Atheist Logic

There are over a billion atheists in the world, why don't they all have the urge to kill and slaughter?

>implying /pol/ is christian

Isn't this a logical fallacy?

Comp./division fallacy. What's true of aggressive atheists is not true of all. They are in a worse state of mind than religious people on average, I would guess.

Funny how I ended up defending atheists to defend religion.

No, they're saying morality can only be attributed to God instilling it in us. Why do we feel bad when we lie? The way I see it is it has to be God

And God has given this to atheists too, by merely existing, and they think to themselves that it is them, their minds, their own bodies that produce this effect, out of a mechanism, where supposedly only the strong survive.

they are a scrap of faith away from becoming the most depraved nihilists around

tell me what does this have anything to do with the left or /pol/?

genetic altruism evolved side-by-side analytical an emotional intelligence in order to insure a base sense of empathy and the basic ability to form packs or work to gather with other humans to insure survive of similar organism and their own unique genes.

Predictable response. The social Darwinists are all similar. Parrots.

dude Christianity is about copying your life after one man

>makes retard assertion
>gets reasonable response
>"i don't like that response"

your right it is predictable and theirs nothing wrong with that if someone is asked what 2+2 is and they answer 4 that is a predictable answer but non-the-less it is correct

the weakest point in Christian-atheist debates on the backs of the former is that their response to latter is never "here is how to find God" it's "you're wrong because here are some texts written by a theologian a long time ago"

top kek

So you're admitting logically there is only one way for your side of this conversation to go? Whereas my side of the conversation, necessarily involving faith, has many different sides. And angles.

Geometrically, social darwinism is a line. It has one direction, and one plane. Religion (the word of God and divine authority) is a sphere, it has infinite directions and infinite planes. Your line is part of this sphere, and unfortunate part that is allowed to exist.

poor atheists never heard of fine-tuning theory in addition to occam's razor.
occam was a monk who spent his life contemplating the nature of god too btw

"Ah, Mr. Occam's razor. The problem, Bernard, is that what you and I do is so complicated. We practice witchcraft. We speak the right words. Then we create life itself out of chaos. William of Occam was a 13th century monk. He can't help us now, Bernard. He would have us burned at the stake."

no my argument just like mine is a straight line where as both of are points can expand to halve different points and sides. the difference however being in the fact that where as my argument has proof that is not part of a self referential arguments making sure it doesn't half a circular logic.

>fine-tuning theory

oh wow being conscious of a universe requires a universe capable of hosting consciousness

come back when you can get someone with microcephaly to derive the same conclusion independently

Religious logic:
>I can't decide if something is right or wrong without God telling me
>If God one day tells me killing babies is right, who am I to argue?

>complicated bullshit is correct because its complicated!

There's a reason why Euclidean geometry was still taught in some schools in this century. It's been over 2000 years.

*your agument just as mind typing error, my bad.

you miss the point
there could be a vast array of potential universes.

Morals are what helps society to function. If you do not follow morals, you will face negative consequences. Thus secular morality is logical.

The fact that is you can make more logical arguments using faith, that is an assumption as your base in no way makes any of those lines of argument valid.

Retards say this but look at the morals of atheistic countries. For example Japan. Christians would never have done what they did.

as to the semantics of your point a line on a sphere still has infinity as many points as the rest of the sphere and with use of no euclidean geometry or with rotation in normal geometry it can still half multiple directs infinite in some case though thats beside the point

religion is a part of social darwinism, Christianity is the largest global religion because the native religions got conquered

the fine-tuning argument is referring to life and consciousness, not selecting one reality among multiverses

You keep on going back on proof, whereas I will fall back on God makes his proofs apparent. There's a reason why religion exists. Some guy didn't come out of nowhere and go 'hey look guys, lets fuck over the human race and trick them into developing religious institutions that will fuck them over and manipulate them' because if that crazy conspiracy ever happened people would need proof to believe in something that is causing them to die. What could have caused them to worship God in the fucking first place? The one, enacting movements and entities to share faith in the universe, that's what happened. You are coming to terms with that, as a civilization. The idea that atheism is on the rise is false. It is a petulant notion, and is one of the reason you see so many children, adolescents, and young adults going after it. Why on earth would these religious institutions exist in the first place if God isn't fucking real?

And the Koran is the word of God as well, a beautifully accurate sign in and of itself.

If by social Darwinism you mean God smacking the shit out of human civilization and showing he exists.

>there are over a billion egotistical sociopaths in the world
Fixed.

>What could have caused them to worship God in the fucking first place?

the first gods were animistic or maternal because scoring a bunch of meat or largest breasted women was awesome

then society moved from hunting to agriculture where defense relied on a clan leader or king, hence monotheistic and sun religions that emphasized single authority

occultism is becoming popular because origins of authority are breaking down with the information age and global destabilization and hence you have people writing cthulu grimoirs and the rise of Kek (pbuh)

>God beats his meat

enlightening

>God
>Not gods
Who in 2016 still believes in the deity of abraham

Still doesn't change the fact Occam would have burned you at the stake if you had a conversation with him.

I never said it had infinite points, just one plane. Which is wrong as well though now that I think about it, technically infinite planes could be intersecting that line, but unlike a sphere, they remain fixed to that line, where the planes of a sphere (or ideas of faith-based thought to keep up with the metaphor) are infinite along another line (of thought): it's main logical strain, the diameter (God's word and law).

Let me help you with this: they worshiped God because he interacted with the human race. He interfered with tribal warfare and mass slavery in the days of Israel and he interfered with Judaic lines of thought through Jesus, and he interfered through paganistic armies, through his direct word and courage in Muhammad. He is one. A single being.

first of
>implying i belive religoin is bad or is a crazy conspiracy
> that i care if their is in fact a god or not or if people car or not
now then i believe that religion devolved for the same reason science did as a means of trying to understand existent and environment having a conscience is not an easy task with having information helping you to figure out what if any point their is to your existence. religion developed as an explanation to natural events before we had the necessary information need to understated are worlds more holistically

i believe people believing that their so special that a godlike being is over looking and caring for each and every of the movies is far more egotistical

I try to mean this in the least antagonistic way possible but, I'm watching Ancient Aliens right now and they're saying the same thing as you, except with "Aliens" swapped for God, interfering in history and all; you really need to qualify what you mean by God or show a way to experience God to avoid this.

no point in arguing the langustics of a metaphor really it doesn't help further the point of the discussion at this point i shouldn't have brought it up, but the infinite point thing i said as a repose to you saying it was mearly a single line with only one point so i used it to keep up with the metaphore

Please direct me to where I said it was a single line with only one point.

And you would be more apt to believe in aliens than in God.

How is this not the fucking end times.