So how many of you are atheists because your parents forced you to go to church on sundays?
So how many of you are atheists because your parents forced you to go to church on sundays?
So how many of you are atheists because your parents forced you to go to church on sundays?
you know when I saw that thumbnail I thought it'd be a meme about Satan forcing parents oto take their kids to church and Christ would be all like "lol whatever just believe in me okay?"
You realize how fricking disingenous that argument is when we could ask you christcucks how many of you are christians just because your parents dragged you to church on sundays instead of a mosque
>My parents forced me to go to church
>I will now completely disregard the religion all my ancestors followed and condemn myself to eternal damnation because I am too proud to accept Jesus into my heart.
>my ancestors
I didnt know you were israeli, my bad shlomo
>all my ancestors followed
ah yes, humanity was created in 324 AD
Christianity invented Western Civilisation. The Ten Commandments is our basis for Law and Morality, and Christians invented the concept of Free Will and Human Rights.
>The Ten Commandments is our basis for Law and Morality
who the FRICK keeps the sabbath day holy?
>no murder
>no theft
Do you enjoy these laws in your society? Thank Moses, The Lord God and Christianity and Repent your Sins to Jesus Christ.
>Romans didn't have any laws against murder or theft
>Neither did Egyptians
I wonder how people like you cope with your idiocy.
That's law in every society ever you dumb frick.
The Romans crucified people, killing them?
didn't the jws stone people?
That's different, God probably gave them permission or it didn't happen and your wrong.
oh yeah I forgot to think about that
thanks for reminding me
And the English hung drew and quartered them. What's your point?
Clearly murder is only wrong in Christian Society while in Rome, murder is alright.
Man, I can't believe it took me this long to realize. Godspeed anon, keep doing St. Shitposters work.
Yeah and taxation is theft, we get it moron.
Holy inquisition and religious wars (among christians too) go brrr
All ancient cultures condemned murder and theft. You are trying to portray capital punishment as "murder is allowed lol" for the people
Your pilpul comes directly from the israeli god you believe in: yahweh
> ten commandments
> morality
Ah yes, thanks to that I know that I shouldn't boil a goat in its mother's milk
Chritianity is a hodpodge of the pagan roots which created it, loosely held together by threats of violence and outright retcons. Abrahamists belong in the desert with their ilk
>pagan roots
vedas?
Yes, Atman=Bythos, we are all one in the pleroma.
I wish we had information going back even farther. I would love to see the family tree of religion going back all the way to the dawn of humanity.
It would be really fascinating, I agree. A shame we are limited to the writings and records of when people actually learned to form a language. I can only imagine what happened before that
Zoroastrianism mainly, osiris second
Canaanite polytheism too, yahweh comes from there
no wonder it's so fricking trash lmao. Anything based on israeli mythology sucks ass
>The Ten Commandments is our basis for Law and Morality
the first amendment goes against the first commandment
Christian apologists legitimately think "don't do things that disrupt public order" is unique to Christianity. Absolutely bizarre.
>Christianity invented Western Civilisation.
I would argue that Christianity helped shape western civilization, but it's certainly not the sole inventor or influence... Not by a long shot
My parents aren't Christians.
My parents were fedoras
I'm a gnostic
what does religion have to do with fedoras? if all you should be a hat as well
Underage b&
it is s a stupid insult that Christians actually thought won them debates
We are unconcerned with winning debates, for us Christians are already Winning the Trial God has Set before us, for we will be Rewarded with Eternal Life, while you will Languish in Eternal Damnation, Seperated from His Grace and Mercy.
>Winning
>Trial
>Set
>Rewarded
>Eternal Life
>Languish
>Eternal Damnation
>Seperated [sic]
>Grace
>Mercy
Do you actually have autism?
>We are unconcerned with winning debates
your actions say otherwise
When you are in Hell, Demons will strike at you with pitchforks, the Flames will lash out at you and Coals will singe your Flesh. In Heaven, I shall be kept aloft in the clouds, my every Whim and Desire satisfied by Angels of Untold Beauty. This is why I am unperturbed by your atheistis remarks, for I know that I will be having the Last Laugh.
>my every Whim and Desire satisfied by Angels of Untold Beauty
Where in the bible does it say this happens in heaven?
I don't know, but it probably does say that in The Holy Bible.
Your average 21st century Christian in a nutshell
>When you are in Hell, Demons will strike at you with pitchforks, the Flames will lash out at you and Coals will singe your Flesh
Why would an infinitely merciful God create a place like this?
All Sinners in Hell Freely Choose to go there of their own Will. Nobody in Hell is Innocent.
>infinitely merciful
I'm asking why does it exist in the first place. Why does an infinitely merciful God need an eternal fire pit to torture people?
God is not the one in need, us Fallen Humans need God. Without the Grace of God, we would Succumb to Sin and Subject ourselves to Eternal Damnation
yea but why would a merciful god create this place?
By default we go to Hell because of our Sinful Fallen Nature. It is God's Infinite Mercy which Allows us to Enter Heaven.
God is the one that created this whole system lol. If he wanted to he could've just automatically forgiven everyone instead of creating this moronic system that he allegedly did,
>my every Whim and Desire satisfied by Angels of Untold Beauty
So let me get this straight. The same actions that are sin on earth, don't count as sin in heaven?
>shall be kept aloft in the clouds, my every Whim and Desire satisfied by Angels of Untold Beauty.
Someone should be screenshotting this lmao
>Turns out when you die your heart gets devoured by Ammit.
is all I'm hearing from you
christcuck moment.
Who hurt you?
Copeity copeity cope cope cope
REPENT crossdog. ALLAH is the truth
You worship a man
About 99% of them
You forget to include all the other reasons
1. Hell is not a fun place to imagine going to while you are trying to go to sleep as a kid because you felt like you made one irredeemable mistake
2. Church IS shit
3. All the stories in the bible are so boring that they would put to sleep and the lessons are so obscure that they can be summed up as "god works in mysterious ways"
4. God generally sounds like an insecure dictator rather than someone id look up to in real life
5. Nothing that gods does adds up, its contradictory to the bone
>God generally sounds like an insecure dictator
this is the real meat and bones of it.
why would a superior being care about my worship at all?
Not Applicable.
>hell is not fun when going to sleep at night as a kid
Good. Doesn’t even require works based religion, if you let the darkness in it is your own fault. The rest of us just got saved and gave our worry to God.
>2
Depends, it about forgiveness.
> All the stories in the bible are so boring
No, I remember being a kid and thinking that Adam in the garden was my favorite story because I didn’t want to go to school and have to work for the rest of my life. I wanted to sleep like my pets, like Adam got to sleep. Notice how I started reading the Bible though despite school. As in it wasn’t something that is necessary to make it happen. I would have read it anyway, used the internet and computers anyway, without all that hardship. ng school did was add homework on top of socialization and sports. I also thought Cain and Abel was interesting, since it talks about brothers and since they are real people, not myths.
If you read further, the reading comprehension begins to go higher, but that also is intended. Since humanity’s sins gets worse with all the wars with Pharoah and all the evil kings that wanted to fight Israel. Those chapters are like reading a WW2 movie. Then Rome becomes stronger than Israel and they become evil so Jesus is sent. Supposed to start with the New Testament and Jesus Christ though. It is miraculous if a child starts reading the whole thing from a young age. Proverbs is too hard to understand for most at a young age. Ezekiel and Revelation are also way too hard till later. But Jesus casting miracles was exciting, Which only gets more appreciative as the years go by and you wish to have those powers too. Jonah and the whale is also interesting for a child because a big whale and being swallowed is something you might think or wonder about. About the only stories that talk about being swallowed and surviving is going to be mostly fiction. Don’t say Harry Potter or Marvel are more interesting, they are not.
>its an 8 year old kids fault if they let fear of eternal torture dominate them, children must all be badass and fearless
You homosexuals will use just about any argument no matter how silly it is
It sounds like you were bad kid. Also a homosexual calling God’s believers a homosexual. Gets more interesting day by day.
Your reasoning is really bad first of all. Murderous shits is like calling America murderous shits for winning ww2.
No, as long as the israelites obeyed God, it would have been able to do what it wants with Rome.
Just like God only sent 300 to kill the midionites.
>Your reasoning is really bad first of all. Murderous shits is like calling America murderous shits for winning ww2.
I'm not calling them murderous shits for fighting wars, I call them murderous shits for the exaltation of genocide and duplicitous murder found in their holy books, alongside what they claim to have done to the original inhabitants of the levant. As for your point, this country is almost definitely full of murderous shits, and the years right after the war proved it.
>No, as long as the israelites obeyed God, it would have been able to do what it wants with Rome.
>Just like God only sent 300 to kill the midionites.
What about the 400,000 he sent to kill the Benjaminites with only 20,000 men are their disposal who faced heavy losses despite the Israelites waiting until they got God's permission (in fact they asked before they even started) to uphold his laws?
Yeah no, I said for winning ww2, stay on subject. Are you saying you love Hitler? Are you a nazi? Should I report you to the authorities? Who am I talking with?
The points you make about the Old Testament being completely evil reveal you have not ever really thought about it, ever been put in the same situations, and likely never will because you aren’t God’s child. If you ever do want to be His child, God will definitely bring you to all that and you are going to shit your ever loving pants that you ever doubted God. He is God and you are a super trannified homosexual because you don’t understand how different things were back then. You just sit in a air conditioned building, take your welfare check from the government, and ride the bus to work or whatever it is you do.
>Yeah no, I said for winning ww2
And I'm telling you that your analogy doesn't work because that's not the reason I'm calling them murderous shits. I'm doing so because they acted the exact same as the nations you claim were evil, and in many cases even worse.
>The points you make about the Old Testament being completely evil reveal you have not ever really thought about it,
>Are you a Nazi
I don't hate israelites though, I hate their religion. It's a fun meme to shit on them because they're so easily demonized, but let's be real, there are like 10 million of them in the world, I don't give enough of a shit to think about them that much. What is a fact however is that their Religious book is filled with some of the most abhorrent doctrines in world history barring communism and tribal practices.
How was it punishment though? The Israelites were being very pious, fulfilled God's wishes to a T, and didn't abandon him at all. Literally what were they being punished for? He even gave them success in their venture anyway, so why even make a point that "if the israelites obeyed God they'd win" clearly that isn't the case.
>so easily demonized
No, you look like a fricking nazi right now. Shut the frick up.
Their religious book? I’m talking about the Old Testament in the Bible. Speaking of old torture practices, they used to tie your jaw shut and cut off the tongue. It would prevent you from revealing more foolishness out of your dumb brain.
:
The benjaminite war was punishment for the Israelites that is why God allowed them to lose and told them to attack and they only died more and more till they were destroyed. Stop questioning God when you don’t understand Him.
I mean, who are you gonna trust,? Doesn’t Benjamin sound like a nice name? Isn’t that one of the 12 tribes? We also have the book of judges begin with a warning that God is very upset with the Israelites and has dispensed judges to hold back their suffering so that they can maybe pull things together, but the Lord says it displeases him further because they do things evil in his sight and begin worshiping the false gods and idols with the heathen, instead of like Joseph who once ran the heathen off the same roads they now bow down to them on.
Are you seriously trying to argue that children are sinless angels? Why shouldnt i call you a homosexual when every thing you christians say is moronic? Your mouth is more productive sucking a dick, you have nothing of worth to say
Anon you have never thought about that some people are pagans and hell scares them often into getting saved because they’ve never heard about it and they don’t want to go there.
While others are born into a saved household and the children are already saved because of being with believers already. Even saved children are bad but they know they are saved so the fear of hell is cast out because of knowing of being saved.
Hence, it is better to be told about hell and be spared through salvation than to go there over not hearing.
How the hell would anyone know whether they were born into a saved religion? People just go along with the first thing introduced to them, very few people convert to anything. Should they convert to islam which burns non-believers or christians which burns non-believers or should they stick with their own religion which probably burns non-believers too, what about the thousands of other religions? Its madness that god expects humans to come to a proper decision
Try to find a religion that's actually monotheistic and you're already limited with very few choices left, not including christianity.
But how would you know to filter out the polytheistic religions? There could be many gods, how does god expect us to know? Are we supposed to intuitively understand that there is only one god? Why were the greeks perfectly fine with believing a polytheistic religion then? God should know that humans are terrible decision makers and shouldnt expect us to make the right decision with this problem
>Are we supposed to intuitively understand that there is only one god?
Yes.
>God should know that humans are terrible decision makers and shouldnt expect us to make the right decision with this problem
He never expected or wanted everyone to do it, that's why we have free will. You see, as long as you don't lie about God, trust idols blindly, indulge in falsehood, refrain from doing good, and similar things you shouldn't have many problems in the hereafter.
That's what I meant, not including christianity because it isn't monotheistic. When you use the word "they" to speak of who you worship you should sense a problem somewhere.
Well guess, none of the polytheistic religion believers felt that there religion was wrong, they were stamped out of by monotheistic religions forcefully. Humans have no such intuition
You still didnt tell me why the greeks had no problem believing a polytheistic religion if its supposedly intuitive. Did they all collectively decide to be wrong? Why would they do that?
People collectively delude themselves all the time, because conformity and peer-pressure are such powerful tools (which can be used for good, but seldom are). God looks for free-thinkers, doubters, people who won't bend the knee to idols because they want to remain fully human and not debase their fundamental dignity. If you worship multiple beings, you're like a slave that belongs to several masters, always wondering which one you should obey, and not satisfying any of them. That's just one example of what's wrong with polytheism, there are many others.
So you agree that god knows most of us fall to peer pressure, that we will generally choose the wrong religion because of that, right? Why does he punish us for that? He made us that way. Besides, the "free thinkers" STILL have to choose between multiple monotheistic religions that all have the same amount of proof supporting them, even they are essentially playing a lottery
Are smart people supposed to think that an infinitely merciful god would create an eternal torture chamber? Really?
>Why does he punish us for that?
Because lying about God is the highest kind of lie you can utter.
>He made us that way.
We are weak, but we can become strong. God wants strong, hopeful followers, not people who wallow in despair and sadness.
>STILL have to choose between multiple monotheistic religions that all have the same amount of proof supporting them
Not really. You see the Bible even blasphemes God, saying he can't beat chariots of iron.
>"And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron."
If people actually read the Bible and stop deluding themselves, they'd at least stop ascribing inerancy to it. Would you worship a God who creates human beings and wants them to be mutilated at 8 days, changing the structure of the brain he created originally (picrel)? That doesn't make any sense, and israelites (who always try to pass as deep thinkers) have poor justifications for such problematic things in their religion. Now you'll say islam also has questionable things, but I tell you that you're supposed to do your homework, study the holy book and the world, and come up with answers that satisfy your thirst for objective truth. Just because everyone else follows whatever religious scholars are saying doesn't mean you're supposed to. You see even Jesus didn't explain everything to believers at the time
>When Jesus came with clear proofs, he declared, “I have come to you with wisdom, and to clarify to you some of what you differ about.
Here's a command from God to exercise critical thinking
>And follow not that of which you have no knowledge! The hearing, the sight and the mind shall all be questioned thereon
Hell and heaven can be speculated upon. Maybe hell is metaphorical, maybe it's literal, or a bit of both, anyway you're supposed to be motivated to not go there and go to Heaven instead.
I'd theorise that polytheism isn't the default religion of primitive peoples and that it arises as a result of civilised (or at least expansionist) societies amalgamating large amounts of tribes into one community so all their different ways of worshipping God and names for God simply become mythologised into different gods in one pantheon.
But any nation that starts seriously philosophising about the origin of this world comes to some kind of monotheism. Even Hinduism comes down to one God when you really get down to it. This is especially evident with the Greeks, where you had philosophers like Aristotle refuting polytheism long before Jesus was even born.
>Christianity
>Actual monotheism
Christians be like
>Yup, I only see one God here.
>If you read further, the reading comprehension begins to go higher, but that also is intended. Since humanity’s sins gets worse with all the wars with Pharoah and all the evil kings that wanted to fight Israel.
Why is that evil? The Israelites were a bunch of murderous shits just like everyone else, and it's not like God showed up to their people to tell them "hey, these guys are different, I'll hit you with those Egyptian plagues if you invade them ever".
>Then Rome becomes stronger than Israel and they become evil so Jesus is sent.
Rome was, at basically every point in it's history after the monarchy, stronger than Israel.
>my favourite stories from the bible were literally the first two pages
Somehow I doubt you read it.
It’s called context. I was revealing events that unfolded from a young age of reading the Bible, and how it made me feel in a positive way towards God, but negative towards the world. Leave it to some self-righteous troll to take what is only natural out of context.
Is it a sin to read the Bible, charlatan?
>4.
Actual dictators don’t sound anything like my God.
>5.
You didn’t read it.
Moses splits the Red Sea, Jesus walks on water.
>Hell is not a fun place to imagine going to while you are trying to go to sleep as a kid because you felt like you made one irredeemable mistake
Go to confession
Protestants dont believe in that.
Get a boner-> go to hell
Its a good thing these North American "Christian" sects are imploding right now.
>Church IS shit
Did Jesus not say that a church is unnecessary, as one could turn a rock and He is there? I'm not an Abrahamic but if I were I'd prefer to read the holy books myself and draw conclusions from there. Would not give my money to a church to mismanage and embezzle.
>turn a rock and He is there
That's from an apocrypha.
And how do we know that this book is actually apocryphal? How do we know that there isn’t an apocryphal book in the current popular version of the Bible?
>1
As a side note has anyone realised how heaven is not described in Christianity at all compared to hell? Probably because eternal peace is a pretty horrifying idea too, almost as bad as eternal suffering.
Imagine how good this board could be if propaganda-peddling israelites were banned
>the cosmological argument from contingency
> the kalam cosmological argument based on the beginning of the universe.
>the moral argument based upon objective moral values and duties
>the teleological argument from fine-tuning
>the ontological argument from the possibility of God’s existence to his actuality
Christ has Risen
Hallelujah. Jesus Is the Lord. Christ is King. Glory be to God for all things. atheists are cuckholds
>special pleading
>special pleading again
>Euthyphro dilemma
>selection bias
>wishful thinking
>Doesnt understand the fine-tuning argument
What's the name of your god? Is it yahweh?
Do you have a source that jesus was actually the son of god?
It was revealed to me in a dream unironically
It was Revealed to us by The Holy Bible that the Eternally Begotten Jesus descended from his Throne in the Heavens to the Earth to Bestow upon us the Gift of Salvation and Eternal Life because He is the Son of God.
How do you know the bible is true?
The Holy Bible is Authored by God.
How do you know it is authored by god and not the devil?
Because The Holy Bible Confirms it was Authored by God.
The bible confirms that god is the author of the bible, and that's why the bible is true? That's circular logic.
I'm going to enjoy looking down at you atheists boiling in Hell from my vantage point in Heaven alongside God and Jesus.
>gets fooled by the devils bible
>thinks he is going to heaven
Lol lmao
The Holy Bible is God's Word, and God never Lies because He is Omnibenevolent.
And you know this because the bible told you. Of course.
While you are burning in Hell, you will look up at me in Heaven. Your throat will be parched, and I will be holding a chalice of the most pristine water. You will beg for this water, and I will look down upon you and tell you "no" before drinking all that water in one big gulp while you are suffering in eternal damnation, ignorant stubborn atheist.
Have you ever converted anyone to your religion with your cringy power fantasies?
Least irrational christcuck.
That doesnt sound very christian-like at all. Sounds damn sinful actually
>muh not real christianity
This is 100% just a new form of the fedora and katana nothing personnel kid internet weirdo.
Christianity on IQfy is literally just "U MAD". That's why it took off here, it's a way to be as cancerous a homosexual as possible with a sense of self-righteousness.
christians on IQfy seethe at imaginary atheists (a tiny minority) but are scared to death of debating muslims kek
>Loses an argument
>Starts having a schizo episode
Do christcucks really?
I accept your concession.
Based and Christpilled
What if the devil was pretending to be god? Whats stopping him from writing a book to mislead people away from god?
that's literally what happened btw
We have no records of early christianity. Satan wiped it out and wrote the bible and replaced it, condemning christians who follow lies and sin straight to hell
That certainly wasn't the reason I stopped believing in God.
Church played a key social fuction in my life that made me happy.
I've actually gone back to church in bad faith because of this.
It's such a comfy enviroment.
>haha infinite mercy goes brrr
I approve of this meme. The more people see how cringy christianity actually is, the better.
My parents are the biggest fedora tippers I know.
>infinite mercy
You rejected it
Hecdoesn't want to force it on you
>either accept my infinite mercy or burn forever in Hell
This doesn't make any sense on a fundamental level. Hell's existence destroys any argument of God's infinite mercy. Hell makes God look more like a threatening tyrant that demands worship from his subjects or he will make you suffer for eternity.
>I want to bask in Sin and Degeneracy for my entire life and then be Gifted Eternal Life for my Misdeeds.
Not how it works. You must live according to the Bible or Perish.
>he wants to defy the laws of kim jung un and be gifted with a happy satisfied life
Not how it works. You must live according to the laws of North korea or perish
Not the Same. North Korea is a Man-made atheist abomination which stands in contrarirance with God's Beautiful Works. Christianity is the Cornerstone of Western Civilisation.
White People are the cornerstone of Western Civilization. Literally every single aspect of Christianity worth while derived from Greco-Roman philosophy or Germanic martial culture.
Jesus did not come from the world. He is Eternally Begotten by His Father and it is His Sacrifice which gives Value and Worth to all aspects of Western Civilisation.
>I put Capital letters Randomly because People won't Take me Seriously if I Don't
What a pompous homosexual.
If you think my capitalisation is random, and not a means to Pay Respects to the Highest and Kingliest of All Beings, God and Jesus Christ, then you are Lost. God has Allotted you only a limited amount of time on this Earth, Use it or Perish in Eternal Damnation.
>Pay
>Lost
>Allotted
>Use
>Perish
>Damnation
Yeah, these capitalisations totally aren't random. Take your meds, schizo troonitarian.
People are lost in a forest or a shopping center. You are Lost because you have Rejected Him. Learn the Difference, atheist.
>the highest of all beings
>names two beings
You can't make this shit up.
I'm a muslim, kafir, you're the disbeliever here. And know that even if you believe it a way to pay respect to God, it still makes you look like the pompous homosexual you actually are.
If Jesus was really the son of God his "sacrifice" wouldn't have even been a big deal for him. A demigod died for 3 days but then resurrected himself and now he lives with his father/self in paradise forever. It's like he had one bad weekend of pain throughout his entire life but it's seen as this ultimate sacrifice that we aren't worthy of.
It's like a frat boy going to Africa on a mission, getting his arm chopped off, getting it reattached with no issues, and then claiming all Africans should bow down to him for his sacrifice. Christianity is dumb as frick.
You didn't answer him. Hell disproves that yahweh is all-merciful since he doesn't grant mercy
Most christians in my country don't ever go to church and don't read the bible. They sin daily too (premarital sex, greed, sloth, anger, envy)
All of them are going to hell despite worshiping yahweh
>infinite mercy
>but only if you believe in and submit to the ravings of anonymous mad desert dwelling israelites who wrote a book full of contradictions about another israelite who supposedly was the creator of the universe
In other words, it ain't infinite mercy
My grandmother was a pastor who held church for our family and regularly appeared as a guest at churches around where we lived.
Despite my enthusiastic attitude towards the whole thing, I came to realize as I grew older that I never felt a spiritual connection to any of it. I loved the music, I loved the stories, I loved the people. But I never believed in god in the first place.
Well I'm not. My parents are atheistic. They told me I could go to church if I wanted to but that they weren't interested.
I'll flip the question. How many of you are Christians to protect your fragile ego and LARP as holier than thou after years of porn addiction, drug- and alcohol abuse and whatever other degeneracy you have indulged in?
>Christcucks admitting their services and synagogues suck so much that they actively repel people
>this is supposed to own apostates
If Jesus sacrificed himself for my sins then why does it matter if I sin or not? His sacrifice means I can't be punished for anything I do.
Yeah it takes a bit of mental gymnastics to understand it. But it helps to realize that if it's a soundbite they repeat, then it's not what they really mean.
For this instance, when they say jesus sacrificed himself for your sins, they are talking about the absolution jesus performed for eves sin. Before he did that, every human being regardless of anything they ever did themselves was hellbound because eve ate a fricking apple. So now, every human born after the absolution has their sin judged based purely on their own self and actions.
That's Catholic doctrine, which makes a distinction between original sin and personal sin.
Protestants have almost as many views as many views as denominations, from total depravity as a result of original sin to Jesus' sacrifice absolving all sin.
I know, I was raised in a protestant family. Only later being exposed to the catholic canon. It's the exact same shit. Every christian denomination believes in original sin / personal sin. Except for that one specific outlier you're going to find to prove me wrong.
Most Calvinist churches make no distinction: it's all original sin.
I wouldn't call that "one specific outlier"
>calvanists
>not a specific outlier
shiggy
Yeah, whatever homosexual, I guess a major branch of Christianity is just as unrepresentative of the faith as the reformed unitarian Skoptsy church of transblack Jesus.
How could I have made such an obvious mistake.
>calvinists
>major branch
s
h
i
g
g
y
>is just as unrepresentative of the faith as
Is it not enough for you to get an answer that validates your complex? You need to pull some absolute nonsense out of your gaping anus to make extra triple double sure you feel like you won?
I really don't know what your problem is.
I gave you an example of churches not following the personal sin/original sin doctrine, who are by no means a marginal group, thus disproving your point that only "one specific outlier group" doesn't follow that doctrine.
Lutherans and others also don't follow that doctrine.
I don't know why this fact that the idea of a distinction between original and personal is widespread but not even close to universally believed among Christian doctrine makes you so mad that you can't write a proper response.
>I really don't know
Biblical jesus isn't even real, he's a fictionalized version of a israeli dude
jesus ben ananias was a historical figure
Josephus, in his work "The Wars of the israelites," tells us of a preacher named Jesus ben Ananias whose life had a remarkable amount similarities to the biblical character's:
>Both are named Jesus
>Both come to Jerusalem during a major religious festival.
>Both entered the temple area to rant against the temple.
>During which both quote the same chapter of Jeremiah.
>Both then preach daily in the temple.
>Both declared ‘woe’ unto Judea or the israelites.
>Both predict the temple will be destroyed.
>Both are for this reason arrested by the israelites.
>Both are accused of speaking against the temple.
>Neither makes any defense of himself against the charges
>Both are beaten by the israelites
>Then both are taken to the Roman governor.
>Both are interrogated by the Roman governor.
>During which both are asked to identify themselves.
>And yet again neither says anything in his defense.
>Both are then beaten by the Romans.
>In both cases the Roman governor decides he should release him.
>….but doesn’t (Mark)….but does (JW)
>Both are finally killed by the Romans (in Mark, by execution; in the JW, by artillery).
>Both utter a lament for themselves immediately before they die.
>Both die with a loud cry.
Gospel writers borrow this other Jesus's story to create their own fictional jesus in the bible. Mithras too
I'm am beyond atheist, aka to me a christian is basically looks like a qaint zoo animal, and atheists sperging out about "how can you believe in X" to me look like the kids I'd slap for poking an innocent bonobo with a stick.
t. Family never talked about religion and the closest I was to religious trauma was when I was ashed that me fapping will make santa put me on the naughty list and not give presents
In most cases I’m poking the bonobo with a stick to show other atheists that it is in fact a bonobo by stimulating their behavioral response.
Sometimes I’m just doing my own bonobo research
Then there's me, humming hyms and being amazed that people thought I was literally thanking god when using the expression.
>So how many of you are atheists because your parents forced you to go to church on sundays?
OP is mocking atheists. If he didn't want atheists debating in his thread he shouldn't have called them out like that. This was all started by a bonobo challenging the kids to poke him. Don't act like Christians are never the ones to initiate a debate with atheists.
I've yet to encounter an atheist whose position was based on anything but emotion.
>I just like, FEEL God in my heart bro
Theists are incredibly feminine. Their belief is wholly predicated on emotion lmao
Your worldview doesn't even allow reason to exist. Miss me with that shit lol
Christians:
> there has to be a god, something can't come from nothing bro!!!
Also Christians:
> nobody created my god, he's eternal and always existed bro!
At least atheists admit when they don't know something. Theists just prescribe anything they don't know to muh God without realizing that the list of things that have been ascribed to God's will or actions is shrinking by the day.
Disney Lion King moron tier:at least Scar doesn’t believe in anything, he should be king.
Mufasa, Simba, believe in the light and good things which can’t be proven so they should just stop.
Is this Liberal McDonald World Debates? I love debates of this tier. I used to play the snes game which was actually pretty hard but beat it.
What reasoning did you use to come to that conclusion?
I asked first, but my moral perceptions are based on the standards established in the divine character. Do you mind answering the question? I'm offering to engage this issue in good faith.
The entire basis of your belief is emotion lol. Why do conservatives project like this so hard? There is literally no good reason to believe in a god in general, never mind one in particular.
This is how I feel about theists. When you guys are really pressed about the contradictions in your belief that don't make any logical sense you just do some mental gymnastics to dance around it to avoid actually answering the question. I still never got a real answer for why an infinitely merciful God would create Hell.
All right, let's talk about that. What is your basis for believing that God is infinitely merciful and what exactly do you mean by that term? I've got time, let's sort this out.
I’m not that dude but Hell is completely unjustifiable in 99% of cases. It’s totally immoral that a dude can lead a normal life with normal mistakes and get sent to hell because he swore a bunch and lied a few times. Eternal torture for shit like that is just moronic and only religious people could even attempt justify something like that.
What are you basing your moral perceptions on? In other words, what aspect of your worldview justifies your moral perceptions?
Not some bullshit from a book from some fairy tale deity who claims homosexuality is evil while at the same time ordering the massacres of women and children, that’s for sure.
In my day to day lift I just try not to be an butthole and do as few things as possible that hurt other people. Do I frick up sometimes and offend others or say some shit I regret in anger or sadness or whatever? Of course. So does everyone. Do we deserve to be eternally tortured for it? No, and any belief system that says we do is moronic and indefensible.
Would you deserve to go to heaven if you got saved and kept on sinning? Would you consider that a reasonable expectation?
If all you're going to give me are insults and opinions, we're not going to get very far. If you complain about theists not giving you reasonable answers and then act like this, I'm afraid there's not much I can do for you.
well assuming there is an afterlife and a god, there should be some sort of punishment for bad/evil deeds done on earth. If I scammed everyone I knew in life, a just god and judge would not let me get away with it without some sort of punishment.
However, note the “bad/evil deeds” part. Part of the reason Christianity is dumb aside from the total lack of evidence and ridiculous claims is that its god bans and/or punishes totally arbitrary shit (homosexuality, mixing fabrics, etc.) while at the same time ordering and doing things that if done by literally any other god or person Christians would universally condemn as evil and rightfully so. I’m not gonna follow a religion that says my gay friend is going to hell for marrying a dude while at the same time extolling the virtues and goodness of a god that murdered the first born of Egypt for the sins of their ruler and ordered the massacres of children.
Part of the point of Christianity is that being a "good person" isn't enough to save you. Paul even said that if righteousness could be gained through the Law, then Christ died for nothing (Galatians 2:21). Instead of being expected to work for it, you're literally being offered a completely free pass. Imagine you're completely destitute, totally broke, and one day I pull up in front of your home with a flatbed truck stacked with pallets of cash and a deed to a beautiful homestead, yours for the taking. You really gonna b***h and moan about how broke you are and how you'll die broke if I don't save you?
The difference is that I can actually see the truck driver and the “salvation” that he’s offering me. The truck driver isn’t delivering his message to me through a book composed of scripts and letters written over hundreds of years that makes blatantly false and ridiculous claims about the world. He also isn’t claiming to torture 99.9% of people who ever existed for not believing in him with no evidence.
And I don’t think the issue is whether or a particular individual is a “good person.” Overall, other than sick fricks line Adolf Hitler or Ted Bundy there’s really no justification for eternal torture. I know for a fact if it were up to you, you would not have people who transgressed against you tortured forever because you’re not a psycho.
We're back to your opinions and that classic anti-Christian hyperbole. I'm not interested, dude. I think the reason why you've never gotten a "real answer" is that you don't want one, aren't ready for one, and wouldn't recognize one if it presented itself. You are, like all atheists, completely unequipped for this. You need the Holy Spirit to work in your heart so you can get out of this funk you're in. You're like a child pouting in his room because daddy sent you to bed without dessert. Nevermind he's been feeding and clothing and sheltering you your entire life. It's time to grow up, folks. God loves you and he's offering you a way, and he's so merciful that he's going to let you continue to sin and fight him in the hope that, eventually, you'll figure it out.
We’ll I’m not the initial guy you were replying to.
And again, he was exactly correct. You’ve danced around the issue of ETERNAL torture and the fact that there is literally no reason to believe your religion over any of the others. Your god refuses to appear (despite doing so in the past apparently), refuses to do anything about the evils in the world, refused to save the hundreds of millions of people who have died horrible deaths from disease and disaster and famine over the millennia. Despite this, he demands compete and utter subservience and threatens anyone who doesn’t comply with eternal torment. Those are not the actions of a good being, those are the actions of a total psychopath.
And again, if it were up to you, you would not have imposed such a moronic system. You would not condemn your son to eternal torture just because he didn’t obey you. If you yourself would not do this and find it repugnant, why would you worship a being that does the same?
Please cite the relevant passages of scripture to support your claims.
Numbers 31:14-18
> Moses was angry with the officers of the army--the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds--who returned from the battle. 15 "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. 16 "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
Essentially sex slavery + the murder of women and male children.
Joshua 6: 20-21
> 20 When the trumpets sounded, the army shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the men gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so everyone charged straight in, and they took the city. 21 They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.
Massacre of the entire city of Jericho.
The laughable flood and the killing of the first borns of Egypt don’t need citation, I’d hope.
>the killing of the first borns of Egypt
The way people just skim over this always blew my mind.
They skim over a lot of things, including "God" not being able to defeat chariots of iron, my personal favorite.
>the bible was written by brandon sanderson
It's all starting to add up now.
I'll admit, it's difficult to address those specific examples without getting into a lot of context. However, atheism provides no alternative moral foundation, so I don't know how you can claim that sex slavery and genocide are evil or bad. They obviously are, but not if atheism is true.
I certainly do believe that God's mercy is as infinite as he is. OP's image isn't scripture, though. It's important to know that hell is not eternal fire. This is one of the problems with most of the English translations of the Bible. When Jesus refers to hell's fire in verses like Mark 9:43, he's using Gehenna, which was basically the giant burn pit for garbage outside of Jerusalem, to illustrate a point. The Bible describes hell in various ways and is often talking about different actual things in the original languages, all of which end up getting translated as "hell" in English. As far as the place/state the unsaved enter after the world ends, that hell is really just absolute separation from God. Right now, even in your sinful state, you're still being cared for and sustained by God in a general sense. If you decide you still hate God by the time you die, he'll grant your wish and leave you alone. Since he's the actuality of all good things (love, life, justice, truth, etc.) you'll find yourself without those things completely. What you'll actually be left with is nothing but yourself. God won't be torturing you for eternity, you will.
>without getting into a lot of context
Translation: I can't defend that shit, it's exactly as bad as it looks.
Well, take the one from Numbers, for example. For one thing, you'll note that it was Moses who gave the specific command to kill the women and boys and all that. Earlier in the chapter, in verse 2, God tells Moses simply to take vengeance on the Midianites. How the Israelites were to carry out that command seems to be left up to them. This anger Moses demonstrated is a pattern with him, and actually is the thing that ends up getting him in trouble enough that he's prevent from entering Canaan.
Ah I see, so it wasn't gods fault :/
>However, atheism provides no alternative moral foundation
golden rule?
>inb4 christianity created it
okay, and?
>if atheism is true.
This is how I know you don't understand what atheism is. Do you think that atheists walk around denying the existence of religion? No, we just say that people created it. That doesn't mean morality is subjective, it just means we observe a different origin for it. That is, the evolutionary development of human temperament.
You fundamentally misunderstand atheism as a belief
Atheism is not a belief, it is the exact opposite
Atheists look at the world and see the world
Theists look at the world and see the work of something not of the world
You're just one more in a long line of atheists who've taken it upon themselves to define atheism as it seems to you in the moment. Color me unimpressed.
What you're describing is opinion and preference, not morality. You may not like sex slavery or genocide, but there's really no problem with them if atheism is true. It doesn't mean morality is subjective, you're right. It means morality doesn't exist at all.
>What you're describing is opinion and preference, not morality.
You didn't read what I wrote. Please refrain from bad faith responses in the future. Evolutionary pressures, beyond the control of a humans subjective whims, are not opinions and preferences...
>but there's really no problem with them if atheism is true.
Wrong, they're not conducive to a stable civilization. What more reason do you need to call them bad.
>It means morality doesn't exist at all.
No, it means morality is based on reality and not a god.
I did read what you wrote and then I responded to it in a way that you don't like. Sorry, I guess.
Okay then. Defend the position that evolutionary pressures are opinions and preferences. You can't just say that like it's a given.
How could it be otherwise? Without an objective, outside source that applies equally to everyone, all you have a personal perceptions. My physical brain is the result, on your worldview, of a specific evolutionary line, completely distinct from anyone else's. Literally all I have, at that point, are my own perceptions and the opinions that proceed from them.
I'm not downplaying it at all. I'm trying to clarify your misconceptions. If the child refuses the father's offer and returns to his room, is the father punishing the child or is the child punishing the child?
>an objective, outside source that applies equally to everyone
EVOLUTIONARY PRESSURES
Why are you ignoring those words, do you have a filter or something?
>My physical brain is the result, on your worldview, of a specific evolutionary line, completely distinct from anyone else's.
No, according to evolution your physical brain is the result of... wait for it... objective, outside sources that applied to all life throughout time creating distinct GROUPS of SIMILAR life forms.
The child refuses to clean his room because he's a little kid that doesn't want to do his chores. It's normal for kids to misbehave sometimes. What would be unthinkable is for his dad to now punish him for the rest of his life for something he did as a child. This is the only way your analogy makes sense based on an infinite punishment for a brief lifespan of sins.
> without getting into a lot of context
What possible context could justify the slaughter of children and basically everyone except virgins? That is literal genocide and sex slavery that Christians defend. If Genghis Khan did that you’d rightfully call him a monster and tyrant, but all of a sudden when it’s sanctioned by your god it’s a grey area?
> atheism provides no moral foundation
There doesn’t HAVE to be objective morality. Who says there does? Even if there isn’t, most atheists agree that slaughtering children and sex slavery are grave evils permissible under no circumstances. Christians apparently do (and MUST) believe that it is acceptable under certain conditions despite the fact that they claim that atheists don’t have a foundation to claim those acts are evil. I’d go with the belief system that doesn’t condone those things ever.
As for the stuff about translations, you may very well be correct. However, this adds another layer of ridiculousness to the religion. Why did God choose this method of communication that’s so vulnerable to and rife with mistranslations, contradictions, and uncertainties? Shit, most people who have ever lived were not able to read. Who is to say that they weren’t taught bullshit by self-serving literate leaders and condemned to hell through no fault of their own?
Am I supposed to learn Greek, Aramaic, and ancient Hebrew to understand the most important message I could ever know? Nobody had time for that shit.
You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. Either there is some objective moral standard by which to evaluate things like sex slavery or there isn't. If there isn't, you've lost any justification for opposing anything God or anyone else does. We're back to your opinions which, no offense, don't matter.
Do you agree that those things are immoral?
Define immoral on the basis of your worldview.
Lol you’re dancing around the question again.
As for me, I’d say immorality is that which causes unnecessary harm and destruction. Shooting a random person is wrong; shooting the attacker to save the innocent is not.
Do you think that Christianity is the only worldview or belief system that holds genocide and sex slavery to be wrong? Of course not, it didn’t even exist before 2000 years ago.
No, I'm literally asking you for a definition for a term you're using. Now that you've defined your term I'm going to ask you to justify it on the basis of your worldview. If you're going to b***h and moan, go ahead and ignore the question. If you'd like to have a grown-up conversation, let's proceed.
I don’t like to endure pain and suffering, most people don’t like to endure pain and suffering. If we’re gonna exist as a social species, we should build towards that which causes the least unnecessary and misery. Should I steal from my neighbour just because I want something he has? No, because I wouldn’t want someone to do that to me (not an exclusively Christian concept) and because allowing that would lead to total chaos and the breakdown of society.
Now I'm going to ask you a question that seems obnoxious but is not intended to be. So, what? You're talking preferences and opinions. Why should thieves, murderers, and anarchists sacrifice their own opinions and preferences just so you can live and enjoy yours?
If you’re speaking in metaphysical terms, they have no cosmic, ultimate concrete reason not to do so. However, when the majority of the rest of people desire to not have their shit taken away, you can characterize their behaviour as deviant and therefore worthy of reproach and punishment.
Worthy of reproach and punishment according to you and maybe some other people who agree with you. Doesn't matter. And there's no real punishment for those who don't feel like submitting to your arbitrary viewpoints. I promise I'm not trying to be mean, but this is why I say atheists have no justification for their moral perceptions, let alone objections against God. By your own characterization of things, you have your opinions and preferences and that's as far as it goes. Don't be surprised when people like me let you know that we don't find that particularly compelling or worthwhile.
Well I never claimed that morality is objective or comes from some moral source. We both agree that wanton genocidal slaughter and sex slavery is abominable evil (I’d fricking hope so, at least).
However, you claim that the Christian morality is the basis for this belief despite the fact that you must believe that they are acceptable under some circumstances (because God sanctioned it) and the fact that you’d condemn that type of behaviour if done by another person or group or commanded by any other deity. That makes no sense.
If we both believe that these things are wrong, Christianity is the last religion you should flock to considering it happened and was sanctioned by God. That’s not to mention the chattel slavery also condoned in the Bible.
That homosexuality and mixing fabrics and eating shellfish are banned but genocidal sex slavery is completely laughable.
Now here's where I'm going to take a detour. I'm not trying to duck the moral question, because it's important, but since we've established that the atheist (or naturalist if you like) worldview cannot justify objective morality, there's another element of the fundamental difference between our viewpoints that I have to bring up. In the same way that your worldview fails to establish a foundation for the existence of morality, it likewise fails to establish a basis for the existence of logic. We can argue all day about the problem of evil, how a good god can allow evil things to exist, and all the rest of it. But if you want to go deeper, I'm going to ask you how you are able to think rationally at all, in order to even consider those kinds of problems. What is logic under atheism and how its existence justified? If it, like morality, boils down to preferences and opinions, then that's all there is. You have nothing left.
How does Christianity establish a foundation for morality or logic? Christian morality boils down to might makes right, which applies to innumerable religions. If you can’t prove the existence of the Christian god, your entire worldview and morality are irrelevant and no one should give it more credence than any other religion.
On top of that, in what way is Christianity logical? Is it “logical” for God to have intentionally hardened pharaoh’s heart and then slaughter the first borns of Egypt as punishment for that which they didn’t even do?
Christianity provides a foundation, most importantly, for the existence of the non-physical. Naturalism does not. It doesn't necessarily mean that Christianity is true but it does necessarily mean that atheism is false, or at the very best, impossible to consider.
> provides a foundation… for the existence of the nonphysical
How so? Merely stating something does not make it true. I can just as easily claim that the Greek pantheon offers a foundation for the metaphysical. You don’t believe in Zeus, do you?
Of course I agree that Christianity and atheism are mutually exclusive. However, the former posits with absolute certainty that a god in particular exists; the latter holds that no god exists. Given the dearth of evidence for any metaphysical beings, how would atheism (or at least agnosticism) not be the more reasonable thing to ”practice”?
An important point. There are a lot of flavors of theism. Once we've eliminated atheism as an option, it actually becomes incredibly easy to weed out the others. I've been through this process to some extent myself, but one thing we do is start looking at what each theist worldview says about the universe, humans, morality, and so forth. It's a process, but not a difficult one once you start searching in earnest.
>Once we've eliminated atheism as an option
You mean once you discount it in your own opinion?
How is it not east to weed out Christianity? Flood stories are common across civilizations. The creation story is so obviously a myth just like all the others. The story of the Ark is laughably childish. Astronomical, biological, geographical, archeological findings all point to an extremely old earth and universe. There are logical inconsistencies in the Bible along with things that can’t possibly be true unless god is intentionally trolling us.
That’s not to mention the moral problems. Apparently gay sex is evil but chattel slavery isn’t? God found time to warn the Israelites against eating shellfish but forgot to condemn slavery? God is good and just but commands genocidal slaughter and allows sex slavery of the survivors?
I should say I found it easy. Other people may not. I was hasty on that one. Your mileage may vary.
Sorry, who punished the child again? I wrote this little parable, so I know the answer, but I wonder if you can tell me.
Logic, among other things.
>but the child chose to not clean his room so his merciful father is justified when he beats him for the rest of his life
Beats him for the rest of his life? That wasn't in the story. I think you're making stuff up about a man you don't like.
The whole point I've been trying to make to you is an infinite punishment like Hell is absurdly severe, especially from a God that claims they are merciful. Your stupid child analogy doesn't work on an infinite timescale.
What I'm trying to tell you is that you have a hyperbolic conception of hell that I'm guessing you picked up from some other anti-Christian somewhere who didn't know what he was talking about. My child analogy is actually really good if you've read the Bible and know what you're talking about when you refer to things like hell. If you don't, you'll just keep getting frustrated and punching straw men.
>I'm guessing you picked up from some other anti-Christian
This is a mainstream belief that Christians threaten atheists with.
A lot of Christians don't read their Bibles and end up doing a lot of damage. Sorry about that.
https://biblehub.com/esv/genesis/1.htm
Spoiler alert: they didn't believe him, either.
So what? Is your contention that literally nobody on Earth would believe that god exists if he appeared to them? The frick?
Paul was an unbeliever and persecutor of Christians and only converted because Jesus literally appeared to him. How many people believed in Jesus after they saw him performing miracles? If even one person can be saved from eternal torment it’d be worth it for God to show himself. It’s remarkably convenient that he all of a sudden stopped appearing to people.
How many people do you know who believe in Jesus despite never having met him? How many of those people do you consider to be fairly reasonable and intelligent, your views on their faith notwithstanding? If we can get there, so can you, and I definitely don't want you to go to hell.
That's interesting and I might look into that more. I still maintain that non-physical things exist, and quite obviously so. Thanks for the information, in any case.
What's the correct type of hell then? The ones i know are
>Classic eternal fire
>Dante's 7 rings with many types
>individual hell depending on the person
>Void
My understanding is that hell as the final place/state of the unsaved is absolute separation from God. I suppose you could call that void.
I think we're at a wall with this one. I'm sorry, man, I don't know how to communicate this stuff. The difference between a thing and your perception of the thing. Sorry, man.
You asked how logic can be universal and I explained to you that yes that’s because logic is either an emergent property of the universe, or thought that aligns with the function of the universe depending on how your’re defining logic.
Thinking out of line with how the universe works is illogical. What do you not understand?
I don't really have a problem with the idea that to be illogical is to think out of line with reality. Logic is part of reality that we engage with when we think. I guess I still don't see how you can have that in a naturalist worldview where all you have is matter and energy. Like, you can have matter and energy doing all kinds of stuff, but when we start thinking about things like meaning, purpose, laws, morality, and concepts in general, matter and energy are clearly not part of those things. They exist, like we all agree that concepts exist, but they obviously don't exist physically. We perceive them, and in some way our brains respond physically to them, but they are still separate.
They’re in our heads anon.
Logic is a little different in that you can argue it is an emergent property of the cumulative effects of matter, energy and forces, or a description of their behavior.
You don’t seem dumb or over-emotional, it’s completely baffling to me that you don’t know meaning, purpose and morality are constructions of the mind and instinct.
You feel meaning in your relationships for your example because your brain is wired to maintain and improve them.
Yeah, like I was saying before, I think we're just at a wall with this one and I just don't know how to articulate it. I really enjoy these conversations when they don't turn into cussing matches, but they do wear me out. I started out just trying to give a guy an answer on the question of hell and ended up on a whole thing.
I don’t think it’s above your intellect to accept that ideas and meaning come from the brain, I think that conclusion is probably just too jarring because your current meta-narrative cannot stand if atheists have an explanation for why we experience those concepts even though they’re not real outside of our heads.
So why exactly does God not just show up and clear this shit up? If his goal was to save as many people as possible from the eternal torture that he’s seeking okay with doing, why the frick doesn’t he just A) prove that he exists and B) clear all this confusion up? At least after that he can say “hey, I literally showed you that I exist and told you what’s right, no excuses now”
>Logic, among other things.
When you use logic you’re just thinking in accordance with how reality works. When you ignore or don’t know how reality works but make conclusions and decisions they are illogical.
Are your thoughts physical?
You can see a human thinking by scanning their brain, we do not yet have the technology to read minds where you can watch a video of someone’s thoughts.
So... it makes shit up?
Seriously how else am I supposed to take that. Not that it demonstrates the existence of the none physical, not that it proposes the existence of the non physical. No, that it just fricking says it exists.
The existence of the non-physical is an obvious reality. Which worldview comports with that obvious reality? Atheism cannot.
Except it doesn't apply equally to everyone. If it did there would only be one kind of living thing. If all I have is my physical brain and all you have is your physical brain, and neither of us is telepathic and there's no sort of collective unconscious, then it necessarily follows that my logic is not your logic. We might resemble each other, but we are not the same.
What are you claiming is non-physical and exists that the nature doesn’t have an explanation before?
Why are you not getting that you share a lot in common with humans, but individuals slightly vary when comparing humans to non-humans?
>The existence of the non-physical is an obvious reality
What reality?
Name one thing that suggest the existence of the none physical.
>then it necessarily follows that my logic is not your logic
No it doesn't. Our brains are built the same way, therefore it necessarily follows that they function the same. The fact that they behave slightly differently is what you would expect, since they've been fed slightly different inputs.
>The fact that they behave slightly differently is what you would expect, since they've been fed slightly different inputs.
Slightly different inputs from individual genes inherited from parents in specific combinations too.
I think he’s struggling with the concept that two groups can be very different from each other (wolves vs. humans for example) but humans can have individual variation too.
Maybe if we frame it like, we're made in the image of god but we're not god. It's essentially the same thing since that idea came from the fact that humans observed that children take after their parents.
Logic, ideas, concepts, numbers...
You mean symbolic representations? They exist inside our brains, physically.
Really? Where?
These little bastards.
That looks like a neuron. I thought we were talking about symbols.
That's awesome. So if I'm thinking about cows they can look in the machine and see my thought-cows?
I think you've had enough, buddy.
When you put a bunch of neurons together, they can think.
Neurons and thoughts are not the same thing, though.
Neurons create thought with electrical signaling and chemically activated circuits
Do neurons create logic?
You’re thinking logically when you use your neurons to think in accordance with how reality works.
Yes, actually. They create logical circuits.
Okay? An oxygen atom and the wind aren't the same thing.
>Neurons and thoughts are not the same thing, though
Neither are an electron and its charge, but charge is a intrinsic property of the electron.
It seems like you are committing a category error: The entire claim behind most materialistic solutions to the mind-body problem (such as functionalism, identity theory, property monism) is not that thoughts are material things themselves, but that thoughts are intrinsic functions or properties (depending on the specific model either fundamental or emergent) of material things.
It’s getting better every year. You can read thoughts to a limited extent at this point. Not to to the point of imagining a cow and having your mind cow appear on a machine, but getting there.
Will you be seeing my thought or a representation of my thought? Could you then extract my thought and put it in someone else's brain? Where is that little thought, anyway? Which neuron is it in? What is it made of?
You see your thoughts in your own head and machines are getting better at imaging your thoughts. It seems like you’re reluctant to accept that thoughts come from your brain and that is strange to me,
What I'm resisting is the idea that abstract things like laws and concepts can be reduced to neural activity. It seems obvious to me that logic is universal, but is itself not a physical thing extended in spacetime. I don't know how to communicate that any more clearly. We might be at an impasse, bud.
>but is itself not a physical thing extended in spacetime
then how does it interact with spacetime?
Yeah it is universal because it’s when you’re thinking in line with how the universe works. If I think my arms can flap enough to fly like a bird im being illogical, purely because I’m not thinking in accordance with how reality works.
I LITERALLY FRICKING SAID INSIDE OUR BRAINS WHY WONT YOU READ THE POSTS YOUR REPLY TO
It’s just god of the gaps goalpost moving anon
Ideas and concepts are created by the human brain, numbers are a conclusion of things existing in quantities.
Where do concepts exist inside the brain? Can we extract them and put them under a microscope to look at?
We actually do have the technology to read minds.
>a thing that physically exists and we can prove thoughts come from
>a gap
????????????????
What if I change my mind and want to be with him after I die? Why does an infinitely merciful God, as you have now said you agree he is, have an expiration date for his mercy? Does God know the people he separated from himself will never change their mind about being with him for the rest of eternity or are they no longer worth saving in his eyes?
Imagine a child whose room is an absolute mess. His father says "you can't have dessert until your room is clean." The child objects. He really wants dessert and he likes his messy room even though there's mold and shit in there that makes him sick. "Okay," says the father, "I'll clean your room and then you can have dessert." "Frick you," says the child, "you're refusing to give me dessert and forcing me to live in my dirty room."
The child is you.
What you're arguing is the child has no option to clean up his room for dessert if he changes his mind after he dies. He is doomed to an eternal fate of being miserable in his messy room with no dessert despite his dad claiming he is all merciful to his children. This analogy sounds ridiculous when you put it into the context of an eternal punishment after death.
The child goes back into his room and lives there until he dies of some disease contracted from the filth of his environment. Since dead people can't make decisions and have no agency, dad's left with no option but to bury him and walk away.
That would make sense in our mortal reality, but God and souls are supposedly infinite. The problem is the child made a couple finite mistake in his limited time in life and now God has decided his punishment must be infinite misery with no chance of happiness again. Eternity is a really long time to punish someone for some mistakes they made a googolplex years ago
Read it again. The father offered to clean the room and provide dessert. The child refused. The child chose. If you choose to live without God, he will choose to live without you, and both parties will endure the consequences.
Why didn't the judeo-christian god create me in such a way that I would freely choose to worship him?
You're downplaying the severity of an infinite punishment for finite sins. Why aren't sinners granted mercy for their sins after death? Your child analogy only makes sense on the scale of a person's lifespan, but God punishes them forever.
Actually I'd like to go a little deeper on this. The Bible refers to the final punishment as the "second death." First death is that of the body, second is that of the soul. When your body dies you no longer have physical ability. So we have to ask what abilities the soul has that will be lost when it dies. How about willpower, the ability to intend?
>In atheism, all morality is subjective
>This is why we need to worship a god's subjective opinion about religion
>love god and love your neighbor, that's all
>"complete and utter subservience"
???
> worship and believe in me despite the fact that I refuse to provide solid evidence of my existence or else I’ll torture you in fire for eternity
> watches as billions of children over the years have suffered and died from disease, famine, war, disasters
> even Christians praying for the lives of their children go unanswered just as often as unbelievers crying to their gods
> “loving” and “morally perfect” being
God's mercy can save everyone from their sins if they accept Jesus, but if you don't you will burn forever in Hell. This is a basic idea of what most Christians believe. I'm asking why would a truly merciful God think to create a place like Hell in the first place. Just the fact it's an eternal punishment for your finite sins in life is fricked up.
Again, what do you mean by infinitely merciful and what basis do you have for believing that the Christian God is infinitely merciful? I'm not trying to trick you or do a "gotcha" or something. I just want to know where you're coming from so I know how to answer it. I don't want to be jumping from one vague assertion to another trying to grapple smoke.
It's in OP's image
and before you say well I don't believe God is infinitely merciful that brings up another problem which is all the hundreds of different denominations and interpretations of God's message that Christians fought bloody wars over. The basic idea is God will forgive you of your sins if you accept Jesus in life, but if you haven't by the time you die then you are tortured in Hell forever. Which means if you try to repent for your sins in Hell God will just ignore it and let you burn forever. His mercy is apparently only valid during your lifespan. After you die he loses any sense of mercy or sympathy for you.
awww, thread went full ham 🙁
>hey want to play a game
>sure
>try to guess what number i have in mind, if you get it right you will get eternal happiness
>what if i get it wrong?
>you will be tortured forever
>WTF? That's fricking sick
>Sorry no going back now, choose or get in the oven
The Bible makes more sense when you know it was written by this guy
Christians were the original liberal hippies. I hope for this idea to become widespread one day.
All those people that wrote the biblr were basically Marxist writers
Test
I was raised by atheists who became atheists because their parents forced them to go to church on Sundays. But I honestly can't say I was raised "atheist" as religion didn't much factor into my childhood at all.
Who told Christians that atheists believe only physical things exist?
The seem to think atheist == materialist (or at least naturalist.)
But to be fair to Christians, this is one of the few points where I agree they don’t engage in all that much sophistry when they equivocate the terms atheist and materialist/naturalist.
Let’s be honest -at least in the West- 95% of atheists are naturalists.
The only great non-naturalist atheist Western philosophers that I am aware of are Schopenhauer and McTaggart.
Atheists don’t not believe in things like logic, ideas, or concepts. Ideas and concepts come from the brain, logic either comes from the brain thinking in accordance with the natural world or is a descriptive term for the cumulative function of the universe.
I mean he is literally saying atheists don’t believe ideas or concepts exist, it’s asinine. He’s polite at least.
Believe it or not, I actually do itch a little when I equate atheism and materialism. I consider religions like Mormonism to be something like supernatural atheism, so I recognize that one is not always the other.
I would never claim that atheists don't believe in ideas or concepts, and if I did say that, I'll gladly correct myself and admit the mistake. What I claim is that atheists have failed to justify their existence on the basis of their worldview. I run into this problem sometimes when I talk about morality. I'll tell an atheist that atheism is amoral and they'll come back all insulted like "you don't think I know the difference between good and evil?!" and I'm like no, you do, and that's kind of my point.
>What I claim is that atheists have failed to justify their existence on the basis of their worldview. I run into this problem sometimes when I talk about morality
They’re from the brain, including morality. I’m not going to be insulting to you but with all due respect anon morality is far from a mystery and is extensively established as a social function for social animals to maintain cooperative, mutually beneficial groups. Monkeys literally understand fairness
Checked, Satan.
I've heard this argument before, but the problem I have with morality as social function is that it still boils down to preference and opinion. It's a little like democracy at that point, isn't it, sort of a majority rules situation. For the thief, murderer, or anarchist who can survive on his own, there is no reason or obligation to move with the herd.
It’s instinct. A preference or opinion is a much lower level less emotionally powerful and driving thing.
My impulse to prevent harm, engage in fairness and act reciprocally is so powerful that it is running the framework of my social interactions.
That is normal and it should be for you too. Furthermore other humans regulate anti-social behavior by punishing the culprit.
I mean you cannot keep a job or friends or a woman if you’re a totally selfish prick. Is this not clear as day to you?
But we're still just talking about something like the social contract. That doesn't seem to get you very far in societies that approve of things like slavery, abortion, genocide, war, or what have you. Not trying to start a debate on any of those particulars, just using them as examples. Are those things good as long as they're agreed to and function for the society in question or are they intrinsically good or bad? How do we contend with things like cults who choose to separate themselves from society and engage in things the society doesn't approve of like polygamy? Do we say that polygamy is evil in the larger society but good in the cult?
My society and culture have concluded though social, political and philosophical development that genocide and slavery are wrong.
In fact even the societies that practiced it agreed but would justify harming those people because they somehow did something wrong or were not truly human
I know I'm getting dangerously close to pulling in the /misc/ trolls, but what if they did do something wrong or have some collective quality that makes them dangerously incompatible? It makes me wonder if human life automatically has intrinsic value. If naturalism is true, I would say that it does not, so if we're talking about wiping out the heterodox to preserve our orthodoxy, obviously members of that heterodoxy will oppose, but what value does their objection have, especially if they're disrupting our society and threatening our cohesion?
What makes you so sure that morality is not just opinion and preference? If you were an Aztec 700 years ago you might’ve been watching a human sacrifice and thought it was a good thing. You’d have had no conception of the Christian god through no fault of your own.
That's a really good question. Is human sacrifice evil already or does it become evil when it ceases to serve its society?
Getting a little off on the idea of the accountability of those who never hear the Gospel, the New Testament does talk about this a little. I'd have to look up the passages again, but from what I recall it basically comes down to God evaluating them based on how much they did know. Paul talks about this in Romans 1 where he mentions that God has certain qualities that are clearly seen in nature, so at some point no one has an excuse.
1. my parents weren't christcucks
2. none of my ancestors were israelites
3. frick off israelite worshipper