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

[Agent Sandoval]

...Why is that stupid? Of all the things that ought to be self-evident in their existence (and not some retarded "God is self-evident by proxy through his works!" bullshit), shouldn't the omnipotent creator of the universe be the most obvious?

If someone claims the ground doesn't exist, we can all agree they're insane because we can just go outside and see it, point at it, touch it, examine it, and investigate it scientifically. It's right there. And yet the supposed creator of something so clearly there has to be intuited to exist through faith, feelings, and vague notions of spirituality.

Perfect circles are real things. Real numbers, as the name suggests, also real. Neither exist, you will never find one to point to or to touch. You're expecting a thing described as being perfect to fit in the universe and submit to our interrogation on a scientific level. That's stupid. Material existence is very obviously not compatible with perfection.

As a metaphysical concept, "nothing" is actually anything but simple. Nothingness by itself is an absolute concept which doesn't exist anywhere in the universe, even theoretically. The idea of something popping into existence out of nothing is difficult to conceive, when considering the actual nature of nothingness.

To be fair, it's also difficult to conceive of what might stop something from happening if you truly had nothing.

Then why is literally every atheist like this?

Not all atheists are like that, a lot are, maybe. There are a limited number of frameworks and narratives you can organize your life around if you don't have a God figure in the picture.

 

[Betonhaus]

The important thing is this: The Bible was NOT written by god. it wasn't written by jesus either. When you look at the history of the bible you find that it originated as compilations of storys that were transcribing oral legends. Ultimately that makes it a fallible document. it doesn't make it invalid, as over the years the bible and the church founded on it build in hard-earned life lessons and morals and slowly built a code to live by. A code that founded an empire that stretched across most of Europe. The purpose of the Bible was to explain events as they were understood at the time. That doesn't mean that impossible sounding events never happened, just that the explanation doesn't make sense in our current context and technology level. A current theory is that the universe is a hologram or great computer simulation, but they didn't have those concepts thousands of years ago. perhaps Jesus was an avatar generated by the computer running the universe to change the direction of history, but describing him as the "son of god" was what made sense to the humans of the time.

We just can't know for sure what the past looked like, we can just choose an interpretation to believe in. But we can accept that the interpretation may contradict our current understanding of the universe. Maybe the interpretation is wrong, maybe our understanding of the universe will change as our science progresses. For a time we believed that there were only four elements, and we didn't know that atoms existed. Maybe in the future we will find out that we were barking up the wrong tree and atoms don't really exist.

 

[Shield Breaker]

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.

It's not really hard to understand. Sin is anything God disapproves of. Because God is holy, He has to punish sin, otherwise He is liar or no longer holy. When Jesus Christ was on the cross, He took all of humanity's sins upon Himself. It is often overlooked but the Bible says that Jesus went to hell when He died and proceeded to fuck shit up; it is called the emptying of hell. The reason why you are condemned for rejecting Jesus isn't because He's mad at you, it's because you're telling God "no, I don't need your help, I've got this" and God is like "okay retard."

 

[Elämällä on väliä]

After all, if there is no God, then Man is God.

How about concept of a real-world enitity than can break rules of thermodynamic only with his will is just extreme stupid?

A current theory is that the universe is a hologram or great computer simulation

This isn't a theory, nor a theorem. It is pure lunacy produced by edgy-boys.

We just can't know for sure what the past looked like, we can just choose an interpretation to believe in.

We can even choose one of the two different biblical versions of the creation of man, or one of the four conflicting gospels.

 

[instant]

The funniest thing in my experience is that, yea of course atheists say heretical shit, but the absolute most nonsensical heresy I see come from protestants who completely warp their idea of God to fit whatever they want.

 

[Betonhaus]

The funniest thing in my experience is that, yea of course atheists say heretical shit, but the absolute most nonsensical heresy I see come from protestants who completely warp their idea of God to fit whatever they want.

Oh yeah, they seem convinced that if they pray hard enough god is going to bend over backwards and change the fundamentals of the world for their every whim.

We can even choose one of the two different biblical versions of the creation of man, or one of the four conflicting gospels.

Or we can choose to accept them all and accept that they contradict each other; finding meaning in each one anyways.

 

[Elämällä on väliä]

The idea of something popping into existence out of nothing is difficult to conceive

Virtual particles are ashamed that you still didn't know physical concept of vacuum.

The funniest thing in my experience is that, yea of course atheists say heretical shit, but the absolute most nonsensical heresy I see come from protestants who completely warp their idea of God to fit whatever they want.

Some heresy that I saw in this thread is something I call generic mobile goddie.

When some special education users just cannot get what is supposed nature of post-Moses JHWH/Allah (a entity than didn't wrote laws of physic nor start the evolution or is a math blahblah but a entity who can just make everything from nothing and turn everything into nothing with ignoring all nature at all - I'm espiecally rotfling when post-christians didn't get that god isn't a guy who works in frame of something or uses metaphores, because it is just impossible for a intelligent or semi-intelligent enitity to belive in ressurection [which would be a violation of thermodynamic] and in the same time make a heresy about god working according to laws of universe or writing it).

Some of guys writting in this thread have nice or stimulating ideas, but others are just pseudintelectuals tier 4chan. 'If I cannot understand why ressurection is so important and why I cannot take it as a metaphore I will just call math t be a god and I will go masturbate now' is something that I suppose at least few of this type of specials can think after they posting.

Like, man. If someone thinks he is a beliver, he should ask himself what happened on Calvary. Or if they belive that Jesaus didn't have a human father. This is the key to distinguish belivers, non-belivers and morons which quick googling skills.

 

[Balalaika Z Bree]

The important thing is this: The Bible was NOT written by god. it wasn't written by jesus either. When you look at the history of the bible you find that it originated as compilations of storys that were transcribing oral legends. Ultimately that makes it a fallible document

That's the scholarly consensus, but given how many scholars can't agree what a woman is nowadays I can hardly be surprised!

The Church has, despite centuries of persecution when it was at it's smallest and poorest, preserved the writings of the Apostles including Saint John who walked with Jesus, who stood beneath the Cross with the Virgin Mary when she was given by Jesus to him and all the Church as mother.

We believe that God inspired the authors, so it was entirely composed by both God and man.

The Catechism teaches:
The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures” CCC 107

See this catholic.com article for a more complete discussion.

 

[Matt Damon]

It's not really hard to understand. Sin is anything God disapproves of. Because God is holy, He has to punish sin, otherwise He is liar or no longer holy.

If God "has to" do anything, he's not omnipotent. That's how omnipotence works.

When Jesus Christ was on the cross, He took all of humanity's sins upon Himself. It is often overlooked but the Bible says that Jesus went to hell when He died and proceeded to fuck shit up; it is called the emptying of hell.

Again, this is nothing more than God jewing his own rules against sin. If you give it even the slightest critical thought, you immediately realize how utterly stupid the idea is.

God sacrificed himself TO himself to skirt around the rules HE invented. That is crazy-pills nonsense.

 

[Betonhaus]

The Catechism teaches:
The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures” CCC 107

See this catholic.com article for a more complete discussion.

I'll take their decision under advisement, but at one point they declared the earth to be one massive church and reacted very negatively to people who observed curvature and concluded it was round like a ball. Claiming that the bible is a 100% factual cronicle of events that must be taken literally ignores that it has been heavily edited over the years, with an entire author's work removed from the compilation.

What Are The 14 Books Removed From The Bible? - Meredith Gould

There are a number of books that were removed from the Bible. These books are referred to as the Apocrypha, which means “those that are hidden” in Greek and

www.meredithgould.com

 

[Elämällä on väliä]

I'll take their decision under advisement, but at one point they declared the earth to be one massive church and reacted very negatively to people who observed curvature and concluded it was round like a ball.

This is a myth. You probably also belive that church was killing witches due to religious things in free time, right?

 

[870EVO]

How about concept of a real-world enitity than can break rules of thermodynamic only with his will is just extreme stupid?

Yes, but thats not whats happening.

 

[Elämällä on väliä]

God sacrificed himself TO himself to skirt around the rules HE invented. That is crazy-pills nonsense.

Honestly, with Jesus are only two things important.

The first thing is whether he was fathered by a man, e.g. Mr. Panther. If someone thinks so, then at best he can look for faith in Judaism.

The second is whether he was resurrected. It is more difficult here, if someone thought that he was simply killed on Golgotha, then as above, let him talk to a rabbi if he really wants to believe in god. Both Islam and Christianity require faith in miracles, i.e. the action of intangible force contrary to the laws of physics, nature and the fucking civil code.

All other things - sacrifice and taking sins from humans - have just a minor importance compared to this two.

 

[Badungus Kabungus]

Virtual particles are ashamed that you still didn't know physical concept of vacuum.

You're an idiot that doesn't understand neither science nor religion. Perfect vacuum completely devoid of photons or particles is scientifically impossible.

 

[AgendaPoster]

Yes, but thats not whats happening.

View attachment 4978178

The fact that some schizophrenics and people with obviously bad intentions exist does not change objective reality in any way.
They can try, but in the end it always results in failure, and if larger groups of people adopt their lies-based model, they will fail too.
You cannot fly planes unless you do the math and physics correctly, you cannot remove a liver tumor unless you know to situate it properly from the scans, you cannot run the scans if you don't understand radiation.
Basically the entirety of the planet functions as it does now because our ability to reliably describe parts of objective reality.
It cannot be deconstructed because it's not a social construct.

 

[870EVO]

You cannot fly planes unless you do the math and physics correctly, you cannot remove a liver tumor unless you know to situate it properly from the scans, you cannot run the scans if you don't understand radiation.
Basically the entirety of the planet functions as it does now because our ability to reliably describe parts of objective reality.
It cannot be deconstructed because it's not a social construct.

Doesn't stop them from trying

 

[Elämällä on väliä]

Perfect vacuum completely devoid of photons or particles is scientifically impossible.

As I was sure, you just never read anything about physics other than a schoolbook.

Use Yandex or Google and read about quantum vacuum state and how it is definied. And no, also quarks aren't red like roses.

 

[Badungus Kabungus]

As I was sure, you just never read anything about physics other than a schoolbook.

Use Yandex or Google and read about quantum vacuum state and how it is definied. And no, also quarks aren't red like roses.

Again, you don't seem to understand what you're talking about, even though you googled it just now.

"Nothing" or a "perfect vacuum" is a physical impossibility that cannot exist without removing every single bit of matter from the universe. You don't understand the difference between the word "vacuum" as a shorthand for "space mostly devoid of matter" and perfect vacuum, also known as nothingness.

Something from Nothing? A Vacuum Can Yield Flashes of Light

"Virtual particles" can become real photons--under the right conditions

www.scientificamerican.com

Quantum physics explains that there are limits to how precisely one can know the properties of the most basic units of matter—for instance, one can never absolutely know a particle's position and momentum at the same time. One bizarre consequence of this uncertainty is that a vacuum is never completely empty, but instead buzzes with so-called “virtual particles” that constantly wink into and out of existence.

"This work and a number of other recent works demonstrate that the vacuum is not empty but full of virtual photons," says theoretical physicist Steven Girvin at Yale University, who did not take part in the Aalto study.

Spoiler

Don't know why I bother explaining this to a literal subhuman, but I like a challenge.

 

[Elämällä on väliä]

You don't understand the difference between the word "vacuum" as a shorthand for "space mostly devoid of matter"

For second time - read about it at least on google, because probably you will not even get how the math for this works so I will not waste my time to wrote you about Feymann or Casimir works. QVS isn't about lack of particles moron.

Affter that read about why virtual particles are present in QVS. You will probably think it is some magic, but try.

 

[Balalaika Z Bree]

I'll take their decision under advisement, but at one point they declared the earth to be one massive church and reacted very negatively to people who observed curvature and concluded it was round like a ball. Claiming that the bible is a 100% factual cronicle of events that must be taken literally ignores that it has been heavily edited over the years, with an entire author's work removed from the compilation.

What Are The 14 Books Removed From The Bible? - Meredith Gould

There are a number of books that were removed from the Bible. These books are referred to as the Apocrypha, which means “those that are hidden” in Greek and

www.meredithgould.com

You really should carefully consider Church teaching. When did the Church teach a flat earth? remember the New Testament texts were written in Greek, the Greek speaking world was aware the earth wasn't flat, they even had a good approximation for the diameter of the Earth for centuries by the time the Church was founded.

I don't doubt there were some flawed characters in the Church who taught error as fact in a personal capacity, including Clerics and laymen like Galileo (turns out Keppler, a Protestant, was much much better with his eliptical orbits model). Naturally there are also textual variations, but they do not change anything meaningful, most genuine arguments and controversies come from translating between languages.

As I understand it there have always been exactly 73 books in the biblical canon, once the last text of the new testament was written. The Church just recognized them. The 66 book version is a bizarre innovation from the late middle ages to throw out the Deuterocanonical books, to simplify false teachings presumably.

Honestly, with Jesus are only two things important.

The first thing is whether he was fathered by a man, e.g. Mr. Panther. If someone thinks so, then at best he can look for faith in Judaism.

The second is whether he was resurrected. It is more difficult here, if someone thought that he was simply killed on Golgotha, then as above, let him talk to a rabbi if he really wants to believe in god. Both Islam and Christianity require faith in miracles, i.e. the action of intangible force contrary to the laws of physics, nature and the fucking civil code.

All other things - sacrifice and taking sins from humans - have just a minor importance compared to this two.

Remember the Apostles and early followers of our Lord had a habit of dying rather than denying his Godhood. This reflection of God's love, to lay down your life for your friends is not of "minor importance".
Comparing Christianity to Islam, and by necessity the Jesus of the Scriptures vs. the Jesus character presented in the Koran, written centuries later and denying his death on the Cross, you must not only believe in miracles in both cases. You must believe in totally different histories.
You must in Christianity believe God loved the world enough to send his only begotten son to die for it's redemption, while in Islam a Jesus character seemingly identical in key ways to certain heretical "gospel" texts (that happen to predate the Koran by centuries) is part of a grand bait and switch, where it's a deception, that Jesus didn't die on the Cross.
The miracle for Christians is that Jesus willingly chose death to free us forever, in Islam it's a mere illusion, Jesus isn't the Divine Son, the miracle seems to be how his teachings which were supposedly Islamic disappeared without a trace seemingly immediately.