How old were you when you grew out of atheism?

how old were you when you grew out of atheism?

20

ITT: newfriends try to troll newer newfriends with a worn out meme

i'm 20 right now

When I saw this thread.

Not yet...

I grew into using christianity as intended and cucking the men who fall for it

eat my mess out of your girls pussy for jesus
ty

>growing out of atheism

Well if you weren't a fucking fedora flipping 500lb faggot you would realize you're just autistic.

Atheism is just arrogant. prefect for 16-21 y/o who think they know it all but it really starts to lose it's luster when you learn how2humility.

Pretending humans are qualified to say god exists is idiotic.

Pretending humans are qualified to say god doesn't exist is equally idiotic

>Agnostic master race

Pretending there's no value in its discussion is equally idiotic.

Agnosticism is equally arrogant

The logical fallacy here is known as the 'false compromise.' Basically, believing that if something is not A or B, it must be somewhere in the middle ... even if this is an absurd or impossible outcome.

Think about it. If one person says the earth is flat, and one person says the earth is round, would you conclude that the earth must be a sort of half flattish-roundish shape? What if 9 people said it was round, and 1 said it was a hexagon? Does this mean the earth must be a hexagon with slightly rounded edges?

...

That is literal bullshit. Point out what middle ground he's supposedly referring to

>how old were you when you grew out of atheism?

Insecure fucktard. Sucking on a nigger dick.

Sigh. I'll take the bait.

Agnosticism basically states that it is not possible to prove or disprove the existence of God, therefore both theists and atheists are wrong and any further discussion is pointless.

The middle ground is formed between proving (or not being able to prove) it either way.

That is where the A or B fallacy arises from. Agnostics never consider that there are also possibilities C, D and Z. You can pretty much burn the playing field by pointing out that saying there is a God is an unfalsifiable statement, and therefore is not scientific or useful.

I could say that there is a teapot on Mars right now, and you can't prove that there isn't. Does this mean you have to spend the rest of your life as a teapot theist, teapot atheist, or a teapot agnostic? Or can you examine the question and see that it has inbuilt assumptions?

That's really not how a middle ground works.

Allow me to share my personal views on God...first, i want to say that i believe there is a God..i cant prove this God exist but something inside me says that i should never be worried about things that are beyond me, and that all things happen for a reason, even if that reason is beyond my understanding..no matter what you believe you have to admit that a lot people have had a similar belief..it seems that one of the common threads of humanity is a belief in a God though it has taken many different forms..perhaps religion is each generations attempt to explain this part of us..i am open to any to anyone's ideas about God and believe that God does love you and would never punish you for not understanding something that was never supposed to be understood..i believe that whatever made this reality is capable of anything..and it is the pursuit of understanding that is most important..

> someone disagrees with you
> OMG ITS BAIT

Middle ground implies accepting a less extreme alternative to both sides you moron agnostics just reject everything alltogether

>2017
>thinks atheism and agnosticism are mutually exclusive
>

I love you

13