Dumb Religious "Reasoning"

I went to catholic school as a kid. I think for some time I 'felt' god. But Catholics love their guilt and their fear. I was really scared the world was just going to end at any point for no good reason, and would pray before bed every night that I wouldn't die in some horrible explosion. I have a weird fear of volcanos and lava about it now too. I have nightmares about lava frequently. During the 'The world is going to end' phase I watched a show about the super volcano under Yellowstone and was convinced that was how I was going to go.

Now that I'm older I feel 'god' again but in a different way. I feel a higher power (a strong, happy, peaceful energy) in nature. It feels a lot more feminine. So, mother nature. I can get behind that. But on the other hand - this horrible masculine wrathful god? No. Don't pray and cry over the thought of volcanos anymore.

Attached: 17884636_406647813042408_6254047373968137310_n.jpg (480x631, 32K)

>being disproven then moving the goal posts this hard
And the correspondence theory of truth is sophistry? It's just the idea that statements are true because there's something in objective reality corresponding to it. Therefore by that system, "You're a retard who doesn't what he's talking about" is true because it's an accurate description.

But the argument from prophecy is infallible. Though if you refuse to believe, then there can be no convincing you, even with prophetic evidence. Because faith is a substance that is given by God.
See pic related for an interesting example. The four great beasts of Daniel 7 were prophesied with precision as follows: Babylon, Medo-Persia, Ancient Greece, Roman Empire.
[Four Great Beasts Detailed Descriptions/History]:
patmospapers.com/daniel/dan7.htm
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

Attached: 1501919466676.jpg (1796x1181, 1022K)

Daniel is shit for evidence bro. Obvious Jew forgery from the Hellenistic era was obvious.

t. Catholic, with a BA in this shit.

It might interest you that this prophecy extends to the "little horn" of the fourth great beast, e.g. the Roman Catholic Papacy, which holds great relevance in profoundly affecting the world & believers to this day.
E.g. Emperor Constantine in the 4th century AD transferred the solemnity of the Sabbath from Saturday, the 7th day, to Sunday, to appease Pagan contemporaries. Do you know the Pagan backstories of Christmas & Easter that derives their festivities from Mithraism, an uncanny parallel religion to Christianity? The etymology of anti-Christ is "the replacement of Christ," which has happened, is happening & will happen in ways that affect most everyone, with or without their knowing.
There is nothing elusive about the prophecies, prophetic knowledge is nothing Gnostic. It is available to anyone wanting to study regardless of belief, but faith helps interpret/understand the significance of prophecy.

Attached: 1520023023980.jpg (435x327, 26K)

Well, yeah. Of course atheist arguments are dumb. Only agnosticism makes sense.

The fuck kind of retarded shit is this? Take your arts degree elsewhere, faggot. Science gives not only objective results but results which can be quantified in their probability of being correct.

Do you give support to every hypothesis thrown your way (take the teapot in orbit claim), and think they are all equally likely?
You know what a P value is, right?

>ontological
I thought it's still the most hotly debated argument to this day

>Science gives not only objective results but results which can be quantified in their probability of being correct.
>objective results
>says this despite major theories getting thrown into the trash all the time
>calling me retarded
>didn't respond to my contention at all
there is no reason to be a firm believer in Atheism instead of just irreligious.

No. But atheists are still guilty of believing something doesn't exist without evidence. They're making a claim.
Yes. The god hypothesis is too vague to make any precise predictions on what is likely to occur with respect to him existing. There are specific formulations you can refute though.

Objective just means not subjective. Science is a process and when used right gives highly accurate results which can be replicated. Theories cast away are examples of science either updating our knowledge bank or being "used wrong" with fudged data and frivolous conclusions, at which point it's not even really science any more.
You can't believe in science because it's not a belief but a data collection and processing methods. Are we now at the point where people are denying replicable results from sound, highly controlled tests involving one or few independent variables?

Buying into the "higher P values" is a suicide of reason. Obviously best thing you can do, since you know you can't know anything about it is suspend all judgement. And god forbid you truly think a higher P value makes it the default position, jej!

lol not at all, its circular and it was thoroughly destroyed a while ago.

I'm referring to newer versions of the argument, not the Cartesian "God IS" bs

They're making a claim based on evidence. Red shift and CMB are the two most obvious pieces for the underqualified, as well as the complete lack of evidence for creationist hypotheses. There are more examples though.
Quite simply, our current model is perfectly consistent with itself in the absence of a god, and there is no evidence other than old books and feefees for god existing. Giving god hypotheses any credence despite a lack of evidence and a much better supported alternative model that all fits together is idiotic. By that logic, you may as well believe everything that has ever been claimed to some degree.
>Gravity isn't real? Could be something else for all we know.
>We wuz kangz n sheeit? Might as well just say "we'll never know to be on the safe side" since we weren't there.
>Dinosaurs are unicorn bones, mermaid bones, dragon bones, and satan's deception? Sure, why not consider that too?
Can't believe emotionals still come to this website.

>Buying into "it's statistically more likely to be right" is suicide of reason
I want to fucking die. This world is fucked.

Those results are still contingent on human experience and measurement, which is not necessarily true in itself.

What's the newer version?

Atheism=/=Belief in science
Atheism is simply the absence of belief in a higher power. Too many people(including most atheists themselves) seem to think that it's some sort of religion centered around science instead of religious scripture.

What's wrong with science? Or do you just mean the types who roll their eyes at philosophy & literature then go on thinking that all their beliefs come from science?

To that degree, you could also be in a simulation, comatose and dreaming, or in AD1200 Turkmenistan tripping on shrooms and hallucinating your current ficticious country and some all seeing eye called the "internet".

>Leap of faith=suicide of reason
FTFY and this is nothing new, it's amazing how you idiots believe you're an enlightened elite with your "SuPeRIOr LoGIc and rEaSOnIng" but you're as bound to your feefees as the other camp. Pathetic. I've seen too many "what do you mean you'd kill all atheists, do you mean this fresh newborn baby has to die, Y-Y-YOU MONSTER!?!" to take you seriously anymore.

>To that degree, you could also be in a simulation, comatose and dreaming, or in AD1200 Turkmenistan tripping on shrooms and hallucinating your current ficticious country and some all seeing eye called the "internet".
Yes, that's true. No reason to dismiss a possibility.

What the fuck kind of dumbshit argument is that supposed to be? Why has murder come into this?
How is a P value a leap of faith? Religion is a fucking leap of faith; you even call it that. Please get help.

Nothing wrong with science. Atheism is not a religion of science though. The association is a misunderstanding. They're not mutually exclusive, but one can be completely ignorant of the underlying scientific concepts and still be an atheist by simply declaring they don't believe in a deity.

The big bang has supporting evidence because of the predictions it makes and how they line up with observation, sure. But god not existing isn't even essential to that theory, so merely pointing out that a god isn't necessary in its formulation doesn't bring you a step closer to disproving a god's existence. If you want to prove god doesn't exist, you have to make definite predictions for the consequences of one not existing and then demonstrate that those predictions don't bare out in reality. Otherwise taking the position is irrational.
Your attempts at le epic ownages seem to run on the assumption that agnostics think it's a 50/50 matter. We just don't make that evaluation.

>Daniel is shit for evidence bro. Obvious Jew forgery from the Hellenistic era was obvious.

>t. Catholic, with a BA in this shit.

man, you are a fool and a charlatan who has merely dabbled with religion if you think Daniel is a forgery

is it not the very Spirit of Christ who revealed the Messiah in the vision of Daniel as 'one like a son of man'?

and is it not this same Christ who's favourite name for Himself in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John is simply; 'Son of Man'?

~

you are a blind guide and thus reveal yourself a child of the devil and part of the synagogue of satan... for you refuse to enter into the kingdom of heaven, and also seal up the words of life that men might otherwise find freedom from their slavery to sin

repent or remain damned

Truly the only right train of thought is that there is no way to disprove a god, but there is no everyone supporting anything related to the abrahamu good, and the whole theology is filled with plot holes

schrodingers god

Agnosticism is for people that need to feel superior to absolutely everybody. It's the religious equivalent of saying "both sides are dumb" in a political discussion and then having no further input. Maybe it makes you feel good but don't be surprised if nobody values your input.

No, agnosticism is for people who know that "lack of belief" atheism is new atheist garbage.

>when christfags of different denominations start fighting though they ostensibly believe in the same god
>when agnostics and atheists start fighting though they both don't believe in god
I think you guys are doing this thread wrong.

If it is an absence of belief, then a rock is an athiest.

You should fear. The world is going to end one day. If you're a Catholic you should believe this. We should all be living in anticipation of this. Might not happen for another 2000 years but it's coming.