To the Atheists of Jow Forums

Time = unit of measurement
Big bang = theory
God = created by man

No need to get off your high horse; I'll pick up your fedora.

It's almost like we don't know and understand how the universe was formed. Amazing.

Attached: wew.jpg (300x300, 20K)

>beats every argument

Welcome bro

Attached: Welcome Bro.jpg (1067x600, 47K)

>... therefore giant almighty being
Ok nigger

Unit of measurement = potential
No unit of measurement = no potential
Incorrect theory = God
Man = created by God

This but the belief in God still retains logical.

>therefore it just "w...works"

Attached: Sick Todd.jpg (1000x990, 180K)

If the universe began to exist, God created it.
If the universe is eternal, it is literally categorically the highest possible thing that exists, therefore it is God.

Bu God I don’t mean the bible God. I just mean God.

It does, but not because of why you think. Nevertheless, nothing good comes from presuming what God is or what it wants.

OKay first of all
the Big Bang means a singularity existed, which means that the universe already existed

why do you reject science and claim ot search truth?

Do you not realize the big bang makes perfect sense as gods craetion?

I'm not the one to claim to know what exactly happened, fuck off

2=3
2+2=5

Well I would disagree, Evil cannot arise from thinking God wishes Good.

I am denying the big bang but simply that the big bang could not originate in itself.

And this theory is somehow illogical? It seems like someone can't handle a differentiation of their belief or possibly you just have an inferiority complex and can't handle others stating something that you didn't think of.

Well which is it?

Well aren't you a clever little boy. You created an incorrect parallel.

>More of hot air
Look, when you christcucks write something new on the subject (not necessarily even true) for the first time in 2000 years, get back to me.

How did lifeless chemicals come to life? (((Scientists))) still can't fully explain this

Why does Big Bang like a porno if its not a jewish trick?

By claiming the big bang is cyclical.

Biochemistry bitch pls

>when you actually make a come back then get back to me

Besides I have many original thought but they do not pertain to the conversation.

What causes the expansion? I thought about this since the Hindu's believe the universe breathes in and out.

Tis true but I mean we can see fungi appear. I guess it's as close as we can get.

This is where the soopa genouses admit that they don't know what comes before the beginning of the big bang. Maybe it always was? That's what you say about God, right?

It's just a bunch of science fags sucking each other's cocks.

That's why i asked for subj related info. Coz i don't need any crazy secondary ideas. You still managed to mention them, though.

You see I say that God lived forever because it is only logical while to say the Universe was always in a stagnant size is wrong because we know it had a starting point through science and so we cannot expect action to occur when there is not possibility or in other words not time. This means that the belief in God is only logical.

We have no knowledge about origin of the universe, only theories.
But what we know for sure is that one desert globalist cult once pozzed Europe and opened it to kike infestation, resulting in all the shit we're dealing with today.

Attached: 1544355029781.png (896x5808, 247K)

Well can you disprove them? I have already explained how they are logical and so the burden of proof rests on you to disprove them. The primary ideas as you call them is the science that shows a big bang occurred and the secondary as you say is the logic that it could not of occurred out of itself when there is not possibility.

Atheism includes accepting that there are things still yet to be understood. Google god of the gaps.

I would also like to point out that I think you misundersrand time, and also potential.

There is also sorta crazy shit that happens when you have unstable fields.

Yea I guess all those Christian empires were just backwards and degenerate, absolute autism.

The point remains that Christianity may show some egalitarian views but it most certainly has not expressed that throughout history and has if anything been beneficial. No mater your view on it, it has been our history.

Besides what are you a Pagan? If so which one.

All Aryan religions are good but none are perfect.

I'm not an atheist, and I'm a firm believer in a spiritual realm. But I'm also a firm believer in science, and I do not think our universe was created by intelligent design.

Atheism may be that in your mind but for most that identify themselves as atheist they view themselves as "I follow science and logic" and do not really believe in any gaps. Besides while these gaps remain is it not logical to suggest God exists?

There are estimated to be over 4000 religious faiths in the world, each with different and contradictory propositions on the nature of higher powers, creation, life, death, and the proper conduct of men.

What makes you so certain that you just happened to beat the odds and be born into the right place, time, and culture to be inducted into the one true faith?

>russian
>atheist
woah, never seen that before

Also reply to the other comment about this, but could you explain how exactly I misunderstood time and potential?

Science and Theology can go hand in hand.

Probably because of those 4000 faiths, only a select handful are held by the overwhelming majority of the human population?

I never stated such a thing that mine was somehow the best or most correct. I simply stating that Religion is necessary, God is real, everything known comes through the mind of man and so man is not perfect the message will not be perfect and so no religion is perfect. But some are objectively better than other all we have to do is look at it rationally.

I wholeheartedly agree, but I doubt this entire universe was created by an intelligent being. Homo Sapiens Sapiens, on the other hand - now that's a different story. We definitely have souls and spirits, and there are such things as demons and gods. But none are responsible for the creation of the universe or its natural laws, though of course they exist in a place that doesn't abide by them

Reducing matters of cosmic truth to a popularity contest doesn't seem sound to me.

Out of those* wow I'm drunk

I agree that it is just most likely that God set this universe in motion rather than every minuscule aspect being apart of his plan. But I agree that humans have souls and such.

I don't know. A person's perceptions and very personality can be altered with the right mix of drugs and/or traumatic brain injury. In light of that, what part of you constitutes your soul?

Ahhh I understand.

Well you see the soul may just be another word the immaterial Psyche or it may generally be something apart (but connected) to the Psyche.

Whatever it is we know that the Psyche is immaterial, the physical brain is a medium for it.

It's not a popularity contest, dumbass. The absolute state of the atheist worldview. Do you think the abrahamic religions became top dog because of how amicable they were? jesus

you sound like this guy
youtube.com/watch?v=gFMZe-RDzcg

I never claimed to be an atheist. I'm just asking questions.

Cool, so answer mine. Do you think the abrahamic religions became so widespread because of how awesome totally relatable and friendly they were? You'll answer your own question

I think they became so widespread because of their follower's skill at conquest.

So...are they true because their followers are better at cracking skulls than the other guys?

>Well I would disagree, Evil cannot arise from thinking God wishes Good.
You put yourself above God and dictate. What hubris.

Well then if not me then whome? A rapist? a murderer?

You see a natural morality exists and we can find this, it is only logical to suggest God pertains such goodness as well. Morals are not as subjective as you might think.

Listen to what you're saying. "It's logical to suggest" about the unknowable, that which by it's very definition exceeds our comprehension. No, it's not logical. Your logic is flawed. But what did you expect when you put yourself in God's place.

he does as long as your married and dont use a condom.

Beating the dead horse again,niggers?

Do you believe God is then Evil?

Whatever his true nature is which I accept is unknowable, saying that he is a Good god is primary.

The prostration of our people comes before what you think Gods feelings are about being understood properly. And that judgement about God is the same as which I am doing.

Stop being such an unhinged autist.

>T. ATHEIST

I'm not a proponent of abrahamic beliefs at all, but you have to admit, they sure have a way of spreading their ideologies everywhere. We probably have the same views, I'm just trying to encourage some independent thinking

I would not presume to ascribe any characteristic to God. I'm not insane. I'm not making a judgment about God, I'm making a judgment about you.

As am I. I appreciate it.

>something magically happen and now we are here
no proof there was even a big bang.

thinking and showing proof are two very different things.

>The number of people believing something determines how truthful it is

Yes you are making a judgement about God because you think it is wrong for someone to say what he believes, you may try to say this is a judgement about me (and it is) but it is equally one about God for why can I not make a judgement about him because you think I am somehow disrespecting him if this was not the case than you would be calling all those that suggested the existence of an atom prior to when we could see it as insane.

Time =/= potential, idiot. And that’s coming from someone who believes in God. And even the Bible makes it plain that potentiel pre-existed God, represented as the Deep upon which God’s line shone.

>Prior to big bang = no time
when scientists say that time began with the big bang, they are using time in the physical sense, not the philosophical sense of motion and change. there could have still been, for instance, prior to the big bang, a higher realm, with all sorts of chains of events which ultimately lead up the big bang and creation of the universe. those events could still have taken place during the meta-time of that higher realm

i'm afraid the big bang is of little help to christian apologists ;^)

Line = light ***

>Prior to big bang = no time
how do you know there wasn't a universe before this one?
what is this universe expanding into, more nothing?

Attached: proofs.jpg (576x463, 36K)

a tribe called Dan (snake) created the concept of "God"

Attached: Vatican - pope's auditorium.jpg (698x524, 179K)

every abrahamic slave is a fucking moron, period.

Attached: GOOD GOY.jpg (700x467, 55K)

God has always existed. Use your rational mate. If there is no time then there is not potential, how can I say I have the potential to move forward if I do not have width, height, depth and time. For all are necessary for movement or who knows maybe a 2D world exists somewhere (Jk).

If there was no time how would you do anything? For everything you do is based on time.

No. Your logic is completely flawed. I am saying if you're going to ascribe characteristics to something you don't understand at all, it will be at complete random if you're correct. You can do it as much as you want, but if you claim it's the truth then that's a lie. Because you don't know.

Yes, to claim the existence of an atom without any evidence to it's nature would be insane. If you were correct, it wasn't because you had any special insight, but that you were correct on random because of your flawed mind. Being right on random is being right, I'll concede to that, but on average it's going to be of little value. And the more important the subject, the graver potential for error.

>how do you know there wasn't a universe before this one?
>what is this universe expanding into, more nothing?

I never said there wasn't but we do know that if there was that it must of shrunk or in other words called the big crunch. And that makes sense but the big bang occurring by itself is illogical. It's expecting a rubber band to expand by itself.

you're simply narrow mindedly dismissing the possibility of all sorts of fantastical things causing the big bang even though there are perfectly legitimate alternatives to god doing it

please elaborate. Hard to determine which camp you're in

Well all those great Christian empires that produced some of the greatest art in history sure were Evil and totally destroyed the Aryan and only after Jewish influence became dominant were they used in such an egalitarian manner even if the religion itself contains such egalitarianism.

Yep totally sounds like it as detrimental.

read the next post, you mongoloid australian troglodyte

>No. Your logic is completely flawed. I am saying if you're going to ascribe characteristics to something you don't understand at all, it will be at complete random if you're correct. You can do it as much as you want, but if you claim it's the truth then that's a lie. Because you don't know.

Of course I don't ultimately know but I do know that an Objective morality does exist in the natural world and if God is good then he follows that because that is good and if he does not then he is not Good and so does not deserve my praise.

I also know that is is beneficial to my fellow man and race if they belief God is benevolent and Good. So ultimately it doesn't matter but what the people believe does.

this is a cause of great confusion for me. European civilization was its greatest under Christian influence, but why, then, is the pagan movement so seductive?

none of this makes the bible true tho

And then we must only accept that the higher realm must of had a start. Besides how does the philosophical sense of time differ from the scientific in your view kike?

KIKES ARE ATHEISTS

Well then I would like to hear these alternatives kike.

Besides one can also claim the existence of the spiritual from Religion, just as Scientists claim dark matter exists from scientists. From a psychological perspective there is no difference in the belief of black holes or angels. Neither one can be said to "be able to see with my own eyes" necessarily or at ease and so you choose to believe the results someone claims to have found or seen, a prophet says he saw an angel and a scientists says he found readings of a black hole.

There are many types of logic, how can you judge one logic by another, why do you choose that logic to judge because you chose it with a logic, which logic is the logic picker?

That's fine. I have no beef with people pretending they know God's will if it helps them in their lives or their societies. I doubt it will pan out to something beneficial in the end, but to each his own.

I'm of course talking about reality and rationality around the nature of God here, so if that's not the debate then we can agree to disagree. You thinking God doesn't deserve your praise if it doesn't conform to your will is pretty delusional as far as I'm concerned, but again I'm not saying it's wrong for you. Subjective benefit of delusion is another matter entirely and hard to argue.

Tchh, I understand your view but it is like a Paedophile saying it is good to rape children because it is pleasurable and what he desires.

This.
Prior to the big bang we have no observation of the universe. We have no good reason to believe there was no time before that.

Not necessarily but parts yes it does.

it doesn't go without saying that time can't be eternal and beginningless. if you want to make that claim the burden is on you.
the difference is that when scientists speak about time having a beginning, they're talking about it as a property of the universe. they refer to the time of space-time. but the time of philosophers is not necessarily bound by space, or by this universe. it simply means that things change.

very strange way to put it my southern hemispheric friend, but i get your point.

my point isn't to bring any particular alternative, only to point out that the big bang isn't a problem for atheists. it doesn't force them to believe in god, because there are more than two options.

on your second and third paragraphs, i fully agree with you.

except for, you know, the implied existence of a multiverse

>That's fine. I have no beef with people pretending they know God's will if it helps them in their lives or their societies. I doubt it will pan out to something beneficial in the end, but to each his own.

Well at least you can appreciate this, but in regards to your prediction to how it will turn out I would say is incorrect. Saying God is unkown allows people to have their own beliefs and guesses or at least accept he is unkown but to say he is Good will have a good effect because people believe in an inescapable Karmic punishment as well as looking at God as good allows for him to be an ideal as well as enforcing the idea that reality is naturally Good.

The big bang does not mean a singularity existed. the space that expanded could have already been infinite.
What is our observable universe was in a very small space and approaching a singularity, but not one. this tiny space that made up our universe could be only part of a universe that stretched out in billions of light years or forever, we have no knowledge.