Anti-Christianity Thread

>So Christian threads that mock silly atheists get deleted and OPs get banned but fedoras are allowed to make clear anti-Christian threads...hmmmm....why does this remind me of communism?

And yet there are always Christcuck threads on the catalog that have nothing to do with history or the humanities, with ridiculous variants such as "went to mass today!" or "let's pray" or some idiotic drivel like that.

>It propagated atheism and scientific achievements,

Only a Christcuck would attach a negative connotation to such a statement. Opinion discarded.

Religion is not necessarily a danger to society, it can be a moderating force in some regards. Also many dogmas, religious laws or promoted behaviors make lot of sense when put in context, hell, even wacky beliefs do. It also has played a huge role in educating populations (what is jesuit education?) and in promoting international solidarity, often offering asylum to persecuted peoples and providing help to those in need, constituting that way an alternative to state perpetrated arbitrarieties. Hell, protestantism spread through the world by promoting some sort of democracy. Christian democracy, but still.

Thing is: organized religion is not always tolerant, nor is it necessarily a force for social stability or overall good for humanity and many times it just tries to infiltrate public institutions, by either coercing functionaries and populations at large or essentialy buying them. Religion can be very dangerous when just “left alone", and can be a decissive factor of divisiveness and sectarianism.

>there are always Christcuck threads on the catalog that have nothing to do with history or the humanities
weak bait

>Christianity
>anti-science
stale meme

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_science
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jesuit_scientists
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Catholic_scientists
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_Catholic_cleric-scientists
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_science_and_technology

Watch this too:
youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZDj5nM0KbdUTEpoka1oyAR8BtHfIiVJm

PS: there would be no science without theism

>Let's have a thread specifically for the discussion of the falsity of the Christian religion based on a number of points, preferably those that are historical/literary

You don't need any of that to be convinced Christianity is all false. Just the fact that it claims extraordinary events (virgin births, resurrections, healings, parting the sea, etc.) without bothering to offer proof (and even branding the desire/want for proof as a bad thing) is enough to show it for a sham. Do you believe in a virgin birth, despite it being physically impossible for it to occur? Why would you, when such a thing has never been shown to occur? Do you really think the laws of physics were only ever distorted once, in a backwater in the first century? If so, why not believe in any other myths that claim other extraordinary events, like Indra riding across the sky on his sun-chariot machine, or some Greek god turning into an animal and having sex and offspring with humans?

Luckily, most people in the West are seeing Christianity as the sham it is: even the majority of people who claim to be religious are only nominally so.

Christianity being an artificial abstraction is blatantly obvious to anyone with a basic grasp of scientific and/or logical validity. It's not an interesting discussion at all.

Also, being aware of this does not necessarily make you anti-christian.

A more interesting discussion would be whether or not christianity serves a purpose in modern society. In my observation, it's holding back the west in genetic research and contributing to the overpopulation problem, which is super gay. It'll inevitably die though, I'm not really that worried. I'm just salty that I was born in a time that I can't really benefit from what genetic modification research is going to accomplish in the next thousand years, and that abrahamic religion is a huge reason it's not advancing right now.

Oh and your beloved Big Bang theory comes from Georges Lemaître, a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Leuven.

PS: the Big Bang proves God

Oh, i also forgot to add: organized religions are just survival seeking institutions, which fulfill this through the accumulation of power. So are states and corporations. For most of them behaving through moral motivations is just a secondary priority, if a priority at all.

They are, sometimes, a necesary counterweight to centralized power. Just not always.

>artificial abstraction

The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:14

And what if a certain researcher was nominally Christian? It means nothing. One good example is Mendel: the man entered the clergy not out of his zealous belief or desire to "serve God", but solely because he was having trouble paying for his academic endeavors and knew that if he became ordained, the Church would pay for his schooling. Even after becoming a monk, he was never particularly observant and spent most of his time administrating the day-to-day logistics of the monastery and attempting to obtain posts at academic institutions. The same for most 'scientists': nominal, mostly.

#rekt

Prove it.

based soviet union

>One good example

What?

>The USSR became the first state to have, as an ideological objective, the elimination of religion and its replacement with universal atheism. The communist regime confiscated religious property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in schools.

And how is this bad, again?

>t.samefag

>The Bible proves that the Bible is real because the Bible says so.

You have made a claim that has no supporting evidence. "Prove it" means present an argument that creates a logically valid basis grounded in tangible, observable evidence.

>Hating religion means that you believe in science
>Because a scientist was brought up with religion means anything
>Criticizing an institutionalized monopoly of knowledge means you discredit the merit of their work
>Having such childish view of history

>How great are your works, O LORD! Your thoughts are very deep! The stupid man cannot know; the fool cannot understand this.
Psalm 92:5-6

>For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
Romans 1:20

>Yet God has made everything beautiful for its own time. He has planted eternity in the human heart, but even so, people cannot see the whole scope of God’s work from beginning to end.
Ecclesiastes 3:11

PS: The universe had a beginning, therefore it was created and its creator is God by definition
youtube.com/watch?v=IQUsK2eNkfc

>Hating religion means that you belive blindly in science
*

>The Bible is real because the Bible tells me so

Truly, we are witnessing an example of the great Christian ""scholastic"" tradition.

Citing the bible as a source for the bible's accuracy is a circular argument and is not logically valid whatsoever.

The universe began, therefore it was created is a non-sequitor. It does not necessarily follow that that is true, at all. There is no evidence.

You have no grasp of logical validity and it is pitiably obvious. But, religion wouldn't exist without cognitive dissonance and people refusing to understand basic logical principles.

>Quotes the bible
>that pic
>Pasta tier argument
Do you copy your post from a religious Facebook group?

I'm an atheist but holy fuck stop saying "logic" or "logical principles" you redditor faggot. You are the reason everyone here thinks le fedora tipper is real.

"atheist policies"? You mean like a secular modern state?
Atheism doesn't have policies, you might mean stalinism?
Same as north korea, or china or other soviet model states, its a personality cult.
Christianity is responsble for people being weakminded willing to accept and follow an authority figure, because they were trained to do it. Stalin used the religious mindset of the people to put himself into a position of a revered holy person.
This shit is not on atheism, or humanism, or secularism.
Thats on christianity for making people irrational and giving them a cultish mindset.

Next thing you'll blame atheism for hitler too?

I wouldn't necessarily say that.
Communism promoted science that was in line with the party ideal, like Lamarckian evolution.
Basically the same reason atheism was probably used as well, namely as a tool for the party to use rather than sincere atheism.

I don't think he mentioned Christianity specifically being anti-science, only that a Christcuck would deem those things negative.
Church philosophy was useful for setting the foundation for the foundation of modern scientific thought though even if the two don't share quite as much in common now.

Really the source of a claim doesn't matter quite that much.
A religious scientist can make contributions to science but absolute conviction in religion can certainly be detrimental to scientific methodology. It's why I think the modern approach to science is pretty cool since it generally offers a way that a statement can be proven wrong.

The big bang also doesn't prove god.

The big bang doesn't prove the universe had a beginning, merely that it expanded from a singularity.
Even if it provably had a beginning it would still have to be proven that it had a creator (This is not possible by induction as induction would disprove this theory by our current standing of knowledge).
Even if it provably had a creator this creator would still need to be proven to have all the traits you ascribe to your god, lest this creator is resigned to a non-sentient particle prefix to the singularity.

>"If I say I'm an atheist maybe they'll believe me when I criticize secularism!"

Shitty attempt, Christcuck

This, really.

Why? I shouldn't discuss things within a logical context because it makes some people think of me as a "redditor" or "fedora tipper"? I don't care what strangers think of me, especially when their convictions are controlled by meme culture.

Atheism is a morally truth-apt stance and is equally as illogical as abrahamic religion. Are you sure you're atheist? Atheism denies the existence of divinity and morality, which oversteps the burden of proof. Non-cognitivism claims that moral statements cannot be truth-apt, which is a logically grounded statement as there is no presented evidence for moral statements to be truth within observed existence. A lot of people who are atheist are actually non-cognitivist.

Christianity is anti-science, yes. Any ideology that promotes faith as a viable source of information about actual reality, above real evidence, is anti-science.
But Christianity is explicitely anti-science, pic related.
"don't look, feel"

Your argument literally is based on the fact that you read logical fallacy on Wikipedia and know you think is a basic logical foundation. He wasn't even making a point, just shitty b8 you underage retarded.

Your argument is literally "it sounds like a meme".

Kill yourself.

Because you somehow think saying x is a logical statement adds any merit to your argument. Atheism is not founded on """"logic"""" it's founded on reason and and critical thought, bur it is not the """""logical""""" conclusion of anything. Saying "lol dumb fairy tales for grown up" and "LOOOL CIRCULAR ARGUMENT LOL" is also not argument. That sad thing is that finding holes in religion is as easy as 1,2,3 but even that you fuck up.

Warning: this thread and all others like it is at a high risk infection rate for some forms of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Some are speculating that some of those who tend to post in these threads may carry a mutated form of AIDS, commonly referred to as 'literal AIDS' (see pic related for an example). Do not post at all costs, or you risk infection.

If you do happen to take the risk of posting in this thread, please make sure that you know how to use protection appropriately and effectively. Do not consult a medical professional until thirty days after posting in this thread, as results within that time period tend to be inaccurate. Consider seeking a medical professional upon seeing any warning signs of infection.

Symptoms include: constant and uncontrollable shitposting, tendency to make non sequitur comparisons to Stalinism, using the term 'christcuck', using some variation of the phrase "this is what x actually believe", searching google images for funny fedora man, quoting the bible, greasy hair, beard growing on neck

Those passages contain wise words, I'm not surprised it triggers you.

As I said, the universe had a beginning, therefore it was created and its creator is God by definition. youtube.com/watch?v=IQUsK2eNkfc

>There is no evidence
youtube.com/watch?v=PYSmV2FlHDw

>Christianity
>anti-childrape
stale meme

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases

Proof that Christianity and Pedophilia are compatible.

PS: There would be no pedophilia without theism

Atheism (and rejecting the Lord) leads to satanic atheistic despotism.

>Atheism is not founded on """"logic"""" it's founded on reason and and critical thought
rea·son
ˈrēzən/
noun
noun: reason; plural noun: reasons

1.
a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event.

2.
the power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic.

Atheism, according to you, is founded on reason which is based in logic.

> Saying "lol dumb fairy tales for grown up"
I never said this

>and "LOOOL CIRCULAR ARGUMENT LOL" is also not argument
If someone makes a circular argument, pointing out that there argument is circular and therefore invalid is a perfectly reasonable counter-argument.

>That sad thing is that finding holes in religion is as easy as 1,2,3 but even that you fuck up.
What do you use to find holes in religion? Is it not logical reasoning?

If only there were a wiki page for all the child molestation and tax fraud that Protestant evangelicals have committed.

Proof that criminal behaviour and Christianity are compatible.

PS: there would be no crime without Christianity.

>satanic atheistic

>If a god creates things, things exist
>Things exist
>Therefore, god created things
This is a textbook example of affirming the consequent, a fallacious argument.

>human consciousness comes from nothing that exploded from nothing and created everything

Don't bother arguing with him: he's a Christcuck who tries to pass himself as an 'atheist', thinking that in doing so, his attacks on secular thought and atheist arguments will somehow appear more valid, or that he'll be taken more seriously.

idk it doesn't really bother me or take any effort to point out exactly how someone being illogical is being illogical, regardless of their intentions.

>LOOK THESE FAGGOTS CAN ONLY UNDERSTAND THE LAST 14 BILLION YEARS OF HISTORY
>meanwhile, you thought the earth was 6,000 years old

I never understood the Big Bang argument against atheism.

It's like laughing at someone for only being a millionaire instead of a billionaire, when you live off of welfare.

Misunderstanding the concept of information is not really proof. Thats wordgames.
Information, to us, is a specific arrangement that carries meaning, but only to us. An arranged deck of cards has as much information in principle as a random deck. Its just information because we assigned it to that arrangement.
Everything is equally information in that sense. If you assign a predetermined meaning to it.

I'd ask for a better argument, but wordgames is litereally all you people have.

ITT: People who don't understand the big bang theory

I'll bite.

>For the protection of wisdom is like the protection of money, and the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preserves the life of him who has it.
Ecclesiastes 7:12

>A wise man will hear and increase in learning, And a man of understanding will acquire wise counsel.
Proverbs 1:5

>The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Proverbs 1:7

>When the scoffer is punished, the naive becomes wise; But when the wise is instructed, he receives knowledge.
Proverbs 21:11

>Therefore do not fear them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known.
Matthew 10:26

>For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light.
Luke 8:17

>But there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known.
Luke 12:2

I could go on and on...

>Veneration of god. Insult of people who "just don't get it".
>You can't prove it. You also "just don't get it".
>Everything is beautiful. Nobody can ever really "get it".

Wise words.

>As I said, the universe had a beginning, therefore it was created and its creator is God by definition.

This has also already been addressed in a somewhat amateur fashion.
Pretty incomplete recitation of that facebook meme there my friend.
Nothing never factored into my argument.
Without resorting to the irrational we have no way of determining the state of the universe before the big bang.

Human consciousness is also kind of weird to assert as this special something that could never form based only on particles and their interactions.

>Atheism is a morally truth-apt stance
More like it's a primitive spiritually empty stance.

>dude the physical world is all there is lmao
>b-but what do you mean? I can't see God!
You're literally like animals.

>human consciousness comes from nothing that exploded from nothing and created everything

That's not the Big Bang, idiot. The Big Bang deals with how the current state of the universe came to be after a singularity that began to expand, and is still expanding today. It does not deal at all with the question of human consciousness, faggot.

Define conciousness clearly and meaningfully, and demonstrate that your definition is correct. Because I have not seen anyone do that yet. Then, and only then, can you argue from conciousness with any meaning. Otherwise, you are arguing from literally not knowing shit.
Good luck with that.

Meanwhile, if there wa nothing, what prevented something from just appearing? Be specific.

>There's no evidence!
>I don't like that evidence!
Make up your mind.

Evil is everywhere because humans are sinful by nature.

Also:

>Sue Widemark A Penn State historian, Philip Jenkins, has done in-depth research of pedophilia and sexual abuse among the clergy and has come up with some rather eye opening facts (Pedophiles and Priests, Anatomy of a Crisis, Oxford University Press, 1996, Paperback edition, 2001). It seems that while .2 to 1.7 percent of Catholic clergy have been guilty of pedophilia (or sexual abuse particularly of boys, p. 80-82), a whopping 10 percent of Protestant ministers have been found guilty of sexual misconduct with a 2 or 3 percent pedophilia rate (p. 50-52).

>This is all the more interesting, notes Jenkins, since there has been NO media term "Pastor Pedophilia" coined at all! Jenkins theorizes that the media, proving the 'point' of the 'necessity' of sexual promiscuity, overemphasizes any instance of pedophilia found among the Catholic clergy since it can use this to criticize the entire idea of celibacy. But it is interesting that the NON Celibate Protestant ministers have a MUCH GREATER problem with it than the celibate Catholic priests!

>Jenkins' research was based on several highly respected studies and statistics. He points out that whereas sexual misconduct has always been a problem, among Catholic and non-Catholic clergy as well as among the general populace, what is new now is that the 'problem' of priest sexual abuse, constructed by the media as a result of a 'moral panic' occurring in the mid-1980's.

catholic-convert.com/wp-content/uploads/SexInProtestantChurches.pdf

Looks who's talking about being primitive! Says the brainwashed ape who believes in something he has never seen or experienced - and which various fields have proved as lies - simply because some old compilation of Bronze Age tales and some Greek fanfictions and otherwise useless clergy/pastors (who depend on perpetuating their lie in order to put bread on their table) tell him its real.

Correct. By rejecting God you unconsciously embrace Satan. He's literally rubbing his hands right now.

>I don't think Zeus is real
>if I'm not magic, then why is there thunder
>what does that have to do with it
>Zeus makes thunder
>I don't think that's where thunder comes from
>do you have a better explanation

The proper term for this is "god of the gaps."

As the gaps become smaller, the domain of god shrinks from raising the dead to appearing on toast.

>As I said, the universe had a beginning, therefore it was created and its creator is God by definition.
If you don't understand physics even a little bit there's no need to post about it as fact ;D

Far as I can tell, any and all of those mean Christianity and Faith by "wisdom". Thats even worse than antiscience, thats redefining knowledge.
And I mean evidence based knoweldge. Not revelation.
Do any of those explicitely place evidence and reason above "faith" and "revelation"?
Because the quotes I provided do, explicitely, call philosophers fools, and "earthly" knoweldge a failed effort.
Your quotes are vague at best, at worst just more of advocating faith and intuition as actual legitimate wisdom.

>Wise words.
I agree.

Regardless of whether or not you accept logical validity, affirming the consequent is not logical.

If P therefore Q.
Q
Therefore P

It does not follow.

What if neither God nor Satan exist?

If you've come to that conclusion Satan is still rubbing his hands.

Atheism is not believing the god-claim, its not asserting that there can't be any god, just that you failed to prove a deity as real. So don't get confused there.

And morality WITH a god is impossible, its a dictatorship, not morals.
Caring about other human beings for its own sake is moral.
Doing what something that somebody defined as good based on threats and rewards is egotistic opportunism. And thats what theism stands for.

"do as told or else" is not morality.

Can't tell if you're serious or not

>the quotes I provided do, explicitely, call philosophers fools, and "earthly" knoweldge a failed effort
No, it's about deceit. Stop playing dumb and taking verses out of context, what you're doing is ''THE BIBLE SAYS THAT NEGRO SLAVES SHOULD OBEY THEIR WHITE MASTERS XD''-tier.

You wish I were kidding.

jesus pls this is a bit too close for comfort

Humans are not "sinful by nature", thats what your weird deathcult teaches.
And yeah, one guy who
"is a contributing editor for The American Conservative and writes a monthly column for The Christian Century. He has also written articles for Christianity Today,"
sure sounds like a reliable source on whether his own cult is shit or not.
Next I'll ask Tom Cruise about the abuses in Scientology.

>he has never seen or experienced
I actually have.

I'd have sex with Jesus :3

Ah, the last refuge of the desperate apologist. "its out of context unless it agrees with me"
Aaight mate, its been fun. Best of luck to you.

What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.

Mark 7:20-23

Are you sinless?

>that pic
>that post
>denying that you're taking verses out of context
>calling that a ''last refuge'' justifies what's almost on par with quotemining
pathetic

The bible is not proof of anything

Nice try. Only a closeted christcuck dislikes the word logic

>you can't post info that comes from Christian sources to defend Christianity!
I should get sources from dishonest atheists? Thanks for the cringe.

Not that guy, but if those verses are truly out of context, then explain their context. You're not debating to beat him, you're debating for the fence sitters watching, and right now you're doing a pretty poor job.

what a crock of shit.

>Atheism is not believing the god-claim, its not asserting that there can't be any god, just that you failed to prove a deity as real.

Wrong, it's the claim that there is no God. It's a belief. it's seeing the vast blind spot in human perception, and saying that the blind spot is "nothingness". You are pretending to be agnostic, because atheism is exposed as being as irrational as any other belief.

>And morality WITH a god is impossible, its a dictatorship, not morals.

That's stupid. Morality is a human concept. God encompasses all things, including morality, but is beyond morality. Morality is a bubble around humanity. it is not an objective or definable concept WITHOUT humanity.

>Caring about other human beings for its own sake is moral.

What if, objectively, human beings are actually something like cancer, or a virus, to the universe. To us, we are everything and struggle to survive and expand and grow. To everything else, we are immoral and evil and destructive.

Again, no objective morality.

>Doing what something that somebody defined as good based on threats and rewards is egotistic opportunism.

So? everything every human has ever done, thought, felt or dreamed of has been egotistical opportunism. You BELIEVE there is no God because your ego can't face the fact that it can't fathom the concept of God (and unfathomable entity), so you reject it, saying "I can't be wrong, therefore, God isn't real." You rationalize your egotistical worldview (badly, I might add), and imply anyone who disagrees with you is immoral, loves dictators, uncaring about human beings, and only react to threats and rewards.

"do as told or else" is order. it's important, and required for humanity. Also, God isn't telling us "I will punish you." God is warning you. "Don't do dumb shit or you'll get hurt." There is a difference.

Are you denying that out of the heart of man come evil thoughts?

PS: the whole ''b-but that's from the Bible'' thing isn't a counter-argument

As did billions of adherents of religions that contradict yours completely. Its as if personal testimonty is not reliable evidence of anything except your own psychological state, and not a reliable way to get information about the world. Which is maybe why evidence doesn't mean "i seen't it!" to a reasonable person, and your religion teaches you to rely on it anyway.
Weird.

>>>r/atheism

Evil is completely subjective

I already explained that one of them was about deceit, I won't explain them one by one.

Also, he's pretending that ''the Lord will give you understanding in everything'' means that you're not allowed to conduct any research on anything.

Reminder:

this

>Wrong, it's the claim that there is no God.

No, it isn't. That's active atheism, and then there's passive atheism which is "I don't believe in God." If you can't see the difference between an active statement and a passive statement, you're a fucking moron.

>"I can't be wrong, therefore, God isn't real."

When has an atheist ever said that? All they usually say is "the evidence is insufficient to such a grandiose claim."

>and required for humanity.

Current understandings of human social and psychological behaviour show us to be naturally social, cooperative, and altruistic just as much as anything else. So prove your claim.

Also, it's God that created the punishment, so yes, it's "do as told, or I'll torture you for eternity."

ikr what's evil anyways?

Not him but

>"do as told, or I'll torture you for eternity."
Watch: youtube.com/watch?v=_jkaEXdLXls