/lit/ - Literature

>>21520140
i don't know how posting that webm is supposed to make atheists look bad because that guy is based af

>>21520140
you're going to reply to your own post, pretending to be someone else, and point out that the guy in the video is a christian.

>>21520147
>t. atheist trying to write something ocherent and failing

a the ists
beat em, shoot them, hang em from a noose

>>21520151
>ocherant

>>21520151
>ocherent
lmao

>>21520140
>hate atheists
which kind, fag? there are many kinds of atheists

best books about ocherantism?

>>21520146
Yeah he's so lmao wtf wink wink

Get a grip retard.

>>21520140
You can see christcucks still have not recovered emotionally from the intellectual beat down they received by the 2000s atheist movement
It feels good to be right…

It's almost incomprehensible, actually imagine being on your hands and knees in the dirt and mimicking whichever popstar is trending at the moment as you slide onto your fat belly - still in a public park - and mimic said celebrity being fucked from behind. While children are presumably around. And filming it then re-watching it and deciding Yes. This is a good thing to put online.
I just cannot wrap my head around it

Blood & Soil morality is the only objectively correct morality, atheists, pagans, jews, muslims and Christians can all hang.

>>21520154
deny the big Goose
more shekels for the jews
but i bring the
good news
so light the fuse
as we reduce
the petulant
athe'st views

a the ists
spray a fine mist
when they split
their wrists
nowhere to go
aint none missed

God's plan
run you over
with my van
get banned
from dinner at nan's

>>21520140
just say
god created the bible, so it must be true
then watch them seethe

>>21520216
They can't recover

>>21520140
>I hate atheists.
Do you hate "I am enlightened" atheists or do you hate atheists? Do you understand that there are atheists who are atheist because they just cannot have faith? The totality of religion is not based on drawing a logical conclusion of 1+1 therefore God exists, it's all about "faith" that you just need to have. If you are not raised a Christian or life has very quickly reared its ugly head to you and showed you that there's no God, if you cannot have faith because you cannot convince yourself of all these things that Christianity or any other religion tells you to take at face value, what the fuck do you do? Fake it? I would love to go to Church and imagine there's a little guardian angel when I'm alone in my little room, but I just cannot convince myself of it just like I cannot convince myself that my waifu is actually real. I cannot self-induce schizophrenia upon myself and that's the only way I'd be able to have "faith". And you cannot even blame me for this because allegedly, it's God himself who decides to bestow faith unto someone or relinquish him onto the world, so maybe you should be pissed at God for making me an atheist.

>>21520146
Seconded. Leave that majestic beast alone.

>>21520140
You can't. No matter what proof of God you attempt, you will never, ever manage to apply it specifically to your God, instead of Allah or whomever.

Much better to argue on some of the adjacent theories which have greater impact - like moral realism, which atheists can easily and coherently believe in, but often wont.

>>21520286
Here is the kind I mostly hate:
>>21520321
>>21520262
>>21520216
>>21520277
>>21520234
>>21520194
>>21520161
>>21520157
>>21520147
>>21520146
>>21520140

>>21520341
>>21397164
You are not capable of hatred, what you feel is envy born from inconsequentialism. You are nothing but a vessel for the opinions of other greater being to pour in to you. To hate you must have the capacity for virtue and logic. You do not. You are a dumb animal for whom hate is an abstraction you can not feel, anymore than the half-feral dog can.

I hate you.

>>21520348
>i will tell you what you feel
well, i will you what you suck: my dick

Stop derailing my thread, I want books to destroy atheists before they burn in hell

>>21520349
>half feral dog response

>>21520321
>You can't. No matter what proof of God you attempt, you will never, ever manage to apply it specifically to your God, instead of Allah or whomever
i read the Bible and it was obviously and unarguably true, i don't need "proof"

>>21520359
>i read the Bible and it was obviously and unarguably true, i don't need "proof

The lack of self-awareness in this sentence is so good, i wish i could bottle it.

>>21520321
Please explain how an atheist can be a moral realist. I have trouble with this as it seems an atheist would still fall within relativistic morals or some form of naturalistic fallacy

>>21520140
I didn't know the typical atheist is also a pedophile.

>>21520524
By putting a truth derivied goal as their first principles and working out from there. In my case, the family is paramount. My moral view us built around that core. That a healthy, loving family is the objective in life and to encourage and support that provides both the happiest and loving people as well as the only tangable look at potential eternal life via a lineage you are part of. There could be an argument to be made of a naturalistic falacy, but not a strong one as we are the only species capable of long-term (generational) foresight.

>>21520140
picrel is a catholic youth minister and a pedophile btw

>>21520140
t. teenage tradcath larper who trots around his christianity like a fashion accessory and has never opened a religious text

>>21520140
Isn't this guy an actual child groomer?

>>21520558
He's one of those tranny rights catholics making him not a christian

>>21520359
Great, but then you're not looking for debate.

>>21520524
They could be platonists about the good. They could be secular Kantians. There are numerous options to subscribe to moral realism without theism. Why shouldn't they be able to be moral realists?
I think the marrying of moral realism with theism is both unnecessary, unreasonable and dangerous, because if you consider them part and parcel, rejection of theology, which is the tendency of our time (and usually reasonable), will be a rejection of ethical realism, which is not quite as reasonable.
Shafer-Landau wrote a very good book on ethical realism, saying that the ontological and epistemic status of ethical claims are much like the ontological and epistemic status of mathematical claims. While it is mostly a refutation of Mackie-style arguments for relativism, you can glean several ways of how to be an ethical realist from it - case in point, you can be a platonist about morality just as easy as you can be a platonist about numbers. God isn't needed for any of this.

But please, let me revert it back on you: why on earth would you need theism for moral realism?

>>21520140
OP is jelly pic rel is skinny enough to see his dick

>>21520524
We can't - it all falls on metaphysical horse shit that may as well just be called God, crazy Kantian arguments about time or just straight up working backwards from what you believe and inventing axioms when you reach a dead end.
Not that this devalues the promotion of moral realism on a large level.

>>21520619
That really isn't a fair assessment of secular Kantianism, and there is no reason to conflate having some indetermined metaphysical commitments with having a theology.

When you say it may as well be called God (with which I disagree), well okay for the sake of argument, but there is zero reason to say it should be the christian one, and we're back at my original point >>21520321

If you're interested in the debate I can warmly recommend Shafer-Landau's book "Moral Realism: a Defense". It is very compelling.

>>21520647
>there is no reason to conflate having some indetermined metaphysical commitments with having a theology.
I disagree with both on the same grounds - show me some supporting evidence that isn't just another thought exercise. I'll give the book a read though as it'd be comforting to be proven wrong.

>>21520592
>>21520647
I'm more trying to understand it from a first principles or axiomatic perspective. Conveniently for a theist the "is" and "ought" of morality is tied in with the absolute foundation of God. I'm having trouble conceptualizing the absolute that a materialistic moral realist would base his morality from without devolving into relativism.

Thanks for the book recommendation.

>>21520140
love your enemy

>>21520748
>if you kill your enemy, they win.

>>21520592
>>21520730
And furthermore I understand where you're coming from when you say
>I think the marrying of moral realism with theism is both unnecessary, unreasonable and dangerous, because if you consider them part and parcel, rejection of theology, which is the tendency of our time (and usually reasonable), will be a rejection of ethical realism, which is not quite as reasonable.
But I also worry about, if I may generalize, the "mcatheist's" or crass-antitheist's reliance on scientism theology, which devolves into a kind of naturalistic mess of moral oughts.
From my perspective in most contemporary, Western men when you pluck out religion you create a vacuum that's filled in with various idolatries to fill their loss of a foundation of morality. These idols can still cause behavioral patterns similar to say the religious fundamentalist's righteous indignation at a rejection of ethical realism. In the case of the atheist of course the "ethical realism" is derived from a kind of scientism, "empathyism", communism, or other materialist ideology (which I equate for all intents and purposes to a theology).

>>21520146
Of course you would think shaking your ass would be based. You're a fucking sodomite that takes a gallon of cum a night

>>21520838
>a gallon of cum a night
Thought that was just Catholic kids.

jerobe is based THOUGH

Isn't that guy a preacher who was fucking minors?

>>21520140
>I hate it when midwits are smarter than me. It’s not fare!
>Help me win my argument with a book that refutes reality, guys!

Why is this thread allowed? Shut up, dummy.