Reply?

reply?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=2-tnnbwIYys
catholic.com/magazine/articles/a-pope’s-answer-to-the-problem-of-pain
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

wtf I hate motivation now

Explain this athiests

>atheism
>another "ism" / cult / ideology or the unprovable

>just the same as free-thinking, rational logic
>implying

Clearly you can see the face of Richard Dawkins laughing in the smoke. Check mate Christians!

clearly the government of peace..

autism a cult you are clearly part of then

what about scientism?

I wonder if Ireland makes it to the top cucks of Europe list. You've voted yes for fag marriage which was unprecedented before. Keep up the good work Paddy, if the Enlish didn't manage to destroy you, you'll do it yourselves.

catastrophic structural failure of load-bearing girders through the agency of prolonged, concentrated heat application; resulting in a cascading 'domino effect' and subsequent collapse of substratal foundation/s

none of the great, ruminative minds of today - neither Dawkins nor Harris nor Hithens... or Krauss or deGrasse or Green - cede to the "atheist" label

"atheism" is foist upon them by their lay followers -- they've each said as much on myriad occasions

Christfags BTFO

great another slav decides his opinion is worthy

>tldr
it was thermite

>Hithens
HITCHENS

>transliterative slip

k, onan-a-moose expert

Fetal alcohol syndrome in action

youtube.com/watch?v=2-tnnbwIYys

Atheist dudes, i understand your lack of faith on religions but God is clearly out there to show of all his glory; his miracles and antimiracles all in harmony.

>winning
You mean steadily losing ground, and destroying their own societies whenever they take over?

Look at how good of a job Secularism is doing in Europe. Honestly it's pathetic. Atheism breeds weak, pathetic people who like watching their women be raped.

>monotheistic ancient Greek talking about omnipotence and omnibenevolence
wut

Thermite one helluva drug

well by the definition of athism they are.. to be without a belief of gods or existence

divide and rule (or conquer)
phrase of divide

1.
the policy of maintaining control over one's subordinates or opponents by encouraging dissent between them, thereby preventing them from uniting in opposition.
"the politics of divide and rule in society"

The argument pre-supposes that 'evil' exists. If God exists, he judges people when they are dead, not in life. This is a pretty basic part of the bible.

yes while Christians breed priests who like to rape children..

>"fetal"
>"foetal"

for the last nation to forsake Latin as their official language, that's some mighty burger-like ebonics you're spouting their, Puskàs

Aight hard mode:
Explain this Athiests

ok you win.. no amount of science can explain that..

no
>ils n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là

>Criticizes use of correct grammar
>their

She is... The One.

clearly evidence against the existence of a caring god.

hes a self proclaimed agnostic.. my mistake, not an atheist

Scientism is a self defeating proposition.

>grammar
>dumbed down, common core """""spelling""""
>clearly evincing burger metastasisation into the last bulwark against shitskin smearing

>a typo

so dawkins says he is a secular christian ie Richard Dawkins, the prominent atheist and scientist, has admitted that he is a “secular Christian” because he hankers after the nostalgia and traditions of the church.
Speaking at the Hay Festival, where he was presenting the first volume of his memoirs An Appetite For Wonder, the evolutionary biologist claimed that although he does not believe in the supernatural elements of the Christian church, he still values the ceremonial side of religion.
The author made the comments after being questioned by an American minister in the audience who claimed that he no longer believed in miracles or that Jesus was resurrected, but still considered himself a Christian and preached the teachings of Christ.

I mean most people would say the teachings and morals of christ are quite good

explain

this entire chain of reasoning collapses if you just ask "how is God supposed to prevent evil?"

Epicurus obviously want God to remove all evil, by simply not allowing it to happen (or something to that effect of course).
This is why he is able to conclude that God is not omnipotent if he doesn't "prevent" evil.

And this is why his argument fails. He has a hidden premise.

God wants no evil to exist, and he is able but he also wants people to repent, and that's why evil can be allowed to happen. Just look at Saul of Tarsus, who became Paul. He was one of the biggest persecutors of early christians, yet after his repentance and meeting with Jesus he became the one of the most dedicated men of God.

Epicurus thinks Saul should have been killed in his sin, so that he could not have done evil, but God knows better.

>Epicirus
>33 AD
>Those questions are revelant since Augustine
Why are atheists retards?

agnosticism = not taking any side on that which is unprovable

>rational, logical, frontal cortex derived THOUGHT

well the how is linked to the able becuase if he is able there is no how

>Dawkins
>Ph.D geneologist
>jew corpse acolyte

>the enemy of the rational man's enemy, is his friend
strange bedfellows =/= lovers

If Black Science Man actually thought about the things he said before he let fly his bulbous African lips, he would say the exact opposite of what he said in your pic.

I'm not saying he would have said God is real. If God was really the pocket of scientific ignorance, then God is getting larger and larger as we discover more about science. Questions do not yield answers - only more questions. The more we find out, the more there is to ask. If there is more to ask, then the pocket of scientific ignorance is larger.

Because he completely missed this blatantly obvious truth, and instead decided to take a cheap shot at God for the rebbit upboats, I can only conclude that the atheism espoused by these popular "scientists" is little more than adolescent anger at a God they claim to not believe in.

I agree with this. "How" is not a binding construct.

...

Epicurus also implies that evil is some sort of conscious primordial force as opposed to an action that people do/or a state of being that people are.

>most people would say the teachings and morals of christ are quite good
dunno at which inbreeding commune that survey was conducted... but those "most people" don't sound like the kind of daemons I'd want to associate with...

It's very premise cannot be proven by the scientific method. This would have required you to think for approximately 4 seconds, and you would have figured this out.

>bulbous African lips
you sound rational...

>God is getting larger and larger as we discover more about science
哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈... funny shit, laowai

But what if the one eyed man's single eye is also blind? Then he's just as fucked as the rest of the blind guys except he has a bleeding hole in his face.

lel

Try again loser.

of course there is a how.
God is not a force. He has a will, and he acts upon it. He chooses how to act upon it.

So of course there is a how.
You are missing the point though, because by agreeing with Epicurus and saying that ableness is linked to how you are in effect saying that God SHOULD act a certain why. But you haven't made a case for why God SHOULD do x instead of y, which Epicurus did not do either.
and this is why the argument fails. Epicurus' hidden premise (maybe not the only one) is that he presuppose how god should act.

because as he implies in his first line if God doesn't prevent evil, and he is able [in the way epicurus wants it to be prevented] God is not omnipotent.

If you love communism so much, why don't you fuck off back to your homeland, Sino-Mongoloid diaspora.

...

>god is just a special super being who lives in the sky
atheists

>proven
>inculcated belief in a magical, invisible, omni-everything, of infant cock-skin collection and conspicuous inaction
>argumentum ex silentio = fact

give me your burger for its first seven meals and I'll give you the obese autist

...

delet this

>muh godtards be white science guys
>...on pain of inquisition and rack-dismemberment

being in the top 1% of the bell curve really is all it's cracked up to be... it's lonely =(

God is omnipotent. The issue comes from the claim that he is malevolent. If evil can be used to form a more meaningful good/more good/whatever or come by logical necessity of some good then you cannot make the claim that God is malevolent letting evil occur. However, evil does not "exist", it is simply a privation of the good.

A good example of the benefit of evil in theology is the doctrine of Free Will. Something created with the intent of experiencing love and sharing in God's love requires the ability to voluntarily choose to love, else the love is mechanical and not actually love.

This can be applied to things naturally in the world as well, such as the finite and distinct nature of the universe enables things to run up against one another and cause clashes which cause a lot of things. We could say this derives from the same sort of purpose but I won't assume to be a theologian.

I would have to default to the great article written about Pope John Paul II's comments on the Problem of Suffering.

catholic.com/magazine/articles/a-pope’s-answer-to-the-problem-of-pain

what the fuck, I hate free will now
>hurr hurr, why can't God just take away everyone's ability to choose to do good and evil and just make us mindless slaves like my Communist theories
And they wonder why legitimate atheists identify as agnostics

>attempting to quantify "scientific advancement" on a fucking graph.

If a person invented a cure to all cancers tomorrow, how many "SCIENCE POINTS" would you award us on your graph? If you can't answer, you're literally admitting that the graph is fucking retarded.

Didn't the crusades lead to a bunch of advancements coming to Europe because of contact with the Arab world?

The third one is wrong, just because he's the all creator, doesn't mean a negativity could not exist, if anything god would have already guided that as well beyond our comprehension.

Faggot.

Not to mention, the preservation of Greek and Roman knowledge and philosophy by the monks.

Only if you're talking to Islamic supremacists who'd have you believe we "stole" a bunch of their shit at that time. For the most part, we had most of what they did by then. In all honesty, at that point, I think more horses would have been the best thing to steal from them around that time.

That would imply that we would be lacking free will, thus we wouldn't be made in god image. Checkmate atheist.

no... the Crusades were enacted because the Ottomans - through Sharia imposition (jizya, lower trade rates with infidels under mudslime sufference et al.) - had all but occluded trade routes for Europe

...culminating in the fall of said boy-love empire, marked by the Battle of Vienna (1683)

#NotAllMicks

>tfw I was the only person I know who voted no on the fag referendum

There are no heroes left in man

>mentions something completely off topic because I don't know what the fuck to actually say!

Einstein didn't believe in a personal God. No one said he did ITT. He hasn't even been mentioned as far as I can see. Anyway, Einstein believed in Spinoza's God. And he also recognized the impossibility of a non-created Universe.

Again, you can't even formulate a real argument, about anything. You aren't in the 1%, you are fundamentally retarded. Thank you for playing.

yeah, it's some bullshit "If I don't like it, then it shouldn't exist!!! Since I don't think it should exist, God shouldn't either!!!!!"

Epicurus himself believed in god.
The difference is that he didnt believed that the gods punished the bad and blessed the good. The gods were "neutral" so to speak.

A mistake that most atheists commit is believing that If a God is not good nor evil, he is not a god.
The predominant atheist concept of God is strongly christianized. They simple dont think outside the box.


Also, theres nothing more stupid than posting random quotes without the background.

>interpreting an infographic as anything but a vague delineation
>implying any Gen ADD 'tard would even clock on, let alone read an expatiated, fact-laden dissertation

why be a frustrated fagget when you good just be a happy faggot?... masochism?

So he let Elizabeth Fritzl be locked in a basement and raped for decades just so her daddy could have a chance to repent afterwards? Is that supposed to be a fucking joke?

He could prevent that evil by idk, breaking a lock or 2?

"Free will" doesn't answer the problem of evil.

He must compete with the devil. As long as the devil exists there will always be evil.

>hurr durr if God cant control literally everything including the devil then how is he a God

Why would that make him not a God? I don't see the logic here.

Yeh, feels good that 'we're bitchslapping historical figures in the ass, as much as DIOgenes(Or Proto IRL Sup Forums).

yeah, Christians say the digusting acts of man are a "test" which is why a new term "natural evil" was invented. this is like when a deer is in a forest and it gets struck by lightning. that deer then is in intense pain for days before finally dying of thirst days later.

no human being involved. why does god let this happen?

That's right you fucking retard.

How is this not what every bad student whines as he rejects all schoolwork?

>deer
>struck by lightning
>not dead

The odds of surviving a lightning strike are probably about as high as being struck by lightning in the first place. Read The Problem of Pain.

That picture is hilarious in more ways than one.

>You will never be Diogenes gone mad.

>off topic
>child molested flesh sacrifices to deities... in 2016... in a """""First World"""" country
k

>Einstein didn't believe in a personal God. No one said he did ITT
>posts inforgraphic of myriad old world white science guys who professed prostration on pain of drawing and quartering
have burgers now managed to weaponise autism...?

wow there are a million other ways an animal can be injured why to complete miss the fucking point

>Epicurus himself believed in god.
no, transvesitis horse fellator

suppositious superimposition of "belief" on ancient, half-truth spouting philosophers, is tantamount to claiming animals consciously worshipped the Sun because they migrated to verdant areas to feed / breed

socrates gone mad*


Not that I care about the theism vs atheism debate, but you shouldn't be using pedophilia as an insult when you we're posting profaggot pictures. Its contradictory.

sorry if i was unclear, but i don't believe our sin is a test. sin is immoral, and totally wrong and every person is responsible for his own sin. nothing more.

my point was that God allowed Paul's evil, and Paul did later repent. and that does not fit Epicurus' silly reasoning.

But onto the deer. I simply don't know. Could be many reasons, but one of my main points were that its good not to read into God's actions (or inactions) as though we know better on what should or should not happen.

hope this clears my position up, sorry if im unclear senpai

Not at all. Most people actually do survive being struck by lightning. Most of the charge runs through your skin, not your insides.

This meme needs to die. Minorities are far more child-rapey per capita, and no one ever talks about that.

Here it is....

It's: "Socratos gone mad" you CIA piece of shit.

>be a 14 year old who hates mom and dad
>know more about religion and God than 99% of famous genius and philosophers since the beginning of time
yeah man like u cant see Him so He obvi duzn't exist XD

>you CIA piece of shit.

w0t

But nobody parades minorities as paragons of morality.

>"evil"
a wholly human construct that differs from town to town, let alone between nations or ingraned ideologies

only that which AFFECTS THE FUTURE OF THE SPECIES is "good" / "bad"... all else is Sup Forumslution level trifle light as fetid brain farts emanating from the slack jaws of plebeians who yearn for meaning to their inutile, methane-squelching existences

>Scrubing through the fat.

And now starts my diet and exercise routine until I get fit.

You're a big guy.

4u

>Battle of Vienna (1683)
>mfw