>>77185013
Stir in the tomatoes, beef stock, tomato ketchup or purée, Worcestershire sauce and seasoning. Bring to the boil, then reduce the heat, cover and simmer, stirring occasionally, for 30 mins.
>>77185456
I'm an a atheist, I dont believe in atheist
>>77185626
Who's does that mean?
>>77185456
>>77185687
Well, then brofist.
I stopped hating christianity after reading Jung's Psychology and Religion. It's imbued in our psyche for a reason, and it's actually helpful for maintaining our sanity, so having religion isn't only fine but optimal as long as you follow the golden rule.
I'm into Schopenhauer myself. Just like I understood the epicurean paradox before reading Epicurus, I understood antinatalism over a decade before reading Schopenhauer.
>>77180110
You are alive. That is proof.
>>77180233
Is this a true statement?
>>77185381
making stuff up about me very loosely based on my posts to discredit me. It's the favorite 4chan arguing techique. I use it willingly sometimes.
For example, here>>77184208
he says i don't know who those guys were, even thou i say absolutely nothing that suggests i don't know who they were. And by implying i don't know who they were, my opinions are discredited, becuase who takes anyone seriously that doesn't know who Imannuel Kant was???
>>77184181
Descartes was christian as fuck, you pleb. He didn't begin with God in his phenomenology though.
Hume wasn't Christian, but that doesn't refute my point.
>>77185753
What does this mean, "For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”
>>77185993
Made me kek out loud. Thanks bro.
>>77185993
No, it only proves that my mom and dad had a creampie years ago.
>>77185923
You should read Schopenhauer's dialogue on religion.
>>77186028
Yes
>>77185456
If people understood anything they would hate Rousseau the way they profess to hate Hitler.
>>77186060
You said that non Christians weren't published, I gave you an example, that's the definition of a point being refuted.
>>77184208
>>77185456
Only Atheists dislike Kant. He changed philosophy permanently.
>>77186101
I don't see how you get that from a kitchen recipe, but I'm gonna tell you that you are worshipping the creation and not the creator and you need to repent
>>77186317
I said it. But it wasn't truth. Non christians weren't publishable only when inquisition was strong.
>>77185456
I listed the philosophers with faith being their real backdrop. I can't really lump in the guys who were marginally associated with it, to be fair.
My whole point is that Christianity compliments the Western condition.
Averroes was the best thing the Islamic faith had. If it wasn't for Genghis Khan or whatever hit the Islamic world in the 1300's that killed all the thinkers, it could have been something of actual merit. The nature of the faith isn't much to write home about. The great divide of Christianity was Luther's IDEOLOGICAL criticism of it, which spurred actual discussion and thought, unlike the schism Islam. Which was literally a tribal dispute over who should take up the leadership role.
Fucking tribalist bullshit. Nothing of real intellectual merit or value.
>>77185923
Jung was great before Freud fucked him up. I like Joseph Campbell's work regarding Jung.
>>77186157
I have.
I like it. He strived for objectivity.
>>77186379
He's the primordial profiler. And except in very specific cases (like race and crime in certain areas), profiling doesn't work, while having quite negative repercussions.
>>77186493
Tell me what came first, the food or the man? The man must have been born through the energy supplied through the food.
>Czechmate Crhistfags
>>77186379
Alright, I'll humor you. Care to elaborate on how, exactly, he did that?
>>77186141
And they wouldn't have had you unless the millions of other necessary steps for them to be born and to meet, and their parents to be born and to meet, so on ad infinitum had happened. If just one of those steps had not happened, or been disrupted in any significant way, you would not be here.
Speaking of probability, neither of us should be here.
But we are. All that is left is for you to face the truth.
>>77186525
Do you know how many people died in the three hundred years of inquisitions ?
>>77186611
Romans 1
You know God exists, and you foolishly mock him, your condemnation is Just, as was mine.
>>77184001
Also goddamn dude, if you're going to wear a tripcode and expect people to take you seriously, spell correctly.
>>77186755
But I don't know God exists. God's like the flying teapot: we know their may be a flying teapot, orbiting earth, but chances is there isn't.
>>77183080
that's racist because you posted data from the beginning of 2001. everyone knows terrorism started on 9/12/01
>>77186626
> If just one of those steps had not happened, or been disrupted in any significant way, you would not be here.
So?
>Speaking of probability, neither of us should be here.
Why?
>>77186755
>God exists because a book says so
>>77186633
You are lecturing t the preaacher bro. I already know everything you are about to say to me. I wasn't born yesterday.
>>77186624
They are significant, especially in the field of ethics and morality. I would say the most significant is the Categorical Imperative and the hierarchy of principles of ethical behavior (or that there exists a highest principles with other principles and decision making guidelines as logically consistent with the highest a priori principle. Kant is dense and it takes effort to distill it, well worth the effort.
>>77187012
Show me how you can know anything without God?
>>77186755
>You know God exists
You keep saying that as if it will somehow make it true. I do not know God exists, and neither do you.
>>77186822
>if you're going to wear a tripcode and expect people to take you seriously
Nah, just fishing for You, mostly. Only sometimes i actually engage
>>77187058
Are you pretending to be stupid? From a statistical standpoint, you should not be here. It is, in fact, a miracle that you are alive.
>>77187058
About 3000 people
Muslims killed that many in one day
>>77187143
>>77187127
Show me how you can know anything to be true, and we can talk about what I know
Kill them both. Let got sort it out
>>77187187
What are you trying to say?
>>77187402
But then all the Muslims will go to hell
>>77187273
Dude, you can keep thinking whatever you want bro. I don't care. If it makes you happy
>>77187455
For them its probably an improvement. Instead of goats, its just people with goat heads. Might even be cooler than sandistan
>>77187187
Not him, and seriously, fuck Barbarossa, but prove your statistics.
The size of the universe approaches infinity, so the existence of an earth like this with carbon-based organics like this and a few million years of evolutionary replication of genes that (passively, not actively) improve the chances of survival and replication of the following generations mean that, no, from a statistical standpoint, your being here is common as fuck. Nothing miraculous about that.
But please, do put your opposite argument in a statistical pov.
>>77187307
Realistically, I can't. I'm forced to make pragmatic concessions every day, and Occam's Razor is a great tool for that. You should try it sometime.
>>77187563
Stay away from the folklore, hell is a terrible place, and is the deserving destination for all mankind.
>>77171674
execpt the prayers in schools this should be the ideology of all man, and has nothing to do with religion
>>77187584
>Not him
We have ID you retard.
And it's Barbosa. Barbarossa is other things. For example operation barbarossa, the invasion of USSR by Nazi Germany
>>77187608
So you can't know anything to be true?
>>77187424
Look at the post of yours I originally responded to.
>>77187770
>We have ID you retard.
I'm still not you and I was replying to a post targeted towards you, you fucking moor.
>>77187584
Think about what I said and think about the odds for yourself. I'm not sure how one would go about equating the probability of any given person existing as they do now without having access to their ancestral lineage.
>>77187715
What folklore. Dante described it as frigid, so i'm pretty sure the sandniggers would love it.
Even if its the "fire and brimstone" shit from the 19th century, thats probably a nicer climate than sandniggerland
>>77187063
I'll check it out later. Thanks, I guess.
>>77188215
Milton > Dante
Better reign in Hell than serve in Heaven.
>>77188215
Dante is a good read, but not biblical, it's described as darkness, fire, and eternal separation from God, and this is the place were men will spend eternity for sinning against a just and holy God
>>77188522
So…basically where mudslimes belong?
>>77187812
With absolute certainty? No, not really. But I can try to get as close as possible to certainty. It's a process.
>>77188708
But you could be wrong?
>>77188655
Have you ever lied?
>>77188904
Always.
>>77189190
Do you know that you could be wrong?
>>77189190
>>77189285
wew lad this is getting good
>>77171674
>Superficial similarities in ideologies means they're fundamentally the same.
Ignorant people still fall for this meme.
>>77187917
I know. But this is not /b/, we do not have to announce anything. We have ID
Either way, good night, sleep tight
>>77189285
Not bad. But I'm going to say no, not with absolute certainty. Let's take the existence of God as an example - I don't know if the existence of a God-like being is possible at all, given the laws of the universe. I could be wrong about the possibility of me being wrong.
>>77189882
So you can't know anything to be true? How can you even reason anything?
>>77189882
If you believe you cannot ever be absolutely right, you have to necessarily believe that you can be wrong, and that in fact, you will be wrong many times before you ever stumble across something you can substantiate as right or absolutely right. He backed you into a corner.
Also, God existed before the Universe, who do you think made the laws?
>>77190203
Like this >>77179615
>>77190527
Can you reason that your reasoning is valid?
>>77190768
I can, 'til I get proved wrong.
>>77190834
Great. Then God exists until it is proven that God does not exist.
>>77183754
Well.... he didn't deny it. Sort of...
>>77190834
Can you say that your not a schizophrenic in a mental hospital?
>>77190936
That's not how it works. Again, see this >>77179615
Saying
>God exists until it is proven that God does not exist.
is like saying
>there's a teapot orbiting the sun. This is true 'til it is proven that there's no teapot orbiting the sun.
You can't prove a negative. The burden of proof is on you.
But it doesn't matter. Faith is not concerned with proof - hell, it's the opposite. So you be a christian if that makes you happy. It's only natural as a mechanism of defense against, well, ending up like this >>77190988
>>77190988
I can't. Just like I can't say we're all in the Matrix or not.
But the burden of proof is on you.
>>77190203
Like I said, concessions. Make as few assumptions as possible, and be aware that those assumptions can be proven wrong at any time.
>>77190234
Being right and knowing that I am right are two different things, m8. But there are a near infinite number of ways to be wrong, and only a set number of ways to be right, so the probability is not in my favor. In general, I could be wrong, and I will be wrong many times. But in specific instances, like in my example, I do not know if there is a realistically possible alternative to my position, even if I can imagine one. So, I can be wrong about the possibility of me being wrong, in that instance.
As for the last part, that's just an empty assertion. We just call them "laws" because we understand them as such. We could just as easily call them "models based on observation".
>>77191237
Schizophrenia is defined as someone who can't determine truth from reality. How could I prove to you something that you could not understand?
>>77191298
>We just call them "laws" because we understand them as such. We could just as easily call them "models based on observation".
No, we call them laws because they have not changed and most likely never will change.
>>77191237
It does in this instance. I can reason that God is real, and I can reason that my reasoning on coming to this position is valid. Just as you said you can reason your that your reasoning is valid until you are proven wrong.
>>77191298
So you take the laws of logic on faith?
>>77190936
>>77190834
Dont worry im gonna prove it soo you just have to elect jesus christ as president
>>77191840
Libertarian free will isn't really biblical
>>77191607
Define faith.
>>77192097
Biblical faith is a trust
Blind faith is belief without evidence
>>77191517
By presenting evidence.
>>77191561
>No, we call them laws because they have not changed and most likely never will change.
Is that so? Just like the law of relativity created by Galileo... that was changed by Einstein (AKA it was wrong/incomplete, and thus science accomodated itself to the more correct concept)?
>I can reason that God is real, and I can reason that my reasoning on coming to this position is valid. Just as you said you can reason your that your reasoning is valid until you are proven wrong.
You could, but you aren't doing it. The dude who talked about statistics tried to do it, but I presented an argument that proved his point wrong, and he didn't follow.
On the other hand, I've already discussed a few reasonings why there is no god ITT. You know, Epicurus and whatnot. And I've reached a conclusion that holds true 'til it gets proven wrong. It hasn't gotten proven wrong. If it was, I'd have to change my opinion.
That's how science works. And again, you, as a christian, shouldn't be bothered with that, because it goes cardinally opposite to your concept of religious faith.
>>77192097
Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
Romans 8:24-25
For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.
>>77191561
>No, we call them laws because they have not changed and most likely never will change.
Whatever. The point is that "law" is a name we've given them, and in no way implies that they have been "made".
>>77192530
Evidence presuposes trueth, and truth presuposes God
>>77192530
People can be wrong about how the laws act, the laws still don't change.
Funny that it was Christians who were mainly responsible for the rise of science.
>>77192649
If something exists how does it exist other than by being made?
>>77192649
So the laws of logic are subjective?
>>77191840
>prove it doesn't exist
Again, you can't prove a negative.
But as a norm, if there is no observable, quantifiable, empirical evidence of a fact, it is assumed to be false.
But for the last time, you, as a christian, shouldn't be worried about proving shit. You're supposed to have faith. So go have faith and be happy.
Anyway, I'm off.
>>77192649
>Whatever. The point is that "law" is a name we've given them,
That the greatest scientific minds throughout all of history have come to agree on and name.* Because they do not change. What you are saying can be boiled down to, "lel we just call them laws because man, yeah just because,not because all of the scientists who have ever lead decided to call them laws for good reason or anything like that, hah get real pal.".
>>77171674
Yeah it's weird, for some reason I can't find all the videos that radical Christians post online of themselves beheading those who insult Christianity.
>>77193806
We only behead worldviews and spread the gospel:)
>>77171674
>Nobody likes degeneracy
What's your point?
>>77193806
Kek, Christianity is truly the religion of peace.
>>77171674
one disagrees with something but tolerates it. the other beheads what they disagree with. Lotta fundies in the Southern US hate Harry Potter but Rowling is still alive. Muslims hated Rushdie...he's not.
>>77192312
>>77192531
That's a no, then. The fundamental concession I made long ago, when I broke away from solipsism, was that the physical world is real, and that empiricism is the test of any argument, no matter how impeccably logical it is. Belief needs a test, to weed out the wrong ones, or you're just stuck treading water in a void.
Anyway, the sun is rising and it's getting hard to formulate sentences. I'm gonna call it a night/ morning.
Thanks for arguing with me. It was interesting.
>>77194665
Do you even inquisition?
>>77194796
soon
>>77194796
How many people died in the 350 years of inquisitions?
>>77183080
so many "unknowns" it almost discredits the data though.
>>77195284
about 1200 or something, so yea.... it's a little overblown.
>>77171674
stupid fucking Japanese. aren't you afraid of bright flashes by now?
>>77194665
Salman is quite alive.
>>77195916
I'm not a Catholic, (reformed Baptist) but I don't like the post modernist false information on history
>>77171674
Fuck off pinko
