Irrefutable

[Anonymous No.22973581]

I'm not even a Fedora but come on! All the counter-arguments reek of cope.

[Anonymous No.22973583]

I'm not going to take a materialist seriously in the year 2024.

[Anonymous No.22973585]

this was refuted by a polyamorous trio of gay men in california adopting a child a few years back. turns out religion carries most of the weight for civilization.

[Anonymous No.22973619]

>>22973581
Atheists are so gay and I hate having to be associated with them as a humanist. Humanism should be like nietzschean ayn rand shit not this faggy fedora crap.

[Anonymous No.22973625]

>>22973585
this could be the plot of a jewish comedy for the goyim and the women

[Anonymous No.22973649]

Well, you're not that great yourself, Mr. Hitchens

Hitchens states that John Wycliffe and Myles Coverdale were burned alive by the Church in the 14th and 16th century, when both died of old age. (page 125)

In the previous sentence, he claims that "There would have been no Protestant Reformation, if it were not for the long struggle to have the Bible rendered into 'the Vulgate'" ([sic], he means vernacular, vulgate refers to a specific 4th century translation of the Bible... in latin), even though a German translation had existed for centuries, and Gutenberg Mentellin printed his German Bible in 1455 1466, nearly fifty five years before Luther's 95 theses! (p.125)

(And speaking of Martin Luther, he is famously said to have spoken the words "Here I stand, I can do no other" at the Diet of Worms in 1521, not in Wittenberg and not in 1517 as Hitchens states. He also did not nail his 95 theses to the door of "Wittenberg Cathedral", which had and still has no Cathedrals, but to the door of All Saint's Church) (p.180)

The entire section about the alleged refusal to translate the Bible is a gold mine of major mistakes. Hitchens states that "all religions have staunchly resisted any attempt to translate their sacred texts into languages 'understood of the people'", which is so incorrect I don't even know where to start. Not only is this reductive to a single stereotype about the Bible, completely ignoring basically every other holy book and text in the history of the World, but it's not even true of the Bible! Allow me to quote William Hamblin on the subject: "The Bible was the most widely translated book in the ancient world. It was translated into Greek (the Septuagint, second century bc), Aramaic (Targum, by the first century bc), Old Latin (second century ad), Syriac (Peshitta, third century ad), Coptic (Egyptian, fourth century ad), Gothic (Old German, fourth century ad), Latin (Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, late fourth century ad), Armenian (early fifth century ad), Ethiopic (fifth century ad), Georgian (fifth century ad), Old Nubian (by the eighth century ad), Old Slavonic (ninth century ad), and Arabic (Saadia Gaon’s version, early tenth century ad). " (p.125)

[Anonymous No.22973652]

>>22973649

Hitchens concludes that Buddhism is anti-intellectual based on a written sign he saw at Bhagwan Sri Rajneesh's (Osho) Ashram... Who was a Hindu. Or rather, a cult leader who was barely recognizable as even a Hindu. So much for his ten pages on the "Eastern solution". (p.196)

He states that Jesus Christ was actually born in 4 AD... When all the serious scholarship I found on the subject agrees on a date around 6 BC, and definitely before 4 BC (which is when the infamous King Herod died). (p.60)

He misattributes a quote to Thomas Aquinas (famous for his breadth of scholarship) of "I am a man of one book" as proof of his narrow-mindedness... When the real quote is "I fear the man of one book", and even that quote is highly suspect considering it first cropped up in the 17th century. Hitchens himself however seems to be the only source for his version of the quote, as far as I can tell... So where did he get it from? (p.63)

Hitchens gets Bart Ehrman's name wrong ("Barton" Ehrman?) multiple times despite quoting him extensively through his book, misattributes work to him, and claims he's Christian when he's long identified as an agnostic atheist (he's still alive today, he really could have just asked him). (p.120, 142, 298)

He claims that the early Church burned and suppressed the works of Aristotle and the Ancient Greeks, which is not only complete fabrication, but especially egregious since the only reason so many even survived the fall of the Western Roman Empire is that the (Christian) Eastern Roman Empire and Christian monasteries in Western Europe actively preserved and copied both, and often incorporated their thoughts into their own philosophies and scholarship. (p.25)

Hitchens gets even basic names wrong while talking about the book of Mormon: "Nephi the son of Lephi" is in fact the son of Lehi, and the "made-up battle of Cumora" would in fact be made up since it's the battle of Cumorah. So much for his alleged "close and erudite reading of the major religious texts". (p.163, 167)

[Anonymous No.22973654]

>>22973649
Pedantry and nothing else. None of these inaccuracies make God real.

[Anonymous No.22973655]

>>22973652

afflingly, he gets the date of the American Civil Rights Act wrong in the same section, "1965" instead of 1964! Where was the editor!? (Especially since the Mormon revelation he tries to place before the passage of the Civil Rights act was actually 13 years after his own incorrect date, in 1978) (p.167)

Hitchens calls John Adams a slaveholder, even though Adams is famously notable for being one of only two among the first twelve US presidents not to own any slaves! (p.181)

This one is just incredible. Hitchens classifies the great (agnostic) physicist Fred Hoyle as a "creationist" for supporting the "Steady-State" theory that was the main rival to the Big Bang theory... When it reality Hoyle opposed the Big Bang Theory partly because of its implied confirmation of Genesis 1:1 (According to Hoyle, it was cosmic chutzpah of the worst kind: “The reason why scientists like the ‘big bang’ is because they are overshadowed by the Book of Genesis.”)! The Big Bang Theory which was first hypothesized by Georges Lemaître... a Catholic priest!!! Not only was the Steady-State theory perfectly legitimate and respected in its time (before it was disproven by Hubble), but Hitchens has somehow taken an agnostic physicist opposing a physicist priest's theory because it sounded too theistic, and turned it into a creationist's dogma-fueled denial of the "true" science! It would have been impossible to be more wrong had he actively tried to be! (p.65)

Hitchens claims he was a "guarded admirer" of pope John Paul II. This seems to be at odds with his previous writings in the hit piece he wrote at his death in which John Paul II is described as, I quote "an elderly and querulous celibate, who came too late and who stayed too long", and suggested that the only reason he would not burn eternally for his crimes was that he was too rational to believe in Hell. (p.193)

[Anonymous No.22973659]

>>22973652
Again, so what? God is still not great.

[Anonymous No.22973660]

>>22973655
he Arian Heresy never taught that the Father and Son were "two incarnations of the same person", as Hitchens claims in passing snark about Kim Jong-Il and Kim Jong-Un. In fact, it taught the exact opposite, that the Father and Son were two wholly distinct entities, with the Son begotten by and subordinate to the Father. (p.248)

He claims that the Rwandan genocide, where one Catholic ethnic group tried to exterminate a different Catholic ethnic group, was caused by religion on the basis of an obscure prophecy uttered by a fringe sect leader (whose nickname he gets wrong as "Little Pebbles" instead of "The Little Pebble") seven years before the genocide and at best briefly co-opted by the Hutus, rather than the perfectly secular ethnic tensions most historians agree are the cause. I have been able to find no actual historian seriously naming the excommunicated mystic as a cause of the Rwandan genocide other than Hitchens. (p.190)

Hitchens affirms that Protestants were forbidden from holding office in Maryland, when that was actually Catholics. (p.34)

He repeats the tired myth of Pius XII being a "pro-nazi" pope when his only source (in a rare instance of him naming it) is John Cornwell's infamous book "Hitler's Pope", which was criticized so much by the historian community that Cornwell was forced to publicly back down from his own claims in 2004, three years before Hitchens would quote them extensively in god is not Great. (p.239-240)

[Anonymous No.22973661]

>>22973660
In a similar vein, he writes that "Benito Mussolini had barely seized power in Italy before the Vatican made an official treaty with him, known as the Lateran Pact of 1929"... Except Mussolini took power on October 29, 1922. Seven years earlier. (p.235)

Hitchens claims that theists "yielded, not without a struggle, to the overwhelming evidence of evolution", when Darwin was a Christian convinced that God was the "First Cause" of evolution, and though he later became agnostic, he stated that "In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God", and the Roman Church never opposed the theory of evolution. Not only that, but he conveniently ignores that the field of genetics was founded by Gregor Mendel, an Augustinian Monk. (p.85)

He calls T. S. Eliot a "Catholic intellectual" even though he was an Anglican (probably on the basis that he once described himself as "Anglo-Catholic", but that is a current within Anglicanism and most certainly not a profession to Roman Catholicism) (p.237)

Hitchens snarks that all the splinters and nails of the True Cross, if put together, would make a "thousand-foot cross", but a 19th-century painstaking cataloguing of all known splinters by Charles Rohault de Fleury found they a total mass of about 4000 cubic centimeters. For reference, that's almost precisely one American gallon. (p.135)

He quotes the controversial Fawn Brodie's equally controversial claims about Mormonism by referring to her as "Dr. Fawn Brodie"... Even though she's never held any sort of doctorate. (p.162)

[Anonymous No.22973663]

Heretics will be the first ones to burn in the fifth reich

[Anonymous No.22973667]

>>22973661
e states that Orthodox Jews have sex "through a hole in a sheet". None of the three branches of Judaism have any such bizarre impositions, and any amount of research should have disproved this tired old anti-Semitic myth of sexual deviancy from a religion notable for actually encouraging husbands and wives to make love as a point of doctrine. An especially head-scratching passage considering his copy-editor and publisher were both Jewish. (p.54)

Hitchens affirms that religion is necessarily hostile to medicine, when both Christianity and Islam were building hospitals and at the forefront of furthering medical research, which he conveniently ignores. (p.46-47)

He claims that "a papal army set out to recapture Bethlehem and Jerusalem from the Muslims, incidentally destroying many Jewish communities and sacking heretical Christian Byzantium along the way", which must have made it an army of prodigiously long-lived individuals, since those are events from the First and Fourth Crusades, over a hundred years apart. Not that even this is relevant, since the Rhineland massacres were perpetrated by the People's Crusade that was most definitely not endorsed by the Pope, much less a "Papal Army". (p.23)

[Anonymous No.22973671]

>>22973667
Perhaps not a "false claim" so much a particularly ironic erring: "The loss of faith can be compensated by the newer and finer wonders that we have before us, as well as by immersion in the near-miraculous work of Homer and Shakespeare and Milton and Tolstoy and Proust", as of these only Proust was not devoutly religious (and not even an atheist, an agnostic): Homer's tale is entirely inspired and animated by the gods, Shakespeare was a conforming member of the Church of England, though some historians suspect he was secretly Catholic, Milton's religious views inspired many of his greatest works including the explicitly religious Paradise Lost and, particularly ironic, Tolstoy rejected Hitchens's thesis that the meaning of life can come from art or philosophy or science, stating instead that "only faith can give truth". (p.151)

Hitchens affirms that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was "announced or discovered" in 1852, and the dogma of the Assumption in 1951. The dates he was looking for are 1854 and 1950. (p.117)

He repeats the schoolyard myth of ancient theologians arguing about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin even though it's common knowledge that it's a satire of medieval "scholastics". (p.68)

Hitchens makes the baffling claim that "there is no country in the world today where slavery is still practiced where the justification of it is not derived from the Koran", conveniently ignoring China, Brazil, and arguably the USA, among many others. (p.181)

[Anonymous No.22973674]

>>22973583
Me neither, I mean if you’re gonna be a skeptic either be agnostic or a deist or fuck off.

[Anonymous No.22973680]

>>22973671
And lastly, though this is most certainly not my area of expertise, a New Testament PhD scholar found in god is not Great fifteen "factual errors" in addition to sixteen that he believes show "a substantial misunderstanding or distortion of the evidence", which it's probably better for you to read there rather than hear from me. The most egregious though is when Hitchens claims that none of the four gospels can agree on "anything of substance" when three of them largely share the same text, and all of them agree on the most important facts of Jesus' life, such as him dying in Jerusalem at Passover under the authority of Pontius Pilates with the complicity of local Jewish leaders. Unless Hitchens would somehow consider this unarguably central part of the story to be "unimportant".

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/series/god-is-not-great-by-christopher-hitchens-a-response/

[Anonymous No.22973682]

>>22973654
I could use empiricism as a standpoint and doubt the physical existence of ‘you’ because I can’t tell whether you’re a bot or not. It would be an exercise in pedantry but religion and god is a feeling you either get, or don’t. You can’t weasel a believer out of faith with reason. I’m the farthest thing from atheist but you should drop it.

[Anonymous No.22973684]

>>22973649
I love this pedantic troll like you wouldn’t believe

[Anonymous No.22973686]

turns out an atheist who is famous only for being a quipping little cunt was a retard that couldn't do the simplest of fact checking, who knew? get some better idols reddit.

[Anonymous No.22973689]

If atheists are so convinced God doesn't exist, why don't they kill themselves?

[Anonymous No.22973696]

>>22973689
Erm, because they don't want to die?

[Anonymous No.22973703]

>>22973696
Why not? Everything is meaningless and there is no life after death: kys.

[Anonymous No.22973711]

>>22973671
how fucking high do you have to be to reference Tolstoy of all people in this context

[Anonymous No.22973718]

>>22973703
>Everything is meaningless
(not true, by the way)
>and there is no life after death
...so they enjoy this life instead. That wasn't so hard to figure out, was it?

[Anonymous No.22973720]

>>22973718
But it's all just chemicals, it's not real.

[Anonymous No.22973735]

>>22973720
he's probably 15 and hasn't grasped what the worldview he adopted to spite his parents entails yet.

[Anonymous No.22973738]

>>22973720
Not my problem.

[Anonymous No.22973743]

>>22973738
Kys

[Anonymous No.22973746]

>>22973720
how are you going to explain to christ come judgement day why you "poorly" attempted to pressure someone into such a grave sin like killing themselves?

>And he said to his disciples, “Temptations to sin are sure to come, but woe to the one through whom they come!
>It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were cast into the sea than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin.

[Anonymous No.22973749]

>>22973743
No, I don't think I will.

[Anonymous No.22973759]

>>22973583
fpbp

[Anonymous No.22973760]

>>22973746
That I did it to some soulless bugman who would be better off dead anyways
>>22973749
You should though. What reasons do you have to keep on living?

[Sage No.22973765]

>>22973581
Atheistlets...it's time to get some new material...

[Anonymous No.22973779]

>>22973760
>What reasons do you have to keep on living?
Spending time with my family and my friends, pursuing my interests, experiencing/discovering new things? And that's just the absolute basics. Are these things all foreign to you?

[Anonymous No.22973782]

>>22973760
I will pray for your soul, anon, you clearly need it

[Anonymous No.22973787]

>>22973649
>>22973652
>>22973655
>>22973660
>>22973661
>>22973667
>>22973671

What a mess. Very very disrespectful.

[Anonymous No.22973812]

>>22973787
I bet he would have loved Epstein Island too

[Anonymous No.22973833]

>>22973671
Jesus christ how embarassing

[Anonymous No.22973852]

>>22973833
It gets worse

[Anonymous No.22973856]

>>22973585
There's never been a single instance of sexual misconduct in the entire length of christendom.

[Anonymous No.22973859]

>>22973856
open sexual misconduct is a completely different story

[Anonymous No.22973865]

>>22973859
Those fags were sentenced for rape so how is any of this comparable?

[Anonymous No.22973869]

Hitchens is a product of the media industry. Like a Perterson 30 years ago. It belongs to the trash

[Anonymous No.22973880]

>>22973865
they weren't in my example and they aren't comparable so i don't know why you made the comparison. a community observing christian values can only have perverse behavior occurring in secret. men are flawed but christianity mitigates what they are capable of drastically.

[Anonymous No.22973908]

>>22973880
?????
Do you think they were raping their adoptive sons in the open? Why do you think this is a scandal?

[Anonymous No.22973924]

New Athesits haven't changed one bit since the 2000s. Most people have moved on to other trifles, but they still carry on as though Bush was still in office and Hitchens still walked the Earth. How can they not see the mileau changed around them?

[Anonymous No.22973939]

>>22973581
He was wrong about Mother Terresa, and his debates give me no reason to think this work will be the product of better research. Hitchens was a polemicist first and a truth seeker second.

[Anonymous No.22973944]

>>22973939
And you are just a coper.

[Anonymous No.22973952]

>>22973649
You do good work, anon. Keep at it.

[Anonymous No.22974009]

>>22973649
> Hitchens states that "all religions have staunchly resisted any attempt to translate their sacred texts into languages 'understood of the people'"
str8 cap
Cyril and Methodie are a great counterexample

[Anonymous No.22974182]

I would have a lot more respect for Christopher Hitchens if he hadn't become one of the most vocal supporters of America's invasion of the Middle East after 9/11. He went from "all religions are poisonous tools to control the masses" to "Islam specifically is the only bad religion, please pay me for speaking appearances so I can keep slobbering Christian Imperialist dick" practically overnight.

[Anonymous No.22974191]

>>22973939
If you've never read it, Simon Leys has a spectacular essay about how Christopher Hitchens got basically every major point in The Missionary Position completely wrong.

[Anonymous No.22974373]

>>22974191
I'll look it up. Thanks.

[Anonymous No.22974379]

>>22973856
kek
GOT EEEM

[Anonymous No.22974384]

>>22973924
There's a significant portion of people who lived through the early 2000s and were convinced by media and entertainment that it was the end of history. They cannot move past this point ideologically.

[Anonymous No.22974410]

>>22973581
Atheist here. I'm not a fan of Hitchens. Whenever I hear him talk or read something he wrote it can be boiled down to "Some Christians do bad things in the name of their religion so Christianity is false," when in reality all that proves is that humans do terrible things sometimes. It doesn't disprove the Bible itself. I'm an atheist because the Bible is loaded with contradictions and historical/scientific errors, not because people do bad things in the name of religion.

[Anonymous No.22975661]

>>22973649
Now imagine if the author of that article treated the Bible with the same level of scrutiny

[Anonymous No.22975681]

>>22973649
>>22973652
BASED.
Fuck Hitchens.

[Anonymous No.22975683]

>>22973654
>>22973659
cope & seethe

[Anonymous No.22975702]

>>22974410
You're anti-christian, more like. Christianity is not he only religion.

[Anonymous No.22975718]

Imagine still being a militant fedora atheist in 2024.

Even your old role models think you are fucking cringe at this point.

[Anonymous No.22975755]

>>22973908
can't explain shit to a cockroach that feeds on it

[Anonymous No.22975920]

>>22973581
Christopher Hitchens lol
>*drinks furiously*
>there has never been a more ferocious, more savage, more brutal tyrant than the great cosmic despot in the *belch* sky
>*really chugging it down*
>he who plagues children with bone cancer and *hiccup* condemns gays to hell
>*opens 2nd fifth of gin*
>and...and..*hiccup* and he's...woah...uh he's a FACKING CUNT, A FACKING STUPID CUNT. HAHA, YOU HEAR THAT DAD? HAHAHAHA. YOU CANT GET ME NOW DAD. IM *BELCH* IM A MAN NOW DADDY, HAHAHAHA. YOU CANT GET ME. FACK YOU AND *hiccup* FACK GOD
>HAHAHAHAHAhaha...hahaha...ha....
>*starts crying*

[Anonymous No.22976091]

>>22973585
>polygamy
bad
>polyamorous
gud

[Anonymous No.22976478]

>>22975920
*projecting this hard*

[Anonymous No.22977324]

>>22973581
>Fedora
Why are you even acknowledging this shit? These religious retards don't even know the difference between a fedora and a trilby, so I'm not surprised evoking some random image of a fat neckbeard guy is still the only "argument" they have after all these years.

[Anonymous No.22977376]

>>22973585
Toleration of gay polycules adopting children is downstream of Christian exaltation of the weak, deformed, sickly etc., an actual scientific materialist would just pull up abuse rate stats for gay adoptions and conclude it probably isn't a good idea.

[Anonymous No.22977380]

>>22973583
*in the year of our Lord 2024.

[Anonymous No.22977381]

>>22977376
>something un-christian is actually christian!
lol

[Anonymous No.22977387]

>>22977381
>is downstream of
Once gays started to be branded as historical victims by the late 1960s or so, anti-gay sentiment was doomed in Christendom. The fact that Christians online present themselves as a bulwark against Globohomo (tm) and not much else just shows how far fallen the faith is - the rest of it got absorbed into social democracy and socialism.

[Anonymous No.22977447]

>>22973581
If there were no God, it would be necessary to invent him.
--Voltaire

[Anonymous No.22977460]

>>22973583
>Being this attached to your illusions
ishygddt

[Anonymous No.22977465]

>>22977447
that's what Biden said about Israel

[Anonymous No.22977483]

>>22977460
Rare Freud L, despite his writing in CAID, which was an otherwise insightful book.

[Anonymous No.22977486]

>>22973944
>look mom I said it. Hey is dad back from the store yet?

[Anonymous No.22977505]

do people actually take this guy seriously or is it just a meme? it’s all youtube tier polemic

[Anonymous No.22977510]

>>22973720
Chemicals are what make things real

[Anonymous No.22977520]

>>22975718
W*men just default to the men's opinion around them, she hangs out with Peterson so of course she became a Christcuck. Doesn't make your magic sky daddy any more appealing, idiot.

[Anonymous No.22977521]

>>22977505
cope

[Anonymous No.22977526]

>>22977483
"God" being a magic father figure in the sky is so far into Freud's wheelhouse it's not even funny. Society projects an authority figure who knows all and sees all and either punishes or rewards actions of it's "children". How much more on-the-nose can it get?

[Anonymous No.22977530]

>>22977505
Are you acquainted with the beliefs of Christians? It's a cult of cannibalistic human sacrifice where most of the adherents just decided to chop up their baby sons' dicks when they are born because the Jews do.

[Anonymous No.22977533]

>>22977520
Isn't it a school night, kid?

[Anonymous No.22977538]

>>22977533
Christianity is cringe

[Anonymous No.22977539]

>>22977530
this is exactly what I mean. using silly language to describe anything is a way to exacerbate incredulity. it’s polemic. it’s not an actual argument
>most
you mean specifically american protestants, last time i checked most christians are catholic. but please by all means make it clearer how much your childhood “trauma” poisons your amerimutt judgment

[Anonymous No.22977540]

>>22977538
yeah posting 5 year old wojaks after getting btfo for an entire thread will really convince people

[Anonymous No.22977542]

>>22977540
>getting btfo
Here we see the delusion so typical to Christcucks

[Anonymous No.22977545]

>>22977540
If not underageds I think it's pajeets who post this shit, it's always the same four or five wojaks and overbearing spamming of "christcuck" whilst never actually adding anything of discursive value.

[Anonymous No.22977547]

>>22977542
>posts more redditjaks instead of arguments
this is why why you’re the only one defending the midwit hitchens itt. you’re stuck in the past

[Anonymous No.22977551]

>>22977539
>most christians are catholic
Yes, and Catholics consume the flesh and blood of a God made human. Thus they are literally a cult of cannibalistic human sacrifice. This isn't a polemic description, it is a literal one. There is a long history of magical thinking that sacrificing a human being will cause magical effects, Christianity is just one of the enduring delusions. Read a book.

[Anonymous No.22977558]

>>22977551
>read a book
>cites retarded proto campbell tier comparative mythology that has been repudiated by every accredited historian for the last 50 years
i’d rather read actual books.

[Anonymous No.22977561]

>>22977547
The Christian beliefs are so abhorrent to the normal moral conscious that you have to be deeply delusional to accept it.

[Anonymous No.22977565]

>>22977558
>"B-bu-but that's been deboooonked by accredited historians!"
gtfo you moron

[Anonymous No.22977569]

>>22977551
>Thus they are literally a cult of cannibalistic human sacrifice
that’s so erotic

[Anonymous No.22977572]

>>22977565
the book is literally on the level of the stuff you’re trying to criticise. i’m sure you haven’t actually read it at all
>the fishier king is totally a fertility ritual if you ignore 90% of the context around it
it’s fucking retarded. it’s taking butchered quotes from random shit and forcing it with other ones through a tortured modernist narrative. there’s a reason nobody born after 1950 cites it

[Anonymous No.22977578]

>>22977561
>the normal moral conscious
ie made up arbitrary bullshit by your own definition- why would I care? appeal to crowds all you want, I don’t need to believe they’re right because they outnumber me.

[Anonymous No.22977584]

>>22973649
Based. Fedora tippers who regurgitate into the idea that the Bible wasn't translated in order to keep it's content secret from laypeople are complete retards (i.e. the vast majority of people were illiterate and if you weren't odds are you were educated in Latin).

[Anonymous No.22977588]

>>22977572
It references a huge number of examples of many things including kings who are sacrificed when they become too old or there is a blight on the land as a magical remedy, and how this was then transposed onto the son of the king. There are also similar things in Greek and Egyptian myths. You are just coping and seething, Christianity belongs to the same anthropological tradition of deranged people deluded into thinking that the ritual murder of a human being can cause magic things to happen. You are a primitive mind who has accepted primitive beliefs.

[Anonymous No.22977590]

>>22977578
Bro, even ancient Greeks like Aristotle knew that virtues could be discovered by reason. Don't act like they are arbitrary.

[Anonymous No.22977592]

>>22977565
>retard: read a book [tips fedora]
>anon: that book is bad though
>retard: HISTORIANS PFFFF!
The unearned/false intellectual pride of fedora tippers is always good for a laugh. Never change.

[Anonymous No.22977598]

>>22977590
aristotle assumed a telos to justify his virtue ethics. i’m clearly arguing with a moron, kek. baked into his moral system is the idea that things are literally created and constantly formed with an end, a purpose, a final cause. central to his system was the first mover, ie, literally a god. you citing him (aristotle actually doesn’t share your view on biology at all, he doesn’t think beings are the product of random evolution or self interested chemical processes) isn’t an argument in defence of your own views either. you can’t coherently explain to me why morality is a compelling or objective system under materialism. nobody has ever been able to do this

[Anonymous No.22977600]

>>22977588
ie, the same thing “zeitgeist” does. I guess im primitive because of what that shit said too

[Anonymous No.22977603]

>>22977592
It's infinitely amusing that someone defending the belief that a magic Heavenly Father had a human son who he had born in order to be ritually executed as a sacrifice to atone for his creation eating a fruit he created and put in front of them so he could forgive them of doing a crime before they had the knowledge of good and evil and thus incapable of Mens Rea, and who held untold number of future generations responsible for that crime will then accuse others of having too high an opinion of their own beliefs. It's amazing to behold.

[Anonymous No.22977622]

>>22977598
Morality is a utilitarian way of maximizing things that we want to have happen. This is perfectly justified under materialism along rational grounds. The moral compass which has evolved around fairness and compassion is exactly tuned to the necessary prerequisites for a functional society. It's not surprising to me that you can't comprehend this though and require a diving father figure to mandate that certain things are good before you'll accept them, you don't seem like that bright of a cookie.

[Anonymous No.22977623]

>>22977598
Morality is a utilitarian way of maximizing things that we want to have happen. This is perfectly justified under materialism along rational grounds. The moral compass which has evolved around fairness and compassion is exactly tuned to the necessary prerequisites for a functional society. It's not surprising to me that you can't comprehend this though and require a divine father figure to mandate that certain things are good before you'll accept them, you don't seem like that bright of a cookie.

[Anonymous No.22977625]

>>22977622
>we want to have happen
ie, appeal to consensus argument ad populum
>perfectly justified
stating something doesn’t make it true
>fairness and compassion
not absolute unchanging concepts, they vary wildly through history and different societies. chemcial emotional in itself, even if it was universal, which it isn’t, wouldn’t be compelling either. evolution and brain chemistry is utterly meaningless, it’s the result of atomic collisions which are completely amoral
>functional society
appeal to nature / efficiency
>you can’t comprehend
sure thing pal

[Anonymous No.22977626]

>>22977603
>fedora sperg
LOL! Thanks.

[Anonymous No.22977631]

>>22977625
kek, you literally can't comprehend anything. Game Theory is not variable, the same outcomes will result from the same givens. And I literally said it's utilitarian and you accuse me of appealing to efficiency? LOL. Human beings desire certain things. There is a certain code of morality which facilitates this the best. Therefore there is an objectively optimal moral code which will best allow the most people to obtain the best outcomes for them.

[Anonymous No.22977632]

>>22977626
>(You)

[Anonymous No.22977633]

>>22977631
>I make up an arbitrary consensus about what people want and apparently mathematical formulas can provide us this.
barring this retardation, the is ought thing is a massive stumbling block for you. these observations aren’t a compelling reason for me to do anything nor are they an objective law. they’re suggestions based on the data of utterly meaningless conditions

[Anonymous No.22977638]

>>22977633
>is ought thing
Meaningless. People do desire things and there is an optimal way to fulfill these desires.

[Anonymous No.22977644]

>>22977638
Okay. I desire for you to be dead. What is the optimal way for me to fulfil that desire? What’s your address?

[Anonymous No.22977655]

>>22977644
Your aggregate desires will suffer by this course of action, therefore you won't do a damn thing. Bitch.

[Anonymous No.22977656]

>>22973581
Well I agree with him I do think the book is trash. Demon haunted world is a better read.

Also a lot of Christians don’t care about finding proof or god actually existing or not. For them it’s a cope and will only care about theological debates.

[Anonymous No.22977670]

>>22977638
a mother desires a social life, she kills baby, she makes national news and is exonerated by a retarded jury, desires actualized.

[Anonymous No.22977685]

sometimes i wonder if the age of atheism was a necessity. all my life ive witnessed (and back in the day, participated) in this thing playing out, and the defining feature of the collective atheist culture has always been about these vague grievances about how religion was holding us back and that sometimes people commit violence in the name of religion etc and the grass was always greener on the other side. perhaps we as a society needed to experience first hand what religion was "holding us back from" and what the real secular core of violence is, until we are collectively so utterly sick, virtually in a state of mass psychosis onn the brink of self-destruction that we go crawling back to the traditions and the spirituality that at least attempted to keep us on the straight and narrow path, even if it wasn't always 100% effective

[Anonymous No.22977692]

>>22977670
So in summary: The action was against the code (law) and most people condemned it? One person's desires can be filled at the expense of another, but it is in the meta interest of all members of society to uphold a standard of fairness so that they benefit individually from society. There are cases where justice is not served or that individuals get away with selfish actions, but the arc of history truly bend towards justice.

[Anonymous No.22977700]

>>22977685
Religion is no bulwark against our "mass psychosis onn the brink of self-destruction". In fact, Christianity is life denying, it is a delusion focused on existing after death, a patent absurdity. It fosters infant genital mutilation. It opposes contraception, fosters the oppression of women, and general retards society.

[Anonymous No.22977709]

>>22977700
why the fuck is it that i come to 4chan and regularly see unapologetic redditors posting here like anyone gives a fuck about your gay little high school opinions? yeah man jesus outlawed condoms and beat up women nobody cares shut the fuck up faggot kys

[Anonymous No.22977715]

>>22977551
>Golden Bough
Refuted by Girard.

[Anonymous No.22977723]

>>22977700
>Christianity is life denying
What does that even mean?

[Anonymous No.22977749]

>>22977723
He has a gnostic perspective of the faith built out of ignorance when it was condemned by the Council Of Nicea

[Anonymous No.22977751]

>>22977685
Every kid has their rebellious phase and unfortunately for those of arrested development it goes beyond it

[Anonymous No.22977758]

>>22977526
Jung was Freud's God-the-gaps made flesh.

[Anonymous No.22977779]

>>22976478
My dad and I are cool and I've never had alcohol problems
Christopher Hitchens was a fucking miserable loser and most men who reject God have father issues
Guy was also a drunk

Hahaha holy shit Hitchens was so fucking stupid and annoying to listen to

[Anonymous No.22977794]

>>22977685
This is literally what the apocalyptic prophecy is

[Anonymous No.22977854]

>>22977709
kys idiot, isn't that what Christcucks secretly want, since Heaven must be better than Earth? And if God punishes suicide, then you must secretly hope a semi truck takes you out, nice and quick fast track through this veil of tears to the arms of Jesus? You Christcucks are a million times more insufferable than redditors.

[Anonymous No.22977855]

>>22977723
Christianity demands that you forsake this world, this fallen world, and "store up for yourself treasures in Heaven". You can't escape the words of Jesus, he plainly says to take no thought for the morrow, to sell your possessions and give to the poor, to abandon earthly pleasures for the sake of an imagined afterlife, one which Jesus very clearly thought was imminent (he said that there were those among his followers who would live to see the final judgement day, Christians are forced to hand wave this away, just as they do for earthly pleasures since they all actually prioritize their selfish life over they laughably childish religion)

[Anonymous No.22977856]

>>22977779
My man, "The Heavenly Father" is undoubtedly the mother of all father issues. Especially one that demands your peepee get a trim.

[Anonymous No.22977868]

>mfw reading this thread

[Anonymous No.22977869]

>>22977856
Really only a Protestant thing, it doesn’t really exist outside of it

[Anonymous No.22977891]

>>22977855
eeh, the way i see it, "storing up treasures in heaven" in Christianity is basically done through a combination of self mastery of the will and being a kind and loving person to the people in your life. not exactly what i would call "life denial", its just a different kind of lifeltyle that has less superficial aims than indulging in vanity and egoism and pure sensuality. if that kind of stuff is all you care about then yea, i guess its "life denial", but it seems to me like most people who are into that kinda stuff generally end up destroying themselves and/or other people around them and all around being miserable and spreading misery

[Anonymous No.22977897]

>>22977869
>>22977891
Yes, when you ignore the words of Jesus and just make up whatever you want, it can be anything. My point is that the further you get away from the text of what Jesus said or the doctrine of any particular church, the more reasonable you become.

[Anonymous No.22977960]

>>22977897
Yeah
I agree. The further you get from the sermon on the mount, the more reasonable you become. Same with the Commandments.

[Anonymous No.22977966]

>>22977856
No. Atheism is. The Heavenly Father is a father who loves you and expects the best from you on the soul level, without God a man has no innate value. Thus he will seek his value through externalities, like deeds, possessions, and status. All of which are intended to be bonuses on top of serving the innate value of the inward treasure. Life.
Men who don't have God have no innate value thus they live like frightened children who are unloved, lashing out and the like. Having no God is spiritual fatherlessness, and we know the effects of earthly fatherlessness. This is the same thing as that, only worse.
And how could a man who has no Father in his soul, be a good father to his sons? The cycle thus continues until one looks at his broken father on Earth and says, I have my father who art in heaven, and the one I have here on Earth suffers for the same reasons I do, we have both lost our patriarch.
Love is impossible to give if it isn't felt securely in ones self. The only secure love that defies all circumstance is God. Without God people don't feel like they have innate value, and they treat themselves, the world and one another as such.

[Anonymous No.22979149]

>>22977520
Richard Dawkins is one of the most effeminate men alive, though

[Anonymous No.22979186]

>>22977966
>The Heavenly Father is a father who loves you and expects the best from you
Yes, a fantasy father who both loves you and whom you are meant to fear. This speaks to major daddy issues.
>without God a man has no innate value
You clearly don't know what "innate" means, since it cannot be granted by the existence of an exterior thing.
>Having no God is spiritual fatherlessness
>"Having no imaginary friend is imaginary friendlessness"
You are really stuck in a childish mindset, aren't you?
>The only secure love that defies all circumstance is God. Without God people don't feel like they have innate value
Fantasy love is a delusion and is therefore not secure. The only real love is from our fellow human beings who we can see, touch, and who can intervene in our lives to help us. On the other hand, you have a made up fictional character who not only refuses to act (mostly on the account of not existing), but who you also suppose to be the reason for all the suffering on Earth anyway! You imagine that this "spiritual father" purposely put you in a situation of suffering and then demands you submit to him. It's perverse and would only appeal to someone who has deep psychological issues and can't imagine relating to one's father as a man, as a friend and equal, as actually grateful to that father for one's upbringing. Instead, people like you think it's natural and normal to be heavily abused by one's father, to be thrown into the world with no succor or solace other than a vague impression that he "expects the best from you". A good father does not merely "hope", anon, a good father helps you and demonstrates his love for you by being there and caring. I am sorry for you that you can accept a literal absent father (God, since he doesn't exist) and still think he's the ultimate form of fatherhood. It truly is heartbreaking to see.

[Anonymous No.22979190]

>>22979149
Atheists are generally faggots

[Anonymous No.22979201]

>>22977460
>the only authorities atheists have are Jewish perverts
Makes you think.

[Anonymous No.22979222]

>>22979201
Ironic since Christianity is based on the Jews

[Anonymous No.22979226]

>>22979222
Neither Judaism nor the Jewish race existed until after Christianity.

[Anonymous No.22979232]

>>22979226
You shouldn‘t pretend to know anything about race if your definition is that it‘s formed by rejecting your favorite rabbi.

[Anonymous No.22979235]

>>22979201
>the only authorities atheists have are Jewish perverts
*Blocks your path*

[Anonymous No.22979238]

>>22979235
he was a deist

[Anonymous No.22979240]

>>22979226
kek, imagine being this delusional

[Anonymous No.22979243]

>>22973652
Osho didn't even consider himself a Hindu. He was running his own cult and frequently sperged out against Hindu and other Dharmic scriptures, gods, sages and gurus.

[Anonymous No.22979248]

>>22979238
A deist who eviscerated the cringe that is Christianity

[Anonymous No.22979252]

>>22979226
>"NOOOO NOOOO, I worship Hebrews, it's totally different than Jews"
Cope and seethe LOL

[Anonymous No.22979268]

>>22979190
Because the only arguments against homosexuality are religious

[Anonymous No.22979273]

>>22979248
Deism created the globohomo masonic hellscape we live in now.

[Anonymous No.22979284]

>>22979273
And Christianity was no bulwark against it. In fact, the Christian would be forced to view globohomo as part of God's plan.

[Anonymous No.22979317]

>>22977551
>God made human
Begotten, not made. Retard.

[Anonymous No.22979337]

>>22979284
Wait, do you agree that thomas paine was instrumental for globohomo?

[Anonymous No.22979342]

>>22979268
Not really. There has never been an actual case made for homosexuality not has the natural law view ever been refuted. All refutations of the natural law view just base themselves on either misinterpreting the natural law view or calling it stupid and sulking.

[Anonymous No.22979345]

>>22979317
Begyatt*

[Anonymous No.22979380]

>>22977460
Do you watch Weltgeist?

[Anonymous No.22979391]

>if god real then why bad thing happen
I'm the first one who thought of this. I'm a genius. Origen? Thomas of Aquinas? Saint Augustine? I don't need to read those guys. They haven't thought as deeply about
>if god real then why bad thing happen
As me.

[Anonymous No.22979404]

>>22979284
Christianity is consistently to most anti-hlobohomo religion. So much so that freemason faggots like Paine had to undermine it.

[Anonymous No.22979416]

>>22977526
>God - Man
>Society - Individual
>Father - Son
>Superego - Ego
The microcosm-macrocosm nesting doll nature of the world. That's evidence for a creator.

[Anonymous No.22979454]

>>22979186
>a good father helps you and demonstrates his love for you by being there and caring.
He did demonstrate his love. He came and suffered with us. He emptied himself and was humiliated and died for us. He taught mankind by providing the perfect example. God is not an absent Father.

[Anonymous No.22979465]

>>22979404
Saying that christianity correlates with people who have a national instinct while the clear reality is observable that such sentiments are safely cordoned off from enacting real change is not the own you seem to think it is.

[Anonymous No.22979466]

every single thread about religion is low iq christians being btfo'd. literally every single time
no wonder they create so many threads. "maybe we wont get shit on this time"

[Anonymous No.22979485]

>>22979454

[Anonymous No.22979503]

>>22979391
If god real why he let bad thing happen but also intervenes randomly?

[Anonymous No.22979526]

>>22973581
only good things about hitchens were his support of palestine, support of same sex marriage, gun rights support and being against serb ultra nationalism
other than that he sucked

[Anonymous No.22979527]

>>22979503
God only intervenes when it comes to truly important issues, like football games.

[Anonymous No.22979646]

>>22979485
Do you have no sense of poetry? Of love? You're mind is stuck in the realm of the economy. Tit for tat, quid pro quo. Stop trying to calculate everything. God's demonstration of love to mankind seems absurd because love is absurd. It is absurd and beautiful. God is crazy in love with you.

[Anonymous No.22979951]

>>22979466
yeah you samefagging to cheerlead yourself is really convincing bro

[Anonymous No.22979995]

>>22973581
Why don't you read a real scholar, instead of a TV celebrity? This is like getting your religious opinions from Conan O'Brien.

[Anonymous No.22980231]

>>22979337
kek, are you for real?

[Anonymous No.22980237]

>>22979416
>That's evidence for a creator.
It's really not

[Anonymous No.22980241]

>>22979454
lol. lmao.

[Anonymous No.22980264]

>>22979273
>Deism created the globohomo masonic hellscape we live in now.
You do realize that the "slippery slope" is a fallacy right? This is like claiming
>The Printing Press created the globohomo masonic hellscape we live in now.
Christcuck retards can never explain how the rational position that we should reject divine revelation and religious authority *inevitably* leads to child trannies and multiculturalism.

[Anonymous No.22980710]

>>22973581
Hitchens is a smart guy to dumb guys. he's all rhetoric and no reason.

[Anonymous No.22980734]

>>22980264
remember when being pro-gay was pushing the overton window and all the people with actual morals said "next they'll be advocating for pedophilia and beastiality!"

and then retards like you said "sLiPpErY sLoPe FaLlAcY"

and now theres people on twitter trying to advocating bestiality and re-brand pedo into "minor attracted persons".

kindly shut the fuck up about "logical fallacies"

[Anonymous No.22980773]

Now write about the Muslims

[Anonymous No.22980805]

>>22973856
Is that Christopher molesting Peter?

[Anonymous No.22980860]

>>22977623
>Morality is a utilitarian way of maximizing things we want to have happen
How exactly is that not arbitrary? That means it could basically be anything and shift with the trends. If that is what morality is then morality doesnt matter.

[Anonymous No.22980918]

>>22980860
Morality is a tool that is used on the societal level to mediate negotiations between people. Good morals facilitate fruitful and ongoing relationships. Bad morals inhibit this. What do you not understand?

[Anonymous No.22980946]

I watched his debate with William Lane Craig and it was obvious that Hitchens was way out of his depth.

[Anonymous No.22980949]

>>22977897
why did you reply to my post with this? what i posted is literally just a summary of how jesus said "storing up treasures in heaven" is done; by having faith in him, loving eachother as he commanded, and controlling your self destructive wordy and egotistical impulses. this is straight from the gospel.

[Anonymous No.22980954]

>>22973619
Humanism was invented by Catholics you fucking moron

[Anonymous No.22980959]

>>22973671
Holy shit what a pseud

[Anonymous No.22980981]

>>22973682
I read a nominalist empircist argument that denied identity all together

[Anonymous No.22980986]

>>22977700
Circumcision is not even necessary for Christians. Shows how much you know.

[Anonymous No.22980993]

>>22977530
>>22977539
It's not american protestants, it's just Americans. Even secular or atheist Americans circumcise their children. Its caused by the corrupt nedical industry profiting from selling the foreskin which is full of stem cells. Circumcision is explicitly ended as a practice in the New Testament

[Anonymous No.22981076]

>>22980734
>doubles down on his retardation
oh no! some random person on twitter said something! I guess we better throw out all rational thought and start worshiping your dead kike on a stick...

[Anonymous No.22981683]

>>22980734
>and now theres people on twitter
So nobody important is advocating for those things. No slippery slope here

[Anonymous No.22983413]

>>22977855
No, Christianity teaches that this world is permeated by death so pursuing the world as your end is in vain. Instead pursue the next life, which is eternal. That doesn't mean to live in a cave and be an extreme ascetic. We will be judged for actions in this world. Therefore live well so you can die well.

[Anonymous No.22983630]

>>22983413
Why would I want to live forever? Be it heaven or hell, they both sound like suffering to me.

[Anonymous No.22983642]

>>22973581
Name one argument
>t-t-t-his one
One that wasn't brought up by peasants in a field hundreds of years ago and answered by the church

[Anonymous No.22983644]

What a retarded book. The argument that disproves Christkikery is this:
>accounts of the Christian god were created by Jews
>Jews lie
>if Jews told the accounts of the Christian god and Jews lie the accounts are a fabrication
>if the accounts of Christianity are false than the religion's bases is in a lie
>if a religion is based in a lie than it is a false religion
>Christianity is a false religion
You can only refute this by tell me that Jews tell the truth, which is a very Jewish assertion. Christkikery BTFO.

[Anonymous No.22983660]

>>22977855
>laughably childish religion
>our entire study of ethics and morality are just footnotes to the sermon on the mount
Anon please. Also the idea that Christianity is false because Christians are sinners is silly, it's the entire point of the religion. If people could live truly sinless lives then Jesus wouldn't have been special and you could say the religion is fake

[Anonymous No.22983775]

>>22983660
Christianity is false because by its text alone, the kingdom of heaven was supposed to have happened in the first century, then when it didn't, they wrote the Apocalypse of John to try and explain this away, but it's wild that it's prophecy didn't happen, and somehow two thousand years later it's still chugging along. Christianity has been on end times are near for 2000 whole years, given that the biblical date of creation is 3761 BC that's a pretty long time to be waiting, particularly when you consider the exodus was in 1440 BC. That means the distance between the exodus and Jesus is less than Jesus and the supposedly very soon second coming. Which is even more surprising when you consider that the exodus is treated as a very ancient event in the New Testament. That's why it's a silly religion. If Christianity was sooooooo important to western ethics, why do Christian ethics rely almost entirely on Aristotle?

[Anonymous No.22983838]

>>22983775
>by it's text alone
>doesn't post the text
Jesus refused to tell anyone when, that is what is written in the text. "But of that day and hour knoweth no man"

[Anonymous No.22983842]

>>22973581
>All the counter-arguments reek of cope.
Ik,r?

[Anonymous No.22983886]

>>22983838
How come in Mark 13:30 he says he is coming back in a generation? Why to Christians just cope and seethe about the literal text of their religion, quoting their prophet saying he will be back soon, and mentioning the hour or the day but not the year let alone millennium? I wonder when the last Christian will die off? 3,000? 4,000? 40,000 years from now still thinking that he is going to be back soon? Can all Christians just decide that if he doesn't come back by 2036, more than 2000 years from the latest possible date of Crucifixion that they will just stop?

[Anonymous No.22983894]

>>22973581
He makes a mockery of himself and you can't take this book seriously when he claims that MLK and Dietrich Bonhoeffer were not true Christians because a genuine Christian would be violent and murderous like the God of the Bible. Honestly, from an academic point of view one sees (since Hitchens never provides a definition of religion; if he did, he would never have succeeded with this tactic) that his entire argument amounts to “Religion ruins everything because I label everything ruinous as religion”. He presumes that whenever something bad happens because of religion, that’s somehow what religion is really about, and when something good happens because of religion, then that’s not really because of religion. The main argument is simply circular logic.

Regardless for the people left in the threat, religion this religion that following a religion is stupid anyway you would be a fool to blindly follow a religion. Follow Jesus Christ and people like this have no arguments to use against you other than seething because you won't stoop to their level and say it's ok engage in the fantasy that we all get to do whatever we want and engage in any sinful pleasure we want and then get to turn into fertiliser when it's over

[Anonymous No.22983900]

>>22973585
That was a gay couple of Australians in California in 2012 had their 6 yrs old adopted son taken by child protection because they had offered him to pedos or something like that. It's easy to look up

[Anonymous No.22983932]

>>22973581
Do you think Cormac McCarthy wasted his time reading Christopher hitchens?

[Anonymous No.22983944]

>>22983630
I don't think "eternal life" in heaven is going to be just modern day life dragged out to infinity. That might be the way it gets marketed by some Christians but I don't think it's possible to really understand what it would actually entail just like there's no way for an ant to understand what it's like to be a human.

[Anonymous No.22983960]

>>22981076
Adding dated /pol/ lingo ("kike," "cuck") to your parlance of dumb atheist buzzwords "magic cloud sky daddy fairy" doesn't make your 2000s atheism any hipper for the 4chan crowd, homo.

[Anonymous No.22983973]

>>22983900
How does that prove Christianity? The New Testament explicitly says not to participate in the government multiple times, and while it says, vaguely, something about a specific type of gays not going to heaven in Paul's epistles it doesn't say anything about actively doing anything about things in the world. The maximum Bible based Christian solution would be to avoid those types, as Christianity has no, biblical, solutions to any problems other than you will go to heaven if you are a good boy. If anything trying to save the world of stopping bad things might be bad in itself based on the New Testament. Obviously, like the whole Jesus not actually returning in the first century, as explicitly promised in the New Testament, Christianity had to adapt to this later and just used Aristotle for its ethics. Nichomaxhean ethics is key.

[Anonymous No.22984001]

>>22983973
If you want religion to just be a worldly political project sounds like Islam is more your speed.

>Obviously, like the whole Jesus not actually returning in the first century, as explicitly promised in the New Testament
This never actually happens, the "not taste death until they see the Kingdom of God" line is literally Jesus alluding to the Transfiguration that happens on the very next page. Jesus never actually says when he's gonna come back, he explicitly warns people that they won't know when it's gonna be.

[Anonymous No.22984014]

>>22984001
>something literal is not literal when it turns out to not be true
Kek, 2,000 more years Christkike.

[Anonymous No.22984024]

>>22984014
It wasn't "literal" you just have no context or reading comprehension
>kike
see >>22983960

[Anonymous No.22984025]

>>22977590
>Bro, even ancient Greeks like Aristotle knew that virtues could be discovered by reason.
They can't. Aristotle was wrong lol

[Anonymous No.22984028]

>>22977598
>you can’t coherently explain to me why morality is a compelling or objective system under materialism. nobody has ever been able to do this
I don't know why "morality" would be any less arbitrary bullshit under anything that's not materialism.

[Anonymous No.22984029]

>>22984014
Sorry about your dad, anon

[Anonymous No.22984032]

>>22983960

Go fuck a Bible

[Anonymous No.22984033]

>>22977623
>Morality is a utilitarian way of maximizing things that we want to have happen.
People want different things; retard.
> The moral compass which has evolved around fairness and compassion is exactly tuned to the necessary prerequisites for a functional society.
No such "moral compass" exists, and that's an appeal to consequences fallacy.

[Anonymous No.22984039]

>>22980993
That's the fault of gullible women and their engagement with jews. Replacing women with artificial wombs and sex bots = men get their foreskin back. Its really that simple

[Anonymous No.22984040]

>>22984024
I don't think so. The gospels are crystal clear on this. Please explain what this could possibly mean other than he is coming back in the 1st century, why would most taste death but not some? How is the Kingdom of Heaven simultaneously imminent and taking more than 2,000 years to arrive?

[Anonymous No.22984047]

>>22984029
He's coming back, I just don't know the hour or the day.

[Anonymous No.22984088]

>>22984040
>Jesus is standing with his apostles and crowd
>Jesus says some (but not all) present will see Jesus' power fully revealed before they die
>crowd goes away, next page
>Jesus goes with his closest apostles alone to the top of mountain
>reveals his full power in the Transfiguration
Is this really that hard to follow?

[Anonymous No.22984100]

>>22984088
He says the kingdom, not his full power. What wild translation are you reading?

[Anonymous No.22984191]

>>22983960
You could have just said
>tips fedora
like your other christkike retards. Either way, it's still not an argument for why people should believe in your Jewish slave religion.

[Anonymous No.22984227]

>>22984088
Please explain how βασιλείαν does not refer to a literal kingdom?

[Anonymous No.22984420]

>>22977590
That's scholasticsism bro and it's basically the Pelagian heresy

[Anonymous No.22984452]

>>22983630
Thats a you problem

[Anonymous No.22984473]

>>22977590
>arbitrary
You don't know what that word means.

[Anonymous No.22984502]

>>22984032
>>22984191
It's amazing that the old atheist talking point in the 2000s was "Christians are too radical," when all the atheists themselves ended up eventually turning into either trannies or nazis (or both lol)

[Anonymous No.22984515]

>>22984227
Same word is used in John 18:36 when Jesus says his kingdom is not of this world. It doesn't mean a physical realm, it means the act of being a full king.

Also it's important that Jesus explicitly refers to himself as "the Son of Man" which has important specific context in the Old Testament prophetic literature, hence Jesus being seen as recognized with authority at the Transfiguration by Moses (the giver of the law) and Elijah (the most important prophet) is so important.

[Anonymous No.22984525]

>>22984502
And none of that makes god real.

[Anonymous No.22984541]

>>22984502
What a reevaluation of all values does to an mf

[Anonymous No.22984555]

>>22984040
dark ages are a myth. in actuality there was a thousand year reign of the holy spirit on earth, all in accordance with scripture

[Anonymous No.22984568]

>>22984032
>>22984191
hello projection

[Anonymous No.22984576]

>>22984568
>Agnostic and Atheist separated

Into the trash, as usual.

[Anonymous No.22984583]

>>22984576
There’s the classic motte and bailey
>God isn’t real!
>oh no, everyone thinks i’m an insufferable retard!
>What I meant to say is we can’t know if God is real!

Last time I checked agnostics don’t have this sad devotion to crying about religion either. You are distinct from them in terms of what you claim but also culturally

[Anonymous No.22984586]

>>22984576
Yeah they’re… 4% less pozzed. Kek. The more atheist you are the more gay you are apparently

[Anonymous No.22984599]

>>2298457
>>22984576
I never really understood why Nu Atheism always had this big pedantic stick up it's ass about the term agnostic

[Anonymous No.22984604]

>>22984555
You mean a thousand reign of boy fucking popes

[Anonymous No.22984606]

>>22984599
because agnostics are the actually reasonable, respectable ones so militant atheists desperately want to larp them into the same lump as them, despite the fact that agnostics specifically name themselves to avoid this

[Anonymous No.22984607]

>>22984599
Because they defined their identity around actively NOT believing in God and something that was functionally equivalent but slightly more intellectually honest hampered that sense of community.

I think "agnostic" is a dumb term and that agnostics are literally just a type of atheist btw

[Anonymous No.22984611]

>>22984604
>countless textual and material attestations to mass greek and roman boy molesting
>countless textual and material attestations to medieval fag burning
>i-it’s the middle ages that w-were gay!!
holy coparoni

[Anonymous No.22984622]

>>22973581
>refutes cucktianity before its inception.

[Anonymous No.22984625]

>>22984622
>evil exists
False. Evil is absence and non being.

[Anonymous No.22984630]

>>22984625
Is there absence and non-being in this world?

[Anonymous No.22984633]

>>22984630
Your mothers pussy after everything I put it through

[Anonymous No.22984639]

>>22984630
no, which is why there’s no evil. just lacking good

[Anonymous No.22984648]

>>22984515
He says:
νῦν δὲ ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐντεῦθεν

In the sense that his kingdom hasn't arrived yet, but will be present in the world.

[Anonymous No.22984665]

>>22984639
>no, there is no absence, just the absence of good

[Anonymous No.22984669]

>>22984630
I’m sorry sir, we’re all out of cream, can I get you a Coffee with no milk?

[Anonymous No.22984672]

>>22984665
saying something doesn’t exist isn’t saying non existence exists.

[Anonymous No.22984677]

>>22984611
So weird to see apologetics for an obviously corrupt institution. Medicci popes, concubines, boyfuckers, non-scriptural teachings like purgatory and indulgences. Even the Catholic church had to acknowledge it was wrong with the council of trent.

[Anonymous No.22984679]

>>22984672
You just conceded there was an absence of good one post ago.

[Anonymous No.22984697]

>>22984648
The statement has a practical level and a prophetic level. The practical level is that he's trying to disspell the Jews' false charge against him to Pilate, who doesn't know anything about Jewish religion and is just worried about stopping a political uprising. On the prophetic level, though, Jesus is fulfilling the prophecy in Daniel 7:13.
>13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,[a] coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

The Septuagint Greek for this passage in Daniel has the same word for kingdom. And no one who was reading Daniel thought it was literal, Daniel uses very speculative apocalyptic imagery just like Revelations.

[Anonymous No.22984705]

>>22984679
as in, evil is not a quality or a positive existence. something can be good, or lacking goodness, but lacking goodness itself is not an ontological thing. it would be like giving positive status to darkness which is not materially anything, it is just not light

[Anonymous No.22984712]

>>22984677
>disagree with what you’re claiming
>OH WOW HOW COULD YOU DO THAT? IF YOU ACCEPT MY CLAIMS, WHICH YOU DON’T, THAT MAKES YOU AUTOMATICALLY WRONG

[Anonymous No.22984717]

>>22984677
>purgatory and indulgences
In Maccabees, which Protestants took out because they took medieval Jewish canon that didn't have it as more important than ancient Christian canon that did.

[Anonymous No.22984720]

>>22984625
"x IS non-being/absence" was refuted even earlier, lmao

[Anonymous No.22984723]

>>22984677
Indulgences are massively overblown. You paid monks to pray for your soul, that’s all it was. Catholics believed, since the start of the middle ages, that prayers for your soul could ease your time in purgatory. So you could pay for masses to be held in your name if this worried you. It’s not honestly that bad at all and was extremely common for nobility

[Anonymous No.22984724]

>>22984001
you can want the world to be better and be religious too y'know. imagine if the spanish justified their miserable state of affairs by saying "christ will send the heretic moslems to hell in due time", they wouldn't be around today. for the record though i don't think you can arbitrarily prop up a religion either, because yeah like with progressivism people will just pretend to believe in it. it would need to be integrated bottom up throughout communities.

[Anonymous No.22984726]

>>22984720
>X doesn’t exist
>so you’re saying non existence is a property of X?
>no, i’m saying X doesn’t exist

[Anonymous No.22984728]

>>22984705
And is there darkness in this world?

[Anonymous No.22984732]

>>22984697
νῦν δὲ ἡ Implies that he will, literally have his kingdom, and while it's not presently here, it will be, present in a literal sense. However, coupled with the ἐντεῦθεν, he is referring to his impending kingdom. That is coming very soon.

[Anonymous No.22984737]

>>22984728
There is not light. I’m not trying to make this a semantic game, my point was material. What actually is darkness? Is it a quantifiable entity? No it isn’t. Is it an observable thing- your intuition may tell you yes, but this is wrong. You don’t see darkness because darkness is simply not seeing. It doesn’t positively exist, it’s a name given to the sensation of lacking light.

[Anonymous No.22984740]

>>22984723
>Indulgences are massively overblown.
No, corrupt popes would send fire and brimstone preachers to scare peasants into funding their vanity projects. I was sympathetic to the Catholic church until I actually started reading about the Reformation. It's disgusting the evils the catholics practiced

[Anonymous No.22984747]

>>22984740
no, they wouldn’t. this simply did not happen. the “fire and brimstone” preaching was not a fucking thing until at least the 18th century, it’s more of a modern phenomenon. and either way, why the hell would they do this to peasants? peasants certainly could not afford indulgences or masses to be held for them, that would be ridiculously out of their pay grade- plus they were tithed. you clearly didn’t really read about the reformation since you’re spouting vagaries and myths

[Anonymous No.22984751]

>>22984740
Where did you read about it? Monty python?

[Anonymous No.22984759]

>>22984737
And my point is, why is there an absence of good at all?

[Anonymous No.22984774]

>>22984625
So people can't be evil and perform evil acts?

[Anonymous No.22984792]

>>22984732
The Christian would say it did come, it came when he died on the cross. It coming =/= it being a physical thing in this world. The Transfiguration made its promise temporarily visible in the physical world whereas the Crucifixion made it manifest in the spiritual world.

The spiritual dimension of "kingdom" is also made apparent in Luke 23 when the penitent thief asks Jesus to remember him in his kingdom, and Jesus said that he would go to today to Paradise (heaven, not a physical kingly paradise). Ambrose says that "the kingdom" is being with Christ.

Maybe it sounds like "the real kingdom is the friends we made along the way" nonsense but that's how it's interpreted.

[Anonymous No.22984806]

>>22984759
I don’t know, I would say that to be a discrete, contingent being, there is a necessary element of limitation. As in, to be an individuated thing, there needs to be a boundary and things you are definitively not. And so while we are composed of and share in the divine attributes, like goodness, we cannot have their totality, because that would entail being a totality, or being being itself. And since God is being itself, he can be identical to goodness or possess goodness maximally, of which we being discrete, limited and parasitic on him, possess in part or to varying degrees. I’m basically falling back on plato here i’m realising, but it has its logic to it. If everything they’re maximally good, it would be God. Since we are separate and contingent on God, we possess goodness according to the limitation of our being as individual things. It’s half 4 in the morning here so that might all be schizophrenic nonsense

[Anonymous No.22984835]

>>22973649
>Greek (the Septuagint, second century bc), Aramaic (Targum, by the first century bc), Old Latin (second century ad), Syriac (Peshitta, third century ad), Coptic (Egyptian, fourth century ad), Gothic (Old German, fourth century ad), Latin (Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, late fourth century ad), Armenian (early fifth century ad), Ethiopic (fifth century ad), Georgian (fifth century ad), Old Nubian (by the eighth century ad), Old Slavonic (ninth century ad), and Arabic (Saadia Gaon’s version, early tenth century ad).
Not European vernaculars lol

[Anonymous No.22984843]

>>22984835
>old german is not european

[Anonymous No.22984869]

>>22984843
I’ve just remembered that i’ve seen plenty of anglo saxon copies of the gospels too. I think hitchens just saw that the entire bible wasn’t translated and assumed it was hidden

[Anonymous No.22984911]

>>22984835
>Greek, Latin, Gothic, Old Slavonic
>Not European vernaculars lol

[Anonymous No.22984995]

>>22984835
>German
>Latin
>Georgian
>Slavonic

>not European vernacular languages
what are you even doing on a literature board

[Anonymous No.22985069]

>>22984033
The vast majority of people want basically the same things. Even monkeys have a moral compass and can gauge fairness. It's all game theory and the negotiations of mutually beneficial interactions across time. If this is too hard for you to comprehend then there is no helping you.

[Anonymous No.22985636]

>>22973944
Free will does not disprove existence of God.
Assume for a second God exists. Would you like lightning to strike you as you fornicate so you go to hell immediately? That's a sin too. Most atheists like to pick some sort of evil that "good God wouldn't allow" as an argument against Him, ignoring all the evil they support or do. But God is patient, merciful and capable o producing greater good from great evil (providence), which gives them too time to convert and be saved. I hope you do so.

[Anonymous No.22985680]

>>22973649
>In the previous sentence, he claims that "There would have been no Protestant Reformation, if it were not for the long struggle to have the Bible rendered into 'the Vulgate'" ([sic], he means vernacular, vulgate refers to a specific 4th century translation of the Bible... in latin), even though a German translation had existed for centuries, and Gutenberg Mentellin printed his German Bible in 1455 1466, nearly fifty five years before Luther's 95 theses! (p.125)
So the Bible translation into vernacular has preceeded Protestant Reformation, and Hitchens refers to it as a key cause of the Reformation.
Where is the contradiction?

[Anonymous No.22985703]

>>22984792
Well yeah, that's because the entire interpretation, and the written gospels, are designed to cope with the fact the kingdom never came. I am treating them like their was an initial "says of Jesus" and not an ur text here.

[Anonymous No.22985717]

>>22985680
No, they banned translations into the vernacular at the Council of Toulouse (1229) and actually banned lay people from reading existing vernacular translations.

[Anonymous No.22985836]

>>22984568
Atheists are generally the most serious Christians in the world. When they discarded their religious beliefs, they only threw out the theological nonsense while doubling and tripling down on the moralism. They have internalized Jesus's moral teachings so thoroughly that they don't even consider them christian, but synonymous with goodness itself. Look at any shitlib belief and you will find something that Jesus preached. The reason "Christians" don't support progressive policies as much as atheists is because the theological BS about believing in Jesus distracts them from his actual teachings, which are largely about subverting your ethnic interests in favor of foreigners.

[Anonymous No.22986494]

>>22984568
>i choose my religious beliefs based on how closely they correlate with my political beliefs according to polling data
So I take it you're a Free Will Baptist then? This has to be one of the most retarded christcuck talking points. I fully admit that most atheists (I actually consider myself a Deist, but whatever) are liberal (i.e. secular christcuck).

[Anonymous No.22986865]

>>22973667
>e states that Orthodox Jews have sex "through a hole in a sheet". None of the three branches of Judaism have any such bizarre impositions, and any amount of research should have disproved this tired old anti-Semitic myth of sexual deviancy
This is true i saw it on curb your enthusiasm

[Anonymous No.22986900]

>>22985836
While atheists are fundamentally Christian they don't really follow the teachings of Jesus very much because Christians themselves fail in that way also.
A lot of what you see are natural conclusions that could arise in any sufficiently advanced society where women are allowed to dictate according to their instincts. All the false empathy and interpersonal leveling are great tools for raising groups of children but become ridiculous nuisances when allowed to scale up through institutions arbitrarily.

[Anonymous No.22986955]

>>22984586
Case in point, there was a graph that has been posted many times on this forum that apparently lgbtbbq identity has an inverse relationship with religiosity.

[Anonymous No.22986958]

>>22986900
I can see that, have you read Le Bon?

[Anonymous No.22987033]

>>22986900
>in any sufficiently advanced society
In any Christian society it may look like common sense to a lay person yes

[Anonymous No.22987405]

>>22987033
Not just that, standard modern English was heavily shaped by: the KJV, the book of common prayer, and the sermons distributed during the reformation. English Christianity is literally baked into the language.

[Anonymous No.22987626]

bex owes me sex my entire life

[Anonymous No.22987629]

>>22987626
oops wrong thread meant to post this in /tv/

[Anonymous No.22987654]

>>22986900
Women in power is a problem too, but their morality mostly comes from social cues, which are almost entire shaped by thousands of years of Christianity. Communism is literally the meek inheriting the earth.The message of The Good Samaritan is "you should be more accepting of hostile foreign ethnic groups because some of the individuals are ok". Libtards whose kids get murdered by illegal aliens always forgive them - who came up with the whole loving and forgiving your enemy thing? A woman's natural instincts are to want protection and to protect their kids, which is very far from what we're seeing now. It's Christianity that twisted them into their current state.

[Anonymous No.22987673]

>>22973581
All this lazy shithead did in his life is swoon the crowds with a never ending appeal to emotion.
He made millions by inventing a million way different way to say "if God real then why doodoo peepee?
You have to be mentally challenged to take this mong seriously.

[Anonymous No.22987688]

>>22987673
>a million way different way
fuck
a million different ways

[Anonymous No.22987860]

>22987654

[Anonymous No.22988317]

>>22980241
kek

[I ignore women No.22988529]

>>22973649
fpbp /thread

[Anonymous No.22988884]

>>22987405
Are there any books that talk about this topic? It sounds interesting

[Anonymous No.22988929]

>>22973581

[Anonymous No.22989611]

>>22988884
In the Beginning: the story of the King James Bible and how it changed a nation language, and a culture by Alister McGrath.

It's also obvious if you grew up going to Anglican Church, because the Book of Common prayer and the liturgy is packed full of stuff you hear all the time. Plus tons of authors from the past, when most people were Anglican (as required by law) mention it.

[Anonymous No.22990385]

could you summarise the most important arguments for me OP?

[Anonymous No.22991294]

>>22990385
Some people do bad things in the name of religion, therefore God isn't real

[Anonymous No.22991840]

I am a non-believer purely on the basis that I don't believe in anything supernatural. Anything beyond that is just fussing over details.

[Anonymous No.22991926]

>>22991294
Christ made this point but further affirmed God

[Anonymous No.22992001]

>>22984774
No but they have vice