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
Oh apparently some other euphoric cow I have never heard of was there at the debate, Aron Ra:


1685225004542.png
 
Blobby's Murder Knife said:
Oh apparently some other euphoric cow I have never heard of was there at the debate, Aron Ra:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=-Z7Y03SnYxM
View attachment 5139320
Click to expand...
I used to watch his videos a long while back, but there was one specific talk he was on I remembered watching on his channel. It was one of the first times he went solely political and I went "wow this is a fucking awful and dishonest take".

It was about then when he basically really began letting his feminist flag fly, and then he basically acted like a cunt to people who went "dude what the fuck". Absolutely made me lose interest in him due to that. Similar to how I stopped watching ThunderF00t when he basically began to only do that whinging baby talk when insulting his critics and went off topic to tard about things that weren't scams.

I'm not surprised AronRa became more embarrassing than he was back in 2015 or whenever that video was.
 
Last edited:
I don't even know what point he was trying to make with that question. For a billion years there was nothing. Yeah, and? That neither proves there was no god nor proves one. Regardless where euphorics get it wrong is they think that The Science disproves God, when in reality, to religious people, it doesn't disprove the existence of God, rather just reveals to us his incredible work. To us, it just proves to us more that God does exist, not the opposite. That's what Farina and other euphorics don't get and why the Catholic church and, Islam before they went retarded, were very much interested in learning more about science and how it all works. Materialism only gets you so far.
 
True and Honest Nibba said:
Lol - how are euphoric pseuds still a thing in 2023? I assumed that they were completely bullied/pressured out of their mindsets by 2015 at the very latest - sometime after the whole fedora shaming wave hit.
Click to expand...
Nah if anything their neckbeards are flowing freer than ever now. /r/atheism is still pretty funny.
 
Blobby's Murder Knife said:
I don't even know what point he was trying to make with that question. For a billion years there was nothing. Yeah, and? That neither proves there was no god nor proves one. Regardless where euphorics get it wrong is they think that The Science disproves God, when in reality, to religious people, it doesn't disprove the existence of God, rather just reveals to us his incredible work. To us, it just proves to us more that God does exist, not the opposite. That's what Farina and other euphorics don't get and why the Catholic church and, Islam before they went retarded, were very much interested in learning more about science and how it all works. Materialism only gets you so far.
Click to expand...
They think all Christians are young Earth creationists who believe there's a Satanic conspiracy behind dinosaur fossils. Those types of people are a vanishingly small minority almost no one takes seriously. These euphorics are the other side of the loud retard coin and make casually discussing topics like evolution just as much, if not more, of a pain in the ass because they have their own meaningless stock phrases and concepts.
 
Blobby's Murder Knife said:
Regardless where euphorics get it wrong is they think that The Science disproves God, when in reality, to religious people, it doesn't disprove the existence of God, rather just reveals to us his incredible work.
Click to expand...
Science literally doesn't address God at all. It's not its job. It might disprove some very specific sets of beliefs, which as pointed out a couple posts ago, are mainly held by a tiny minority of retards, like Young Earth Creationism. An important counter to this is it was a Catholic priest who literally came up with the prevailing Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe as we know it.

And while it appears to be a near certainty that is what happened, it is an absolute mystery why.

"Suddenly nothing exploded and turned into everything" is a profoundly unsatisfactory explanation and certainly doesn't rule out God as the first cause.
 
So I got this video recommendation
It on of those clearly euphoric atheist channel who sole purpose is debunking christian faith without understanding how faith work. They're many little crispy thing like the guy putting all the christian in one basket (it mostly evangelical who believe the rapture try to find any catholic or even protestant who believe this crap) And questionable reason like it worry and put fear into people so it bad
 
Phd in Satanism.png
I ain't gonna watch this, just laugh at the headline.

On an unrelated note, I personally welcome any bashing of any religious fundies, even by halfwit skeptics or other religious fundies.
But I often get the impression that once you 'make it' as some sort of skeptic polemicist, you get caught in some sort of rhythm, where even if you are presented with serious counter arguments, you still treat it like the other dogshit arguments you deal it, making you yourself look like a fool.
Or that the whole euphoric skepticism becomes a business and you do something like that fat slob coward rationality rules asshole and release some gay card game based on it.
 
Justwandering02 said:
So I got this video recommendation
https://youtube.com/watch?v=NP10A5ehOsYIt on of those clearly euphoric atheist channel who sole purpose is debunking christian faith without understanding how faith work. They're many little crispy thing like the guy putting all the christian in one basket (it mostly evangelical who believe the rapture try to find any catholic or even protestant who believe this crap) And questionable reason like it worry and put fear into people so it bad
Click to expand...
This guy was a christian for most of his life.
 
CAPTAIN MATI said:
But I often get the impression that once you 'make it' as some sort of skeptic polemicist, you get caught in some sort of rhythm, where even if you are presented with serious counter arguments, you still treat it like the other dogshit arguments you deal it, making you yourself look like a fool.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't think they're really capable of telling the difference. I think Dawkins was really the only one with any form of education in philosophy and he mostly attacked creationism which is some low-hanging fruit.

The average euphoric atheist youtuber just doesn't even have the background to start addressing more involved apologetics, and they certainly don't seem interested in learning.
 
std::string said:
I honestly don't think they're really capable of telling the difference. I think Dawkins was really the only one with any form of education in philosophy and he mostly attacked creationism which is some low-hanging fruit.
Click to expand...
No he does not have philosophy training. Dawkins might be more educated in general than the average neckbeard atheist, but his arguments are stale and theologically unsophisticated, relying on very superficial reading of the Scripture with disregard of what those passage meant for the intended audience.

Take his stance of the Transubstantiation. Many non-Catholic denominations have long distanced away from this claim, seeing the Euchraist is an act of commemoration, which is both Biblically justified and avoids the difficulty of "mystery" altogether. Hence his objection is at best anti-Catholic, and is not, as he believes, against Christianity or Theism in general. Someone with any speck of philosophy training, or indeed anyone who has made honest effort to understand what he is up against, should recognize the distinction.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone here watch Dan McClellan on Youtube or Tiktok? I've been watching him for a couple months. He's a biblical scholar and makes videos refuting inaccurate readings of the bible, often by Tiktokers.
I only found out yesterday he is a Mormon, but he does not seem to be an LDS apologist. He was employed by them as a translator a while ago, but not anymore. He seems to have a lot of atheist redditor and ex-Mormon fans.
He's an LGBT apologist though. He says that Sodom and Gomorrah is about inhospitality and people attempting to gang-rape an angel, not about homosexuality and that people in the Greco-Roman time of Early Christianity did not have the concept of gay and straight, so that text is saying that a man being in a receptive/bottom role specifically is bad/an abomination.
 
Last edited:
Sparkling Yuzu said:
He says that Sodom and Gomorrah is about inhospitality and people attempting to gang-rape an angel, not about homosexuality and that people in the Greco-Roman time of Early Christianity did not have the concept of gay and straight, so that text is saying that a man being in a receptive/bottom role specifically is bad/an abomination.
Click to expand...
At least by my reading, I'm willing to concede that it isn't about gay people explicitly (Leviticus has enough to say about it anyway). But anyone that tries to argue it's only about a specific kind of sex act ("bottom role") is a retard.

In broad strokes, the story's about whether Sodom and Gomorrah has at least 1 upstanding person. Upon having visitors from Heaven itself, they not only show inhospitality toward their guests, but want to actively fuck them. It's supposed to show how beyond hope they are, and that it's understandable why God nukes them from orbit.

I'm willing to (partially) agree with his interpretation that it's more about inhospitality and being sex pests, but how on earth do you turn around and say it's a specific sex act?
 
Roger Dennis said:
Found something as atheist-infested as RationalWiki. https://religions.wiki/index.php/Main_Page

Claims that Hitler was a Christian and cries about Christian apologists.
Click to expand...
A friend of mine once said that the Euphoric Atheist seethes upon seeing an apologist for he can't "deboonk" his claims in a single sentence.

Somewhat related is the Atheist page on Encyclopedia Dramatica caused the most seething edits on any of the articles relating to religion on that site.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom