People have always been mostly irreligious. Most peasants aren't

>Most peasants are dumb enough to believe in bullshit like god or the afterlife.

ftfy

>>3279881
prove your own theory first before asking others to debunk it.

File: discourse + sources.png (164KB, 1817x321px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1817x321px

>>3279881
>prove me wrong
Prove yourself right, faggot. Where are your sources?

>>3279897
>>3279899
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Your claim is that billions of people have believed imaginary humanoids rule this Universe and they believe there is something after they die.
So you're the ones to prove me wrong, hence why I asked you to do so as soon as I opened the thread.

|Among the most vivid descriptions recorded by the Inquisitors are accounts of blasphemy, many which took place in taverns or during games of chance. For example, in 1494, while playing a game of bowls, Bernaldino Pajarillo angrily cried out, “I reject the whore of a God!”. Six years later a surgeon, Master Bernal, urged on his slowing bowl with the cry, “Get there! Get there! May Jesus Christ never flourish!”. Meanwhile in 1487 Rodrigo, a draper, was said to have shouted while playing pelota, “I don’t believe in God, buggering St. John!”. Another gambler, Lope de Vallejera, who was once a page to the Countess of Denia, was said to have cried out, “I reject the fucking Jewish whore of a God!”

A cleric, Diego Mexias, said in Aranda about 1485 “that there is nothing except being born and dying, and having a nice girlfriend (gentil amiga) and plenty to eat”, and that there were no such things as heaven and hell. The late Pedro Gomez el Chamorro, of Coruna del Conde, expressed similar “materialistic” views in 1500, “warming himself by the fire, annoyed and and fed up with the weather there was and the cold”. His complaints about the weather led him to conclude, “I vow to God, there is no soul”.

… Pedro Moreno, a chaplain, seems to have tired of the conversation of a group who were talking, in conventional terms, about the activities and attributes of the saints. It was said that, “St. Michael held the balance, and St. Bartholomew held the devils in chains and St. Peter had the keys of heaven”, to which the cleric replied, “Yes, in his jock-strap”, and, as the female witness solemnly recounts, “some of those who were there reproached him”

One of the most interesting comments comes from Diego de Barrionuevo, who was accused of saying in 1494, “I swear to God that this hell and paradise is nothing more than a way of frightening us, like people saying to children, ‘Avati coco‘ [‘The bogeyman will get you’]”

The records included accusations against eight men and one woman over their beliefs that Christianity was not the only path to salvation. The woman for example, was a peasant farmer called Juana Perez, who said in about 1488 that “the good Jew would be saved, and the good Moor, in his law, and why else had God made them?

In another case from the 1480s, during the Granada war, an argument broke out between a miller, Diego de San Martin, and a farmer called Gil Recio. The miller said to Gil, “Gil Recio, let the water [that is, in an irrigation channel] through to the mill. The people are dying of hunger. O, Saint Mary! What a great drought there is, because there’s no rain”. Gil replied, “How do you expect it to rain, when the king is going to take the Moors’ home away, when they haven’t done him any harm”. Diego replied that the wars by the Christian against the Muslims in Granada was a good thing, but the farmer responded, “How does anyone know which of the three laws God loves best?”.

The Inquisition at Soira also found many instances where conversos were comparing their former Jewish faith with Christianity, and finding the latter wanting. For example a shoemaker named Anton Tapiazo, was said to have mused, “In the synagogue they used to sit on benches and wear their hoods, and how in the church they knelt on their knees and got up again lots of times, and it seemed as though they were playing ‘bobbing up and down’.”

Medieval evidence thus seems to support the general principle that religious doubt is an intrinsic part of faith. Therefore, even if Febvre was right to argue that “atheism”, in any modern sense, was not an option in the sixteenth century or earlier, it does appear none the less that there was indeed genuine religious scepticism in late medieval and early modern Europe. The question which remains, though, is where and how such an attitude originated. The striking similarity of material from such widely differing regions and periods raises important issues concerning the interpretation of “popular” religion and its relationship to the religion of “elites”.

The article, “Religious faith and doubt in late medieval Spain: Soria, circa 1450–1500,” by John Edwards, appeared in the journal Past & Present, No. 120, which was published in 1988.

People have always been irreligious, but "mostly" is a bold (and brash) claim

File: 20170716_113500.jpg (14KB, 303x102px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 303x102px

Was '& Humanities' a mistake?

>>3279969
Go back to r/atheism, you mentally deficient child. Nice totally not cliched Carl Sagan quote.

but peasants were dumb and there wasn't any real alternative

File: IMG_0175.jpg (33KB, 600x750px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x750px

>>3279969
>Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Why do all atheists use the same shitty rhetoric? I've heard this line basically every time I've seen an atheist debate. And if this is true, why do atheists never provide eveidence for their own extraordinary claim that the universe was created randomly from nothing?

>>3279991
>>3279994
>>3279998
Nice read. Thanks

>>3280311
You don't get Atheïsm. An Atheïst just says the claims by religion so far are bullocks.

>>3279881
It had less to do with free speech and more to do with atheism becoming a philosophical stand by otherwise normal, sociable people. Being irreverent and irreligious before that wasn't really the same thing, and was treated more like alcoholism or anti-social behavior.

>>3280311
>And if this is true, why do atheists never provide eveidence for their own extraordinary claim that the universe was created randomly from nothing?
Or, get this, they'll just claim they don't know.

>>3279881
I would tend to agree with you... however, keep in mind that the average peasant for most of human history probably barely ever went more than a few miles away from his or her village. Their breadth of knowledge and sense of what is and isn't physically possible wasn't like ours. And their lives were so hard compared to ours that they had a lot more need for psychological opium than most of us do.

File: misfit.png (1MB, 720x1068px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 720x1068px

>>3279881
>>3279969

>People have always been mostly irreligious. Most peasants aren't dumb enough to believe in bullshit like god or the afterlife.

Over half of humans' religion is irreligious (i.e. impious/sacrilegious). Monotheism is a fool's paradise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4XdACQWGwI

>>3279991
>>3279994
>>3279998
medieval romanticsts BTFO

how will they ever recover?