Militant Atheism

Trying a new tactic now that you've finally got it through your thick skull that bible verses don't work on people who don't believe in the god of said bible?

Anyway, I don't really know much about either of those orgs, but now that I know they piss you off I am rather happy that they exist.

Oh and being an atheist does not mean that you are also a communist.

Hey tell me, out of the four latest recipients of the "Richard Dawkins Award" given by the "Atheist Alliance International" whose directors are Stuart Bechman, Elida Radig, et al. who deserved it the most? Steven Pinker (2013), Rebecca Goldstein (2014), Jerry Coyne (2015) or Lawrence Krauss (2016)?

Are you trying to attack someone over actions taken by an organization that they aren't even a tiny little bit related too? :^)
Atheism itself is not linked to any type of organization or church, user.

NUMBERS NUMBERS NUMBERS

I think they're caricatures of themselves. It's an enormous exercise in masturbation.

Can't you see who's behind this 20th century anti-Christian militant atheism? You need to wake up, start rejecting what the antichrists are feeding you and start accepting Christ, user.

>“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’”
Matthew 23:37-39

Satanist here.

In general I support anti-theist movements. Theism needs to be fought against and destroyed. However I don't agree with violence and theft in pursuit of that goal.

Here's what you have to remember though: theism spread by the sword, putting countless people to death, subjugating entire peoples, destroying priceless cultural artefacts, stealing land, and so on. Theism was built on genocide. But when theism gets a taste of its own medicine it demands tolerance and slanders its critics. It's the greatest hypocrisy imaginable.

Embarrassments, much like how OP is an embarrassment to Christians

James 4:7

>you
>Christian

>community board

Do retards go to community boards about retards? Not unless they're on display. In all likelihood it's just a bunch of bleeding-heart normals who work there.

>Militant Atheist
>Fat, ugly and unsuccessful people

Why am i not suprised.

>Can't you see who's behind this 20th century anti-Christian militant atheism?
Those people don't have anything to do with me user. I'm not part of any anti-theist movement, I'm just a mere atheist. Now, that's not say that if you come spouting your religion beliefs to me I will just stay quiet and not argue.
>You need to wake up, start rejecting what the antichrists are feeding you and start accepting Christ, user.
You sound like a militant christian.

I'm not. I kinda feel for them though. Being linked to a simmering cauldron of autism and /x/ tier schizophrenia doesn't sound fun at all

>I'm not
it shows

You know I'm trying to show some sympathy, right? I know you're not mr /x/tian because he can't resist attention whoring, so what's your problem?

>someone showing me the truth which I hate is attention whoring
nice buzzword

damn

I really don´t care

As long as you keep the church separated from the state, of course.

If you do that,you can worship a spoon for all I care.

Ah, my mistake. I bet my original point just flew over your head too, didn't it?

Not convinced that this is irrelevant

Protesting outside of a church is obviously relevant.

>buttblasted

>commies always impose atheism
>atheist left in america
>left moving more toward Marxism daily

The communism/atheism argument is valid because it's a commonly repeated event in history. But by all means, unironically come back with a "Christians done crusaded 1000 years ago" meme.
Atheist philosophy is shit, keeps proving itself to be shit, and Europe (where atheism is gaining most ground) is rubbing itself out more by the day.
I predict that atheism will go out of style again pretty soon because people will start to see what totalitarian assholes they are.

Where is the chance for fellowship I Militant atheism. While we reject organized religions, they are filled with genuinely good people who you can hang out with and plan wholesome social activities. What chance is there for wholesome spiritually uplifting events in Militant Atheism.
Let me guess, is Satan behind it? Oh please, do tell.
oh Mr. Satinist, look. if you want to destroy Theism, that means that Satanism MUST BE merely organized atheism with a familiar anti-establishment face put on it.
The Book of James. James came out of Mary's womb. Didn't Josephus mention him?
(/this) There is no spoon, but I respect your right to worship it. Just keep it out of school.

>The total number of Christian victims of Soviet state atheist policies, has been estimated to range between 12-20 million.

Just want to point out that they weren't policies based in atheism. Atheism does not in itself inspire or ask anyone to do anything. It is not dogmatic.

I'm sorry it just really bothers me when people attribute these atrocities to atheism. Maybe you weren't trying to do that, in which case, double apologies.

To answer the original OP question, I understand it to an extent. I do think that to get to space and outlive the planet as a species we will eventually have to leave behind religion, or at least, leave behind the ones we have now (or rework them in some fashion).

Right now we have religions in battles, especially between Christianity/Judaism vs. Islam, that cannot coexist and create boundaries between human beings that people literally believe extends beyond their life.

Obviously, religion is not unique in its power to divide people, and they will always fight about something.

ONTHEOTHERHAND not into people just being assholes to Christians for the sake of it.

>Satanist
So, can I ask, how does that work? What are your beliefs exactly?

...

Right, not sure how you aren't getting this, but those are personal dogmas of those figures. Atheism doesn't have like, a book or anything that tells you to kill Christians. If some of them choose to do that, then that's their choice. There is no philosophy of atheism. This is not difficult stuff.

Quoting something does not mean anything. You should attack the argument itself. Does calling "you will say that" makes what he's saying wrong?

Because you're arguing with a troll. Holy shit, are you new to the internet?

>troll
You underestimate people's stupidity.

>James came out of Mary's womb
No he did not.

Living in Belgium, everyone above 35 says these fucking platitudes as seen in OP's pic.

I don't know what it is about generation X that makes them such rabid atheists.

Where in there does it actually explain, at all, how atheism is anything but a rejection of a hypothesis?
Where does it say how you got any call to action from that?

Theism doesn't tell you to do anything.
Deism doesn't tell you to do anything.
Atheism doesn't tell oyu to do anything.

The bible on the other hand tells you to do a bunch of horrid shit explicitely and threatens you with hellfire if you don't.

You people are seriously too desperate to see how desperate you look by posting shit like this. Or this is a false-flag post, but its really hard to tell at this point.

>is Satan behind it? Oh please, do tell

It explains how Communism and atheism are inextricably linked.

>b-but not all atheists are communists!

Then obviously that image does not apply to them.

There is no god. Satan is a symbol.

Your argument doesn't make any sense. If communism and atheism are inextricably linked, then how are there non-communist atheists such as Max Stirner (who was actually quite anti-communist)?

Ok let me phrase it differently then: all communists are atheists but not all atheists are communists.

But that's not true either. There have been multiple attempts to combine communism and theism.

Everyone in that picture should be gassed.

>attempts

Exactly. The point is that the most influential communist thinkers (Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao) made militant atheism an essential component of their ideology.

Silverman may be the worst living debater. Her arguments are almost entirely
>God should have did it this way instead. It's dumb he didn't do it my way
or
>This part of the bible hurts my feelings. Therefore, I refuse to believe its true

>Imagine 2 lesbians kissing.... thought crime!

At the heart of Atheism is the declaration "there is no God"
>its just a rejection
No it isn't, it doesn't stand to reason that a rejection is promulgated in the form of a negation and yet itself maintains status as a rejection.

But the point remains that your absolute statement falls flat. Many communists are atheists, but not all communists are atheists.

Yes it is. "There is a god." followed by "I don't believe you." is a rejection.

Something tells me that you're not reaching a lot of people by attacking communist atheists.

...

>"there is no God"
Wrong. Should be "I don't believe in gods".

>169x300

Vote strawpoll.me/10407759/

It ultimately depends on how you define what makes someone a Communist and according to Marx himself "Communism begins where atheism begins" but if it makes you feel better I can concede that my language may have been over broad.

Bible verses should work on people...
It's like saying "ah hah, you've stopped quoting Socrates and the Republic because you've realized that I fully reject Platonism therefore nothing within the Republic is good philosophy. BAZINGA!"
You will be the cause of a modern crusade....headed by intellectuals.

Also
>I don't believe Socrates existed because he didn't write anything
>therefore anything attributed to Socrates is not only not his but is false

One might reject the existence of Christ, but who among us would say that the golden rule is unacceptable?

why the fuck doesn't strawpoll organize results from highest to lowest anymore

Absolutely based.

Isn't a Kibutz a localized Jewish Communist community?

Well, Marx wasn't the sole thinker of communism, he wasn't even the first. He was undoubtedly the most successful, but it's not like he trademarked the term.

good ***

>muh 12-20 million
Christianism is a jewish sect, all right.

Don't cut yourself on that edge.
The Last Man will write your epitaph.... I hope you know that.
you too.

What´s wrong with me?

(Flanders)

It's not the verses that work user, but the Spirit that breathed them.

Bourgeois

Read Gen. 12:7, Gal. 3:16 and Gal. 3:29.

>There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 3:28

>In speaking of a new covenant, He makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
Hebrews 8:13

Its not "there is no god" it's "you have not made your case for a deity". C'mon man.

The golden rule is nice, but certainly not devine or christian. Just a good general rule of ethics. It reduces suffering and increases wellbeing in those societies that use it. Most holy texts have good parts. Propably even "mein kampf" does. Doesn't excuse the other parts.

Legitimacy and Wisdom should not be confused, spirit would grant legitimacy, but the wisdom exists regardless of whether one accepts the legitimacy or the spirit itself.

I´m fairly marxist actually

But stripping people from their beliefs with force is not something I can agree with.

the world needs less hate
just let everybody do their own thing

t. atheist

>unnecessary division
At the core of the movement is the declaration "there is no God" there are more factors than just rational ones.
In our society you'd be hardpressed to find a large number of atheists who say "maybe".
If it's a maybe, then they call themselves agnostics.
If it's a "God does not exist" then they are atheists.
It is not the word itself that gives the meaning as your arguing, maybe 200 years ago it would have been understood differently but in our day and age..., it is the meaning that subscribes to the word.

The Golden rule as we understand it is entirely Christian, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
That is a moral progression which came about only with Christ.
Before it was just mere reciprocation good or bad, Christ amped it up to a theoretical reciprocation in which one always does good.
>other parts
There is far more that we should adhere to than what we should not.

Ah but the foolish man flees from wisdom and only the Spirit can renew a foolish mind.

what if "their own thing" is what you consider hate? then would you be a hypocrite and stop doing your "own thing" so you can stop them? or would you continue to just do your own thing and be indifferent to the hate? wouldn't that be hate in itself?

Have you read Nietzsche?
Bloom?
It isn't an economic judgment......
Its a spiritual one.
From your sentiment, I can tell that you value a certain degree of individual peace, though with the rejection of an absolute such as God, you are not left with much you could use to declare how things should be.
Your disagreement with a certain proposition has no more legitimacy than the proposition itself.
This creates weak men, men without chests, men without will.
For Nietzsche, he thought our yearning would be enough to forge something of a second Christianity.... man was found wanting.

>do what thou wilt

Fair enough.

Friendly reminder

That's not what that means.

So we should burn their churches and slaughter them all who won't convert?

>this what they did to Pagans so obviously that's what they want done to them

>seriously christcucks get your shit together

acting obnoxious is no way to stop other people from acting obnoxious

>Let's talk about how much we hate atheists
>We are so righteous
>They are not righteous hey are also foolish and probably hedonistic Jews
>Righteous are the Christians for they are righteous, foolish are those that disagree with you. You have the moral high ground Gospel of Jesus 7:77

*tips fedora and lubes up dragon dildo in agreement*

No idea what you are even trying to say in the first part.
"I don't believe there is a god" does not equal "i have complete certainty and faith that there is no god and can't be any". People who are not religious don't think like that, that whole faith stick is not universal.

I'd love for you to find me a percentage of atheists that claim absolute certainty in rejecting of god-claims. Then compare that to the number of theists who claim absolute certainty in theirs.
Russels teapot still applies. I have not disproven santa, and i have not disproven god. Until someone demonstrates their existance, i will keep believing neither is real. But NOT claim absolute certainty.
That is the position of the vast majority of atheists.
The rest is your persecution complex talking.

>golden rule is christian
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule#Antiquity
Yeah ok. Then surely so are dying saviours, promises of eternal life, monotheism, crucifixions, virgin births, and resurections. No plagiarism in the bible, all original. Must be, otehrwise you'd look foolish, huh? Also the earth is the center of the universe, with the vatican in its very middle.

supreme edgelords

>golden rule is christian

>So we should burn their churches and slaughter them all who won't convert?
would you have them slaughter you?
If you wouldn't, then do not slaughter them.
Do as they you would have them do unto to, not as they do unto you, but what you would want done unto you.

>christcucks
Aren't polemics great?

Re-read what I said.

>developmental disabilities facility established through the concept of Christian mercy and charity
>use it to bash Christianity

>meanwhile...

>black & white

No one is debating absolute certainties here.
We are discussing social definitions, your problem is with society not me.
You don't know what I am trying to say because you are trying to argue, just listen.

>Russels teapot
When there is a club of militant anti-potters....
You see, the teapot would fail, Santa would fail, etc.
You'd do better arguing between Egoism and Solipsism.
This isn't a discussion where everyone has the same presuppositions, you need to consider that Atheistic presuppositions are within the same spirit but are quite different than Christian presuppositions.
All men have axioms for which faith is required, all men desire rational explicatives for the metaphysical principles that grant material explicatives.
However, When one rejects certain presuppositions at this level, they are saying "There is no X" in a near absolute way.
I would question your conception of "certainty".
Studying mathematics and physics has severely undercut the term "certain", you would do well to realize that there are fanatics on both sides who claim irrational certainty.
Compare numbers is irrelevant, it's irrelevant because it doesn't matter, what matters is the level not the number but the level of dogma which is found on both sides.

I said the rule was moral progress....
Not finding its origin in Christianity but its modern conception.

I don't think that similarities can be called plagiarism....

Home is where the heart is, the heart is the center.
We are the center of the universe.
Israel is surprisingly the center of many ancient geometries.

How did we get to biblical plagiarism from discussing the wisdom of Christ?
Do you have something to tell us?