Being an atheist is the ultimate stamp of a midwit intellect.
It's okay to have an atheist cringe phase in your teenager years.
But denying the existence of a higher power, of the spiritual world and the connection that humans have with the Divine is the hallmark of a brainlet.
You did grow out of your teenage angst, right?
fpbp
cringe
Eternal anglo cunt.
yes but im still healing
There's no god dude
Atheism is ironically a bigger leap of faith than believing in God.
There is no evidence, whatsoever, for the existence of God(s) or other supernatural entities.
The big bang theory itself is evidence of something supernatural, something outside of the material world. Think about it.
The Big bang Theory is a theory based on observable evidence to show how the universe might have formed. It says nothing about what initiate the Big Bang. You can not attribute supernatural forces to it.
You need to understand that before Lamaitre (the catholic priest who formulted the big bang theory) scientists believed that the universe was eternal, that it was cyclical. Entropy only moves forward, therefore if the universe is not eternal, and originated from a point in time, there has to be a cause for it that is not contained in the material realm.
The universe won't "loop back"
there was a point in time that there wasn't a universe, and then a point in time that there was. What is your conclusion on that?
Not that anon but you're a total pseud. You have no idea what you talking about. You are proof that these topics are only for certain people.
> therefore if the universe is not eternal, and originated from a point in time, there has to be a cause for it that is not contained in the material realm.
There is absolutely zero evidence of this. We have no idea what if anything started the big bang so we don't know. We have no idea if rules of cause and effect exist or are necessary before the big bang.
>there was a point in time that there wasn't a universe, and then a point in time that there was. What is your conclusion on that?
You can't make a conclusion on that. We don't know. You are making the god of the gaps fallacy. You're just another retard. Sorry
>You can't make a conclusion on that. We don't know.
Thats the current knowledge, there was a point in time that there wasn't a universe, and then a point that there was. Your whole reply is a cope "we don't know, we can't be sure," "but btw it totally wasn't God"
get the fuck out of here you philosphical fence sitter
>Thats the current knowledge, there was a point in time that there wasn't a universe, and then a point that there was
That's not the current knowledge. We know that space and matter all expanded from some singular point in time... but we don't know if there wasn't a universe before that. We don't know if there was a such thing as a "before that" at all. We don't know if some outside entity caused it, or if it is part of some cyclical existence, or if that's simply when time started, and there's no meaningful answer to "what started time?" Here's a thought: time doesn't even exist. We exist within a static, 4 dimensional object. The big bang represents one end of the object and the heat death of the universe represents another. That object is in and of itself eternal.
>but we don't know if there wasn't a universe before that.
We know there wasn't, that would break the entropy law. There is no big crunch or the universe looping back. Do you understand that?
Entropy is a process that happens within the universe, as is time. Talking about any of these things necessarily means you are speaking of the universe. It is impossible to think of a time outside of the universe because time itself is within the universe. Cause and effect are part of the universe, so when you speak of a time before the universe when something caused the universe to exist you are positing that cause and time are processes that happen without the universe and not only do we have no evidence of that, we have no reason to believe it is the case.
I'm not OP though, I believe in God and Christ is King, just pointing out some interesting stuff to think about. God is beyond time or cause and effect in my opinion, we simply have no frame of reference in which to contemplate His existence.
>we don't know what was before big bang
>but we somehow know time doesn't exist
Time is just a form of measurement. We use it to track the movement of bodies in a space. It’s not a physically tangible thing you could point to or manipulate.
>I cannot manipulate time
>therefore it doesn't exist
This level of conceit explains refusal to believe in God
>we don't know what started everything and we work with the idea that there needs to be start inside of said everything so GOD CREATED EVERYTHING
Actual fucking nagger tier thinking
There need to be start, thats the whole point of entropy moving forward, the universe is not eternal, do you even understand the big bang theory?
As the other anon stated, we do not know the cause of the Big Bang, we only have evidence supporting its possible existence. We don't even truly know if the Big Bang happened because our observable universe is just a tiny decimal of the real full universe. For all we know, our observable universe could have been created in a catastrophic natural event inside an eternally and infinitely large real universe and the vey minute curvature of space may be the result of extremely vast distortions in the wider, but localized, part of the universe that lies outside of the observable horizon.
But beyond this, if the Big Bang happened, we have no idea if cause and effect exists beyond the reality of a universe. It may be the case that the nature of non-existence has the natural property to create universe(s) without cause (that we understand).
It may even be the case that we will never know because the nature of non-existence of incompatible with the matter and energy we are made from.
> For all we know, our observable universe could have been created in a catastrophic natural event inside an eternally and infinitely large real universe and the vey minute curvature of space may be the result of extremely vast distortions in the wider, but localized, part of the universe that lies outside of the observable horizon.
I hope you can see the contradiction in that statement. The current understanding is that there is no "Big crunch", the universe does not "loop back" and entropy only moves forward. There cannot have been a material cause for the big bang in the current model
Can you only imagine theoretically possible things?
I don't understand the question.
We have far more evidence outside of books for George Washington. Try again.
If something is theoretically possible, you can imagine it, or at least some part of it. Can you not?
The Bible is more widely documented with more accuracy than anything in history so no I shall not try again.
you can't be serious, there are as many contradictions in the bible as there are pages.
There are zero contradictions. Just verses taken out of context.
1.Who incited David to count the fighting men of Israel?
(a) God did (2 Samuel 24: 1)
(b) Satan did (I Chronicles 2 1:1)
2.In that count how many fighting men were found in Israel?
(a) Eight hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)
(b) One million, one hundred thousand (IChronicles 21:5)
3. How many fighting men were found in Judah?
(a) Five hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)
(b) Four hundred and seventy thousand (I Chronicles 21:5)
4.God sent his prophet to threaten David with how many years of famine?
(a) Seven (2 Samuel 24:13)
(b) Three (I Chronicles 21:12)
5.How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
(a) Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26)
(b) Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2)
6.How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?
(a) Eighteen (2 Kings 24:8)
(b) Eight (2 Chronicles 36:9)
here are just 6 I have 95 more a click away.
I'm not gonna go over each one because that takes more time than your 5 second copy and paste. But the first one is just like the book of Job. God never tempts us to sin. Satan does. However Satan is on a leash. God allowed Satan to tempt David. Therefore both answers are correct. Satan incited David but only because God allowed it, in order to further His plan.
#5 the Ahaziah question is a translation issue. In one instance he ruled ALONGSIDE his father starting at age 22. The other, is when he began ruling ALONE after his father's death when Ahaziah was 42.
Each of your examples only need to examine research or context and reading beyond the surface at a 5th grade level to understand them.
sounds like a concession of defeat to me, here are some more contradictions for the road, better luck next time cultist
95.Who killed Saul?
(a) “Saul took his own sword and fell upon it.... Thus Saul died... (I Samuel 31:4-6)
(b) An Amalekite slew him (2 Samuel 1:1- 16)
96.Does every man sin?
(a) Yes. “There is no man who does not sin” (I Kings 8:46; see also 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9;
Ecclesiastes 7:20; and I John 1:810)
(b) No. True Christians cannot possibly sin, because they are the children of God. “Every one who
believes that Jesus is the Christ is a child of God. (I John 5:1). “We should be called children of God; and
so we are” (I John 3: 1). “He who loves is born of God” (I John 4:7). “No one born of God commits sin;
for God’s nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God” (I John 3:9). But, then
again, Yes! “If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (I John 1:8)
97.Who will bear whose burden?
(a) “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2)
(b) “Each man will have to bear his own load” (Galatians 6:5)
98.How many disciples did Jesus appear to after his resurrection?
(a) Twelve (I Corinthians 15:5)
(b) Eleven (Matthew 27:3-5 and Acts 1:9-26, see also Matthew 28:16; Mark 16:14 footnote; Luke 24:9;
Luke 24:3 3)
99.Where was Jesus three days after his baptism?
(a) After his baptism, “the spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he was in the
wilderness forty days ... (Mark 1:12-13)
(b) Next day after the baptism, Jesus selected two disciples. Second day: Jesus went to Galilee - two
more disciples. Third day: Jesus was at a wedding feast in Cana in Galilee (see John 1:35; 1:43; 2:1-11)
You copy/paste real good, Anon. Be proud.
you worship a israeli rabbi real good, don't forget to clip your peen
Best compliment I've received all week! Thanks!
you're welcome, I have some boots you can lick while you're at it
>supernatural
Just humans cannot comprehend the extent of nature that does not make things beyond what we are capable of understanding supernatural. The gap between our comprehension and the extent of the natural universe is god. Belief in god is the acceptance of this fact.the humility that acknowledging the existence of an unknown which you are incapable of understanding brings you is objectively the superior position compared to the arrogance of absolute certainty that is inherent to "athiesm" (which isn't even real, everyone believes in god whether they are able to admit it to themselves or not)
> Just humans cannot comprehend the extent of nature that does not make things beyond what we are capable of understanding supernatural.
Christians and most religions consider their deities to be supernatural by definition, that is, they can decide and work above the nature laws.
Your inability to accept the term "supernatural" when practically all of your fellows do accept it simply means you are insecure in your beliefs as you are beginning to correctly associate "supernatural" with being made up non-sense.
> Belief in god is the acceptance of this fact.the humility that acknowledging the existence of an unknown
People who do not believe in the supernatural already have humility as they believe everything they know is a tiny sliver of what there is. The religious believe they know everything because they think all that they have to know is that their God exists.
> the arrogance of absolute certainty that is inherent to "athiesm" (which isn't even real, everyone believes in god whether they are able to admit it to themselves or not)
> Atheists ask for evidence
> You're arrogant for even asking for evidence
You need to work on what you think "arrogance" is.
And assuming atheists believe in some kind of God is just you coping.
If god isn't real then why are you so mad tho?
I'm not. You just think I am because you feel threatened and therefor imagine your threat coming from outside you (me) and thus you see me as a hostile. Anyone who questions your belief and values that were crystalized in you when you were a child by your adult figures becomes a threat, because children learn everything as a lesson of life and death.
> The Bible is more widely documented with more accuracy than anything in history
Just show the evidence.
>I'm not. You just think I am because you feel threatened and therefor imagine your threat coming from outside you (me) and thus you see me as a hostile. Anyone who questions your belief and values that were crystalized in you when you were a child by your adult figures becomes a threat, because children learn everything as a lesson of life and death.
Weird projection. I was raised in an atheist household and accepted the reality of a higher power as an adult.
Unusual path, but the same will typically apply. Some atheists or non-religion X people will convert for similar goals. Conversion due to stress, trauma, loneliness, etc, etc. is a common driver. But everything else remains the same, your neurology thinks I am a threat which is why you think I am mad.
>But everything else remains the same, your neurology thinks I am a threat which is why you think I am mad.
You are mad because you know what I am and you are not getting the respect from me which you feel you deserve. It would be statistically impossible for you to be both financially, physically, and mentally superior to me unless you were part of a very specific population living in a certain geographic location, which I know you are not. Therefore your defense is to get mad and accuse me of viewing you as a threat (there's that atheist arrogance rearing it's head again).
Let me ask you this simple question. If your life, from birth to death, amounts to nothing more than servitude to my people, with you willingly submitting to this without protest, and my people hold a firm belief in god... does that not make it your belief as well?
> It would be statistically impossible for you to be both financially, physically, and mentally superior to me
Take your meds, schizo.
> amounts to nothing more than servitude to my people
Sounds like something a israelite would say, your schizo checks out.
Out of all the religious people I have met, israelites, above all, hate it the most when you ask for evidence for the existence of their God(s).
>It says nothing about what initiate the Big Bang.
The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep... Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
???
A sentence from a book is not evidence of a physical event.
All of fuckin history is a sentence from a book you nitwit. Nobody alive has ever met George Washington. Yet we know he exists because of sentences in books.
How does existence come to be without a creator? Also, explain the logistics of an eternal universe, if you are one of the atheists with absolute faith in that?
> How does existence come to be without a creator?
We don't know yet. There's a variety of possible explanations. Quantum fluctuations are known to exist and they can seemingly "create" and "destroy" matter and energy without any known cause. It may be that the nature of non-existence allows these quantum fluctuations to be much more violent and allows dramatic expansions of energy and matter.
> Also, explain the logistics of an eternal universe, if you are one of the atheists with absolute faith in that?
It's just a possible explanation that may be possible with the known geometry of the Big Bang. It's not a popular theory because it requires more assumptions outside of the known evidence, but it's still technically possible (although improbable).
Nothing I stated in the green text you made talks about the origin of the universe, merely is possible geometry and formation inside a greater geometry beyond the horizon of the observable universe.
Also, "cause and effect" is a purely in-universe phenomenon, we have no idea if such a phenomena exists in the nature of non-existence.
>Also, "cause and effect" is a purely in-universe phenomenon, we have no idea if such a phenomena exists in the nature of non-existence.
so you admit the existance of something outsidethe material universe
> so you admit the existance of something outsidethe material universe
Everyone who subscribes to the Big Bang Theory naturally thinks that something existed beyond the universe (and may still exist beyond our universe). Exactly what that something is or what properties it has is not known.
The thing outside the universe is still "material" (i.e. empirically existent), but has a dramatically alien nature. It may be so divergent from ordinary matter/energy/space-time that we have no way to interact with it.
Imagining something theoretical is always possible, but backing that theoretical idea with evidence is the gold standard to acceptance.
>The thing outside the universe is still "material" (i.e. empirically existent), but has a dramatically alien nature. It may be so divergent from ordinary matter/energy/space-time that we have no way to interact with it.
If it is outside the universe it is not empirically existant, because science is based on material evidence, it is a materil compass, and it breaks when we speak about things that are supramaterial (AKA supernatural). The last part of your post on alien, interactable stuff is just kinda your conjecture. But at least you are engaging honestly in the thread.
> If it is outside the universe it is not empirically existant
Just because something is far away, difficult to measure, etc. does not mean it is not subject to empiricism. But it may mean that is is impossible to test despite having evidence that it is possibly there.
Look at the theory of gravity, it took over seven years before scientists acquired the first evidence to support its existence. Many did not believe gravity could even be tested, not because gravity did not exist, but because the physical ability to test may be too difficult.
> The last part of your post on alien, interactable stuff is just kinda your conjecture.
Well, yes and no, we do have things that we know exists but are extremely difficult to accurately measure. Sometimes even using instruments to measure the thing causes contamination and changes the nature of the thing (see double slit experiment).
It may be that the nature of non-existence is so divergent from us that it is absolutely impossible to interact or measure any part of it.
So, you accept it is impossible to imagine something theoretically impossible. Only
theoretically possible things can be imagined.
Anselm bros, we won
We always do.
Or some part of.
>it is impossible to imagine something theoretically impossible.
I imagine things that are theoretically impossible all the time. this is stupid. you're stupid.
Like what, you actually not being a midwit toolbag?
which version off the bible do you subscribe to? I want to be as accurate as possible when I dissect your beliefs.
I have stated my beliefs here, yet they remain undissected. Keep on coping midwit, you might get there one day.
I'm going to assume king james bible.
how does it feel basing your belief on a revised translation
Trying to find your safe space?
you're terminally retarded
Unironicly posting, a smart move.
It is possible to imagine something theoretically impossible, such as unicorns. But this is a different issue entire from imagining something that is possible given what we know from evidence.
Would it not be possible with "science" to genetically modify, a horse for example, to resemble a unicorn? Or are you unsubscribing to your belief in trannys? Would be most unusual for an atheist to do so.
> Would it not be possible with "science" to genetically modify, a horse for example, to resemble a unicorn?
No, not impossible. Hopefully we do, that would be cool.
Unicorns, however, are magical, horns, flying, infinite life, supernatural healing abilities, possible invisibility, etc, etc.
Theoretically, anything can be possible. But one can not live life believing in all things that could exist. It's best to stick as close as possible to the evidence.
> Or are you unsubscribing to your belief in trannys?
I never talked about trannys? You're interested in trannys?
> Would be most unusual for an atheist to do so.
Because supernatural beings that break the laws of nature as we know them are out of the realm evidence.
The key point is :nothing is theoretically possible, therefore, unless atheism/science proves the universe to be eternal, atheism is quite literally impossible.
>nothing is theoretically possible
*impossible.
> nothing is theoretically impossible
Yes, and? We base things on the best evidence we have, everything outside this is just theory (with some theories being more well supported than others).
> nothing is theoretically possible
???
This sentence is non-sense.
Things exist, we know this, this is beyond theory because we have evidence. We have made theories of things existence before evidence, did tests, confirmed their existence, and now we know they are real and possible.
> unless atheism/science proves the universe to be eternal, atheism is quite literally impossible.
???
There is no burned of proof on atheists to prove anything.
Heh, made a typo, you go on to agree with the spirit of my argument. Entertainment intensifies.
Unless, atheists are in fact agnostic. Where, then the label of atheism becomes useless. They are claiming something. Maybe, atheists are just loudly stating their opinion?
>They are claiming something.
wrong, you are claiming something, you are claiming god exists. athiests are saying prove it.
> Unless, atheists are in fact agnostic.
Theism and atheism are statements of belief. Like someone saying ketchup is better than mustard.
Agnosticism is a statement of epistemology, whether or not something can be known. i.e., someone who doesn't know what condiment they like more.
Most atheists are atheist agnostics. All we require is evidence. For as long as an agnostic does not believe in the existence of God(s) then they are atheists by definition. In some cases there are theist agnostics, these people believe in God(s) despite not knowing the nature of God(s).
> here, then the label of atheism becomes useless.
Atheism and agnosticism are not at odds, they are completely different categories.
If someone does not believe or lacks the belief in God(s), they are atheists. Children are all born atheists before taught otherwise.
>The key point is :nothing is theoretically possible
yes, this is true. it is possible for nothing to exist
> therefore, unless atheism/science proves the universe to be eternal, atheism is quite literally impossible
explain your logic because I'm not following you, this seems like a really stupid 80iq take but maybe you can elaborate
The original source of this universe, is impossible to find within this universe. It was designed this way.
which came first? the creator or the creator of the creator?
If you believe with your heart you're not using your mind. Which ironically is an insult to the god that gave you an intellect.
If you live your life based on scientific evidence, it will be a hollow one.
> If you live your life based on scientific evidence, it will be a hollow one.
Funny, because I live in a civilization ruled by empiricism and we have a hyper abundance of resources, low crime, extreme degrees of freedom, long life spans and health spans, nearly infinite knowledge at my fingertips, and fantastical opportunities to do practically anything I want with my life.
My life isn't hollow. If you think your life is hollow, that is a problem you have.
>I need a divine being watching over me and waiting for me in the afterlife or else my life is hollow and meaningless
Sucks for you bro.
>There is no evidence
Except there is. You just decide to ignore it.
Provide evidence for the existence of God(s).
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
what you're saying is you have no proof
Do you believe in the existence of all things that have no evidence? Of course not, that would be an absurdity.
Provide proof for the existence of God(s).
Provide evidence for the existence of God(s).
Near death shit is all hearsay, scams, brain damage, hallucination, wishful thinking, etc.
>Near death shit is all hearsay, scams, brain damage, hallucination, wishful thinking, etc.
cool, so in other words, you asked for evidence, I told you were to look and you refused. As far as I'm concerned all your science is scam, hearsay, brain damage, hallucination and wishful thinking. Don't forget your third booster.
P.S. Brain damage and wishful thinking does not regrow 90% of your intestines you lost after getting crushed by a semi-truck. But you would know that had you bothered looking into them objectively.
you just believe anything don't you, present something as a miracle and you gobble it right up
Go get your booster sweet heart, it's safe and effective, i'm sure you gobble that one right up. Don't talk to me or my wife's son ever again until you bothered watching the testimony i told you about.
buddy all you have is ad hom and butthurt, I've enjoyed making you cry like a bitch.
>17 posts by this ID
kek.
>Provide evidence for the existence of God(s).
>provide dipshit with said evidence
>refuses to look into it
here is a picture of a section of the report, you can go and listen to the interview and look for the rest on your own, you're a big boy with big atheist pants, flex your high IQ by showing me you can do the basic task of googling something.
>X posts by this ID
>HAHA that'll get em
lol lmao
Lmfao.
> just read this totally real medical report that is unintelligible and not cited.
Behold, the defeated christcuck
Ad hom!
Fallacy!
Delusion!
Stupidity!
GO THEIST!
>t. actual cucks
teenage angst
Provide evidence for the existence of God(s).
> regrow 90% of your intestines
Show the medical records proving this claim.
You haven't provided evidence for any of the claims you have made.
> Just look up this source I didn't cite, bro
> just trust me, bro
I'm not wasting time on a pompous man-child, if you're truly interested and not just wasting my time, look into near deaths experiences. Go right now on youtube, and look at the testimonies of those witnesses, you can look at bruce van natta's if you want a place to start and go from there.
>but muh brain lacking oxyguhn!
go and listen to the testimonies. Lack of brain oxygen does not get rid of terminal cancer. Lack of oxygen does not regrow 90% of your intestines. Lack of oxygen doesn't make you meet dead relatives you've never seen and able to describe them. Lack of oxygen does not allow you to know facts that you couldn't have possibly known. You want proof of divine? Go look into those testimonies and the miracles that God has performed. They are all out there, which you would have known about had you decided to look for the truth rather than listening to some atheist that shoves bananas up his ass.
you are tarded guy
No, it isn't.
if you believe in god it's because you're like most people on the planet and you're a fucking retard narcissist who thinks he can have any idea of something he believes created literally fucking everything
Why are you able to conceptualize it, but religious people aren’t?
Why are you special?
True, to believe nothing is out there is a scary thought to me.
>t religitard IQ
Sad
not really. Thats what I used to believe too before my 'enlightment'
Truth is what matters the most
Atheism comes from school indoctrination and false/half true scientific workings. Used to project your own ignorance and your digestion of 'the science'. (Major in all positive sciences btw, dont even start)
The devils biggest trick is making you believe he doesnt exist.
Used to believe matter gives rise to consciousness.. boy I was wrong and the engligthment moment hit hard.
Your atheistic beliefs are so understandable though. I just hope everyone will experience God, even for a moment. And that moment is not so far away.
"Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed"
Graspings: things whole and not whole, what is drawn together and what is drawn asunder, the harmonious and the discordant. The one is made up of all things, and all things issue from the one.
συλλάψιες· ὅλα καὶ οὐχ ὅλα, συμφερόμενον διαφερόμενον, συνᾷδον διᾷδον καὶ ἐκ πάντων ἓν καὶ ἐξ ἑνὸς πάντα
—Heraclitus. fragment DK B10.
Yes. That is deep. As if yourself and everything around you is God :b
Nothing wrong with proper science. But you see how incomplete it is and how we always find the inner workings by more digging. How boring this world would be if there were no treasures to find, discovering the origins of yourself at the same time.
I see nothing wrong with science if properly understood. It does explain what it seeks to explain, which is the things that can be measured with instruments. It is full of truth about those things.
But those aren't the only things that exist! And the unmeasurable things do not contradict our theories of the physical. They're things that can be experienced, or reasoned, or remembered, but not with our current instruments measured.
israelitetains are fat, dopy, pedo rednecks.
The only thing I know for certain is that I will die. After that, I can't say.
> The only thing I know for certain is that I will die. After that, I can't say.
Your body will decompose. Over time you will be forgotten, and any genetic footprint you had will be scattered in time back into the reverted mean of the gene pool. In a few centuries, it will be as if you never existed. If you're somehow famous you might have a few millennia.
Based. Now the next step is to understand the only religion where God is knowledgeable is Christianity (LDS is the original true Church).
Heavenly Father is real and so is His Begotten Son Jesus Christ.
Emperor Constantine saw the rise of the Christian cults and erosion of the old Roman cults. The Christian cults were highly fractured and had a wide range of beliefs of religious books.
Constantine ordered the Council of Nicaea to collect all the known and popular Christian books and edit the books into a single book, the Roman Bible. After long deliberation, the council decided what books were and were not believed to be divinely inspired. The council then printed the first 70 some odd Bibles of which all Christian religions derive from. This became the official story, all other Christian cults were violently suppressed. The conflicting books were destroyed, lost, or hidden away, a few of them have been found in recent times.
In the end, however, Christianity became fractured again, new Bible were created, new interpretations made, etc.
Ironically, many Christians considered Constantine to be an agent of Satan as he personally violated several Christian laws. For example, he was one of the first Roman Emperors and the first major Christian to be clean shaven. The Bible states that being clean shaven is a symbol of Satanic allegiance, as is having a goatee. And, of course, Constantine was insanely violent, and made his empire the seat of God's throne by creating the Roman Catholic church under his domain of authority., etc, etc.
This is a slide thread. Nothing that you have said even approaches adding any value to a real conversation on this.
I don't even care what you do or don't believe. Stop shitting up the board you dumb nagger.
idiots are so annoying
Atheism is perhaps the best cope against the idea that we were created for entertainment, to experience suffering, because this creator is a sick fuck with nothing better to do than create life for the express purpose of treating it like shit because it's a "test". "Trust me, bro."
>thank you ancestors for believing in God and creating this wonderful civilization for me
>too bad god isn't real, time to do drugs and play video games and burn it all to the ground because all that matters is if I feel happy and entertained
Great plan lmao
suffering is a man-made affliction anon. the world is bountiful enough for all.
most atheists cannot grasp that their creator is indeed benevolent enough as to not interfere. that the allowance of free will and the pursuit of good or evil is the creator's love incarnate. imagine being unable to choose because you simply 'know'.
they cannot grasp that they might have chosen to come here and experience this as they would have played a novelty game at a fair. they cannot grasp by laws of energy that it simply makes no sense that one emerges from nothing into consciousness and recedes back to nothing as anon says in the latter part of
an atheist will point toward born deformities or handicaps as evidence of a cruel god, but these too are things born of man. only when the hand is weighed too far will the creator act. it is why evil incarnate must flaunt itself and rely on the collective apathy of a consumerist culture to ignore it's presence, lest it rouse the creator into resetting it's mamon cycle for another millenia.
read Ecclesiastes. find god
> an atheist will point toward born deformities or handicaps as evidence of a cruel god, but these too are things born of man. only when the hand is weighed too far will the creator act. it is why evil incarnate must flaunt itself and rely on the collective apathy of a consumerist culture to ignore it's presence, lest it rouse the creator into resetting it's mamon cycle for another millenia.
> read Ecclesiastes. find god
Non-sense.
as is your
>'Everyone who subscribes to the Big Bang Theory naturally thinks that something existed beyond the universe'
is this the ultimate coping mechanism for atheists? if god were proved beyond disputable fact they would probably recite something like this.
> as is your
Provide evidence for the existence of your God(s).
> if god were proved beyond disputable fact they would probably recite something like this.
More non-sense.
Actually the only reasonable post here. Well done, you get it.
This. God's a piece of fucking shit
Tell me about the suffering you still would complain about after the first million years of life eternal.
God is great, and you are small-minded and petty.
>No internal monologue
>No ability to envision imagery
>Spiritually dull, cant sense evil
The mark of the NPC
That's very cute. Now please rank the intellect of someone who believes Yahweh is real. Yahweh is a fairytale deity who had to ask Adam where he was hiding the Garden of Eden and who supposedly gave the ten commandments to Moses on Mount Sinai. Do you believe these events with Yahweh literally happened? If so, why? And why do you consider this entity to be "God"?
Explain to me how you are smarter than supposed "midwits" for believing these stories. I know this thing about Yahweh won't apply to everyone in the thread, but I'm sure it relates to some of you.
>be midwit atheist
>someone starts talking about divinity
>immediately start kvetching about Christianity.
You fags are so kiked in the brain it is unreal lmao
I made it clear that Yahweh doesn't apply to everyone. Also, Yahweh applies to judaism and Christianity. I've noticed that religious people start having these atheism debates as a distraction because there is no justification for their religions even if you believe in God. Yahweh narratives are Santa Claus-tier theism. Explain how you're smart for believing in that. I know some of you do.
Rent free, you midwit.
You have no response to the fact that the Bible is fiction. What is the point in these debates? You believe in God? So what? Does that mean you're going to mutilate your penis because your imaginary friend Yahweh told you he wants your foreskin for his collection?
Explain to me what you think follows from belief in God. Is it following the Bible or Quran like a manual? Is it believing random schizos when they say God gave them a prophecy? The thinly veiled bullshit can be smelled from a mile away.
The religious people in this thread have no response to my posts.
The anthropomorphic character of Yahweh Elohim, an earthbound god little different from mortal humans, is highlighted in this passage. Here Yahweh Elohim dwells on earth—presumably in a palace or temple, although it does not explicitly appear in Genesis 3—and walks about like an ordinary human in the cool evening breeze of the pleasure garden, in imagery influenced by the temperate breezes of the Islands of the Blessed (Homer, Odyssey 4.560–565; Pindar, Olympian Odes 2.55–85; Strabo, Geography 3.2.13). Yahweh Elohim is the opposite of omniscient, calling out to find man’s whereabouts, questioning him on his suspected disobedience, and querying the first woman as well. This depiction of Yahweh Elohim as possessing knowledge limited to the senses, like ordinary mortals, also appears in Gen 4:9, where Yahweh questions Cain on the whereabouts of his brother. Marcion would later point out these details as proof that the biblical god Yahweh was not the supreme god of the universe, but belonged to a lesser order of deity (Harnack 1990: 67–92). Similarly, the lesser gods of Plato’s Timaeus, unlike the Demiurge, appear neither omnipotent nor omniscient.43
what the hell are you talking about
Yahweh is just some terrestrial deity even within the biblical narrative. He's not some omniscient or omnipresent god. He walked around the Garden of Eden like a mortal and was forced to ask Adam where he was hiding. The biblical narrative gives us a pitifully poor excuse for a "god".
Stop kissing source creators ass
>blah blah blah *personal insult* blah blah blah *intellectual insult* blah blah
Really making quite the point there. Also I’m agnostic, homosexual. The fact that you NEED a religion to cope with your existence is pathetic. Just believe, consumer.
When there's less days ahead than are behind you'll adjust your views
You’re speaking from your own fear, bucko.
If you can’t realize there are powers greater than you even if they are not sentient that should be respected, you are a fucking egotistical retard that doesn’t deserve to breathe air. This is the bare minimum of being a respectable, humble human being.
humans are a disease, a cancer of the biosphere
>its just there
It really isnt
>im special because i can see the divine
You really arent
I DO NOT CARE
KYS you stupid "Sopa Do MacaChristCuck uma delicia"
Everyone who believes in God has failed to do their own investigation and has simply accepted the word of some other man as truth. Look outside yourself and see if you can find God. Look within yourself and see if you can find God. In both cases, I know what you will find, but I'm betting you're too fucking lazy and deluded to look.
I did find God, and I have non placebo concrete evidence of Him. You just don't have enough life experiences.
Go back to bed, boomer
I grew out of it awhile ago
memeflag is a macaco from brazil, this conversation is a waste of time
>i had to be made a fool to become truly wise.
>all the atheists itt
when did this place become reddit
also, can a single atheist explain why it is wrong to kill them
/misc/ was never a christian board, fucking tourist
Religion, based on a books written by old deadmen as proof of something existence. I will believe in a God when you cunts prove to me Spider-Man does not exist!
I could only ever believe in a God that doesn't ding people for not believing in dieties
Yea I grew out of it when I turned 18 and did mushrooms for the first time. I knew after then that god or magic or something else exists. I could feel it. I still do.
THROW OUT ALL SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY GUYS!!!! THISS FELLA HAS A FEELING FROM WHEN HE WAS ON DRUGS!!!
Atheist activism becomes the religion in place of a diety. You worship “interlocutors” like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. You parrot arguments without actually thinking them through or actually developing your own concept of how things work or reality as a whole. It’s literally worse than religion because you have no moral system aside from what you Frankenstein together from other religions, only to eventually turn to some form Buddhism. It sells you the illusion of individuality while you slowly become a sheep for the globohomo. Then before you know it, your government becomes your god because a desire to worship something is ingrained in 99% of humans. Atheism is the ultimate bluepill.
I would somewhat agree, except that I think belief in a personal god or aligning one's beliefs perfectly with a particular denomination is just as cringe and arrogant as atheism. It is deferring one's thinking to others and putting oneself and his connection to god at the centre of the universe.
Top of pol, what a joke
>Brazil
>Theist autistic screeching
This is a secular board nagger
Being an atheist is pretty natural when compared to the popular official religions, which make no sense at all and are just tyrannical and get mad at you if you ask real questions.
I grew out of it when I ditched them and thought about God, rather than the reactions I'd had to religions. More people would think better if we didn't have these stupid religions that deserve to be hated.
"feelings" are just chemical reactions in your brain. Feeling faith or God is not proof it exists. You are a monkey that doesn't understand whats happening to you.
>"feelings" are just chemical reactions in your brain
source?
no one is denying the existence of a higher power but it doesn't have to be the magical sky daddy in your israeli fairy tales
I believe there is a higher power but I don't think any human can claim to know who or what it is with 100% certainty, especially not from reading some thousand year old book written by a bunch of desert goat-fuckers