Yes yes well done reddit well done reddit

yes yes well done reddit well done reddit
HOWEVER

So you arrive at the conclusion that agnosticism is the most logical answer.

Oh wait, you're a believer, you're just as bad as the atheist.

test

The Sequel Is Lit, Yo

>just as bad as the atheist
nice try
HOWEVER
propability's the name of the game
even deism is mathematically less likely then atheism
but your highly specific, rich in details form of gnostic theism is a million times less likely than that.
so much for your "it's all the same"-nonsense

Atheism is hilarious senpai. Guess you 100% know with absolute concrete proof how the universe started, what happens to the consciousness at death and all the other mysteries our mammalian brains will never understand. Good for you, you totally haven't taken a faith based stance unlike those foolish theists

What are the mathematical odds of Atheism compared to Deism?

>Pfft... Atheists... Theists... I'm superior to both *tips fedora*

did you even read my post? are you trolling?
First of all, atheism and agnoscism are not mutually exclusive. Knowing that one can never arrive at absolute truth about the god questiond doesn't change the fact that you either believe or dont believe in a god at any given moment.
Secondly, as l said, lt's about propability: themore detailed the claim, the less propable.
So you cant just equate atheism and a specific religion like that. Gnostic atheism and gnostic theism are both bad, but not to the same extend.

>Guess you 100% know with absolute concrete proof how the universe started, what happens to the consciousness at death and all the other mysteries our mammalian brains will never understand.

Not him, but that's not at all what atheism claims. It's nothing more than a lack of belief in god. You're a fucking idiot.

By that logic, because we don't "100% know" how the universe began = god did it? Do you know, 100% with absolute concrete proof, that flying pink unicorns don't exist? No you don't - does that mean it makes sense to believe in them?

No atheist claims to "know with 100% concrete proof" that god doesn't exist - they just don't have reason to believe he does - and it's a logically valid stance. On the other hand, billions of people will claim that they know with 100% concrete proof that god exists. Which group do you think is more logical?

Fucking kill yourself.

the deist goes a slight step further than the atheist in assessing that there is a conscious deity, therefore the propability of the claim being true lowers comparatively.

Which is worse? Gnostic atheism or Gnostic theism? Why?

Sup Forums - Religion discussion

bump

What makes a god who ignores his creation more probable than a universe that exists without needing a creator?

gnostic theism is worse because what the believer believes to be true is less propable than what the atheist does.
just think of a guy saying that he is 100% sure that there's a invisible unicorn in his backyard while another says, he's 100% sure that there isn't.
Both are intellectually dishonest. But one is definetly more dishonest than the other.

>odds are in favor of us all being in a simulation (seriously)
>therefore, god is likely to exist in some capacity

The claim is more fleshed out and needs more assumptions than the other. l'm not saying that it's not the case but the odds are to some extend against it.

Look at this triggered underage atheist spewing his retardation and frothing at the mouth. Let's break down his garbage.

>lack of belief in god
correct
>fucking idiot
triggered this hard by an opinion :^)
>we don't know=god did it
here's where your incandescent rage blinds you. no-one knows or will ever know. we are smart apes on a spinning rock. we'll never figure it out and probably lack the senses and cognitive function to discern what's going on around us. atheists like pretend they will discover this knowledge. they won't but they have faith they will
>flying pink unicorns
could very well exist, yes. just because i cannot perceive it does not make it impossible
>no atheist claims to know god doesn't exist
this contradicts your earlier statement and the whole atheist movement. well done
>they don't have a reason
debatable
>billions of people claim with 100% concrete proof god exists
flat out lie. i assume you personal spoke to these billions of people?
>fucking kill yourself
this is always the big give away you're talking to a teenager. because they're still in their own angsty little nirvana stage they see this as the 'ultimate' insult. it's both a massive projection and a flag the person you're talking to still goes to school

I don't know how people seriously get their panties in a bunch about gnostic atheism.

Do you believe in fairies? Or unicorns?
No?
How can be so sure?
Better keep yourself on the fence without committing to either side.

See who stupid that is?

You'd think the same way with an other religion's deities.
Do you believe in Ganesh? What about Horus?
Well why not?
Better keep your mind open for Ganesh.

Gnostic atheism is the natural choice.
No Westerner is an agnostic atheist about fucking Ganesh or any other ridiculous Hindu god.
Why is the Christian God suddenly special enough that to be a gnostic atheist with regards to him is the better position?

>some capacity

90% of people who speak of "god" are speaking of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent being that cares about what each individual thinks and does, and whom each individual can telepathically communicate with. This notion is frankly absurd.

When you say "some capacity," I gather you are inferring a creator - be it an interdimensional or alien species that created this "simulation." This does not satisfy the above criteria of god.

Which claim is more fleshed out?
There is an all powerful God who's origins and purpose are not clear, but we know he exists and we know he created the universe by himself and we know he has not interfered with the universe ever since.

The universe exists and it came about through natural ways most of which we do not know but we may eventually understand the natural processes that caused this creation.

>this contradicts your earlier statement and the whole atheist movement. well done

No it doesn't. At all. Lack of belief does not equal knowledge.

>flying pink unicorns may very well exist.
Just as I thought - you completely fail at logic.

None of your other points even merit a response. You should literally kill yourself.

>I gather you are inferring a creator
No, the creator is entirely irrelevant.
The nature of simulation means that the simulation itself fulfills all of those criteria, it only lacks a will of its own. Most religions believe their god has a will of its own, though that is almost never listed as a requirement for godhood.
Hence, "some capacity". It's a god as we define it, but not as we understand it.

Lack of action, interaction, evidence or general assistance in daily life points to at least one of three conclusions:

1.) Is unwilling and uncaring. Thus not worth worship.

2.) Isn't omnipotent or really relevant at all. Thus not worth worship.

3.) Or doesn't exist.
Sandniggers, Christians, Jews; kill yourselves.

Dude, you're a moron. Atheists don't claim to "know" god doesn't exist. Any one that does would be considered a gnostic atheist, and I've never once heard of or met one. Even Richard Dawkins himself, "king of all atheists" does not consider himself a gnostic atheist. He contends that the existence of god is highly improbable, as the vast majority of atheists do.

>he can't refute it
>k-kill y-yourself
Good game little boy, no rematches. Head up to bed soon, it's a school night

>itt babby's 1st intro to philosophy course

>atheists don't claim to know god isn't real
Mate are you tapped in the head? Lack of belief in God is all atheism is. It's the fucking central precept
>Dawkins
That faggot is not the lord of atheism

I don't think anyone could be Christian if they knew Christian history.

Agnostic is an adjective
Atheist is a noun.
They're not mutually exclusive. Saying you're an agnostic instead of athiest is like owning a red car and saying "I have a red, not a car"

Again, if this "god" exists within the context of a simulation created by something else, it does not satisfy the criteria of god as most people define it.

As most humans define god, it would have to be something that exists independent from the simulation which created the simulation itself, which has all power over the simulation and can interact with and "know" everything about the beings in the simulation. .

I don't think anyone could be Americsn if they knew American history

I don't think anyone could be a Sup Forums poster if they knew Sup Forums history

Already did refute it - and you have no counterargument other than to tell me to go to bed.

Typical fence sitting agnostic idiot without a valid understanding of logical thought. But then again, I was expecting nothing less ;)

Good analogy. People are born Christian and don't often stray from it because of the community they are involved in and because it is what their parents tell them is the best and only acceptable solution for religious discussions

>Mate are you tapped in the head? Lack of belief in God is all atheism is. It's the fucking central precept

Are you really this stupid? Do you really think that not believing in god is the same as claiming concrete knowledge that god does not exist?

You've got to be kidding me... this is not a complicated concept. Please don't tell me you're that daft.

>i-i r-refuted i-it
You picked out two lines and avoided everywhere you got crushed. Out of interest explain to me how the existance of pink unicorns is a universal impossibility? I'd love to hear it.

Atheist here. I believe this is a stupid and pointless splitting of hairs.

I believe that God does not exist. Just the same way I believe that Santa Claus does not exist. And I'm as sure of that as possible.

Honestly, both atheism and christianity are both equally wrong

>atheism
>"I know god isn't real!"
>"prove it"
>"......."

>christianity
>"I know god is real!"
>"prove it"
>"......."

>I'll argue semantics that will show him!
Right so you choose not to believe in something with no evidence. So you're just as bad as a religious person is what you're telling me? Everytime I speak to one of you guys you always tell me how God can't be real. How science had proven it. Now you're telling me there's no proof and you're literally going off feelings?

Religion, Food and Capeshit.
The holy triumvirate of trolling on Sup Forums.

I don't think anyone could be anyone if they knew anything about anything.

I'd first like you to explain to me why it would make sense to believe in flying pink unicorns simply because one can't prove they don't exist.

This is the logic you use which is flawed, and you can't see it. That's the entire point I was making - the fact that something cannot be disproved does not make it logical to believe that this something exists, be it god or unicorns.

You're not perceptive enough to understand how this logic is flawed, apparently.

You should read the thread before replying. Do it now before replying to me.

Daily reminder Sup Forums only claims to be christian because it's a "white" religion, even though a good portion of blacks are christian and the religion itself started in the middle east

I never said it made sense to believe in them. That's you assuming I'm your "enemy". I said I could never disprove they existed. That's a very different thing

Guaranteed American. Everything is fucking race with you boring cunts

>Right so you choose not to believe in something with no evidence.

Yes. If there is literally no evidence for the existence of something, I choose to not believe in it. It astounds me that you think this is absurd.

>So you're just as bad as a religious person is what you're telling me?

No - religious people believe in things with no evidence. It's a positive claim. I'm not making a positive claim - I simply don't believe god exists because there is no evidence for it.

> Everytime I speak to one of you guys you always tell me how God can't be real. How science had proven it.

No one with half a brain has ever claimed that. If they have, they're idiots. Being an atheist doesn't automatically make you smart. There are many atheists out there who are idiots. They have the right idea, but for the wrong reasons.

>Now you're telling me there's no proof and you're literally going off feelings?

No. Again, I'm going off of lack of evidence.

How can you not understand this? It's really, really simple.

I think they pretend to be Christian because of how easy it is to bait atheists into their threads

>I never said it made sense to believe in them.

Wow! Now you're starting to get it! There may be hope for you yet kiddo!

Now equate that to god - given the lack of evidence, it doesn't make sense to believe in him either. That means a lack of belief in god, which equals... wait for it... atheism!!! See how that works?

Irrefutable evidence that god exists

>religious people believe in things with no evidence
This is where you mis-step slightly. There are things you might not consider evidence but others do. You don't see them as evidence so you see your position as logical. Someone else might see it as evidence and belief then becomes logical.

The fact scientists are memeing on about us being in a computer program mentioned earlier is a good example.

In the future our descendants will look back and think how stupid we are for even having such conversations

its less any specific god or religion and more the humble idea that humans even with all the progress are still very limited when it comes to the universe and there might be some powerful entity out there that we cannot understand.

So its not the christian god, its god in general that gnostic atheism rubs the wrong way.

The general god doesnt have to have any rules or be benevolent or even give a shit at all about us, but our limited knowledge leaves room for something far beyond us to be possible..

Although I don't believe there is such a thing.

:^) faith. The whole aspect you miss. As for lack of evidence, singularity. Golden ratio. Electrical impulses in the brain looking like the largest galaxies. Atoms like suns. You see science. Someone with faith sees something different. You believe your stance makes you brighter and superior. There are more things on heaven and earth etc etc, you believe the answers will always be found without a creator-figure. I don't

>burden of proof
>no, YOUR burden of proof
100/10
meme related

>There are things you might not consider evidence but others do.

You mean like "feeling gods presence?" Feelings, emotions, hunches - these are not evidence in a scientific sense. They're not even evidence in a civil sense - they would not be considered hard evidence in a court of law. I'm talking about tangible, testable evidence for the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful god. There simply is none. If this changes, I'll change my views on god.

Actually that's called dispersion. Light of varying wavelengths (colors) travel at different speeds through water droplets they come into contact with, resulting in their separation.

Do you really think this kind of attitude wins people over? When was the last time someone admitted they were wrong because you acted like this?
If your intention is to educate you've failed before your opponent even reads your comment.

Like lads saying we're in a computer program. That looks like a very weasal worded way to say we were created. Holographic universe same shit. Even double slit experiment throws up huge questions

"Look at these faggots, they're on Sup Forums and not even baneposting"

>gnostic theism

I fucking hate this term, Gnostic means something entirely fucking different in a religious context.

>agnostics
>rational

I too am agnostic towards the great pink unicorn of juju

not that guy, the only reason you take refuge in your self appointed high ground that you call faith is because you have a community that reciprocates your beliefs.

There is literally no difference between you and some random person who believes that answers won't be found without flying globs of semen riddling the universe unseen by any human.

The world would look at that guy like a moron, and you fancy yourself not a moron, but the glob semen believer has just as much faith as you do.

Agnostics are atheists though

>:^) faith.

This literally means belief without evidence. And you tout it like it's a virtue? If it makes you feel better about yourself and your beliefs, that's fine, I guess.

>s for lack of evidence, singularity. Golden ratio. Electrical impulses in the brain looking like the largest galaxies. Atoms like suns.

Literally none of that is evidence for an all-knowing, all-powerful, creator god. At all. That's fine if you as a person of faithg wants to read into it - I honestly don't care. Just don't impose your belief on others through legislation, that's all I care about.

And I don't think my belief makes me brighter and superior - I think it makes me more logical. If you want belief that makes people feel superior, take a look at some of the major religions and what they tell their special, chosen followers.

You know Reddit is actually the atheist site right.
I mean I have no doubt that most people on Sup Forums are atheists or agnostics, but the whole edgy fedoralord atheism euphoria thing is literally originated by and the absolute definition of reddit.

>a community
No user I don't. This is the part of the argument I really enjoy. Americans - and it's always Amerians - frothing at the mouth over Christianity. I'm not a member of any organized religion and don't believe I'll be seeing Shiva, Mohammed, Jesus or even God anytime soon.

That does not mean I don't believe in a creator. I'm not being coy and trying to imply I'm a fucking pagan or something either

Belief without evidence can be a virtue. Faith is something that can enrich your life. Knowing it's just faith and not based on reason can be courageous and life-affirming.

I'm an atheist though.

And who do you think designed the universe so that would be a thing? You can't get a good piece of art just by setting some paint near a canvas and hoping something will happen.

So now you;re attacking my attitude and not the logical point I made, huh? Nothing to say on that, apparently?

This is Sup Forums, you raging faggot. If I were having this conversation in real life, I'd be much nicer. What did you expect coming here?

The logical point in that post was absorbed - I can tell that by the lack of argument against it, whether I was a dick about it or not.

Quit acting like a morally superior faggot to garner sympathy points - remember where you are, you dumb piece of shit. This isn't fucking tumblr ;)

Jesus, religious people are really unintelligent.

Not the person to whom you're replying, but when two people disagree, the answer doesn't always lie in between them, or within them both. It's possible one is completly right and one is dead wrong.
How can we tell which is which? By seeing which conclusion had greater predictive power. Science makes predictions that can be tested, accurately and rigorously by many people. Religion doesn't do that. So you can look at the filaments of galaxy clusters and notice they look remarkably similar to neurons, but what does this prove? They don't behave in the same way. They don't form in the same way. The similarity is a coincidence of appearance - after all, there are only so many shapes in geometry.
Religion tells us nothing about how galaxies or neurons form, but science does. That's how I know it's right and religion is wrong. It's not my opinion, it's the objective, factual truth.

This is a common misconception, sure people will never admit they are wrong or change their mind when it comes to such a big part of somebodies person.

What does happen is a senseless walling of rational thought, anger clogs up the roads and a hunkering down of beliefs is undertaken.

They then go and talk to friends and family who will tell them they are right to think the way they do, and they will continue.

But deep down, in quiet moments of solitude, flashes of weakness in their psyche will show a grave knowing and rabid fear.

This is because most know it's all a fairy tale, wishful thinking in its finest form.
Because the writing is on the wall, the arguments have been made and destroyed time and time again.

I for one enjoy ripping the floor out from anyone who still has any semblance of blind faith. ;)

>Faith is something that can enrich your life

If you believe it can, then yes, it can. If you believe logic and knowledge can enrich your life (which I do), then it will in the same way faith does. It's all about perception. I just happen to choose the more logical route.

My dick fits in your ass, does that mean God intended for me to fuck your tight boipussy?

>yes

Except they aren't mutually exclusive. A person can pursue logic and knowledge and still have faith. Plenty of doctors, scientists, and academics are religious. I know a ton of religious doctors and researchers. You can't pretend that it's contradictory.

>belief without evidence
More confidence. I think the dictionary defines it as complete trust
>virtue
Faith has always been extolled as one of the highest human virtues. You shouldn't look down on it because you disagree with it personally
>none of this is evidence for an all-powerful god
I never said it was and I'm not arguing it does. It's something you and I can't explain and why probably never be able to explain. A very bright monkey has a hard cap on how much he can see and understand
>don't impose beliefs
I believe in seperation of Church and State. Everyone is free to have their own opinion on everything
>logical
Fair enough
>special, chosen followers
I only know of one that goes on about chosen people. The rest as far as I know are universally open.

I wasn't the person to whom you were originally replying, I failed to mention it as I didn't see how it was relevant.
I'm not offended by your language or tone, I'm just pointing out the fact that if you're having an argument, and you want to win someone over, don't insult them. Nobody ever changed thier mind after being called an idiot.
Again I'm not saying you're mean I'm just saying if you act the way you are, don't bother replying at all because you might as well speak to an empty room for all the good it does. Unless you find pleasure in the act of arguing for its own sake. If that's the case, fine.

woah, then you are even more arrogant than organized religion.

So you just arbitrarily decided to believe in some creator, whom you don't attribute any characteristics but lay the burden of answers to the universe at his feet?

Ignoring the obvious influences that organized religion has had in bringing to life your imagined creator, its interesting to think about why you would even want a creator when by design you have no idea what it will do for you.

Do you just need some super power to look up to in believe in? Or is it just an edgy fuck you mainstream religion version of desperately wanting something after life?

>This is because most know it's all a fairy tale, wishful thinking in its finest form.

Not trying to be a dick, but I honestly believe this is true. I think the vast majority of religious people have doubts - doubts which they never talk about, and which terrify them. They can't emotionally or intellectually handle the truth, so they bury it deep and protect it at all costs. Kind of sad, honestly.

If you only know of one religion that includes the concept of "chosen people" then either you're choosing to ignore a lot of details about a lot of religions or God has chosen you to be an ignorant retard.

I know what the argument to moderation fallacy is user. Just because a person has belief he's not retarded.

Science doesn't tell us half as much as we want it to. Double slit experiment. Quantum mechanics. Holographic universe.

And I would imagine those galaxy clusters are carrying electrical impulses, same as the neurons. It's a good structure for that

this however shit is the most unfunny meme Sup Forums has ever forced

Except Agnostics still fail Pascal's Wager. Logically, you should be a believer as it's the safest outcome.

It is contradictory when you ignore science in favor of religion. If you want to spend all your time bending your thoughts about religion to fit what science tells us, be my guest. Many, many people do that - that's what gave rise to the "god of the gaps" fallacy. I simply choose not to go there.

remember not to reply to people that bring up Pascal's Wager, they are bait posts fishing for (you)s

Does anyone have the deformed version of these images? They used to be posted here and I dunno what the fuck you do with photoshop but it always cracked me up

I think the Better Call Saul generals did it too, his face looked fucking weird and I giggle like a retard just thinking about it

Simulated universe my uneducated friend

>Pascal's Wager

Pascal's Wager fails itself. An omnipotent God would know your faith is phony.

Having doubts doesn't mean you don't have faith and it doesn't mean you secretly believe that your religion is wrong. Faith and doubt aren't mutually exclusive. A good religious leader or teacher will help you explore those doubts instead of repressing them. What do you think a committed atheist would tell you if you had similar doubts about that belief system? Blah blah Invisible Pink Unicorn.

>ignore science in favor of religion
I can't think of any more anti-science claim than attempting to exclude anything from a scientific explanation. You'd have fit in with the "scientists" of ages past sneering at the "mystics" claiming that the earth wasn't the center of the universe.

There's only one group of God's Chosen people. Even Christianity makes reference to it

>Unless you find pleasure in the act of arguing for its own sake.

I'd be lying if I said this wasn't accurate. I also find pleasure in being a dick anonymously over the internet with no repercussions. I only do it here, because I assume people who come on this site know what they're getting into - at least, they should. It's a fantastic outlet.

That being said, I stand by every argument I've made.

Where in his wager does he say your faith should be phony? Everyone has a spiritual side, everyone has faith. You electing not to use yours doesn't mean you lack it, anymore than refusing to open your eyes makes you blind.

In this simulated universe what happens when you "die"

what did he mean by this?

...

I'm going to give him a (You)
(You)