This guy just refuted all eastern faiths with 0 effort…

PrinceLuenLeoncur

PrinceLuenLeoncur

Crusader ghazi jihadi mujahideen, YESHUA ACKBAR
Joined
Sep 19, 2021
Posts
50,085
Reputation
66,895

@Swarthy Knight @buddhistking come defend yourselves don’t accept this MUH nigga the enlightened ones must prove they follow the true chandragupta ahshahehhehshahenfhshe buddah
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: iblamexyz, Jager, Primalsplit and 1 other person
7 mins hell nah bro
 
  • +1
Reactions: Orka
I’m pretty chill now as well I have overcome my zealot phase so I’ll engage nicely with you
 
  • +1
Reactions: PeakIncels
  • +1
Reactions: PeakIncels

@Swarthy Knight @buddhistking come defend yourselves don’t accept this MUH nigga the enlightened ones must prove they follow the true chandragupta ahshahehhehshahenfhshe buddah

i agree ngl buddhism is for npcs
 
  • +1
Reactions: PeakIncels
i agree ngl buddhism is for npcs
It’s one of the better religions tbh.

Woudl rather be that then Muslim.

Then again both are wrong so agnosticism is preferable to both. But I am not trying to offend Muslims or Buddhists as there’s some truth and niceness is both so may hod watch over and protect them
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: takethewhitepill, noobkiller999, Swarthy Knight and 1 other person
I ain't watching allat chief. Might later when I have more mental clarity

Just summarize his main argument(s) with a few bullet points if u can
 
  • +1
Reactions: SplashJuice and MiserableMan
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: MiserableMan and Swarthy Knight
It's true. I spent like a decade as a western hindu and in the end nothing made sense. Now I'm agnostic.
 

@Swarthy Knight @buddhistking come defend yourselves don’t accept this MUH nigga the enlightened ones must prove they follow the true chandragupta ahshahehhehshahenfhshe buddah

"I-if you-y-you j-j-just f-follo-low in-ins-instructions... i-i-if y-you just me-me-medi-dita-tate..."
 
"I-if you-y-you j-j-just f-follo-low in-ins-instructions... i-i-if y-you just me-me-medi-dita-tate..."
Welcome to what it feels like being an Orthochad when conversing with Gaytheists and other religions

It’s like being an adult debating a 5 yr old
 
  • +1
Reactions: HTNcutecel
Welcome to what it feels like being an Orthochad when conversing with Gaytheists and other religions

It’s like being an adult debating a 5 yr old
I don't get it? You agree with me? This isn't about Atheism at all.
 
I don't get it? You agree with me? This isn't about Atheism at all.
I do indeed agree. The Buddhist got bodied by basic philosophy because Buddhism and Hinduism are philophixally unsound
 
all religion is cope
 
so what's his point? i'm too lazy to watch this
 
buddhism is not a religion though
 
why do u think its not
Because the philophixal evidence points to it being true. If it’s not true then the preconditions for knowledge become impossible without the Christian God. So essentially all evidence points to Christianity even Plato realised this 3.5k years ago yet Gaytheists base their entire worldview on some random nigga in a white lab coat
 
fairy tales written by jesters thousands of years ago and calling it truth
can you, my naughty boy, prove that these are just fairy tales?
 
can you, my naughty boy, prove that these are just fairy tales?
can you, my naughty gal, prove that these arent just fairy tales ? in this day and age where everything is captured suddenly your skydaddy insists on hiding :oops:
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Don Alejo Garza, spongebobsex and theRetard
can you, my naughty gal, prove that these arent just fairy tales ? in this day and age where everything is captured suddenly your skydaddy insists on hiding :oops:
my cutie, but you made a positive claim so the burden of proof is on you
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Don Alejo Garza and Sujumh
my cutie, but you made a positive claim so the burden of proof is on you
rejecting claims without evidence isnt a positive claim in your favor jfl. The burden of "proof" is still on the one insisting that god exists.

if i say that unicorns and mythical creatures dont exist, do i need to provide proof for that too babes ? :love:

@Abdullahm06 @vvd @inversions @chromednash
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Don Alejo Garza, inversions, Abdullahm06 and 3 others
rejecting claims without evidence isnt a positive claim in your favor jfl. The burden of "proof" is still on the one insisting that god exists.
but can you point it where i rejected something? also rejection is already a positive claim
if i say that unicorns and mythical creatures dont exist, do i need to provide proof for that too babes ? :love:
yes you need to prove it
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: Sujumh
yes you need to prove it
1761219535688

look not real :feelsree::feelsree:FAKEE
 
  • JFL
Reactions: theRetard
god stupid no exist no proof exist :love:i win. where my prize
so why is no proof exist? there's quite a lot of proofs like ontological or teleological
 
so why is no proof exist? there's quite a lot of proofs like ontological or teleological
ontological OR teleological "PROOFS" rely on conceptual reasoning or inference. They have never provided any logically necessary proof that a GOD actually exists, So your claim of a "proof" still remains unproven. Can't trust the words of jesters without any proof boyo
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: chromednash and theRetard
ontological OR teleological "PROOFS" rely on conceptual reasoning or inference. They have never provided any logically necessary proof that a GOD actually exists, So your claim of a "proof" still remains unproven. Can't trust the words of jesters without any proof boyo
so why is conceptual reasoning not a logical proof?
 
  • Hmm...
Reactions: Sujumh
so why is conceptual reasoning not a logical proof?
Conceptual arguments like the ontological only show that the idea of God is internally consistent(as you claim) they do not prove that God actually exists in reality. You the one providing no proof he actually exists and just trying to facefuck me with upside down questions. provide me clear and concise proof and ill believe it but guess what, what said retardedgodbeliever123 1000 years ago doesnt count as proof ? CRAZY RIGHT ? to be unable to argue with straight facts but just reciting what retardedgodbeliever123 said 1000 years ago is absurd. hope this helps xx
 
  • +1
Reactions: chromednash and theRetard
Conceptual arguments like the ontological only show that the idea of God is internally consistent(as you claim) they do not prove that God actually exists in reality. You the one providing no proof he actually exists and just trying to facefuck me with upside down questions. provide me clear and concise proof and ill believe it but guess what, what said retardedgodbeliever123 1000 years ago doesnt count as proof ? CRAZY RIGHT ? to be unable to argue with straight facts but just reciting what retardedgodbeliever123 said 1000 years ago is absurd. hope this helps xx
but if the idea of god is coherent then it already exists in reality
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Don Alejo Garza and Sujumh
but if the idea of god is coherent then it already exists in reality
Coherence or logical possibility doesn’t imply any real world existence just because we can imagine a skydaddy which will apparently return after how many years but still went into pussy mode hiding after the world entered the state of cameras and video capture doesn’t mean he exists any more than a unicorn does xx. still waiting on clear and concise proof babes xx
 
  • +1
Reactions: Don Alejo Garza, chromednash and theRetard
Coherence or logical possibility doesn’t imply any real world existence just because we can imagine a skydaddy which will apparently return after how many years but still went into pussy mode hiding after the world entered the state of cameras and video capture doesn’t mean he exists any more than a unicorn does xx. still waiting on clear and concise proof babes xx
so existence itself is not a real thing even though it is coherent
 
so existence itself is not a real thing even though it is coherent
Just because something makes sense in your head doesn’t mean it exists in real life. being coherent doesn’t make it real
 
Just because something makes sense in your head doesn’t mean it exists in real life. being coherent doesn’t make it real
so basically what you are saying is existence may be non-existing in real life
 
  • +1
Reactions: Sujumh
so basically what you are saying is existence may be non-existing in real life
yep coherence in thought doesn’t equal existence in reality. If that were true, literally anything you can imagine would exist.
if that were real i could imagine a 6'2 stacy who would play yakuza 0 with me @Abdullahm06
 
  • +1
Reactions: Abdullahm06 and theRetard
yep coherence in thought doesn’t equal existence in reality. If that were true, literally anything you can imagine would exist.
if that were real i could imagine a 6'2 stacy who would play yakuza 0 with me @Abdullahm06
so if something is coherent in thoughts, but it might be non-existing in reality, so thoughts aren't real either. but how do you even think, if thoughts aren't real?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Sujumh

Similar threads

unstable
Replies
23
Views
636
foidletslayer
foidletslayer
Elegant
Replies
52
Views
3K
curtisjoneslover
curtisjoneslover
chromednash
Replies
85
Views
9K
T50 Demon
T50 Demon
omnis
Replies
69
Views
3K
NEET_Emperor
NEET_Emperor
Sloppyseconds
Replies
37
Views
2K
Gamerspyy786
Gamerspyy786

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top