Euphoric atheists

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Shaka Brah said:
At one point he tried to argue that God couldn't exist because there were multiple universes. His argument to prove multiple universes? "They could exist, so they must."
Click to expand...

Chuck Gruden said:
Also the whole "God can't exist due to the multiverse" is a bit dumb once you think about it. Since God is infinite.
Click to expand...
You cannot escape the necessity of a sheer, absolute beginning by taking refuge in the Multiverse, as some atheists attempt to do by postulating that the Big Bang in this universe was caused by some quantum fluctuations within a larger Multiverse. The Multiverse, if there were one, is necessarily expanding (otherwise the daughter universes, each expanding rapidly, will eventually coalesce with each other, a scenario rarely considered in Theoretical Cosmology). And by what is known as the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem, any spacetime that expands cannot extend infinitely into the past.

So the question what (or Who) begot the Multiverse remains a valid question.

Pikapool said:
View attachment 3419175
Click to expand...
Because God loves his creation and is eager to bestow the truth on us?
 
Last edited:
Positron said:
You cannot escape the necessity of a sheer, absolute beginning by taking refuge in the Multiverse, as some atheists have done by postulating that the Big Bang in this universe was caused by some quantum fluctuations within a larger Multiverse. The Multiverse, if there were one, is necessarily expanding (otherwise the daughter universes, each expanding rapidly, will eventually coalesce with each other, a scenario rarely considered in Theoretical Cosmology). And by what is known as the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem, any spacetime that expands cannot extend infinitely into the past.

So the question what (or Who) begot the Multiverse remains a valid question.


Because God loves his creation and is eager to bestow the truth on us?
Click to expand...
Like most materialist arguments for Creation, there's a lot of smoke and mirrors to dazzle midwits in the Multiverse but not much substance or observation. We can observationally (and rationally!) prove that the universe we see around us began to exist at a finite point in time in the past. Any explanation that doesn't address the observed physical data that shows this is true can just be thrown out because it doesn't match reality.
 
Pikapool said:
View attachment 3419175
Click to expand...
Duse, he's posted that exact same tweet before in the EXACT SAME wording.

Same.png
(L, A)
 
The supreme court has just solidified themselves as the American Taliban. They don't care about upholding law.
Click to expand...

I wonder if they'll uphold any laws saying you can't kill babies?
 
Self crosspost that I think fits well for this thread.
Krystal said:
Here's a chicken or the egg question that I think is perfect for this thread. Are people autistic because religion is autistic or is religion autistic because people are autistic? As a Catholic myself (not trad-Cath, mind you) I think the latter.
Click to expand...
 
Tootsie Bear said:
[screencap]
Click to expand...
marisa # said:
Christians "borrowed" the story as much as Australians "borrowed" the union jack for their flag.
Click to expand...
FILTH Tourist said:
Its even dumber, its like saying Australian English ripped off English English.
Click to expand...
Notions of "intellectual property" and "copying is theft" are fairly modern. Long before "copyright fanatics" like one may see on deviantART, and long before "social justice warriors" REEEing about "cultural appropriation" in Current Year, arts and cultures freely copied. Even now not all have an "intellectual property" mentality.

Also a Christian could counter the "Christianity copies other religions" argument with the argument that "other religions have elements of truth" or something like that.
 
Last edited:
Shaka Brah said:
Richard Carrier is a really strange character and a lolcow in his own right. He's mostly viewed as a laughing-stock by everyone who would argue with him, but he produces some of the worst and most motivated takes on history and religion that you can get. He's Dawkins-brand fedora atheism distilled down to its very essence.

At one point he tried to argue that God couldn't exist because there were multiple universes. His argument to prove multiple universes? "They could exist, so they must."
Click to expand...
Chuck Gruden said:
I mean look at this face and tell me this ain't a lolcow-worthy face.View attachment 3417709
Guy looks like he does some of that good shit they sell at the Shell station. Probably why his takes are so far-stretched with his "Jesus was based off of other gods". When you actually read the myths of the various pagan gods that Jesus was supposedly based off of, this theory falls apart faster than the Falcons in the 4th quarter of Super Bowl 51. Sometimes I wonder if Carrier actually took the time to read the myths while sober or without Dorothy Murdock's input.

Also the whole "God can't exist due to the multiverse" is a bit dumb once you think about it. Since God is infinite, ie something that we can not comprehend and infinite essentially meaning "limitless", what's stopping him from having control over multiple universes? Sounds like a no-brainer but this is euphoric atheism we're talking here so anything that involves logical explanation of a higher power is thrown out the window.


You thought the "I Fucking Love Science" crowd was just a meme? It's all too real, Jack. Funny how they reject the worship of higher powers only to replace that with the worship of "science". Not the process of science like how the Scientific Method says, but the aesthetic of science. They don't have time for petty things like "research" and "hypothesis", just articles from pop sci magazines and quotes from people like Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Carl Sagan.

Don't tell them that many great men of science also were men of faith. Even Einstein said there was a possibility of God existing.


Yeah, I think most of us here thought religion was a load of bullshit. The difference between us and euphorics is that we grew out of that phase, and if not coming to religion, at least having respect for it. While euphorics still dwelled in that adolescent mindset, becoming even more childish in the process. Not saying it's true for all of us but I bet a great deal of people here can agree.
Click to expand...
Man, Richard Carrier. Is he still even talked about in atheist circles? I would’ve thought he’d be completely unpersoned after he was, like so many others, exposed as a creep who glommed onto the feminist/social justice movement to get close to women. I mean, that’s what usually happens to men like him. They’re either unpersoned/never talked about again as if they never existed or they’re unpersoned AND thrown in jail depending on how serious their crimes are.
Pikapool said:
View attachment 3419175
Click to expand...
Newman's Lovechild said:
I can't even get mad enough to roll my eyes at it. It's kind of amusing just how basic this lauded bigbrain can be.
Click to expand...
edricluffie said:
He's not the 1st atheist that has to make a false assumption to make a point and think that it was a genius one (actually idiotic).
But these kind of behaviour is actually super common among euphorics.
Click to expand...
He’s still kicking? I thought he would’ve been cancelled for upsetting the troons?

Also, anyone remember these? Summer Camps for euphorics;

One of them (Camp Inquiry, a subsidiary of the Center for Inquiry) bit the dust ages ago while the other (Camp Quest) is still going.
I mean, are most normal summer camps really overtly religious that a “nontheistic alternative” was considered necessary? I’ve been to a couple in my short life and they weren’t overtly religious or political.
 
Mr Metron666 said:
Man, Richard Carrier. Is he still even talked about in atheist circles? I would’ve thought he’d be completely unpersoned after he was, like so many others, exposed as a creep who glommed onto the feminist/social justice movement to get close to women. I mean, that’s what usually happens to men like him. They’re either unpersoned/never talked about again as if they never existed or they’re unpersoned AND thrown in jail depending on how serious their crimes are.
Click to expand...
Yeah, for some reason they still like him. Dawkins and Hitchens have mostly been canceled, so they're out.

My favorite mythicist is Price though and they don't talk about him much. Jesus never existed and Paul was actually Simon Magus but also his epistles were forged by Marcion and now I have schizophrenia.

e: oh I forgot Atwill too. That's another one of the crazies.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom