Do many of you truly believe in Catholicism/Christianity? In the current day and age it's 100% clear there's no God...

Do many of you truly believe in Catholicism/Christianity? In the current day and age it's 100% clear there's no God, especially the type depicted in the bible. How can you defend yourselves in an argument? Religion is destroying the right and their cause. People can't take anyone or their arguments seriously that is religious due to their clear delusion/lack of judgement from believing in a religion in the first place. Mentioning a fedora or vape isn't an argument.

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=I-vKLszXeEo
youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas
pewforum.org/2016/05/12/changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/
m.youtube.com/watch?v=sX5s5V7bf-s
m.youtube.com/watch?v=DakEcY7Z5GU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Fedora
Vape

Food
Money
Government
Police Officers

Tell a physicist that the theory of gravitation is crap and he will ignore you. Tell a christfag that his favourite god does not exist and he gets triggered.
The physicist knows what he believes is true.
The christfag subconsciously knows what he believes is garbage. And it terrifies him.

Indoctrination is a powerful thing, user.

>pic
what the fuck is that

That still doesn't account for so many right leaning people especially on this board being "religious". Why do it to the right wing movement? Why portray yourself as an idiot? Does right wing ideology just attract morons?

God is all things that bear vibration (light/heat/motion) and on earth is represented by the sun. Devil is all things stillness (darkness/coldness/stillness). From no vibration came vibration (big bang, Christianity, yin and yang, etc.)

Yes.

It's 100% clear you're a fool and a follower.

I defend myself by not being a follower.

Religion is the right and it's cause.

People have always been weak, silly beings. You think you are new, but you've been around for millennia. As soon as things get hard, there will always be those who abandon their faith.

I don't think you're a fedora. I think you're a fool and a follower. If fedoras were popular, you'd wear a fedora. If fedoras aren't popular, you'll take it off and make fun of people who have it. I have a lot more respect for your garden-variety fedora-atheist neckbeard than you. You're just a cheap whore.

lol

The liberals are more open-minded (therefore, less religious), but it makes them pussy socialists who wrongly believe everything is, and should be equal no matter what.

The conservatives are more close-minded (therefore, more religious), but ironically, it makes them more darwinian, giving them a realistic take on the nature of society.

Any rational person should be fiscally conservative, and socially liberal.

do you believe in the metaphysical?

This is what Christians actually believe kek

>more darwinian

Having sex with 1 woman is darwinian? Wew lad.

>Thinks that starting an argument with "You're literally 10000% wrong and you can't even begin to defend yourself pleb normie" makes him sound intelligent
>Tabs out to jack it to r/Hentai
>Takes bite of hot pocket before it gets cold

Go back to r/Atheism gentlesir

>In the current day and age it's 100% clear there's no God,

Can you clarify what you mean by this?

Yes it is, fuck off faggot.

I believe in God because the world would be a better place if everyone did. Be the change you want to see.

because you arent attacking the physicists belief in a God or gods. Lile if you told me I was wrong about wearing black shorts even though I am I wouldn't care.
Also it is real, faggot

No one claimed to be Christian here until the fedora memes mocking atheists started popping up and that Deus Vult bullshit became popular circa 2014.

If you were able to somehow flash that Men In Black memory-eraser thing to all 7 billion people on the planet regarding religion, none of them would re-emerge a thousand years later exactly as they existed two thousand years before when they were founded.

If you did the same with every science textbook, it would re-emerge the exact same since the same observations and theories and equations would inevitably be re-discovered.

If you erased all knowledge of the Peloponnesian War, it also would never be rediscovered

Sad little follower.

The burden of proof is on you for your claim, and whining isn't an argument.

>History is the same as science

Alright, I'm done.

No you retard, it's the same as religion. If you lose records of a historical event, it's gone. It doesn't mean that it never happened

>if you erased all knowledge of religion the same ones wouldn't pop up again
no shit retard

Well for this board specifically it's just because many people on here come here every day spending hours on end lurking/posting, and so they forget much of the knowledge and perspectives of the outside world, getting sucked 100% into the memes, including the meme of "climate change is hoax", leading them to believe all science is just a jew hoax. Not to mention the "muh traditions" and "avoid degeneracy" memes, both of which they forget can be achieved without religion.

but most of the not religious people are degenerates

...

>"it's the current year"
>"bekam adesits"

*tips*
( )
smoges :D
( )

>it's 100% clear there's no God

When did this become a fact?

Again, I said CAN be achieved without religion. Your chart only proves a lack of decent education on the nature of reality and of which values are usually the best values. If we can better educate the people of these values, without deluding the masses into worshiping an almost certainly nonexistent sky-daddy, don't you think that would be best?

I have no idea what side of the fence you're on with this issue. Are you saying all the claims of Christianity are based in historical fact?

Yes, it's a "no shit" argument to normal people, but to religious people, they would come back and say God would just send another prophet to reveal the truth should that ever happen.

Whatever you think of Jesus, he existed as a historical character who founded Christianity.

It has to do with the treatment of atheists by the current political parties more than viewpoints that you consider degenerate.

why are you so concerned about what other people think?

simply put you are insecure.

there is no other explanation.

If you were secure, you wouldnt give a flying fuck

Yes it CAN be but it won't be. The reason we are allowing all this degeneracy is from people moving away from God. Do you really think this shit would have been tolerated even even 50-100 years ago?

It never did and never will.

>If you were able to somehow flash that Men In Black memory-eraser thing to all 7 billion people on the planet regarding religion, none of them would re-emerge a thousand years later exactly as they existed two thousand years before when they were founded.
Wrong. Christianity is Inspired and requires no pre-knowledge of it's existence to re-exist.

Anyway, I like how atheists have to come up with ridiculously silly scenarios to justify their "rational" beliefs...

Yes he probably then would. But like the leaf said if you erase history we can't get it back.

Yes but im a calvinist so any opinion on the matter and pol instantly will shit on me

>In the current day and age it's 100% clear there's no God

saged.

No a lot higher percentage of atheists are for gays than compared to Christians

Might have existed. It's much more likely that, like many of the most important figures in the bible, the stories of Jesus are an amalgamation of various stories of people claiming to be the messiah, pretending to perform miracles, and spreading their own interpretation of how the current religion of the time should be practiced.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=I-vKLszXeEo

>If you care about suicide bombers, religion, anything, you are insecure
lol, the mental gymnastics to come to this conclusion

>100% clear there is no God
Fucking idiot. Watch this:
youtube.com/watch?v=v2Xsp4FRgas

...

Jesus is on a different level from other Biblical figures, and if you refuse to acknowledge that he existed as a historical character (whether or not he came back from the dead) then out of consistency you should also deny the existence of Julius Caesar and Socrates

Why do people hate on calvinists? I've seen this happening too.

No, it's more close minded.

How many christians do you know that have only slept with one woman?

>I have zero theological knowledge but I'm going claim things I heard from my favorite youtubers as truth

t. high school freshman

>people believing in God is the same as people blowing them selves up in a group if people

>t. fedoratard

...

>The reason we are allowing all this degeneracy is from people moving away from God
While I do agree with this aspect, this doesn't mean that moving back to god is the solution. We just need people to be more rational and form heir beliefs/policies off of a more scientific way of thinking; that is figuring out based on evidence and critical thinking which policies and values work the best for society.

you cant prove God does not exist any more than a believer
can prove god does exist

so whats the fucking point of asking?

Because rather than admit their depraved nature, fake belief, or half hearted belief (thus not tasting God's irresistable grace) they take our "election" beliefs as us being arrogant holier than thou assholes instead of us recognizing God's omnipotence.

Source?

One time when I prayed God told me that "believing in god and having religion is only for faggots" and since I frequent /b I guess I will keep believing

That's likely a good thing.
I'm friends with a lot of faggots and those who had the most conflict with their parents tend to end up the most degenerate.
You shouldn't have an issue with gay people that aren't shoving their agenda in your face, but then again you Christcucks tend to be extremely authoritarian.

>Wrong. Christianity is Inspired and requires no pre-knowledge of it's existence to re-exist.


I have no idea how you're going to defend that statement since billions of people walked, lived, and died on this planet with no knowledge of any Abrahamic religion at all and never developed anything that even resembles one.

>Anyway, I like how atheists have to come up with ridiculously silly scenarios to justify their "rational" beliefs...

It's called a "thought experiment" and it apparently triggered you because you've provided no rebuttal.

Okay, you're really missing the point here. You compare religion to history, but then give a religious reason for why it would re-emerge exactly as it exists now.

Yes, lots of people existed as historical figures, some have more proof of their existence than others, again, you're also missing the point, if the religion Christ founded is correct and undeniable, then it should be able to re-emerge as it existed before after all knowledge of it had been erased. That wouldn't happen, though. It would with science, however.

Nope, this type of opinion is outdated by over 100 years. Read some Nietzsche or Dostoyevsky. If there is no God, you can do whatever you want

oyster mushrooms growing on what looks like a statue made of straw and wood chip

...

dammit you got me. you're right i'm not being very intellectually honest with myself. been trying to improve.i just figured jake from tbr, who studies history and theology, new what he was talking about. brb gonna go research jesus

Can you disprove the existence of unicorns?

That's literally the logic you're using.

pewforum.org/2016/05/12/changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/

Josephus, Tacitus etc. are known christian interpolations and are an academic embarrassment
when used by apologists to claim historicity of their man made god.

>If there is no God, you can do whatever you want

I don't believe in God and I do whatever I want. I just have no interest in eating my children, committing rape, murder, or theft, or running over pedestrians trying to cross the street.

My sense of morality comes from own natural instincts which tell me what is right and what is wrong. I don't hear someone screaming bloody murder from a distance and wring my hands and think "Ohhh, yes, more of that!", I feel unsettled and then feel the need to notify someone.

Now, either I was just lucky enough to be born as a saint on earth or most people are exactly like me: Your own instincts tell you what is right and what is wrong, you don't need God to dictate that to you. Yes, there are outliers who are incapable of feeling empathy or sympathy, but they're the extreme minority and lord knows religious people never commit atrocious acts, right? I'd type the wink emoticon, but I think you get the point.

God is real, the video i posted argued it.
If your attention span is too low to watch a 15 minute video, this is the arguement:
1)The universe is a simulation
2)simulations can only exist in a computer or a mind
3) A simulation that exists in a computer must, itself, be simulated in a mind
4) Therefor, the the universe is a simulation in a mind
5) This Mind is what we call God
6)Therefor, God exists

Quantum Mechanics has proven that there is no material reality, and that the universe is a simulation inside God

The Bible is a story with good metaphors that teach you about the true nature of reality

People that believe it as true 100% are retarded

It's interesting because you say one thing to one guy and the opposite to me. I'm saying that a religion could be lost because it's more like history. Then you imply that if it was really true it would re-emerge. Of course, if there was divine intervention it would re-emerge, but then you criticise this guy for saying just that.

Now of course it would be possible for a reduced form of Christianity to re-emerge (after all, Christianity is the successor of Greek philosophy, which could conceivably re-emerge if knowledge of it was lost, but in a different form). But to have Christianity with Christ at the center of it, you need either new divine revelation or historical record.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=sX5s5V7bf-s

>I have no idea how you're going to defend that statement since billions of people walked, lived, and died on this planet with no knowledge of any Abrahamic religion at all and never developed anything that even resembles one.
Christianity exists.

>It's called a "thought experiment" and it apparently triggered you because you've provided no rebuttal.
My rebuttal is that Christianity is inspired and would require no pre-knowledge of it's existence to come back into existence in the (impossible) scenario you've invented.

Basically, you suggested a miracle of Satan in which all knowledge of the Living God were wiped out from men. I just answered that in such a case, a miracle of God would most likely occur and lead men back to the true Faith. Since we're dealing with thought experiements, you can't prove this wrong. You can laugh and say: "That's absurd" but then again, so is your ridiculous scenario. You just want to pick and choose which ridiculous scenarios are okay to talk about and which ones aren't because you don't have any real, factual evidence, and we have overwhelming evidence.

Don't fret, OP. Religion is dying and as the world realizes our technology and culture is advancing due to human discovery and not some divine being, the idea of one will die out. People are getting smarter and thus religion is dying out. Give it time

>Do many of you truly believe in Catholicism/Christianity?
I do, as do others here. Some people do not but promote the ideology on utilitarian grounds. They are foolish people.

>In the current day and age it's 100% clear there's no God, especially the type depicted in the bible. How can you defend yourselves in an argument?

The first comment is terribly loaded but basically by appeal TO Catholicism. Christianity is largely understood in Protestant and Enlightenment terms. Comments of faith and the use of it in religion are just comments about fideism. Comments of God are almost exclusively of theistic personalist interpretations in the mainstream and say nothing of classical theism or divine conservatio. Comments about the role of authority and scripture are based in sola scriptura. People criticize transubstantiation as if it were transformation without even approaching substance theory. When the soul is mentioned, it is substance dualism rather than hylomorphic dualism. The very intellectual grounds of theology - natural theology - is dismissed by the Protestant strawman of it being "figuring out how many angels can sit at the tip of a needle" without any understanding of it and what criticisms are attempted are incredibly shallow to Scholastic arguments and serve only to attack Protestant and Enlightenment ideas.

So, OP, you defend Catholicism by presenting Catholicism.

>you can't enjoy something that doesn't exist
good luck watching movies, you faggot

religion isn't fundamentally about what exists or does not exist regarding God.
it's about what humans should do.

the "what exists about God" is just a way of codifying the moral prescriptions of religion in a way that doesn't require every single person to be an expert in moral philosophy. so the anti-religious mindset is usually that moral philosophy should be so simple that every person should be able to fully understand it. This is like the liberals "even my kid just said Drumpf is evil and gay people are good!"

however when left-wing systems develop further they also end up creating rules that people need to believe without question, left-wing dogma. like the "don't question lived experience" rule. then rightists criticize it as being "just like a religion"

but if you're trusting someone else's word on morality, how does it matter whether they're using a supernatural or a materialistic explanation if you personally aren't given any say in whether they're correct or not?

so I kind of think it deserves to be divided on two axis: supernatural vs. materialistic moral philosophy, and dogma-based vs. system that everyone is supposed to fully understand

the problem furthermore is that the dogma-based systems are always disguised. the religious systems say it's based on the word of God, but it's actually based on the ideas that are shown to work in tradition, however they were originally developed. the liberal system is supposed to be "so simple children understand it" but it's actually based on obscure philosophy and postmodern jargon so confusing even the scholars don't understand it.

>My sense of morality comes from own natural instincts which tell me what is right and what is wrong.
You mean the social conditioning which is 90% Christianity?

>taking everything literally and believing that God is a bearded guy living in a cloud.

Here is the bottom line, so long as someone, anyone does believe in God, then God exists.
with or without proof.

ergo God exists. period.

>allowing degeracy is a good thing
pictureofChristChanlookingatyoulikeyou'refuckingretarded.png

Lack of belief in the end-times was already prophesied and it results in Christianity winning anyway.

>is religious

I believe in the gods of my people.

Heill Óðinn, sæl Óðinn
Heill Óðinn, sæl Óðinn
Heill Óðinn, sæl Óðinn

No, I'm not saying the opposite of anything, I'm fucking confused as to where either one of you happen to stand on this issue.

If you think of religion as just something which occurred and developed throughout the course of history, nothing more and nothing less, then fine, we agree. It wouldn't come back.

But the other guy said "God would probably send another prophet to reveal the truth should that ever happen". Okay, so he is a Christfag or not? I can't fucking tell thus I don't know how to approach either one of you.

>Christianity exists.

Says you.

>My rebuttal is that Christianity is inspired and would require no pre-knowledge of it's existence to come back into existence in the (impossible) scenario you've invented.

Says you.

>
Basically, you suggested a miracle of Satan in which all knowledge of the Living God were wiped out from men. I just answered that in such a case, a miracle of God would most likely occur and lead men back to the true Faith. Since we're dealing with thought experiements, you can't prove this wrong. You can laugh and say: "That's absurd" but then again, so is your ridiculous scenario. You just want to pick and choose which ridiculous scenarios are okay to talk about and which ones aren't because you don't have any real, factual evidence, and we have overwhelming evidence.

Says you.

Okay, let's change it from the Men In Black flasher thing to just good old fashioned, mom and pop, meat and potatoes fucking book burning. Does that make it any less ridiculous to you, you fucking idiot?

You say that unironically, meanwhile 70% of atheists voted for Clinton in the last election.

that's only 2/7. Also do you realky think the apostles would have just made up a person or just used someone that already existed.

But you were raised in a Christian culture that either directly or indirectly passed these values onto you. Consider this: if there is no God, and I could kill someone without getting caught, why shouldn't I, especially if it benefits me?

I'm familiar with what Jordan Peterson teaches, and he's good with a lot of things, but he's wrong on this. Christianity lives or dies on the question of whether Jesus came back from the dead, and this alone determines whether or not it has any value.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=DakEcY7Z5GU

>Posts a video of a guy who can't even pronounce the word "hypothesis"
>Presupposes the universe began to exist from nothing
>Presupposes that it must be a virtual reality simulation and argues from that point

You've been watching "The Matrix" too much, buddy.

>science textbook, it would re-emerge the exact same
no
instrumentalism v realism etc

how is two-scoop-trump doing so far?

Japan is less than 1% Christian and is one of the safest countries on the planet, Brazil is one of the most Christian countries on the planet and has the highest crime rate on the planet.

So, it appears that "Christian-inspired social conditioning" doesn't mean a goddamned thing when it comes to behaving yourself.

And I wasn't going to bring race into this, but blacks are very Christian and they're not exactly known for their academic achievements or willingness to obey the law.

>t. retard

Redpills coming up:

Basically God has become an outdated term, sadly. I don't go into defining God any more but suffice to say that it involves a belief in something larger than us, mere humans. A modern person might invoke the cosmic laws that govern all things etc.
Since a few centuries ago people have been proving wrong some claims and assumptions either made in earlier times by religious institutions or supported by them. Later post-enlightenment, rationalist, reductionist mind has swept everything prior to the bin of history. Thinking science will (due to it disproving earlier claims rooted in religious stories) inevitably overcome any and all questions about the natural world.
When we enter the world of modern physics though the case is very different. Our models no longer seem to hold water like they once did. And it becomes almost necessary to consider metaphysics seriously again.
The problem is twofold:
1. old religious vocabularies simply can't stand the rate of cultural/scientific evolution happening around us. Or there isn't really a stable time, when we could wrap our scientific findings into a neat unifying narrative (religion), since everything simply changes too rapidly for us to handle.
2. We absolutely, positively need a coherent, unifying metaphysical narrative (religion) to orient our societies. (every civilization in history has required the existence of a religion, the lack of which today explains the current states of degeneracy and corruption) but we cannot create such an institution in the current state of affairs because of point 1.

you may say god does not exist

and you may be right.

not trying to defend the existence of or the belief

but my point is very simple, so long as people believe in the existence of god, then god exists,
for that person/or people

thats what im trying to say

just because someone else does not believe in the existence of god doesnt make the reality of the believers real.

much the way opinion operates.

No, idiot, this is the current model of quantum mechanics. Stop being useless and stop denying science.
It has been PROVEN that materialism is false and that reality is a simulation.

> In the current day and age it's 100% clear there's no God

The fool in his heart says there is no God