Atheism is the fastest shrinking religion in the world. Athe

Who the fuck cares you sick muslim

>>744986903
a Muslim is better than an atheist

>Atheism is the fastest shrinking religion in the world

>Religion

Atheism isn't a religion

File: bait the musical.jpg (108KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 900x900px

>>744986647
>Atheism is the fastest shrinking religion

Oh look, it's this thread again.

Reminder that Islam is the fastest growing religion, on course to overtake Christianity in a matter of decades. Meanwhile, nones continue to grow in Western nations.

>tl;dr the world is becoming secular West vs Muslim shitholes

low quality b8, try again OP

File: 1503831770394.jpg (37KB, 656x583px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 656x583px

Everyone stop replying to this dumbass thread so it can die

File: Dawkins Poop.jpg (36KB, 580x530px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 580x530px

>>744987356
>>744987368
>>744987441
Atheism is a belief, therefore it is a religion. you worship Dawkins as if he was Christ

File: atheist.jpg (562KB, 1725x998px) Image search: [Google]

562KB, 1725x998px

>>744987555
that means that Atheism/secularism is weak

File: religion.png (687KB, 1596x2384px) Image search: [Google]

687KB, 1596x2384px

>>744987555

Atheists are the ones letting Muslims grow unheeded.

It's not a coincidence that Trump is Christian and is one of the only western leaders who's stopping shitstains from ruining his country.

>>744987893
gr8 b8 m8

>>744987604
I believe that homosexuality is something that shouldn't be discriminated against, but does that make it a religion? Theists use the "atheism is a religion" argument when it's so clearly not. It's one of the most retarded arguments theists use, and they have some pretty retarded ones.

>>744987929
Christians are the ones who tend to be against contraceptives. Muslims are growing because they are breeding faster than everyone else.

>>744988101
Muslims and Christians have the same birthrates though

File: r atheism wojak.png (227KB, 920x900px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 920x900px

>>744987356
>>744987368
>>744987441
>>744987517
>>744987590
>>744987596
>>744987991
>>744988072
ATHEISM IS NOT A RELIGION

STOP SAYING ATHEISM IS A RELIGION

FACTS AND STATISTICS ARE B8

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BEING A FAGGOT

>>744988213
No, they don't. Muslims have 3.1 kids. Christians have 2.7.

File: gays5.png (5KB, 511x306px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 511x306px

>>744988072
>being a literal faggot atheist

>>744988369
meh

>>744988701
A significant difference over time, especially with people in the West abandoning Christianity in droves.

File: Atheist.png (43KB, 572x708px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 572x708px

>>744989085
>people in the West abandoning Christianity in droves.
>A far, far worse religion comes in and takes over

do you see why Atheism is so crap now?

>>744989463
>A far, far worse religion comes in and takes over
>do you see why Atheism is so crap now?
No.

File: battle of las.jpg (65KB, 249x637px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 249x637px

>>744989631
Atheism is weak and it has failed to defend Europe

>>744989843
Prove that the reason is atheism.

File: 1500027653037.png (526KB, 1453x862px) Image search: [Google]

526KB, 1453x862px

>>744990008
you just said yourself that people in the West are abandoning Christianity in droves
>>744987929
and this pic proves it

>>744990208
>you just said yourself that people in the West are abandoning Christianity in droves
Yes, I did.
>and this pic proves it
No, it doesn't.

File: Europe_is_being_raped_putin.jpg (64KB, 750x534px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 750x534px

>>744990687
>when Europeans were Christians they defend Europe from invaders
>now that they are atheists faggots that are being taking over by a outside force

>>744991176
Correlation does not equal causation.

>>744991365
what if it dose?

>>744991551
It's something you need to prove, and even if you did, it wouldn't make Christianity true.

>>744991728
>moving the goalpost
You implied that atheists have nothing to do with the Muslim menace. They do. You got BTFO. Stop trying to trick people with your shitty /r/atheism arguments.

>>744992270
>You implied that atheists have nothing to do with the Muslim menace.
I didn't.
>They do.
Prove it.
>You got BTFO.
Where?
>Stop trying to trick people with your shitty /r/atheism arguments.
I've never been there.

>>744992441
Everytime there's a religion thread, you go in it and say "Correlation does not equal causation" no matter the context. You're an annoying rat.

>Prove it.
Get some common sense nigger. If there's a country that's majority atheist, and it's the one getting fucked by Muslims, and the atheists are the ones protesting to let more Muslims in, that's correlation enough. You compare that to a country that's majority Christian, and see that hey, they aren't getting fucked by Muslims. Maybe this Christianity thing actually has useful values.

Who the actual fuck is not an atheist 2k17?

btw
> being religious on 4chan
> enjoy hell

>>744989463
they are literally the same. Why arent you happy about the increase in muslims if atheists are bad?

File: happy Galil.jpg (42KB, 587x720px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 587x720px

>>744986647
>Based Black Pigeon delivers again.

>>744992849
>Everytime there's a religion thread, you go in it and say "Correlation does not equal causation" no matter the context.
I can't recall doing this any other time. It is true though.
>Get some common sense nigger.
Appeal to common sense is a logical fallacy.
>that's correlation enough.
Like I already said, correlation and causation are not equivalent. You need to show that the problem is occurring because they are atheist, not that they are atheist and a problem is occurring.
>Maybe this Christianity thing actually has useful values.
Maybe it also has some harmful values.

>number of athiests is dropping
>world average IQ is also dropping
Really makes you think

>>744988072
can you define your faith based on tenants of a larger group, wildly preached and practiced? looks like you're a religion guy

File: fedoras.jpg (553KB, 1496x1432px) Image search: [Google]

553KB, 1496x1432px

>>744993255
>Appeal to common sense is a logical fallacy.
seriously go tip your fedora somewhere else

>>744993540
I don't own a fedora.

>>744993519
>can you define your faith based on tenants of a larger group, wildly preached and practiced?
Not with atheism, no.

File: surprise galil.jpg (194KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1920x1080px

>>744991176
When Western Euroland falls greater Poland and greater Russia shall rise along with the resurrection of the Austro-Hungarian empire and this time without annexing Serbs who want to remain indepdent. The night is brightest just before the dawn.

>>744986647
this exact post was here like 2 days ago

>>744993762
You're saying atheists don't share a similar belief that all gods are false and that only reason and logic prevail? If that's the case then you're just being deliberately ignorant

>>744993952
>You're saying atheists don't share a similar belief that all gods are false and that only reason and logic prevail?
Right, they don't.
> If that's the case then you're just being deliberately ignorant
No.

>>744994034
Define atheism?

>>744993948
This exact post has been here multiple times across several days.

>>744994096
The lack of belief in the existence of gods.

>>744994227
but you ascertain that conclusion based entirely on faith?

>>744994441
It isn't even necessarily a conclusion, let alone one that needs to come by faith.

Someone who concluded that gods didn't exist through faith would certainly be an atheist, but so would someone who has never even heard of gods.

>>744994640
>It isn't even necessarily a conclusion, let alone one that needs to come by faith.
But you have heard of gods and are basing your beliefs on faith that no god exists

>>744994962
I have heard of gods, but I have no faith-based belief that no gods exist. Instead, I do not believe in gods because I see no good reason to believe in gods.

>>744995052
So if a christian said I have good reason to believe in gods, would his argument no longer be based on faith?

>>744995388
Correct.

>>744995481
faith
fāTH/
noun
noun: faith

1.
complete trust or confidence in someone or something

>>744995675
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

Anyway, #1 works too. The key word there is complete.

>>744987929
Trump is a Christian? hahahahaha
he was just saying that to appease the evangelical GOP dumbfucks

>>744995828
You have no proof to discredit the idea of there being a god or gods, and you're basing this on a (albeit not complete) leap of faith?

>>744989463
who gives a shit? I'll be dead by then. I have no kids, and I don't care what happens to yours. Let Sharia Law take over the whole world. People are assholes and deserve it.

>>744996167
>You have no proof to discredit the idea of there being a god or gods
Correct, which is why I don't claim that there can't be any gods.
>you're basing this on a (albeit not complete) leap of faith?
I don't even make the claim, and I've already told you why I don't believe in gods.

>>744996340
Right, and I'm not attacking your reasoning not to believe in god I'm just saying if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

>>744996557
Sure, with the duck being named reason. If you can show where I've used faith, go for it.

>>744996192
m'edgelord

File: [UTW]_Fate_stay_night_Unlimited_Blade_Works_-_07_[BD][h264-1080p][FLAC][69072F1B].mkv_snapshot_08.56_[2017.08.28_22.48.06].jpg (191KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 1920x1080px

>>744996192
Drown in your ideals and die.

>>744996675
Why don't you believe in the existence of a god? I know you said you don't see a reason to, but that must bee rooted in something

>>744993762
You got beaten, atheism is a religion, you can disagree but thats doesnt make it less true.

>>744996864
It really is that simple. I grew up in a home where we didn't talk about religion, so I didn't have any religious indoctrination to get over.

>>744996908
>You got beaten
Where?
>atheism is a religion,
How?

>>744997069
so you're still choosing to believe there is no god? despite having no proof to contradict its existence? Based entirely on conviction?

>>744997289
>so you're still choosing to believe there is no god?
No, I just don't believe in gods because I see no reason to.
> despite having no proof to contradict its existence?
It's the same reason I don't believe in ghosts and unicorns. We don't believe things until we have a reason to believe them (or at least, we shouldn't).

>>744997490
>I just don't believe
Its a conclusion you've come to after synthesizing arguments from both sides of the argument. Not believing wasn't just assigned to you at birth

So? I'm an atheist not a populist.

>>744997752
>Not believing wasn't just assigned to you at birth
Well, I mean, it kinda was. You don't start out believing in particular gods.
>Its a conclusion you've come to after synthesizing arguments from both sides of the argument.
The conclusion that I came to is that none of the arguments for the existence of anything that I would label a god are both valid in structure and have premises that I accept. Therefore, I have no good reason to believe in the existence of gods. That doesn't mean that I believe that there can't be gods, it just have no reason to believe there are, so I don't.

>someone makes christian bait
>christians make it stronger by contributing
>atheists fall for it
>now people aren't having an argument, but a contest on who can get the other to pull the gnostic "it could be right, it could be wrong, idunno" as soon as possible

>>744986647
>Atheism is the fastest shrinking religion
Atheism isn't a religion.
Is it?

File: 1 (22).png (1MB, 1273x1273px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1273x1273px

>>744986647

>>744997979
You also didn't pop out averse to the idea either. So in conclusion you choose to believe there is so credible argument for why a god would exist, so given that information you choose to believe there isn't one?

>>744998957
>You also didn't pop out averse to the idea either.
Sure.
>So in conclusion you choose to believe there is so credible argument for why a god would exist
I wouldn't say that I chose to believe it. It's the belief that resulted after I chose to investigate the arguments.
>given that information you choose to believe there isn't one
No, given that information I simply don't believe there is one. There's no belief switch that I flipped.

More Spider-Man please

File: 2b8.jpg (89KB, 736x736px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 736x736px

>>744987604

Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods.

Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system.

To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

Agnostic isn’t just a “weaker” version of being an atheist. It answers a different question. Atheism is about what you believe. Agnosticism is about what you know.

If you lack an active belief in gods, you are an atheist.

Being an atheist doesn’t mean you’re sure about every theological question, have answers to the way the world was created, or how evolution works. It just means that the assertion that gods exist has left you unconvinced.

Wishing that there was an afterlife, or a creator god, or a specific god doesn’t mean you’re not an atheist. Being an atheist is about what you believe and don’t believe, not about what you wish to be true or would find comforting.

>>744993952

there is no 'we' to atheism. Each atheist has their own beliefs, opinions, values, and ideas.

The only time an atheist should even profess their lack of belief is when the believer of a fairy tale tries to press their misled, morally void views on the rest of the world.

'We' are not saying to stop believing in your imaginary friend, 'we' are saying stop forcing fucked up values on your fellow citizens based on the ridiculous and unscientific claims of men who knew virtually nothing thousands of years ago.

>>744997752
Not anon, but you are so full of specious reasoning and faulty logic, it's almost unbelievable.

There is no good reason to believe in any concept of God, because it's not based on a shred of empirical evidence, and until proven otherwise, it's purely a construct of the human imagination. No one can disprove the existence of God, but that's not saying much, given that you can't disprove the existence of any supernatural entity. However, we can say, beyond a reasonable doubt, that any concept of God comes from the human imagination... and stays there.

Make no mistake, the burden of proof lies on the claimant--especially when the claims are utterly baseless.

File: answer this.jpg (87KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 720x540px

>>744999454

>>744999141
>definitively DECIDES one side of the argument is correct
>refuses to call it a choice

>>745000017
When you hear someone say that 2+2=7, do you choose to believe that they are wrong or does that belief result from your knowledge of mathematics?

>>744999802
So does each christian. There are gay Christians, murderous Christians, devout Christians, and casual Christians. They each may have wildly differing values but are united under the same umbrella term

>>745000017
Atheism is the default, the null hypothesis of every person. Nobody is born religious. Atheists hear the arguments and reasoning for god and find them unconvincing, thus returning to the default of not believing. It's that simple.

1: Everything that begins (comes into being) has a cause (something, outside of itself, which explains its origin)

2: The universe began.

3: Therefore, the universe has a cause.

This cause of the universe must have existed before the universe and its properties in order to have cause it.

This cause existed before time so it therefore must be timeless.

This cause existed before space so it therefore
must be spaceless.

This cause existed before matter so therefore it must be immaterial.

Realize that so far we have entirely secular argumentation which proves there must be a timeless, spaceless, immaterial cause of the universe. But we can go further than that.

There are only two types of immaterial things: abstract concepts (an example being numbers) and minds. Since abstract concepts cannot cause anything to happen, the cause of the universe therefore must be a mind.

Again, this is argumentation entirely devoid of "because the Bible said so" reasoning that proves there must be a timeless, spaceless, immateiral mind that caused the universe.

>>745000331
So when I say its based on belief you say its based on fact, when i say its based on fact its suddenly back to being based on innate instinct?

>>745000544
Kalam Cosmological Argument. Premise 1 is unjustified.

>>745000564
No, where did you get that?

>>745000490
Thinking that not believing in God is the definition of atheism. Hah. Go ahead and look up the definition of atheism according to the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.

Atheism is not simply the lack of belief in God; more specifically, atheism is the denial of God's existence. Agnosticism, a position mutually exclusive to atheism, is neither the affirmation nor denial of God's existence.

Agnosticism, not atheism, is the default position of people, but that's about as meaningful as suggesting that rocks are agnostic as both babies and inanimate objects are incapable of holding positions.

>>744999865
Im not shilling for Christians, I'm just pointing out that atheism is just as much a religion as any other

>>745000544
>1: Everything that begins (comes into being) has a cause (something, outside of itself, which explains its origin)
Then what's the "cause" of god?
If you say that god doesn't need a cause because he has always been, why is it so inconceivable that the universe has always been?

>>745000490
Nobody is born an atheist?

>>745000771
Who decides the meaning of words?

File: drawing hands.jpg (149KB, 736x552px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 736x552px

>>745000629
So you're suggesting that things can come into existence without anything causing it to do so? That's exactly what rejecting premise one means. You're either suggesting that things can create themselves (which is a contradiction; an example of this is "Drawing Hands") or that things can appear out of nothing (which contradicts the first law of thermodynamics and basic logic/common sense as nothing lacks any capability to cause anything to happen).

>>745000544
>Everything that begins (comes into being) has a cause (something, outside of itself, which explains its origin)
We can't fathom infinity--I see that as a pretty massive problem with this argument.

>therefore, the universe has a cause
God is not a sufficient answer

>>745000771
You're clearly equivocating over semantics because your actual arguments hold no weight, but okay, I'll bite. Gnosticism and theism are not mutually exclusive, they're descriptors. (a)theism is asking what you believe, (a)gnosticism is asking what you know. You can believe without knowledge just as much as you can not believe with knowledge.

>>745001036
So then where did god come from? Any answer to this question violates premise 1.

>>745000775
But it's not, and I think anons have successfully destroyed that notion. It's the absence of belief in a God, not the belief that God or Lord Zenu or Zippityflapjack doesn't exist

>not being buddhist
>which is basically fucking post-religion
>2018

>>744986647
kek for the sake of your country americunts, I hope that 80% of the people in this thread are actually baiting/trolling

>>745000775
Sure, just like how bald is a hair color and not-collecting-stamps is a hobby.

>>745001036
>So you're suggesting that things can come into existence without anything causing it to do so?
I'm suggesting that you have not justified that there cannot be something which came into existence without a cause.
>or that things can appear out of nothing
Or that "nothing" does not actually exist. The universe could have a beginning and also not have anything before it.
>which contradicts the first law of thermodynamics
The laws of physics as we currently understand them break down as you approach the beginning of the universe.
> basic logic/common sense
Appeal to common sense is a logical fallacy. We are not dealing with something common.

>>745000814
Kek. Literally everyone is born an atheist

>>745000713
You simply know there's no god. You never had reason to believe, but retrospectively feel comfortable saying there is no god. This is an example of a faith based argument

>>745001473
>You simply know there's no god.
False.
>You never had reason to believe,
True.
>retrospectively feel comfortable saying there is no god.
False.
>This is an example of a faith based argument
It would be if I made it, but I don't.

>>745001392
You came out of your mother a militant atheist? >>744999141
At least this guy gets it. You come out oblivious to either side

>>745001473
>>745001473
If someone asked you "do you think there's a teapot orbiting Saturn right now?" you would say "no." You wouldn't have faith, you just wouldn't think that statement true without pretty convincing evidence. This is the exact same thing.

>>745000780
Things that being to being to exist have a cause. Emphasis on "beings to exist." God is eternal, without beginning or end, and therefore does not have a cause. Nothing brings into being that which has always existed.

"If you say that god doesn't need a cause because he has always been, why is it so inconceivable that the universe has always been?"

Two main reasons.

1: Scientific evidence of the Big Bang. Unless you're trying to suggest that the Big Bang is a Christian conspiracy to suggest that the universe had a beginning, then you'd have to reject all of the scientific evidence which suggests that the universe did, in fact, have a beginning.

2: In infinite regress is logically impossible; suggesting that the universe is eternal would suggest the existence of an infinite regress.

To give an example of why infinite regresses do not make any sense, think of time as a continuing cause where each second causes the next to happen.

Think of this: The only reason the present has been reached is because 100 years have passed since 100 years ago. There was a point 100 years prior in time and 100 years have passed since then and that's how we got to today. Makes sense, right?

What if only 80 years had passes since the point of time 100 years ago? That would mean the present would not have been reached; we would be 20 years in the past rather than where we are today. Still simple, right?

Well realize that if the universe were to have existed eternally into the past then that would mean that time goes infinitely backwards, so in order to reach the present a infinite amount of time would have been required to reach the present. What's illogical is that if it takes an infinite amount of time to reach the present then the present would never have been reached.

Again, that's just one example of why infinite regresses are illogical.

>>745001660
Everyone is born without beliefs. Atheism=the absence of belief in a God/deity/whatever-the-fuck-you-want-to-call-it.

What is God? Describe God for me.

>>745001564
So do you consider yourself an atheist or an agnostic

>>745001066
- "We can't fathom infinity--I see that as a pretty massive problem with this argument."

You're essentially trying to say "We can't comprehend the concept of infinity therefore things can pop into existence from out of nothing." which is entirely illogical, irrational, and nonsensical.

- "God is not a sufficient answer"

...because you emotionally deem it so? Instead of just making blind statements how about you try to use reason to support that claim?

>>745000544
1: Everything that begins (comes into being) has a cause (something, outside of itself, which explains its origin)

>>745001736
therefore does not have a cause

>>745001887
Both. I do not know whether or not there are any gods and I also do not believe that there are any gods.

>>745001842
Its more a belief in nothingness than just pure void

>>745002018
you cant have your cake and eat it too, this explains why we've been debating in circles

>>745002109
>you cant have your cake and eat it too
In this case I can. Knowledge and belief are not equivalent. Neither atheism nor agnosticism is a subset of the other, but neither are they mutually exclusive.

>>745001736
>God is eternal, without beginning or end, and therefore does not have a cause
>something can only be in-and-of-itself when I say so

>scientific evidence of the Big Bang
Physicists have been moving away from that theory for a while now

>what if only 80 years had passes since the point of time 100 years ago?
Are you really thinking in terms of how we measure time/movement. Very low energy, anon.

>>745001080
> "...your actual arguments hold no weight..."

That's essentially you saying "I don't like the conclusion therefore I reject the argument." If the argument doesn't hold any weight then prove it.

> Gnosticism...

Go ahead and read the actual definition of that word for yourself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

Atheists have been redefining words in order to play games of semantics for quite a while.

I mean, i don't care what other people believe in. But I believe there is no god. Sooooo...

>>745002218
One definitively negates gods existence, and the other accepts the possibility of its existence.....

>>745001147
Things that being to exist have a cause.

"begin to exist."

Things that already exist cannot begin because to begin means to be brought into existence. God is eternal, without beginning or end. Noting created/caused God because there was never a point at which God did not exist. God is the logically necessary un-caused first cause.

>>745002465
Not by the definitions I am using.

>>744987929
Fucking this. Literally every atheist nation hates Christians but want open borders for Muslims it makes no sense. And it's pathetic how all races believe in God yet whites in the western world are being brainwashed to stray further from faith. No wonder denegeracy is rampant here. The most atheist a society is the more cucks and beta males exist. Fucking Sweden is a prime example

>>745001916
>We can't comprehend the concept of infinity therefore things can pop into existence from out of nothing." which is entirely illogical, irrational, and nonsensical
Technically, things can pop into existence out of nothing--they've been able to observe this in experiments with a vacuum.

>..because you emotionally deem it so? Instead of just making blind statements how about you try to use reason to support that claim?
You've said nothing about what God IS--you've merely raised doubt about a strictly material reality.

>>745002534
>you cant prove me wrong if i make up my own words

>>745001371
- "I'm suggesting that you have not justified that there cannot be something which came into existence without a cause."

Things that begin either

1: Can create themselves.

2: Can form from nothing.

3: Can be brought into being by something other than itself.

There are no other conceivable suggestions that are not just rephrasings. By proving both options 1 and 2 to be impossible, we can prove that everything that beings must thereby be caused by something other than itself.

1: Things can cause themselves.

This is a contradictions. In order for something to cause anything, it must already exist as things that do not exist cannot cause anything to happen. When something begins that means it comes into being; it does not exist but is then brought into existence. To suggest "this thing created itself" requires suggesting that it both exists, in order to have caused itself, and did not exist, in order to begin in the first place.

As something cannot both exist and not exist at the same time, this is an obvious contradiction and is therefore impossible.

2: Things can form from nothing.

Firstly, "nothing" or no-thing (the absolute lack of anything) cannot cause anything to happen. If it had any such properties to cause something then it would cease to be nothing as it would therefore be something after all.

Also, to suggest this is possible would require rejecting the first law of thermodynamics which, in layman's terms, states that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed (emphasis on created).

So, because things cannot form from nothing or cause themselves into existence, therefore things that begin must have something else other than itself to explain its existence (or to put it as it appears in the argument, things that begin have a cause).

>>745002848
Except that I defined what I meant by atheism way back up here >>744994227

That you choose to ignore the definition that many, if not most, people who self-identify as atheists use will only result in a failure to communicate properly.

File: 1495759882423.jpg (24KB, 267x200px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 267x200px

>athiesm
>religion
Learn definitions of words before you try to sound intelligent.

>>745001371
>The universe could have a beginning and also not have anything before it.

That's just suggesting that the universe formed from nothing, which is impossible as I explained in my other reply. Nothing possesses no capabilities to cause anything because any such capabilities would be something and therefore not "nothing".

- "The laws of physics as we currently understand them break down as you approach the beginning of the universe."

That's the biggest cop-out ever and it doesn't even work. You're abandoning science in order to defend atheism. It's logically impossible for something to come from nothing, therefore the universe could not have done this.

- "Appeal to common sense is a logical fallacy."

Notice how I didn't just appeal to common sense but also logic. Appealing to common sense and common sense alone is a fallacy, but appealing to that along with logical argumentation is not a fallacy.

>>744986647
Your god is dead, m8. These are the twitches of a corpse.

>>745001842
According to the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, that is an incorrect definition of atheism. Atheism is not merely the lack of belief in God but, more specifically, it is the denial of God's existence. No one is born shaking their first at the sky claiming that God does not exist, so no, no one is born an atheist.

>>744986647
It's pretty amazing that atheism has managed to suppress religion when only 1.9% of the world is atheist. How do you suppose they got to do that? Is their some shadowy atheist cabal that's infiltrated every nation? I thought that was the jews. Are jews and atheists the same?

>>745003030
>There are no other conceivable suggestions that are not just rephrasings
As long as we are very liberal with that word nothing.
>Firstly, "nothing" or no-thing (the absolute lack of anything) cannot cause anything to happen
Except that we do not require there to ever have been a lack of anything. Indeed, this could well be impossible as it implies time, which is something. If we want to say that the universe can form from nothing, we would not be saying that there was ever a state in which there actually was nothing. It simply means that the universe formed and to speak of a before the universe would be nonsensical (similar to speaking of a south of the south pole).
>Also, to suggest this is possible would require rejecting the first law of thermodynamics
Again, as already stated, the laws of nature as we currently understand them break down as you approach the beginning of the universe. You cannot appeal to them here.

Thus, premise 1 remains unjustified.

File: move kebab else where.jpg (166KB, 952x839px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 952x839px

>>745002382
You could peacefully coexist with Christfags or get beheaded by Ahmed for being a filthy Kafir, which sounds like a better option anon?

>>745003360
This is some Philosophy 101 shit you chucklefucks are engaging in. Maybe read up some more and come back with more interesting points that people don't already have pre-baked defenses for.

>>745003030
Your argument is basically "I don't know"

>>745003085
If I said im a christian, i just happen to accept the prophet Mohamed as my messiah what amI?

Have we learned that god is a synonym for ignorance yet?

>>745003360
>which is impossible as I explained in my other reply
See >>745003545
>That's the biggest cop-out ever and it doesn't even work
It isn't a cop-out at all and it works fine.
>You're abandoning science in order to defend atheism
I'm embracing science as it is science that tells us this. The beginning of the universe is called a singularity for a reason.
> It's logically impossible for something to come from nothing, therefore the universe could not have done this.
How so?
>Notice how I didn't just appeal to common sense but also logic
You did not appeal to logic in that statement however. Merely asserting that it goes against logic does not make it so.

>>745003480
I can be both disbelief or the lack of a belief, but I think most atheists acknowledge that they can't disprove supernatural claims.

>>745003742
A person who accepts the prophet Mohammed as your messiah. I would have to ask you further details to determine what else you believe and are defining as Christian, then we can move along and use the word Christian how you want.

>>745002642
>Technically, things can pop into existence out of nothing--they've been able to observe this in experiments with a vacuum.

You've been deceived about quantum physics. 1: a quantum vacuum is not a literal "nothing"; this is use of the equivocation fallacy.

2: Things are not actually brought into existence from a quantum vacuum. This is not describing something being brought into existence as you've been lead to believe, rather, this is describing how already-existing matter behaves differently based on whether or not it is being observed.

- "You've said nothing about what God IS..."

A timeless, spaceless, immaterial mind. If you personally don't want to call it "God' then go ahead, but when theists say "God" this is what they are referring to.

>>745003480
>According to the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, that is an incorrect definition of atheism.
You say that as though the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy is an authority on the meaning of words.

>>745003683
No it isn't. To have gathered that from what I've said shows that you don't comprehend any of what you've read, that is if you read it at all.

>>745003965
>immaterial mind
What does that mean, exactly? Every mind that we have encountered is the result of a material brain.

People who believe the world is geocentric could be growing and it wouldn't make it correct. Atheists can drop in number but no change occurs in how correct we are. Delusional deitards can suck it.

>>744992999

According to facts and data over 98% if the world population

Were you expecting to get a reaction or something we don't give a single fucking shit

>>744986647
Who gives a shit atheists are a minority? It's not as if intelligent people were ever the majority. Being a Christian, Muslim or in any other religiou is pretty fucking baffling to me to be honest. Those people probably forgot their brains somewhere on the way

>>744987201
Nice try Mohammed

>>744986903

Muslims believe in God too, it's the Atheists who are the real scum and should be cut open like pigs.

>>745003545
>As long as we are very liberal with that word nothing.

Then go ahead and provide other suggestings of how things come into existence.

- "Except that we do not require there to ever have been a lack of anything."

Yes, we do in fact require there to ever to have been a lack of anything. Suggesting otherwise would create an infinite regress which is logically impossible.

> Again, as already stated, the laws of nature as we currently understand them break down as you approach the beginning of the universe. You cannot appeal to them here.

"You cannot appeal to science to prove your argument when it's inconvenient for me."

Even if you want to suggest that the laws of nature just so happen to conveniently not exist it would still be logically impossible for something to come from nothing.

You've already throw away the laws of nature in favor of atheism; are you also going to throw away logic too?

File: isis chan vs christ chan.png (226KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 480x640px

>>744987201
>a Muslim is better than an atheist
Hahahahaha, not falling for your tricks Ahmed. Also you have to go back to Turkey.

>>744986647
Strange. Atheists/agnostics are now the majority in Britain for the first time. It's hard being the master race.

>>745003965
>a quantum vacuum is not a literal "nothing"; this is use of the equivocation fallacy
You're right about that; in fact, I thought of that right after I posted it.

>This is not describing something being brought into existence as you've been lead to believe, rather, this is describing how already-existing matter behaves differently based on whether or not it is being observed
This is wrong. You either misunderstood what I was referring to, or you definitely don't know what you're talking about (I'm guessing the latter).
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-virtual-particles-rea/

>A timeless, spaceless, immaterial mind
Ooooo, well, then I guess that explains everything. You still haven't told us anything about what constitutes this entity or WHY it's beyond space and time

>>745004128
In order for that to be a valid counter argument you would then have to prove that it's logically impossible for a mind to exist without matter. This, however, is not the case.

>>745004795

Atheist terrorism is dramatically on the rise too, people freaking out whenever God is mentioned and churches/mosques getting burned down by Atheist terrorists on a weekly basis.

We need to return to being a Theist nation, that's why most people voted for Brexit.

>>744987893
-Rape and Pillage
-Rape and Conquest
-Rape and Technology
-Okay, I wouldn't Rape them and they're offering.

Clever move tumbrina's.

>>745004755
>Yes, we do in fact require there to ever to have been a lack of anything.
No, we do not, as I already explained and you conveniently ignored.
>"You cannot appeal to science to prove your argument when it's inconvenient for me."
You cannot appeal to laws of science which science says does not apply to the subject of the discussion. What you want to do is akin to using classical mechanics at the quantum scale.
> it would still be logically impossible for something to come from nothing.
How so?
>You've already throw away the laws of nature in favor of atheism; are you also going to throw away logic too?
I haven't thrown away anything. It is you who seems to be ignoring things that are inconvenient for your argument.

>>745004974
Can you prove that it's possible for a mind to exist without matter? Can you explain what that would even mean?

>>745004916
>You still haven't told us anything about what constitutes this entity..."

".what constitutes this entity..."? Nothing "constitutes this entity" because that's exactly what "immaterial" means.

> ...WHY it's beyond space and time

Because it's logically necessary. Whatever caused space existed before space and therefore does not require space in order to exist. Whatever caused time existed before time and therefore does not require time in order to exist.

Imagine a painting and a painter. Though the painting is logically dependent on the painter for its existence, the painter is not and cannot be logically dependent on his paintings in order to exist.

>>745003949
Let me rephrase what if I said a cube was both entirely red and entirely blue

>>745004106
You're just raising doubt, anon. You don't really know what the hell you're talking about.

>there has to be a cause for an effect
>something has to exist for this to happen
>cyclical universe?
>"no, I'm actually going to illustrate why that's not possible using the metric of years to debunk this. It was definitely God"
>how did God get there
>beyond space and time
That's your argument. "I don't really know"

>>745005262
How can something without a time dimension cause anything?

>>745005294
Then I would have to ask you what you meant.

An Atheist and a Christian walk into a bar and both order a cocktail.

The Christian says, "thank you barman for making these drinks for us".

The Atheist responds, "oh yeah? A barman made these drinks? Where is your evidence? Huh? They obviously appeared from nothingness, my liberal professor said so."

The barman chimes in, "I can promise you, I made these drinks for you. I have even written a book about what ingredients I used."

The Atheist slapped down the book and screeched, "YOU CAN'T FORCE ME TO READ THAT, I KNOW IT ISN'T REAL! SCIENCE MADE THIS DRINK AND YOU AREN'T REAL!"

He downs his drink and storms out. The Christian turns to the barman and says, "even though he denies you, I will thank you again on his behalf. His heart may be closed to the truth but he clearly enjoyed what you created for him, despite his arrogance."

They both shook their heads, smiled and enjoyed another drink together.

Also the Atheist enjoyed violent movies and cussing.

>>744986647
>"Atheism"
>"Religion"
/thread

>>744997289
so you're still choosing to believe there is god? despite having no proof to its existence? Based entirely on conviction?

>>745004786
>Also you have to go back to Turkey.
Butthurt Armenian detected

>>745005721

What is the oldest known text referring to the big bang? Thousands of years old, yeah?

>>745005262
>Nothing "constitutes this entity" because that's exactly what "immaterial" means
So, what IS IT? And please, don't give me the stock answer again.

>Because it's logically necessary. Whatever caused space existed before space and therefore does not require space in order to exist. Whatever caused time existed before time and therefore does not require time in order to exist
The concept of infinity is hard, and you certainly haven't come close to debunking an infinite material universe--you've just jumped waaaay ahead of our knowledge and said "cause God".

>>745005987
Lol.

Y'all too autistic.

>>745005529
Lets say I was any number of two mutually exclusive things at the same time

>>745005198
Things are either possible or they are impossible. If something is not impossible then it is therefore possible just as if something is not possible it is therefore impossible.

If something is not logically impossible then it therefore must be logically possible, just as if something is logically possible then it therefore must not be logically impossible.

So, if you have no way to prove the concept is logically impossible then it must be logically possible.

> Can you explain what that would even mean?

I can try at least.

The differentiation between your imagination and reality is that reality continues to exist even if you stop believing in it. Now imagine if all you had were your imagination and there was nothing that continued to exist even after you stopped believing in it. This is what I imagine God's, an immaterial mind, perspective to be. What we think of reality, that which continues to exist even if we stop believing in it, is more of an imagination to God because it, what we think of reality, only exists so long as he continues to 'believe in it'.

Regardless, whether or not you can comprehend something does nothing to prove or disprove a concept from being possible. Just as an example, four dimensional space is both logically possible and incomprehensible.

>>745006303
If you defined them such that they were mutually exclusive, then I would say that's impossible.

That has not happened here.

>>744986647
>atheists shrink in number
no
>that somehow make them wrong, then
no
>its a religion
no
>pew
it cites its own study in its own study
>real surveys
no

>>744987604
>atheism is a belief
no its a lack of your belief

>>744986647
tldr wanker but ive read first sentence
actually research says that religions disappear , probably due to technology and access to information people get educated and stop believing in fairy tales

>>744987893
What's wrong with Elsa Jean?

>>745006398
>So, if you have no way to prove the concept is logically impossible then it must be logically possible.
This is false. The inability of an individual to prove a negative does not prove the positive. Things are either possible or they are impossible, and we do not know which until one of those is demonstrated to be the case.
>I can try at least.
I appreciate the attempt, but you didn't really resolve the issue.
>Regardless, whether or not you can comprehend something does nothing to prove or disprove a concept from being possible.
Agreed, though you have yet to prove that it is possible.

>>744987893
Those are libtards not atheists.

>>745006436
So then the eventuality I've reached is you're not an atheist, and therefore have no authority here

>>745006398
>so, if you have no way to prove the concept is logically impossible then it must be logically possible
However, just because one can't prove something to be impossible doesn't mean the person making the assertion is correct. In this case, the person making the assertion (you) have provided no evidence, nor airtight logic, to back up your claim.

>what we think of reality, only exists so long as he continues to 'believe in it'
So, it's an entity with beliefs...

>>744986647
Flying Spaghetti Monster ftw!

Which invisible magician is your god?

>>745006929
You can think that if you like, but I am an atheist by how I have defined atheism. I cannot compel you to accept my definition just as you cannot compel me to accept yours, but that makes meaningful communication impossible.

>>744986647
Aetheism isn't a religion. It's literally just not believing in god. How is this so hard for you to understand?

>>744986903
Mudshit > atheist
At least mudshits are impartial about who they hate (everyone else). Atheists like to claim ethical and intellectual superiority, and they love to paint the picture that they're all scientists and scholars, but they're just another christian hate group. The only thing discerning them from any other hate group is how unhealthily over/underweight and unhygenic they are.

Atheist here and I'm kind of glad Christianity is on the rise. We have let our morals and our communities down. And in the UK it is an answer to Islam. Hell, I wish I could join myself, thr church seems pretty comfy. Shame they don't let you join if you don't believe in deities and magic.

>>745002470
So then you admit that NOT everything requires a cause? You've unraveled your own argument.

>>745008189
>And in the UK it is an answer to Islam
I imagine Christianity is slightly more palatable in the UK than in the US. The protestant/evangelical communities are astoundingly retarded in in the US.

I just assume it's better in the UK, because when you guys get retarded, we always seem to have to one-up you.

>>744987929
A-fucking-men.

>>745008659
I don't think our Christians are much like yours... They tend to be quieter smarter and don't tend to influence the country or politics so much. You don't really even get street preachers, they just stand there offering a chat and a booklet if you want one.

>>744986647
Athiesm is lack of religion. So if it's shrinking as a religion it's because people realise that.

t. Atheist

>>745008918
>They tend to be quieter smarter and don't tend to influence the country or politics so much
That's what I thought. Catholics aren't so bad here, but the people who belong to any other major denomination are mostly braindead.

I just wished the Christian Mysticism of Meister Eckhart would make a comeback. Unfortunately, it'll never happen because it isn't nearly as comfy as the vulgarized versions.

>>745007070
Then I am a camel by how I've decided to define camel

>>744989463
See:
>>744987201
The fuck are you worried about?

Also, atheism isn't a religion, and nihilism is the only true path. Defend things because you want to defend them, do things because you want to do them, and live because you want to, not all for some bigot in the clouds who possesses all the power to make every life a carefree romp through paradise but CHOOSES to let it be a cesspit of fear, torment, pain, and suffering. Fight the reins, free yourselves, life for life's sake, and stop trying to find reason where there doesn't have to be any and likely isn't.
Existence is by nature futile, just do whatever it is that brings some sort of value to your life and leave when the time comes.
Stop pretending you know or understand anything.
Stop trying to impose your bullshit on everyone else.
And most importantly, ignore me completely, call me a faggot, point out the flaws in my logic, and get really butthurt that I don't care about a core aspect of your life.

>>745007070
For someone who bases their entire argument off of logic and reason you have a hard time combatting logic and reason

File: Satanic Commandments.png (119KB, 1941x1885px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1941x1885px

ya'll motherfuckers need Satan.

>>745010226
Yet another edgelorg who went to Sunday school when he was younger and thinks Christianity is the be all end all of theism because he's to scared to move out of his comfort zone. Ps nihilism is for fags

>>745010416
Nah, just a normie who studied the major religions and found them lacking. And on the contrary, seeing life as inherently meaningless is super discomforting; I wish I had the capacity for belief but I just can't muster any up. It's somewhat of a weakness of mine, and it has deprived me of a major comfort zone that a vast number of people get to rely on and draw strength from.
That being said, I prefer my lack of belief to your seemingly illogical beliefs backed by various texts written by people whose brains would implode if they saw the barest bit of our society today, then translated and edited hundreds of times until all meaning was lost, then used and abused by governments and people to create a world tailor made for themselves.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but it works for me either way. Believe what you want, I choose not to~

Yea, I don't believe in any God. Who gives a flying fuck. I get that this is bait but shit this is so retarded that it has to fucking be hated on. BTW, tell me what your "god" has done for you other than the common "He gave me life" or "He made the world."

>>744987590
+1 this is boring bait jfc

>>745010886
Religion is constantly evolving m8. Do I think god is watching us making sure we don't masturbate because some sandscit tablet told me so. No. Do I believe that the universe had a definitive beginning out of pure void, and that the spark of life from primordial goop somehow led to the deep vistas of the human consiousness. Yes. And do I think that it could all somehow be the result of something no human could or was meant to understand. Yea. I just think for some people it's easier to believe in nothing because it make it easier to accept the insignificance of all of us

File: Galil tears down the wall.jpg (143KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1920x1080px

>>745011111
>Checked and Kek'd

>>745011706
If you can admit that no human could or is meant to understand how all this came about, why believe in something humans made up to explain it? Why not just accept that you do. not. know. and you never will?

That's what I did, and I regret nothing. Does the mystery of it all keep me up at night? Sometimes, yeah. Would I ever choose to allow myself to coddle up to a figurehead created by inherently flawed beings just to allow myself the pleasure of "knowing" how this all got here? No. Do I think the universe was consciously and deliberately created? Absolutely not, but I do not know, and I am more than comfortable accepting that.

Why does something thought up a couple thousand years ago have to be the reason for all this? Why does there have to be a reason for all this? Why can't you just accept that it's here now, and one day it probably won't be, and no amount of wishful thinking will change any sort of outcome or uncover any sort of origin or reason to it all? Because no amount of religious evolution is ever going to change that.

I'm not trying to say you should espouse your beliefs like I have. I admire you for sticking to this, and I really do wish it were that easy for me. But it's not, and I just don't see any need for overlying reason in a world tainted by our own limited perceptions.

inb4 "you're agnostic"
Even if "proof" was given, I couldn't accept it because I don't think truth exists. It's another concept, another label made up by a species that seems to have a huge hard on for making things up.

>>745011706
Let's be honest, what you're talking about isn't religion for 99% of religious people

>Imagine it’s four thousand years ago and you are the chief elder of a small pagan tribe living in what is now known as Yemen. You have chosen to pitch your tribe’s tents near an oasis that’s also shared by, say, half a dozen small Arab pagan tribes. Paganism, with its orgiastic sexual promiscuity, its lawless blood-sacrifices and hyper-irrational superstitions is the zeitgeist of the day – and you, as tribe leader are becoming more concerned for the safety of your tribe because the new four-horned pagan god of your nearest neighbor’s tribe is an aggressive god who instructs his worshipers to raid and kill what they can by night to appease him. You stoically start to wonder how best you can insure your tribe’s safety: you spend all day performing pagan protection rituals and prayers; and your nights you spend sleepless in nerve-knotting anxiety: over-thinking everything and hitting one mental wall after the other in search of a solution to your security crisis.
>Soon, you’re worn down emotionally and mentally and crippled by anguish and despair.

>Soon, the fears within you multiply causing you bouts of melancholia and paranoia and loss of appetite. You look everywhere but you can find no reprieve from your laden mental agony and exhaustion. So profound, intense and unbearable is your solitary anguish that you begin to doubt the protective powers of the very pagan gods you yourself worship. Doubting your gods thus day and night, you soon enough therefore decide that you are no longer a pagan: that worshiping effigies and natural phenomenon and inane objects has never produced any reliable results anyway; and has certainly not guaranteed you safety, especially when as a wandering tribe in the past, you had been repeatedly ambushed and your animals and half your women were dragged off away by brutal raiders. Yes, you fully realize that paganism is futility itself. You feel strange but brilliantly liberated to shed the mantle of paganism. You look around you and you start to see pagan folks as inferior, as physically uninhibited but mentally enslaved. You are thrilled by your internal discoveries, but this euphoria is soon shot down when you realize that you now have a much bigger problem: what do you next worship?

>You’ve killed off your old pagan gods and you need to fill the void with something… something?… yes, something… something that would be… even… better – even bigger and scarier than anyone can ever imagine! Well, you have to think super big so you can sell why you dumped the old gods to your cynical brother and to others in the tribe. Domestically, your tribe folk absolutely need ‘stuff’ to worship; and foreign policy wise, your neighboring tribes are always curious to know what ritual you performed, whether it worked or not, and you have to be able to convincingly accommodate this normal pagan curiosity, otherwise they would view your tribe as unconventional and shrouded in dark secrecy; they will accuse you of nefarious and antisocial activities; they will spread ugly rumors about you and your tribe; they will disown all previous trade deals with you; exclude you from important regional social events, and humiliate you by calling you a godless crackpot and a feeble tribal chief: which in turn would invite violent raids and unwanted hostility – the very thing you’re desperate to avoid.

>You sit under stars alone outside your tent and wonder what kind of new gods you can kneel to, impressive gods unlike any other in the pagan world around you. But… where, where on earth does one find such a mighty and hidden collection of gods, you ask yourself. You find no answer to this question, hard as you try, and so you think to yourself: perhaps I can start by finding the first god and when that’s done, I can be looking for the next one and so on and so forth. It seems like an awful lot of mental work is ahead of you and you despair at the impossible challenges you’ve entangled yourself in. Then it hits you! All you really need is ONE GOD! ONE GOD! Only one! A god who is so imbibed with mystery and magic and might that he works from a grand and fantastic invisible realm – a god who is absolutely everywhere, yet unseen by the human eye as his face is too powerful for a human to behold without causing injury and even death to the beholder: for you, there’s no more praying to multiple silly effigies anymore (yet ironically, you still believe in paganistic magic).

>>745013381
ONE GOD!
And his name is...
Spiderman

>>745012924
There's always more to learn and always unknown possibilities. For instance what if there is an afterlife. I don't particularly submit to the thought, but what if. There's no way of knowing until you do. I keep an open mind. There's just so much that doesn't quite add up, and if it takes the rest of my life so be it. But still being able to question and relish in the mysteries of the universe keep me content

>>744987929
The "christian" countries are all poor and shit, dont have enough money for ur own ppl let alone others

Polska come unclog my UK toilet and ill give u 5 quids
Also ur wellcome to come to the UK and join my countries systems, even if its welfare

Human capital growth, make my country bigger and richer and stronger

Mad?

>>745013381
>>745013365
>>745013353
>>745013260
It's easy to contort the meaning of religion and spirituality when you introduce human nature into the mix, but I ask what a single hypothetical pegan has to do with the birth of the universe if not just our world?

File: 1504884465393.jpg (5KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 300x168px

>>744986647
>IM SUCH A FAGGOT I THINK 5 INCHES IS A WHOLE FOOT

>>745013865
I agree wholeheartedly, and in this weird existence we inhabit the pursuit of higher knowledge is probably the only lasting goal to strive for. But when it comes to absolutes, religion teaches you to accept absolute truth without question or be persecuted and punished. While in reality, there can never be an absolute truth. Logically, if the universe is infinite and anything is possible, then there is always going to be something to contradict every proof. There will always be a flaw, always a circumstance that renders what is true false. And always a juxtaposition of truth and falsity that reveals that they are one and the same. In this universe of unknowns, I just can't see any reason why there should be reason. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to learn as much as we can, just that we should accept that everything we learn is colored by what and how we perceive, and therefore that the truth we find is entirely subjective and biased towards our own individual outlooks. Placing a god or gods in the seat of reason and knowledge helped us unite as a species and conquer ancient problems, but it's time to move past that and look for something more tangible, something that actually has a basis in the finite, something that adequately explains what happened. It won't be perfect, it won't be true, but it will make more sense than "God did it."
I take all information as it comes, I haven't closed my mind but that doesn't have to mean that I understand or accept any of the information presented as truth either.
I'm content to discover what I can with my limited senses, anecdotal and experiential evidence, and flawed internal logic, until such a time when I expire and get to see if anything continues from this.

>>745013787
Yahweh strikes you with jewish tricks. Roll your save.

>>745014181
Obviously the author is describing the genesis of Abrahamism.

>>745014824
I really like you so I don't want this to come off as shitty but you're still confusing religion with preconceived notions of dominant theistic beliefs. You're also thinking within the frameworks of how we understand the universe (which is remarkably little) and not the infinite power it holds and can consivably be wielded. Plus there's just the little every day stuff like why is there a single genisus point of life on earth (excluding cephalapods which are their own genetic branch coming in much later) if conditions remained stable to host many over an extended period of time? Religion isn't synonmous with ignorance, ignorance only comes when we're to afraid to ask the questions that put our beliefs on trial

>>744986647
atheism is a ticket to a trapped soul.

>>745015331
Rolling for 86 to shove a lit candle up his ass

>>745005610

Liked and Shared

>>745006058

>implying my parents were dumb enough to vaccinate me

>>745015586
noice

File: 1500258904657.jpg (760KB, 4608x2592px) Image search: [Google]

760KB, 4608x2592px

>>745005610
upboat

>>745000775
Does that mean I'm tax exempt. Awesome

>>745015414
Not anon, but people like you irritate me almost as much as bible-thumpers
>no, no, I'm not talking about that silly man in the sky with a beard. No, that's TOTALLY ignorant. What I'M talking about is the flim flam of the rim ram and the dingidee doolittle scaramee which is beyond space and time and our comprehension of the skittilee derp a slurp.

>>745015414
I was just thinking how I'm enjoying this convo; it's ended up being remarkably pleasant where most of these turn into shitstorms close to immediately.

That being said, I don't want to sound shitty either when I say that I think you're confusing spirituality with religion. Spirituality is more like believing that something is there and drawing from that belief, where religion is using that something to directly influence how you think and act though set beliefs and laws for lack of a better word. Spirituality lacks the framework of standard religion, and I think if it were up to me I'd consider you more spiritual than religious. But that's my opinion based on a brief conversation. I also don't want to sound rude when I ask you for some sort of empirical evidence of a single genesis point, because I've never heard of such a thing and as regional evolution seems to show, variants of life can spring up anywhere and adapt to anything, so conceivably life could do the same. And if you mean that there is a single spot where the first life came into existence here, I would have to argue that this is simple logic; it wouldn't have had to be put there necessarily, because logically there has to be a first and it would have to inhabit one spot when it became existent.

(1 of 2, comment too long)

>>745015414
As you say, we understand remarkably little about the universe, though I would say we really don't understand any of it at all. That being said I can't possibly speak from a vantage point which I do not comprehend and neither can you; we are both trapped by what humanity thinks it understands because we are both human. We just have slightly tweaked frameworks from each other due to a difference in stimuli and thought patterns. And to think that anything infinite could ever be wielded or controlled is madness, plain and simple. It hearkens back to the "immovable object meeting an unstoppable force" philosophical riddle; even if it's possible, it would probably be disastrous and would definitely by completely incomprehensible.

I do not think that religion and ignorance are synonymous, but I do think that religion breeds and fosters ignorance. To allow people to get such a quick and up front answer allows them to stop looking for alternatives, thereby rendering them ignorant in many (not all) cases. To be truly open to all possibilities, you cannot harbor any preferences for any of them. I am of the opinion that in order to begin to grasp what possibilities there are, you have to avoid trusting any of them.

(2 of 2)

File: IMG_6891.jpg (66KB, 532x400px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 532x400px

>>745016632
I laughed too hard at this

>>745015586
Holy fucking shit I did it.
HAHAHA~

File: IMG_3936.jpg (63KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 403x403px

>>745016632
>it's ignorant to question the world around us!!! Don't you get it you're the same as those idiots who stone women to death for being in pure by putting fourth questions that I don't have an answer to!! God why doesn't everyone just have my exact world view, everyone's an idiot except me
My poor son, what have they done to you

Atheism is in decline, but those who identify as being non-religious is growing faster than ever. Check and mate

>>745017130
>implying the reverse-kleenexification of the term "god" is accepted by anyone outside of Abrahamists

>>745016911
I guess I would fall under the spiritual catergory, I just hate it there because it's always full of stoners who are one with the world maaaan. But yea I hope for both our sakes we're both wrong. In any event you're a very pleasant person

>>745017130
Oh good, you decided to post a quote by a smart man who once made an unfounded, nebulous statement about the origin of all things.

I realize it's entertaining to speculate about these things, but there's really no point in speculating about something that would be out of reach by means of our petty senses and intellect... and there's certainly no sense in believing in any particular concept.

>>745017298
Again I'm so sorry not everyone can submit to your world views, I'm sure it would be paradise.

>>745017529
Those are just more labels, you don't have to adhere to any of them~
You're you, believe what you believe and be who you are, categories are trivial ;D
But again, I agree. I want to be wrong more than anything. I'd love for there to be reason in this chaos. We'll see, or more likely we won't haha.
I think you're quite pleasant as well, this conbversation has been quite nice and entertaining!

I wish you luck anon, don't let anyone compromise your beliefs, and keep looking for your truths!

>>745017750
There are other gods that aren't jealous projections of psychopaths, you know. Hundreds of them.

File: OHSHIT3.png (356KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 1600x900px

>>745017529
Also, admire the fact that while we were having this deep and thought provoking conversation, I managed to shove a lit candle up Yahweh's ass. Lmfao.

>>745017910
What if it?

>>745017813
Goodnight, love you

File: 1307328910949.jpg (24KB, 252x160px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 252x160px

Agnostic is where it's at

>Don't waste my time devoting hours towards a religion
>Man of rational facts and objective science because that shit makes sense in the REAL WORLD WE LIVE IN
>Don't have to give money to bullshit
>Don't have to make other people feel uncomfortable talking about my religion

If there's any definitive proof that a god exists I'll be the first motherfucker to convert because fuck yeah higher power, but as of now you're all stupid as shit.

>>745018015
Love you too, sleep well~

>>745017813
>>745017529
You guys are making me feel like a shithead for bein such a douche. I take this back >>745016632

>>745015414
You seem cool, anon. I give you official permission to believe what you want.

>>745018233
Yaaaay <3 as long as people can believe what they want and encourage others to do so I'm happy

File: 1488861447899.jpg (98KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 400x400px

>>744986647
>>744987201
>>744987604
>>744987929
>>744988367
>>744988548
>>744989463
>>744991176
>>744992270
>>744996908
>>745016002 (Get the fuck out of here with your Reddit shit)
>>745017130

>>745018419
Implying Reddit isn't a atheist website, and as we all know b is a Christian image board

>>745018233
Cooler heads prevail anon ;D
I forgive you even though you didn't yell at me, haha

>>745018574
>b is a Christian image board

MASSIVE KEKS

>>745018671
Well I thank you for that ;)

File: 1437184871065.jpg (216KB, 1118x1106px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 1118x1106px

>>745018740
God loves gore and porn shut the fuck up

>>745018949
EVEN YET MORE MASSIVE KEKS!!!
I bet he would anon, I bet he would

>>745018671
You remind me of my last boyfriend, he was a passionate debating about that stuff and he'd always forgive me on his behalf kek

>>744986647
I'm more concerned about living with reality then how many people willing choose a fiction to live by. At the end of the day It doesn't matter how many people are christian or not. As long they don't interfere with my life they can worship how they please.

>>745019488
I hope that's a compliment, feels like one at any rate~
If you're cute and single, I could also remind you of your next boyfriend ;D

>>745019653
Ayyyy haha it was and I am, I typically have a don't date men from 4chan policy for obvious Craigslist killer-y reasons

>>745019769
Ayyyyyyyyyy~
I can respect that, I generally share the same policy but the opportunity was too perfect to pass up. It practically dropped into my head without any thought, haha.
At any rate, thank you!

>>745019488
I fuckin KNEW you were either gay or female. It's funny, the only people I've ever known who've talked about spirituality in the same flaky way preferred cock.

Btw, I'm the jerk

Atheists btfo, they will never recover

>>745019933
You caught me, and since there are no women on the internet by process of elimination I am...

>>744999494
No everybody gets one just like Spidey says

>>745019933
And like I said you're not a jerk, just passionate

>>745020135
Unfortunately, not a cute lady as I had hoped~
Or, a cute and facetious lady in disguise.
Ah well, either way I still stand by my flirt, haha. I may not swing that way but I can flirt like I do lmao

>>745020135
Shit, this actually just brings up more questions. Why do you pursue religion if the vast majority of them persecute you for your preferences? Also, presbyterian?

>>745020722
Just close your eyes and it all feels the same, besides it's not gay if the balls don't touch

>>745020135
Don't get me wrong, I've known a lot of flaky dudes, but there's a certain way females talk about woo woo philosophy--in person, it usually involves copious use of the word "like".

>>745020662
I try not to be a jerk, but I usually fail.

>>745021000
Yea, they like it because it feels safe like a real religion, but without the reprucussions of having to adhere to a code / be held accountable for their actions. That and spearituity can be worn like an accessory to them. And we all have our character flaws hon it's what makes us human

>>745020987
I'm always open to new experiences ;D
>>745021000
I second his opinion, passion doesn't automatically make you a jerk, but you should try to slow down sometimes, let the thoughts and emotions sink in before you blurt out things you later come to regret and/or retract~ No a criticism, just friendly advice. Also, like, ladies, like, tend to like, use the word like, like, a lot, especially when like, they are trying to, you know, explain stuff, like beliefs. I've like, noticed it too, lmfao

>>745020947
Because I've always been facinated with the beginning, the very beginning of concios thought and everything around us. I've read a lot of theoretical and Astro physics papers and publications however the only field brace enough to venture head on into what some would call pure conjecture was theology. This is all a hobby of course, I'm a marine biology major (if I get one gay sailor joke I'll kill all of you)

>>745017918
Man look at all that tor shit. You must like the cheese pizza. :^)

>>745021221
It doesn't help that all of my former friends are creative types/hipsters. I don't have any friends anymore (jerk).

>>745021282
Yes, emotions tend to cloud judgement

>>745017130
I'm the Anon that posted this had no idea what the deeper meaning of what Mr Heisenberg was saying is use your brain think of the year anthropology and the complexity of what he worked on he invented the freaking uncertainty principal something used in many many theories in physics and a incredibly simple but complex idea something That seemed almost omnipotent
By remember the year I mean think pre world war 2 Heisenberg lived in a time when many more people went to church every Sunday than do now he worked on the atom bomb for the axis powers of ww2 but was granted immunity by the Americans because they new his intellectual capability could be helpful

>>745021630
I'll be your friend <3

>>745017130
I meant to say I'm sure the Anon who posted the this didn't understand

>MFW I said I'm the anon

>>745021494
You ought to get some philosophy in while you're at school, if the beginning, existence, and consciousness fascinate you then you seem a shoe in~ Also, fantastically jealous, I've always wanted to be a marine biologist, ever since I went diving for the first time when I was 15. I might still do it, but I doubt it. But yeah, I can dig that, it's a much better reason than most people have for being religious! Seriously though, take philosophy, you'll get so much insight; it teaches you to think differently, ESPECIALLY about stuff like this. I minor'd in it when I was in school and plan to again, even though it blatantly won't help me at all in my current career pursuits hahaha.