How do we address the atheist problem?
- Home
- Board: /pol/ - Politically Incorrect
- Reading: How do we address the atheist problem?
How do we address the atheist problem?
>>71669234
We tell them to push away their ego, and attachment to the physical. Search their souls and feel the energy of god within them. If they don't see the light it's ok, because they are going to hell anyhow.
>>71669234
How are we the problem?
kiss our feet
>>71669234
Wait one generation and it'll be illegal in half of the world.
>>71669234
Proving that God is real.
>>71669234
There is no escape. We will take your children and turn them into rational human beings.
>>71669234
GRATE
BATE
MATE
Delete r/atheism.
Have a religious renaissance and possibly a Neo-Christianity.
>>71669234
I tend to debate them, then destroy them with my logical arguments as to why Christian Creation theory is the most logical and plausible theory as to the creation and subsequent evolution of Earth and the universe.
They're also mostly 14, and therefore stupid.
Why are atheists so attracted to destructive ideologies?
>>71670043
>atheism
>rational
Suddenly I understand why everyone calls you a shitposter.
>I'm an atheist. Debate me.
I don't think about you at all.
>>71669847
9/10 of your are lib-prog cuckolds
source: http://www.pewforum.org/2012/10/09/nones-on-the-rise-social-and-political-views/
>>71670190
>atheists are so irrational
>they refuse to believe my facts as shown in the bible here
>it says I'm right!
>>71670699
>b-burden of proof is on you to prove god exists!!!
>REEEEE DON'T TELL ME TO PROVE HE DOESNT THATS NOT HOW IT WORKS
Typical fedoralord cuck,
>>71670354
>be german
>try jokes
>experience physical pain
>>71670831
no really, the burden of proof lies on the claiment, bare assertions are lgocally fallacy. But you keep worshipping your kike and think of your soul, never mind the dark hordes at your gates goyim.
>>71670831
Well despite your memepost, that's actually correct. The burden of proof is on you.
>>71670400
Nothing to do with atheism retard.
>>71669234
We gotta >tip harder
>>71670989
>>71671031
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Making the claim God does not exist, however, DOES require proof. Can't provide it? Then you have no ground to stand on.
Good thing about the atheist is they don't/cannot breed. They are so weak in their non-belief that they are allowing ultra theist muslims to flood in and populate their countries.
They argue on 4chan while Christian Chad is fucking the girl of their dreams and Ahmet is raping that one they wish they would have talked to!
>>71669234
The same way with every Religion is true thread
>sage
>>71670989
it's not that the pro-side never provides evidence in the debates, it's that it's always shut down with
>nah, i don't buy it, i'm a materialist/naturalist and therefore can't accept anything you've said as evidence for your claim, i need peer-reviewed scientific data that reliably predicts future events if you want me to accept your claim as fact.
like their opinion on methodology is somehow falsifiable/verifiable.
it's like trying to argue with a solipsist that you're a real person and not just a mental construct of theirs.
>>71671423
I don't make the claim that there is no god. I merely make the notion that there is no evidence of one and as such dismiss the notion of one and act as though there isn't one until the criteria is met. As I do with all things in life.
>>71671480
Fedoras are not the only atheist, literally any human that doesnt believe in gods at all is an atheist, that chick you see sitting a coffee could be an atheist for all you know. You christians are so stupid.
>>71669234
I think when you are over the age of 5, and you still believe in imaginary people and places.
You might be an autist.
>nothing personnel kid
>>71669234
Religion is the problem, not people who don't believe in imaginary sky gods
What fedoras fail to realise is should god show himself what would the point of faith be?
Adam and Eve were banished from the garden for distrusting god, trust in god on earth and you shall meet him in heaven.
Enjoy hell ebin fedoraman
>>71669234
one bullet at a time
>>71674682
>what would the point of faith be?
So you admit you enjoy being stupid jesus fuck how did humans this insane get to the modern age. If your deity did reveal itself then I would be curious about it but your HURR FAITH is as good as any deity in human history which there are over thousands so yours cannot be real if none of them are real retard.
>>71674682
Bad news, god is not real and there is 0% chance he is
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/04/21/my-wife-and-i-are-white-evangelicals-heres-why-we-chose-to-give-birth-to-black-triplets/
Christians are weak cucks, they're disgusting and they adopted a semitic religion. A non cuck true white man would be either an atheist or a pagan. KIKE ON A STICK
>>71670400
What if I'm not?
>>71670400
Sounds like we have a lib-prog cuck problem then, not an atheist problem.
I do not have a problem with atheists per se, I choose to believe and they do not. What bothers me however is their constant need to argue, to what end?
Could it be something as banal and arbitrary as jealousy? No matter how much you feel the pre-mature urge of proving your, ehrm "intelligence", you can never deny the sense of community religion brings.
>>71675272
Nice cherry picking, you fat Canadian faggot. Most liberal are atheist, I know that because it's the first thing they tell you.
>>71671480
>Christian Chad
most modern day Christianity is the most cucked beta male feminist trash there is.
>>71675832
well then i gue--
>sweden flag
yeah you are.
>>71669234
We point out that atheism is an unscientific position.
>Agnosticism is of the essence of science, whether ancient or modern. It simply means that a man shall not say he knows or believes that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe.
>-Huxley
The problem is they've all sperged on Dawkins and think they can be an "agnostic atheist" without realizing it is a contradiction in terms.
Others are retarded enough to say that all agnosticism is atheism. These people are too braindead to be saved.
But the half intelligent and reasonable atheists will convert to agnosticism once they see the error of their ways, because it is indeed the only rational position to take on the existence of God or any other unanswerable question for that matter.
>>71674682
I have a question:
If God only shown himself 2000 years ago, what happened to the other homo sapiens 200 000 years before ?
Are they in hell ? Isn't this a bit unfair ?
>>71676171
>Oh I might have to refute that
>but wait
>I'll just insult him based on flags instead
Nice one my dude
>>71675997
Funny you say that when basically we have christfags making post like this about "atheist problem".
>>71669234
there are religious extremist chopping heads and you want to "address the atheist problem"
neat
>inb4 replying to b8
i know it is b8
>>71676195
Agnosticism basically is atheism.
If you don't pray, don't go to church, or a mosque, or a synagogue, or a buddhist temple, or any of the other multitude of religious holy places, you're not a believer, which means you're an atheist.
>>71676371
i didn't have to refute it, i qualified my statement by saying not all of you are (9/10), it's just that it's very likely that you are if you're an atheistic swede.
>>71676195
Gnostic Atheism is the only legitimate position because god and religion are logical impossibilities.
>>71676484
Atheists deny the existence of God. Agnostics don't.
A very simple distinction that you really need to learn.
>>71669234
I read the bible, I want to believe in God because I believe in the values that the Church once promoted but theres too many flaws in the Holy book. So I don't really know what to do about that.... I believe in the good that christianity do but I can't believe in God because the Church right now is just... corrupted and full of SWJ
>>71676572
>god and religion are logical impossibilities
This statement is nonsensical.
>>71676592
>Atheists deny the existence of God.
Most don't. They just reject belief in the existence of God.
One bullet at a time.
>implying the cucked political correctness we have today isn't the logical conclusion of Christian values when there isn't enough evidence to support literal interpretation
This is what happens when your entire philosophy is based on muh feels
>>71676506
Yeah that is fair enough, but you do have to take into consideration that I am browsing /pol/.
>>71676643
You need to prove a positive claim, you're not required to prove a negative. The negative is god is not real, the positive is god is real. It is impossible to provide any evidence that god is real therefore in the realm of logical rational thinking god cannot exist because of the lack of evidence.
When there is no religion with any evidence, and when that evidence disproves it or most of it, then what is there even to argue about?
>>71676572
Agreed... ish.
>>71676643
I think he was trying to say you can't arrive at judgements about god's existence or the truth of a religion via logic. It would take a Tolstoy-esque revelation to know, hence the "gnostic" atheism.
>>71676680
>they just reject belief in the existence of God
stop with the bullshit semantics.
1) God exists. Theist.
2) God does not exist. Atheist.
3) I don't know. Agnostic.
Stop trying to justify your label by generalizing it.
>>71676905
When two parties are in a discussion and one asserts a claim, the one who asserts has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim.
Atheists assert a claim (that God does not exist).
>>71676977
But I don't deny the existence of god, and I'm an atheist. I just doubt the claims to the existence of god by theists, and I don't think faith is a good way of gaining knowledge, because it doesn't demand justification.
Since when is not believing in bullshit a problem?
>>71677299
You are an agnostic. Stop calling yourself an atheist.
>>71677430
Agnostic would imply that he is netrual towards the prospect of god.
>>71677500
He is neutral.
> I don't deny the existence of god
>>71676977
Where is the "I dont care, none of this matters" option?
>>71676977
>>71677430
This is the correct answer.
>>71677572
>And I'm an atheist
Implying he's not.
I don't think there is a god - therefore I would call myself an Atheist. But I obviously can't know that with 100% certainty therefore I am agnostic.
So I guess this anon would fall into the same category of Agnostic Atheism.
>>71677430
>You are an agnostic.
No, I am not, because I'm not a believer in god. I don't believe in any deity, and I don't pray to any deity, so I am an atheist.
Why atheism is on the rise in the west? Every other social media I visit every edgelord saying "fuck man I'm an atheist, because of science and shieet", what's the driving force behind it? Someone or something is pushing this agenda on the Western masses.
>>71677789
ag·nos·tic
aɡˈnästik/
noun
noun: agnostic; plural noun: agnostics
1.
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
You are agnostic, not an atheist.
>>71677237
>Atheists assert a claim (that God does not exist).
Which suffers the same faults a claim that God does exist.
Hence the need for gnosis for genuine atheism to have any ground to stand upon.
>>71669234
They die childless and alone. There is no problem.
this is how it should be:
>>71676977
[pic related] is obnoxious
Why are there so many religiousfags on this board?
>>71677890
But I do claim disbelief in God. Like I just said. I don't believe in any deity nor do I pray to one.
But that doesn't mean I "deny" the existence of God, because I might be wrong.
We can just leave them alone, Christians being dicks to them doesn't exactly show the love of God.
>>71677757
The fact that he calls himself an atheist does not imply he is an atheist. Words have meanings. I can't say "I am a unicorn" and this change the definition of unicorn.
Agnostic atheism is a contradiction in terms.
>>71677876
>someone or something is pushing this agenda on the Western masses
That something is called "becoming rational" and is on the rise because people are (slowly but surely) realizing that it's fucking stupid to believe in 2,000 year old books as the end-all, be-all explanation of the universe.
>>71677978
This pic is fucking stupid
I dont follow a religion, thats all there is to it. I dont need a label to tell you i dont believe in god
>>71677999
To claim disbelief isn't the same as not believing. To claim disbelief is to assert that God does not exist, or as you put it, "deny the existence of God," which is the position that atheists hold.
>>71669234
I am deist. I do believe in God, I just don't believe in Church and holy books such as Bible and Quran.
Now, to your question. There is nothing you can do. Except teach/disciple your children. As most atheists are naive and not mature yet.
I'm atheist for a reason.
God doesn't exist, he never has in my life, and no amount of praying to him has ever helped in my life , in the times I needed him the most.
God doesn't exist, prove me wrong
you can't
>>71677999
Disbelief in God means you deny the existence of God.
Disbelief does not mean absence of belief.
>>71678317
Burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
>>71678223
My fellow /pol/lack, tell me, why do you believe in god? I ask this legitimately because I'm genuinely curious. What sort of god do you believe in? How do they act and interact with the universe?
>implement national ban on fedoras
>heavily regulate fingerless gloves
>require licensing and testing for trenchcoats
>shut down reddit
>>71676977
The dictionary says otherwise, although I wouldn't expect Christians to know what words mean.
>>71678150
>To claim disbelief is to assert that God does not exist
No it's not. It's to assert that I don't have any belief in any deity.
>>71678322
>Disbelief in God means you deny the existence of God.
No. It doesn't. Disbelieving and denying are two different words in the English language for a reason.
>>71678430
Hes not real, show us absolute proof or shut up you fucking lunatic.
>>71678430
Looks like can't come up with evidence.
checkmate Christians.
>>71678123
Ok, but why all the sudden now, why haven't humans adapt that idealogy 2,000, and please don't tell because of science and shieet.
>>71678317
>god doesn't exist because he doesn't personally come to help me
>he thinks that atheism and theism can stand up to logical scrutiny like pure agnosticism can
>>71678519
Because the same lunatics in this thread killed rational people that disproved their nonsense. who knows how many intelligent humans have been killed by religious retards.
>>71678482
dis·be·lief
noun
inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real
You say it is possible God could exist.
Therefore, you do not refuse to accept that God could be true.
Therefore, you do not disbelieve in God.
Therefore, you are not an atheist, but an agnostic.
>>71677978
>that pic
what is this shit
is this like tumblr theory of gender applied to philosophy
>>71678628
everything to the left of your weebfag pic is correct
>>71669234
It's addressing itself
They are killing themselves
Atheism's just one of the many side effects of autism. It's best to leave these people alone in their safe spaces, where they can pretend that there is some link between the scientific output of a person and their belief in a higher power.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/psyched/201205/does-autism-lead-atheism
http://www.aspminds.com/abstractthinking.html
http://www.autism-society.org/what-is/aspergers-syndrome/
atheism has the highest rates of suicide
They can't handle life
When you think about it they are a lot like trannies
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp.161.12.2303
Atheists unironically on suicide watch.
>>71678618
And now you know why people don't give a fuck about God these days. useless imaginary asshole who tells us to follow commandments and laws when the idiot can't even enforce them? Either intervene and show your face and do some magic to make us happy or go fuck yourself
>>71678699
I see you skipped the other definition.
dis·be·lief
noun
- lack of faith.
"I'll burn in hell for disbelief"
synonyms: atheism, unbelief, godlessness, ungodliness, impiety, irreligion, agnosticism, nihilism
"I'll burn in hell for disbelief"
>>71670831
This.
BUT WHILE WE ARE MENTIONING THIS
DON'T YOU AETHIST FAGS WORSHIP SCIENCE? NOT Science! but real shit?
Read "Who built the Moon" By Christopher Knight
Intelligent designers created our local System bruh.
Look at the drawing to the left. It is a circle inscribed inside a square. The Earth and the Moon conform absolutely to this simplest of geometrical figures. Let us imagine that the green circle represents the Earth. If this was the case, then everything in the drawing that is not green and is shown in red, would represent the Moon.
The drawing is an expression of a mathematical fact. It represents the relationship between π (Pi) and the number 4. The symbol π appears time and again in mathematics and it has fascinated people for at least 6,000 years. π defines the relationship of the diameter of a circle to its circumference. The true definition of π cannot be discovered because it appears to go on forever. However, if we round it off at the fourth decimal point we could say that π is 3.1416. This is exactly what the builders of the Moon did – they considered π to be equal to 3.1416 – which is yet another way we know there was a deliberate intention involved.
>>71678437
I believe in God because how otherwise how you explain atoms? How DNA starts? Big Bang Theory/how universe begin.
I don't believe what most churches said. God doesn't interfere with our lives. As He believe in free will. Evil exists because of free will. If he interfere every time we did something bad, how we grow as living beings?
Basically, God is a Creator not a parent.
>>71671423
Religious people are the ones making the claim that there IS a god. Atheists are saying that there isn't any evidence, and as such dismiss that claim. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim, and religious people are the ones making the claim, you clod.
>>71678735
There is no absolute proof Yahweh is real while the concept of a deity is interesting we are not insane enough like you to think its a fact of reality. Atheism is the default state of life, religion has only been observed in humans.
>>71678430
The burden of proof is on religious people since no one is born religious.
>>71670163
>Christian Creation theory is the most logical and plausible theory as to the creation and subsequent evolution of Earth and the universe.
We're listening
>>71669234
Prove god or gods exist. Oh wait, no proof is good enough. Just give them an island.
Agnosticsm does not exist. You either believe in a god or don't and ti believe that your god is the right one and everyone is wrong is rather childish. Atheists are red-pilled, you indoctrinated faggots need to accept your man in the sky is a storytale made by the jews.
>>71678869
You cannot dismiss a claim without evidence.
Dismissal of a claim requires evidence to the contrary.
This is how science works.
Both Theists and Atheists are making a claim.
Both carry a burden of proof which cannot be satisfied.
Both are unscientific believers.
>>71678830
>typical atheist worshiping science instead of my ms paint picture of a circle
>>71669234
You can start with addressing the problem of door-to-door evangelizing and taking every opportunity to speak on behalf of omniflatulent beings just because you haven't any authority of your own.
Don't say, "well my denomination doesn't..."
Nobody cares.
>>71670831
This is shit bait. The burden of proof is 100% on the claimant.
>>71674934
>Caribbean
>atheist
I swear I remember a cap of some Caribbean atheist complaining how hard it was being an athiest in the carribean
>>71679045
"God does not exist" is a claim.
>>71678519
>because science and shieet
Nah, I'm not retarded.
I imagine that it's due to the popularity of figures such as Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Bill Nye (the Science Guy), etc. The Bill Nye vs Ken Ham debate was pretty well covered. I'm not exactly saying this it is becoming "cool" to be atheist now, but it's definitely becoming more socially acceptable. In addition, books like "The God Delusion" have also helped to spread atheist reasoning and have been incredibly successful. Clearly, people want this change.
Why is it happening now? Like I said, it's acceptable to be atheist now, or at least, it's becoming more acceptable. During the 1950's in the US, you would be shot for coming out, as if you were gay. But now, with a more PC worldview, more and more people are being exposed to the idea that there is no god, and that viewpoint is gaining enough traction to warrant attention.
>>71670136
Confrontational atheists have been infesting the internet long before reddit was dreamed up by a couple Jewish kids in NYC.
>Religion
>>71678803
Notice that both atheism and agnosticism are both listed as synonyms, despite being two different things. Atheism is regarded as a denial of the existence of God, agnosticism is regarded as neither the rejection or acceptance of (the possibility of) God.
>>71679126
Religion is started by one claim: "There is a god."
>>71678699
>icame.jpg
God doesn't exist, that's it . There's no argument to be had about this. Just admit you're praying to a false idol and possibly the devil .
>>71678917
you hit the nail right on the head with that. Sadly, people will argue "b-b-but yeah huh!"
>>71679126
It's more like,
>the existence of deities is not apparent.
>>71670699
>>71670831
>>71678830
>>71678869
>Prove or disprove knowledge that is beyond the bounds of objective evidence
>Also, provide objective evidence please
This is silly. You can have your own subjective knowledge and experience of things, but something like a proof or disproof of God that can be transmitted from one person to another is absolutely ridiculous.
It's just something one must decide upon themselves... or not in the case of agnostics.
>>71679185
>Atheism is regarded as a denial of the existence of God
"Atheism is, in the broadest sense, the absence of belief in the existence of deities.[1][2][3][4] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.[1][2][5] One inclusive, contemporary definition holds that atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist.[6][7] Atheism is contrasted with theism,[8][9] which, in its most general form, is the belief that at least one deity exists.[9][10][11]"
There is no "denial" here.
>>71679256
A nice example of what atheism actually represents.
>>71677996
There's not. Half of the people on this board are trolling. The other half only "ironically" believe what they say here.
>>71669234
By showing evidence of God.
>>71679294
There is no evidence one way or another.
>>71679338
What exactly is your point? Our species managed fine many eons before it developed the capacity to substitute logic with nonsense generated from their emotions to explain reality.
>>71669234
Atheists are people with low social intelligence.
>>71679296
>>71679011
Fucking stupid
Most atheists are agnostic atheists. Most theists are gnostic theists. Agnostic atheists don't have to prove anything because they're not claiming anything.
>>71679298
>atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.
Keep clinging to your precious label. I don't know why people fall in love with a label and stick to it even when another label fits much better.
>>71679298
>In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities
>One inclusive, contemporary definition holds that atheism is the rejection of belief that any deities exist.
>rejection
You're an agnostic.
>>71671423
First define God. What God are you talking about?
>>71679256
Dude...
>There's no argument to be had about this
Then
>Just admit you're praying to a false idol and possibly the devil
You are making argument here. You sound stupid.
>>71679356
So you believe that without any proof or knowing what kind of people post here? That's a huge leap of faith.
>>71679503
Agnostic atheist is a contradiction in terms.
>>71679503
This image is retarded because it doesn't include "I am completely neutral and believe that there is a 50/50 chance God exists." Yes, this philosophy is entirely valid no matter how many infographics or links you post.
>>71679503
> yet another retarded ideological compass, now with fake middleground
p1: whatever begins to exist has a cause of its existence. (PSR)
p2: the universe began to exist.
c1: therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence.
p3: the cause is either impersonal or personal.
p4: the cause of the universe is not impersonal. (impersonal causes cannot alone elect to change one state of affairs to a different state of affairs.)
c2: therefore the cause of the universe is personal.
prove me wrong
>>71679541
No. I'm not. Because I reject belief, just like I've been try to tell you three or four times now.
A rejection of belief in deities, is not a rejection of deities. It is a rejection of the act of believing.
I'm an atheist but I don't know if there really is a God.
That's all, now leave me be and I'll leave your to your little book
>>71679680
>I'm an atheist but I'm not an atheist
>>71679012
I am Buddhist. I am arguing for intelligent creators. Learn to read.
>>71679604
Are you going to address this point? >>71679216
>>71679680
You're an agnostic. Atheists claim that there is no god.
>>71679641
The universe was caused by the big bang we just dont have the science advanced enough to figure out what caused the big bang.
>>71679641
Now demonstrate how you get do a deity from that argument, and then demonstrate the God of which religion is the correct one, and when you're done that, explain how causality doesn't apply to the deity itself.
>>71679680
>little book
That little jab is why there will never be peace. You don't want it. You secretly crave antagonism, so you passive-aggressively push for it at every opportunity.
>>71679641
Basically this.
Our local system was created intelligently, and on top of that - holographic disclosure already happened.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEaecUuEqfc
>>71679620
It's a stupid position to have desu
50/50 is a hell of a stretch
>>71679625
>fake middleground
Lack of belief doesn't mean belief in nothing. If you are an atheist, you reject religion and don't believe in a god. If you're agnostic, then you aren't sure if there is a god. You could be unsure about an existence of god and still believe in one, but I doubt there is anyone out there that is "sure" that god doesn't exist.
>>71669234
What part of finishing the final solution do you not understand? They invented it!
http://jewishatheist.us/
>>71679656
Again: semantics. You hold the position of an agnostic.
Refer to your post here: >>71678482
If a rejection of disbelief is what defined both atheism and agnosticism, there would be no need for two different words.
Atheism is the assertion that there is no god, agnosticism is the lack of faith without outright denial.
>>71669234
Kill liberalism. The two go hand-in-hand way too close.
>>71679947
>It's a stupid position to have desu
No, 50/50 is literally the only position to withstand logical scrutiny since there is literally zero concrete evidence for or against the existence of God.
>>71679991
a rejection of belief**
>>71679833
>Now demonstrate how you get do a deity from that argument
that's c2
> and then demonstrate the God of which religion is the correct one
outside the scope of the argument
>and when you're done that, explain how causality doesn't apply to the deity itself.
because anything that doesn't have a beginning don't have to have a cause. (inb4: speshul pleeding -- i said anything)
>>71679130
>During the 1950's in the US, you would be shot for coming out
citation
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
>>71679503
>The eternal fencesitter
Making it way too complicated.
You believe in God, you believe there isn't God, or you refuse to decide.
All the rest of that garbage regards *how* one comes to that decision (or lack thereof), which is frankly a pointless distinction to make.
>>71680027
Correct. At least one person understands here :^)
>>71679855
>>71679786
>>71679741
This is why I mean. Religious people are extremely hostile as fuck. Most wars are created by religions. If religion was erased we would have peace.
>>71679680
see
>>71679855
>That little jab is why there will never be peace
Why it is so hard for you to show respect while you are making argument? That's why many religious people never like you guys. You respect them and just said agree to disagree in the end. You will earn their respect. That way, they will not hate you. Why that is so hard?
>>71678911
If atheists are so sure of their beliefs without any proof, how can they say that those who believe in God without any proof are wrong? Check-mate atheists.
>>71680020
The influx of moralfag whites is due to Christianity its your fault this is happening not us, as I said before we are the default of the human species what actions people do while atheist has no correlation to atheism because there is no atheist culture or beliefs retard.
>>71676613
The true Chuch is not some physical building you pray in and get lectured by some guy, but the congregation of people beholden to Lord Jesus and God the father.
>>71679991
>If a rejection of disbelief is what defined both atheism and agnosticism, there would be no need for two different words.
That's because in the beginning atheism was about belief, and agnosticism was about knowledge. Nobody can know if God exists or not. Literally nobody. Even if they claim they know, they can't. They can only believe. Which is why agnosticism is retarded to begin with, and was only invented by Huxley as a word to use instead of atheism because atheism had very bad connotations to the majority of people(which it still does, especially in the United States of Shit).
produce some credible proof that your religion is correct
>>71680104
Oh yes, the Buddhists around the world are extremely violent and have killed so many people.
>>71680020
>Kill liberalism
Kill yourself and get out of America first.
>>71669234
How come these threads always get so many replies? Make up some weak bait with a random dumb picture mentioning religion/atheism and it's 300+ posts of useless back and forth among people who never listen to each other.
I know many /pol/acks are retarded dipshits but i don't think they are THAT retarded
>>71680104
What makes you think other ideologies, less religiously influenced, wouldn't simply take their faith? Like, let's say, Marxism, liberalism, conservatism, etc. Belief exists without religion and an absence of religion would solve nothing.
>>71680202
That doesnt help your case, you semitic religion followers are mindless monkeys compared to other religions.
>>71680027
The thing is, that you either believe in a god or you don't believe in a god. If you aren't actively believing in a god, then you don't believe in a god.
>>71680094
I don't believe in a god, not that there isn't a god. See the distinction? I don't believe in unicorns, but I also don't believe that unicorns don't exist.
>>71679991
>there would be no need for two different words.
There is when the word "gnosis" has a different meaning from the world "theism".
Theism is belief. Gnosis is a claim of knowledge (certainty).
Agnosticism is a position of uncertainty with respect to anything you please.
Atheism is the absence of belief in deities.
>>71680261
What is my case? I never said I followed a semitic religion. The point is you can't conflate all religions as being the same, or all as being violent.
Buddhists are notoriously nonviolent.
>>71679620
This image is retarded because it`s ideological compass.
And the God is not 2d entity.
Everybody has alter-ego, that corresponds directly with what you belive, even if you do not call it "the God".
Most atheists worship the same thing as satanists, muslims, other destructive cults and most of pagan cults. They worship the force. Also the time.
If they are given a choice, they chose force over truth.
Their god is omnipotent and omnipresent.
>>71680176
>because there is no atheist culture or beliefs retard
>Cult of reason
>Calles law
>League of the militant godless
>Atheism plus
>>71680261
Dude... your action is the reason why religious people don't you.
>>71680051
okay, not literally shot, I apologize for my exaggeration
But certainly, people were MUCH more religious during the 50's. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2013/07/the-religion-of-the-1950s/
>>71680388
Don't like you*
>>71679947
> Lack of belief doesn't mean belief in nothing.
There is no lack in anything here. There is actually a ton of extra bullshit.
>>71680318
>I don't believe in unicorns, but I also don't believe that unicorns don't exist.
lmfao, amazing the mental gymnastics you kids will pull just to cling to your preferred label.
Just call yourself agnostic, faggot.
>>71669234
How is being atheistic a problem?
my set's
>Pro Papa-Trump
>Not cucked
>Dislike all religions equally, altough major emphasis towards mudslimes, I fucking hate those people
>Hard working
>Well educated
>Not making nigger-triplets because of "religion"
>>71680318
>I don't believe in a god, not that there isn't a god. See the distinction? I don't believe in unicorns, but I also don't believe that unicorns don't exist.
Right. So you are an agnostic.
Pretty simple.
>>71680190
>Which is why agnosticism is retarded to begin with, and was only invented by Huxley as a word to use instead of atheism because atheism had very bad connotations to the majority of people(which it still does, especially in the United States of Shit).
FINALLY, someone who fucking gets it.
I am so fucking sick-and-tired of idiots who continue to use Agnosticism as a middle-man/mutually-exclusive because they're too afraid to own their Atheism.
>>71669234
>How do we address the atheist problem?
prove that god exists
>>71680190
Sounds more like your personal opinion on the matter than what actually is and is defined. Atheism is a denial of God that requires faith that he does not exist, which cannot be proved, which necessitated the origin of the word agnostic, which neither believes or denies.
You're both right and wrong. And an agnostic.
>>71679216
>Religion is started by one claim: "There is a god."
No, religion started with one saying: "I do not understand"
>>71680388
I dont care if you stupid monkeys hate us, you are just proving us right by hating us for no reason at all other than not indulging in your madness.
>>71680376
Fedoras are not atheism you stupid fuck, I have never even read a single book on Dawkins at all.
>>71670043
You sound like gay guy that said he was going to turn all your kids gay
>atheism=agnosticism
a·the·ist
ˈāTHēəst/
noun
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
ag·nos·tic
aɡˈnästik/
noun
1.
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
Dictionaries are your friend
>inb4 atheist damage control
Agnosticism is mutually exclusive from atheism.
>Agnostic doesn't have anything to do with or describe anything about belief
>I don't care what the dictionary says I'm using my own definition
>autism
"Agnostic atheist" is just a new atheist attempt to hide behind agnosticism weak wordplay.
To believe something is to accept it as true or valid. In order to do this, you must have knowledge of it. Thus, belief always requires knowledge.
New atheists are really trying to hide behind agnosticism. There's an atheism site, atheism.org that literally says "you can't trust dictionaries to define atheism".
>I don't believe anything, but I have many suspicions.
-Robert Anton Wilson
>>71673153
AR 15s are gay. Get an AK 47
>>71680611
I'm laughing my ass off at the dude from the Bahamas calling Americans "monkeys"
Classic projection
>>71680104
Practically every war has been about resources, not religion. Shit, even the Crusades was political in nature, not religious, due to Arabs invading and conquering up the Europe. Religion was very secondary.
>>71680176
Wrong. A huge majority of atheists have been highly left-wing, and a lot of it has been to reject Christianity.
>>71680572
>that requires faith that he does not exist
Ok, if it is "faith that he does not exist" please illustrate the tenets and dogma of Atheism, specifically which prayers to the Non-God that we believe in.
Atheism is nothing more than a status symbol these days like how Satanism was something dumb kids did in the early 2000s just to start shit with everyone else.
>>71680572
Atheism is a rejection of your own culture. A concentrate of the social decadence.
There is no traditional people on Earth, that had no deity of some sort. So religion is at least the organic part of any normal human culture. And you reject it, "because muh science".
>>71680804
A monkey is a primate that acts on simple animal instincts that is what most christians and muslims are animals. You people are so subhuman that you need a make believe fairy tale to make you civilized at all.
>>71680611
I am deist, you moron. That's why no one like you fuckers. Arrogance, inflated ego, insult people when you are 'mad', and god complex. Just fucking show respect.
Congrats, you and other atheists make me don't really 'like' you guys.
Disgust.
>>71678843
You raise valid concerns, and essentially, we don't have answers. Yet.
That doesn't mean we won't find them.
I have a different question: do you believe in heaven/hell? If so, what determines entrance to either one?
>>71679130
You didn't answer my question, but like I figured you have to get science involved someway or another , we are talking about spiritual belief not why science is the core center of every atheist belief system, Stop running to science dude, did the father of modern science einstein believe in the existance of a creator and a higher being, and that the universe and whats in it didn't all form by a mere chance. I'm not a professional religious debater like yourself, and this is my first time ever commenting on one, but c'mon you know what you saying doesn't make any sense.
>>71680707
>New atheists
I've seen this debate happening for about 25 years, personally.
This was way before Dawkins was a thing.
What do you mean by "new"?
>>71680828
>Wrong. A huge majority of atheists have been highly left-wing, and a lot of it has been to reject Christianity.
Thats their choice but do not generalize us with them its nothing than that religious tribalism of yours trying to find reason to hate us stupid monkey.
Wait I'm not with edgy. I was brought up atheist, I never adopted it to be cool. Christians are bros. At least you're not muslim. I just want to be friends. :(
>>71669234
Well frankly m8, we don't, that's God's job, he will get round to each of them when their ready. We are just workers in the vineyard. We tend the crop but God raises it. He makes the blind see not us.
>>71680707
Way to go dipshit, you listed two definitions for both atheist and agnostic
Atheist
>a person who disbelieves in the existence of God or gods
OR
>a person who lacks belief in the existence of God or gods
Agnostic
>a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena
OR
>a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God
So an agnostic atheist would combine the second definition of atheist with the first definition of agnostic, to arrive at the conclusion that even though he can't possibly know whether or not a god exists, he still lacks a belief in one. Hence, agnostic atheist.
>>71681019
What is your god, anglo?
>>71680862
You cannot know that God doesn't exist, therefore it is a /belief/ that he doesn't exist. That is why atheism was regarded as a religion, as religion is a set of beliefs. It's propped on the same thing as having a belief in God, which you cannot prove either.
>>71680941
If my actions makes you hate other atheist then you a simple minded tribalistic idiots like most christians that find any bad atheist to generalize all atheist. I call you a monkey because you act like a monkey.
Well another thread has devolved into a shitshow. Moving on...
>>71680994
>What do you mean by "new"?
http://atheismplus.com/
>>71680974
I agree that we don't have a solid evidence that God exists or not, only faith.
I don't believe in hell nor heaven. I do believe that there is a form of afterlife. A place where souls rest and when their time comes, they reincarnate. Needless to say, I do believe in Karma.
>>71680707
>To believe something is to accept it as true or valid. In order to do this, you must have knowledge of it. Thus, belief always requires knowledge.
Not true at all, because religious people believe in the validness of the Bible simply because the Bible says it is valid, which isn't knowledge at all, it's faith.
>>71681012
>Don't generalize us
>Begins to generalize everyone else
wew lad, I am laughin
>>71681092
Do you believe unicorns don't exist, or do you not believe in unicorns?
Careful, yes to the former implies certainty, but yes to the latter implies a lack thereof.
>>71681228
I generalize you because of you christian monkeys act the same, you cant morally function without your imaginary friend and want to savagely brutalize people that dont believe in your madness at all. Look at the barbaric thoughts you show towards homosexuals for example.
>>71671423
>Making the claim God does not exist, however, DOES require proof. Can't provide it? Then you have no ground to stand on.
>Making the claim God does exist, however, DOES require proof. Can't provide it? Then you have no ground to stand on.
are you capable of breathing without help?
>>71670400
I feel like its the other way around. Atheism wouldn't logically result in liberalism. Liberalism as an ideaology requires atheism though.
>>71681079
A agnostic or atheist is governed by two main principles: 1) all beliefs must be supported by observational evidence, and 2) beliefs that contradict observational evidence cannot be tolerated. However, atheism states that there is no god, even though observational evidence indicates that the universe has a cause that cannot be detected observationally. So despite the lack of observational evidence for a naturalistic cause for the universe, the strong atheist believes that the universe has a naturalistic cause and that there is no god, contradicting the tenet that all beliefs should be based upon observational evidence.
To be atheist is to claim no belief in god (s)
How hard is this to grasp?
Your feelings have no merit to the meaning of words
>>71681106
Irony
>If my actions makes you hate other atheist then you a simple minded tribalistic idiots
And yet you call us monkeys based on... what? Oh right, on generalization. You are fucking moron. Just fuck off. I will not show respect nor defend you anymore.
What does pol have against Atheism?
does /pol/ belive in god?
Why are you christians always shitposting on /pol/, instead of doing something productive for your family, church, community, etc?
>>71681378
Christianity is the impetus for most liberal ideas so human equality or helping the poor. Again its your fault all of this is happening you stupid morally righteous sociopaths.
>>71681092
>You cannot know that Big Foot doesn't exist, therefore it is a /belief/ that he doesn't exist.
Right.
>>71681412
To be fair, I could say same to you guys. Why you shitpost here? Do something productive for your scientific community and liberal community?
>>71681407
/pol/ has always believed in God Even way back when it was /new/ and /n/
>>71681181
This is how "agnosticism" became a thing in the first place.
>pic related
It happened when, in a formal debate, a theist put forth an argument that depended on a strawman of his opponent about him claiming certainty about the non-existence of deities and using that very narrow point to argue that atheists are no better than theists.
>>71669234
Redpill them. Conservative atheists like me are your greatest ally, pushing away one what can be viewed as one of the negative stereotypes of right wing voters. Better yet, redpill them on Christianity.
>>71681551
What is pol's proof?
>>71680992
First, I'd like to say I'm not a professional. Let's just get that out of the way.
Second, I answered your question. You asked "Why is this all happening now?" and I feel that I adequately explained that part. As for the second half, "why not 2000 years ago," well, because back then, you were persecuted for not believing. Pre-Christian Rome, you were persecuted if you didn't belive in Jupiter, Juno, etc. After Christian Rome, you were persecuted if you didn't believe in Jesus and God.
I did not "run to science" and say "because science there is no god." I used examples of people (of whom only a few were scientists).
>>71681092
>You cannot know that God doesn't exist, therefore it is a /belief/ that he doesn't exist. That is why atheism was regarded as a religion, as religion is a set of beliefs. It's propped on the same thing as having a belief in God, which you cannot prove either.
>That is why atheism was regarded as a religion, as religion is a set of beliefs
Whoah, hold up. The rest is right, but a religion is much more organized and nuanced than simply "a set of beliefs". Atheism isn't a religion, it isn't even a cult. But yes, it does require belief.
>>71681547
God you people are dumb you keep associating atheism with liberalism and science.
Most /pol/acks are atheist.
So, what's the problem?
>>71681407
I don't hate atheism, only atheists.
>>71678519
What are you using right now? What enables the instant exchange of ideas all over the world?
>>71681547
>To be fair, I could say same to you guys. Why you shitpost here? Do something productive for your scientific community and liberal community?
Not him, but we don't have an injunction from our Holy scriptures to help people and our community. You do. And yet you're the ones making threads about the "atheist problem".
>>71681412
Because we are called to by the Holy Bible
Mark 16:15
“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”
King James Version (KJV)
>>71681706
Kill yourself, nigger.
>>71681234
I don't believe in unicorns. That doesn't mean that I deny them. This is the position of an agnostic. Also see here: >>71681382
"
The Correct Literal Meaning
In ancient Greece, the word for "god" was "theos". Obviously, if "theos" meant god, then there would need to be a word that meant the opposite. By putting "a" in front of "theos" the word "atheos" was formed, which means "no god". In Greek "a" can also mean "without", although I think in this case "no" makes more sense. Taken this way a person that says, "no god(s)", is making a denial of the existence of god(s). Any confusion about whether it meant "without belief in god(s)", as modern atheists claim, would not have been a consideration at this point in time. It was simply a denial of god(s) existence."
Cited here: http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm
>>71681710
Depends on the Atheists then
>>71681731
Again, I am deist not religious person.
>>71681754
Would you look at that the christian monkey is throwing a fit now.
>>71681193
>only faith
And that's my problem. If there is not evidence for God, why would I believe?
>karma
Who sets the basis for which karma is judged? For example, whose definitions of good and bad are the "correct" ones?
>>71681776
Yeah. Perfect example,
>>71681497
I fucking hate him. I hate any people with god complex.
>>71681776
Why the fuck are you here?????
Die kike, to the oven
>>71680318
Not actively believing in God != atheism.
Actively believing there is no God = atheism.
See the difference?
>>71681864
I have no god complex I am stating you semitic believers act like wild animals. Reacting with all this violence what barbarians you christians are.
>>71681872
What do you mean?
muh familia escaped ovens
>>71680400
So? What did they have during the 50's? Family values, people weren't really degenerates, they were hard working. So tell me, what's wrong with that?
>>71681977
Well they shouldn't had.
>>71681617
Ameriburger gets it, the truth is saying you are certain that the universe was created by a god is just as stupid as saying you know for certain that there is no creator.
The rules of science clearly state that energy cannot be destroyed, only transferred or dissipated,
so therefore the energy that created the big bang=a creator
>>71682078
Not related to being religious
>>71681655
Yes, a religion is more organized and nuanced than being boiled down to "a set of beliefs."
I know that atheism isn't a religion, but it has been argued before, by some, that it can be considered a religious belief simply considering that atheism is propped on a belief in nonexistence. I was simply clarifying.
>>71682078
That's implying that being religious results in having family values and being hard-working.
Newsflash: you can be moral without being religious.
>>71682149
There is no god until proven otherwise
>>71682149
As far as we know unconsious forces(the laws of physics) are the making of reality infact most of the universe is an invisible intangible "thing" called dark energy that causes space to expand. Who is the say there are no extra universal laws of physics that explain how our universe was formed?
>>71681762
The point is that both agnosticism and atheism can simultaneously exist in one person, just like doubt can exist simultaneously with faith in the most religiously devout person.
What you're essentially saying, is that it is impossible for a person to say the following:
>I cannot possibly know with any serious degree of certainty whether a god exists or not, but the real question is do I believe in such an entity's existence? No I don't.
You really, honestly, cannot imagine a person saying such a thing?
>>71681762
Okay, but you don't believe in them. That means, you lack belief in unicorns. An agnostic just thinks that you can't know whether or not unicorns are real. An agnostic can't lack belief, because being agnostic isn't related to whether or not you believe, but rather to whether or not you think that one is capable of knowing if unicorns exist.
>>71681900
Nope. Refer to this guy's post >>71680707
>a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
Therefore, not actively believing in God, or lacking a belief in God, equals atheism.
>>71682166
You're a literral mem. The jew. Why are you here
>>71681827
>And that's my problem. If there is not evidence for God, why would I believe?
I agree with you. I just arrive with the conclusion that God exists on my own.
>Who sets the basis for which karma is judged? For example, whose definitions of good and bad are the "correct" ones?
That's hard to explain, I still struggle with it. I will say ten commandment is good place to start.
I forget to mention, I don't believe in holy books but I do agree with some religion. Such as Jesus' love thy neighbor phrase.
>>71681634
The old Christian generals and nightly Ossuary threads(this was a roll over from /new/)
/n/'s sunday and wensday church threads
http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/24577193/#24577193
They was even /pol/s old soccer team look at their names
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMgdw2Tief4
Holy shit you pious morons really are stupid, these are some of the rediculous statements I've read
>atheists lack culture
OK cuck, look at what happened to sweden when they wanted "culture"
>atheism is a rejection of your own culture
Yeah, no. My culture? Religion has fuck-all to do with finnish culture, it's literally amongst the smallest things. Our culture is Sauna and old folk-lore and fantasy, all of which I appreciate, just not on a faith-based level, I don't pray to fucking Väinämöinen or the lady of the lake, but I humor myself with the legends and respect them with every scoop of water I throw on the hot rocks in a Sauna.
>atheism is nothing more than a status symbol
Yeah, no. Atheism is literally not believing. I'm not religious, I do not believe in gods or fear what comes after death, those are not things that concern me, this life is my heaven and I try to make the best of it, I don't need some bearded fuck and a community filled with whores who only take it up the ass before you put a ring on them to make me lead a good life.
>Atheists try to disprove god
I honestly couldn't give a shit about your faith. But how would you feel if I told you that a fantasy character from my favourite book doesn't like what you're doing? You'd look at me like I was an autist. I don't care what you do on your own, but I simply don't care and don't want anything to do with your "god" or beliefs.
>Atheists believe life started by an explosion
Yeah, no. I find it a viable theory, but I honestly do not even care. Life to me isn't about wondering about existence or trying to find a reason, or even looking what was before or what is to be after life, my life is about the moment in which I live.
>Atheists are people with low social intelligence
Oh man, this was a good one. How does not having pious beliefs make me have low social intelligence? Great generalization right there.
Is being agnostic allowed?
>>71681963
You think you are far better person than other person because whatever your reason is. Intelligence, character, or whatever. You are more like have superiority complex than God complex.
>>71682285
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/atheism says >>71681900 is correct.
>my dictionary is better than yours
>>71670163
explain...
>>71682472
you fucking annihilated those straw-men, great hunting, my friend.
>>71681551
>le /pol/ is one person may may
>>71682472
Morality is objective and the Lord's will defines it. If you do not believe, you sin. If you sin, you are committing a moral fault. If you commit a moral fault, you are a bad person. Atheists therefore are bad people.
>>71682312
>I do agree with some religion
That's fair. As much as atheists like myself dislike saying it, there ARE valuable morals in holy books. For example, some of the ten commandments are good. Don't murder, don't commit adultery, don't steal, don't commit false witness against your neighbor. Those are solid morals.
However, that's all lost by the atrocities and heinous acts elsewhere in the Bible (as an example holy book). The Flood, slavery, and justified rape and murder are okayed by God, so it's worth carefully looking over holy books. You seem to be on the right path.
>>71682561
I am a better person because I dont need fairy tales to be civilized unlike you christian fucktards.
Besides the most arrogant people are christians so fucking arrogant you think the entire universe was made for you.
>>71682274
That statement is a bit overcomplicated. Mere disbelief is implicit with the uncertainty, if you aren't certain whether or not there is a God then clearly you do not believe in said God.
At best it would be redundant.
>>71669234
I never understood why anyone would worship an omnipotent being that clearly does not give a single shit about what happens on this planet. If there is a god he is purely indifferent to anything on this planet including us. So why pay him any attention in the first place.
atheists don't say "god does not exist".
they say " why the fuck do you believe this unproven bullshit, you fucking retard"
>>71682635
>le
>may may
>Using reddit terms
Meeting all of /qa/'s requirements for newfaggotry and being a reddit/tumblr user
Taken from /qa/
how to spot reddit/tumblr users
Typical behaviour includes:
>Bringing up old memes or events when they're completely irrelevant to try and establish oldfag cred
>not understanding 4chan is a community and discussion site and not a raw content provider site
>making no-content posts that are in essence upvotes such as "/thread" and "this", especially so in response to very minor posts that wouldn't even warrant that type of response
>attempting to enforce their personal opinions as if they're site rules (popular examples are "weeb boards make up less than a sixth of all boards total, we need a GR15 addendum to quarantine anime because I don't like seeing it on /v/")
>deliberately tries to recreate the exact same sort of irreverent off topic threads content aggregators love to screencap and document, complete with screencapping the glut of textless reaction image replies like they're some sort of laugh track
>admission that the threads directly stated above is what they come to 4chan for, and believe that they're much better and worthwhile than genuine discussion threads
>deliberately makes off topic threads and then defends them as "board culture", explicitly referring to them as such
>vehemently refuses to lurk and attacks anons attempting to self moderate with stuff like "muh sekrt klub :^)"
https://desustorage.org/qa/thread/173406/#173436
https://desustorage.org/qa/thread/173406/#173460
>>71682683
Behold the monkey needs Yahweh to know what is right from wrong, you people are subhuman completely mentally subhuman.
>is a atheist doesn't believe in miracles
>likes Bernie and still thinks there is a chance for him to get the nom
>>71682285
>a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
>a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
Correct, I lack belief in unicorns. That isn't the same as disbelief.
>>71682274
I understand what you're saying but you still hold the stance of an agnostic considering the etymology of the word atheist. If theism is the belief in a god, atheism is the disbelief in a god.
"I believe God exists," vs. "I believe God does not exist."
Agnosticism is the middleground; any other labels or classifications are unnecessary.
>>71682683
>Divine command theory
I bet you would murder every person in your neighborhood if you heard a voice telling you it was God and that you should do it as well you retard.
>>71682751
Fuck off kike. What the fuck are you doing here retard. to the oven
>>71682515
See:
>>71681617
It's a meme position for a non-existent fence. You either believe in deities or you don't.
>>71679011
There is a planet 3 times the size of earth filled entirely by sentient elmo dolls. There we are. Good now I can start my Elmo doll planet thesis.
>>71682751
well i say to them that proof doesn't exist outside of mathematics, and whether or not the evidence provided is sufficient enough for a person to consider the claim as proven is subjective to the individual.
what causes them to say that the claim of theism is 'unproven bullshit' is their methodology, which is also an opinion and unproven bullshit.
>>71679011
Can you disprove the flying spaghetti monster?
>>71682768
There is no right or wrong without the Lord. Do some self-examination: where do you get your morals? I would hazard that they are "cultural values" and stem from a long history of religious tradition.
>>71682703
Atheism seems far more arrogant: given how unlikely the development of conscious life seems to be, isn't it a little pretentious to assume you're lucky enough to be one of the few entities to ever think a thought?
>>71682762
jesus christ I make a joke and you go off on a massive rant lmao How pathetic
>>71682795
Well I don't agree with you then.
Because I consider unbelief the whole point of the word atheist, and if I don't believe in religion or deities, then I'm going to call myself an atheist.
>>71680916
People that make these cartoons confuse the shit out of me.
>>71682703
>christian fucktards.
Again, I am fucking deist. God, just fucking kill yourself.
>Besides the most arrogant people are Christians so fucking arrogant you think the entire universe was made for you.
Kek. Where they said that? They only believe in God. I disagree with most Christians on most issues. I talk with them and I show them respect. After all, they are human beings. Even through you like to demonize Christians just because you don't like them. Just like SJWs.
Often, we just agree to disagree on most issues. They are still my friends. Plus, they are far far better people than you will be.
>>71682961
>where do you get your morals?
The oxytocin in my brain
>given how unlikely the development of conscious life seems to be
Life is just a really complex chemical reaction.
>>71682768
Consider the claim moral realists are making. They generally claim there are invisible properties in the world not detectable by our usual tools of science, properties of an entirely different sort than the usual “is” facts of science.
These are mysterious “ought” facts, and there is great disagreement about what they are or how we know them.
Now that is a strong claim.
An extraordinary claim, we might say. And extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, right?
So what is the atheist’s extraordinary evidence for this claim? Usually, it’s something like this:
“I experience a world of moral facts. I feel very strongly that rape is objectively wrong, and charity is objectively right.”
“Almost everybody believes in moral facts. It’s just obvious. Until you can prove there aren’t any, I’m justified in believing what people have always believed: that some things are really right or wrong.”
Do those arguments look familiar? They should.
Atheists are skeptical of these arguments when given for the existence of God, but they are credulous and gullible toward these arguments when you replace the word ‘God’ with another mysterious thing called ‘moral facts.’
This was brought up by Max Stirner
Max Stirner was an anarchist egoist believing that following certain perceived virtues was only "spooks" and we ought to do them ultimately to serve ourselves.
>>71682961
>Do some self-examination: where do you get your morals? I would hazard that they are "cultural values" and stem from a long history of religious tradition.
For me it's mostly an evaluation of what we'd have to do as a society so we can have nice things.
>>71676195
I chose to identify as atheist because it is statistically more likely that there is no creator of the universe.
Theists claim that God must exist, because the universe is too complex to have appeared on its own. However, this implies that the creator would have to be even more complex than its creation. By the same argument, a creator so complex would need an even MORE complex creator. Ad infinitum.
Its more probable that the universe grew in complexity by natural processes, than that there is an infinite chain of ever-complex creators.
>>71683097
Morals are caused by empathy without empathy are no morals.
>>71682762
Fuck a duck you have issues mate.
>>71682976
I'd still say that's the position of an agnostic, so we can agree to disagree, which is fair. But what then, is the label for a denial of God, if not atheist?
My opinion is this:
>God: theist
>Denial of god: atheist
>Don't know: agnostic
>>71683094
It is not possible to be an atheist nor to be a theist if you discard free will, friend, so you should not argue such. You are merely a physical entity that produces output that would coincide with a nonexistent internal rejection of belief. You are not an atheist if you are correct. You are an atheist wrongly if you are incorrect.
>>71683291
>It is not possible to be an atheist nor to be a theist if you discard free will,
Atheism is no belief in deities therefore I am atheist.
>>71676572
You can be Gnostic Atheist towards religions (because they're all wrong) but being a gnostic atheist toward the concept of god itself isn't a rational position to have and makes you as bad as religitards.
>>71683262
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheism
>>71682227
>>71682166
Then what gives us those morals? What teaches us right from wrong? If there's nothing to tell us what is right then we just devolve into animals, killing, stealing, doing everything for our own gain, we're better than that.
>inb4 my parents taught me morals and they weren't religious
Your parents most likely had parents or grandparents or great grandparents that taught them morals. According to the bible every human descends from Noah, whom God saw as a righteous man, enough so that he saved him and his family from the flood, which I would assume is why every culture in the world has at least some form of morality.
>>71677299
>don't deny
>atheist
Pick one
>>71677978
I'm not sure but isn't it Dawkins who started this? It's ridiculous how he's using brain states to describe a philosophical position yet his supporters just lap it up.
The terms are just as absolute as say, pregnant. You can't say you're kind of pregnant or you're kind of not, you're one or the other.
>>71669234
> i'm an atheist, debate me :^)
"You're a faggot prove me wrong"
>>71670163
as a christian i'd like to see those arguments
>>71682973
>I was merely pretending
>>71683243
Take your own advice
>>71683291
If I say that free will (rather, a lack thereof) is determined by the limitations of our reason imposed upon us by genetics, is that contradictory to being an atheist or theist?
Sorry, I meant parents or grand parents or great grandparents that were Christian, Catholic, Jewish, or some other religion. Islam and the Talmud don't count, fuck those guys.
>>71683236
>Morals are caused by empathy without empathy are no morals.
Morals vary across countries and cultures
What wrong in one is considered acceptable in another
>>71683097
I'm atheistic, I agree with this, and I don't recognize the external validity of "morality" or "ethics" except as shorthand for "muh feelings" whether you believe in deities or not.
Appealing to this as a reason to turn to religious nonsense is quite ridiculous, as well.
/pol/ how do we address the Christian dipshit problem?
a large percentage of the forum believes in miracles and that they are teleported to another dimension when they die.
>>71669234
Demand an argument beyond dick butt pre-cum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlDNrHGUoOQ
>>71683579
That's for this >>71683445
Man I'm fucking up today...
>>71683585
Yes and there would be morals at all if we had no empathy look at the black race thats exactly what humans would be like without empathy.
>>71680916
>this picture
whoever made this picture obviously has no idea how shit scientists are actually paid to do their research. You only need to look at NASA to see how meek it is, so it astounds me when retards think this is whats actually happening.
>>71683530
It's contradictory to any opinion whatsoever, since you are not a thinking entity but rather a mere physical object, assuming "you" refers to a combination of mind and body. Of course, things change if you reject the mind as physical (think Leibniz's pre-established harmony).
>>71683671
>Yes and there would be morals at all if we had no empathy look at the black race thats exactly what humans would be like without empathy.
So you admit whole groups of people can have no empathy and thus no morals?
>>71683790
Yes.
>>71681642
Fair enough. That was a better explanation.
>>71682683
Sin is for the believers. You're basically telling me the rules of your fantasy board-game and telling me I'm a bad person because I don't roll the dice until I hit 24 when three players yell "orc!" while holding hands in a shape of a ceptagon, wearing robes made of straw and piss. Because I didn't roll 24, I now must face a beating because I'm a bad person according to your rule-book.
Please, what you said is stupid as fuck and it baffles me how you can pass this logic as true in your head. I doubt anyone who knows me would call me a "bad person". I can't believe I share a planet with people who are this blind.
>>71683719
On the contrary, disregarding free will in the manner that I have doesn't necessarily imply a lack of sentience (being a physical object), rather that the scope our actions and thought are limited by the degree to which we are sentient. I don't find this contradictory to theism or atheism, merely an extension of Darwinism, even if one considers the mind to be physical.
>>71680246
It's actually a nice discussion desu
>questioning the holocaust: okay
>questioning jew involvement in anything: okay
>questioning anything with the slightest left bias: okay
>questioning a 2000~ year old book: not okay
>>71681382
So if my 'belief' is that the existence of God seems unlikely and illogical, but I can't rule it out because I can't explain how the universe came to be, and am happy to admit the current best answer to such things is 'We don't know', then am I agnostic or not?
>>71683445
>What teaches us right from wrong?
Compassion. Empathy towards your fellow man. Not quite intuition, but humans are naturally altruistic because it benefits them (Not that we aren't also violent and conniving, but those are just different aspects of humanity).
Now, I'm not saying that a lot of of morals don't come from religions. To do so would be ignorant of history. However, I AM saying that you don't need to be religious to have these morals. Think of it like learning from the mistakes of others: You don't have to get drunk, drive, and hit a car full of people to know that drinking in driving is dangerous. You don't have to sexually abuse someone to know that it is wrong, you can see the effects it has on victims and feel that it is wrong. Likewise, I don't have to believe in God to believe that murder is wrong. I can agree with the message.
Also, I appreciate that you mentioned Noah and the flood. It's my favorite Bible story because it's one of the funniest. Not that widespread destruction and death is funny-I think it's horrible. However, I guess since God did it, it's okay.
>>71682941
by your logic we shouldn't believe that anything is true because all truth is subjective.
science claims rely on a set of mathematical expressions of an expected behavior which is tested and confirmed by enough scientists to turn it into a theory. that's the basis of human knowledge, and spoiler alert, [spoiler]it's objective[/spoiler].
now show me a scientific theory for the existence of god...
>>71683948
Thank you. Any further questions?
>>71684010
Yes, that's exactly what I'm telling you. I don't think anything in this world is really subjective or "grey": every "opinion" is just the affirmation of a truth or a lie.
God exists and His word defines morality. This is fact. For either of us to hold different "opinions" is nonsense: they are not opinions, but rather lies. Reason, observation, thought, and experience are distinct from truth. Only truth alone is needed, and truth justifies itself.
>>71684300
No senpia, enough schooling for the day, my head hurts.
>>71679147
What the cuck?
>>71678735
>Atheism's just one of the many side effects of autism.
Of course it is, atheism and those gosh darn vaccines.
>>71684262
>by your logic we shouldn't believe that anything is true because all truth is subjective.
no, i was talking about epistemology, not ontology
>now show me a scientific theory for the existence of god...
science is methodological naturalism, supernatural entities are beyond its scope.
if God came down to earth and slapped you in the face, science would tell you to accept the naturalistic explanation that it was all just a hallucination.
>>71684309
No, your "god" can define morality any way he wants, but his words or opinions are not above mine. If god exists, he can say and have opinions on whatever the fuck he wants, see if I care or if it affects me.
I don't need someone to tell me that harming another person is wrong to know that it's wrong.
You sound like you need a manual just to take a piss, what's your problem, can't make decisions and assumptions without someone giving you a hint?
Land of the free my ass.
>>71682149
>The rules of science clearly state that energy cannot be destroyed, only transferred or dissipated,
Right...
>so therefore the energy that created the big bang=a creator
What? You just said energy CAN'T BE created. I can accept the first bit is true, but not the second. Surely if you believe the second part then whether or not energy can be created is up to whether or not God feels like it should be.
>>71684233
You make some good points, also did you notice how God saw that the world was full of evil in the days of Noah? To the point he wished he never made humans, but it was only by Noah being a righteous man did he save the human race, the world is getting to that point again. Children are also naturally predisposed to lie when they've done something wrong, they need to be taught that the action is wrong and that lying is wrong, I agree with learning from mistakes and others mistakes, but that can take years. It's also a matter of conscience, God gives us this conscience, but we still have the free will to ignore it. I'm not sure how you find that story funny though.
>>71684309
Yes, God, who killed the firstborn sons of Egypt because the pharaoh wouldn't let the Jews leave. God, who punished man for trying to build a tower to be closer to Him. God, who flooded the world because everyone was being a dick, and let a single family repopulate everyone (also, every animal bred from a single pair, even the ones in North America, South America, and Australia, places that the Jews didn't know about).
Yes, this a being whose morality I should trust.
>>71684623
This statement is nonsensical: if the omnipotent omniscient Christian were to exist, defiance or any action other than total obedience is not possible.
You seem very self-assured w/r/t morality, but I would encourage you to participate in some thorough self-examination.
>>71684762
First, tell me, is the story of Noah literally true? Do you believe in that story literally?
>>71677789
*facepalm* You're agnostic dude just accept it.
>How do we address the atheist problem?
See attached image.
If there's one lesson that the story of Jesus should have taught you, it's that any attempt to dominate and erase your ideological enemies will produce little more than an inspiring story for any sympathetic individuals who happen to witness your oppression.
You literally sympathize with Jeebus because he called out the Jews in his community on their bullshit. While I can relate to that, I'm not automatically sold on what allegedly happened three days after his crucifixion.
God doesn't have to exist for his rationale to be sound and self-evident.
>>71684849
Yes, God did those things. Yes, all of those things are totally morally correct, *by definition*. God defines what morality is: to say that an act of God is immoral is to contradict what it is for an action to be moral.
>>71683618
I don't see it as a problem. What we really need to do is deal with the extreme libfag atheists who only hate christianity. The leader of AmericanAtheists is literally a jew who gives Islam a blind eye. Same with the peeps on 'the atheist experience' program. I genuinely thought they were rather smart people until I listened to calls relating to Islam where the caller calls them out for ignoring Islam and they bring up 'muh racism' and 'muh slavery'.
>>71684908
Stop making up words you retard. Also, you can put all the emphasis on the word "if" you have tucked in there.
If. If your little fantasy figurine would exist yeah. But he doesn't and looky here, how I'm being disobidient. Have fun living in an "if"-world.
Don't drink all the kool-aid, little guy.
>>71684849
This implies that a belief in God is derived from the contrivances and interpretations of other men. You can believe in God without believing the words of men who attribute the things you listed to God.
>>71684546
>Provide links to back up claim
>He replies with a snarky no argument response
wew lad
