Religious because stupid

It feels that the average Sup Forums's IQ dropped by some 20 pts in the last couple of years. You need to be utterly ignorant and dumb to unironically buy medieval arguments for supernatural beings. Like "there needs to be cause" hurr durr. Define "cause" first of all. That's a human concept. Number two: "there needs to be" -- what does it even mean? What needs to fulfill what for whom and why? Why does something need to hold only because you want it?

What especially amuses me is when you say "god exists because hurr durr look at atheists, they are soooooo evil and muh christian brothers are soooooo good hurr durr. Therefore, god exists".

Can you disprove that you are not just a bunch of morons? Say, are there any scientists over here besides me?

Bonus question: why does the Jewish god exist, but Buddha, Allah, Shiva and Flying Spaghetti Monster don't?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=aMn3HTHNUuk
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

All of these stormfront and reddit tier posters really contribute to lowering the average IQ of the board.

Someone make a JIDF bingo card please.

>American whites vs Euro whites.
>White males vs white females
>Pushing racemixing threads galore saying shit like why can't we racemix with latina, black, or asian women. They have much better family values than white women!
>"Its stupid to have kids threads."
>Open borders threads
>Anti-religion threads.

Even if a god existed and gave a "purpose" to existence itself, this purpose would be arbitrary.
It doesn't matter if God exists. He would be tied to the objective meaningless of existence as we are.
God could or couldn't exist. This wouldn't change anything.

>It feels that the average Sup Forums's IQ dropped by some 20 pts
i believe 56% is cause of this drastic IQ drop.

REDDIT REDDIT REDDIT REDDIT

HURR DURR

WHEN I DON'T LIKE DA POST IDS REDDIT HURR DURR

...

Define "cause" first of all
>cause
Nope. Aquinas does not state cause. What Aquinas uses is "motion" and his definition of motion is exactly like how most people would define motion. Furthermore, the arguments of Aquinas argue for the existence of God, not necessarily the god of the bible.
>human concept
What is this is supposed to mean? Just because something is a human concept it is less true? 0 is a human concept, yet you still use it all the time.

If the arguments of Aquinas and Aristotle do not satisfy you, then you can always go the predicate logic of Godel. Either way, you're fucked because Godel argues for the existence of God as well.

You really think you are smarter than Aristotle and Godel? Aristotles thoughts on the mind are very similar to dynamic processing, methods that outperform non dynamic processing AIs by a large margin. His ideas on infinite were also very profound and similar to Newtons, keep in mind that Aristotle lived 300BC. Not to mention that Godel's understanding of meta-mathematics puts him leagues above you in terms of intelligence.

>is exactly like how most people would define motion
IS NOT** exactly.
Error on my behalf. Typing way too fast haha.

I believe in God, because He is working in my life. He is my shepherd, and I am his sheep. And He makes my quality of life much greater, and He protects me from evil. And he loves me more than anyone on Earth could. I hope this helps.

...

You can make the same picture to represent the average Sup Forums christian

These two Americans prove evolution by being a link between apes and humans

Why do you make fun of people for believing in something that you will never in your lifetime prove to be false?

You advocate nihilism. That is a recipe for pure degeneracy and destruction. I'll listen to Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Aquinas, etc. instead. If, after the requisite years and years of study needed to understand them, I'm still not totally convinced they've proved their case, I'll just have a little faith, to close the gap.

>prove to be false
BHAHAHAHAHAHAHH HAHAHAHAH HAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHHA

Prove that Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist, moron. It is your true god, meanwhile. Repent until it's too late!

I choose not to believe in the Spaghetti Monster. He did nothing for me. I choose to believe in God because He saved me. What's your problem with that? Why do you think you know so much more just because you came to a different conclusion?

...

I mean okay, let's say the Flying Spaghetti Monster also birthed hundreds of civilizations and saved billions of lives. Why would you spend your entire life talking bad about, being mean to the followers of, and trying to disprove that spaghetti monster? Don't you think that's a bit arrogant?

>You need to be utterly ignorant and dumb to unironically buy medieval arguments for supernatural beings
Unless said medieval arguments said that people like you would make this argument in the future and were 100% accurate with that claim. Score 1 for religion.

Ungrateful lier. You exist thanks to it. If you don't believe in it, you become a groundhog after death and will live the same day every day for eternity.

You need to distinguish between truth and perception here. For instance, imagine you did a double blind study where the control group was told to keep their mind clear as they go on a one-mile run, while the other group was told to imagine that the person they love most had been kidnapped and to imagine they're chasing that person as they go on a one-mile run. Do you think the power of this clearly false belief would have an impact on performance? Lies, imaginings and other perceptions might not be true, but they are real and have real effects.

When it comes to Christianity, a scientific inquiry into the truth of the claims of the religion reveals it is bullshit. However, if you investigate the effects of Christianity on its believers, it has a wide range of positive social effects. After all, Christians did pretty much build Western civilization.

I think there is something to the fiction. In the same way that a fictional movie or novel can have a profound effect on a person, the fiction that is Christianity has a strong beneficial nature to it. I wouldn't shun it just because you know it's not true — after all, do you do that for Hollywood? Of course you don't.

There are no atheists in foxholes buddy

What does Varg have to say about this?

youtube.com/watch?v=aMn3HTHNUuk

Great non-argument

Now you have a little taste of what it's like for me, having to walk through life surrounded by you dolts.

There are fairy tales about elves and dwarfs which also have had positive social effects. But it doesn't make most people believe in elves and dwarfs. What's the essential difference to the Jewish god?

Buddha was a person o great atheist genius.

The future atheists generally want:

The future they'd actually give us:

...

Religiousfags are stupid but so are edgy atheists. It's not about the belief in a sky wizard. In the cultural war, Christianity is extremely important as a pillar of western society. It will be key in the fight against Jews and Muslims. Even if you're an atheist, you ought to support Christianity fit the tone being because the decline of religion in the West is bringing moral decay and degeneracy.

>fit the tone
for the time* Jesus I hate phoneposting

>It will be key in the fight against Jews and Muslims
>jews and muslims
>jews
user, I...

So you have no refutation for Aristotle or Godel?
REKT!!!!
An omnipotent omniscient eternal God influences morality in a way that elves and dwarfs to do not.

Waiting for you to refute Aristotle and Godel.
You can't do shit.

JIDF are pro-Christianity, as they are hard on "refugees welcome", just not in the US.

Everyone on that picture is religious, though.

>So you have no refutation for Aristotle or Godel?
Nigga pls. Appeal to authority is a baby's first logical fallacy that you should have read about in the sticky.
Aristotle or Gödel assumed certain axioms to make their arguments seemingly work. But to comprehend that, you need to know basics of formal logic which you, due to low IQ, can't. Moreover, Gödel's "proof" was made for fun and used non-standard predicates.

You can have a set of axioms and a logical system built upon it where you can "prove" any absurd. There is no universal logical system you deep shit.

Nobody said that Allah, Shiva and even the Flying Spaghetti Monster don't exist, it all depends on what these words signify and whether its in line with the Christian concept of God.

There is only Truth, and throughout the ages that Truth has found its place here on earth, in the Middle East in Asia etc... The difference is the interpretation of Truth and how its spoken about. Truth when it reaches a certain group is then expressed in terms native to that group, ie their language and concepts from their own history.

People on the other side of the world did the same and obviously it's not going to be spoken of in completely the same terms, but if you are a good Truth seeker you would read both texts and try to find where they intersected. The truth is that they are simply using other words to describe the same thing.

If I show a huge painting to 10 people and ask them to describe it they will give me descriptions which are somewhat similar but not completely, one person might focus on one particular party of the painting and really go into detail describing it, while for another that part wasn't of significance so he leaves it out or spends little time describing it.

It's the same painting, the materialist scientific mind is ignorant in that it is very rigid when thinking about religion and spirituality, it effectively tries to use the same methods to for coming at the truth as they would in an experiment and that's just like using a hammer to cut a pipe, the tool is wholly incompatible for the task at hand.

Spirituality and religion are things which deal with meta physics and no matter how advanced science becomes in its investigation of the material never will it be able to answer these questions with its current method. I can observe empirically that effect A is caused reliably by cause B, but I cannot tell you what the means in the larger picture of life because that would be going into metaphysics.

>whether its in line with the Christian concept of God.
ROFL

> Hurr durr if it's in line with my religion then it's true

Current physics is very very strange so how is it that the idea of a single source principle permeating all things is so unbelievable? Have you read about quantum mechanics? Have you read about quantum entanglement?

The universe is extremely bizarre if you look at the latest science, some people will learn about it and come to the conclusion that the world must be innately intelligent while for others it's just fascinating science.

We are not some helpless beings who by sheer randomness have come into existence for no reason or purpose. We are not disconnected from the world around us, we are not strangers in this world, we are co-creators, the very fact that we are conscious is proof of the higher intelligence.

Its beyond ignorant to be a conscious human being and then claim that life is devoid of consciousness, except that we slightly more evolved animals have organs which fire chemicals and make us see pictures, make us hear sounds, make it possible to fall in love and feel anger. But that the entire process of life is going on in nothingness and for no reason.

Science scoffs at religion because it requires blind faith, the idea that all of existence sprang into being in a single instance without cause or reason is the height of blind belief. Everything in this world has its cause, there cannot be something without it having come into being by something else. Its obvious that whatever or whoever is at the beginning of existence must have been infinite, it must have been life itself, it must be that which permeates every single atom in existence. Just like a dream, it comes out of nowhere, it exists in your consciousness but during the dream you are completely unaware of this fact, the people and events have an emotional impact on you even though its not real.

THAT is our existence today, you don't believe there is one who dreamt this into being, and I do believe it, I even believe that I can see the world from that higher consciousness.

> a wall of vague nonsense

>ITT: menorah tipping kike wannabes

(((Christians))) need to get gassed along with their (((Greatest Ally)))

You wont ever find a "God particle" if that's what you are looking for, and if you don't like metaphysical contemplation then don't start a thread about metaphysics.

Its funny how people like you actually think they are smart because of their skepticism, you are a very limited human being in my eyes.

When I sit here, as an atheist and see the autistic shit atheists are doing, I fucking cringe.


>Muh enlightenment
>Muh revolution
>Muh religion doesn't have a monopoly on morality
>I don't have to act morally because there's no punishment
>One life live it like a degenerate


I'd rather live amongst Christians than fucking atheists.

dark skin means they were cowards during the war in heaven.

You should take some shrooms, blow that brain out of your head for a few hours to really make you understand that you know nothing about the world, the sheer arrogance of you is astounding.

Science can't even cure Herpes and you are looking toward it to answer whether God exists or not...

Maybe you should start with your definition of God. The world is fractal, this means that it is infinite in every dimension, this is why we say that there are infinite "parallel universes".

Do you acknowledge this or do you think that there is a definite limit to existence?

>Like "there needs to be cause" hurr durr. Define "cause" first of all. That's a human concept

wow, you sound smart

>hurr durr there's no divine entity because I don't want there to be one

Repent now Heathen

>Appeal to authority
Get real faggot. I'm telling you to refute their arguments, not accept them just because of who they are.
>assumed certain axioms
And yet here you are, ASSUMING that only the material world exists. Hypocrisy
>non-standard
non-standard doesn't equal false
>You can have a set of axioms and a logical system built upon it where you can "prove" any absurd
I see that you're getting desperate. Feel free to not accept the axiom of contradiction, and axiom of excluded middle, but you are a complete and utter retard. You use contradictions all the time when arguing against organized religion but when it comes to philosophy you don't like it because it proves what you hate. Which is God.
>no universal logical system you deep shit
If you want to be a skeptic go ahead, but then that means you know nothing and should stfu.

God is not going to stop existing because you hate him. God will not go away if you ignore him, or try to avoid him. Haha.

Provide an argument, with ANY SET of axioms of you want, that disproves the existence of God.
Pro tip: You can't

That alone proves faith is nothing but a survival strategy.
The eternal void is terror itself, so our brains do what they must to make the end less horrible.

>non-standard doesn't equal false
I'll back track here, and state that just because something hasn't been proven false, does not mean its true. But the arguments of Aristotle and Aquinas still stand. And it's clear you haven't read either because you used the word "cause" in your original post.

Ba frate cand ne unim

>hurr durr there's a divine entity because I want there to be one