[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 41 KB, 391x400, the.four.horsemen.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
507880 No.507880 [Reply] [Original]

Who's your favorite out of the four horsemen of atheism, /lit/?

I have to go with Dawkins

>> No.507903

I saw a Lecture by Sam Harris once. He wasn't an idiot but he was still a douche.

As compared to the rest who are both.

>> No.507908
File: 431 KB, 175x175, reaction image.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
507908

>>507903
>Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett
>Idiots

>> No.507911
File: 72 KB, 328x183, 4horsemen.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
507911

>> No.507916

>>507903

Trufax

>> No.507920

Gonna have to say Dawkins.

>> No.507921

>implying atheism needs evangelism

>> No.507933

So...it's a circlejerk?

Don't we get enough of that from the the zinekiddies?

>> No.507935

Dawkins really pisses me off, even though we agree on most things.

>> No.507941

Hitchens, he's the most entertaining; whether arguing, or just speaking. I think he's an arrogant clown, but the way he obliterates people's arguments and makes them look like a fool, all the while being a disengaging jerk, always makes me chuckle.

>> No.507963

Generally speaking, I don't think the so-called 'new atheist' movement is very good at promoting rational thought as much as it is simply another trend; however, ironically, I like Hitchens the most of these four. He's funny, quick on his feet, a little...cruel, but nonetheless he makes his points very well.

>> No.507964

>>507941
this

>> No.507971

>New Atheism differs from the atheism of earlier free-thinking humanists in that its main aim is not to enlighten, but to scaremonger about the impact of religion on society.

>> No.507977

The "New Atheists" are freaks. They actually want to make religion illegal.

They keep talking about how religious education is somehow child abuse. It's completely insane.

>If ‘bringing a child up Catholic’ is itself abuse, there can only be one solution: external authorities must protect children not only from religious institutions but from their own religious parents, too. One new atheist has proposed an age of consent for joining a religion: 14. In an Oxford Amnesty Lecture popular amongst new atheists, a liberal academic argued that children ‘have a human right not to have their minds crippled by exposure to other people’s bad ideas’, and parents ‘have no god-given licence to enculturate their children in whatever ways they personally choose’.

>> No.507979

New atheists are cunts.

I used to be able to respect atheists. Now . . . not so much.

new atheism:atheism::fundamentalists:christianity

>> No.507997

I don't agree with fanaticism of any flavour.

I'm atheist, by the way.

>> No.508006

>>507908
They are idiots in that they exaggerate everything and know almost nothing about the things they deride.
I mean, I read the god delusion. Dawkins is just an arrogant prick.

>> No.508009

None of them, quit sporting atheism around, its not a new fad.

>> No.508021

Dawkins is actually a really smart guy. His older stuff is very interesting, I just wish he'd give up his crusade against religion.

Go back to being "Blind Watchmaker" Dawkins, and not so much "God Delusion" Dawkins.

>> No.508024

>>508021

I agree, Dawkins is extremely intelligent. The God Delusion is a joke though. Catholic priests tore it to fucking shreds. Dawkins just didn't really understand what he was attacking - particularly the Quinque Viae.

>> No.508025

yea these atheists turned me into a christian, seriously.

>> No.508028

Atheist here. I don't follow any of their deeds or work. I read a Dawkins book, about evolution, it was okay.

>> No.508035

>>507977
I see your point. Catholic parents should force their children at age 9 to join Catholicism That shit makes perfect sense because kids at that age have had so much experience with the world to understand what constitutes good and evil.
Well played, sir.

>> No.508036

>>508025
So you abandoned skepticism, reason and logic because of the actions of a few individuals you don't even know? Or perhaps you never had such traits..

>> No.508040

>>508035
Indoctrination is GOOOOOODD!

>> No.508041

>>508035

People teach their kids about what they believe to be right.
Anybody who thinks an atheist would be any different is a fucking idiot.

But calling religious education child abuse? That is fucking retarded in every possible way.

>> No.508043

>>508036

>reason and logic
You can have these and be Christian.
Look at all the Christian philosophers for God's sake.

>> No.508047

>>508035
>Catholic parents should force their children at age 9 to join Catholicism
I'm an atheist and I don't see a problem here. A parent must be allowed to teach their children what they believe is right and wrong.

Look at it from the parent's perspective: the immortal soul of their child is at stake - of course they're going to do what they can.

>> No.508048

I think that they are all arrogant pigs.

>> No.508051

>>508036

This is the biggest problem with the new atheists: you do not even know your opponents

There are some smart fucking Christians out there. There are even some smart fucking fundamentalists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.K._Chesterton

^ he's a good start if you want to get a better understanding of your opponents.

>> No.508052

>>508036
skepticism, reason and logic are all constructs that only serve to promote the existence of the elite, another construct...actually a form of mass manipulation for the sake of a parasitical minority.

>> No.508053

>>508041
Indoctrination into cults is good.

>> No.508054

>People expressing uncommon ideas is ranting and raving, bordering on lunacy.

I see your point here. Everyone who has a different opinion than you is, obviously, a lunatic freak that is angry and wants to forcefully convert you.

The only reason you think he is angry and aggressive is becuase he questions your identity. No matter how calmly a person presents their idea, if they, in any way, challange your purpose or identity, they will be considered lunatic, mad ravers of intelligable non-sense.

Well played, sir.

>> No.508056

>>508035
>force their children at age 9 to join Catholicism
because that actually means anything, right? I was born in a catholic family and thus had to go through the four first sacraments, and that did not prevent me from turning toward atheism later in my life even though I still have a very deep respect for the faith even nowadays.

>> No.508057

>>508036
>Being a christian means you abandon all reason and skepticism.
hahahaohwow.jpeg

No. Christianity for me is not about finding proof of god, it isn't about KNOWING anything. It is about doing your best to be helpful and kind. That's what I get out of it anyway.
But seriously, people like Dawkins are what make people hate atheists. They are the arrogant, cocky, people who make all of you look bad. The trend these guys started(Basically, religion is evil and everybody who thinks different is retarded) is so insanely stupid I don't even know where to begin.
Religion can be good or bad. But to assume it is solely one thing, and to generalize complex belief systems in such a stupid way is insanely ill informed.

>> No.508058

>>508052
Tell me more Alex Jones. Tell me how science is evil and under the control of lizard overlords.

>> No.508060

>>508057

>It is about doing your best to be helpful and kind.

Why do you need Christianity for this?

>> No.508065

>>508057
That's not Christianity.

>> No.508066

>Parents only teach their children what they think is right. Don't you teach your children what you think is right? -Christian

I see your point here. People, like polygamists, headhunters, and peadophiles believe what they do is right, since, obivously, they wouldn't practice it if they thought it was wrong. Therefore, poligamists, headhunters and peadophiles should all be allowed to teach their children those traits.

Well played, sir.

>> No.508069

>>508058
If only there were lizard overlords or overlords of any type to give us a semblance of order, but sadly we are without a tether. As one junky said to another Nothing is true, everything is permitted.

>> No.508071

>>508053
>Indoctrination into what I believe is good
>Indoctrination into something I don't believe is evil.

Ultimately you are doing the same thing as the people you deride.
If you ever had kids you would teach them believing in god is stupid. Maybe not in those exact words but they would grow up with that idea. You would teach them about what YOU believe.

Religious people do the same. It isn't indoctrination nor is it child abuse. Indoctrination would be the shit in Jesus camp. Catholics don't do that. Hell, Christians in general don't do that.

>> No.508076

>>508066

Ever hear of a little thing called freedom?

>> No.508077

Christianity in the West is very secular today so >>508057 post is entirely valid.

>> No.508085

>>508057
Being a Christian means believes in a god that is a logical contradiction that has zero evidence. Please tell me how this is compatible with skepticism, logic, and reason. Sorry, you can't. What you call Christianity is not Christianity.

>> No.508086

>>507880

Would it be ironic if they turned out to be the actual Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse?

>> No.508087

>>508066
>Implying teaching your children about religion is always same as teaching them to kill and rape.

You are stupid.

>>508065
Yes, it is.

>>508060
Did I ever say you did? No, I just say that is the message I get from it.

>> No.508098

>>508071
Go to the south and mid-west and tell me indoctrination isn't common, or go to a Muslim country and tell me indoctrination isn't common.

>> No.508100

>Since nothing can only beget more nothing, God exists because he is something. Therefore, I trust in God and believe in God. -Religous person

I see your point there. So, in essence, we have a perfect, omniscent and omnipotent being that is only capable of perfection. Therefore, nature works to destroy us ( e.g. hurricanes, forests, earthquakes, volcaones, etc) and our own bodies are frail, weak and easily diseased (e.g. cancer, viruses & etc). Therefore, a perfect God must have created us becuase only a perfect God could create this perfect world that we live in today.

Christian God Logic:
God, who is only able to do perfection, creates angels and Satan. Thirty percent of the angels rebel and hate god, and so does Satan.
God, who is the only creator, creates a place for those who rebel against him to thrive and live (i.e. hell).
God gives Satan the power to speak telepathically to his most favorite creation, mankind, so he might corrupt them and take them to hell, which God created for him.

God is only perfection.

Well played, sir.

>> No.508105

>>508085
Okay then, tell me what Christianity is without googling fucked up bible verses.
There is no monolithic interpretation of any religion you moron.

I don't know anything about the nature of god, if he exists, or what he wants. I just believe he might exist and when I look at my life, the world around me, and other people I feel there is one. Ultimately to see things from my perspective you would have to be me.
Pull your head out of your ass and stop assuming you know the secrets of the universe.

>> No.508106

>>508098

So you're pretty much against all strong beliefs then?

>> No.508108

>>508087

>Did I ever say you did? No, I just say that is the message I get from it.

So why be Christian?

>> No.508109

>>508098
>Implying some people in the south and the middle east represents every religious denomination ever.

Just keep digging...

>> No.508110

A nice discussion about four well respected, controversial authors turns into a HURRRRELGION debate. Stay classy, /lit/.

>> No.508111

>>508066
>compaying religion to polygamists, headhunters, and peadophiles
>invalidates own argument

>> No.508116

>>508087
No, it's not Christianity, Jesus said so. I think he is a bigger authority on it that you. Being a nice guy is lodged in many religions and beliefs and by people who have no religion.

>> No.508117

>>508098

Come out here to Colorado. There are plenty of Christians, but they are all pretty good people. Most of my friends are part of a denomination of Christianity and they aren't pyscho Christfags.

>> No.508118

Rationality, and all enlightenment era ideologies are another kind of creed, one with which the ''abrahamic religions'' present a contest. Who will win? Well I don't see richard dawkins carbombing people for atheism so...

>> No.508123

>>508066
>implying there is anything wrong with polygamy

That sounds like a Christian viewpoint.

>> No.508124

>>508110

I'd say we're remaining fairly civil.

Well, except that polygamists and pedophiles guy.

>> No.508129

>>508087
>Implying that I was implying something.

I see your point there. My point was that your logic was not sound. The point is that we, as humans, have found out that some ideas are wrong for society, and then we outlaw their practice. That was my point. I think we have come to a point in our society where we understand that religion is not always best for our lives (e.g. foundation of U.S.A and all modern democracies).
We live in a secular country, and that country has brought us special things: secular schools, secular health-care, and secular socialism. All those advancements in society were due to secularism, not religion. In fact, the basis for our government was secularism, not religion.

>> No.508130

The edgy atheism is strong tonight.

>> No.508131

Does this HAVE to be a religion versus atheism thread? All the annoying, angsty teenagers come out and start blathering away the same old arguments I've heard a million, million times just because they find the topic fresh and exciting. How nauseating.

>> No.508133

Hitchens, who's also one of my favorite essayists, etc. in general, and is an extremely compelling person.

I don't know much about Dennett.

Dawkins is out of his area when he's talking religion.

Harris is just a confused, intellectually mangled shithead.

>> No.508139

>>508131
You know, /lit/ is probably the last place to come for a proper discussion. Your ranting is probably a waste of time, as much as this post is.

>> No.508142

>>508111
Islam and Mormonism share all those characteristics.

>> No.508146

>>508131
Religiousfags had to turn it into one. Blame them.

>> No.508147

>>508100
>Doesn't understand anything he is talking about
>Thinks Satan is not used to represent human evil and temptation
>Thinks hell does not represent separation from god and only means torture for the sake of torture
>Thinks this same kind of shit isn't found in every other religion
> Thinks good can exist without evil(free will is kind of central to the whole thing, you know)
>Takes everything at face value.

And you guys wonder why I put you on the same level as evangelicals.

>> No.508150

Why is there more dick waving going on in /lit/?

>> No.508151

Hitchens. Because of the blue eyes and sexual charisma.

>> No.508161

>>508146
>Religiousfags had to turn it into one. Blame them.
>Religiousfags
I'm glad we're not all so immature as those blasted "religiousfags".

>> No.508167

>>508147
You are wrong on all accounts sir. Most American Christians believe hell is a real place and Satan is real. These things were not written in the bible as mere metaphors and they were not taken as such until very recently. And, good can exist without evil or freewill.

>> No.508171

>>508129

Let me get this straight, since you PERSONALLY don't believe in god, you think the idea should be outlawed? Communism can be good or bad. Capitalism can be good or bad. Atheism can be good or bad. Theism can be good or bad.
Ultimately everything under the sun can be used for good or evil.
Religion didn't cause the holocaust, the Vietnam war. Religion didn't bring Staling into power or cause the invasion of Iraq.
Greed and human nature cause the problems in the world. Not the fucking bible, and if you think different you are an idiot.

You can't outlaw ideas just like you can't outlaw human nature you dumb fuck.
My logic isn't sound? You are the one advocating outlawing this passage because a minority of maniacs exist in the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatitudes
>Blessed are the peacemakers

HOW FUCKING EVIL IS THIS SHIT!?

>> No.508175

>>508147
>Has a new-age interpretation of the Bible and then justifies the existence of human evils on free-will in the world.

I see your point there. Free-will is a joke. Free-will is the idea that people would only be able to understand love and everything good when they know the oposite (i.e. evil).
How do I begin?
Other people's sufferings allow me, in my comfortable position in USA, to understand my blessing. Therefore, little hatian children that were killed in the earthquake are justified by the idea of free-will. How would I understand safety and comfort, if I was not aware of discomfort and danger? Answer: Free-will.
Free-will would be the most immoral thing for a God to ever give a creation, because it allows for the deserved subjagation of the vast majority of peoples for the benifit of the comfortable minority ( USA v Africa, White v Black, Nazi v Jew)

Well played, sir.

>> No.508177

>>508161
religiousfags, atheistfags, litfags.. here on 4chan message boards it's common when referring to a group of people even the group you belong to and is not meant as disrespect.

>> No.508179
File: 245 KB, 690x854, 1265095360325.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
508179

>>508151
I think this calls for a photodump.

>> No.508183

One of the nicest guys I know is a traditionalist driving-two-hours-a-week-to-hear-latin-mass Catholic.

This thread is dildoes.

>> No.508184

>>508167
No, it can't. Then you would just be a zombie.
In order to understand why good is good and why evil is evil you need knowledge of both.

And most American Christians haven't even read the bible, and if they do they don't read it very closely. So ultimately nothing they say has any relevance to me.

Like many things you can take something like the bible a thousand different ways. Ultimately it is up to you.

>> No.508188
File: 97 KB, 1024x768, 38--Antonia_and_Christopher_Hitchens.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
508188

>>508179

Hitchens and his daughter, Antonia.

>> No.508193

>>508171
>how evil is [pacifism]

Pretty evil, insofar as it very often enables evil.

For the record, I'm with you on the it's-not-religion point, I'm actually a kind of religiousfag myself, but it's impossible to argue that certain attitudes in different religions, at different historical times, have enabled or facilitated bad shit. It's also wrong to put this squarely on religion, which is just another vector for attitudes about the world, but universally absolving religion is as stupid as universally condemning it on these grounds.

>> No.508199

>>508175

Why would god change something we should be able to change ourselves? Why do you idiots think it is gods job to come down and help people? It isn't.

>> No.508204

Atheistfags are just that...fags.

They feel the need to rub their lack of belief in everyone's faces for attention. Yes, that's right, they only do it for attention.

Prove me wrong.

>> No.508206

>>508167

>These things were not written in the bible as mere metaphors and they were not taken as such until very recently.

Catholic here, I don't know how anybody could make this point in good faith.

Sure the literal description of hell as a lake of fire may have been a metaphor. It's actually infinitely worse than a lake of fire. It's an eternal separation from God, which is inconceivable for us.

I mean look at Jesus' contemporaries, the apocalyptic Jewish writings in whose tradition he chose to speak, etc.

whatever this post is shitty, I'll still post it

>> No.508209

>>508171
Don't be absurd. Religion has influence over people. You think Islamic countries would be in such poor shape with rampant oppression if they didn't adhere to such radical ideas that have been instilled in them through Islamic culture and indoctrination? Little girls are buried alive in Turkey for talking to boys.

>> No.508219

>>508204
We only do it because of faggot like you.

>> No.508222

>>508193
>Implying trying to make peace in the world is always the same as letting Hitler kill all the jews.
>Blessed are those who hunger for righteousness.

Religion has killed less people over the past 2000 years then communism has killed in the past 50.
Lets just cut the bullshit and admit things can be taken both ways. It doesn't mean we should outlaw it.

>> No.508223

>>508219

BAWWW DADDY DIDN'T LOVE ME THAT MEANS SKY DADDY DOESN'T LOVE ME EITHER BAWWWWWWW

>> No.508228

>>508223

You're not going to convert anyone with that attitude, you just drive people away.

Think before you post.

>> No.508230

>>508223
>And wonders why he isn't respected.

>> No.508235

>>508228

I'm not trying to convert anyone, just piss them off.

fwiw I'm no Christian.

>> No.508238

>>508209
Politics has influence over people too.
So does wealth
So do emotions.

Religion can be good and bad. To say it is universally one or the other is stupid in every conceivable way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kB-5Srv05M
Skip to the 2 minute mark. This guy says it better then I can.

>> No.508240

>>508171
>Implying that the majority opinion is always jusitifed.

I see your point there. First, I never argued to outlaw religion. I said that forced conversion is wrong. Forced conversion is when churches mandate that, at a certain age which is normally below 10 years, children must join the church. I am agasint that idea. I felt sick when I had to go to see my cousin join the Catholic church at age 9. The fucking kid was just talking to me the day before about how he wanted to be a super-hero doctor, and how he can't wait for the new Halo to come out. Kids have no fucking clue whats going on, and they are forced to join a Church that will frame their mind. I understand that some kids will find their way out, but the fact that kids are given no alternative is indoctrination, and that is very hard for people to shake away from.

You built a nice straw-man there.

My point is that there are better things in this world than the belief of a God: secular socialism.

I understand that people don't always have the best thing in mind for each other, but the fact is that we have built a pretty damn good society without the basis of religion. In fact, it is the best damn society the world has ever fucking seen. When will you guys fucking see that? The United States, for all its fucked up-ness, gives everyone an education, treats the mentally ill, gives health-care and the fucking lot.

Would you rather live in the fucking 1500's when Religion dominated the world?
Or, would you rather live in the 2000's when secular socialism dominated the world?

DURPA DURPA IM A CHRISTIAN AND ONLY CHRISTIANS DO GOOD THINGS INTHE WORLD.

Well played, sir.

>> No.508241

What exactly is this new Atheism? EXPLAIN

>> No.508247
File: 57 KB, 493x349, 1265093961589.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
508247

>>508188
Cool, someone else picdumping.

Also,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6VClfZVulU&feature=related

Hitchens gives a brief tour of his apartment, with the sound badly out of sync.

>> No.508258

Why the fuck is Daniel Dennet in this? Oh dear god.

>> No.508263
File: 25 KB, 460x300, christopherhitchens460.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
508263

>>508247
Oh, and why are Hitchens and his daughter in some tunnel in construction garb?

>> No.508275

>>508240
Secular socialism-flawless

Yeah, no. Ultimately you are telling me that a world without god would be better then a world with god. Okay, but this is very simply not true. A world without religion would be like Brave New World. Hell, even WITH religion we are going down that road.
I hate to break it to you, but kids are not retarded. I got confirmed into the catholic church at age 9 as well. I thought most of it made no sense then and I am the same way now. Teaching your children about what you believe is not universally evil.
Political and social programs are different then religion. They aren't even comparable. For many religion is a personal thing, not a political thing. It is something they use to make themselves better people. If you don't agree, fine. But don't act like this is universally evil. It's not completley good either, but to act like it is some sort of blight on mankind is to ignore the reality of human nature. WE fuck up the world. WE are bigoted, WE are ignorant, WE are stupid.
You can get rid of religion, you can make the entire world atheist.
Nothing will change except the reasoning.

>> No.508282

>>508241
Never mind I looked it up.
>Tolerance of pervasive myth and superstition in modern society is not a virtue.
Religious fundamentalism has gone main stream and its toll on education, science, and social progress is disheartening.
Wake up people!! We are smart enough now to kill our invisible gods and oppressive beliefs.
It is the responsibility of the educated to educate the uneducated, lest we fall prey to the tyranny of ignorance.


What the fuck. And so what if God(s) is outside of the wavelengths humans can perceive, leave it alone.

>> No.508285

>>508263

They are touring a particle accelerator out in California I think.

>> No.508287

Fundamentalism is bad for everyone, regardless of whether it's Moqtada al-Sadr or Christopher Hitchens preaching it.

>> No.508288

>>508241

It's the atheist version of the Taliban. Except instead of cutting off peoples heads and throwing acid on schoolgirls, they just act like insufferable douchebags.

>> No.508289

I like none of them, because I don't give a shit about them. I've established that I'm an atheist. I don't want people preaching about it. That's the exact opposite of what I want.

>> No.508299

>>508240
Confirmation (in the Catholic church at least) occurs in high school. I dunno what denomination has it at 10.

>> No.508301

One of them tries to look down their nose at me IRL it's gonna get broken on them.

>> No.508308

>>508275
> Implying that I was saying that people are perfect. Also, implying that socialism wasn't the reason for all our social programs, and that religion and god were.

I agree that people are not perfect, but socialism has created this world we live in, not religion.
Socialists value life because we understand how far we can go by protecting and helping another, not becuase some sky-god told us to.
Also, Brave New World wouldn't be a bad place to live. Everyone is happy, and everything is safe and clean. The only thing missing is what your religion indoctrinated you to believe: individuality.

>> No.508319

>>508308

Brave New World would be a horrible place to live and you're a horrible person for saying otherwise.

>> No.508323
File: 224 KB, 718x540, vlcsnap-2009-10-17-23h59m21s200.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
508323

>>508308
>Brave New World wouldn't be a bad place to live
>reactionaku.jpg

>> No.508325

>Everyone implying that people aspousing athiesm are angsty, angry ramblers, and that the idea of athiesm runs against informing of its existence.

I'm so done with this thread.

>> No.508333

>>508308
>Implying I said religion and god created our social programs.
No, I didn't. I said it is not inherently opposed.

>Implying I was indoctrinated.
Once again, you are making dumb assumptions. No. My dad would give me Hindu religious texts to read and openly bash the Vatican.

>Socialists value life
Tell that to Stalin

>Brave New World wouldn't be too bad
So you would enjoy being a corporate slave?

>> No.508337

>>508308
>Brave New World
>not a bad place to live
>I missed the point of the book

>> No.508339

>>508319
>>508323
People who cling to the idea of free-will, and if it were to be in existence, it would be more valuable than safe, ignorant pleasure.

>> No.508340

>>508325

Well, that's been my experience with atheists.

Prove otherwise and I might change my point of view.

>> No.508344

>>508339
Free will makes you you. Free will is freedom.
Everything else is slavery.

>> No.508345

>>508299

>Confirmation (in the Catholic church at least) occurs in high school. I dunno what denomination has it at 10.

That's not really true. It's up to the bishop to decide the age of confirmation. In Europe it tends to be younger, around age 10, whereas in the states it tends to happen during high school. In non-Latin Rite churches confirmation is given right after baptism (which was the original practice).

>> No.508346

>>508337
>Sometimes books don't prove what they set out to do (e.g. bible and the existence of God)

>> No.508350

>>508345
I got it when I was 15. Like everybody else I know.

>> No.508353

>>508340
Basically every post that starts with green text and ends with "Well played,sir."

>> No.508355

>>508337

It's not that he missed the point. It's that he thinks the point is wrong.

>> No.508360

>>508353

Typically "Well played, sir" is said in a smug manner. At least that's how I read it on 4chan.

>> No.508366

>>508350

Yeah that's fine. You're missing the point, it varies by diocese. The general trend has been to have it later and later (which makes sense imo) but the age of confirmation still varies widely by geography.

>> No.508371

>>508339
Without free-will life is pointless for us as sentient/sapient beings and we might as well make all attempts to revert back to something more akin to our most recent ancestors with apes.

Also, your statement supposes that free-will does not exist, which is a fundamentally flawed argument ( even if, to many 'higher' educated people it seems logical).

>> No.508372

>>508346

Wow, you really did miss the point of that book.
Brave New World describes a society controlled through consumerism. The people are drugged, they live in a class system, and their lives are ultimately meaningless and unfulfilled. They are all slaves controlled by the elite.
Of course, they don't know this because they are too busy wasting their money on stupid shit and taking drugs.

The whole point of the book was the dangers of consumerism and materialism.

You missed the point, horribly.

>> No.508373

>>508344
Slavery to what, pleasure? I don't see the problem in "Brave New World."
One might make an argument for the lower castes, but the book says that they love their work, so I fail to see how they are suffering. Each caste functions perfectly and is passionate for their own productivity. No-one is suffering.
The only people suffering are two, maybe three people. Who is to say that the suffering of two people should outweigh the collective? The answer: people who believe in free-will.

>> No.508374

>>508346
You actually like the idea of Brave New World... HOW CAN YOU LIKE THAT, WTF.

>> No.508381

>Sometimes books don't prove what they set out to do (e.g. bible and the existence of God)
>Sometimes books don't prove what they set out to do (e.g. bible and the existence of God)
>Sometimes books don't prove what they set out to do (e.g. bible and the existence of God)

>> No.508382

>>508373

>no-one

Come back when you learn basic grammar, kid.

>> No.508384

>>508381

Where in the bible does it try to prove the existence of god?

>> No.508390

>>508381

The Bible didn't set out to prove the existence of God at all, though.

>> No.508393

>>508373
And then you end up with a stagnant society, which rightfully dies. I'm sorry, but suffering is what leads to progress, and without progress a species dies, forever.

>> No.508394

>>508372
Why do you want to control everything? Just...let...go. If you could destroy all suffering, why wouldn't you do it?

>> No.508404

>>508393
So, by your logic, heaven will rightfully die because there would be no suffering.
>>508384
Hmmm.... The Bible does not set out to prove the existence of God? I think you have me stumped on that one.

>> No.508408

>>508404

The people who wrote the Bible just sort of took their god's existence for granted. They don't have to prove it, they're preaching to the choir.

>> No.508410

>>508382
It was used for emphasis, kid. Learn style then come back to us, kid.

>> No.508411

>>508410

4 years as an English major. Your shit is wrong and no amount of denying it will change that.

>> No.508415

>>508404
'Heaven' isn't a society.

>> No.508418

>>508415
wat?

>> No.508423

>>508411
I understand that it would not be appropriate for papers, but this is not english class, faggot. Also, you should have taken a descriptivist linguistics class.

>> No.508428

>>508423

lol close that wikipedia tab so that you can stop making a fool of yourself

>> No.508430

>>508418
It's not a society. 'Heaven' is a place without suffering; in heaven 'suffering' does. Not. Exist.

>> No.508432

>>508408
The point of the Bible is to give God's word to mankind.
I think the books proves the opposite: the Bible is proof that there is no God that could give a word to mankind.

It's so hard.

>> No.508434

>>508428
>Implying that he understands what I just said.

>> No.508436

>>508434

Keep posting, I haven't run into such a lolcow since philosopher-fag on /r9k/ (anyone remember that guy?)

>> No.508437

>>508430
So, you are defining a society as a place of suffering?
Thanks for the new definition, Mr. Dictionary.

>> No.508438

>>508423

You're right. This isn't English class. This is a board where people should already know how to write correctly without being told.

Descriptivist linguistics is linguistics for people who are too ignorant to understand how a language properly works.

>> No.508440

>>508436
>Implying that I am not getting lols from your responses.

>> No.508441

>>508437

I think he's saying that it's not a normal human society. It's a "society" in the sense that there are people there, I guess (and that's a pretty lame definition of society), but it's not an earthly society and etc.

>> No.508444

>>508437

No. A society is a system of social organization. 'Heaven' is a place.

>> No.508449

>>508438
>Descriptivist linguistics is linguistics for people who are too ignorant to understand how a language properly works.

Niiiiiiiiiicccccccccceeeeeeeeeeeeeee. We see your true colors.

>> No.508453

>>508444
wat

>> No.508455

>>508449

And those are?

>> No.508461

>>508453
reality = place

heaven = place

society =/= place

heaven =/= society

>> No.508462

>>508444
A society is the condition of living in companionship with others, or in a community, rather than in isolation. (dictionary)

You are so right. Heaven is where we will all live in isolation. Wait. Isn't that hell? I forget.

>> No.508464

>>508455
>Descriptivist linguistics is linguistics for people who are too ignorant to understand how a language properly works.

>> No.508467

>>508464

And it is. Just because people speak in a certain manner does not make that manner of speaking correct. You're failing to provide an argument. I suspect you're butthurt.

>> No.508468

>>508462

>Wait. Isn't that hell? I forget
Hell is other people.

Seriously though. Don't apply human concepts to divine realms.

>> No.508469

>>508462
'condition of living in companionship with others' a long way of saying a way of social organization, heaven is the place, not the society.

>> No.508472

>>508468
We have reached an impasse.

>> No.508481

>>508467
>thinking about using your own logic against you.

The argument in support of descriptivists is inherent. You have to prove to me that it is not.

>> No.508486

>>508481

No, I think I'm going to leave you to your butthurt and go read Beowulf.

>> No.508487

>>508393
Revelations picture of New Jerusalem doesn't promise progress, but life for all. Frankly, that's not a concern for religion. Heaven doesn't need to give progress because it offers perfection.

>> No.508490

>>508486
>Beowulf
...is what you read in 12th grade. That is proof that you have not gone to a 4 year univerisity and acquired an English degree.

>> No.508491

>>508490

Think what you like, it honestly doesn't matter. I'll even let you have the last word after this post. I'm off.

>> No.508496

This thread sucked.

Fellow Christians, I am disappoint ;_;

Stop letting atheists get you side-tracked.

>> No.508501

>>508496
It's hard to have a good thread about this when all the religiousfags do is present platitudes about athiests.

>> No.508503

>>507880

Dawkins is the most entertaining to watch.

>> No.508508

>>507880
Hitchens

>> No.508512

I'd have to say Dawkins even though he's become the intellectual, atheist version of Fred Phelps. The Selfish Gene was pure brilliance.

>> No.508548
File: 221 KB, 445x518, 1252032501487.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
508548

I regard myself as an Atheist and I am very disappointed that so many people associate Dawkins with me/us.

There was this one video where he's giving a lecture at a campus and a Christian student asks him if he's wrong, he completely deflects the question and retorts with a "What if you're wrong?"
If he's going to endorse atheism and decide to publically speak on it, he should at least be ready to answer questions and defend his ideals.

In my opinion, Dawkins is a failure as an intellectual, Atheist, and despite me never reading any of his literary work, an author.

>> No.508557

>>508548
lol

>> No.508560

>>508548
Mother, may I have some more?

>> No.508562
File: 36 KB, 391x400, horsemen.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
508562

>> No.508573
File: 23 KB, 600x320, 1270071596380.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
508573

Checkmate

>> No.508579

>>508573
>Implying atheists believe in God.

>> No.508583

>>508579
>Implying you have no sense of humor

>> No.508588

>>508583
>implying that i was implying

>> No.508597

Atheists: If F=ma, then why can every set be well ordered?

>> No.508598

>>508557
>>508560
Why do I even bother an attempt at an actual discussion?

>> No.508600

>>508598
I thought you were subltly laughing at christian and religious logic when it comes to athiesm. You haven't read any of his books, but then you called him a shit author.
Wow. Religous fags really are that dumb.

>> No.508605

>>508600
>edit. you are an athiest. my bad.
You're just a really dumb athiest. We gotta have some.

>> No.508612

>>508548
the problem with that is, dawkins is human. "what if you're wrong" is basically pascal's wager, which has been rebutted to death, and the fact that the guy asked it showed that he was just parroting things without going deeper or thinking about what he was asking. i'm not saying it was proper of dawkins to do that, just understandable.

>> No.508620

>>508612
right. but his point is even worse than that. you can't base someone's intellect off of one snipet. dawkins has tirelessly tried to prove the worthiness of his cause. that one example cannot wash away his strong efforts

>> No.508621

Theist here. I love Hitchens. He's such a badass, unlike those other straight edge faggots.

>> No.508630

>>508621
Two are drinking martinis, one is drinking scotch/whiskey. The last one is a little iffy, might just be Perrier.

>> No.508650

Anyone else think that New Atheists are retarded and need to go away?

>> No.508693

>>508650

yo

>> No.508701

>>508650
what is a new athiest? i dunno

>> No.508702

>>508650

Dennett > You and your mother

The rest can go away though

>> No.508708

Daniel Dennet deserves better company than these morons.

>> No.508769

I like them all, except Harris, fuck him.