Why are (((Atheists))) like this?

[Precious Bodily Fluids]

There's a big split among Atheists between what I'd call progressives and the hard materialists.

The progressive atheists (Bill Nye, dickheads like David Pakman) subscribe to all the blob opinions on every topic. Trans rights, subjective beliefs are all valid regardless of evidence (as long as you're not white or Christian) etc. The hard materialists (Richard Dawkins, Kathleen Stock) are barely tolerated nowadays among the establishment because they are problematic. They disagree with gender ideology, might say bad things about Islam, etc. You don't see the latter group in the media as much but there's regular low-level bust ups going on in atheist spaces whenever these factions encounter each other. On Twitter for example both sides have their own separate bubbles.

This mostly isn't a left vs right split but more of an internal liberal vs postliberal civil war as the hard materialists represent the old guard enlightenment rationality vs the emerging "successor ideology" which the progressives fall in line with. Most Atheists aren't conservatives or right-wingers, which makes sense because Christian fundies have been describing them as having no morals (and worse) for decades with the once-influential evangelicals pushing creationism in schools which was a lightning rod back in the late 2000s. The evangelicals drove a lot of reasonable people to the left over the years (and were utterly defeated politically and culturally). Of course gender ideology in schools is just as bad as creationism, probably worse. There's rules against Christian magical beliefs being taught as fact in schools, but trannies beliefs about being "born in the wrong body", receiving gnostic "gender envelopes", etc are just as magical and have no basis in material reality but are totally legal to teach. Because they technically aren't religion as far as the law is concerned.

I think in the future you'll see more of an emerging coalition between materialistic Atheists and serious Christians because, despite their differences, they both agree that the material world exists and that will drawn them into political alliances against the Gnosticism of progressives. You'll also see a lot of woke Jews, Christian, Muslims wearing their supposed religion like a skin costume while insisting that -RELIGIOUS LEADER- would have wanted all children to be prescribed Lupron and fucked by pedos for social justice or whatever.

 

[Idiotron]

An Atheist would say "I don't know, but I do know God didn't do it."

An atheist would rather say: "I don't know and I don't believe any deity did it."
Sure some will say they know but that's ignorant because they don't know.

you're actually just an agnostic, but keep using the wrong label

Like I've said earlier, agnostic and atheist are 2 different things.
Agnostic means "I don't know", atheist means "I don't believe".
You can hold both positions at the same time without there being a dissonance.

 

[CornBogFitz]

Atheists are narcissistic man children. They fundamentally misunderstand what religion is.
Religion answers 3 things.
How we got here?
What happens when we die?
What is morality?
This is why various types of paganism are not distinguished with different names.
Any true skeptic of God would claim to be agnostic, because they simply submit that they do no know. The atheist secretly believes in God but denies him even to himself out of spite “how dare someone imply that my accomplishments are not my own.” Christianity is the only religion that addresses how God is unable to be proven by making faith the prerequisite to salvation. They stir in their own mind miserable because the hardest thing for any man to do is to openly proclaim that they can not do something alone. And that is exactly what submitting to Christ does. Do not argue with atheists, humiliate them so they may be humbled and then exalted by the Lord

 

[gang weeder]

I think in the future you'll see more of an emerging coalition between materialistic Atheists and serious Christians because, despite their differences, they both agree that the material world exists and that will drawn them into political alliances against the Gnosticism of progressives. You'll also see a lot of woke Jews, Christian, Muslims wearing their supposed religion like a skin costume while insisting that -RELIGIOUS LEADER- would have wanted all children to be prescribed Lupron and fucked by pedos for social justice or whatever.

That would be nice to see, but it seems difficult in practice as you will run into hang-ups on things like gay marriage, libertinism, etc. Although I guess if the left becomes a big enough problem people might be willing to just overlook those differences for the sake of pushing back the bigger threat. But from what I've observed so far, even "right-leaning" atheists get very uneasy having any sort of association with genuine Christians (or other serious religions) because they are still liberal on ass sex, drugs, etc.

I don't think I've ever seen an atheist who *actually* fully committed to "yeah, I don't believe in the Sky Daddy, but I agree with Christians on literally everything else" i.e. everything about how people should live, everything that actually matters. And even then you would have some lingering questions about the place of church, community and ritual in people's lives (atheists have never developed worthy replacements for these). I think you don't really see such people because people who agree with the religion to that far of an extent probably end up just converting, if they were ever truly unbelievers in the first place.

 

[Betonhaus]

Atheism requires you describe what a god is, then disputing it's existence and everything connected to it. If you truly didn't care you'd be agnostic, or would still consider yourself Mormon/Hindu/Catholic/etc - just not actively practicing. Sure you'd get more faithful who vehemently insist that god exists and is influencing your lives, but you'd also get people who don't particularly care - but acknowledging god is part of the traditions that their family and community has followed for their lifetime.
if you look at statistics you'd find that about half of all scientists hold one religion or another (less then the general public but still significant), and find meaning in their research that doesn't conflict with their beliefs. many historical scientists who have made great contributions to the advancement of science in general were religious.
Even if you are unsure that god is real, god as a concept was useful for defining a cultural core. How many of you teach your children (or were taught as children) about Santa Clause - the modern version that was defined by a Coca-cola advertisement? there is very little question that Santa Clause doesn't exist, and yet we all know he's a fat man in red and white that lives at the north pole and gives toys to good children and coal to bad children. We have written many songs and stories about him and his work, every hear we have pictures and figurines and inflatable lawn decorations of him. Santa Clause as a person doesn't exist and never did, but we are drowning in evidence of the concept of Santa Clause. So the question becomes, does it matter if Santa Clause exists or not? And if it doesn't, then does it matter if gods exist or not?

how many of you shout to the high heavens that Santa Clause doesn't exist?

 

[Sargon's wife's son]

David packman is not an atheist he's a dirty Jew and he's going in the oven with all the blacks

 

[Betonhaus]

David packman is not an atheist he's a dirty Jew and he's going in the oven with all the blacks

A real one, or the ones the Americans said were the in order to win the war?

 

[Lone Wandering Courier]

Atheists are narcissistic man children. They fundamentally misunderstand what religion is.

That is just objectively false

Religion answers 3 things.
How we got here?
What happens when we die?
What is morality?

I mean do poor answers not backed by any facts or evidence really count as answers? Hell we have evidence showing all that creation mythology to be false

Any true skeptic of God would claim to be agnostic, because they simply submit that they do no know. The atheist secretly believes in God but denies him even to himself out of spite “how dare someone imply that my accomplishments are not my own.” Christianity is the only religion that addresses how God is unable to be proven by making faith the prerequisite to salvation. They stir in their own mind miserable because the hardest thing for any man to do is to openly proclaim that they can not do something alone. And that is exactly what submitting to Christ does.

Yep, you really have no clue or understanding about atheism. christians simultaneously believe and deny free will exists when it convenient to the conversation.

Do not argue with atheists, humiliate them so they may be humbled and then exalted by the Lord

lol

 

[Moths]

Lmao imagine being a smug nigger than pulling the 'muh oppression' card fuck off

 

[gang weeder]

I mean do poor answers not backed by any facts or evidence really count as answers? Hell we have evidence showing all that creation mythology to be false

The first 2 questions are really abstract and esoteric but the third one is pretty important and atheists suck at answering it. It seems pretty obvious that one major function of religion is to deal with that third question in order to facilitate things like social cohesion and decent behavioral norms and etc.

 

[Kung Pow]

Stupidity, really. They get all work up by theists and the theists get all work up by the atheists which creates a cycle of aggression. But, between the two, atheists are the ones that gives the most shallow answers in general like: "No", "Wrong", without elaborating it further, they also rationalizing their ignorance on the subject by simply labeling it silly in their heads like, "why should I study that if it is dumb?". Not realizing that ignorance is stupidity and also not going further in their research other then belching some atheist meme on the internet or rarely reading the Bible like once.

They always stay on the offensive, because of course they do, you can't attack what the other isn't willing to expose like their actual personal beliefs on life, death, self and language. It is in general a stupid game of people that like to discuss without not actually saying anything with misinterpretations, lack of information, bad faith and sometimes mistaking affirmations about atheism as a group with himself as an individual, as if the group ethos, which contains millions of people, is the same as his. Being an atheist invokes a certain kind of superiority complex on inferior people by putting them in the club of euphoric, "enlighten" individuals that can only serve to boost their egos in most cases.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

It would be harsh, but universe needs no reason to exists. It just exists. If you say 'god made it' you need to answer who made god or from which place he came.

The key difference is the universe has a beginning and wasn't eternal, while in most religions, there is an eternal god or the first god was created from an eternal primordial substance because it is in the nature of that substance to create god. That makes a lot more sense than "nothing created everything", which is the belief of most atheists today due to their belief in science.

Most religions?
Are you including the thousands of them that didn't get widespread and got lost to time or regional ones?
Or just the big ones that got adopted by empires and spread through conquest?

I am literally including every religion ever, from dead ones to obscure tribal ones to today's major religions. It's astounding how many similarities they share, almost as if they come from the same understanding of the universe around us, an understanding that there probably is a higher entity than humanity.

That makes no sense.
I don't have to have any explanations since I'm not making claims, I'm just rejecting claims.
I'm not proposing any system in place of a theistic one, I'm just saying I'm not convinced by it.
It's up to the theists to provide evidence of their extraordinary claims.
This is an old theistic tactic of shifting the burden of proof, I've seen it many times before.

I can say "the United States does not exist", but that is contradicted by the extraordinary amount of evidence in favor of the existance of the United States. You can "there are no deities", but that is contradicted by the extraordinary amount of evidence that some sort of deity or higher force exists and created everything, since nothing did not create everything.

See? I don't need an old book to tell me those things are wrong, I can just figure it out from looking at the world around me.

Okay, so you just follow the morality of the society you live in (a society dominated by Christian and to a lesser degree Jewish values), thus proving my point that atheism can't exist in a vacuum. Or maybe you follow that morality because it's evolutionarily beneficial to do so, in which case you are following the exact same Darwinian morality exalted in Nazi Germany where morality was equivalent to what benefitted the Aryan race.

 

[CowPox]

If a Christian has true faith in what they preach and recommend for others to follow i've never understood why or how they could truly be bummed out by the various hypocrisys and attrocities that occur regularly on the planet in the way a non believer is, its not as if they don't know that in the end everything is prophesied to turn out well if not perfect for them when they sit with god or go to heaven or whatever, that somehow when they reach the thrown all wrongs are righted and everyone gets what they deserve in paradise. But with the plastic and malleable nature of the religion i'm sure this circle has already been squared in some convoluted poorly lettered way...

 

[Betonhaus]

Life would truly suck if you spend every waking moment pitying all of the starving children in Africa and in the wars going on all the time and all the woman in Sweden being raped by migrants, all of which you have little to no control over. Regardless if you consider it part of a God's plan, worrying about all the people you will never meet and know nothing about aside from they're not doing okay doesn't make you a good person - especially if you regularly shove your worries about those people in the faces of other people that can't do anything about it and are trying to live their lives and worry about the things they can do somethibg about.

 

[Idiotron]

I can say "the United States does not exist", but that is contradicted by the extraordinary amount of evidence in favor of the existance of the United States. You can "there are no deities", but that is contradicted by the extraordinary amount of evidence that some sort of deity or higher force exists and created everything, since nothing did not create everything.

LOL Are you seriously making this comparison?
Also, read what I wrote, I never said "there are no deities" bruh.
I said "I don't believe your claims that there are deities. Evidence, please".
So.... evidence, please.
If there's as much evidence for the existence of god as there is for the existence of the United States (I still can't even that you made this comparison), provide it.

Okay, so you just follow the morality of the society you live in (a society dominated by Christian and to a lesser degree Jewish values), thus proving my point that atheism can't exist in a vacuum. Or maybe you follow that morality because it's evolutionarily beneficial to do so, in which case you are following the exact same Darwinian morality exalted in Nazi Germany where morality was equivalent to what benefitted the Aryan race.

That's what everyone does, regardless of beliefs.
They adapt to the world around them because that's beneficial and much easier than trying to change the world.
You follow the law of the country you live in not because that's what aligns with your beliefs but because it's beneficial to you.
Also... bringing out the Nazis already?
Dude, you're such a parody of a Christian apologist.

 

[Betonhaus]

Atheists do seem much more obsessed with nitpicking the fundamentals of a God's existence. Normally those questions are usually asked by a child that's infinitely curious about the world, and are usually satisfactory enough answers that they stop pestering their tired parent and go play with their toys.

Faith in a God is usually just a base fact that a community accepts then go on with their day. Spending so much time arguing against it only serves as a distraction for more pressing concerns, and enables a form of narccism where you believe you're better then your community because you know more about things - that ultimately don't really matter.

 

[Balalaika Z Bree]

Why? They are fallen humans, sinners walking in darkness, and if they are actively rejecting God they are hardened of heart. May the Lord in his infinite mercy bring them to saving faith.

The whole thing is sad to me because Jesus has repeatedly offered a way out for them and they hardened their hearts to him. He still is to this day.

God has no grandchildren, each man or woman must accept Jesus to be saved, to become a son or a daughter of the Father.
Those who grow up without the Gospel or a false gospel, they all deserve our pity, and the truth of course. The descendants of those who had the benefit of some or all of divine revelation to that point, yet rejected Jesus, they deserve our prayers and compassion, remembering it was their ancestors Jesus was sent to personally preach to.

There's rules against Christian magical beliefs being taught as fact in schools, but trannies beliefs about being "born in the wrong body", receiving gnostic "gender envelopes", etc are just as magical and have no basis in material reality but are totally legal to teach. Because they technically aren't religion as far as the law is concerned.

There's tangible evidence of our biological living reality before our very eyes. The various "Young Earth" cosmologies including those outright denying evolution and ancient living creatures like dinosaurs are not comparable to transgender lies. Maybe if they claimed the earth was 20 minutes old, and there are no fossils they are just imaginary.
I think Christians are less like the woke/trans cult. I think Scientology is a better comparison. It's also branded as science, it has bizarre non-evidence-based medical opinions, and it tries to dominate the media with major successes in living memory.

Agnostic means "I don't know", atheist means "I don't believe".
You can hold both positions at the same time without there being a dissonance.

This is my understanding of what most agnostics and/or atheists mean when the terms are used formally.
When either is used informally it's probably safest to ask for clarification, assuming they are probably both if it's a self description, and possibly atheists if describing someone else.
P.S. God loves you, enough to die for you.

 

[Idiotron]

P.S. God loves you, enough to die for you.

This is just a nitpick but.... no, he didn't.
God took the form of a human, he suffered for a bit, he got stabbed, then he went to hide behind a rock for 3 days to regenerate his health... and then he went back to Heaven to rule over the entire universe for all eternity.
That's not sacrifice, that's just a vacation.
He was bored and decided to try being a human for a bit.

Also, dying for our sins... why exactly?
He's god, he can just forgive people for their sins, he can get rid of the concept of sin entirely.
Instead, he sacrificed himself... to himself.
Why was a human sacrifice necessary?
It wasn't, god just chose to do things that way to guilt trip humans.

 

[Elämällä on väliä]

The key difference is the universe has a beginning and wasn't eternal,

We don't know. Some versions of BBT are pointing that universe is in fact eternal. Other just states it is eternal.

You can "there are no deities", but that is contradicted by the extraordinary amount of evidence that some sort of deity or higher force exists and created everything, since nothing did not create everything.

Point one.

in most religions, there is an eternal god or the first god was created from an eternal primordial substance because it is in the nature of that substance to create god.

And the eternal (((thing))) decided in some point of time that they should be some universe with Earth and humankind? Also placed some false evidence that they didn't?

This is extreme stupid.

 

[Betonhaus]

This is just a nitpick but.... no, he didn't.
God took the form of a human, he suffered for a bit, he got stabbed, then he went to hide behind a rock for 3 days to regenerate his health... and then he went back to Heaven to rule over the entire universe for all eternity.
That's not sacrifice, that's just a vacation.
He was bored and decided to try being a human for a bit.

Also, dying for our sins... why exactly?
He's god, he can just forgive people for their sins, he can get rid of the concept of sin entirely.
Instead, he sacrificed himself... to himself.
Why was a human sacrifice necessary?
It wasn't, god just chose to do things that way to guilt trip humans.

I'd have to double check the books, but that was a symbolic thing to represent a clean slate, and sort of like the base deduction you get when you're filing your taxes. The event was to represent forgiveness for historical sins and prevent them from being passed down so you aren't found guilty of the crimes of your ancestors. It isn't seen as perfect absolution. It is better then the chicken thing tho. Humans do sin and will continue to do so, but it's something that can be accepted even while we try to avoid sin.