Atheists unironically believe this

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/GOFws_hhZs8
escholarship.org/content/qt6zh3j3pr/qt6zh3j3pr.pdf
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

religions believe that someone called god that can't physically exist created everything from nothing. I see no difference from your image after all...

Atheists also don't believe that everything was created from nothing, or at least the clever ones.

Honestly that seems about right. Not everything makes sense.

i dont.

i think that there was nothing, the big bang happened for unknown reasons and then the universe was made. there was no before.

also
who created god?

go to church, nino.

what if there was always something and time doesn't really exist so there was never an end or a beginning

Not an argument

already been there. the only reason for me to visit a church is to see the church and the paintings/architecture of it, no other reasons.

Something producing something
vs
Nothing producing something

These two things are not alike.

Gods realm of no time is beyond our comprehension

it would be great if brainlet christfags did not have to make up stupid stories about what their intellectual superiors think.

I thought the same thing until I started to look into AI and saw simple computer programs being able to efficiently "evolve" with no outside input.
This series of videos for example:
youtu.be/GOFws_hhZs8

>religions believe that someone they call god that isn't physical created everything
ftfy
>Atheists also don't believe that everything was created from nothing, or at least the clever ones.
Yes, they believe in infinite regress that itself begs a cause, whose cause begs a cause ad infinitum, ad infinitum etc. rather than God, a concept for which they have very poor arguments for being irrational in the first place.

But then what god created God? Did He come from nothing?

That's why the two sides of the argument are ultimately the same.

how can you define "god" as "something"? how can you say that nothing generated something? what if there was a something before that wasn't god? if this something created the universe, then if could be considered as "god" since it's what of the universe originated from.

dude weed lmao

I’ve made such things myself. You can’t start with “nothing”

Where the fuck has all the antimatter gone?

God exists outside time as an absolute constant truth like e.

Science just told it to go away.

While Venice looks gorgeous I have the impression it smells like ass am I wrong?

someone keeps dumping it round the back of our building
i have to keep shovelling it into the recycling bin
dunno where it all comes from. i blame that stephen hawking

>who created god?
>lel if evolution is true why are there still monkeys
That’s about the most shit tier level of challenge to theists.

There is no serious theist philosopher who states “everything must have a cause” or “everything requires a creator” or “everything requires an explanation”. They state the universe requires this.

What did he mean by this?

He just has autism, ignore him.

eeh, it's full of chinks during the tourists seasons, but i don't think it's that bad.

And infinite time and space is capable of eventually producing life without the intervention of a God. I mean, when a Boltzmann Brain is considered a plausible concept by science, why do we need an argument against God creating the universe that convinces you?

ITT: people who no very little about infinite regression.

escholarship.org/content/qt6zh3j3pr/qt6zh3j3pr.pdf
>Persons with autistic spectrum disorder were much more likely than those in our neurotypical comparison group to identify as atheist or agnostic, and, if religious, were more likely to construct their own religious belief system. Nonbelief was also higher in those who were attracted to systemizing activities, as measured by the Systemizing Quotient.

Le God doesn’t exist meme is nothing more than a meme. His existence is quite evident to anyone capable of processing logic. The creation of our universe from nothing must have been caused by someone outside our universe. This person might not be God though and could simply be living in an outer universe with a creator as well, and this creator dwelling in another. You cannot have an infinite regress so this would continue until you reach the ultimate creator on top. The existence of God is not hard to understand. Atheists are just uncomfortable with the idea.

yes, the big bang spawning from the primordial sludge covering the universe, or god being apparently created from nothing. seems a little illogical doesn't it?

You’re doublethinking. The Big Bang happened, so something was created from nothing.

>there is no philosopher who states everything must have a cause

>THE EVIDENCE IS RIGHT THERE!!!11
>CAN'T YOU SEE IT?
>OMG YOU STEWPID

thats literally how we got phones though

> They state the universe requires this.

Why the universe requires a cause,but its creator, conveniently, doesn't?

Its almost like they are just looking for an ad hoc rationalisation for their religious dogmas, in which case they shouldn't be called philosophers at all.

mmm sky cake

If you believe in determinism then you know there must be a cause. There is no “it just happened. Don’t question it.”

Most atheists still believe in the theistic model of the universe they just modified it slightly to exclude god.

They still believe in the self - an analogous concept to the soul. They still believe in freedom of choice. They believe this universe didn't exist at one point and suddenly popped into existence due to some external force. They still believe they themselves suddenly popped into this universe from nothing. They live their lives and then die except....instead of judgement day there is simply nothing again. As they removed the concept of god that idea of an afterlife is apparently nonsensical. Yet everything else is perfectly rational.

It's a very muddled way of thinking being an atheist.

Try asking an atheist why he only lives once or why he won't be reincarnated once he dies and returns to the nothing. The nothing from which he has already sprang into existence from once before - yet apparently will become a barrier to existence after death. Their model starts failing here.

I don't see any scientific difference between "God made it" and "nothing blew up and made everything."

"Who made God?" Who made the primordial soup? What made it explode? The Big Bang Theory is a religion

A creator exists, but it almost definitely isn't the Jewish desert god known as Yahweh.

This right here. There must be a noncontingent being.
"Nothing creates nothing. Something exists. Therefore, there was never nothing."

>trying to apply logic to religion and failing miserably
What created your creator? Did he come from nothing? Then what makes the thought of our universe also coming from nothing so different. Was he always there? Then what makes the thought of space and matter being always there so different?
The point is that we don't know. And trying to support religion with logic looks even more retarded then trying to support atheism with logic. It's about belief you pseudointellectual faggot.

I am comfortable with the idea that there might be a god, but until I see direct proof, the most logical theory will be the one I subscribe to.
As for what that is, currently I am thinking about the constant expansion of the universe and how it must have an after effect, such as a constant retraction for instance. This constant retraction is what I believe eventually initiated what we usually call "The big bang".
But for all I know there might be a god controlling this very motion.

You get it. Their philosophy depends on doublethink. “Feigning” intellectual superiority only lasts for so long.

>the big bang happened for unknown reasons
Except absolutely nothing in nature gets better over time without an outside force involved.
It violates all the laws of Thermodynamics to say something came from nothing.

So you reject the Big Bang to preserve your atheism?

And so God was created from nothing too, him being "outside of time" is hardly an escape from that fact. You want atheists to argue in a way that meets your terms, then they can want for you to argue in a way that meets theirs.

>They still believe in the self - an analogous concept to the soul.
>It's a very muddled way of thinking being an atheist.
And a theist, apparently.

No theist philosopher arguing for god says this. Point to the philosophical argument that says everything needs a cause. Yet the typical conversation between a theist and an atheist goes like this:
>theist: the universe needs an explanation, and that explanation is god
>atheist: fucking idiot if everything needs an explanation then what explained god CHECKMATE
>theist: no, i said the universe needs an explanation not everyth-
>atheist: LOL do you even know about logic reason and science
>theist: yes but actually im making classical arguments from western philosop-
>atheist: YOU WORSHIP THE BEARD GUY IN THE SKY LOL

The whole point of God is that He is the being which does not require a creator, the unmoved mover, existing outside our dimension and outside of time itself. Something like God must exist.

You'll motherfuckas need Aquinas.

Probably under the sofa with the TV remote

Basically, your argument is that we shouldn't call the entity that created the universe "God".

Well, okay. As long as we agree that there was an initial creator and you can sleep comfy in your rhetoric blanket at night.

No, I don't. But it's just a theory. It's just my belief in the same way your belief is that it was god who created the universe.
Just in case, big bang theory is not about something coming out of nothing, so I hope you didn't get a wrong idea.

Nothing created God. When Moses asked God what to call him God said "I AM." It's not something we can comprehend, but it is certainly more likely than a vacuum producing matter.

>unironically
>literally

Why are you children obsessed with these (((words)))?

I used to be a fedora tipper, but now I'm more inclined to believe there is some kind of higher power that exists.

I have seen too many weird coincidences and glitches in the matrix in my life to still be able to say there is no God with 100% certainty.

>religious pople are actualyl arrogant to assume they do know how it owrks


sweetey

Wow these atheists sound very silly.

>>almost all religions speak about how faith is required rather than proof to reach heaven
>>"I'm waiting for solid proof, I'm not going to just go in on faith."

It seems about equally believable. I've never heard of the idea of vacuum creating matter though.

The real redpill is even if a creator exists theres no reason for it to be yahwah.

We're like dogs trying to figure out quantum mechanics.

Some interesting thoughts.
Because humans do better as a collectivity,
Natural selection favours organised religion vs atheism.
Natural selection favours tradition vs progress.

I as a combined force of all the atoms that I consist of will not be reincarnated.
There might be someone who thinks like me, looks like me, or even has my exact name. But these will not be me, as I am a product of my perception of the world, not a carefully molded creation of God.
My body will decompose and just as my mother produced me in her womb, the world will use my decomposed body to produce many other things. The iron in my body might one day end up on a transport ship from the former Repubic of Korea to their ally The Greater Isreal.

>always wet
>full of wops

The equation which allows the current state of the universe to be the result. Human math is imperfect and requires more time and effort before arriving at some answers.

However, all theories are based on laws and real data that requires no faith and can be understood.

Whatever people are falling atheismm nowadays is dumb kids being kids. However, there is more evidence documented against the existence of a mighty all powerful sapient being beyond our understanding than there is for.

Oh fuck off you pedantic """centrist"""

Asserting the matter was always there is no less absurd than asserting God was always there.

Just like Boston.

yes because it was Elohim and not YHVH.

I exist and you exist?
Do you see?
Do you think?

Something*

You are not composed of the same atoms you were born as. Even if use this materialistic logic - that you are only what you are made of - then you are constantly being reincarnated and there is no real self.

Have you not heard of trigger's broom? He changed the brush 7 times and the handle 5 times, but still claims it is the same broom as when he bought it.

Me too. Looking back on my past there was so much I missed too.

If a bum told you "I will give you 1 billion dollars if you suck me off" and then you ask him if he had proof that he can pay you that much would you still do it on the count of faith?

If god can exist without a creator you're accepting that very complex systems can exist without the need for a creator.

A more parsimonious explanation would be to believe the universe itself have always existed without the need for a creator.

>I exist but god conveniently doesn’t? Seems like an ad hoc rationalization to fuel your atheism.
That’s the form of your argument. Because one thing has a property everything must have the property or it’s an ad hoc rationalization. To put it a different way, let’s say a scientist argues our universe and all others in the multiverse are spawned by an origin universe which is eternal and uncaused. There’s nothing wrong with saying this and you can’t say because the scientist thinks our universe needs a cause that the other one needs one as well. He never said it’s a property of all possible universes that they need a cause, just that ours needs one. Realize your position rules out all non infinite regress explanations.

This too. Even if it weren’t evident that God exists, an objective moral standard is superior to a subjective one.

YHWH*

Well, but this was my point all along. It all comes down to belief and no amount of false assumptions and faulty logic will give us the exact answer.

God does not require a creator but matter does. Matter exists, therefore, it must have been created by something.

Do the religious actually believe this shit or is this lame bait just eternally effective?
Either way fuck ya'll

I've thought about this. Shouldn't the REAL GOD be the one in the oldest religion? Which isn't christianity or the abraham ones.

Why do Eurofags have a tendency to be such annoying atheists?
Except Poles.

>>there is no philosopher who states everything must have a cause
>No theist philosopher arguing for god says this. Point to the philosophical argument that says everything needs a cause.
You mean like... causality? As determined by, you know, that guy no one's heard of called Aristotle - which he used in his argument FOR God?
>One of the most famous and ancient philosophical arguments for the existence of God comes from Aristotle. This is the argument that everything that moves is moved by something else, so going back in time, there must have been an unmoved mover, or Prime Mover, or original Creator God.
I mean, clearly you know this, you basically just said so

The realer red pill is that we are all only one consciousness that is imagining the entire world including every ego (person, conscious animal, etc) and creating the physical world as an idea.

This is called god traditionally, but now scientists call it "simulation theory" and "god" has just changed his name to "the computer".

>then you are constantly being reincarnated and there is no real self.
I liked this reasoning, until I learned that brain cells don't regenerate.

Is that what religion is to you?

Well of course we all change as time moves on, the same with the atoms we consist of.
But the point still stands that when our body can no longer sustain the creation of new atoms compared to the decline of the old ones we will no longer be alive as we are.
And for all I know there might not be a real self and only a present self, constantly changing as we go along.

>primordial sludge covering the universe

What made the sludge? All I'm seeing is my meme image or God.

Also you fucked up my meme, cunt

Replace the iPhone with God and you have religious logic.

Gonna need some proof of that, sparky. Because what you just said sounds an awful lot like special pleading.

fixed your image sweetie

>I have seen too many weird coincidences and glitches in the matrix in my life to still be able to say there is no God with 100% certainty.
There's a lot of stuff in the world, let alone the universe. The changes of you occasionally encountering coincidences aren't very high.

Wow, no. Nothing in our universe exists without a creator, God would be the entity outside the universe which does not require a creator. "Very complex systems" do require a creator if they are part of our universe.

Because they're used incorrectly so often using them correctly isn't over usage.

>This is the argument that everything that moves is moved by something else
>everything that moves
See the difference between “everything that moves” and everything?
>unmoved mover
If it’s not moving it’s not moved by something else, according to the argument. See what I mean?

Not at all, I hold all religion in high regards.
In a sense religion is what gave us morals, and many other great things.
All I'm saying is that religion in its present form is not an idea I subscribe to as it is, in my opinion, an outdated practice.

ITT: people talking about "nothing".

wine gets better over time.

because there is no evidence to suggest reincarnation is true.

also i didnt spring from nothing. im the product of millions of generations of evolution. every single one of my ancestors had a child. tfw you will ide alone and destroy billions of years worth of evolution by not fucking everything you see like all of your ancestors did