Why are theists incapable of telling the truth about atheism?

>stems from the basic idea of treating people how you yourself would like to be treated
Not sure if trolling or autistic.
Literally a core belief that Christians believe the Bible teaches.

>so they have to resort to fallacies
Now sure autistic. It is a fallacy to say that a fallacy means a conclusion is wrong.

You are justifying your position with a fallacy. You are no better than a theist.

Attached: 1378839006710.jpg (557x711, 49K)

>claims that morality is subjective
>Makes an objective claim for a subjective

Ok brainlet

Because it's specifically written in religious texts many times, sometimes contradictingly, that unbelievers are bad in some way or another.

On a more day to day level, I've had to face theists who outright told me that they saw science as ''anti-truth'' because it goes against the truth set by god, especially when talking about gender, which is a religious construct. There's a vid of Pastor Steven Anderson establishing an exhaustive list of what is proper and improper to wear for each christian gender, spending something like 30 minutes listing shit on a board obsessively...

They just believe it's the truth and they get violent cognitive dissonance when people tell them they are wrong...

my argument is
'haha you have a bad experience and reason to not believe' pwnd by satan

The bible permits and condones slavery. It doesnt say shit about treating others how you want to be treated. The entire biblical narrative revolves around what skydaddy wants to see happen. Christianity teaches how to endorse slavery. It doesnt teach you how to be a good person.

Define objective.

>witches dindu nuffin

>lets hate them out of ignorant superstition because people who read a debunked book tell us we should

>It doesnt say shit about treating others how you want to be treated.
Matthew 7:12
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you:
do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets

>The bible permits and condones slavery
So your logic is that if some part is wrong, the whole thing is wrong. Darwin got some things fundamentally wrong in Origin of Species. For example, he talked about blending inheritance, which we know is wrong.
So your logic must conclude evolution is fake news.
You must not believe in evolution to be intellectually honest. Damn kid, you a retard.

Attached: 1378837158526.png (774x1032, 660K)

The fact that the bible permits and condones slavery is enough to disqualify moral claims made for the bible. Fuck off with your strawman attempts.

Jesus loves (You). Have a good life.

>atheists laughing a t other atheists
epic

There's loads of evidence. Personal witnesses . You won't accept that as evidence. What evidence would you accept? Scientific, real scientist's won't touch the question.

''In reality, morality is subjective and stems from the basic idea of treating people how you yourself would like to be treated.''

That's what we call basic reciprocity and is not the base for morality... ''Do unto others like you would have them unto you'' is adapted to homogenous tribal societies, or in this case people who have a tribal society level IQ.

Nowadays, in a post-modern world, reciprocity is considered obsolescent and people are expected to be intelligent enough to have something you guys probably have never heard of, especially on Jow Forums, a little something called EMPATHY.

You know the ability to place yourself in someone else's shoes and gain a reasonable understanding of how they would appreciate to be treated.

I'll give you a top-tip, having empathy is also a great way to score with the ladies and not appear like some fucking autist.

Try to place yourself in their shoes and imagine how they would react to your advances and realize that they are most probably not interested and if they were they'd find a way to make you know so just don't.

>So your logic is that if some part is wrong, the whole thing is wrong
There was zero implication of this in his post. Why do you have to argue dishonestly?
>Darwin got some things fundamentally wrong in Origin of Species
Why are you comparing your God to Darwin?
>You must not believe in evolution to be intellectually honest
You don't need to believe in evolution, it's a scientific fact. Changes over time occur whether you're offended by it or not.

Why can’t you atheists learn some fucking quantum physics and finally accept your creator?

>theres evidence
>testimony aka word of mouth
Amazing. That "evidence" is not independantly verified, therefore utterly worthless. Claims about claims about claims on claims. Doesnt mean shit besides there are a bunch of claims.

You are wrong.
>It doesnt say shit about treating others how you want to be treated
That is easy to demonstrate as wrong.
You claim that if someone or thing is wrong in any way, everything they say is wrong.
We know you are wrong.
For some reason autistics can't spell "straw man". Every fucking time with you kids its "strawman". Just another thing you are wrong about.

You are fundamentally wrong about what is written in the Bible. So you demand that all of your conclusions are wrong. That isn't a straw man. That is your claim.

Why are you so wrong?

Attached: 1378838584532.jpg (500x281, 118K)

>Why can't they just deal with the non-belief in gods?
Because that belief is irrational and stupid.

Jews don't spread atheism. Are you retarded?

>There was zero implication of this in his post. Why do you have to argue dishonestly?
You are correct. He did not imply it. He explicitly stated it.
>Why are you comparing your God to Darwin?
Whoops. Your autism demands there are only 2 possibilities here. Autism is a mental deficiency. Your ability to reason is permanently compromised.
>You don't need to believe in evolution, it's a scientific fact.
There is no question about what I believe. His autistic logic demands that he not believe in evolution.

Kid, you are wrong and in over your head.

Attached: 1378838947421.jpg (898x726, 338K)

Personal witnesses, that which they experienced.
As I said you won't accept it.
How do you get up in the morning? Do you call mommy in to tell you if the floors still there.

>He explicitly stated it.
Provide the quote that shows this, please. I'll wait.
>Your autism demands there are only 2 possibilities here
I don't, unless you're stating either there is a God or there isn't. I'm simply wondering why you're comparing your God to Darwin. Don't dodge it if you're going to reply to it, bud.
>There is no question about what I believe. His autistic logic demands that he not believe in evolution.
Based on what, exactly? He makes no claim about evolution, or implies such. It's solely claims in regards to the bible. Your inability to be honest and not argue fallaciously at every turn isn't helping you.

Peter 2:18 is an example of why I'm right. It states slaves are to obey their masters through cruelty or ANYTHING. Because God wants it.
>dont run away from an abusive master
>suffer under them and give thanks to god for having the opportunity to believe in him
Christianity is trash. All good merits are contradicted by a slew of inhuman and irrational ideas in the bible. I suggest you actually study it. Fucking retard.

>Why can't they just deal with the non-belief in gods?

Religion is archaic political ideology and political partisanship. Should tell you everything.

Belief in god is important and hard wired into humanity. When you reject you open yourself up other false and insane demons.
Like Communism.

>personal witness
Again that means nothing to me. Anyone can make any claims or amount of claims they want. Makes no difference of you have nothing but more claims.
>they said they saw it and I believe them!
That isn't proof or evidence of anything but hopeful delusions

Whatever the apostles penned down is inferior to what Christ was recorded to have stated. Nowhere did Christ ever tell you to endure tyranny, rather the opposite.

It all depends on how you morally qualify slavery - what's your basis for considering it to be immoral?

literally nobody cares that you dont believe in any God OP

youre the one constantly REEing and freaking out over God...not the other way around.

Atheists are the problem.

He is right, faggot. You can't say, for example, that the invasion of Europe and north America by shitskins is a bad thing objectively. It's good for the brown invaders, and bad for whites. It depends on the viewpoint

Literally nobody gives a fuck about fedoras
>Fedoras on steroids laughing at ordinary fedoras

Not him, but i'd rather not be owned by someone else. I'd rather be treated as an equal; society agrees.

Started a post to slander Theists cause he's not secure enough to STFU and live.
Standard, you're trying to hurt your daddy, congratulations.

Slavery was much different in biblical times.

>Provide the quote that shows this, please. I'll wait.
You are asking me to repost his post. With reading comprehension that low, all the special ed teachers must love you.
>I don't, unless you're stating either there is a God or there isn't.
Doesn't think he says there are only 2 possibilities. Immediately lists only the 2 possibilities he thinks exists. Autism, not even once.
>Your inability to be honest and not argue fallaciously at every turn isn't helping you.
Your argument is a fallacy. Argumentum ad logicam. Very intellectually dishonest.

Learn to read before you get back to me kid.

Could you own people against their will?

>what christ was recorded to have stated
Nothing was written about him until almost 100 years after his claimed death. Nothing which was written was ever a direct personal account of the life of jesus either. It's all writing about what his disciples etc. CLAIMS he said. Literally its "he said she said" and it cant be actually verified as objectively true since there is no way to test it. The bible is full of claims yet lacks substance of objective verification. You know what we call that these day: A bunch of bullshit

Oh little autist. You can't follow along.
The Bible does condone slavery. No one is saying you are wrong about that. Do you understand that big guy? Am I going to fast for you.
You are wrong that the Bible does not have the golden rule. That is very false. That is what you are wrong about.
You wrote that the Bible doesn't contain a core Christian belief, even though it very clearly does.
Have I dumbed that down for you enough special little guy? Is the short bus going to fast for you?

Attached: 1378838529499.jpg (640x480, 85K)

It's never been morally good in any case. You have no argument.

It's proof to them, that's all people really need. All proof is personal if you really think about it.
The atheists claim, also is devoid of proof. You make an assumption of the nature of reality. But the nature of reality can not be proved, only experienced. Personally.

>You wrote that the Bible doesn't contain a core Christian belief
No I didn't. Is your fedora constricting blood flow to your brain?

Equal to what? To who? Equality is a chimera that is elusive when you try to pin it down. Right now we are all in servitude to the state, to debt, taxation, the obligation to work in order to sustain ourselves. Even the laws of the land are applied unevenly to people such as ourselves and those in positions of power. Your birth certificate is issued by the department of commerce. You are a slave.

because eventually you come to a point where you realize morality is largely genetic and jebus say you have to love niggers.

>You are asking me to repost his post
I'm asking you to put a statement that provides evidence for your point. Something you've been incapable to do, considering you've just been arguing fallaciously and against strawmen.
>Doesn't think he says there are only 2 possibilities. Immediately lists only the 2 possibilities
The word "unless" in that sentence gave you very clear reference to why your statement is wrong. But it's not darwin or God, that wasn't my argument. I asked why YOU compared darwin to God, and you went off on an irrelevant tangent instead of answering the question. But we've already covered the fallacious arguing from you.
>Argumentum ad logicam
I didn't say "your argument is false because of your single fallacy" Don't post things and pretend to know what they mean.

>The atheists claim
Atheism makes no claims, it merely rejects them.

Which is a claim.

reddit thread

>the atheist claim
There is no claim. Atheism is literally JUST a refusal to accept the claims of God based on insufficient evidence. Its essentially just skepticism in application, which is why it conflicts with religious claims so much. Religious beliefs work through faith - make a claim and have faith in it to be true, even without sufficient evidence. Skepticism works when facts of truth are genuinely presented forward, orthwise there is just perpetual skepticism. Atheism is a kind of skepticism.

>No I didn't. Is your fedora constricting blood flow to your brain?
Oh really thing African autist?
>It doesnt say shit about treating others how you want to be treated
You wrote that. Oops.

>Is your fedora constricting blood flow to your brain?
Also, I am sorry you didn't understand the pics I was posting. I forgot autistics can't comprehend sarcasm (like they can't comprehend most things). Those pictures are making fun of you. They are not me.

You are proof that I could never be a special education teacher.

Yes, the statement "I reject your claim" is a claim, which is inherently true, I do reject your claim. I do not make any further claims, which is what you are insinuating.

Apparently I can't click on posts today.

> Atheism is literally JUST

Agreed.

>Equal to what?
To everyone else in society. To clarify, so you won't wiggle out of the point: equality in terms of being able to live/exist in society within the bounds of laws and freedoms within said society.
>Right now we are all in servitude to the state
No we're not. You make a choice to do something and owe people money, choice =/= slavery. Don't be so dishonest to use "servitude" as well, you're not changing the subject. We both understand owning people as slaves isn't even close to anything you've posted here.

Would you be fine with being owned by another person? Directly answer this question, instead of going on an irrelevant tangent.

1 post by this id.
Btw we are trying to wake up them.
Without God you fall into relativism knowingly or not.
Without God you elect another god to seek a leadership knowingly or not.

Attached: 1527586170355.jpg (819x1024, 175K)

i mean, if its supposed to be instructions on how to live the best life, given to us from god itself, one would assume that it would be without any errors whatsoever, seeing as god is supposed to be be perfect and all.

The claim of atheism is on the assumption of the nature of reality.

>I'm asking you to put a statement that provides evidence for your point
His post was like 3 sentences with small words. Copy/paste isn't going to help you read it any better. It will take years of special education to get you to that point.
>I asked why YOU compared darwin to God
I didn't. Your reading comprehend is so bad, Internet forms are not a good way for you to express your autism.
>I didn't say "your argument is false because of your single fallacy"
This isn't a media with audio. I don't know or care what you say. It is about what you write. And you write like someone who is learning disabled.

Wrong. Atheism is not fundamentally a claim. Atheism is skepticism in application. If you make a claim and I dont accept your claim as true, based on the fact that you have insufficient evidence to verify your claims, that's all atheism is.
>christtard: believe me. God is real because faith
>skeptic: why? I'm not convinced.
That's atheism.

> Kavanaugh got raped, there's personal witnesses attesting to it and that's proof
t. retarded christfaggot

Attached: image.jpg (973x1280, 554K)

Germans elected Hitler in 1933, and it worked out pretty good for them. He was also definitely not fond of christianity, and of religion more broadly, as his quotes indicate

Because science begins to break down at the higher level which is where a lot of the exceptions to theories start to come in. Basically your system just doesn't work fundamentally. Quantum pairing is another one. Giving things names doesn't mean we understand it.

Why did you bring Darwin up at all?

Hey OP, what book is the Scientific Method from? Oh yeah, that's right the Corpus Hermetica you fucking Jew! Your "Science" is a form of religious concept.

Sage.

There's a reason why all the disciples were men.

I believe in God because of personal experiences, and this cannot be changed.

Every pro-atheist post is a shill
sage.

Empathy is for children and doesn't help people grow. People are actually discussing it a ton here, but since they aren't using the word specifically you probably didn't understand that.

There's personal witnesses for every religion, and all claim to be the truth yet one can actually be true.

Not having a holistic explanation does not validate an inferior alternative.

And it does not even change the practical utilities of the already in use "lower" sciences

His post was like 3 sentences with small words
And you should be able to coherently break it down to show me where he implied this. You can't and refuse to because he didn't. I know you won't admit you're wrong, but that's fine. Just making you aware.
>I didn't compare darwin to God
See >So your logic is that if some part is wrong, the whole thing is wrong. Darwin got some things fundamentally wrong in Origin of Species
This is in reply to: "The bible permits and condones slavery" (Which your argument has nothing to do with)
You (incorrectly) framed his logic, then diverted to talk about Darwin and how he got some things wrong. This directly implies to discussing about getting things wrong by using someone's logic, giving another example of getting things wrong from within the discussion of God and the point of condoning slavery. Otherwise, what could you possibly be referencing in relation to? You're either stupid, dishonest, or incoherent.

The rest you've posted isn't an argument, I don't care how you feel. If you can't understand things you write, it's not on me to explain it to you.

No, I don't care for being owned by a person, ideology or state. It's why I refuse to take on any debt and will not pass along any responsibility for my life to any other than myself. Nobody owes me anything and I owe no-one in return. It still stands that you are not equal to everyone else in society - even as defined on the terms you suggest. Are the laws that bind you just? Are they applied to all members of society equally? Take the Libor scandal as an example, the largest fraud in human history and not a single person was prosecuted. And as for choice, just try to opt out of the system. This is the illusion of choice masquerading as free will.

>some guy: god doesn't exist
>atheist: I agree
That is atheism. It is not an intellectually superior position. That is why it needs all these weasel words like "strong" and "weak" atheism. Atheists are desperate to wear that atheist badge because they want to belong to their little club of fellow atheists.
Atheists want to wear that label. They think they have some profound insight in to the nature of existence. They believe they are an oppressed minority. That sounds suspiciously like something else.

No one else is obliged to believe on the hearsay of your experiences

Empathy is the greatest tool for understanding other human beings we have.
>doesnt help us grow
I 100% disagree.

We need to get back to burning witches.

That's antithesim, not atheism

Anti- is not synonymous with a-

Dude I've told you all atheism is is skepticism in application. Sorry if basic skepticism when applied is enough to be an impassable wall for the claims of your shitty jewish religion.

That doesn't refute the argument I made you retard, nothing I said is inherently tied to rape accusations, dumb ass, how retarded are you? The argument is that personal testimonials aren't sufficient proof for anyone except a biased moron.

Attached: image.jpg (1000x454, 167K)

Belief in God is inherently faith-based. Thus, belief in God will always be predicated on personal experiences. That being said, belief in God is an intellectually superior position than atheism. Agnosticism is a cucked, "on the fence" position.

Salem witch trials had nothing to do with pagans you brainlet

Attached: 1537938907471.jpg (500x500, 28K)

Wrong it's a claim on the nature or reality.
Consider the claim our existence is within a butterflies dream. It cannot be proved or disproved. And is equally of value to the claims of this is a reality that experiences God, or this is a reality that doesn't experience a God.
As I said, you can't prove reality only experience it.

Yeah, just like rejecting the existance of invisible flying unicorns is irrational and 'not an intellectually superior position'.

Pretty sure he is talking about (((modern Christianity))) with this quote. I could be wrong, though.

>Belief in God is inherently faith-based
Correct
>That being said, belief in God is an intellectually superior position than atheism
He said, providing no argument

Atheism is a refusal to accept claims on the nature of reality because lack of objective and independantly verified evidence. Atheism is not a claim. Atheism is just another word for skepticism. Why do you strawman atheism so hard?

If it is inherently faith based, why does it matter if people must believe it uniformly? Why does it matter that anyone else believes your religion at all?

> my beliefs are superior because I say so
t. retarded christlet without an argument who worships a Jew

Attached: image.jpg (600x418, 101K)

Because they have something you don't. A soul.

>it was spread through violence.

I'd say manipulation.