Pro-Atheism thread.

File: 95c1aebf789765f45e525606ac475feb487bc6542e18078eb119cbe5cfea98b0 (1).jpg (34KB, 345x337px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 345x337px

>>717102659
Fuck off back to r/atheism were you belong!

File: 1477856138682.jpg (63KB, 761x315px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 761x315px

>>717102972
>theist triggered

>>717102659
God is gay

File: 15400987_1319573924783756_761217631846473665_n.png (778KB, 950x550px) Image search: [Google]

778KB, 950x550px

>>717103257
Can't be 'gay' if you don't exist.

File: let__s_learn____by_nayzak-d5okem5.jpg (223KB, 900x1228px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 900x1228px

>>717102659
Delete this thread now!

File: think for you.jpg (108KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1920x1200px

>>717103423
No.

>>717102659
fuck you, this is now an agnostic thread.

Remember that time Atheism was a world power, and had major swing in the NASDAQ?

Wait that's right. They don't.

What about Misotheists? Right, none. No ties with the nuclear weapon trade, no arms dealers, no states of power, nothing.

Y'all are pussies.

File: XZJDBUO.jpg (50KB, 557x711px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 557x711px

>>717103337
>Can't be 'gay' if you don't exist
*tip fedora

File: rational_thinking_by_nayzak-d5p9ro1.jpg (204KB, 1024x1229px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 1024x1229px

>>717103481
Well it's your loss then anon.

File: fu.jpg (3KB, 150x150px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 150x150px

>>717103481

File: 14192678_1201743139900169_7641267192567794307_n.png (307KB, 800x582px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 800x582px

>>717103564
Exactly.

Going out for a jog. Later.

>>717102659
What, you fags are too good to be a slave to an figment of mankind's collective imagination? What makes you so special? PROSTRATE YOURSELF BEFORE THE CONCEPT OF GOD OR ILL MAKE YOU

>>717103693
>argument coming from a fat digusting neckbeard
>therefore argument is invalid
theist logic 101
also fuck you for making me respond to bait
also fuck you for making me bite y

File: 1478447943419.png (243KB, 580x606px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 580x606px

>>717103564

>>717103700
lol

File: 1456405125768.jpg (6KB, 160x160px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 160x160px

>>717103829

>>717103564
At least we have images of spiderman. Haven't ever seen a picture of God. (drawing does not count). Based on that the probability of spiderman existing is higher.

>>717104091
You must have one too many chromosomes

>>717102659
I know this is bait and all, but what if the thing we consider "evil" is not evil for God. Its not evil to kill people or to rape cute lolis in Gods eyes. But it is evil to get old thats why he punishes old people with death.

File: 1462329989963.png (154KB, 401x293px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 401x293px

>>717102659
If atheists are so cool then why do all the most powerful people in the world pretend to be religious?
Atheists: 0 - Theists: 0

>>717102659
But why does God have to be omnipotent, omniscient, or benevolent? Why can't he just be a hot, muscly grandpa chilling in the sky that comes down every now and again to impregnate mortal women?

>>717104233
Evil is subjective, then, and to choose to align your morality with a fiend like God is retarded as his basis of morality would be so alien and vile compared to any reasonable conception of moral goodness from basically any culture that isn't savage and warlike.

>>717104295
>If atheists are so cool then why do all the most powerful people in the world pretend to be religious?
Politics is a process of fooling the stupid.

>>717104295
To take advantage of religious idiocy

>>717104462
>evil is subjective
> his morality is vile

>>717104932
There is no contradiction between those two statements, retard. Morality may be subjective, ultimately a construct of man rather than an implicit truth, but that does not mean all are created equal according to standards of decency and usefulness. Only a weak fool looks at the lack of implicit meaning in the universe and decides to throw their hands up and say "none of this matters I'll be fine with whatever."

File: 188.jpg (12KB, 300x100px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 300x100px

>>717102659
I've been there actually. Thinking just like that. But ... try to imagine a purpose behind evil and suffering. There actually is one.

People are to some degree stubborn, malevolent being, egoistic and stupid. Some more, some less, ok, but it appears that some things we, as humans, only learn through suffering, and the purpose of evil is to bring that suffering forth. Easiest example are kids learning in early age not to do certain stuff because it results in suffering, and later on adults learning the very same lessons, but on different level.

We won't learn through examples. Some things we have to learn through experience, and sometimes suffering and evil is necessary for this experience.

It wouldn't be possible without evil. It has a place in here. Think about this life as a correctional facility and boot camp at the same time. (I personally believe in reincarnation. So no, I don't think that killing yourself will make it all go away. You'll just start over. Kinda nasty.)

If you look at it this way "God" (if there is one, I'm not a theist) might intentionally allow the evil and suffering to persist.

Epikur. I studied some of his works. Questioning God without questioning reason behind existence of evil and suffering is a mistake.

File: 1467909602663.jpg (72KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 640x480px

http://imgur.com/a/WxEWj

>>717105268
Assuming evil is a big cosmic conspiracy "for our own good" is logically fucked, though. Attacks on god as a moral being are besides the point, which is that he is a fictional being.

>>717102659
And adhering to the moral system of such a being that holds a high enough power to decide fates is not useful how? In the example given by the previous anon earlier, such a god punishes those not adhering to his standards.

>>717105706
Die on your feet instead of living on your knees, coward

File: pooh.jpg (109KB, 1024x569px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1024x569px

>>717105575
That's actually a reasonable stance to take.

>>717102659
Just because someone avoided by a different set of moral standards than you doesn't mean that they don't enjoy those morals. Some may take preference in it. Who's to say that they aren't enjoying themselves proudly while living by such standards?

File: Contemplating_The_Pineapple.jpg (66KB, 500x377px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x377px

>>717102659
This destroys the idea of a god with morals. Could just be some fuck who doesn't give a shit.
>agnosticism

>>717102659
abides, not avoided*

>>717106096
Then they have a false-consciousness they've been indoctrinated in. Their morality is abjectly awful and slavish.

>>717106160
/thread

>>717106296
And you don't have a false consciousness that you've been indoctrinated in without realising it, which puts you at odds with their perfectly viable voices, because...?

>>717102659
There is something called free will. Given to us by God, it is up to us to individually prove our worth to him. Without free will, why have anything exist at all to experience? Giving free will means that God is not alone, evil men and good men will exist, but only the ones who enact their free will towards good will enter the kingdom of eternal reward. In showered love and bliss. That's why you lose.

File: 1481870512108.jpg (48KB, 960x692px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 960x692px

>>717102972
>>717103129
>>717103267
>>717103693

>LE FUNNY NECK BEARD FEDORA MEME XD
That's really the best you can do christfags?

>>717103129
>everyone who hates annoying atheists must be a theist

This is why you have no friends anon.

>>717103771
Free will, dumbass. It's Gods ultimate gift to let us decide for ourselves, and not be pawns. Sounds kinda nice not to be forced to do something yeah?

>>717102659
Maybe that which we call god is not a person and beyond perception

>>717106616
No I realize it. I'm conscious of the influences on my values and try my best to look past them and analyze ideas on their own merits, using evidence where applicable, instead of slavishly following dogma. Fuck off with your false-equivalence bullshit

>>717102659
Epicurus wasn't an atheist, his works clearly state that he believed in the gods, he just didn't give a fuck and believed that they gave zero fucks about people, thus the uselessness of religion

>>717104310
Zeus in a nutshell

File: uHL9Jne.jpg (117KB, 1440x1798px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1440x1798px

Checkmate atheists!

>>717107152
Which was a sensible position in the time before monotheism, when the gods were more human-like, fickle, flawed and limited in their powers. The gods of the pagans made sense in the context of their world. The gods of monotheism only make sense as mechanisms of social control during the time of growing state power and national cohesion.

>>717104310
That's why I venerate Zeus.

>>717106881
That's completely missing my earlier point, though. People can decide by themselves, of their own free volition that their own morals coincide with that god's. Maybe it's their fetish, maybe they just wholeheartedly believe in the same things that god wants, but it's still their choice.

Even reducing the argument to "die standing up rather than living on your knees" is creating a false dichotomy and depriving of choice.

>>717102659
The most annoying thing that Christians don't get:

God knows everything that was and is, correct?

God knows what you will be when you are created, then. He will know the life you live and the things you'll do, be them good or bad.

In other words, God knew you were going to go to eternal damnation before you were even created you, an infinite realm of suffering and anguish, he knew you were going to go there.

But he created you anyways.

A loving father forcing you into existence against your will just to inevitably spend an infinite amount of time suffering the most horrid pain.

He knew it and made you anyways.

Let's define being gay as someone who has had sex with a man or would not clearly prefer having sex with a woman to sex with a man.
If an agnostic person has had sex with a man, they are gay.
If an agnostic person has not had sex with a man, they do not know if they would prefer sex with a man to sex with a woman, so they don't clearly prefer sex with a woman to sex with a man, so they are gay.
QED all agnostics are gay.

>>717107509
There is nothing false about the dichotomy between slavery and freedom. Even a bird will grow accustomed to its cage, but you would never suggest that the bird was meant for its cage. A bird is meant to live free and wild, much like mankind is meant to be free from its chains, whether physical or mental.

There are around 2500 Gods worldwide. You think 2499 are wrong and you got it right?
You also got it wrong!

>>717107816
The point is that they're not being chained. Let's say that the god decrees that it is punishable to not fap daily. That's something that I'm already completely behind in my life. There is no slavery here. There is no forcing of will. There's just, "oh hey, I already believed in that. Cool. Now I can just keep doing what I like to do AND not be punished for being a heathen."

>>717107484
It's unknown what the original target of epicurus' riddle was, but it would likely have applied to all forms of worship, as his issue was not with gods or their existence, but with the effects of religion, I.e. Using religion to regulate society as you said. That applied to the Greek gods too, since even though there was no centralized church ruling everything, individual temples had massive power over the rulers in their region and the gods were more a part of everyday life (or more relevant, as you said), leading to a greater everyday interaction with religion.

Either way, Epicurus did not approve. You should look into some of his teachings, they are actually quite fascinating for over two thousand years ago, he was the first person to interpret atomic theory as not being a prerequisite for determinism and therefore not implying lack of free will

>>717108184
The threat of punishment is the chain, you dense fuck. Even the worst authoritarian bootlickers are still ultimately slaves even if they'd follow their imaginary cloud-dictator without the threat of reprisal and damnation, because the threat is still there. It is not an option, it is mandated.

>>717103423
Go away Islam, nobody likes you, not even the other religions

You're literally the King Joffrey of religions

>>717102659
Epicurus wasn't an atheist

>>717103423
waifu

>>717107667
If the goal of this thread is "pro-atheist" why aren't we currently working to disprove every worshipped god in the world, and only focusing on the Judeo-Christian one. This seems more like a "vent anger at the concept of the Christian God" thread.

>>717108585
Because they are irrelevant. The Judeo-Christian god and the institutions and throngs of idiots that follow him and perpetuate his dogma are a genuine existential threat to human freedom. Islam, Judaism and Christianity are all similar in the fact that they are authoritarian death cults that fetishize the end of time and teach mankind to loathe itself. I don't give a fuck about Ongo Bongo in Congo worshiping the fucking sun until he forms African ISIS and starts bombing subways in Paris.

>>717107688
Agnostics don't use the same thought process for their personal life. And that is because it is personal.

>>717108387
It's not really a threat if it causes literally no change to what I do, what I believe in, or how I live my life. It would mean literally nothing to me. To people who don't already do/believe in those things, then it's a threat.

If a nation declares it'd kill all blacks in its borders, that'd be a threat to blacks, not to whites. They'd just live their lives like normal because the criteria for punishment doesn't really have anything to do with them.

You finally starting to get what I'm saying here?

>>717109236
No, you're just obtusely ignoring the point. God's word is a divine mandate of how to live. Even if you'd live that way anyway, you're still obligated to do so, removing the choice to do otherwise. That is slavery. Get this through your thick skull or fuck off. God is a perfect expression of unfreedom and you've done nothing to prove otherwise.

>>717109586
True, an authoritarian god, like most depicted gods, enforces some form of slavery.

File: tmp_23752-images(30)-888207782.jpg (15KB, 256x197px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 256x197px

>>717102972
I know rite? Atheism is like a totally new thing, and all atheists are teenagers, like u.

>>717102659
>Let's come up with petty excuses for being shitty people.

>>717109984
oh man im so steamed brb im gonna write a paragraph about how your clearly wrong point is wrong

>>717109586
God says not to kill, or I'll go to hell. Most atheists look at their situations objectively and decide, "you know what? I shouldn't go around killing people. It holds no benefit to me and this is something that I choose to hold as a belief."

A perfectly reasonable choice. They already didn't plan on killing anyways. Just because a god happens to exist and his judgement coincides with their decision doesn't mean that they are a slave to his will.

The concept of a god isn't purely symbolic of unfreedom. You just choose to decide it to have that meaning. One can even say it's more symbolic of consequence. The law says I can't steal. Does that physically stop me from doing so? No. I can still CHOOSE to steal, I'll just have to beat with the consequence of making that choice. The laws of gravity assert that if I were to throw a heavy rock directly above me, it'd fall back down and hit me. Is that obstructing my freedom? I'm free to chuck rocks in such a manner as much as I want, I'd just have to deal with them falling back down on me.

If A) Eternity is true then Heaven, Hell and their respective paths are more important than any amount of human suffering. If Eternity in heaven or hell is true, then a life spent under extreme torture that ultimately leads to salvation was a worthwhile life because this life is less than a moment compared to eternity and is insignificant.

B) God wants people to choose him through free will. He could stop the shooter from killing the girl, but then he'd be taking away the free will of a would be shooter to do the right or wrong thing. and once you save one, under the logic that he values all his children equally, the logical extreme of that is that the entire human race becomes 100% controlled by God, we lack human will, but we do everything right, thus no murders ever happen. life on earth is paradise, but life in eternity is bad for god because he now has fellowship with slaves. No love is satisfying if it's forced upon someone.

C) God is not the cause of sin, man's choice to reject Gods way (a perfect way by a perfect being) causes sin in this world as God is the opposite of that. If all people followed God's teachings completely, there would be no murders, so Mr. Atheist, if he were serious about arguing the theology of it all, should be mad at the shooter and human beings in general for their evilness, not a God who's ways are beyond comprehension.

>>717110545
Stop equating the mandate of a divine being with the laws governing the operation of nature, the rules decided upon by a society and the decisions individuals make using reason. None of these are like things and your point is basically a non-sequitur at this point, hence I'm not going to continue responding to it because I've already done so too many times and yet you keep on repeating and reasserting this same bullshit point like nothing has changed. I'd rather scream at a brick wall than speak to you any more.

>>717110897
> stop comparing the mandate of a divine being to the rules of nature

They're both immutable, there's nothing you can do to change them, we're assuming that they're both known essentially in their entirety, and it's known what kind of reaction would be a consequence of action in regards to each.

How is planning your life around one so incomparable to planning your life around another?

>>717110763
A) If god created all, then he also created the fabricated scenario that necessitates a lifetime of torture for an eternity of salvation and is still a fucking asshole for doing so. Either god is not all powerful or he is instead a cosmic child with a cosmic magnifying glass hovering over our cosmic anthill.

B) Similar to the last point, if god is progenitor of all then the evil in men's hearts come from god. He either failed at creating moral beings or deliberately created evil to torture us for his amusement. And indeed creating beings to love you and punishing those who do not choose to is something a psychopath would do.

C) Special pleading, once again. You doge the question of gods power. Either he is all powerful and the creator of all things, including the evil lurking in men's hearts, or he is not god. Power bears with it responsibility, god lacks the former or fails at the latter.

>>717111696
So then what's wrong with God essentially being Zeus. I'd be cool with that. He doesn't have to be all-powerful, benevolent, or a great creator.

>>717111364
One is impartial, without agency, simply the many moving parts that make up the machinery of existence. They can be understood and worked within. The other would be a fickle personage with agency, ultimately arbitrary and bearing the full responsibility of all creation on their shoulders. One is literally amoral while the other is morally repugnant.

>>717111949
Apart from being a bit silly, I don't have much problem with paganism. But that isn't the discussion we're currently having. In most forms of paganism there are numerous gods with their own limited dominions. Complete devotion is not necessary in some cosmologies, simply tribute where tribute is due. Pray to Athena when you need reason and pray to Poseidon when you board a ship about to leave port. Paganism was, mostly anyway, a lot more chill than any monotheism at least in terms of doctrine. Religious people and their institutions will always find an excuse for violence and oppression.

>>717112420
*these cosmologies*

>>717105268
God isbperfect and omnipotent. why were we not created with that knowledge? He makes us suffer for it? Your words are as empty as your soul. Mankind ill needs a faggot like you.

File: Ca.jpg (14KB, 265x265px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 265x265px

>>717103423

>>717105853

People being reasonable on /b/? No, that can't be...

>>717106881
If free will exists then it means god is not omniscient, otherwise he would know exactly what you are going to do, at all moments. So either free will doesn't exist or your god doesn't know everything.

> can be understood and worked within
So can a god. Just don't break his rules.

>a fickle personage with agency
That's just assuming that a god wouldn't just decide things one way and completely stick with it, seeing as how gods are kind of attributed with having transcendental knowledge.

> ultimately arbitrary and bearing the full responsibility of creation on its shoulders

The laws of nature could also be said to be completely arbitrary. Why are elementary particles the way they are, at the most basic level? They kinda just are.

And, barring the idea of a god having created the universe, creation itself would have been dictated by the laws of nature.

I still don't see too much difference between them. They're both kind of just "This is the way things are because nature" and "This is the way things are because god." Either way, you just work around "the way things are."

File: 1479855316850.png (212KB, 392x462px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 392x462px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwmeH6Rnj2E

Reminder: True observation of nature is the only human activity with complete moral validity. Our spirituality is the only spirituality with meaning, all other spiritualities are just distortions of ours.

Morals are not relative and the "anthropology" of Christian "scientists" is false, un-reproducible and should be thrown away. I'd name names but you know what I mean, anthropological studies designed to create moral despair, studies where say, an isolated tribe's extreme adherence to a protomorphic form of anarcho-capitalism is transliterated as the lack of morality. No, a culture with such respect for freedom it would on occasion allow theft or murder is not even that unusual and not sufficient evidence that morality is relative to culture. It very much appears to be inborn, largely the same in each culture with shifting loci of focus. For instance which is more important, participation or independence? Nature no more has to make this decision than it has to pick a standard height or eye color for human beings, it's explorative and adaptive nature is not sufficient evidence for it's relativity.

If you look carefully you will find even in the most serious anthropology every single suggestion of moral relativity has been made by a Christian "missionary", an Islamic "scholar" or a Jewish grant-thief. This is to hide the truth that only Atheists are completely moral people, the only ones who love the universe instead of hating and fearing it.

>>717107348
damn, you've got us!

>>717103423
As a christian, I would happily purge all religions just to get rid of Islam.

>>717113747
Youre the hero we dont deserve

>>717113747
I like you.

>>717103129
Possibly, but theists are not the only ones bored with atheism.

File: george-carlin-quote-life-550x200.jpg (20KB, 550x200px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 550x200px

>>717113220
Spirituality is also bullshit.
>Spirituality: The last refuge of a failed human. Just another way of distracting yourself from who you really are.
Define spirituality. Is it a characteristic? Is it a feeling? Is it an entity? What is it?

I am God

>>717102659

atheist turned agnostic here. i dont hate atheists but they are no different than people with imaginary friends.

>>717102972
>having no imaginary friend makes you overweight and ugly and have a bad beard

i swear, its like memes are the only education people have nowadays

File: IMG_5513.jpg (25KB, 236x287px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 236x287px

>>717106814

>>717105575
a man living 1800 years ago or so still has more sense than a lot of people living today

i know it can happen etc, but how in the world does that even happen

he must of been a superbly smart man

>>717114833
I agree with the memes bit, but as for atheists, I find them beside the point, and the novelty of being an atheist, if it ever was a novelty, has long ago died.
P.S: Your first comment seems to contradict your second.

look, I don't care if you are an atheist, you have the freedom of expression, but if a bunch of people wanna talk about god, why do you always have to butt in and point out your beliefs?

>>717103587
'member that time for a couple thousand some odd years how chrustians shamed, ostracized, imprisoned, tortured, raped, murdered, and committed infanticide, attempted genocide, and various other "cides"?

thats right, NO ONE has forgotten

keep your bullshit mumbo-jumbo to yourself and worry about yourself, and we will get along famously.

remember, jesus does NOT want you to proselytize

>>717102659
atheists are faggots, become a secular humanist and stop arguing about religion on the interwebs, it really get's nowhere and I bet it really makes you feel empty inside.

atheists are just as bad as fundamental religious types, believe they have a chip on their shoulders and a know of the world.

File: 535050_414827081943417_1587852678_n.jpg (29KB, 500x490px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 500x490px

>>717116571
>become a secular humanist
Sounds like atheism with extra steps

>you feel empty inside
Not really, no.

>just as bad as fundies
Only when said fundies put 'god' on everything, bitch non-stop about an imaginary "war on Christmas," and lie to children about sky-wizards and ground trolls.

>>717116571
lrn2english europoor

>>717116945
i like you, you can fuck my sister

File: 1477787886044.jpg (268KB, 1600x1600px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1600x1600px

>>717117166
I appreciate the invitation, but I have no interest in sex.

>>717115894
you mean the same way most christian's do? i would call them the same way as most christian's do. you probably don't notice it because everyone seems to do it but it is out there. shit, they even changed our pledge of allegiance and our money to say "in god we trust". i would not think an atheist would do that bc there is nothing to believe in but they believe in the seperation of church and state. i am an athiest but i don't go telling everyone about it. there are some christians who don't talk about it (getting further and further from the norm) and some atheists like me who don't care wtf you believe in. as long as you don't effect me then we are cool.

>>717116142
>remember, jesus does NOT want you to proselytize

i agree wholeheartedly

File: Terry-A-Davis-2.jpg (58KB, 605x417px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 605x417px

>>717114424
It's a way of saying, "I'm an atheist, but not yet ready to accept that all things have a natural explanation." I've got no problem with that I guess. I have schizotypal personality disorder, so I tend to engage in magical thinking if I'm not careful, and sometimes even when I am. I am conscious of just how crippling and devastating it can be to my personal life though. I think I am "spiritual," at least sometimes anyway, but it's nothing to be proud of, as it just causes problems. I bet it's nice for normals who are able to turn the bullshit on and off at will though.

>>717114833

Most atheists are agnostic. If you used to be one of those aggressive, and annoying strong atheists like Dawkins, or Hitchens, then good for you for deciding to stop being an asshole. If you actually believe that you've discovered some magical middle ground between belief and non-belief, then sorry, you are a fucking moron. Is there a god? It's an either/or question. There is no 3rd position.

Do any of us have enough information to be 100% certain? Well most theists claim to, and that minority of strong atheists do too, but none of them can provide any evidence to back up their claims, so no, we don't, and agnosticism is the only reasonable position to take at this time. However, just because there might be a god, doesn't mean there is, and it is just as reasonable for me to assume that there probably isn't until I am given better information to go on.

However, I think it is safe to say that the God of Abraham (which is to say the god of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and a few others) doesn't, as the claims made by the religions are patently absurd. Hindu, overall, doesn't fare much better either. The God of Deism though is a possibility, as Deism doesn't make ridiculous claims about that God, albeit, an impersonal god, that does not intervene in the affairs of it's creation is about as appealing as atheism to most theists.

>>717102659
Help a poor fag out? Out of food, only need a dollar or two til I get my paycheck... anything helps
PayPal:
[email protected]

File: waiting on you at the doe.jpg (23KB, 600x337px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x337px

>>717119734
Why don't you pray for it?

>>717102659
If God is omnipotent, then how do us as mortals can even comprehend what God is?

>>717107348
Old, but still funny