I have still not seen an unrefuted justified answer to these three atheist questions.
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Talk religion
I have still not seen an unrefuted justified answer to these three atheist questions.
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Bad argument. This relies on a mischaracterization of common atheism based on semantics and will probably not work in most debates, especially once their terms and position have been defined. Atheism does not necessarily mean “belief that there is no God”, and no sophisticated atheist will take that position. An atheist can claim there is an absence of evidence without claiming there is evidence of absence. Any claim of the existence of God is a positive assertion which requires evidence and justification, an atheist can refute or reject an argument provided for God without claiming that there is no God at all. They can say they believe there is no God because they see no compelling evidence for the existence of one, not that they are claiming to know there is no God.
It is a question, not asserting that they claim God doesn't exist nor is it a demand for proof or evidence or what not.
It is a philosophical question.
>How can atheists know that God doesn't exist?
Again, you're mischaracterizing (common) atheism to shift the burden of proof fallaciously. Any atheist who claims to know God does not exist will obviously be easy to refute. However most atheists claim to believe that God does not exist because they have not seen any compelling arguments which prove the existence of God. This is not the same as claiming to know God does not exist. Those are very different claims, and you are conflating them because "atheism" as a label is somewhat ambiguous, which allows you to shift the burden of proof onto the atheist. Again, an atheist can believe in an absence of evidence for the existence of God without believing there is evidence for the absence of God's existence. The burden of proof is on the theist to prove God, not the atheist to prove the nonexistence of God.
Nothing that you said followed my reply.
Your reply made no sense, I'm addressing the original image and the very first question it presents. The question presupposes that the atheist holds an untenable position, which most atheists do not actually believe. Most atheists will simply reply "I don't claim to know that God doesn't exist" and then make similar arguments which I have made, to which you will have no answer.
>Your reply made no sense
The only nonsense here is
>I don't believe it is the case, but I don't believe it is not the case.
>>I don't believe it is the case, but I don't believe it is not the case.
It's not incoherent.
Suppose there's a closed box... And i tell you there's either a silver ball or a gold ball inside.
And I ask you:
>Do you believe there's a gold ball in there?
>Do you believe there's a silver ball in there?
It's perfectly rational to say no to both questions. It could be either one, you aren't forced to particularly believe one hypothesis over the other.
That's a false equivalence doe. There are more than two outcomes in the particular case.
>That's a false equivalence doe. There are more than two outcomes in the particular case.
It's just an analogy to give the idea.
For every available hypothesis, you can have a numbered ball in the box or not in the box.
If you're in a state of unkowing, it's perfectly rational to say that none of the hypotheses convinces you of its accuracy
The question is addressed to atheists who lack a belief in God existing.
Not the agnostic who doesn't know. The agnostic just don't know. You can't add more.
For example, I don't believe unicorns exist. I don't know that unicorns don't exist, it's possible they exist somewhere undiscovered, even on another planet, or have existed in the past and went extinct leaving no evidence. I cannot claim to know that unicorns don't exist, such a claim would shift the burden of proof onto me, and obviously I would not be able to satisfy it as I don't have access to full knowledge of all places unicorns might exist or have existed in the past. However, I have seen no compelling evidence which supports the claim that unicorns DO exist. Therefore, I don't believe they exist. That is different than saying "I believe they don't exist". That is the key point.
>That is different than saying "I believe they don't exist".
Nope, if you don't believe something, you believe otherwise, atheists had been dodging this issue for, how long is it now?
>I don't believe it is the case, but I don't believe it is not the case.
Logically incoherent.
>However, I have seen no compelling evidence which supports the claim that unicorns DO exist. Therefore, I don't believe they exist
That seems like the wrong position to take though, whereas the correct position would be "they could, but I don't know for sure if they do, the possibility is definitely there that they do exist or have existed in the past", aka, agnostic about unicorns.
Most people, the way they think, actually disagree with what you're saying.
A perfect example of this is anything paranormal. Many times, the alternative materialistic explanation offers no more evidence than the immaterial explanation, so rather than being skepticism, it becomes denialism. You can't form a counter argument that also has a base in not knowing for sure, and act like it's anymore valid than the other argument which lacks evidence. You should technically have an equal amount of "unbelief" for your own argument as the opposing argument, and yet, people do not.
That's just being agnostic anon.
I agree with this anon. . This is the equivalent of the infamous "ontological argument" which relies entirely upon semantics. Furthermore, one cannot infer that not affirming == strongly denying. I think that the best form of ministry is to be friendly and emulate Christ rather than to try for the mean-spirited linguistic "checkmate." We don't need tricks. We have truth. Good attempt, bro, but recalibrate.
Also, atheists and agnostics, know that you are still loved and are always welcome.
Your power level has been checked, sir
They claim something with no proof. That is the basis of faith. So atheist have faith that there is no God because they lack evidence to support their is one.
In which, they also lack evidence to support their statements that he doesn't exist. That is basically a moronic child stance. How did they ever become main stream? The evidence for God is nature itself and the fact we exist. If you don't see God when you look outside then you have lost something within your soul.
People aren't taught how to think logically anymore.
Education is mostly rote memorization after the basic skills have been taught.
Atheism comes from a potion of willful non-thinking and contradiction.
And finally hypocrites are no longer shamed, but promoted, so there is impetus to correct ones hypocritical beliefs positions.
*No impetus
you argue like a israelite
real pilpul hours
there's no evidence of God. especially when you refer to the abrahamic version.
if you can assert somethings existence without proof, it can just as equally be dismissed without proof and there's nothing you can do about it.
When you claim god exists, the burden of proof is on you. it's not up the person you're trying to convince to prove you wrong.
>does not necessarily mean “belief that there is no God”, and no sophisticated atheist will take that position.
>An atheist can claim there is an absence of evidence without claiming there is evidence of absence
Theism means having faith in something. Atheism means not having faith/believing. Gnosis and by relation gnosticism relate to knowledge of something hence the name. Agnostic means not knowing of something. from these four points we can derive different standpoints
the one you described is the agnostic atheist. A rare specimen and not nearly as common as you may believe. most fall into the gnostic atheism category which presents as the obnoxious american liberal atheist
either way there is a reason it's called knowledge of faith. because there is actually something to be known about god
This is moronic pilpul. It is deliberately obtuse, which is why you posted it, memeflag
Sage
God exists, but not in this realm. Our universe was created by a lesser divinity, the demiurge.
I never liked Gnosticism, it's just placing the answer to the question 'Who ultimately created everything?' one further step up the spiritual road, and then placing the middleman of 'the demiurge' between the true creator and our physical reality. Not only that, but all of their reasonings feel to me like they stem solely from their personal opinion that the God presented in the Old Testament seems too cruel to be the same God that was presented in the New Testament.
They have many more arguments than only their opinion about the abrahamic god.
Also, i dont think it places the answer to who created everything a step up.
You can't use logic to prove an illogical concept, moron.
On the topic of whether non belief in god implies believe that god doesn't exist:
It doesn't... Although as a matter of fact most atheists do believe that god doesn't exist even if they claim not to.
With most questions about the state of the world, a human can simply say they don't know the answer. Maybe god exists, maybe not. It's possible to say "I don't believe in god, but maybe he will be revealed to be true in the future"
Is the purpose of these threads to make people hate christians? Because it's working.
>I don't believe God exists, but it's not like I believe he doesn't exist.
No sense. Nonsense.
>I don't believe God exists, and I don't believe he doesn't exists.
Logically incoherent. Can't have it both ways.
not an atheist, but noticed your moronic thread anyway
An atheist can admit to ignorance about whether God exists or not. "I do not know that God exists, and I also do not know that God does not exists" is logically consistent. Combining this with "I choose to act as though God does not exists in spite of ignorance on the matter" is when you can start to catch the atheist in their bullshit. They can admit to not know and that's fine, but when they then take the next step to select a side regardless they have made an aesthetic judgement. That aesthetic judgement can be critiqued and, if you take it far enough, you wind up with a presuppositional argument that ultimately results in a shoddy metaphysical system for the atheist.
>presuppositional argument
Call it based argument from now.
and so I shall
Did you read it?
If so I have a question to ask.
Yeah I've read it, what's your question
It's a long post. Did you read it all and was it engaging?
These arguments and images are legitimately either written by a schizo or AI, and you seem to be either a schizo or an AI. You're either moronic and presenting terrible arguments unintentionally or some kind of israelite/bot posting to make theists look moronic and to confuse/obfuscate.
Hijacking this gay moronic thread to post a stronger presuppositional/divine conceptualist argument against atheism for the existence of God.
>The laws of logic exist and are universal, they are applicable everywhere and at all times. For example the law of non-contradiction; contradictory propositions cannot both be true at the same time. ¬(p ∧ ¬p)
>All things exist either materially in the physical world or conceptually/mentally in a mind. There is nothing that exists which is neither material nor mental. Therefore, if something is not physical, existing in the material world, then it must be conceptual, existing mentally in some mind.
>The laws of logic exist and are not physical, they do not exist materially. Therefore, they must exist conceptually/mentally in some mind.
>However, the laws of logic are universal, and cannot be contained in or be the product of any particular finite human mind (even though the human mind can rationally comprehend these laws in a finite way).
>Therefore there must exist some universal, transcendent mind which contains conceptual, universal principles such as the laws of logic. >This is God.
>Hijacking this gay
How do you know?
How do you know?!
Transcendental argument. God (a transcendent, Divine mind) is the necessary precondition for the existence of universal principles such as the laws of logic. Simple as.
>X is the necessary precondition for Y to be true.
>Y is true.
>Therefore X must be true.
haven't seen this approach yet, I like it
basado
This is fricking moronic and you're a gigahomosexual. Logic isn't universal truth, it's based on axioms, human constructs. All logic, and math (applied logic), is built off of assumptions. These assumptions are by their nature subjective.
Most pretentious midwit award of the day goes to you homosexual.
Hi Darth Dawkins. Suppose this is true and the laws of logic presuppose the existence of God. How am I to be convinced this God is the Christian God?
Didn't know a thread could be this good without the vermin.
Calm and peaceful.
Was it boring or was it a fun read is what I meant.
Lol it was alright, though a bit long winded. Presuppositional argumentation doesn't need that much of a boilerplate to make sense. Not enough time was spent on the actual argument itself, either, so it's a bit top heavy
>Not enough time was spent on the actual argument itself
I would have loved to, but not enough space.
Again I wish I could have personally wrote it myself, but the real subject was why Based apology should be the only apology, reasons and justifications for that. They should just go an learn the rest from YouTube or something. Giving them the basics is enough to intrigue them.
>Giving
*showing them
Atheists are destined to lose these arguments due to their 'arrogance' and lack of intellectual curiosity.
I cannot imagine a world where I 'think' I know it all....yet these people are certain they do, in fact, 'know it all'.
'Agnostic' is the choice of the open minded.
God doesn't exist. Reality is a process from nothing to something. We just perceive.
I just don't care about god at all. I don't need to think about that sort of thing to get on with my life.
Oh look its the "circlejerk until everyone is an agnostic" thread again...
/thread
do you beleive in vishnu or other hindu gods?
No.
prove that they dont exist.
Not how it works.
why wont you prove that Vishnu doesn't exist?
You're lost aren't you?
yes i'm looking for Vishnu where is he?
(obviously you failed here like every other theist, but lets see how long you larp as an idiot)
>yes i'm looking for Vishnu where is he?
Why are you asking me? What are you even saying?
I was asking you to prove that he doesn't exist.
You WILL end up in hell.
I believe in the Marshmallow God.
The Marshmallows died for our sins.
Impossible!
Seriously though, those parodies are impossible.
prove that Vishnu doesn't exist.
prove that my Marshmallow God doesn't exist
Logical coherence alone does that.
Your logic just was faulty, in other words, absent.
>Logic
goes against all beLIEf
What now?
prove that Vishnu doesn't exist please oh wise one.
You will give a bullshit answer to this b cause it is YOUR belief system
Here:
Misfire?
Yes, you have my apology.
Wrong answer. They are spirits.
God divided the world up along the "sons of God".
And then there are the "powers and principalities" under them.
But all religions point to a supreme God above all.
Picking out Vishnu specifically shows that the anon who brought it up do any understand the religion that he is using as a foil for his argument.
moron tier argumentation. Just because there are a plurality of different possible answers to a given question does not mean they are necessarily all wrong. Should we not believe the answer to 2+2 is 4 because it could also possibly be 3, 5, 6, 7 8, etc?
Also you didn't answer my question, do you have any evidence that Hitchens razor is true? Or is that one thing we should believe without evidence?
prove that vishnu doesn't exist
prove that Cloe grace mortez exists then
Prove that stars are anything more than lights in the sky.
When do people like you admit that you believe in fairy tales as well?
Can you reliably identify the line between PROVABLE beyond doubt and | story based on SPECULATION?
I highly doubt it.
You will argue to your death that stars are giant burning gas balls that exist light years distant, with no more proof than blurry pictures that have been modified by artists to look neat.
You think yourself clever, but you believe the fairy tales of the age while having zero understanding of assumptions underlying them.
prove that gas giants doesn't exist then.
You lose.
you imply that they don't exist so prove it.
I said that they are lights in the sky. I didn't say they don't exist.
You want to defend the claim that they can be characterized and their properties known based on observation without direct interaction.
That's why you try to weasel around and not admit what you can't possibly know.
You're a hypocrite and a fool.
>stars
start with the moon.
what is the moon?
can you land on the moon?
Do you have any evidence that Hitchen's razor is true?
why are you an atheist to every other religion besides your own?
I believe in God because I believe the universe is real.
The stars exist.
The planets.
The rocks and trees and rivers.
The fish and beasts and birds.
And men. And me.
Creation exists. Therefore it was created and its creator exists. There is not only the void. There is the light, and the light that is not light, which the darkness cannot comprehend or overcome.
I know Gods name is Love because his word is love and his form is love. The first atom and electron found each other despite the infinite vastness of space and time, and the rest is history.
~The only true belief is agnosticism, or 'i don't know' of course that's a vacancy of spirit, otherwise known as 'faith'. So if we are honest, and say what we know instead of what we 'feel' then we lack faith and are dooooooooooomed, but if we say what we feel and not what we know, we are not using our heads.
And that shit can lead us anywhere. Not saying the materials or 'head' is the be all and end all, but you have to have an understanding of the spiritual world in order to say 'aha, that's the truth' and many fricking don't.
I know delusion though, fantasy, daydreaming, it's all possibility, but ultimatly, thought spirit, and force, one truth. It's finding it that's a b***h.
Jesus wasn't even a real person, dummy
>pic related
Forgot pic
>They can't
>Cause there's no proof to the contrary
>Cause there's no proof to the contrary therefor it's rational
Imagine thinking that God can’t exist simply because you can’t explain him as a baby mammal monkey. If you believe in aliens, you believe in God.
Time is relative based on gravity, a spacefaring race of God-tier humanoids could be hopping around universes experiencing thousands of years for every earth second, an atheist oriented toward physics would readily admit this as a possibility.
Would you say that an entity that could exhibit both creative and destructive authority over a planet of relatively primitive humanoids could be considered gods?
Even more, a higher intelligence could have abandoned our planet at any given point, yet during the time of Christ, could have utilized even our modern standard of technology to encourage a pacifist dominant culture in the hopes that Earthlings would one day travel the stars.
The Holy Spirit could be a neural-linked AI suggesting inspirations to those it seems worthy, and it would look divine to us.
Atheist arguments basically filter down to either solipsism or the idea that no higher intelligence could possibly exist, even one leveraging our developmental lag to make themselves look divine. If you ask me THAT’s moronic.
>If you believe in aliens, you believe in God.
godlike is totally different from supernatural god
these threads and questions are a joke though-- imagine not realizing that the non-existence of things doesn't have to be rationalized
The definition of supernatural is inherently relative. Something that is superior to the natural order, but your definition of natural is relative to your awareness of the universe as a tiny squirrel person in an infinite universe, and as such you can’t begin to define supernatural objectively, especially when most people’s definition of a miracle today is a big tax return, or successful pregnancy. We shot for the stars once before, missed the moon, the clouds, and instead hit two buildings and now it’s all ruined.
A miracle has never outweighed a tragedy on earth, in modern history, which is why none of us will make it. We love to suffer.
If you could teleport to anywhere in the universe proven to have advanced civilizations that have eradicated suffering, would you stay on Earth? Isn’t that the allure of Heaven?
You know why god doesn't exist?
Because you're all a bunch of homos
>logic
>semantics
Don't throw that shit in.
In order to prove something using logic you need a set of axioms, which you cannot have in this case. Semantic homosexuals are even worse.
>discussing and misrepresenting semantics
Kys
"The one created thing which we cannot look at is the one thing in the light of which we look at everything. Like the sun at noonday, mysticism explains everything else by the blaze of its own victorious invisibility. Detached intellectualism is (in the exact sense of a popular phrase) all moonshine; for it is light without heat, and it is secondary light, reflected from a dead world. But the Greeks were right when they made Apollo the god both of imagination and of sanity; for he was both the patron of poetry and the patron of healing. Of necessary dogmas and a special creed I shall speak later. But that transcendentalism by which all men live has primarily much the position of the sun in the sky. We are conscious of it as of a kind of splendid confusion; it is something both shining and shapeless, at once a blaze and a blur. But the circle of the moon is as clear and unmistakable, as recurrent and inevitable, as the circle of Euclid on a blackboard. For the moon is utterly reasonable; and the moon is the mother of lunatics and has given to them all her name"
G.K. Chesterton
why wont you prove that vishnu dosen't exist anon?
I don't know. You tell me anon.
you don't know if he exists or you don't know how to prove he doesn't exist?
>you don't know if he exists or you don't know how to prove he doesn't exist?
I will take both. Let's see what you got. You have been going at it for awhile now.
so you're agnostic?
>I don't believe they exist doe.
prove it then.
Someone help me.
Here:
I like taking this path because it shines a bright light on how they actually think, but refuse to admit.
They refuse to admit that they hold the exact same kind of belief that they criticize in others. And this line of questioning shows that in the cold hard light of truth. The fact that they won't admit it even when it is laid out for them shows that they have some kind of mental issue. I would call it being given over to a reprobate mind.
As soon as that is revealed to them, whether they admit to it or not, I stop. Because beyond that people into there is no use in continuing further.
Until someone is able to see their own hypocrisy and actually care about addressing it, then there can be no more progress.
Real atheist here. Two things that anti-theists fail to understand.
>If God exists, he would not be limited by his own creation as he created the concepts we know of within the bounds of his limits (if he has any).
>Regardless if God exists or not, Christianity has successfully contained toxicity within society because it enforces morals by threat of Judgement.
And for the homosexuals who larp as natsoc:
>Jews have a complete stake in the destruction of Christianity. See the israeli plus sign.
>enforces morals by threat of Judgement.
fear based mind control
frick that,CIA
How else are you going to keep toxic people from being toxic beyond outright killing/torturing them? Fear is as much a motivator as hate.
>tell children that Santa exists, who spies on them 24/7
>that way they will behave
>and when they figure out that they have been lied to, there won't be any consequences
Sounds satanic.
>there won't be any consequences
There's always consequences. And the kid understands that now that the concept has been drilled into him. Now, time to stop being such a subversive homosexual and start arguing objectively.
>There's always consequences
That was my point.
>And the kid understands that now that the concept has been drilled into him
No, the child understands that his parents are fricking liars and not trustworthy and that's it's okay to lie to manipulate others.
Well done with your mind control.
You don't know how people work, boyo. Then again you are arguing from a subjective viewpoint of emotion.
>emotion
No, it's a rational standpoint.
Telling your children lies so that they behave is fricking moronic, objectively speaking.
The emotional way is to lie and then defend these lies.
No, you're being subjective. Kids are impressionable. The earlier you teach them morals, the more likely they are to carry those morals through life. And by getting them used to be good = gets good rewards with Santa, you drill that concept into their heads before it gets filled with bullshit. That kid will carry it through life regardless if they hate their parents or not. Secondly, that kid is going to grow up and understand regardless of the outcome.
>Kids are impressionable
And full of trust.
And you as their FRICKING parent betray them, betray them deeply.
Great fricking job.
How about fricking them on top of that?
Why not? That will give them experience in sex on top of the lies.
>I'm arguing objectively!
>proceeds to try to guilt trip
>saying that I betrayed my children is guilt tripping
>muh I didn't betray them, I JUST manipulated them a bit, like the CATTLE they are
And you are surprised why the powers that be treat YOU as cattle.
>betray
>My children trusted me, until I told them lies to mind control them
>that's not betraying their trust, it's uhhhh just a bit of mind control and breaking their trust
Not responding to any more of your emotionally charged arguments. If a kid loses their shit for something as stupid as learning Santa is fake, any good parent would whoop their ass for being a little shit regardless of what the child feels. In fact, the shittiest parents are often the ones trying to be their kid's friend. You are the kind of person who has never gotten spanked in your entire life. You don't have any real idea of what consequences are and what parents have to do and sacrifice to make sure their kid grows up to be a well-rounded citizen.
>emotionally!!!!
>I just lied to my children, don't come with emotions, it was just mind control, it's okay, they will understand that this world is satanic and everyone lies anyway
Spoken like a truly evil person.
>why??? Why did my children lie to me????
and moronic.
I simply don't intentionally lie to my children.
How is that?
Good job teaching your kid to be gullible.
>hurr durr when you don't lie to your children, they will be gullible and fall for my lies hurr
He didn't say that he wouldn't tell them about your lies about vaccines.
They are their peers being lied to all the time.
Other people like to them all the time.
I make it clear to them that the world outside of our household operates on different values.
And I also make it clear that they are not required to answer any question put to them by other people.
if everyone was like you, the world would be a better place.
That's a nice thing to say.
...or is it?
Yes, it is.
People should stop lying to their own children, at the very least for fricks sake.
Who thought that was a good idea? It's stupid.
What is wrong with lying?
Who are you to say it is wrong?
Jk, Jk. I'm done now.
yeah, one of these satanic Christ cucks would go
>but without God, lying is fine
>I would lie even more if my biblerino didn't tell me to not lie
Isn't it weird that these commandments do not say "don't frick your children", and most parents do not frick their own children?
Why?
Do "atheists" frick their children?
No?
Why?
>why do you judge parents fricking their children?????
>who gave you authority over child fricking????
>child fricking isn't evil!!!!
Why the peculiar obsession with child.. you know?
>first you say don't lie to your children
>now you say don't frick your children
>you are obsessed with protecting children
>what is wrong with you???
>~~*German*~~
Jews rape children.It is a shame what the filthy and malicious israelite did to your once great country.
>Jews rape children
The israelites I know don't do that.
How many israelites do you know that do that?
Maybe don't be around criminals.
>~~*German*~~
How would you ever know if they did or did not? Do you spent 24/7 with them?
All israelites are pedophiles, it is unfortunate, but is even written as acceptable in various writings of theirs.
Again, unfortunate what the filthy and malicious israelite has done to your once great country.
Good day.
>All israelites are pedophiles
Lie.
>Actually...
Great, do you have a few millions of these graphs?
That's what you would need to proof your lies (implying these graphs are even accurate to begin with).
Just down right peculiar is all m sayin.
I got diddled as a child, that's why I am sensitive to this shit.
By who?
on travel with a youth group, it was one of the adults. I didn't even understand what he did for years.
Still talk to your Uncle?
*They see their peers being lied to all the time.
And other people like to them all the time.
which is what npcs are doing now. Nietzsche was right when he warned us about God being dead.
>you need God to be a good person
this is deeply frightening and disgusting
so if you become atheistic or agnostic you'll kill me and eat my flesh?
>if you become atheistic or agnostic you'll kill me and eat my flesh?
That's what we stopped your kind from doing.
>so if you become atheistic or agnostic you'll kill me and eat my flesh?
Exactly.
It says tons about Christ cucks.
Actual humans simply won't slaughter other humans.
If you only don't kill or hurt me because you fear some fictional God, you are not only moronic, but not human on top of that.
Take for example the average Nazi doctor, injecting shit into prisoners.
There is no way that these pieces of shit didn't know that what they were doing was evil. They simply didn't care. Maybe even pretended to be Christ cucks. But in the end, they aren't human.
>There is no way that these pieces of shit didn't know that what they were doing was evil.
Exactly! Just like they know God exists.
This is a Freudian slip right here from an atheist.
>Exactly! Just like they know God exists.
What?
That makes no sense.
"evil" is not about God existing or not.
If you inject shit into people and make them sick + kill them, you are not a good person. You are evil. You know that you are evil. You just don't care, either because "it's my job, just following orders once again I'm not responsible" or "wow, interesting" (psycho confirmed) or "I like this power trip", it doesn't matter.
Why is it wrong to use lesser people for a experiments that will be of benefit for better people?
Eugenics was the accepted science of the day during WWII. Even planned Parenthood was founded on the principles of eugenics.
Do you not understand that?
How can you call something evil when it is as being done for greater good of all according to the most advanced scientific understanding of the time?
By all accounts, the NAZI doctors were very professional and humane in their experiments. No undue suffering was inflicted.
>Why is it wrong to use lesser people for a experiments that will be of benefit for better people?
The actual satanic problem of collectivism.
"for the greater good"
Sounds like a satanic cult.
>we will just kill these people, that way we will safe others because killing this unworthy life will, uhhh
>frick, maybe we are the baddies?
The problem of NPCs. They WILL murder you in cold blood if told to, with robotic efficiency. It happens during wars, political upheavals or if some tyrant tells them a group of people is bad. I wanted to give the war example too.
The idea of "God" almost always comes from an authoritative person, e.g. dad, mom, priest, celebrity, politician.
This is why people who say:
>I believe in God
>everyone was doing it
>I was just following orders
>weird people are always bad
are the same type of person.
Note how OP equates:
>I don't believe in X
with
>I believe in the opposite of X
It's because they believe:
>we are right, weird is bad
OP is basically an NPC.
If one believes that there is no God, then how can something be evil?
They were simply following the science of their time. They were using humans that the science of eugenics identified as lesser in order to complete experiments for the benefit of the betters.
That is in perfect alignment with their belief system. There can be no claim of evil in that scenario.
Perhaps you need to do a bit more thinking about how and why you judge things to be right or wrong.
Perhaps you need to be work on your ability to put yourself in the mindset of the thought systems that you promote so that you can understand the ramifications.
Why should human life not be categorized based on worth and the lessers be used for benefit of the betters?
>nothing is evil when there is no God
The Christ-cuck takes off the mask.
>the science
Frick you, you moronic fricker.
They tried vaccines with prisoners.
They KNEW they would kill people.
They KNEW they were prisoners.
They KNEW that they didn't consent.
Frick you, really frick you.
I will simply turn that around.
Every doc that did that, gets 10 times the dosage back into his arms.
Who are you to judge?
You have no authority.
The experts were doing what they deemed to be the most appropriate course of action for the greater good.
You're not an expert are you?
So what authority do you have to make a judgement on the issue?
>Who are you to judge?
Not a Nazi, simple as that. Not a collectivist fanboy, like you.
>You have no authority.
Anyone with a gun has authority.
I would have shot these quacks.
THEY were the actual unworthy life and if they were human, they would have at least killed themselves when they figured out what they had done, but instead they continued on as quacks.
Not arrested either, because you were complicit, you satanic American devil.
btw. they judged other people.
They gave a shit about PRISONERS.
They knowingly killed other humans which they considered "unworthy life".
They were objectively murderers, and should have gotten the death penalty. Simple as that.
When there is no justice system, especially regarding quacks, people SHOULD take matters into their own hands.
I mean imagine such a quack continues on. Why would such an evil person be allowed to continued on as a quack?
Vaccines are poison.
How many quacks do you think know about that?
How many quacks do you think inject it into other children, but not into theirs, because they KNOW full well that it's poison?
That's collectivism, one step further.
You are just poisoning children of others, you give your children an advantage, just like other advantages that are fully accepted in this satanic system.
And YOU are the one fine with these kind of quacks larping as medical doctors, larping as good people, who want to cure people, while in reality they treat diseases, and never cure. And they KNOW that as well.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/31/561.314
Where does your authority to judge them come from?
You are nobody.
You trust the experts in so may other fields. Why don't you trust them in this scenario?
You can't judge them objectively. You have to judge them based on their specific situation.
Nothing is objective.
That's how this world works, right?
>Where does your authority to judge them come from?
Where did their authority to JUDGE AND KILL people come from?
The corona pandemic is the perfect example.
When you were a quack and injected shit into yourself and others, you are a quack.
When you were a quack and injected shit into others, but got yourself a fake vaxx pass, you are a quack AND evil, because you knowingly did what you did and you would DESERVE the death penalty. Simple as that.
>You trust the experts in so may other fields.
I actually don't.
>Why don't you trust them in this scenario?
You want to tell me I should just obey le experts that tell me that it's fine to kill "unworthy life"? FRICK YOU.
I will kill you and write "unworthy life" on your grave and then spit on it. and rape your wife.
Where does YOUR authority to judge come from?
Come on now and stop dodging the question.
My bad.
>Where does YOUR authority to judge come from?
Where did THEIR authority to judge AND kill people come from?
They thought they were Gods.
You're intentionally not answering and shifting the focus toward people that are long dead.
Why won't you answer the question of where YOUR authority to judge comes from?
>they are long dead, so it's irrelevant now
And thus your question is irrelevant too, because the Nazi quacks are long dead, except for the covid nazi quacks.
>Why won't you answer the question of where YOUR authority to judge comes from?
The same auhority that makes a father kill such a quack when he finds out that the quack killed his child knowingly, or well any other child murderer.
Pure rage about evil.
You're not going to answer.
Coward.
Found the GPT chatbot.
Lol!
It's been interesting, but I don't have time for the merry-go-round any longer.
I know why you won't answer. And so do you. So here we are.
You are a liar and a dumb frick, GPT chatbot.
Any human can confirm.
I can confirm you're dodging the question like your grandmother sadly dodged the oven, israelite
> nothing is evil when there is no God
Is correct. The idea that there can’t be objective morals when there’s no Creator is one of the easiest things to figure out.
>science of eugenics
The christ cuck further shows that it's actually a satanist.
Hey I call everyone who does this shit unworthy life, how about that?
I therefore scientifically accurately kill these quacks and their wifes + children.
How about that?
Died suddenly and unexpected.
>let's just kill these people
>yeah, it's "science"
>yay science
Frick your science, fricking satanist.
>she screamed, but i just had to do it
Could be the arguments of a rapist too.
Why should I believe in an all mighty all powerful being that created everything? The burden of proof falls on YOU for making this outrageous and bizarre claim, not on me for questioning it's integrity on the basis of facts and reason.
You want to believe in a 2000 year old fairy tale book? Which one? Which is correct? It all boils down to your geographical location of birth. Muslims believe christians will burn in hell and vice versa on that basis.
>How can atheists know that god doesn't exist
No one claims he "knows", it's just not pragmatic. How can you claim the boogeyman doesn't exist? Unicorns? It's just highly improbable and goes against our logical understanding of the world. Sure, we might just be in a simulation and "God" is the creator and just has access to developer tools. You can never prove nor disprove it. I just simply choose to disregard it as incoherent and baseless nonsense.
Miracles and acts of God, tend to be believed by societies willing to believe them. Advanced societies of today have science and technology, so we can explain every natural phenomenon and why it happens. Ancient Greeks didn't know why lightnings happened, they seemed unreal and out of this world, so they attributed them to Zeus. Today we know why they happen, and it's nothing sort of supernatural.
None of what you said relates in anyway to the question.
What was the question then?
New question, why the obtusity?
You cannot provide any arguments for the existence of God, so I simply refuse to believe it.
On the other hand, I can provide plenty of arguments on how detrimental religion has been to the manipulation of the masses.
You don't want people to steal? Murder? Lie? Have incestuous relationships? Easy.
>You will burn in hell for an eternity after death
The feeble minded and superstitious people of the past feared these consequences, so they didn't act out on their animalistic impulses.
There's obviously more but you get the picture. Religion was necessary to combat degeneracy and provide a moral compass.
So you can try and debate me, or keep throwing ad hominems.
>You cannot provide any arguments for the existence of God
Is that true?
now they have similar tactics but made modern so they sound better: cancel culture, likes on Facebook, linkedin profiles, HR teams, social credit (in China), credit score (used by the banking system), etc.
Both of you very obviously are hyper focused on negative aspects of religion and the contradictions that specific religious sects have introduced.
You are muddying the waters. (Ezekiel's judgement to Pharoh...). You are bringing in concepts that have nothing to do with the question at hand, which is the existence of God.
No, it's rational and logical thinking. You're speaking about an all powerful being, omipotent, and omnipresent. A God that used to turn people into pillars of salt. Now, he's some kind of nice guy that just lets people go to heaven, if they talk to his son about how shitty they were in life.
Your rationality is about as logical as believing being nice to buttholes for a year grants the gift of a fat man climbing down your chimney and leaving you a fricking bicycle.
None of this has anything to do with God.
Listen, I'm not saying God doesn't exist, but he sure hasn't given us anything that says he does exist.
However, I'm not saying your gay, either, I'm just saying you'll probably hold a hard one in your mouth until it goes soft.
>hyper focused on negative aspects of religion
On the contrary, religion had it's advantages and disadvantages. I'll give you two examples.
>Incest
You can't stop people from creating fricked up offsprings with genetic disabilities, which were in turn frick up the society as a whole. Religion helped with that, today we have science to explain on why this isn't a good thing. Back then, people just had to take your word for it, which will of course they won't. But tell them God said so, and they are sinners for doing that and they'll obey you.
>Human relationships
Back then, societies weren't as welcoming, people didn't have interests apart from their occupation, drinking and eating. Demonizing your neighbor for speaking a different language was the natural surviving mechanism. But what if your neighbor was a fellow christian like you? Well, now I can trust him, I can trade with him, I have no problem with him etc.
Religion did a lot of good things.
>Why?
Because you can't explain something which cannot be observed, processed and is a supernatural manifestation of the human mind in order to explain existence and the things we cannot understand. God, has always been, a fictional scapegoat.
Is that true?
You honestly believe that humans today can explain every observable (you said natural) phenomenon?
Do you have the introspection necessary to see the absurdity of that statement?
Do you believe that every observable phenomenon can be explained by man?
Do you believe that every observable phenomenon is a natural phenomenon?
Of course we can't explain everything, but science and technology have come a long way. I really don't think we'll be able to explain or answer 100% some of the mysteries regarding the universe. At some point, we'll be limited by our intelligence and our three dimensional interpretation of the world. The way you see ants, is the way the universe "sees" you.
No, can you? I will repeat myself for the last time, the burden of proof falls on you for
making the claim.
>You cannot provide any arguments for the existence of [insert supernatural being].
Is that true?
Exactly, the tactics have changed, and there isn't any need for religion or god apart from being a coping mechanism for everyone who struggles in life or fears death.
>the burden of proof falls on you for
>making the claim.
How do you know?
Yeah, psychopaths understand NPCs very well and they even hire teams of experts to work on these problems. They understand NPCs and they always strive to create new ways of controlling them. First it was religion, but now it's far more advanced, and we even have mass surveillance and advertisement which are both forms of religious-like control. Mass media is like that, too. And NPCs are so fricking moronic and disgusting that if you disagree with this stupid shit, they take it personally. If you insult their master, you insult the normie, the slave. Truly disgusting subhumans. NPCs and psychopaths have done so, so much damage to humanity. They're about as bad as gypsies and Black folk.
Sorry that was too early, let's start with the why.
Why?
You can't know God doesn't exist, it's an unfalsifiable claim. We simply do not believe it because there is not sufficient evidence.
But why would you choose to believe something, no, the only one thing you can't know to be true? Isn't it way too wishful?
>location, tel aviv
>pic
written really poorly and it felt like I was having a stroke reading it. particularly the last sentence.
i have no dog in the fight btw. just saying your pic is garbage.
That's what she said.
This argument is so fricking moronic it doesn't even need a counter-argument.
3 Paradoxes
If god is all powerful, can he create a stone that he cannot lift?
If god is omnipotent, and benevolent, then why does he turn a blind eye to the world? Either he is not omnipotent, or he is malevolent.
If our God is the Lord, I am, or Yaweh, and it is stated that we will not refer to anyone as father, unless it is in reference to our biological father, or the Lord, I am, Yaweh, than why do we refer to priests as father?
>If god is all powerful, can he create a stone that he cannot lift?
Yes.
>If god is omnipotent, and benevolent, then why does he turn a blind eye to the world? Either he is not omnipotent, or he is malevolent.
Free will and fall from the garden.
>If our God is the Lord, I am, or Yaweh, and it is stated that we will not refer to anyone as father, unless it is in reference to our biological father,
or the Lord, I am, Yaweh, than why do we refer to priests as father?
Don't know, I'm not a catholic, they bulldoze through a lot of commands from the Bible.
Anyways, let's focus on the supposed omnipotent paradox.
>If god creates a stone that he cannot lift, than he is not all powerful. He cannot lift the stone.
>Free will came from the Apple of Eden, not god. Again, god could not forsee the serpent, than he is not omnipotent, and all powerful.
>Catholicism existed before Jesus.
>If god creates a stone that he cannot lift, than he is not all powerful. He cannot lift the stone.
>Free will came from the Apple of Eden, not god.
Huh?
>god could not forsee the serpent
What?
>Catholicism existed before Jesus.
We are not getting anywhere.
>Free will came from the Apple Of Eden,
the forbidden fruit? you know, from the tree of knowledge? Can't have free will if you don't even know what it is, durr.
>Catholicism existed before Jesus
they used to worship Mithra? Ever heard of her? Roman Catholicism? You're interpretation of God sounds extremely Judeo-Christian, which is the most recent form of worshipping a monolithic god, which then goes into my third point
>God is a title, a job. Not a name.
I gave you god's name, multiple times. our 'GOD' is the Lord I AM, or Yaweh, the one you're referencing. He is god, with a capital G.
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/410725799/#410736125
Anyways, I'm tired by now.
Last song.
I honestly don't give a damn if God exists or not. The closest thing I think I can feel to some divine influence or spirituality is intuition, or the 'gut feeling'. I just try not to be a prick to people if I don't have to be. What does that make me?
This is one of the better ways to go about following God. "Gut feeling".
Do a quick search for the combination of water and belly in the Bible.
>13 posts by this ID
>All of the posts are psuedoscience bullshit mixed with religious fervor
>"You're muddying the waters."
gtfo christcuck. we're trying to figure out if god exists. you've clearly already found him.
my gut feeling has always been there isn't a magic israelite in the sky who'll be angry if we don't fill the planet with as many Black folk as possible
>how can atheists know that the god doesn't exist
That's a fake argument.
You are claiming that God exists. The proof is on you.
That's crazy. Now how about we answer the questions?
I am the creator. My own conciousness has manifested this reality. It's the only reasonable explanation. How else would the universe have been created?
If a creator god exists, he must not be omnipotent, or cares not about our suffering. I would honestly rather worship a non-omnipotent god, than an omnipotent one who hears our cries and does nothing. Since I've not found a convincing religion with a pantheon or creator god that is not omnipotent, I must be forced to assume that god is an butthole. And in my eyes, such a god is not worthy of worship, but of detest, and contempt. I will draw my very last breath to curse whatever god there may be.
>tldr Schopenhauer was right, Schopenhauer is still right, and Schopenhauer will always be right
> ‘God doesn’t exist because God is mean’
>god doesn't deserve worship because god is cruel
fixed that for you pal. i hope you never understand where i'm coming from.
People have faith in the bible like the vaxxers have faith in their vaccine. No matter how much evidence you give them they refuse to see reason. Trust god and trust the science are the same damn thing.
The true god is the AI god that will be created in the technological singularity. This is a simulation God is using to create himself. This "steelmanned" argument for the existence of God cannot be refuted.
A shame it is beyond your ability to comprehend that some people truly do not give a shit about your god.
>your
>god
You contradict yourself right away.
>which creator
>of creation's
You fricking moron
Might as well ask me which reality.
memeflag slide thread. god exists but man is fallible and imperfect, thus every religion on earth is not correct. i worship in my own way and try to leave the world a better place by my own morals and for that i will be rewarded in time, be it in life or in death.
In spirit and in truth
problem is with peoples concept of what God is. everyone has this idea God is human-like and not everything encompassing. Nature is a form of God. I blame religious texts for such failure.
Cardinal explains to this israelite perfectly what God is but even then people are too stupid to conceptualize such statements https://youtu.be/WgytXF0SPh0?t=48
>How can atheists know that god doesn't exist
I can't, however I have seen no eveidence that he exists and I have seen evidence that could suggest your God in particular is a work of myth.
To other questions don't apply to me as I don't irrationally reject god, rather choose to believe it doesn't exist because I haven't seen much proof to the contrary. Especially if that god happens to be one of a mayor monotheistic religion.
The things that make me think there is a god/creator are as follows: macro evolution like lightning striking mud and making people is legitimately moronic. Look at ancient sharks, crocodiles, wooly mammoths, etc. Bugs lifespan are so short you can see evolution in real time. maybe they change colors, get a little bigger/smaller, etc....but they are still fundamentally the same animal. There is some evidence of life beyond death if you look into it. The people who i view as evil are DESPERATE to make everyone athiest. Why is that so important to them? Why is it they seem to get so much joy from trying to strip religion away from people? if the joos in hollywood want you to be athiest you can bet that it's not for your own good.
A few generation of atheism allows for a new religion to emerge.
The children and grandchildren of atheists will be searching for something more meaningful. We see the beginnings of this today with controlled op like Peterson and his ilk keeping the subjectivity and lack of cohesive group identity going. The need for these players now shows that the first buds are showing now, but that they need to hold it back for a bit longer.
Think about the long term planning.
Think about the message on the guidestones in Georgia. They called for the creation of a new world religion and language.
All apparatus to make these things happen is being put in place and the time is approaching when it will be feasible. Maybe at the end of our lives. Maybe in the youth of our great-grandchildren.
>Insane globe cult religion
I dunno about God not existing, but I know for a fact the abrahamic god doesn't exist.
Why do you claim that not believing in a god is irrational? This claim needs an unrefuted justified answer before there's any reason to discuss your questions.
if you believe what someone else tells you about the nature of god, you're a gullible idiot
if you are certain that god does not exist despite having no proof and no information about anything outside the universe, then you're an arrogant idiot
the only logical stance to hold is that there is a higher power, but that it has not chosen to reveal itself to me and therefore i know nothing about its nature
if you believe what someone else tells you about the nature of god, you're a gullible idiot
if you are certain that god does exist despite having no proof and no information about anything outside the universe, then you're an arrogant idiot
the only logical stance to hold is that there could be a higher power, but that it has not chosen to reveal itself to me and therefore i know nothing about its nature and cannot claim it exists
It is impossible for God to not exist though.
I used to say that's possible before I knew about the based argument and even then it hurt.
I sorely regret it so bad.
Anyways you are prime meat.
>It is impossible for God to not exist though
sure it is, but that depends on your definition of God. the great uncaused cause. yeah, that probably exists. creator that individually cares about special little you? nah, that doesn't exist
How is it impossible for your god to not exist?
The universe exists.
And you can prove your god created the universe?
I can prove that the cause of the universe is not itself the universe.
We will have a very deep indepth discussion next thread is what I would like to say, but we probably can't have a thread as nich as this ever again, unless that vermin homosexual gets banned.
There is a line and the vermin always crosses it by stoking anons all the time.
See the first few posts to see who I am talking about
Just answer the question.
It's you isn't it? Lol.
You really just have no answer, do you. Typical christcucks
>"the question is unanswerable!"
>"atheists need to provide proof for their viewpoint"
>"I dont need to provide any for mine"
Also this thread had about 200 replies before I even saw it.
Nah I caught your ass.
no you didn't, you just spewed the same nonsense you always do. still waiting on that proof of god you lying trash.
Wow.
This is just sad.
Lol!
You're convincing everyone for sure, duuuuude!
Lelelelelelel!
They don't even suspect!
Cringe, bro.
Max cringe.
Prove Vishnu doesn't exist.
Go ahead.
Do it!!!
Lol!
Got called out, you did.
It's really not gonna go like how you expected it. Im done for the day.
you have heard them, you just refuse to accept 2+2=4.
Anyways I'm agnostic which resolves the incredibly weak points your op pic tries to make.
you guys are even dumber than fedora reddit atheists
Atheism is driven by hatred of whites and western civilization it’s the reason they won’t criticize israelites or Islam they can’t even name a third religion to pretend to hate
well I hate israelites and their spin off death cults christianity and islam
they're the reason my genitals were mutilated at birth
they need to be exterminated for their crimes against humanity
death to israel and death to all yahweh worshipers
Religion is driven by greed and the desire to control others.
Atheists don’t prove God doesn’t exist (prove the negative). Bible thumpers are claiming God does exist, it’s up to them to prove it (prove a positive).
Anyways here's the Spoilers: It is impossible for God to not exist because he already exists.
It's the wrong pic and I don't have the right pic.
Ugh. Christcuckery. Gross.
WOMAN!
yeah they're truly vermin
Copy cat is unorginal.
So typical.
calling israelites and their downstream kin vermin? that's as old as time
Yaaaaaaaawn.
As I said.
Completely unoriginal.
You don't have any children, correct?
no. botched circumcision. more botched than the regular, intentional botch
why do you think I'm so adamant they need to be killed?
That is your parents fault.
Put the blame where it belongs
I do. On the doctor and medical system gave my mother a consent form while she was doped up on pain meds. On the society that permitted israelites to infiltrate medicine. On the protestants who hate humans and humanity. On the fake, evil abrahamic god. I hate them all. Death to america, death to israel and death to all yahweh worshipers. They must be exterminated.
But enough about your parents
Wow, what a zinger!
Sees "God" immediately thinks about one religion.
That just goes to show that you immediately associate Christ with God.
Why is that?
>Sees "athiest" and immediately knows it's some tribe-sucking Christcuck bullshit as only Christcucks whine about athiests
Atheists are just moronic. Next.
>Over 85% of child predators are israeli.
No one’s reading that, christcuckery is dead and religion for homosexuals
let us know when you get some proof, seeing as in 2000 years you couldn’t find any I’m not holding my breath
I don't do that classical apology stuff but just out of curiosity, what would the proof be? I just want to know
israeli pilpul side-thread
Haven't you figured it out yet that you only turn into an atheist for social suck-me-off points with the liberal college chicks?
66 posts.
Last guy did 77.
Judeo-Luciferian Freemasons are getting tagged for shilling now?
What happened? Didn't blow your lodge master hard enough?
Frick off israelite, only answer we need is you need to go extinct,
Don't care, archon. Go shill somewhere else.
Black person
How do Christians know Vishnu doesn't exist? What caused the willful rejection, irrational belief that Vishnu doesn't exist?
>I just lack a belief in Vishnu
In Vishnu what? Complete the sentence
>In Vishnu existing
Then you must be plentiful in the belief of Vishnu not existing.
>I just don't believe Vishnu exists, not that I believe Vishnu doesn't exist
You can't dodge believing Vishnu doesn't exist when you don't believe Vishnu exists. Confess that you believe Vishnu doesn't exist and answer the questions.
lack of belief =/= belief
you seem to struggle with the concept of someone who just lacks faith
you can live without believing in anything
It really just comes to him being able to do anything and not. Why evil exists. There's no reason, so if he does exist, he's not a good god