Lists of things atheists can't do/be:

[Anonymous No.22049468]

>Justify their morals
>Produce beautiful things
>Truly experience beautiful things (The full concept of beauty can only be unlocked from acknowledging divine beauty, That's why atheists have cringe sense of aesthetics, ugly minds)
>Feel at peace
>Being trustworthy
>Not being slaves to their cock/vagina/prostate
>Not consoom and being the end product of parasitic economy
>Feel miserable without constant social attention/engagement, Can't fully be alone and enjoy it, Those who do often belong to dangerous tribes of philosophies
>Have a respectable opinion (Because atheists can't justify their morals them speaking with authority about anything "human" look funny and absurd)
>Accept degeneracy into the status que and single handedly lead to boom and bust cycles in every field in life

[Anonymous No.22049473]

>>22049468
>/lit/-literature

[Anonymous No.22049483]

>>22049473
/thread

[Anonymous No.22049494]

>>22049468
>what are confucian and daoist ethics

[Anonymous No.22049539]

>>22049468
this is an odd post for someone who supposedly feels at peace, really comes across like you are trying to justify yourself and your beliefs to make up for a lack of faith.

[Anonymous No.22049547]

>>22049468
Actually it's religious people who can't do any of those things

[Anonymous No.22049553]

>>22049468
Science literally proved atheism wrong so most atheists shut up and moved on like 7 years ago.

>Mass cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred

Okay so how did the mass get there? Unironically checkmate, atheists. Now I'm not tell you you you have to believe in the Christain god, or whatever. I don't know how it got there, maybe we are in a matrix, maybe it was fucking Gandalf, but either way, you cannot organically create matter. So that alone is a huge piece of evidence that we have a creator of some sort.

[Anonymous No.22049561]

>>22049553
>Mass cannot be created
>Therefore someone must have created mass

[Anonymous No.22049564]

>>22049547
It's more about people who believe in god rather than religious people.

[Anonymous No.22049565]

>>22049561
I am pretty sure mass is a spook.

[Anonymous No.22049568]

>>22049561
I'm >>22049553
Not necessarily, although that is a logical conclusion. The point is something can't come from nothing, and until it is proven that it can, then I think Atheists have an uphill battle on their hands

[Anonymous No.22049583]

>>22049568
But something (mass) could not have always existed?

[Anonymous No.22049595]

>>22049583
It cannot be created or destroyed (as far as we know) only transferred. This is a 'law of science' (which technically is some bullshit some dead guy wrote down) but if you believe the laws of science you have to understand that mass cannot create itself. For instance. You can turn water to ice to air, to combine with another chemical to create some other element, but you cannot figuratively 'delete' it

[Anonymous No.22049599]

>>22049595
>that wasn't simple enough for him
Why can't the mass be eternal or come from some place else? Why did it have to get created?

[Anonymous No.22049604]

>>22049468
An atheist can do all that, but if they are intelligent, they will acknowledge that they were shaped by their cultures values and, in turn, the religious history that shaped those values.

[Anonymous No.22049606]

>>22049599
Everything has a beginning, at least in the way we understand time, so I would argue eternal mass is proof for the existence of a creator or creation. Even the big bang, which is the most widely and accepted theory of how 'we' came to be. Started with a microscropic super heavy ball of mass that exploded as the universe is ever expanding from what they can tell.


I hate to break this off, but this is getting to the point where I need to light up a spliff, and I'm working so unable to do so, perhaps I will check in to this thread later when I'm really high so we can pontificate on this. It is a really interesting conversation.

[Anonymous No.22049626]

>>22049606
https://youtu.be/8EQDhtVl_50?t=28

>Everything has a beginning, at least in the way we understand time, so I would argue eternal mass is proof for the existence of a creator or creation

You made a leap of logic that makes no sense at all, you're starting your chain of logic from the premise of the existence of a creator and working your way back there. Existence of mass does not necessarily imply the existence of a creator. The simple fact is that we don't know, and the fact that you're so eager to jump to the conclusion that there exists a creator shows your heavy bias towards that premise.

[Anonymous No.22049643]

>>22049606
Why does everything have to have a beginning? Having a beginning is different than being created. You are sort of dancing around the question. If God can be eternal why couldn't mass be eternal?

If everything has a beginning than God had a beginning. Was God created. What was before God?

[Anonymous No.22049658]

>>22049468
>Justify their morals
Kant, Aristotle, any moral theory that stipulates moral facts - this is easily done. Every intellectually honest theologian agrees.
>Produce beautiful things
Marcel Proust is but one of thousands of counterexamples.
>Truly experience beautiful things (The full concept of beauty can only be unlocked from acknowledging divine beauty, That's why atheists have cringe sense of aesthetics, ugly minds)
I have special atheist wizard armor that means that any beauty I experience is even greater than yours tho, and you also can't see it, so checkmate.
>Feel at peace
I do.
>Being trustworthy
I am.
>Not being slaves to their cock/vagina/prostate
I'm not.
>Not consoom and being the end product of parasitic economy
I don't.
>Feel miserable without constant social attention/engagement, Can't fully be alone and enjoy it, Those who do often belong to dangerous tribes of philosophies
I do, and not a member of a dangerous tribe.
>Have a respectable opinion (Because atheists can't justify their morals them speaking with authority about anything "human" look funny and absurd)
See above.
>Accept degeneracy into the status que and single handedly lead to boom and bust cycles in every field in life
What the fuck does this even mean?

I genuinely miss the /lit/ when we had good theologyfags who could have intellectually erudite and honest discussions. The atheism=no morality in particular just betrays such a profound lack of insight into pretty much the entire history of philosophy of ethics, vast amounts of which have been dedicated to developing secular morals. Some 5 years ago theologyfags would be posting interesting stuff about scholastic ontology from the lesser known greats of this tradition, now it's nothing but babby's first retarded polemics.

>>22049539
That's another thing with the former theologyfags versus the current christfags - know the tree by its fruits. Instead of thinking through interesting points from theological history or christian metaphysics, it's just pure ressentiment, frogposting and crying about strawmen. The worst thing is that it is probably not much more than 2-3 autists who are consistently shitting up the board. At this point I'm inclined to believe it is a poor false-flag to paint religious people as retards, but I refuse to do so, I've known too many intellectually honest, curious and intelligent christians.

[Anonymous No.22049660]

>>22049626
>>22049643
God is a necessary being to this otherwise infinite regress

[Anonymous No.22049665]

>>22049626
Correct, we don't know, but if you had to take a guess, how do you think the matter got there?

>>22049643
My personal opinion, we're in one of many infinite universes. My brain is too stupid to know. I would say I'm agnostic, not atheist though, I think something created mass/matter forever and a half ago.

[Anonymous No.22049666]

>>22049643
https://youtu.be/b_uMOWvYni0
Who made the architect who made the architect?

[sage No.22049668]

>>22049468
very gud. now rope youself

[Anonymous No.22049678]

>>22049660
Uh-huh, if we accept that for the sake of argument, then to infer God from this, you have to demonstrate why an infinite regress is logically impossible.
Good luck, have fun.

[Anonymous No.22049686]

>>22049665
>but if you had to take a guess, how do you think the matter got there?

The thing is, a random guess is worthless. I could "guess" a giant homeless man pooped all the matter into existence and it would have as much validity as saying god did it. Assigning the concept of god to answer whatever question we currently don't have the means to answer is the same thing prehistoric humans did when they didn't understand things like lightning and thunder, the day and night cycle, etc, happenings that are now trivial to our scientific understanding of the universe.

If you had to guess, how do you think god got there?

[Anonymous No.22049688]

>>22049468
>Justify their morals

Neither can religious people by the way. "You should follow God's law" does not follow from "God exists."

[Anonymous No.22049711]

>>22049468
What would you need to post this if your religion brings you such joy and meaning? It's the sign of someone who is frustrated by and in denial of the fact that they have given themselves to a faith or religion that has given then nothing in return

[Anonymous No.22049713]

>>22049468
The highest peaks of artistic beauty were always reached by faithful people or people with a strong divine/metaphysical sense. There is no exception.

[Anonymous No.22049715]

>>22049686
BASED

[Anonymous No.22049720]

Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.Atheism is a meme sect of US Christianity made up in like 2005, the dumbest religion ever. "Atheism" is cancer, none of you are "atheists" except in the sense that you identify with one of the dumbest memes in history.

[Anonymous No.22049725]

>>22049720
>the dumbest religion ever
How is "I don't think a guy named Jesus had star trek replicator powers that he used to feed people 2000 years ago" dumber than "I do think that"?

[Anonymous No.22049726]

>>22049468
>Can't fully be alone and enjoy it
aren't (You) supposed to go to church, why are you here?

[Anonymous No.22049731]

>>22049713
Problem being that God doesn't exist with a significant degree of likelihood, so you're just saying that all great art was made by delusional people/primitive people from the past.

[Anonymous No.22049732]

>>22049725
You are an absolute retard and you have absolutely no idea what the religion of Christ is about. Worse: you have absolutely no idea what religion is and why it is essential.

[Anonymous No.22049736]

>>22049732
not an argument albeit

[Anonymous No.22049766]

>>22049660
Why?

[Anonymous No.22049770]

>>22049658
>Kant, Aristotle, any moral theory that stipulates moral facts - this is easily done. Every intellectually honest theologian agrees.

Atheists can't justify morality, They've no standards in which to judge good or evil because they don't believe in objective morality (Which god commends/exists in abstract platonic space which's basically metaphysics and just one step closer to god), Nothing is inherently evil and nothing is inherently bad. Atheists can ACT moral (Although every subjective morality system is utter garbage) but they can't justify their actions ultimately.

>Marcel Proust is but one of thousands of counterexamples.

Proust had mystical proclivity, You don't need to believe in personal god in order to acknowledge divine beauty. He was raised as christian and already had imbued sense of divine aesthetics. Atheists without mystical proclivity can't produce beautiful things.

[Anonymous No.22049772]

>>22049770
and there go the goalposts

[Anonymous No.22049774]

>>22049599
why can't eternal mass be God?

[Anonymous No.22049776]

>>22049772
If God can do anything can God move the goalposts so far that even he can't reach them?

[Anonymous No.22049779]

>>22049774
Because it would invalidate my argument.

[Anonymous No.22049781]

>>22049774
Why can't the eternal mass just be eternal mass.

[Anonymous No.22049786]

>>22049779
It was not an argument, it was a question. I don't actually have a horse in this race and am just asking questions for curiosities sake. Apparently my questions can not be answered.

[Anonymous No.22049787]

>>22049781
Because it would invalidate my argument.

[Anonymous No.22049791]

The thing about arguing with theists is they think they have the capacity to argue with logic and reason, when in fact their very thought processes are flawed to a fault and it's impossible to present them with arguments from rationality, because they will not understand them. Like, at all. And thus they will keep on spouting nonsensical platitudes and ad-hominems while being deaf to explanations.

[Anonymous No.22049792]

>>22049736
Funny loser.

[Anonymous No.22049793]

>>22049786
see
>>22049787

(I didn't scroll up and thought that your comment was anti-religion, and positing that eternal mass could be *instead* of a god, which I think is equally possible, and I was agreeing with that point, not your apparently pro-religion actual point).

So yeah, why not eternal mass instead of a god? Both have an equal amount of evidence.

[Anonymous No.22049800]

>>22049791
Indeed.

>>22049792
>>22049736

[Anonymous No.22049802]

>>22049793
My point is not pro or anti religion, nor is it a point, just a question.

[Anonymous No.22049807]

>>22049802
It is pro religion though. God can't be eternal mass in this debate because we are speaking of a guy who started the chain, vs no chain starter.
An eternal mass god wouldn't fit into the prime mover mould, since there would be no prime moveMENT.

[Anonymous No.22049812]

>>22049720
this is not helpful but the idea that atheism has christian origin is. contemporary atheism is just definition in opposition rather than any kind of meaningful theory, it pretends not to be dogmatic while latching itself onto popular science as a means of justifying itself and leaves no room for the unfortunate truth that there are unexplainable phenomena (whether that be factually, or in a more metaphysical rite). the whole purpose of religious-ideology is a rationale for mortality, and while it may seem silly to think "there is a life after death" it holds more implications than just cartoonish heaven v. hell (ie reward v. punishment). Even though a lot of christian dogma has been bastardized for oppressive ends, the basics are good and worthwhile to any individual who has to interact with his fellow man.

[Anonymous No.22049815]

>>22049791
You are wrong from the very beginning if you think it's a matter of "arguing with theists". Your mind is simply poisoned by a made-up idea that never existed for 50.000 years, and you shamelessly claim to have an equal dialogue with people who think and behave in the only natural way. Topkek.

[Anonymous No.22049825]

>>22049807
we do not have to be speaking of "a guy" though. that is an extremely limited view of what is totally incomprehensible to man. the basic premise of religion is there are unexplainables in our world and we, for better or worse, are trying to rationalize them.

Science moves the goalposts a bit, but it doesn't ever reveal the whole picture and so there must be another way of explaining things to ourselves.

[Anonymous No.22049829]

>>22049825
>that is an extremely limited view of what is totally incomprehensible to man
This.

[Anonymous No.22049833]

>>22049825
Holy hell, please be a troll. Accept my concession, whatever, but you are too stupid to keep talking with. Peace.

[Anonymous No.22049839]

>>22049807
That assumes God. Also, I never said God was eternal mass or even suggested it, I said if God can be eternal why can't mass be eternal? which was going back to the unanswered question of why does mass have to be created in the first place.

[Anonymous No.22049843]

>>22049815
>who think and behave in the only natural way
You think Zeus believers are as correct as Christians?

[Anonymous No.22049852]

>>22049839
Oh, no. I've gone crosseyed. I think we are on the same side here buddy. Might be my fault, my post formatting has been terrible in this thread.
I'm team skeptic, as you seem to be.

[Anonymous No.22049858]

>>22049852
it seems like you're just too close-minded to have an honest conversation.

[Anonymous No.22049862]

>>22049825
>the basic premise of religion is there are unexplainables in our world and we, for better or worse, are trying to rationalize them.
This is the basic premise of science (for want of a less loaded word) though.
>Science moves the goalposts a bit, but it doesn't ever reveal the whole picture
It reveals more all the time.
>and so there must be another way of explaining things to ourselves.
Doesn't follow.

>>22049858
elaborate

[Anonymous No.22049863]

>>22049843
Anyone who thinks and behave and exist having a sense (I would say, a consideration) for the metaphysical realm, is a superior human being.

[Anonymous No.22049867]

>>22049862
>Doesn't follow.
Go back to breddit you fucking pathetic object.

[Anonymous No.22049870]

>>22049852
I am not a skeptic, as I said, just a curious person with questions. You seem like you are trying to find your way out of a hole.

[Anonymous No.22049873]

>>22049863
This. Muslims and Satanists stand with Christians against the Athiest menace.

[Anonymous No.22049875]

>>22049862
>This is the basic premise of science (for want of a less loaded word) though.

Science doesn't give answer for "why" questions. It never will.

[Anonymous No.22049877]

>>22049867
rude

[Anonymous No.22049883]

>>22049870
No need to be rude, man. How is questioning God's existence not being a skeptic?

[Anonymous No.22049888]

>>22049867
not an argument, thoughever

>>22049875
>why does rain fall

[Anonymous No.22049890]

Yeah atheism is completely incoherent and arbitrary
Funny how the enlightenment that brought about atheism also brought the philosophy that brings it down

[Anonymous No.22049893]

>>22049890
>>22049725

[Anonymous No.22049895]

>>22049862
All I've been trying to say is that it doesn't have to be an either/or situation, as you are making it out to be.

>This is the basic premise of science (for want of a less loaded word) though

Yes. That's what I mean. They are working toward the same end, so why do they have to be in inherent disagreement? Historically of course they have been thrown into disharmony by people attempting to use one or the other as a means of governance. It's not the reality, however.

Each picks ups where the other leaves off. Religion has blind spots that science offers alternatives to and vice versa. The whole thing is that we have to live in a universe that we can't comprehend in totality, so what is so wrong about having each in its place?

[Anonymous No.22049896]

>>22049888
>>why does rain fall

lmao you just exposed yourself

[Anonymous No.22049897]

>>22049873
Ironically enough, Satanists are the ones who, while encouraging atheists to be atheists, defecate on atheists heads more than anyone else.

It's absolutely delicious to see atheists getting enslaved by their own rulers.

[Anonymous No.22049901]

>>22049843
I think you need to read more books, you little Minnesota bourgeoise kid.

[Anonymous No.22049906]

>>22049895
There just isn't any benefit that religion brings which requires god to be real.
It's like reading a self help manual, finding it helped you, and then worshiping the writer because he claims to be god.

>>22049896
elaborate

>>22049897
meds or something

>>22049901
not an argument

[Anonymous No.22049908]

>>22049468
>Not consoom and being the end product of parasitic economy
Bullshit, compare the United States to the Soviet union

[Anonymous No.22049914]

>meds or something
>not an argument

Imagine being this scared little boy.

[Anonymous No.22049915]

>>22049914
see
>>22049914
>>meds or something
>>not an argument

[Anonymous No.22049916]

>>22049883
I am not questioning God's existence, I am questioning a person about their beliefs and reasoning.

[Anonymous No.22049924]

>>22049906
>There just isn't any benefit that religion brings which requires god to be real

I think if you thought about it for a while you would find this to be very arrogant.

If you are thinking of "God" as a man in the sky, I can see why you might be so upset by the idea of him, but any serious theologian is not talking about it this way. Sorry if you had a bad experience with religion growing up anon, but there is a much richer implication to the concept of a God than 'guy who literally created everything like lego blocks'

[Anonymous No.22049927]

>>22049916
aren't you-
>>22049839

[Anonymous No.22049929]

>>22049915
>bumping a thread that expresses an idea you disagree with because your stress doesn't allow you to do anything else

[Anonymous No.22049930]

>>22049915
see
>>22049915
>>>meds or something
>>>not an argument

[Anonymous No.22049936]

>>22049924
>I think if you thought about it for a while you would find this to be very arrogant.
How so?
>Sorry if you had a bad experience with religion growing up anon
Projection?

[Anonymous No.22049941]

>>22049929
Lame post. Both sides are doing the same thing and yet you single me out. Betrays that you are guilty of your own accusation, frfr no cap.

[Anonymous No.22049956]

>>22049941
I have an unspeakable hatred for those who accuse and make fun of religious people without having read the Bible, Eastern sapiential literature, Platonic and Neoplatonic texts, even contemporary philosophy on the subject. I just hate that every single time religious people get accused, it's by someone who is simply plain ignorant and unexperienced about the sacred.

[Anonymous No.22049962]

>>22049956
Yeah whatever, just keep your hypocritical accusations to your next time, brutha.

[Anonymous No.22049965]

>>22049956
Yeah whatever, just keep your hypocritical accusations to yourself next time brutha.

[Anonymous No.22049978]

>>22049924
Theologians wouldn't be able to say something concrete if their life depended on it.
>god isn't a bearded sky daddy with lego blocks
Alright, good for him. What IS god though?

[Anonymous No.22049983]

>>22049965
That's exactly what someone who has no idea what to say will reply.

[Anonymous No.22049989]

>>22049983
No, I knew exactly what I wanted to convey, which was my annoyance at your stupid interjection in my and that other guy's shit flinging contest.

>you will now act like I should stop replying even though your posts are antagonistic

[Anonymous No.22050002]

>>22049989
Read 20 fucking books on God, religion, spirituality, metaphysics and then come back, brainlet.

[Anonymous No.22050008]

>>22050002
Why would I do that if it doesn't even cure such basic errors as blatant hypocrisy?

[Anonymous No.22050010]

>>22049927
And? If someone wants to make their beliefs out to have all the answers I am going to take advantage of that and ask questions. The question was not about God, it was about mass, bringing God into it was a way to avoid answering the actual question. I have no issues with reducing things to faith and just saying it is because I have faith that it is correct, but that is not what this thread is about, it is people pretending their faith is more than it is, that it is fact and I find it difficult to believe anyone with faith would do that because whats the point? My faith is my faith, it can not be proven wrong or right and if it could it would cease being faith.

[Anonymous No.22050011]

>>22049956
>I have an unspeakable hatred
woah
find jesus, man

[Anonymous No.22050031]

Kind of unrelated, but I truly dislike militant atheists as people.
I remember seeing a picture of one called Hitchens and he looked like a try hard who wanted to look deep.

[Anonymous No.22050036]

>>22049978
>Theologians wouldn't be able to say something concrete if their life depended on it.
>What IS god though?

There isn't a real concrete answer to this question. God is an interconenctive force between all men which it takes an act of faith to believe in. It is a concept which takes a lot of introspection and open-minded discussion with others.

I had a long essay typed out in response to your previous post but I couldn't bring myself to send it. Too much jargon, etc.

The whole problem of humanity is that we exist to die. So we must at a certain point admit that there is a limit to our perspective. We can study the history of man for eternity, follow each and every scientific notion to its logical and statistically sound conclusion and still we will not have an eternal perspective, which (for whatever reason) we tend to look for.

Why should someone ask if there is a point in God while looking toward something like the Big Bang Theory as an answer and rebuttal? How are these separate concepts except that the camp which brought one answer forward disavows the camp which brought the other?

Aren't we all sort of powerless to the answer no matter what it is?

[Anonymous No.22050040]

>>22049468
Didn't read plus your god's fake

[Anonymous No.22050041]

>>22050031
>and he looked like a try hard

[Anonymous No.22050047]

>>22049468
Super cool identity politics bro! I'm sure that defining categories of people you hate and why will lead you to understanding yourself.

[Anonymous No.22050050]

>>22049956
I can understand you.
There is a subset of atheists who are very shallow, uneducated but who like to act as if they are super intellectuals and superior to everyone else.

[Anonymous No.22050054]

>>22049553
Additionally, if mass/energy is eternal and does not go away, what does that then mean for our consciousness? It being a verifiable, though currently inexplicable phenomenon, we must then come to the conclusion that there is something after death and all that implies.

[Anonymous No.22050057]

>>22050054
reincarnation senpai

[Anonymous No.22050058]

>>22050050
who are very shallow, uneducated but who like to act as if they are super intellectuals and superior to everyone else.

[Anonymous No.22050063]

>>22050041

[Anonymous No.22050064]

>>22050058
kek'd and true

[Anonymous No.22050070]

>>22050063
>Camus cosplay
vs
>gaudy gay superhero

[Anonymous No.22050073]

>>22050058
MAGA Americans don't pretend to be great intellectuals. They have a lot more humility than the subset if militant atheists I'm talking about.

[Anonymous No.22050078]

>>22050073
>They have a lot more humility
holy fuck, keep it coming

[Anonymous No.22050080]

>>22050070
Benedict was not being a tryhard. He was wearing the clothes for his job. This fucker here >>22050063 is a tryhard

[Anonymous No.22050087]

>>22050036
By all means, please post that jargon heavy reply.
Because your argument sounds like a weak and wordy god of gaps deal.

[Anonymous No.22050088]

>>22049678
Because if there is an infinite regress then nothing can come into being because there is no reason for it to exist because there's no start to it. It's an impossibility. Or are you really saying that everything has a cause, except the start of the universe, which just so happens to be causeless?

[Anonymous No.22050094]

>>22050064
Some atheists: religion is fake and merely a tool for political control.
60% of Christians: if you aren't a Christian you're going to be tortured for all eternity and deserve it.
TOTALLY the same.

[Anonymous No.22050095]

>>22050080
The job is tryhard though.
And also, doesn't Hitchens get paid to think? In that case wearing Camus clothing is wearing clothes for his job too, kek.

[Anonymous No.22050098]

>>22050087
I don't think this is going anywhere. I lack the art, and you seem set. Good luck.

[Anonymous No.22050099]

>>22050078
Yes, they do. MAGAs are far more humble than they are.
Even Argentines have more humility than the atheists of the "In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony god's blessings. But because, I am enlightened by my intelligence" kind

[Anonymous No.22050103]

>>22050080
I hated hitchens too because he looks smug as fuck (and he is, and writes like you'd expect him) but the man is based.
The pope though? cringe

[Anonymous No.22050105]

>>22050088
>Or are you really saying that everything has a cause, except the start of the universe, which just so happens to be causeless?
This is you as well though. God is your causeless causer.

[Anonymous No.22050106]

>>22050099
>If you don't believe my religion you are going to hell and deserve it, you degenerate demon.
TOTALLY humble.

[Anonymous No.22050108]

>>22050095
>The job is tryhard though
It is not. No job is "tryhard' you dumbass.

[Anonymous No.22050110]

>>22049825
>>22049829
a totally incomprehensible explanation doesn't seem like much of an explanation

[Anonymous No.22050112]

>>22050108
It is a job where he pretends to be the conduit of a fictional character.

[Anonymous No.22050113]

>>22050088
Linear cause and effect is an abstraction, not the fundamental nature of reality. Reality doesn't progress step-wise in events of atomic cause and effect like dominoes. The fundamental nature of reality is mutual influence: co-causation.

[Anonymous No.22050114]

>>22050106
Why would that be prideful?

[Anonymous No.22050115]

>>22050098
Based, another W for Christ.

[Anonymous No.22050117]

>>22050041
That's how a Pope must look, you absolute retard.

[Anonymous No.22050118]

>>22050117
Exactly, try hard.

[Anonymous No.22050120]

>>22050103
Benedict was smarter than Hitchens and didn't make pictures like this.
He was also intellectually honest, unlike the smug fuck.

[Anonymous No.22050123]

>>22050115
>didn't follow the thread

[Anonymous No.22050125]

>>22050120
How was Benedict smarter?
How was we honest in any way?

[Anonymous No.22050126]

>>22050112
Atheist humor, everyone.>>22050125

[Anonymous No.22050132]

>>22050120
>He was also intellectually honest
He and all popes lie to millions about god's existence though.

[Anonymous No.22050137]

>>22050123
Who else would be defending the concept of god so vehemently but a Christian? I don't think many Muslims visit 4chan.
If you are arguing for some alien, inhuman, unknowable god beyond understanding, what the fuck is the point? Might as well worship the void between the stars.

[Anonymous No.22050138]

>>22050126
>humor
No, i'm serious. That is his job. To dress up like little red riding hood and hoodwink people.

[Anonymous No.22050139]

>>22050105
>This is you as well though. God is your causeless causer.
this is the only legitimate answer in the thread.

Aquinas called it "the unmoved mover"

[Anonymous No.22050141]

>>22050132
And raping kids

[Anonymous No.22050143]

>>22050125
Benedict is considered one of the best theologians of the 20th century. Hitchens is just some polemicist, a left wing Milou Yannipolous.

Also, unlike Hitchens, Benedict didn't write lies to defame someone who spent her life helping dying people in India.

[Anonymous No.22050144]

>>22050105
Precisely. The nature of the universe necessitates a causeless causer, and I think it logical that this is some kind of power or entity to which we give the name "God". Not nothing, since it is clear that some "thing" exists that created this, and existence cannot logically spring from nothing. The nature of this causeless causer is something entirely different however, but I think it clear that it is not non-existence.

[Anonymous No.22050147]

>>22050139
...what?
That is what this whole thread has been about, and how theists can't rule out what they think they can rule out.

[Anonymous No.22050148]

>>22050139
And Aristotle called it bullshit

[Anonymous No.22050150]

>>22050144
it is impossible for us to know

[Anonymous No.22050151]

>>22050132
God is real, so they are telling the truth

[Anonymous No.22050155]

>>22050144
>The nature of this causeless causer is something entirely different however, but I think it clear that it is not non-existence.
AKA you have absolutely nothing to support your claims

[Anonymous No.22050158]

>>22050143
>Benedict is considered one of the best theologians of the 20th century
Why?

[Anonymous No.22050159]

>>22050148
how did Aristotle get to it after the fact?

[Anonymous No.22050162]

>>22050151
cap

[Anonymous No.22050163]

>>22050147
You seem to be responding to yourself at this point.

>>22050155
What a narrow and materialist view this is. Nobody owes you an answer. There isn't a check for every box. The sooner you accept that the more you can allow yourself to be open to ideas in the world

[Anonymous No.22050166]

>>22050163
And I thought atheists were smug, holy shit.

[Anonymous No.22050169]

>>22050155
Prove right now that you exist and are conscious. Or, refute consciousness and therefore existence.

[Anonymous No.22050170]

>>22050163
I accept your concession(s).

[Anonymous No.22050172]

>>22050169
Why? That wouldn't advance the debate.

[Anonymous No.22050175]

>>22050144
I can get behind this.
How does this prove Christianity or any religion whatsoever right?
Why would I believe in what any holy text says?

[Anonymous No.22050180]

>>22050175
>holy text
you are being intellectually dishonest

[Anonymous No.22050182]

>>22050158
That's his reputation. He was famous as a theologian before he became Pope.

[Anonymous No.22050184]

>>22050180
>>22050182
two evasions in a row by team christ
classic

[Anonymous No.22050187]

>>22050114
Do I really need to explicate? "I'm so certain that I know the truth of reality that others deserve endless suffering for not believe it." It's MAXIMAL pride and arrogance.

[Anonymous No.22050188]

>>22049468
>My imaginary sky being can do all of those! atheists BTFO'dDDDDD

[Anonymous No.22050190]

>>22050184
that's an accusation, retard

[Anonymous No.22050195]

>>22050180
Why?
And yeah, how does the universe being created by a god prove Christianity right?

[Anonymous No.22050197]

>>22050118
Wrong. Personifications of Tradition.

[Anonymous No.22050198]

>>22049468
don't forget the most important one
>procreate
they are literally a genetic dead end

[Anonymous No.22050203]

>>22050182
What were his contributions?

[Anonymous No.22050205]

>>22050198
you get bfto every time you post this (not by me though too lazy to go googling rn, you accept my concession etc).

[Anonymous No.22050211]

>>22050198
It doesn't matter because we're going to teach YOUR children critical and creative thinking skills, and those skills will do the rest of the work for us, because that's what we actually care about, not atheism; atheism is the result of us valuing learning.

[Anonymous No.22050216]

>>22050184
>>22050203
https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2022/12/31/pope-benedict-theology-obituary-225604

https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2023/01/02/the-theological-legacy-of-benedict-xvi/

[Anonymous No.22050217]

>>22050203
>well actually, you have no evidence

[Anonymous No.22050226]

>>22050143
You're right, Benedict moved pedos around so they couldn't get prosecuted

[Anonymous No.22050227]

Take your time, nihilist.

[Anonymous No.22050231]

>>22050187
I think you have a few misunderstandings on how we think salvation works.

[Anonymous No.22050236]

>>22050231
Explain how it works

[Anonymous No.22050238]

>>22050172
Because, consciousness itself is as inexplicable and impossible to prove as a cause to the universe. And yet, it exists.
If consciousness and therefore existence is an undeniable truth, then the existence of some fundamental cause to the universe becomes obvious.

>>22050175
It doesn't. This is where faith comes in. For me, personally, it is a belief in Beauty and Love, but I will admit that it varies from person to person and someone may choose to abstain from religious faith. But I think that to claim the universe is causeless is a profound dishonesty, or ignorance.

[Anonymous No.22050239]

>>22050231
the whole thing with this type of atheism is it's
based on assumption rather than investigation

[Anonymous No.22050242]

>>22050205
not your boogeyman, schizo
>>22050211
and the children that fall to your corruption will in turn become genetic dead ends while the biologically fit ones will survive
such is the nature of the world

[Anonymous No.22050247]

>>22050242
Good. Keep the production of slaves steady for the men of the cloth.

[Anonymous No.22050248]

>>22050238
>Because, consciousness itself is as inexplicable and impossible to prove as a cause to the universe. And yet, it exists.
>If consciousness and therefore existence is an undeniable truth, then the existence of some fundamental cause to the universe becomes obvious.
doesn't follow

[Anonymous No.22050252]

>>22050247
I'd tell you to keep your disgusting ga pedophile fantasies to yourself but we all know that is how you atheists """procreate"""

[Anonymous No.22050254]

>>22050216
How has his work impacted your life and your understanding of God?

[Anonymous No.22050256]

>>22050252
>pedophile
catholic church though

[Anonymous No.22050261]

>>22050252
kek.
People as naive and gullible as you make it really tempting to get into religion.

[Anonymous No.22050267]

>>22050248
>doesn't follow

[Anonymous No.22050268]

>>22050256
literally 100% of all catholic priest molestations are a result of you people (communist/atheist/gay/pedophile, it's all interchangeable) infiltrating and attempting to subvert it in the name of your master, satan

[Anonymous No.22050275]

>>22050236
We believe there is a God, that the Good is in God and that the "good end" is to not be separated from God.
Hell would be when out of your own free will you separate yourself from God eternally. Since you won't have access to the Good, we believe this is a bad end of suffering.

This is not about us feeling we are above others. This is about "the universe works like this. If we follow God we will have a better ending than if we don't".
Or, "if you put your hands on fire you will hurt yourself".

[Anonymous No.22050277]

>>22050267
not an argument

>>22050268
lol

[Anonymous No.22050282]

>>22050268
this

[Anonymous No.22050283]

>>22050254
For one, his smacking down of liberation theology.

[Anonymous No.22050285]

>>22050275
>Hell would be when out of your own free will you separate yourself from God
Do you believe that God's omniscience also extends into the future?
Because if he already knows everything that will happen then there is no free will.

[Anonymous No.22050286]

>>22050248
you're not even trying to see the point

[Anonymous No.22050288]

>>22050286
I am, you just don't have a good one.

[Anonymous No.22050291]

>>22050288
>admits close-mindedness

[Anonymous No.22050293]

>>22050275
Who is "we"?
Are you from the same religion that says you literally get tortured forever if you don't believe in God?

[Anonymous No.22050296]

>>22050291
>your point isn't compelling
>you're closed minded
doesn't follow

[Anonymous No.22050304]

>>22050285
We believe God exists outside of time.

>>22050293
I'm Catholic.

[Anonymous No.22050306]

>>22050296
>doesn't follow
>doesn't follow
>doesn't follow

user error

[Anonymous No.22050310]

>>22050304
What does it mean for God to exist outside of time?
Does he already know what will happen or is he also discovering the future along with his creation?

[Anonymous No.22050312]

>>22050306
I accept your concession.

[Anonymous No.22050315]

>>22050248
Correct me if I am wrong here, but the crux of the disagreement is over the cause of the universe; whether it is a causeless causer or non-existence. The problem is that it is impossible to prove either way, because there is no fundamental proof for either position. A discussion on consciousness may seem like a bit of a non-sequitur, I admit, but, upon reflection, we realise that like arguments for the creation of the universe, there is currently no scientific proof or explanation for human consciousness, and yet it is an undeniable truth that every man knows, and lives, and if this is so, does it not then seem impossible for non-existence to be cause for the universe, and human existence?

[Anonymous No.22050325]

>>22050315
>Correct me if I am wrong here, but the crux of the disagreement is over the cause of the universe; whether it is a causeless causer or non-existence.
You are wrong here. The debate was initially more about god vs eternal mass.

[Anonymous No.22050336]

>>22050325
how do you not see that those are the same thing?

[Anonymous No.22050337]

>>22050336
i'm out

[Anonymous No.22050349]

Atheists are proud to stick to the level of reality, and then, for this exact reason, never create beautiful things.

What a sad, unforgiving fate.

[Anonymous No.22050360]

>>22050349
How does sticking to reality relate to not creating beautiful things?

[Anonymous No.22050363]

>>22050349
>forests aren't beautiful
Bennatar pls.

[Anonymous No.22050377]

>>22050310
It is kind of hard to explain (reason why it took this long to answer), but God exists at all times. God doesn't "feel" time passing like we do.

[Anonymous No.22050382]

>>22050377
So he knows everything that will happen or not?

[Anonymous No.22050387]

>>22050382
Yes

[Anonymous No.22050389]

>>22050349
Science haven't seen revolution since the early 20th century because atheistic proclivity dominated academia and society in general. When you think about it Math and Physics are first and foremost a search for beauty which happen to sometimes work empirically, No wonder we haven't seen unified theories since then, It takes beautiful minds to create beautiful solutions, And current society and academia is shaping ugly minds.

[Anonymous No.22050392]

>>22050387
If he knows everything that will happen, then he already knows who is going to hell and who isn't. how is free will real?

[Anonymous No.22050399]

>>22050389
Exactly. Also, funnily enough, certain scientific findings are turning against science and science people by forcing them to take into consideration the possibility of God. Absolute debacle of le science.

[Anonymous No.22050401]

>>22050392
>>22050389
>>22050387
>>22050382
>>22050377
>>22050360
>>22050349
>>22050336
>>22050306
>>22050277
>>22050275
>>22050268
>>22050248
>>22050242
>>22050238
What level of incel do you have to be to argue about this shit on 4chan all day?

Go to the gym and do something productive faggs

[Anonymous No.22050404]

>>22050401
Faggot

[Anonymous No.22050411]

>>22050399
What scientific findings are doing this?

[Anonymous No.22050412]

>>22050392
I don't get your point.

[Anonymous No.22050421]

>>22050401
>he doesn't quote the one retard posting "not an argument" and "doesn't follow" ad infinitum

[Anonymous No.22050442]

>>22050412
>God let's you have free will
>But he already knows what you will do
>So there is already a "path" your life will follow since God can see it
Where is the free will in that?

[Anonymous No.22050451]

>>22049658
>mystical proclivities
Holy cope.

[Anonymous No.22050461]

>>22050389
Einstein didn't believe in god albeit

[Anonymous No.22050462]

>>22049732
>you have no idea what the religion of christ is about
So you deny the sci-fi miracles?

[Anonymous No.22050467]

>>22050442
God is outside of time, bro. Present at all times at the same time.
I'm not very good at explaining this (sorry) but if you can grasp that you can understand why they are compatible.

[Anonymous No.22050472]

>>22050467
Yeah, so he is present when a person is born and when a person is damned to hell. So the person being born is already in hell.
There is no free will.

[Anonymous No.22050473]

>>22050054
No we don't retard. Consciousness is correlative to a VERY specific structure of matter. VERY SPECIFIC. There is nothing fundamentally, constitutionally different about the elements which compose the human brain in comparison to other structures. But the difference is this very specific structure. Once the homeostasis of the structure breaks, consciousness evaporates. Simple as that.

[Anonymous No.22050484]

>posts a shitload of made up bullshit, not even trying to sound real
>now discuss and entertain me
kys

[Anonymous No.22050485]

Hate atheists so much. Can’t think of a sadder religion. Lower then cynics

They have no morals. They always say things like, "you don't need religion to have morals". But then you ask them what their morals are, and they have no answer. If they do have an answer, it's always some untested fad beliefe.

Meanwhile, Abrahamic moral structures have been scientifically tested and developed over the course of thousands of years.

You don't have any morals.
You just say you do. You make some blanket statement like, " I have every moral". But you can't name any of them. Your just talking about hypotheticals. Point to your moral belief system? It's not there. You just make it up as you go. It's just a fad to you.

[Anonymous No.22050500]

>>22050485
Based, I have no morals.

[Anonymous No.22050510]

>>22050485
>noooooooo you need the heckin morals and you need a bullet list of them, preferably in markdown

[Anonymous No.22050517]

>>22050411
nta, but it's well known that a lot of astronomers and quantum physicists have started to admit the necessity of god in the last 30-40 years

[Anonymous No.22050524]

>>22050517
>a lot of astronomers and quantum physicists have started to admit the necessity of god in the last 30-40 years
Like?

[Anonymous No.22050527]

>>22050524
elon musk for example

[Anonymous No.22050533]

>>22050527
Anyone else?

[Anonymous No.22050540]

>>22050533
lol I am not that anon, elon musk was just a bait

[Anonymous No.22050566]

>>22049553
Even if the universe was created by a being, it doesn't postulate the Christian god. In that case, it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things because Christians still believe in a social construct and they are therefore objectively mistaken.

[Anonymous No.22050574]

>>22050533
yuval noah harari

[Anonymous No.22050580]

>>22050566
The Christian God is the perfect Human, you absolute brainlet retarded subhuman. It was placed there for you to imitate Him, for you to be better than what you are, for you to learn to be great. You fucking shit-filled toilet skull.

[Anonymous No.22050593]

>>22050472
Think about it like this.
We know the results of Charlemagne's actions. How he fought the Saxons, how he was crowned Emperor. Does that mean Charlemagne had no free will?

[Anonymous No.22050647]

>>22050593
The problem is that no one knew what was going to happen and things unfolded and went down in history, but in this case we have an external observer who already knows everything that will occur before it does and passes judgement.
It's like being a character in a movie. The plot is already laid out , the movie recorded and the character cannot do anything different at all no matter how many times you rewatch the movie.

[Anonymous No.22050671]

>>22049720
Atheism is a meme sect of Talmudic Judaism.
They share nearly all values and are politically nearly identical.

A good point though slightly off

[Anonymous No.22050673]

>>22050485
>hate
find jesus

[Anonymous No.22050684]

>>22050647
Suppose you get a time machine and can watch Charlemagne's life as a ghost. Wouldn't that keep his free will, even if you know everything he will do?

[Anonymous No.22050712]

>>22050684
If you could go back in time as a ghost and be an observer to events that you know will occur and you can't alter in any way or form I suppose that would be a big W for hard-determinism.
You wouldn't be seeing history in he making, you would be seeing a previous state of matter. Like a cube of ice before it melted
When you put it like that, it does feel like there is no free will at all. God or not.

[Anonymous No.22050829]

>>22050712
There is a free will. In my example you just watched what happened as if happened.

[Anonymous No.22050909]

>>22050036
Why would you dedicate your life to something so inconcrete? It also completely negates OPs shitty points. You still have no objective morals.

[Anonymous No.22051187]

>>22050829

Not the other guy btw, but let me chime in. You don't understand what the omniscience(all-knowing) and omnibenevolence(supremely good)of God begs. I think this is elementary level of the argument for or against God.

1. God is all knowing: he knows what man will do from birth to grave.
2. God punishes said man to hell for committing sin.
3. The judgment is passed because of free will(I acted on my own volition and consequences are justly served).
4. God is omnipotent(all powerful) and controls ALL things - a logical necessity since he can not be called omnipotent if there is a single occurrence that he has no control of(it is a contradiction if man can move about and cause events outside of God's control).
5. If God controls all things then he controls what a man will do.

Imagine a scenario where you push a cart, causing it to move forward, lead it to a location X. This is where you come into picture; you posit that the cart was placed in location "X" because of it's "free will", you imply that it was the cart's choice to place itself on location "X"; however, this is not true since you had a direct involvement; the cart was merely a vehicle or vessel to achieve a purpose; a dumb means to an end. This free will can not coexist with the Christian God(which claims him to be omnipotent, omnibelevolent, and omniscient).

Suppose you have a child, a daughter, you take her to a park, to an ice cream truck, there are two flavors; vanilla and strawberry, you know she will pick strawberry, and this strawberry will make her suffer from a terrible allergy. Knowing all this you still allow her to pick strawberry and even planned all the events leading to that choice of picking strawberry ice cream. Would you say you are a decent parent? A loving one? Let alone an ALL loving parent?
Such arrogance at display; although this is a necessity in the christian belief system. That is why I see it far from happening, that I will believe in the God of the bible.

[Anonymous No.22051228]

>>22051187
bretty based