Atheists are so fucking annoying

[vanillaicecream]

You haven't presented a single argument, even in this reply you failed to present an argument. Show me a single argument you presented, should be easy since you presented "tons"

Do you even know what an argument is? Do you understand what deductive and inductive reasoning is? All you do is hand-wave and say "this is dumb" "this is pseudo-philosophical" "you're delusional" without giving any actual counterargument. And then you link a 50 minute video of some retard speaking JFLL

I mean, did you know that I actually mean it when I call you those things? Have you ever been in a discussion where the opposing side is so worthy of pity that you cannot even bother to try to maintain a real discussion with them? Did you know that you actually ARE fucking delusional and so unbelievably poor at constructing arguments to defend your imaginary friend? All you're trying to do is use a bunch of concepts stemming from the human intellect that suit your point of view as if it is direct and conclusive proof of the EXISTENCE OF SOMETHING. Are you fucking retarded my guy???? You use these arguments to discuss moral values. You use these arguments in a philosophy discussion. Again, I ask you to watch the video if you have an open mind to having your delusions shattered. Then again, religion is the practice of ignoring logic and evidence and being able to believe in fairy tales based on (blind) faith alone so I wouldn't expect you to change your mind. Keep living a delusional lie I guess.

 

[Deleted member 17026]

I mean, did you know that I actually mean it when I call you those things? Have you ever been in a discussion where the opposing side is so worthy of pity that you cannot even bother to try to maintain a real discussion with them? Did you know that you actually ARE fucking delusional and so unbelievably poor at constructing arguments to defend your imaginary friend? All you're trying to do is use a bunch of concepts stemming from the human intellect that suit your point of view as if it is direct and conclusive proof of the EXISTENCE OF SOMETHING. Are you fucking retarded my guy???? You use these arguments to discuss moral values. You use these arguments in a philosophy discussion. Again, I ask you to watch the video if you have an open mind to having your delusions shattered. Then again, religion is the practice of ignoring logic and evidence and being able to believe in fairy tales based on (blind) faith alone so I wouldn't expect you to change your mind. Keep living a delusional lie I guess.

Just watch my 50 minute video bro because I can't type up an argument.

 

[vanillaicecream]

Just watch my 50 minute video bro because I can't type up an argument.

Yes because I will definitely bother and have the patience to type out all of those thoughts on here. Why can't you just watch it? Are you afraid of reality?

 

[vanillaicecream]

Btw silly of me to ask whether you're afraid of reality since your whole belief in the imaginary figure precisely boils down to a fear of reality. A coping mechanism.

 

[Deleted member 17026]

Yes because I will definitely bother and have the patience to type out all of those thoughts on here. Why can't you just watch it? Are you afraid of reality?

"If you dont watch my cringe atheist video you're afraid"

Still waiting for you to type up an argument.

 

[Deleted member 17026]

Btw silly of me to ask whether you're afraid of reality since your whole belief in the imaginary figure precisely boils down to a fear of reality. A coping mechanism.

You're the one afraid of burning in hell forever.

 

[ropeorcope]

I mean, did you know that I actually mean it when I call you those things? Have you ever been in a discussion where the opposing side is so worthy of pity that you cannot even bother to try to maintain a real discussion with them? Did you know that you actually ARE fucking delusional and so unbelievably poor at constructing arguments to defend your imaginary friend? All you're trying to do is use a bunch of concepts stemming from the human intellect that suit your point of view as if it is direct and conclusive proof of the EXISTENCE OF SOMETHING. Are you fucking retarded my guy???? You use these arguments to discuss moral values. You use these arguments in a philosophy discussion. Again, I ask you to watch the video if you have an open mind to having your delusions shattered. Then again, religion is the practice of ignoring logic and evidence and being able to believe in fairy tales based on (blind) faith alone so I wouldn't expect you to change your mind. Keep living a delusional lie I guess.

I have read all your faggot popular atheist books, The God Delusion by Dawkins, A Universe From Nothing by Krauss, God is not Great by Hitchens (that fatass is getting tortured in his grave rn btw JFL), The End of Faith by Harris. I've also watched all of their popular lectures and debates with theists. If you think I'm gonna have my "beliefs shattered" by your regurgitated low-IQ atheist video you're simply retarded. I've heard every argument there is. Keep in mind I also used to be a smartass low-IQ atheist at one point.


Also keep in mind that in this entire low-IQ paragraph you just wrote you STILL didn't make a real argument JFLLLL

 

[vanillaicecream]

You're the one afraid of burning in hell forever.

I am sure your god, being an omniscient being, will know and understand that I don't deserve to suffer for eternity for simply using my brain and being rational . The least he could've done is manifest himself rather than let people rely on blind faith. So I'm pretty sure he will spare me from it.

 

[vanillaicecream]

I have read all your faggot popular atheist books, The God Delusion by Dawkins, A Universe From Nothing by Krauss, God is not Great by Hitchens (that fatass is getting tortured in his grave rn btw JFL), The End of Faith by Harris. I've also watched all of their popular lectures and debates with theists. If you think I'm gonna have my "beliefs shattered" by your regurgitated low-IQ atheist video you're simply retarded. I've heard every argument there is. Keep in mind I also used to be a smartass low-IQ atheist at one point.


Also keep in mind that in this entire low-IQ paragraph you just wrote you STILL didn't make a real argument JFLLLL

Woah, you did all of that and still chose to remain connected to your imaginary friend? You just did justice to my "Religion is the practice of ignoring logic and evidence and being able to believe in fairy tales based on faith alone" sentence. .

 

[ropeorcope]

Woah, you did all of that and still chose to remain connected to your imaginary friend? You just did justice to my "Religion is the practice of ignoring logic and evidence and being able to believe in fairy tales based on faith alone" sentence. .

Still waiting for you to make an argument

 

[JamesHowlett]

Incorrect.

Annoying people are annoying, i.e. zealots on both sides.

 

[ezio6]

Trust jesus as god, doesnt matter if you still sin. Youll still gain entry to heaven, with consequences,

Dont trust me? Google" jesus is saviour" website

 

[vanillaicecream]

Still waiting for you to make an argument

My guy what arguments do you want? There is absolutely nothing that proves the universe NEEDS to have come from will and intuition. Absolutely nothing that proves it NEEDS to have a cause let alone one that is a conscious powerful being that is so invested in a single species on a place that makes up an pathetically small portion of everything. Absolutely no empirical concrete evidence of this other than you using your own mental concepts because you want it to be that way. Are you really trying to dictate the rules of how the fucking universe came into existence? You haven't presented a single shred of real evidence nor has anyone else ever. You really think I'm the low IQ one here?

 

[ropeorcope]

My guy what arguments do you want? There is absolutely nothing that proves the universe NEEDS to have come from will and intuition. Absolutely nothing that proves it NEEDS to have a cause let alone one that is a conscious powerful being that is so invested in a single species on a place that makes up an pathetically small portion of everything. Absolutely no empirical concrete evidence of this other than you using your own mental concepts because you want it to be that way. Are you really trying to dictate the rules of how the fucking universe came into existence? You haven't presented a single shred of real evidence nor has anyone else ever. You really think I'm the low IQ one here?

P1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
P2. The universe began to exist
C. The universe has a cause

There are properties of this causer that are necessary in order for it to be able to cause the universe:

- Will and intention: The causer needs to have an intention and will to cause the universe, if not, then the universe would never have been created. Why would this causer create the universe rather than not? It must have decided to create it, thus entailing intention and will, otherwise there would be no universe and nothing would change ad-infinitum.
- Power and intelligence: It needs to have the power and knowhow to cause the universe, otherwise it wouldn't be capable of causing/creating it, this doesn't need further explanation.

This "causer" is what we call God, and he holds those attributes amongst others. God IS the best explanation we have for the universe, and as rational agents we accept the best explanation.

Form a counter argument. Before you try, look up "inductive reasoning" and learn what it is, and then come back. It says a lot about your understanding of formal reasoning that you think empirical evidence is a must for proving something.

 

[vanillaicecream]

P1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
P2. The universe began to exist
C. The universe has a cause

There are properties of this causer that are necessary in order for it to be able to cause the universe:

- Will and intention: The causer needs to have an intention and will to cause the universe, if not, then the universe would never have been created. Why would this causer create the universe rather than not? It must have decided to create it, thus entailing intention and will, otherwise there would be no universe and nothing would change ad-infinitum.
- Power and intelligence: It needs to have the power and knowhow to cause the universe, otherwise it wouldn't be capable of causing/creating it, this doesn't need further explanation.

This "causer" is what we call God, and he holds those attributes amongst others. God IS the best explanation we have for the universe, and as rational agents we accept the best explanation.

Form a counter argument. Before you try, look up "inductive reasoning" and learn what it is, and then come back. It says a lot about your understanding of formal reasoning that you think empirical evidence is a must for proving something.

Oh my. Can you fucking read? I said why that doesn't make sense and you come back at me with the same argument? We simply don't know if the rules of causality comprehended and observed by us apply to the universe as a whole, this is a FACT not something that is up for debate. I find it pitiful that you have trouble understanding something as simple as this. I find it pitiful that you keep filling the gap of "we don't know" with your imaginary friend and trying to make it a fact with lazy and ignorant concepts of your brain. Either you do lack intelligence or you just deliberately choose to blindly deny something obvious and logical, which again, what religion is all about in the first place. I am really done with you, maybe when the idea that the universe was not specifically and specially made for us really sinks in for you you'll understand that "god" as you understand it is nothing but an invention of the human mind.

 

[ropeorcope]

Oh my. Can you fucking read? I said why that doesn't make sense and you come back at me with the same argument? We simply don't know if the rules of causality comprehended and observed by us apply to the universe as a whole, this is a FACT not something that is up for debate. I find it pitiful that you have trouble understanding something as simple as this. I find it pitiful that you keep filling the gap of "we don't know" with your imaginary friend and trying to make it a fact with lazy and ignorant concepts of your brain. Either you do lack intelligence or you just deliberately choose to blindly deny something obvious and logical, which again, what religion is all about in the first place. I am really done with you, maybe when the idea that the universe was not specifically and specially made for us you'll understand that "god" as you understand it is nothing but an invention of the human mind.

It is so funny how you keep saying shit you clearly have no understanding of Go read a book brainlet, you legit sound like the average redditor who has never properly studied anything he's talking about but just regurgitates dumb shit he hears from the atheist horsemen.

"We simply don't know if the rules of causality comprehended by us apply to the universe as a whole" do you understand anything about basic epistemology? If we go down this train of unfounded ultra-skepticism we will end up as solipsists. You didn't follow my advice did you? You didn't look up and try to understand inductive reasoning. The universe having a beginning and cause has IMMENSE inductive support and IS the best explanation we have. It's as simple as that. Saying "b-b-b-but we don't know for a fact! w-w-what if there was some other explanation for it that we just don't know!! " only demonstrates that you don't know the first thing about the theory of knowledge or inductive logic. The alleged and baseless possibility of counter-evidence existing is not a negation of the existing evidence. That's like me saying water is wet and you reply with "b-b-but we don't know that for a fact! maybe we just haven't found dry water yet!" You're retarded. We have the big bang. We have the BGV Theorem. It is overwhelmingly clear that the universe has a finite beginning and it is not only a physical impossibility but also a logical impossibility for it to have an infinite past. If it is physically possible for things to be uncaused, then where are all those uncaused things? I already know your low-IQ response will be something like "w-w-well just because we haven't found anything uncaused yet, doesn't mean it can't exist!" and once again all this would demonstrate is that you don't understand anything about epistemology and ontology.

There's no point arguing with someone as clueless as you on this topic. You don't know anything about reasoning, logic, or the theory of knowledge and theory of being. I would be surprised if you have ever picked up a book in the past 10 years. Keep coping with your neanderthal reasoning skills. When you die you'll wish you had used your brain. I've BTFO'ed you too many times in this thread and it's just starting to feel like bullying at this point tbh ngl

 

[vanillaicecream]

It is so funny how you keep saying shit you clearly have no understanding of Go read a book brainlet, you legit sound like the average redditor who has never properly studied anything he's talking about but just regurgitates dumb shit he hears from the atheist horsemen.

"We simply don't know if the rules of causality comprehended by us apply to the universe as a whole" do you understand anything about basic epistemology? If we go down this train of unfounded ultra-skepticism we will end up as solipsists. You didn't follow my advice did you? You didn't look up and try to understand inductive reasoning. The universe having a beginning and cause has IMMENSE inductive support and IS the best explanation we have. It's as simple as that. Saying "b-b-b-but we don't know for a fact! w-w-what if there was some other explanation for it that we just don't know!! " only demonstrates that you don't know the first thing about the theory of knowledge or inductive logic. We have the big bang. We have the BGV Theorem. It is overwhelmingly clear that the universe has a finite beginning and it is not only a physical impossibility but also a logical impossibility for it to have an infinite past. If it is physically possible for things to be uncaused, then where are all those uncaused things? I already know your low-IQ response will be something like "w-w-well just because we haven't found anything uncaused yet, doesn't mean it can't exist!" and once again all this would demonstrate is that you don't understand anything about epistemology and ontology.

There's no point arguing with someone as clueless as you on this topic. You don't know anything about reasoning, logic, or the theory of knowledge and theory of being. I would be surprised if you have ever picked up a book in the past 10 years. Keep coping with your neanderthal reasoning skills. When you die you'll wish you had used your brain. I've BTFO'ed you too many times in this thread and I'm starting to feel bad, it feels like bullying so I'll stop

Look at this guy doing mental gymnastics to defend the existence of his imaginary friend that will give him eternal life.

"
P1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
P2. The universe began to exist
C. The universe has a cause"

Excusing his god from the same exact reasoning and allowing it to not have a cause and not realizing that if it does it will put him in an infinite loop.

Pitiful. Just absolutely fucking pitiful. You are not bullying anyone with your fairy tales and deluded, ignorant sense of importance my friend. You are really fucking not.

 

[isis_Bleach]

You are snowbunny religion ?

elaborate on snowbunny relgion
jewish women have to fuck their own men to repopulate after the 6 gorillion
white girls might wanna experimate but a bbc told me the other day every white girl he was with he was the first to bbc pill them

 

[ropeorcope]

Look at this guy doing mental gymnastics to defend the existence of his imaginary friend that will give him eternal life.

"
P1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
P2. The universe began to exist
C. The universe has a cause"

Excusing his god from the same exact reasoning and allowing it to not have a cause and not realizing that if it does it will put him in an infinite loop.

Pitiful. Just absolutely fucking pitiful. You are not bullying anyone with your fairy tales and deluded, ignorant sense of importance my friend. You are really fucking not.

JFL if your past 20 posts hadn't already proved you were retarded this one definitely did. God not having a cause or beginning is a necessary property of God. That's literally what makes him God, He is the necessary existence upon which everything else is contingent. God exists outside of space and time, therefore the laws of space and time don't apply to Him. Imagine not being able to understand that JFLLL It's over for you low-IQcel

Read the first premise "everything that begins to exist," God did not begin to exist, so P1 can't apply to Him. Beginning to exist entails time ("beginning" is a time-relative concept, it means when t=0). God exists outside of time, God CREATED time. This is so simple to understand yet you're still somehow too retarded to understand it

JFL at you calling my explanation "mental gymnastics" just because you're too low-IQ to understand it

 

[vanillaicecream]

God not having a cause or beginning is a necessary property of God.

Hmm, and why is that? Because you said so? I too can make up fictional characters and dictate the basis on which they operate, is this evidence of anything? "Not having a cause is a necessary property of a god" do you not hear yourself when you dictate how your god operates just to suit your argument and allow you to not have to explain the very same thing you argue against and rule out the possibility that universe doesn't need to have a cause as if you know shit? Scientists don't know this and are working on it, who the fuck are you to dictate how the universe works you deluded fuck? Who the fuck are you?

 

[FastBananaCEO]

As usual anything with the word “atheist” turns into a 3 page thread

 

[Anyanglover]

three words:

modal.ontological.argument.

 

[hebbewem]

As usual anything with the word “atheist” turns into a 4 page thread

Its 3 page thread at the moment

 

[FastBananaCEO]

Its 3 page thread at the moment

fixed it before you finished your comment jfl

 

[vanillaicecream]

We exist. Therefore god. Sums up pretty accurately how these delusional fucks feel.

 

[ropeorcope]

Hmm, and why is that? Because you said so? I too can make up fictional characters and dictate the basis on which they operate, is this evidence of anything? "Not having a cause is a necessary property of a god" do you know hear yourself when you dictate how your god operates just to suit your argument and allow you to not have to explain the very same thing you argue against and rule out the possibility that universe doesn't need to have a cause as if you know shit? Scientists don't know this and are working on it, who the fuck are you to dictate how the universe works you deluded fuck? Who the fuck are you?

It never began for your IQ tbh.

Go learn what "necessary" means in modal logic and then come back to me (not that you understand the basic prerequisites of formal logic to even learn anything about modal logic). It is a necessary property of an unmoved mover to be unmoved, how the fuck is that hard to understand? That's like me saying "it is a necessary property of a red dog to be red" and you say "do you hear yourself when you dictate how red dogs operate? " JFL

Go re-read my "mental gymnastics" reply where I explain why we can rule out that the universe is uncaused. Read it slow and sound out the syllables, I know you can do it, come on man you gotta have at least a few neurons in there. I'll repeat it and dumb it down for you even more than I already have. All the evidence both physical and logical points to the universe having a finite past (a beginning), while we do not have a shred of evidence or even logical theory that could postulate that the universe has an infinite past and is uncaused, so yes, we CAN rule out that the universe is uncaused. You also seem not to even understand how science works either, science also works based on the best explanation given the evidence. The consensus of scientists is that the universe had a finite beginning. Again just look up the BGV Theorem as one example.

 

[vanillaicecream]

It never began for your IQ tbh.

Go learn what "necessary" means in modal logic and then come back to me (not that you understand the basic prerequisites of formal logic to even learn anything about modal logic). It is a necessary property of an unmoved mover to be unmoved, how the fuck is that hard to understand? That's like me saying "it is a necessary property of a red dog to be red" and you say "do you hear yourself when you dictate how red dogs operate? " JFL

Go re-read my "mental gymnastics" reply where I explain why we can rule out that the universe is uncaused. Read it slow and sound out the syllables, I know you can do it, come on man you gotta have at least a few neurons in there. I'll repeat it and dumb it down for you even more than I already have. All the evidence both physical and logical points to the universe having a finite past (a beginning), while we do not have a shred of evidence or even logical theory that could postulate that the universe has an infinite past and is uncaused, so yes, we CAN rule out that the universe is uncaused. You also seem not to even understand how science works either, science also works based on the best explanation given the evidence. The consensus of scientists is that the universe had a finite beginning. Again just look up the BGV Theorem as one example.

Not a single fucking word.

"We exist therefore God is real"
"There is a superior powerful force behind it all and it just so happens to fit the image of an insignificant single species because I want for there to be and I want it to be that way, because it it will give me eternal life"

 

[ropeorcope]

Not a single fucking word.

"We exist therefore God is real"
"There is a superior powerful force behind it all and it just to happens to fit the image of an insignificant single species because I want for there to be and I want it to be that way, because it it will give me eternal life"

Can't respond to my argument so he goes back to his low-IQ redditor strawmans with no value

If anyone ever gets into an argument with you they can just refer back to this thread where you got relentlessly bullied and proven to have sub-80 IQ, I would delete your account and start fresh at this point tbh ngl

It's simply over for your IQ

 

[Baldingman1998]

Also @Baldingman1998 wanna respond to this debunking of your retarded argument or you just gonna sidestep like a little bitch?

Yikes. Who hurt you sweetie?

You can believe in whatever you want idc. You seem more pressed than me. I have no counterargument but that doesn't mean that religion and/or are real

 

[vanillaicecream]

Can't respond to my argument so he goes back to his low-IQ redditor strawmans with no value

If anyone ever gets into an argument with you they can just refer back to this thread where you got relentlessly bullied and proven to have sub-80 IQ, I would delete your account and start fresh at this point tbh ngl

It's simply over for your IQ

Actually I have already responded, plenty of times. If you choose to blindly ignore and deny it it's not my fault. Again, principles of religion innit.

 

[Deleted member 17026]

Yikes. Who hurt you sweetie?

reddit tier comment

You can believe in whatever you want idc. You seem more pressed than me. I have no counterargument but that doesn't mean that religion and/or are real

Point is burden of proof argument is not how you think it is in this situation.

Default position is agnosticism, not atheism.

 

[BearBoy]

Just your low-IQ assertion and nothing more. Form an argument.


P1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
P2. The universe began to exist
C. The universe has a cause

There are properties of this causer that are necessary in order for it to be able to cause the universe:

- Will and intention: The causer needs to have an intention and will to cause the universe, if not, then the universe would never have been created. Why would this causer create the universe rather than not? It must have decided to create it, thus entailing intention and will, otherwise there would be no universe and nothing would change ad-infinitum.
- Power and intelligence: It needs to have the power and knowhow to cause the universe, otherwise it wouldn't be capable of causing/creating it, this doesn't need further explanation.

This "causer" is what we call God, and he holds those attributes amongst others. God IS the best explanation we have for the universe, and as rational agents we accept the best explanation.

Your "muh religion is just cope for people scared of death!! " is the average low-IQ atheist assertion with no substance from people unable to form coherent thoughts

Religion is cope fairytale bullshit, but believing in just God a creator who made everything but we dont know what cause and why, what or who the creator is, is high IQ.

 

[BearBoy]

"
P1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
P2. The universe began to exist
C. The universe has a cause"

Yes this has everything to do with God, simply a creator but doesnt mean it has anything to do with religion. Religion is just made up fairytale by humans who think they know what God is, what the purpose is, why we exist and so on. its just pointless and retarded

 

[Baldingman1998]

Makes no sense, look at north korea no religion and no degeneracy. Stop with the bullshit.

the state is basically a religion of its own tbh, people there just worship Mr O'hare instead of God

View attachment 1550392

North Korea does have a religion. It's the cult of the Kim family. Ideology mixed with fanaticism and authoritarianism is practically a religion. See Soviet Russia, Mao's China, and Nazi Germany.

 

[Deleted member 17026]

I have no counterargument but that doesn't mean that religion and/or are real

"I have no counterargument" = "I'm talking out my ass"

You probably don't even have a concrete definition of atheism here. You just wanna circlejerk with pseudointellectuals about "burden of proof", thinking you know what that means in relation to your fluid definitions.

 

[Baldingman1998]

"I have no counterargument" = "I'm talking out my ass"

You probably don't even have a concrete definition of atheism here. You just wanna circlejerk with pseudointellectuals about "burden of proof", thinking you know what that means in relation to your fluid definitions.

So you left for 2 days then came back to reply this? Living rent free I see. Stop projecting your own doubts onto me. It's not my fault that you feel doubtful

 

[Deleted member 17026]

So you left for 2 days then came back to reply this? Living rent free I see. Stop projecting your own doubts onto me. It's not my fault that you feel doubtful

"rent free" is a pathetic cope.

My life doesn't revolve around this forum, unlike your bitchass.

And I'm not doubtful, you are the one who is doubtful and doesn't even know what atheism is. You can't even make your mind up and has to resort to fallacious burden of proof argument. You're just using fluid definitions to make some argument as to why you are more "rational" in order to feel better about being intentionally ignorant.

 

[Baldingman1998]

"rent free" is a pathetic cope.

My life doesn't revolve around this forum, unlike your bitchass.

And I'm not doubtful, you are the one who is doubtful and doesn't even know what atheism is. You can't even make your mind up and has to resort to fallacious burden of proof argument. You're just using fluid definitions to make some argument as to why you are more "rational" in order to feel better about being intentionally ignorant.

Of course I'm doubtful. Anyone who doesn't have doubt and claims to have the "Truth" is lying to themselves. No one knows the reality that's why we need proof to try and get closer to the truth

 

[Deleted member 17026]

Of course I'm doubtful. Anyone who doesn't have doubt and claims to have the "Truth" is lying to themselves. No one knows the reality that's why we need proof to try and get closer to the truth

I never claimed to be fully 100% in the know.

My point was this "burden of proof", argument is flawed because on one hand atheists will claim "G just dont believe in God", and on the other hand they will say "God doesn't exist, after you die thats definitely it"

The oscillate between these definitions depending on context.