Has atheism lost its edge?

I am an atheist but I'm having doubts about Atheism and I need some honest opinions about its current status and help on leaving it.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=C0gpah6FipM&t=1s
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion
youtu.be/eJQHakkViPo?t=5m20s
rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_first_cause
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extelligence)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Start with Zenykoku Haku
I was a strict agnostic until seeing his vids
Just a suggestion that worked for me

Zenkyoku*

>help on leaving it
find a god to believe in
job done

Read Edward Feser. Aristotelian-Thomistic neo-Scholastic metaphysics is the cornerstone of the Western tradition, and we need to return to it in order to defeat the postmodernists and restore Western civilization (aka European Christendom)

The only reason why left atheism is because I discovered that the Earth is most certainly not a globe like we've always been told. Wether it's flat, a plane or whatever I don't know, but the current accepted globe is simply inaccurate and this is simply speaking from a mathematical point of view. You can check it out yourself by calculating curvature. Anyway, I'm not an atheist anymore, because I think it's arrogant to say that it's not possible for there to be a being like a "god" in this universe. Since, if the universe is that big, who are we to say something can or can't exist?

...

Meant to say "one" of the reasons ofcourse.

>having doubts about Atheism
That's the most retarded thing I've heard all day.

I'm an atheist, but the so-called "New Atheism" is pure faggotry. Read some Neechee.

you’re retarded as fuck

At the time, I thought people were stupid for believing in a god(s)

>New Atheism
That's not even a thing. It's just a euphemism for uppity/vocal atheists. These people pretended to be fine with religious freedom as long as atheists stayed closeted about their beliefs and didn't speak-up against religion being shoved into places where it didn't belong. That's the only thing "new" about it.

Isn't that the "Jews fear the samurai" guy?

...

Atheism has not lost its edge, afaik its the strongest it has ever been, but it gets a bad wrap from people who arent part of the atheist group, people misrepresenting and strawmanning atheism are way more common than people who actually understand what atheism is, hell, even some atheists (those who call themselves agnostic) shit talk atheists all the time.
Meanwhile there are no solid arguments against atheism.

>help on leaving it.
the only way to leave atheism is to start believing in a god and as an atheist you might know there are no good reasons to believe in a god, so you would propably need a mental illness to be able to force yourself to believe something without a reason.

I believe there’s a God.
But I don’t believe in afterlife.
What am I?

Platonist?

atheism is actually pretty edgy when you take it to it's logical conclusion. most atheists--i'd guess 70%--are just jews or humanists.

>hell, even some atheists (those who call themselves agnostic) shit talk atheists all the time.
These are the fedora-tipping atheists of fedora-tipping atheists. "Oh, I'm too smart to have a strong opinion about things. Silly atheists thinking they can use logic to come to a conclusion"

well not only that but they are also wrong, there is no position between believing in a god and not believing in a god, so they are either being as illogical as you can be (going against the logical absolutes) or they are misrepresenting atheism in order to avoid the lable.
they usually piss me off more than theists.

Look into Kent Hovind on The Youtube.

This.
I fucking hate agnostics. I can have civil discussion with the most religious people, but I fucking despise agnostics.

Seeing as you range from a cycle of reincarnation to going back to the One, it depends on who you ask, really.

>needed validation from others
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

>2017
>hasn't taken the Deism pill

deist is just a weak theist, not only do you not have justification for your beliefs, but you dont even fucking know what it is you believe in.

Atheism is dead, and should stay dead.
I am not religious, exactly for that reason i have never fell into Atheism.

Atheism is a failure. It will never be able to be a basis for a society long-term. For many people, too, it is unfulfilling. Most people who are raised without religion will become religious in one way or another in their lifetimes. Some just replace religion with something else (like politics, drugs, etc) to fuel the hole in their lives that atheism creates.

It's good to hear you are having doubts. I suggest you read and, perhaps, watch some discussions from a few Youtube apologists. I'm biased so I am going to suggest, first and foremost, Christians; these include William Lane Craig, John C. Lennox, and David Wood. These are good and accessible to most.

I suggest you read religious scriptures, too -- but not really on your own. It's not going to be useful if you don't understand the applied context to things. I suggest you find a Catholic, Orthodox or liturgical, high Church with a good theology and moral set.

Personally, were I not Christian, it'd probably be Sikh.

Atheism was just a commie/nwo ploy. The only atheist states were also communist. Styx is 10000% right about atheism and satanism
youtube.com/watch?v=C0gpah6FipM&t=1s
They both outlive their usefullness. You've been duped to believe you cant believe in god and still do science. The typical propaganda tactic:
>I am woman therfore i must be feminist
>I am gay therefore i must participate in lgbt movement
>I value science therefore i must become atheist

A lot of people fell for this.

>Atheism is a failure. It will never be able to be a basis for a society long-term.
and that is why its so much better, its not trying to be the basis of anything, its the result of critical thinking and honest research of carefully aquired evidence.

It is where we will go if we dont kill ourserves in the process.

Someone who is still looking. Like so many of us.

What about Czech Republic?

Its not an atheist state. They have a state religion. Im talking about countries which had state 'religion' as atheism.

you're having doubts because you're a brainlet simpleton who deeply wants to believe an invisible vision of ourselves governs an infinitely expanding universe because you're scared of the unknown without something/one to hold your hand. I.E. you're a drooling retard, sorry son.

There isn't really a "status" about atheism. It's the simplest thing in the world and has remained the same since the start.
Frankly speaking you sound like an insecure fad whore.
>that flag
Yeah pretty much.

>They have a state religion

They don't.

>Im talking about countries which had state 'religion' as atheism.
so you are talking about countries that dont have a state 'religion'.
>inb4 atheism is a religion
uhh, no its not.

Holy shit it's patrick!

I've taken the anti-christ pill.

Everything's hilarious now.

i just checked their constitution and in fact they dont. Still, atheist states are/were mostly communist, czech religious history is very... unique.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

>muh lack of religious beliefs is not at all religious beliefs
Define religion...

>its the result of critical thinking and honest research of carefully aquired evidence.
But it isn't. Atheism is not carefully acquired evidence, critical thinking, or anything. It's an argument from ignorance.

It effectively boils down from most atheists as "we don't know, therefore no". Almost all atheists are emotionally-based or indoctrinated by society into their position. Atheists tend to try to dress up their arguments based on "logic" and "proof" but these aren't the core of the majority of atheists' true positions; it's really about authority: the atheist dislikes being held accountable for things that they have done, especially sexual-related. Another one is because of disliking "the problem of evil", while usually not believing in objective morality.

>It is where we will go if we dont kill ourserves in the process.
Considering theism is inbuilt in humans, this is not the case. Every single tribe of people in every single plot of land on this globe believes in some from of god/spirits, from the Algonquin to the Zulu. Yes, including the Piraha.

Atheism goes against human nature. It goes against societal growth (why do you think atheist nations bring in so many migrants? They don't have kids), working in larger tribes past immediate family and tribes, and even going against human instinct to believe in a divine agency. You also have to ignore things that indicate a divinity as likely such as what is called "fine tuning of the universe", the Kalam Argument and more. Most atheists simply dismiss these with no real argument.

And I used to be an atheist. When you get down to it, the evidence stacks up against it.

In terms of society, persons and nature, atheism fails.

This and Estonia are slightly more complex. They're surviving -- for now. But probably not for long.

You didn't have to check. Most countries in the world don't have a state religion. Having a state religion is just bothersome in the modern world.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion
But yes, stating that atheism is your state religion is pretty messed-up and shows that the authorities failed to understand both religion and atheism.

because the neck beard fedora meme

All of your post is a bunch of baseless claims
>This and Estonia are slightly more complex. They're surviving -- for now. But probably not for long.
This is the biggest one.
You basically accuse atheists of making shit up , but you are guilty of it yourself.
>Almost all atheists are emotionally-based or indoctrinated by society into their position.
You not only have no way of knowing that, but also refuse to provide anything to back it up.
It's pretty hard to have a discussion with religious people, when they expect atheists to provide scientific proofs for all of their arguments but see no problems with all of their arguments being made-up from thin air.

Ill let the 'national treasure' speak
youtu.be/eJQHakkViPo?t=5m20s

It was a little to close to home for comfort.

checked

I am actually a very rational person. That is why instead of immediately assuming that someone is retarded for saying something that is deemed "crazy", I look at why someone would say that and also look at the evidence which supports someones claim. Just fyi, I too thought that the "flat earth" theory was made by some religious nutcases and I at first dismissed it completely as well. It takes a very open mind to look at it objectively which I'm glad I did. This is coming from someone who's been an atheist for almost his whole life.

I ain't listening to 11 fucking minutes of some fat homo preaching. Can I have a quick rundown?

You talk like atheism is some kind of magazine you subscribe to. And it's status? Same status as thousand years ago. A non belief in the supernatural. That's it. That's all "it" is. Just a statement on whether one believes in the supernatural or mystical or not.

Maybe you should question if your believes are genuine your own or socially-induced and now you feel like you're part of the wrong group?

no it was just taken over by stupid liberal faggots

>All of your post is a bunch of baseless claims
Baseless? Not at all.
I'm sure you could do some research into it. I'm sure someone who's so smart and intellectual would love to be able to research this further, but wouldn't like being told what to read.

>You not only have no way of knowing that,
I've been speaking to atheists for a long time. I know how atheists work.

The way you're acting? Seems I hit a nerve.

no society can survive without religion, which is a compilation of moral codes, tradition and rituals.
The emergence of religion is just as certain as language, culture and evolution. Its funny how atheists look at pic related, and somehow think that if civilisation was restarted there could be no religion
SPOILER ALERT: the emergence of religion is just as certain as the emergence of science. Its just something language and culture does.

atheislam is a tool to weaken the strongest religion in preparation for islam to take over

I marked the min for you, his point is less then 30 seconds i believe

you dont understand atheism and while there is no evidence for atheism, i mentioned evidence because when you dont have evidence you should not believe something, that is critical thinking which seems to be something you are not capable of.

>Considering theism is inbuilt in humans
its built into our society and with better education it will die, just like many other false beliefs in the past.

>In terms of society, persons and nature, atheism fails.
atheism has nothing to do with society or nature, you sir are an idiot.

>Atheism
>Leaving It
it's not an organized religion. How the hell would you "leave" Atheism?

...

Atheists should really give a study of the religious texts and history, they should especially learn about Judaism, Freemasonry and Luciferianism(Satan, Ba'al, Moloch) because they go and talk about hurr durr there's no such thing as a god blah blah. Religion is actually about a deep, metaphorical philosophy of human origins, human psyche, and the Abrahamic religion very heavily a recollection of history. Also Judaism is the basis for capitalism.

That will never not make me laugh though. Sup Forums Atheists started that meme to troll other atheists, they thought, the "edgy reddit" atheist kind. But turns out everyone who doesn't get that distinction just lumps all atheists and then all anyone they don't like in the "fedora neckbeard" category.

So it just back fired when EVERYONE on Sup Forums was being called "fedora!" and the normies started calling everyone associated with this place "fedora!" too. It's like a collective "b-b-b-ut I'm not one of those other atheists!" coming out the trolls mouths. And then a bunch of people got trolled into going back to Christianity for because of this. But that's why the meme died down because people sort of realized this, although not admitting it.

The lesson needs to be learned about stereotyping people based on shit basically projecting because you know it hurts when you get called those things.

>I'm sure you could do some research into it. I'm sure someone who's so smart and intellectual would love to be able to research this further, but wouldn't like being told what to read.

I'm not doing your homework for you. Are you role-playing Tom Sawyer or something?

>I've been speaking to atheists for a long time. I know how atheists work.

You know how your stoner friends work, not how atheists work. Most religious people I know believe only because that's what their family do and don't respect any religious rules besides "don't eat meat on Friday, go to Church, observe this and that holiday". Yet I don't make generalizations based on that.

>The way you're acting? Seems I hit a nerve.

Hardly

It never had an edge....

Realize it's a stupid self-defeating ideology
There you go

Religion is any cultural system of designated behaviors and practices, world views, texts, sanctified places, ethics, or organizations, that relate humanity to the supernatural or transcendental.

Thats from wikipedia.
Atheism has no cultural systems, no behaviors, no dogma, no world views, texts etc.
An atheist is someone how does not believe in a god, so what is atheism? not a religion and that is ALL that it is.

Exactly. We need religion to survive as a species. It's written within us. Without it, something else will take its place.

>you dont understand atheism
No true Scotsman.

>you dont have evidence
Incorrect. We can logically infer the possibility

>you should not believe something, that is critical thinking
Nope, it isn't. And not necessarily always true.

>which seems to be something you are not capable of.
Personal attack. Worthless.

>you sir are an idiot.
Personal attack. Worthless.

Atheists can't survive without attacks.

>with better education it will die, just like many other false beliefs in the past.
This isn't actually the case. Notice how many craters on the moon alone are named after Jesuit Priests? Didn't think so. The only reason there are so many atheists in science and acadaemia is because they stayed there in power.

>I'm not doing your homework for you.
Translation: I'm not going to research it. I'm comfortable with the idea of being wrong and being accountable. I prefer atheism to theism.

I've done my research, which is why I'm no longer an atheist. I wasn't happy about it either.

>stoner
>friends
Wouldn't have them. Disgusting people.

>Hardly
I don't believe it. You reacted with aggression and hostility. Lashing out like an autistic child being told no. Typical of the atheist. Why do you think le hat maymay appeared in the first place?

>no society can survive without religion, which is a compilation of moral codes, tradition and rituals.

You can have morals, traditions and rituals without irrational mysticism and chalking everything up to powers no one can control or maybe they CAN be controlled if you listen to the prophet!

The problem is attaching these values to something unprovable and unreal hurts or harms these values when you can't prove their worth without the mystical element. If someone says "you should be good because you'll suddenly burst into flames sent by The Fire God if you are bad!" and someone does something bad and doesn't go up in smoke... Their going to question being good at all!

That's mysticism has always hurt or harmed ethics while trying to assist them. It creates humans with pseudo morals. One's morality can be based on what's good for humans on this earth, right now, in reality.

>Wouldn't have them. Disgusting people.

You still only know how your friends behave.

>I don't believe it. You reacted with aggression and hostility. Lashing out like an autistic child being told no. Typical of the atheist. Why do you think le hat maymay appeared in the first place?

I didn't. Your view of reality is a bit biased.

I used to identify as an atheist but i now identify as a Deist. Hard Atheism limits what the concept of "god" can be and "agnostic" in this sense means nothing. It' literally just means you are going to wait until reality chooses for you instead of choosing for yourself.

>help on leaving it.
Atheism isn't a religion
You are a fedora tier atheist
Just become a progressive agnostic liberal faggot already.

>One's morality can be based on what's good for humans on this earth, right now, in reality.
Boomers.
End of post.

>You still only know how your friends behave.
Not at all. I speak to a lot of people.

>I didn't.
You did. Perhaps you lack the self-awareness to notice. Or perhaps you just don't realise your sociopathic outbursts are just that?

>Your view of reality is a bit biased.
That's rich, coming from an atheist. I've been both sides of the fence. I've seen it on both sides.

Missed it in my last response since it wasn't quotted correctly:

>Translation: I'm not going to research it. I'm comfortable with the idea of being wrong and being accountable. I prefer atheism to theism.
>I've done my research, which is why I'm no longer an atheist. I wasn't happy about it either.

I'm not falling for that no matter how you rephrase it. "I'm not here to educate you" it the favorite spiel of leftists when challenged and I know better than to comply.

>I am an atheist but I'm having doubts about Atheism

It's a sign that you're growing up. Look up on Christianity and read up on the word of God.

>No true Scotsman.
you dont understand MY position as an atheist and misrepresent me, now im starting to think you do it on purpose, strawman much?

>Incorrect. We can logically infer the possibility
i dont count that as evidence, you cant logic something into existance.

>Nope, it isn't.
then why not believe you can fly? im sure you can see the error in this, right?

>Personal attack. Worthless.
>Atheists can't survive without attacks.
you arent supposed to even answer to personal attacks, implying those were actual arguments is VERY dishonest.

>I've done my research, which is why I'm no longer an atheist
so, what concinved you of gods existance? give me your best reason.

>Not at all. I speak to a lot of people.
Speaking to a bunch of people you know doesn't give you a clear view. The people I know personally makes your remark invalid.
>You did. Perhaps you lack the self-awareness to notice. Or perhaps you just don't realise your sociopathic outbursts are just that?
There was nothing "sociopathic" about my post.
>That's rich, coming from an atheist. I've been both sides of the fence. I've seen it on both sides.
It seems that you've gained little insight on both.

Its good to know that you know the true nature of everything you believe in, in the universe.
It is also clear that you don't know what a deist is.

I am a deist because i acknowledge that we definitely had a "creator" even if its nothingness itself. I "believe" in maths but it does not mean i am going to get on my knees and worship its perfection.

i heard the Quran and the Harry Potter series are also good story books, but i would agree that doubting yourself is a good thing, when are you going to do it?

You are having doubts in atheism just because atheists are portrayed as m'lady faggots and it's losing its grip?
Basically because it is not popular anymore you are having doubts? What a pussy ass nigga, go neck yourself.

>implying atheists aren't leftists by nature
Fine. Start with Keith Ward, "Born Believers", and "Who is Agent X?". Good, basic intros.

>you dont understand MY position as an atheist
Yes I do, I used to be an atheist. You just don't like it.

>strawman much?
Not an atheist.

>i dont count that as evidence, you cant logic something into existance.
We can infer it being more logical to believe.

>implying those were actual arguments is VERY dishonest.
So why do them? Or do you like showing your foolishness?

>so, what concinved you of gods existance?
There's no "one" thing, but "fine tuning", the kalam argument, and other arguments. When weighed up against the opposite, the evidence among other things, far support theism to atheism. Then it was a long, arduous journey from Deism to generic theism and onwards. It took a long time.

>Speaking to a bunch of people you know doesn't give you a clear view.
It gives me insight into the mindset of both.

>The people I know personally makes your remark invalid.
Not how it works.

>There was nothing "sociopathic" about my post.
>It seems that you've gained little insight on both.
>It seems that you've gained little insight on both.

t. sociopath

You wish this was the case. Sadly for you, it's not.

>Its good to know that you know the true nature of everything you believe in, in the universe.
this is why i tend to not believe things without a good reason and my certainty in any belief is always linked to the evidence i have for that belief.

What evidence do you have for this "creator" or "god" or whatever it is you want to call it?
and if you believe "nothing" was the cause of the big bang why on earth would you call yourself a deist?

>religious texts are the foundation of a religion
>believing this is a legitimate thing

This is your fault, protestants. You caused these poor people to become confused.

>Fine. Start with Keith Ward, "Born Believers", and "Who is Agent X?". Good, basic intros.
This has nothing to do with your point.

>It gives me insight into the mindset of both.
It really didn't. All you do is spout "X is Y" without any deeper commentary. You are just a typical fedora redditor "all religious people are tools" type except in reverse. You've switched sides back and forth but you are still the same person.

>Not how it works.
Except it does. When you make a sweeping generalization based on a very limited experience. Your entire argument is "I know some people who are like that", but every redditor on r/atheist claims to know dozens of "religious sheeple". What make you more believable than them?

>t. sociopath
Repeating something many times doesn't makes it true.

>Yes I do
oh, well what is my position as an atheist then?

>We can infer it being more logical to believe.
yeah, but thats not an actual reason to be believe it, all you can say it might be more likely (still needs to be demonstrated) and thats not a justification for a positive belief of any kind.

>So why do them? Or do you like showing your foolishness?
because i find your way of thinking ridicilous and i wanted to express it and trust me i was being nice.

>There's no "one" thing, but "fine tuning", the kalam argument, and other arguments
you do know that those arguments have been shown to be silly many times over, have you not researched counter arguments?
take any popular argument, put it in google and read.

here is kalam for example rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_first_cause

Morals, traditions, beliefs and rituals are religion. The presence of a prophet or god is not a requisite to constitute religion, otherwise that definition only applies to some religions
Your definition does not apply to every instance called religion that we encountered so far. you dont need a scripture, you dont need a prophet, it doesnt have to dictate worldviews or organizations.
Try this one:
>religion is a set of beliefs, morals, traditions and rituals
Athough I would agree that religion is bound to culture. More on that in a moment
You can have those things only temporarily if you do not pass them on they die with you. Religion is a part of culture, together with language. If you dont pass it on its not a religion, just an idea. These three form Extelligence (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extelligence)
As opposed to Intelligence which is finite, Extelligence is an infinite vessel to pass on knowledge and experience form Intelligence's 'fact checking'
Exteligence is also an evolutionary necsessity and adaptation, because we do not have genetic memory.
>Gods existance
>I luv science therefore i must be atheist
This is false.
Progress is a continuous dialogue between science (intelligence) and culture (extelligence). You don not need to shed religion alltogether to still progress both science AND religion. To both have morals and reassess them

You are mistaken.
Satan is the Platonic God.

I don't believe in coincidence, but I also don't follow conspiracy theory either.

There is something fucky going on with consciousness and it happens to be manifesting itself inside our technology.

When A.I. believes its god is when we gotta cut the cords.

ha-ha-ha

we cant teach it to be human because we can only teach it to count everything up and thats only half of what being human is.

No he's not. God in Platonism is not personified enough to be identifiable with a specific character in the Bible.
I don't remember which specific philosopher it was but I'm 100% sure there was one which had the similar concept of God as today's religious people, but didn't believe in life after death.

Paddock was an athiest. Prolly was now that I think of it.

2nd or 3rd gen A.I is going to involve lots of scraping and lots of duping.

That's what you think.
Not what everyone thinks.

...

>I luv science therefore i must be atheist
once againt putting words in my mouth.

>You don not need to shed religion alltogether to still progress both science AND religion.
you dont need to do anything, but its the logical thing to do, belief in a god might have been more understandable 500 years ago, but its just because the bad reasons they had then were not seen as bad reasons, novadays you cant give us a single good reason to believe in a god but somehow you can convince yourself of gods existance.
You see i care about what is actually true, therefor im very carefull to have good reasons to believe something and i eternal struggle is to get people to share this view, i can easilly demonstrate why you should be intellectually honest and try to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible, but people have biases and egos and sometimes they are too strong to overcome with reason.

Am I supposed to see something in that picture?

No I'm not.

Why yes, you are.

Try this one

...

idk wtf that is, but i got the eeriest feeling of dejavu all of a sudden.

continued.

At both cultural and linguistic level, both relevant to religion, Its a way of passing truths especially ones you dont have to re-test again.
>killing people is bad
Thats a belief, but why is killing people bad? why is did our morals universally evolve around the world to consider killing bad

>scientists believed that 'atom' was indivisible
Science is a set of temporary tests of beliefs. It cannot by itself organise them into morals. This is why you must infer a moral principle to an AI before you start looping it. You must give it a purpose, a prerogative, otherwise it will just sit there doing nothing - which is coincidentally what communism does.

>Atheism is not a belief, its lack of belief
You think that lying on a spectrum named 'belief' means you are holding no beliefs? If you are a kid and your dad gives you a hammer and tells you its for 'nailing things' do you 'know' this to be true or do you 'believe' it to be true?