>"I can prove there's no God."
>Gives a sad story about how their dog died
>>28479966
I used to be a Christian and just stopped believing one day.
There's just way too much to the universe that the Bible doesn't even imply. It's just too obvious that there isn't a God.
>"i can prove"
>proceeds
>you can't disprove god
>goes on to state that, despite an astounding lack of evidence, it isn't logical to assume that it doesn't exist, in the sane way it isn't logical to assune that a person's invisible flying purple cow monkey isn't real
>"I can prove "
>Uses the Axiom of choice
>when I see a christ fag taking his wife and children to church where they let an invisible sky fair teach them about family values and morality
pathetic
>tfw in between catholicism and atheism
>tfw can't make up my mind
Agnosticism is the only logical belief.
You don't know, and you will never know, and that is the fact, because it cannot be proven nor disproven.
I wouldn't even say Agnosticism is a belief because everything else is. It is a fact that you don't know.
>>28480035
>an astounding lack of evidence
>existence itself isn't evidence
>it isn't logical to assume that it doesn't exist, in the sane way it isn't logical to assune that a person's invisible flying purple cow monkey isn't real
>a creator isn't a logical assumption after observing a creation
>>28479966
>you cant prove god doesnt exist, muh bible says so heh i win
>2016
>actually believing in god(s)
>he thinks he can talk to me about god
>I just don't listen and imagine my 2D waifus making out instead
/devilish/
Pretty much sums up every fundy atheist when pressed hard enough - God is evil he doesnt exist which of course is hilarious since atheism lacks a standard for objective morality. Fedora tippers are too much
the sun is god, you stupid fuck. think about it.
>>28480110
Agnosticism is akin to the people who say "I don't support either political candidate. They're all stupid." It's basically just "look at me I have no coherent belief so I can never be wrong and I'm right no matter what and no one can argue with me. I'm the smartest person in the world." when in reality it's just a weak opinion. You have to make some kind of bet in your mind or else you have no say at all or no right to judge. It's pseudo intellectual nonsense
>"i can prove there's a god"
>gives a happy story of their dog getting better
>>28480160
>"I don't support either political candidate. They're all stupid."
So.. they're right?
I don't quite get the idea of worship. I'd be fucking terrified if there was 100% legit proof of there being a god, to me it just seems like someone higher than me on the food chain that could kill and eat me at any time.
>>28480173
They're faggots who don't risk a belief or throwing any kind of stake into the ring yet think that gives them some kind of high ground.
>>28480160
>You have to make some kind of bet in your mind
????????
says?
>>28480197
What makes you think that ring is important enough to waste your life on? Life's too short to care about stupid political beliefs
>>28480197
>anon, it's time we talk. You have a non-gambling problem. Why don't you develop the healthy habit of wastefully betting on uncertain things?
Autistic thread. Don't bump it please.
Honestly, I don't know how anybody can be anything but Agnostic.
>>28479966
>"I can prove there's a God"
>it's a story about a rainbow that appeared after her grandma died
He doesn't exist, get over it faggots
>>28480149
explain
(fuckingrobotstopmutingmeyoufag)
>>28480160
That's complete bullshit
I'm agnostic cause I could give a shit
I also have my own stance on political views and supporrt them heavily; it's just that my views aren't completely right-wing/"republic" or left-wing/"democrat."
>Support less stricter gun laws
>also support abortions
>"You can't have both anon!"
>>28480205
By have to I mean have to in order to have a coherent belief. Otherwise you have no actual ground on the topic and should avoid it completely rather than pretending your input has any weight
>>28480216
Some of us care about history and the future due to children or a sense of interest in where humanity goes
>>28480160
My say is worth just as much as anyone elses because they are all just BELIEFS. Anything you say about god or the afterlife is worth just as much as what anyone else says because you just dont know.
I am on no high horse or soapbox. Very little people know what my beliefs are because I never feel any reason to state them.
But it's true that I cannot be wrong, but I can't be right either. But neither can anyone else on this subject, because nothing can be proven. That's what being agnostic is, admitting that you don't know and never will know.
>>28480197
It's not about risk or being a pussy. You sound very obnoxious, because in real life nobody gives one flying fuck what you think about god.
>>28480245
>I'm agnostic cause I could give a shit
proving my point. You have no coherent belief on the topic. You don't care about it. Therefor your opinion is useless and literally the least valuable possible. The opposite of some kind of moral high ground agnostics see themself on
>tfw agnostic
>have to deal with autistic reddit-tier atheists and beta normie christian cucks everywhere
>>28480249
>Some of us care about history and the future due to children or a sense of interest in where humanity goes
You realize that no matter how much you care about it, you will never have any affect on its final outcome right? It'll always be a wealthy ruling class in charge whether you vote republican or democrat.
Why not just do something actually enjoyable until the inevitable void finds you?
>>28480249
>By have to I mean have to in order to have a coherent belief
thats the whole point in agnosticism you shit. its retarded to have such a belief.
fucking retard
>hurrr u have to CHOOSE. i chose so u HAVE to do it too! why?? because otherwise i deem your opinion IRRELEVANT :+)
the thought of god watching me take a shit turns me on a little
>>28480258
>My say is worth just as much as anyone elses because they are all just BELIEFS.
But they aren't. Agnosticism is not a belief. It's the lack of one. It's pretending not having a belief is on the same level as taking a guess. It's like raising your hand to a math question in class just to say "I don't know" then "heh I'm technically right" when you hear the answer
>>28480304
>math is the same as emotional bondage to an ideological belief
wew lad. just use a food analogy instead next time
"You're either with us or against us!"
t. beta christian cucks and fedora-tipping atheists
>>28480274
>You realize that no matter how much you care about it, you will never have any affect on its final outcome right?
Literally false in a literal sense. No matter how small the affect, the affect is still the affect. That's what history is. You could say that in ancient times to a random roman citizen yet it would be false because of what a huge impact the romans had on history
>>28480304
>It's like raising your hand to a math question in class just to say "I don't know" then "heh I'm technically right" when you hear the answer
>comparing math to whether or not a god exists
>>28480193
The corgi is pretty much how religious people view their relationship with God.
>>28480281
>hahahah you ACTUALLY have a belief? IDIOT!!! Don't you realize you could be wrong?! ahahahah. Fucking retard. Just play video games and don't think about stuff instead.
>>28480304
>It's like raising your hand to a math question in class just to say "I don't know" then "heh I'm technically right" when you hear the answer
not an argument
>>28480333
99% of romans were nobodies who have had nothing written about them and that had no affect on the outcome of the empire. we're all slaves to fate. someone writing about it later down the line changes nothing
>>28480110
You don't 'know' Russell's teapot doesn't exist either but there isn't really a good reason to think it does. Same with Dog tbqh.
You probably heard them wrong, he was trying to prove there is noDogXD.
>i believe in god and this is why
>proceeds to explain how he feels god protected him during a """demon attack""" in which he was given the courage and calmness by god to pull the head off of a demon attacking him in the middle of the night
>ask him to consider if perhaps it was sleep paralysis or a dream
>nah it felt real
this is fucking real, im at a loss. hes a cool guy and i dont mind his devoutness since he keeps it to himself and doesnt push it on me, but come on now
>>28480059
is there anything better than zfc? im actually curious. im learning zfc rn. what is wrong with any of the axioms of zfc, they all seem sensible to me.
>>28480137
Meanwhile, your standard for morality: He says so. So we have to believe him. Don't ask for empirical evidence because he also says you can't do that.
>>28480304
I guess this all comes down to how literally you are defining agnosticism, as you seem to be taking it entirely literally.
Agnosticism is just saying that you will not believe without some kind of evidence. Which neither side has.
That being said, you can be a Theist or Atheist agnostic, where you're partial to believing there is a higher power or you think that it's unlikely, but either way you are admitting you don't know. I believe I myself am truly in the middle because I can't see a reasonable argument for either.
>>28480110
Completely true. Nobody can KNOW either way. You just can't.
Well I do think something like god may exist but if you think God is Jesus or Allah you must be retarded.
>>28480350
sounds about right tbqh. why place a poor bet when you could just not gamble at all?
>>28480398
The difference is you gain your morality from a higher authority, meaning you have no authority to change it. It's out of your control. Compare that to atheist morality where they can change it at any convenience. Their morality can be bartered and negotiated, where a Religious person's cannot. Making the Religious morality objectively more trustworthy
>>28480398
>He says so. So we have to believe him
This bothers me a lot. Why the fuck does god necessarily have to be right even if he exists?
>>28480244
>there's no life on earth
>sun shines down on it
>literally everything alive comes from this
>>28480242
Yeah cause a God with trillions of solar systems to oversee is paying that much attention to the feelings of one pathetic little Anon on one pathetic little planet at one pathetic little moment in time enough to make a rainbow BUT NOT ENOUGH TO KEEP GRANDMA FROM DYING IN THE FIRST PLACE
>>28480433
Because He (praise be to his name) says so.
>>28480021
>thing
>do
lmao
>>28480406
What it comes down to is that agnosticism is a useless belief. Like my first anology of comparing it to a person who just proclaims both political candidates are stupid so they won't vote and then attacking the person who chooses who they see as the lesser of two evils. At the end of the day, big fucking deal, you chose not to participate. If you're not participating your say is completely meaningless and the exact opposite of a moral high ground. It's the safe corner where your criticism becomes meaningless. The problem is people pretend agnosticism is the high ground .
So many arguments I have about there being no God it's really not even funny. The only proof is a book in every religion... Makes sense.
>>28480502
lmao who cares nerd? agnostics got better things to do than talk in circles about a retarded topic
>>28480418
That would be fine if you left the table. Instead you hang around and when someone loses say HAH TOLD YOU SO and when someone wins says HAH TOLD YOU SO
>>28480433
>Why the fuck does god necessarily have to be right even if he exists?
If he is real then he created everything so he also creates the rules. Why doesn't that make sense?
>>28480522
>wherever I go someone places the table in front of me and talks about their belief
>IF YOU THINK ITS SO SILLY THEN WHY ARE YOU AT THIS TABLE THEN, SMART GUY?
>>28480463
>implying death is a punishment and not the start of the journey to a reward to the faithful
>>28480117
The creator could have been a set of Japanese Shinto spirits so at best this gets us to deism but it sure as shit doesn't validate the whole Jesus cross bullshit and honestly it isn't even a good argument for deism.
>>28479966
If there is a God, he/she/it sure as hell doesn't give a fuck about my existence. So why should I care about it?
>>28480062
that webm is cool tho
>>28480536
Because god has long since lost his copyright claims on reality and it is now in the public domain
>>28480517
And yet here they are
>>28480361
Russel's teapot isn't a metaphysical question, it's a completely absurd and stupid hyperbolic example. Also, you're response is a non-sequitur.
Hello, just stopping by for a sec.
>>28480502
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems
Read this, then try to tell me agnostics have no ground to stand on and that it's just a meme lazy way out. I have actual grounds for my beliefs.
>>28480536
What if he's lying? What if whatever complex fundamental truths there are to existence go way beyond god and he is but a speck of dust, irrelevant in his own way just like how we are in this vast universe? I don't see how someone creating me means that I should trust that they know everything and isn't keeping anything hidden away from me.
>>28480539
You came into this thread
>>28480551
>implying its anything
>>28480431
Let's get this straight right now, nobody's morality, except for complete fucking nutjobs, is based off of any religion.
Judging someone's morality off of their religion is retarded. I know complete shitheads who are very religious and at the same time good people who do not believe in anything, and vice-versa.
People just warp "Religious Morality" to fit their own or otherwise do not believe in it.
>>28480502
I don't understand all this high ground talk. It's not got nothing to do with agnosticism, maybe you've attached it to douchebags who are agnostic but it has nothing to do with what it is.
There is NOTHING to participate in. Any argument for or against got is meaningless because you do not know.
The politician analogy also makes more sense. It would be closer to someone who just says "Well I don't know about either of these candidates so I'm not participating because I am uninformed.", not "haha they r both dumb!"
>>28479966
>god wants me to be a good person
>kills my dog
>priest tells me dogs don't go to heaven
>>28480164
You know what I don't get?
"I found my faith in God after the awful accident where I lost both my legs. It really rekindled my faith, I'm so happy I found Jesus again"
>mfw
>>28480555
Where in this thread did it start talking about Christianity and not deism in general? We could talk about that but trying to force too many topics at once gets threads a little crowded
>>28480578
religion is an absurd and stupid hyperbolic belief :^)
>>28479966
>I can proove there is no free will
>proceeds to spew logical fallacy and circular logic he learned in wizzardchan
>>28480587
I'll set it aside and read it tonight. This thread's too active now and I'm enjoying it too much to stop. You can summarize it to me if you'd like
>Once you have felt God in your life, you know he's real
>>28480578
Metaphysics is a meme idiot. Russel's teapot was dreamed up, so was God. He done exit foolish man.
>>28480431
Let's get this straight right now, nobody's morality, except for complete fucking nutjobs, is based off of any religion.
Judging someone's morality off of their religion is retarded. I know complete shitheads who are very religious and at the same time good people who do not believe in anything, and vice-versa.
People just warp "Religious Morality" to fit their own or otherwise do not believe in it.
>>28480502
I don't understand all this high ground talk. It's got nothing to do with agnosticism, maybe you've attached it to douchebags who are agnostic but it has nothing to do with what it is.
There is NOTHING to participate in. Any argument for or against god is meaningless because you do not know.
The politician analogy also makes little sense. It would be closer to someone who just says "Well I don't know about either of these candidates so I'm not participating because I am uninformed.", not "haha they r both dumb!"
Sorry, I made a lot of typos so i reposted because it was really confusing in the previous post.
>some priests thousands of years ago needed a way to keep the populace in check during times of rapid population growth
>this must mean everything they've said is true and not at all a convenient lie
>I mean why would a person even do that, get up on a podium and lie?
>>28480160
>It's pseudo intellectual nonsense
is that all we are capable of?
>>28480632
C'mon when most people reference God they are discussing some conception of the Abrahamic God, not some general creator. There are very few true deists out there. Most make the leap to some form of organized religion
>tfw normal atheist
>never speak of it
>tfw atheist are treated online for no reason the same as Jews were treated by the Germans in their fictional tale, "The Holocaust"
okayIf you think the most god-like deity that exists is anything more than a hyper-advanced post-organic civilization, you are objectively wrong.
>>28480609
>Let's get this straight right now, nobody's morality, except for complete fucking nutjobs, is based off of any religion.
>99% of humans since the dawn of humanity is no one.
>Judging someone's morality off of their religion is retarded.
It's the fundamental base of religion. If you met religious people who don't follow their religions morality, that's a doesn't change their religions morality. "Christian Morality" means a distinct think. It's a set in stone list, as is all religion. "Atheist Morality" means nothing. It's a case by case fluid basis that has no ground. Religious morality is something distinct and atheist is not. That's non arguable. Anecdotal evidence means nothing.
>>28480729
Like I said, that's another topic which I can happily discuss but that would make this thread even harder to keep up with so I'm focusing on deism in general because that's what the topic was
>>28480756
>Christians follow biblical morality
Lol!
>>28480756
"religious" morality is just human morality, because thats entirely where its from. an athiest can have pretty much the same morals and never be christian, because they've come from the same place
christians just assume their morals come from a higher power and that humans are incapable of such behavior without some guy behind a curtain telling them to be that way
>>28480734
>you are objectively wrong.
>he doesn't know what objectively means
also
>immediately to the nazi's
Godwins law
>>28480224
Agnostic here. This is a weak example; gambling still offers you the chance of gaining some sort of prize. Like money, believing in a certain God is an unlikely bet, but there is still a chance that they might hit the jackpot when they die, because there's no knowing if that God doesn't exist.
Oh look, another thread on religion on the most uneducated, ignorant part of the internet outside of fucking YouTube and the Guardian comment sections
>>28479987
>There's just way too much to the universe that the Bible doesn't even imply. It's just too obvious that there isn't a God.
le logic-reason man has no argument but still accepts to be taken seriously (even though he does not take himself seriously enough to commit to his ideology)
>>28480117
>evidence
lol
>>28480398
The Lord is the arbiter, so yes that works perfectly fine.
Why can't you idiots even comprehend how your precious 'logic' and 'reason' works?
>Don't ask for empirical evidence because he also says you can't do that.
Empiricism is an actual meme.
>>28480609
>good people
By what metric?
As an empiricist, you require a metric or axiom, yes?
I see none; just you pulling big hunks of nonsense out of your ass.
>Let's get this straight right now, nobody's morality, except for complete fucking nutjobs, is based off of any religion.
Wrong, morality is not subjective (in the sense that multiple people can have a morality)
There is only one morality, ergo the only good are following said morality.
>>28480686
>Metaphysics is a meme idiot
Said every STEM sperg ever.
>>28480700
OMG ITS JUST A MYTH HAHA IM SO LE SMART EVERYBODY ELSE BEFORE THE CURRENT YEAR IS DUMB WE'RE CLEARLY GETTING SMARTER XDDD I DONT NEED TO PROVE IT BECAUSE IM SO SMART EVEN THOUGH I RETORT AGAINST ANYBODY ELSE DOING EXACTLY WHAT IM DOING XDDD IM NOT A HYPOCRITE
>>28480734
>If you think the most god-like deity that exists is anything more than a hyper-advanced post-organic civilization, you are objectively wrong.
IM NOT LE STUPID ANGRY ATHEIST BUT IF YOU DONT BELEIVE WHAT I EBELIE YOUR FUCKING STUPID AND YOU SHOULD DIE FUCKING ASSHOLE
>>28480795
They by definition do, yes.
Your anecdotes don't count, sorry!
>>28480814
>knowing
Knowing is a meme.
You know nothing and so does everybody else.
>>28479966
I hate threads like these. There's no point in arguing over religion. It's the most fucking retarded thing to argue about.
>>28480756
Well, the thing is, I've known nobody, and thus it is logical to believe that nobody in the past, who subjected themselves entirely to a religious morality. Like I said, they warp it to fit their own morality.
Sure you can be influenced by religious morality, but there are billions of christians in the world who have sinned all of their lives yet still claim they are morally christian.
Yeah religious morality is distinct but it doesn't mean anything when nobody follows it. People in the past had their moralities based off of their own lives just like ours are, which may or may not have contained religious teachings.
>>28480814
its more likely that the newer abrahamic religions are not the right ones and that you're going to end up in some pre-abrahamic god's hell
>>28480272
>some kind of moral high ground agnostics see themself on
Explain
>>28480814
Or there could be a god that does not care about non-religious people but gets specifically pissed off about people that follow THAT religion in particular. I mean, the amount of evidence for this highly specific type of god existing is literally the same for that of any known religion, that is to say zero.
>>28480795
>The concept of Christian morality is defeated by the Christians you know not following it
>>28480811
The difference though is that the Christian sees his as coming from a higher authority and therefore he cannot change it. Let's assume an atheist and a Christian with the exact same morals. The Christian sees his as coming from God. This means he can't change it. This means he thinks he has to follow it whether he agrees with it or not. It is forever his morals as long as he is a Christian. An atheist has no higher authority. He can be bartered out of it. It can be negotiated or forgotten. There is nothing higher to answer to.
This means in approaching the two of them you can trust where the Christians morals are better. If someone says "I'm Christian" you know what they believe to be right and wrong. If someone says "I'm atheist" you're in the dark.
This means logically the Religious morals are more trustworthy to an outsider dealing with them.
>"i can prove god doesn't exist"
>life on earth
>>28480854
If you're an atheist you'll go there anyway
>>28480850
>Sure you can be influenced by religious morality, but there are billions of christians in the world who have sinned all of their lives yet still claim they are morally christian.
Confirmed for not understanding Christian morality
You can leave now, you dunce.
>>28480854
False
>>28480873
>evidence
Evidence is a meaningless ideological construct.
>>28480893
>and therefore he cannot change it.
except thats exactly what the pope and other religious leaders do all the time, to keep their religions relevant. what worked 2000+ years ago isn't always going to work today
>>28480850
But see, a Christian not following Christian morality, does not change Christian morality. Breaking the rules does not change the rules. From a logical stand point Religious morality is more trustworthy than atheist morality because there is at least a rule book. A distinct guide. Even if you can still be deceived by it and people will still break it, it is MORE (relative term) trustworthy than non religious morality by default
>>28480923
>False
Well with such a strong argument, you sure have me convinced!
You realize you only type these things to convince yourself, right?
>>28480837
Morality is subjective like you said but there are undefined, very reasonable categories by which you can place people based on their actions.
If I shot a child in the head, I am bad, and that is the truth to any reasonable person.
I don't think that anyone can have the exact same morality as the next person, even if they claim to follow those set by a religion or code. I should not have said 'based off of' but rather 'strictly follows'.
>>28480873
Agnostic anon here. I agree; why would God blame us for not believing in that religion. If he is so loving he should be understanding to the point that he'll pardon us for our disbeliefs, assuming this is a loving god
>>28480837
>Said every STEM sperg ever.
doesn't make it wrong tho :^)
tfw there is no god and it will end in pure darkness as our universe expands until there is no more energy left
tfw humans desperately cling to any idea that makes them feel more important and they cannot cope with their own mortality
tfw we are just monkeys that ate some mushrooms and our consciousness expanded to the point in which we asked 'why'
tfw human's concept of god is grossly limited and strange
>>28480893
Actually, you have no idea what they believe. You'd have just as much an idea of their morals if they said nothing about their religion, because an individual's morality is not their religious morality. Nobody adhere's to it completely, and not only that whatever they claim or say cannot be taken as truth.
Having a morality that cannot be bartered is not a good thing.
>>28480893
Authority comes from power, and god clearly does not enforce his authority in any perceivable way. If a religious person violates his morality in any way there won't be any sort of consequence like a lightning bolt striking them down. If you break a law, however, a very real authority known as the police will put you in jail.
tl;dr: enjoy depositing your trust in sandniggers and Christian Mexican drug dealers simply because they're more religious while I deposit mine based on whether or not the person is a law-abiding citizen regardless of them being irreligious or very religious
>>28480924
Yes yes the pope and protestants are heretics. Every good Christian knows this. The point still remains that breaking the rules does not change the rules. Christians not following Christian morality does not change the fact that Religious morality is by default more trustworthy than atheist morality. Read this post because I explained my point a little better there >>28480941
>>28480965
Do you know the story of the bible? This is explained throughout it. Can't exactly sum the whole bible up in a 4chan post
>>28479966
Most people just need to grow out of atheism. there's nothing you can do to help them except have patience
>>28480941
>>28480923
Direct to this post in response @morality.
>>28480976
Like I said christian morality may be set in stone but those who say they follow it do not have moralities set in stone. So what is that christian morality worth? Nothing, because just as an atheist can you may change your morales at any time you'd like.
>>28480284
"Oh Lord," I moaned softly, nuzzling my face into my race car bed. "Oh my Lord Jesus," I whispered, as His fingers began spreading my creamy hole. My eyes shut tight, ass rising to meet His tender strokes, I could hardly believe what was happening to me. I was being pleasured by the Lord of Hosts! My anus loosened against my will, my hips moving erratically. "Jesus...I'm going to..." And His voice was like sweet honey as He answered me, "Let it come, child." My shit sprayed high into the air, jetting upwards in spurt after glorious spurt; onto His face, into His hair, and over His beautiful nail-scarred hands. It took me a moment to catch my breath as I lay there, shuddering in His arms, but finally I whispered, "Will this ever happen again, Lord?" And He just smiled at me and said, "Well, child, this is Heaven..."
>>28480976
>Having a morality that cannot be bartered is not a good thing.
This is very wrong. A Chivalrous knight, an honourable samurai, and Steve the college kid at the bar. Who's word do you trust? The one's with unshakable morals they do not compromise on, or the guy who listens to joe rogan podcasts.
>Actually, you have no idea what they believe
You do. A Christian believes in Christian morality by definition. A Muslim believes in Islamic morality by definition.
> You'd have just as much an idea of their morals if they said nothing about their religion
This has nothing to do with my argument.
>>28480949
>Argument
I don't need to make any sort of argument because I am not ideologically bound.
>>28480954
>If I shot a child in the head, I am bad, and that is the truth to any reasonable person.
>reason
Nice spook.
Morality is objective by definition, and you are thereby evil.
Stop talking to me, I've had enough of your kind's corrupting influence for a lifetime.
>>28480973
Again, morality is not personal or subjective.
It's objective.
>>28480978
Oh look, the bootlicker tries to use 'logic' but fails.
You don't even comprehend your own deity.
Society is evil, the law is evil, citizenship is evil.
>>28480974
>le science
>conflating le science with childish mysticism
>>28481023
Failed attempt at pragmaticism.
Stop posting, you ignorant little twerp.
>>28480387
You ever consider demons are real and can attack while in sleep paralysis?
Of course not, you are a psuedo intellectual faggot who believes all truths he holds are absolute. Youre the type of sheep that would bawk at galileo as he explined objects of different masses fall at the same speed, that is until it was actally proven, then your banwagon ass would start to parrot that to any new ideas on the subject.
Daily reminder that Jesus himself said that with his coming the law of Moses is no longer binding and that faith in Him is the only way to heaven. I can't remember the verse but Jesus basically said that the law was written for fools before his coming so that they too might be saved, but now all sins are forgiven and the righteous will Live by faith alone.
>people tend to think there's an intelligence behind forces and events they don't really comprehend
>when these things are inspected closely it tends to be the case that they're not intelligent and that there's no god of wind
>people keep insisting there must be some grand "intelligence" anyway
but y
>>28481073
Jesus never fucking said that, Jesus didn't even speak English.
>>28481023
>So what is that christian morality worth?
More than an atheists. You're using an example of someone who introduces themselves as Christian but does not actually believe it as an argument against a Christian morality. That's just another atheist
>>28481067
>morality is objective by definition
top kek mate, that is the dumbest thing I've read all day
>>28481075
>inspected closely
Why is this correct?
No reason, of course, despite you worshipping reason.
Trend-hopping manchild.
>>28481067
>It's objective.
just because you say it doesn't make it true dude
>>28481061
But there were fucking horrible "honourable" samurai and rapist, douchebag "chivalrous" knights. Whatever they claim means nothing because morality has nothing to do with religion. Your morality is just as mallaeble as an atheists because you are not strictly adhering to that religious morality and therefore you may change it for yourself in whatever way you want.
No, you don't have an idea, because they can just be fucking lying to you.
>>28481067
This guy is just a stubborn asshole. I don't even know most of these terms, I'm just arguing with what I'm thinking right now.
>implying this isn't a huge simulation where nothing is real
cmon anons, read up on self-correcting code and string theory, or at least believe in the multiverse theory
>>28481104
Why is what correct? Are you going to bog everything down with "you cannot know nuthin" and refuse to accept some basic axioms despite them being pretty self-evidently true?
>>28481061
>A Chivalrous knight, an honourable samurai, and Steve the college kid at the bar. Who's word do you trust?
Certainly not the word of two underlings who serve literal warlords.
>>28481075
You assume defining something and analyzing it somehow is relevant to whether or not that thing had a creator
Sir Isaac Newton said it best when he said he defined and explained gravity, he did not say why there is gravity. Something with that intent, not looking up the word for word quote. The point is that you can 100% define gravity and it still does not have anything to do with why there is gravity in reality. Science does not contradict there being a creator behind the universe
>>28481099
Well then almost nobody is christian in morality, because if you do not follow christian morality strictly than you are following atheist morality.
so tired of monothiests bullshit. even there was a god it isn't worthy of worship or even acknowledgement.
>>28481104
>Trend-hopping manchild.
>reason has been "trendy" pretty much since forever
Why do you clean your anus after taking a shit? Are you just a trendhopper doing the same as everyone else?
>>28481126
You're just completely wrong here though. Do you understand what a relative statement is?
A person who believes there is rules ------M-O-R-E-------- trust worthy to follow those rules than someone who claims there are no rules.
That is objectively true. That is not opinion. That is true by definition. No amount of your personal experience or anecdotal examples changes that.
>>28481169
>anecdotal personal experience disproves a philosophical principle
just gunna leave this here
>>28479987
Thats where the faith part comes in, your placing your bets on the Bible.
>>28481215
I still disagree with this, because of what I've already said. I wouldn't trust someone more because of their religion because they do not follow it strictly and therefore can change it in any way they wish. It's not anecdotal. I know there are not many people who follow a religious morality to the T.
>hurr what I say is philosophy and and whatever you say is NOT!
Philosophy is just thinking, basically. Just because my thoughts are different from yours doesn't make it not philosophical.
My mom used to take me to church but I never really "felt it". I guess I exprected to avtually hear the voice of God himself amswer me back every night but because I didnt I just fogured that religion wasnt for me
>>28481103
>ITS DUMB CUZ I DNT LIEK IT ITS OBVIOUSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS AND COMMON SENSE LOGIC REASON THAT BECAUUUUUUUUUUSE PEOPLE BELEIVE LIKE...DIFFERENT THINGS THAT MEANS THEY ARE ALL RIGHT BECUZ THEY HAVE THEIR OWN MORALITY (BUT I STILL CALL PPL EVIL CUZ IM RIGHT BECAUSE IM MASTE ROF LOGIC AND REASON)
Stop posting, now.
>>28481126
No, morality is objective. Are you illiterate or are you, Master of Logic and Reason, ideologically tied? You only want to further your agenda of humanism or whatever nonsense is being pushed in your quarters these days.
>I don't even know most of these terms
Illiterate it is.
>>28481142
>self-evident
Rationalism cannot confirm rationalism.
>axioms
Ideological constructs.
>>28481168
Empiricism contradicts itself and has always been irrelevant fluff for materialist trash.
>>28481169
Every Christian follows Christian morality by default.
That does not mean they act it.
>>28481171
>secular NEET that jerks off all day things he's better than a literal perfect being
>>28481192
Worship of reason and temporary acceptance to further a temporary cause are two entirely different things.
If I am to continue to spread my message then I must live by your grimy little trend-hopping ideology.
>>28481262
No, you are putting faith in the Lord.
One can never read the Bible and still live by faith.
>>28481289
Oh, sorry. Im not an actual christian so I was a little iffy on what exactly you were placing your bets on.
>>28481248
Elevate Orthodox Christianity to God tier next to Catholicism and creative another sub category called edgy teenager who hates his dad tier just for Satanism and Nihilism and I'd agree
>>28481282
>because of what I've already said
What you've said is wrong.
>I know there are not many people who follow a religious morality to the T.
This is the definition of an anecdote.
>Just because my thoughts are different from yours doesn't make it not philosophical.
Don't flatter yourself, illiterate.
>>28481287
>if i dont get immediate empirical satisfaction then its le dumb!!!
STEM sperg, leave.
>>28481192
jesus blesses my shit and anus daily. i have no need to cleanse it.
>>28481282
Well then you're an illogical person. Person A says "I follow these rules" and hands you a list and Person B says there are no rules. Person A is no logically more trustworthy to follow the rules you have on the list than Person B, regardless of opinion. You can go ahead and say you trust Person B just as much, but all that means is you're illogical
>>28481289
You're trying to imply that I'm on some kind of high-horse. I'm just not. You're assuming a lot of things and it's annoying.
Morality is not objective. I don't understand where you're getting this from but I'm almost sure this is an argued point so stop making it out to be fact.
If you don't act as christian morality demands than you are not following it, you just say you are.
>>28481362
>. Person A is no logically more trustworthy to f
I meant now not no, Typo changes the whole argument to the opposite lel
>>28480413
yep, only jews can
>>28481364
You are on your own high horse, you push your agenda because you are lowly.
>Morality is not objective.
Yes it is, because multiple things cannot be right. Why is it that I am better at applying your ideology than you are?
>fact
Another ideological construct.
>If you don't act as christian morality demands than you are not following it, you just say you are.
False, dictation and following are two different things.
All of creation is dictated by His morality (the only morality.)
Christians accept it as true, ergo they are knowingly dictated.
This does not mean they follow it or act onto it.
You are ignorant trash, why do you believe you get to speak on the subject? Seculars are filled with so much horrible pride.
>>28481362
Whut? I can claim it is illogical to believe the opposite just as easily.
>>28481348
Okay, if we're not basing shit off of our experiences what are we supposed to base it off of?
Everything is fucking anecdotal when it comes to this. You can't base an argument on morality on any kind of evidence or fact because there is no way to measure it.
>>28481451
>Okay, if we're not basing shit off of our experiences what are we supposed to base it off of?
Empiricists are so ignorant, but they keep yapping and yapping.
>You can't base an argument on morality on any kind of evidence or fact because there is no way to measure it.
There you go, projecting your ideology.
Stop talking.
>>28481448
>fact
>Idealogical construct
This is too far down the rabithole for me. Holy fuck.
I can speak on whatever I want lmao.
>>28481451
>I can claim it is illogical to believe the opposite just as easily.
And yet you'd be wrong because you can't back it up, which I have for my statement, and you've been unable to counter
let me copy and paste it again.
Person A says "I follow these rules" and hands you a list and Person B says there are no rules. Person A is now logically more trustworthy to follow the rules you have on the list than Person B
refute this
>>28481493
>I can speak on whatever I want lmao.
There's that ungodly pride of your kind.
>>28481496
This thread itself refutes this. I'm the only logically consistent one and I completely reject logic.
>>28481496
Because I may "logically" believe the opposite. You're not backing anything up with anything.
>>28481486
No matter what, whatever you believe you believe because of what you have experienced. You read something or many things and now you believe this. You only believe it because you read it with your eyes and experienced the reading.
If you lacked all senses you would have no opinion to form because you would have nothing to form it on.
I've accepted I'm literally too stupid to become full blown atheist or religious. I had a very religious upbringing that I struggled with. But it was the concept of faith itself that made me quit.
>>28481559
>No matter what, whatever you believe you believe because of what you have experienced
False, stop projecting your empiricism onto me you filth.
>>28481559
>You're not backing anything up with anything.
I am. I'm using reason
Person A says "I follow these rules" and hands you a list and Person B says there are no rules. Person A is no logically more trustworthy to follow the rules you have on the list than Person B
This is logically sound. Saying Person B is more likely to follow the rules on the list than Person A is just objectively wrong.
You've proven you won't accept logic or argument though so there's no point in continuing this
>>28480389
>lmao dude let me just pick a random element of this set
>But how? How do you construct an arbitrary choice function? Can you show me this choice function?
>fuckin shut up nerd XD I can do what I want cuz it's independent of ZF. fuck making sense hahah. also look at this nice proof!
>Ok, well if you want math to be easier than why not just add new axioms whenever you can?
>WOW FUCK YOU THAT'S WRONG THE ZFC AXIOMS ARE PURE AND HOLY DUDE WOW FUCK OFF
>>28481591
You wouldn't even know what "Empiricism" means if you did not read about it, if you did not experience learning of it.
>>28481604
I already said It's NOT logical because person A can be LYING or simply not truly follow those rules. Even if person B said "I do not follow these rules" according to person A's list he can be lying.
>>28481660
>because person A can be LYING or simply not truly follow those rules. Even if person B said "I do not follow these rules" according to person A's list he can be lying.
MORE LIKELY MORE LIKELY MORE LIKELY
>stack of cards with 5 kings and 1 king is more likely to produce a king than a queen when a card is drawn at random
>your argument
NO NO NO BECAUSE YOU CAN STILL DRAW A QUEEN SO NO
>>28481696
The card analogy doesn't work because you can numerically measure it. You can't do that for morality.
I'm not saying anything is more likely. You are. I'm saying what they say doesn't have any effect on the likeliness of whether or not they follow what they say.
>>28479966
Don't talk to me or my God ever again
There is literally no reason to believe in a god anymore.
>He believes in God in the current year
>>28481660
>You wouldn't even know what "Empiricism" means if you did not read about it, if you did not experience learning of it.
Oh, you're just retarded and don't understand any epistemology.
Go take an ESL course on reading, they're all filthy empiricists like you so you'll get along, and reread my posts.
>>28481843
LE 2016!!!!
LETERALLY NO REASON TO BE LE WHITE MA-LE!!!
Bigfoot exist
>>28481876
Name one (1) reason to believe in God.
>>28481908
>reason
You're projecting your ideology.
>>28481619
I hear you friend-o, but don't AoC equivalents like Zorn's make intuitive sense to you? Not who you're replying to btw
>>28481619
>>28482040
>intuition
>'self-evident'
>arbitrary axioms
Top ideology.
And there are people that think mathematics is 'objective'.
>>28481938
le burden of proof
I cannot believe in any sort of sentient being creator that would give a shit about what happens here on Earth. It's like if we cared what went on in ant hills. Whether they exist or not is irrelevant to me and my life.
>>28482082
Proof doesn't exist.
>>28482119
Worthless, prideful cunt.
why would somebody try to prove something doesn't exist when the burden of proof falls on the person claiming something does exist?
>>28482060
Mathematics is a very good descriptor of formal systems that we either see in the world or can imagine. It's "objective" in the sense that one tries to minimize the number of assumptions used.
>>28482126
How does his admission if insignificance come off as pride?
>>28482126
>Proof doesn't exist.
Well lets go to the evidence then.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk
Biblical contradictions in the perfect word of "god" aka YHWH.
>>28482162
Any assumptions makes it non-objective.
>>28482167
Calling a perfect being's existence 'insignificant' may as well be an admission of extreme narcissism.
>>28482219
Evidence doesn't exist.
There are no Biblical contradictions, stop projecting your ideology onto a differing system and stop treating it as literal or of one author.
Now, stop talking to me you uneducated secular trash.
>>28482250
Humans aren't perfect
Say God is real: why does God deserve to be worshiped? Why does God deserve to be loved?
>>28482274
Because He is a perfect being of absolute love.
Of course, atheists only care about themselves and what gets them off at the end of the day so none of this matters to them.
>Evidence doesn't exist.
>There are no Biblical contradictions, stop projecting your ideology onto a differing system and stop treating it as literal or of one author.
>Now, stop talking to me you uneducated secular trash.
So glad we have separation of church and state t b h
Well I have some evidence of evidence and that's not very nice of you to call me trash and I'm pretty sure bieng nice is a commandment you bible cuck
>>28482327
How do you know God is perfect? Because the bible says so? Someone says "I'm perfect" and you just believe it?
If God was perfect, why would that make him worthy of being worshiped?
God is most certainly not perfect, though, otherwise he would not have created beings with the capacity to be evil and stupid.
God is not loving or he would not have created beings who can suffer, and put them in situations where they can suffer.
>>28482327
>perfect being of absolute love
According to who or whom? Him?
What if he's lying?
>>28482250
also
>stop treating it as literal
Why not? Because it sounds ridiculous or because you have no faith?
>>28482327
Why did he create this meat grinder of a world? and if he didn't create it why does he allow it to continue? ignore humans, try to imagine the suffering of billions of animals tearing each other to pieces.
>>28482387
theist BTFO
>>28482250
>humans are perfect
wat
>>28482250
>humans are perfect
literally wat
>>28482250
>Evidence doesn't exist.
Why are you even here if you aren't willing to engage in debate?
Also proof:
>a = 1
>b = a
>therefore b = 1
>>28482250
>humans are perfect
>>28482361
>evidence of evidence
Stop posting, you are incapable of even following your own ideology and are thereby a self-admitted joke.
>So glad we have separation of church and state t b h
There is no state, it's an irrelevant ideological construct.
'state' would imply they have any legitimacy. What they are is a force of objective evil that you only support because it furthers your bootlicking agenda.
>le epic pic i found in reddit.jpg
Now again, sweetie, take an ESL course and reread my posts.
>>28482370
The Bible isn't written by God
>God is most certainly not perfect, though
>God is not loving or he would not have created beings who can suffer
Oh look, another illiterate pseud trying to look deep online.
Stop posting, you worthless cunt.
>>28482387
Because it isn't literal, you illiterate.
>>28482400
>WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH WHY DID HE DO THING I DONT LIK EOMG WTF IM OBVIOUSLY THE MORAL ARBITER OF CREATION BECUZ I AM LE MASTER OF LOGIC AND REASON
>>28482429
>>28482459
Literal illiterate right here.
>>28482454
Proof doesn't exist, especially not the presumptuous garbage you just posted
>b-but muh ppl in power sed its right so it must be
Bootlicking, ideologically-driven trash.
There is no debate to be had with the objectively wrong.
>>28482454
I will argue on the theists behest.
We may not be perfect in our eyes, but we may be perfect in "God's" vision for the universe. This is why he's using the narcissism argument.
>>28482501
>loving god
>creates a literal hellhole for trillions of organisms to suffer and die in
...ok.
>>28482501
what other things can i believe on the basis of them not being interpreted literally??
is green eggs and ham an allegory for accepting a nigger because niggers harass me every day?
you're fucking retarded
>>28482501
>can't win argument
>starts rambling about entry level anarchist ideas
Have fun paying your taxes biblecuck
Why don't you think the bible is literal?
Nowhere in the bible does it say "don't take my word literally". It seems to say a lot of things about believing the stories.
>>28482501
>I'm one of the chosen people to have a deep, personal relationship with the creator of the universe who demands to be constantly worshipped by followers for eternity
>you don't believe something without evidence? HOW NARCISSISTIC OF YOU!!!
>>28482501
>presumptuous
nigger what the fuck are you on about
b = 1 is a consequence of definitions. There's no presuming going on. It is literally right fucking there in black and white. There's no way fucking you're actually this fucking dense.
>>28482501
>insulting people is an argument
>>28482501
I can't tell if you're baiting or not
>theist
>starts insulting people when he makes a mistake or gets btfo
?????
welp u got me to reply so 2/10
>>28482521
>stuff like this happens on a daily basis
How can people pretend there's a creator that gives a shit?
>>28482646
maybe you wouldn't suffer so much if you weren't a massive pussy.
look at how uncaring that zen zebra is.
>>28482636
I mean not really, he could have a much better argument but he seems to have just dived in without thinking.
Although I find it funny, it's rather annoying to see this much ignorance from theists themselves
>>28482511
Don't put works into my mouths, dear.
>>28482521
>hellhole
The theologically illiterate do not get to talk to me.
Sew your mouth shut if you're so tempted.
>>28482534
>UR STUPID FOR SAYING THING I DONT LIKE OMG FUCKING RETARD IM SO LOGICAL BUT I CALLED YOU A FUCKING RETARD BECUZ IM SO LOGICAL IM NOT A WORTHLESS FUCKING HYPOCRITICAL SUBHUMAN AT ALL I AM LE MASTER OF LOGIC AND REASON ALSO I MAKE MASSIVE JUMPS IN REASONING AND MASSIVE PRESUMPTIONS AND EXAGERATIONS BUT AM LE MASTER OF LOGIC AND REASON *DRINKS MOUNTAIN DEW*
Jump off of a cliff, /b/tard.
>>28482564
Again, stop projecting your ideology onto me, trash.
Do you not understand what I am talking about, attention whore? Clearly not, your pride has clogged your ears like air-tight wax.
>Nowhere in the bible does it say "don't take my word literally"
If it did it would have to be taken literally, you stupid cunt.
You don't even comprehend your own system of beliefs, you are logically unsound to the very core.
>>28482570
>evidence
An ideological construct.
>>28482583
>nigger what the fuck are you on about
Exactly what I keep saying, you disgusting little tools don't even understand your own ideology.
Do you not understand what a presumption is? Clearly not since you do not understand than an axiom is a presumption.
>>28482584
I don't need to make arguments because I am not a slave to ideology.
>>28482607
>LE ANYTHING I DONT LE LIKE IS LE FISHY ME-ME I BROWSE REDDIT FOR 10 HOURS A DAY
>>28482705
holy shit you're actually salty about this aren't you?
you a baptist or something?
>>28482636
Same-fag circle-jerk because you cannot accept how wrong you are.
You're clinging to your ideological status quo because it furthers your evil little agenda.
You live a lie and are proud of it because other worthless cunts like you also live a lie.
The moment you get called out on your bullshit, you drag your precious ideology in the mud because it no longer benefits you.
Then you drag it out, wash it off, and give it a kiss. (if you don't understand what I'm talking about by now, you have the reading comprehension of a toddler)
Stop posting now, subhuman.
>>28482646
>LE THING I DONT LIKE LE HAPPENS SO LE GOD IS EVIL BUT THERE IS NO LE GOD XDDDDD IM SO FUCKING SMART A PERFECT AND OBJECTIVE BEING CLEARLY FOLLOWS MY ETHICAL STANDARDS XDD SO.FUCKING.LOGICAL1!!!
>>28482690
How many times do I have to tell you that
'arguments' and 'thinking' are ideological constructs that do not phase me?
And you call me ignorant, you disgusting subhuman filth. Your comprehension of rationalism and empiricism match that of a fucking toddler, yet you praise it and hold it high.
>>28482723
>salty
Go back to Facebook you tool.
>>28482705
>anything I don't like is ideology
>>28482705
>I literally don't understand how math works
Even so, if we are to assume that proof is an ideological concept alone, then what you're saying is complete gibberish. If proof doesn't exist, then, really, the words you use don't mean anything, as it's impossible to prove that they do mean anything. In other words, by your definition, language is an ideology and therefore means nothing.
>>28482705
The bible is literal.
>>28482751
>getting this btfo on the internet
>>28482751
nice ideology.
>>28482824
>anything I don't like is ideology
Your illiteracy and childishless does not give you the merit
>>28482825
>I literally don't understand how math works
Why are you projecting?
Mathematics is based upon axioms, criticize this axioms and it falls apart.
You're a brat who fell for the STEM meme, you just started your first formal logic course (watered down for spergs), and you think you know everything now.
But when your axioms are criticized, then you have nothing.
>If proof doesn't exist, then, really, the words you use don't mean anything, as it's impossible to prove that they do mean anything
Why are you projecting your ideology onto metaphysical things now? Filthy empiricists do this like a pervert: project their filth everywhere.
You have no understanding of epistemology. By following your set of rules, I am able to make statements that you must follow that I may ignore, foregoing any dissonance.
>>28482870
It's not though, why do illiterate seculars believe they get to speak on these things?
>>28482871
Stop flattering yourself, brat.
>>28482928
>Your illiteracy and childishless does not give you the merit
You sound like an idiot who is afraid your beliefs are founded on nothing.
>It's not though, why do illiterate seculars believe they get to speak on these things?
The bible says to prove all things, why don't you prove the bible?
>>28482928
How the fuck is language metaphysical?
>>28482751
Are you on amphetamine, m? Why are you being so condescending? You're not allowing a dialogue or debate, you're ridiculing anyone who dare challenge your supreme authority. I think it's safe to assume that not everyone is on your level. This is senseless.
>>28482974
He's interpreting the bible how he sees fit. Like pharisee. So when the bible says to be full of compassion and loving kindness he simply faith's away what he doesn't want to do.
Even if I were religious I would be disgusted by this satanic display of rebellion form god.
>>28482974
Also when the bible gives the dimensions of the boat that housed all the animals on the ark via miracle. He would say we can't take it literally casting doubt on the veracity of the scriptures. This man is not even a believer in the true god, but of his own creation and imagination.
Truly a heathen.
>>28482961
>You sound like an idiot who is afraid your beliefs are founded on nothing.
You're projecting, it's what the ideologically-whipped do when their precious beliefs are destroyed.
'foundation' is an ideological construct that exists within your ideology, by projecting it onto an outsider you are contradicting your own ideology by not following your precious 'lawjick'
>>28482965
The meanings and definitions of language are metaphysical.
>>28482974
Because you're disgustingly stupid filth that keep yapping on about things you do not understand. You're trend-hoppers that live off of the latest cool ideology. As somebody said earlier in this thread, you'd be the first to condemn somebody like Galileo for attempting to disrupt your ideological status quo, then hop right on the heliocentric bus once it is more socially beneficial to you.
And I bet you're a frog poster, too. Whine about 'normalfags' a lot, how they only care about being accepted by everybody and will essentially whore themselves to ensure this? You are one.
>You're not allowing a dialogue or debate, you're ridiculing anyone who dare challenge your supreme authority.
What a filthy hypocrite you are, all empiricists are hypocrites of the same order.
Bet you call yourself a 'skeptic'; a 'free-thinker'.
>>28483012
>>28483041
The theologically illiterate do not get to speak.
Return once you've past the 10th grade and learned that 'le epic trole' is a joke stance that will be treated as a joke.
>>28483097
>The meanings and definitions of language are metaphysical.
In what sense? Because mathematics is a lot like language, hell, it pretty much is one. Yet you were pretty quick to do away with it. So what's different?
>>28483124
Oh look, you don't know the difference between 'definition' and 'axiom'.
What an adorable little pre-schooler.
>>28483097
>You're projecting, it's what the ideologically-whipped do when their precious beliefs are destroyed.
I guess you're a prime example -considering how early you resorted to ad-hominem attacks.
>The theologically illiterate do not get to speak.
I agree that's why you should quiet down.
>Return once you've past the 10th grade and learned that 'le epic trole' is a joke stance that will be treated as a joke.
Just like you.
If this is how biblecucks operate no wonder they used to stone them to death. Utterly irrational and self absorbed.
>inb4 more stupid insults
>>28483148
>I guess you're a prime example -considering how early you resorted to ad-hominem attacks.
There you go, going at the same nonsense again.
>Utterly irrational and self absorbed.
Top projection.
Read the thread /b/tard, I've used your own rules to show how irrational you are; and you are by default self-absorbed ego-worshipping children.
>I agree that's why you should quiet down.
xxDDDDD le epic clever trole xDDDD
*eats doritos*
>>28483175
If I didn't meet your expectations then I do;t feel the least bit guilt since you didn't meet mine.
Any fool can say they know what god wants. The book is what keeps you fools in check.
I suggest reading it and following it and staying out of public life for the benefit of everyone trying not to look at a retarded beggar while they enjoy their morning cup of joe.
>>28483142
But definitions rely on axioms. In order for something to have a definition it needs to rely on a constant.
>>28483203
But muh god and muh bible that I don't think is really true but I draw inspiration from it to create my own idea of god.
praise muh god
theists should literally kill themselves, not with bombs strapped to themselves hopefully.
>>28483097
Is it imperative everyone conform to your ideological stance? Why are your arguments littered with ad hominem rather than explaining yourself clearly and concisely?
To be completely honest matters of faith and ideology take a backseat, are they in the forefront of your mind? Are you frustrated you can't make others see the way you do? I'm trying to put myself in your shoes here, you have to keep in mind I'm hardly capable of conceptualizing this the way you can 2bh.
>>28483201
>Any fool can say they know what god wants. The book is what keeps you fools in check.
le master of logic and reason right here
*watches latest capeshit movie*
>>28483203
>But definitions rely on axioms.
According to?
>>28483230
>PRAISE MUH GOD
>*throws feces at secularists*
>>28483230
>According to?
Anyone with a fucking brain. The very nature of definitions necessitates axioms.
>>28483226
>Is it imperative everyone conform to your ideological stance
I have no ideology.
>Why are your arguments littered with ad hominem rather than explaining yourself clearly and concisely?
Because I am not whipped by your ideology and thereby do not to follow your rules.
>To be completely honest matters of faith and ideology take a backseat,
You're lying to yourself; you are solely ideologically-driven.
>>28483247
This is what rationalists believe, yet they think they are 'rational' and 'classy' and try to live by an idealized image of themselves while posting blatant nonsense online to 'bait le christcuck shills'.
Like I've said before, go back to /b/.
>>28483254
>Anyone with a fucking brain.
>IF YOU DONT ACCEPT MY IDEOLOGY UR FUKKIN STUPID FUKKIN CHRISDENS
Nice presumptions.
>>28483285
Are you the guy from /x/ who draws his own shitty "inspired" religious art?
>>28483310
Are you done exaggerating, le master of logic and reason?
>tfw you will never destroy Judaeo-Christianity before it turns into a total retard fest
>>28483285
>IF YOU DONT ACCEPT MY IDEOLOGY UR FUKKIN STUPID FUKKIN CHRISDENS
Neat. Now are you going to address my point?
>you will never be an iron pilled roman legionnaire killing godcucks
>>28483333
>anything i dont like is stupid
Coming from a troll of all people.
>>28483336
You have no point, you just have ideology.
>there is no god
>there is a god, but he is not good
>there is a god, but he is a powerless deceiver who just likes to have his fill of narcissistic supply
Pick one
>>28483361
>anything I don't like is an ideology
>>28483372
>projecting your ideology onto a perfect being
Kill yourself
>>28483399
t. secular manchild that doesn't know what ideology is
>>28483353
romans were the ultimate agnostics. they were superstitious but still had no belief in an afterlife. they thought anyone who did was backwards and retarded
>>28483409
When the bible says he is perfect do you take it literally?
my god i am so glad i took philosophy in highschool
>>28483440
>>28483445
I don't think you understand how biblical scholars work or the basic theory regarding biblical study.
Of course, manchildren like you were probably masturbating while their family went to church.
>>28483440
There was always something special about the Romans to me. We're taught to hate Rome in a biblical context because they are the world, but in a world without god all there is is the world, so all there is, is Rome.
>tfw don't really care and just focusing on improving myself
>tfw its infinitely better compared to all the bullshit that I could have ingested instead
life is good desu senpai, no regrets
>>28483478
Are you posting in this thread? Because if so, you learned nothing and should go back to /b/ with the rest of your Facebook-esque secular buddies that thrive off of popular ideology and general trend-hopping.
>>28483483
I don't think think you do so we're even.
You sound like you have a lot of faith in these "scholars" they sound like spooks t b h f a m.
>>28483409
I don't understand why you're so hostile towards "ideologies" considering I just showed you, how, using your own logic, you're just as guilty of an ideology as anyone else here, if not more so. Even barring what is your actual ideology, working under the axiom that axioms are illegitimate.If you're going to use your own fucktarded logic, at least have the balls to follow through with it.
I have no clue what sort mental gymnastics take place in your head, but they surely are spectacular.
>>28483502
Get laid.
A lot.
For me.
>>28483496
>le 'there is no god becuz i sed so' meme
So logical.
Stop fantasizing about fighting wars or whatever you neckbeards do to get off, you have so little dignity left.
>>28483502
>improving yourself
Except you're still worthless.
>>28483521
I have no ideology and am using your own logic to destroy your own logic.
You deny it because it's too painful, because you're a pleasure-seeking trend-hopping manchild that would be the first to carry torch and pitchfork, or stone, when your ideology is criticized.
If you still fail to understand, you need to reread the thread and take that ESL course I suggested you.
>>28483580
>have no ideology
You do operate under axioms. You have literally have to if you have a sense of what is right and what is wrong, morally or otherwise. Also I'm not the guy you suggested the course to.
>>28483620
>You do operate under axioms. You have literally have to if you have a sense of what is right and what is wrong, morally or otherwise. Also I'm not the guy you suggested the course to.
You're presuming I do.
>believing in God
This will never not be hilarious to me. It's literally retards enslaving themselves to arbitrary, stupid rules invented in their own minds because they're too weak minded to see outside of their childhood indoctrination, accept the idea that they aren't special, and that death is final. It was justifiable 1000 years ago when the human race was still collectively retarded, but with the Internet at almost everyone's finger tips and the fact that practically everything in the universe can be explained naturalistically with no intervention on the part of any deity, Christian, Hindu, or fucking alien or anything, there is no excuse whatsoever to still be uber religious or really religious at all unless you want to continually live in happy delusion or can't see yourself being controlled and manipulated from birth by the church.
