What literature will convince me to convert from Christianity to Atheism?

What literature will convince me to convert from Christianity to Atheism?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>Wanting to be an atheist

Bad taste

none
only your own retardation could achieve such an incredible feat

the bible

heh... you won't believe anymore after these doubles
CHECK EM

Lee Strobel tells me atheists are just atheists because they want to be bad people. Is this accurate?

More or less. They like to try and dress it up as a choice made by logic and rationality but in reality atheists just want to live their life answering to nobody. Means they can get away with being as selfish and degenerate as they want.

thank you for putting to words what I felt.

I can't tell if you're shitposting, but I kinda agree. I haven't met a single self-proclaimed atheist who wasn't a dickbag in some way.

fuck god and fuck you

Basically this

Read Dawkins xD

So much shitposting ITT. Why does Veeky Forums hate atheists so much?

Because they're self righteous dicks who have a tendency to denigrate the intelligence of people with different belief systems.

They are the vegans of philosophy

Ludwig Feuerbach - The Essence of Christianity

Martin Hägglund - Radical Atheism

Maybe youre baiting, but all youre doing here is circle-jerking yourselves with a self-assuring explanation for why others believe something different than you do. As long as you demonize everyone you disagree with, you will always be crippled in your faculties of reason. And about this in particular - I can tell you with certainty that is not why all atheists believe what they do. Maybe some, but not all, and likely not most.

A Catholic bishop wrote that if one wanted to get into "true atheism", that is none of that cheap Dawkins or Hitchens crap, then Feuerbach along with Marx, Freud, Nietzsche, and Sartre are the philosophers one should read.

Most Christian Apology.

It all depends on the basis of your christianity. If you base it on philosophical arguments then pic related will do so.

If you base it on Christianity being wholly unique then studying compartive religion will do so.

If you base it on historicity of Bible studying ancient histography will do so.

If you base it on a form of utilitarianism studying Marx and the materialists will do so

If you base it on cultural inertia nothing will do so

If you base it on personal experiance nothing will do so

Because ragging on Christians is no longer counter cultural.

its so ugly

there's no aesthetics in it

You say that like you haven't seen a Veeky Forums Christian thread.

The Bible (NIV translation).

No particular book. It will happen if God wills it.

Critique of Pure Reason

This guy gets it.

Except Kant was a devout pious christian. Only God has no place in metaphysics qua the epistemological limits of reason (hence his critique of ontological 'proofs' of God in the part on the transcendental dialectic). BUT the question of God is not out of the question, only it is reserved for practical reason. Hence why God is central in Kant's moral philosophy.

Surely if you ignore everything else Kant has written and only read the first Critique, then yeah, you can see him as an atheist. But its narrowminded and anachronistic to do so.

>Except Kant was a devout pious christian

More just Christian than devout and pious

Whoever that fezzy fez guy is that people have posted about on here.

N

It's called logic

agnosticism is the way to go

Wait. Atheists, or Veeky Forums?

Because you're describing this thread.

Anyway, fuck you. I'm an atheist, and I'm an atheist because there's literally *thousands* of different faiths and its totally retarded to think your sky pixie is the correct one out of all of those. (How's Odin doing these days guys?)

"Oh, all those millions of people were wrong and went to hell before Jesus was even born. But IM different because MY faith is the right one."

Fucking children. Walking through the asylum shows faith proves nothing, bitch.

I actually have some general respect for people who at least convert to a religion though, even if its from atheism. At least they can argue that they didn't just get into their religion because it happened to be what they were taught growing up and obviously 'independently decided' was the one correct faith in the world. At least they tend to have actually thought about the morals of tenets of the religion a little bit.

And - weirdly - I have a huge amount of respect for the real fundamentalists out there. You know, the ones who actually take their religion seriously, follow every single rule no matter how insane and generally act like its still the dark ages.

Sure, they're lunatics. But if you're going to follow a faith, actually follow the faith. If you have a book from the desk of God, you don't just pay lip service to 99% of it because its too inconvenient and the modern age has moved on from it's morals. Its from fucking God.

You don't eat shellfish. You shave your pubic hair. You stone the fucking gays. Because that's what your god told you to do.

Sure, other people like me will call you crazy and evil. But you're keeping to your actual religion instead of a bastardized modern version of it.

Fundamentalists are crazy, but at least I can respect their faith.

Took me a few years but I finally finished reading these tomes. Now let's see the true ... power of anime.

A history book.

>I'm an atheist and I'm not a prick who denigrates other people because of their beliefs!
>*Goes on to write a large autistic rant about the standard atheist strawmen*
I've got fedora bingo here.
"Sky fairy/wizard" check.
"How do you know your religion is the right one!?" check
"You're crazy and/or belong in an asylum!" check

Thanks for going ahead and proving why you're cancer.

I used to find the fedora thing annoying. Now i realise its basically just a tantrum of 'WAAAH I HAVE NO ARGUMENTS! WAAAH"

And yeah, fundamentalists who want to kill people for being gays are crazy and belong in prison or an asylum. What a strange and alien viewpoint that is weirdly also held by most civilized justice systems.

All I said was that atheists tend to be disliked because they're self righteous, arrogant and intolerant of belief systems other than their own. Which you demonstrated beautifully by rushing in here and having an autistic fit over how superior you are to other people who believe different things to you.

The fedora thing is just convenient because nobody made atheists posts their disgusting neckbeards overlaid with cringy quotes. They did it themselves with no coercion whatsoever. It's just an expedient way of exposing that these people who assert their intellectual superiority because they read pop sci and aren't religion, are actually nobodies who cling to that idea because they base their entire self worth on it.

Again, what were you hoping to prove by trying to argue against by writing a huge wall of text about how euphoric you are? Don't you realize you just proved the point?

>What literature will convince me to convert from Christianity to Atheism?

op-eds from buzzfeed and huffingtonpost

>Don't you realize you just proved the point?
I don't believe he (or any atheist) has any amount of self-consciousness, no.

>All I said was that atheists tend to be disliked because they're self righteous, arrogant and intolerant of belief systems other than their own.
The hilarious thing is this is exactly what theists on Veeky Forums are like, including you, and it's exemplified by the fedora meme.

...

Lol irony at its finest

Pretty much this. The fedoracore atheist meme has crested. How many of the anti-atheist shitposters are actual Christians, or otherwise religious, who knows?

A.A. Lewis

Any book where someone is willing to subject their ideas to an adult level of scrutiny.

A god could exist, just not the ones we worship.

This, desu.
Why the hell would you ever want to lose your pure belief in a afterlife and your solid foundations for ethics, morality and aesthetics?
Do you even realize how much any atheist thinker struggle to reach even the most obvious conclusion?

Keep your christianity and become an erudite.

Because you're talking about atheists on Veeky Forums/reddit/twitter/fb/tumblr, plagued by scientism and corrupted by pseudointellectuals such as Dawkins, NDT and Harris. They're the equivalent of christian soccer moms.

Atheism is a complex problem which bears vaste implications (that should put some modesty into your brain), yet most atheists can't raise above the overused ''wow are you believing in space daddy? lol jesus was a zombie'' trope.

>yet most atheists can't raise above the overused ''wow are you believing in space daddy? lol jesus was a zombie'' trope.

Why do you think most posters here on on either side of that bigoted coin? Christians here fall into the same trap of believing atheism has no rational legitimacy and is instead just a mental problem or condition to be treated - ie the exact reasoning used by fedoras.

It wasn't an apology for Christianity, I was just explaining to that guy why atheists are a meme on Veeky Forums.
That said, I agree with you, most people's (probably us included) opinions are completely unexamined.

Believe or don't. Who gives a shit? It's the prisoner's dilemma.

To be fair, most religious people can't raise an argument beyond "it's easier and it's how I grew up", either.

To be fair, we mock those people too.

We don't do it often enough, and whenever we do it's invariably met with *tips fedora* memes.

Sure, but mockery is the overly simple way to begin with, and right now we're discussing the current climate on Veeky Forums, where theism has somehow become the "obvious, rational choice".

I never have understood religion. I've always had people trying to convince me how they preach peace and pacifism, but easily enough I contest that religion has objectified, demonized and harassed more than it has helped. Sure you may go to the homeless shelter and feed the poor, but at the end of the day you'll go back to your house and sleep in a bed whereas they can't. Or perhaps you'll continue the never-ending trips to Africa to try and sway people from their culture under the pretenses of housing projects and support which obviously comes with the ideologies of whoever-the-fuck goes there. Religion I feel has strayed from being a template for how someone should set their morals and act in a society and has evolved into determining how someones entire life and devotion will be and gives someone and ultimatum versus a choice. It's interesting how many people praise the morals but use religion's grey-area as a blanket to spread influence the same way a country expands territory, with it's logic I feel it can be coherent but the amount of those who are unwilling to listen to a different perspective (of course this doesn't just apply to religion as it is a personable trait itself, however prominent in religion). I'm in a bad place anons, I just wish I could die while I'm asleep one of these days. Thanks for letting me vent, have a good day.

>Sure, they're lunatics. But if you're going to follow a faith, actually follow the faith. If you have a book from the desk of God, you don't just pay lip service to 99% of it because its too inconvenient and the modern age has moved on from it's morals. Its from fucking God.

>You don't eat shellfish. You shave your pubic hair. You stone the fucking gays. Because that's what your god told you to do.

>Sure, other people like me will call you crazy and evil. But you're keeping to your actual religion instead of a bastardized modern version of it.

Do you have any idea what theology, exegesis, and hermeneutics are? Or do you believe extremely literal readings of religious texts are the only correct way to understand them? Because it sounds like that's what you're arguing, which makes sense if you're an atheist who has no interest in religion other than briefly scanning the Bible and forming snap judgments about its main tenets are.

I'm not even religious, but ignoring the metaphorical and allegorical aspect of religious texts and instead treating them as "legal code + origin stories" is dumb.

It seems that way. Every atheist that I know of is a sexual deviant of some sort.

>your solid foundations for ethics, morality and aesthetics?
This is a dumb reason to be religious. Atheists assume that religion is a manmade creation, and that therefore, all of the moral and ethical rules that come with religion are arbitrary choices made by people. There is no reason an atheist couldn't decide to just follow the same arbitrary set of rules. The justification that "God created these rules" simply isn't needed.

>implying sexual deviancy has an inherent moral or ethic value

That's what the vast majority of functioning societies and working systems of morality and ethics imply

>Atheists especially new atheists actively want to fuck with another group
>Vegans just want animals to be left alone if we're in situations where we don't have to eat them for food.

I know this is bait but at least be original.

Only because it pleases peoples' comfort zones. It has the same origin as etiquette and general savior faire; to make things neat and simple.

The difference is that we're expected to have our sex in private, and something that only affects its willing participants can't be attributed with any clear morals or ethics.

What would you say to me then? Because I think theres a lot of value in Christian doctrine and I would say that I follow it, I just don't believe in God because there is not enough evidence to support his existence. By that definition I'm an atheist. The moral argument is out of the equation for me.

>if I put the word "just" in here, it will make my statement seem not as bad

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism

>and something that only affects its willing participants can't be attributed with any clear morals or ethics

There was a case in Germany where a man consented to allowing another man cut off his penis and eat it. Do you think this is morally acceptable behavior?

If he wanted to have his penis severed and eaten and was legally able to consent (not affected by psychosis or drugs, etc), then yes. He made his own decision and had it fulfilled, morals and ethics don't enter into it.

>There is no reason an atheist couldn't decide to just follow the same arbitrary set of rules.

Being a christian implies the belief in a vast array of metaphysical statement. The most direct implication that stems from being an atheist is the complete scepticism towards those narratives.

Now, some atheists may just ignore this conundrum and chose to believe in ethics and morals, but in my opinion this behaviour directly goes against the reasons with which they justify their atheism.

>The justification that "God created these rules" simply isn't needed.
Of course, but suddenly you don't have any justification at all for those systems. You can chose to follow them, but that would be as arbitrary as believing in God.
This does not discredit the atheist choice (I'm an atheist myself), but should still be a source of confusion for any thinker that deems himself as rational.

What I'm saying is that saying ''dude just believe in ethics'' does not cut it when my initial position is one of complete rejection (or seemingly so) of almost any metaphysical statement.
A good atheist, imho, should overcome this absolute empiricism. Moral and ethical realism is a thing, and does not require any sort of religious sentiment, yet the education needed to grasp these concepts is anything but trivial.
To this day I'm still deeply concerned about the nature of the choice I make.

And some atheists wonder why normal people feel uncomfortable around them. I don't want to associate with anyone who thinks its okay to cut off another mans penis for sexual pleasure. Your moral compass is broken and you're capable of justifying all sorts of horrible things.

>read this
>tfw this guy is actually right

You're a failure, my friend. This is why atheism is slowly but surely becoming a meme even on atheist safe spaces such as Veeky Forums.

I'm not even an atheist, and those "horrible things" would only be horrible to an outsider. If some group of mad yokels want to gather into a cabal and dance naked under the moonlight as they carve their own bodies up and chant blessings to Kim-Jong Un, while leaving the entire rest of society alone, then let the poor waterheads do that. Right and wrong, good and evil, stem from what you impose upon others.

Again, I'm not an atheist.

>Again, I'm not an atheist.

What religion do you believe in?

Not a bad post, user
7/10

I partially disagree tho

Doesn't matter, and I'm not going to have a sub-discussion started over it, but suffice it to say that it's not one that ENDORSES cutting people's cocks off. However, I have my own perception of right and wrong, and it's based on free will and the effect you have on others.

He worships man. He's a hedonist first and foremost.

You know nothing about me. Argue my standpoint, not my person.

I'll even take out the just then

Vegans want the precise opposite of what atheists want, and as I specified, particularly new atheists. Atheists want to harass, vegans want a group left alone.

>However, I have my own perception of right and wrong
This is not allowed in any monotheistic religion.
Just tell us if you're following a monotheistic religion.

>and it's based on free will and the effect you have on others.
Uh, I guess you're following a Eastern one.

There is no arguing with somebody that thinks it's okay to cut somebodies penis off for sexual pleasure.

>what if they constent tho

There is no organized religion whose moral compass is wholly compatible with modern society. Across my experiences in life, I eventually came to the conclusion that a perfect moral system is impossible beyond "don't make victims of people". Pre-marital sex, certain foods, alcohol, gambling... There are many things that are forbidden within major religions, yet few people would argue that you can't be Christian if you sleep with your girlfriend.

>dude, you're wrong because, like, you're messed up in head, man

This is the extent of a religious person's ability to argue, everyone.

That's you giving up. Tell me why it's WRONG to cut off a willing person's penis, beyond "it makes me feel bad".

Wanting a group to be left alone implies picking and harassing an antagonist group that *doesn't* leave said group alone. In the case of vegans, this antagonist group is pretty much everyone who eats meat (aka normal people).

>few people would argue that you can't be Christian if you sleep with your girlfriend.

not inherently. You can want someone to be left alone simply by actively disengaging with the antagonist group as much as possible you don't have to harass them at all.

>say fucked up shit
>people complain without iron-clad, fully logical arguments

>SEE? YOU'RE JUST LIKE THE RELIGIOUS GUYS? LET ME BE FINE WITH PEOPLE CUTTING THEIR DICKS FOR SEXUAL PLEASURE

>(aka normal people)
Is there any other way faster to discredit yourself than frame your argument with 'NORMAL' as the basis. The entire basis of philosophy is questioning what is normal, acceptable.

I never brought up the extreme case of penis-cutting, someone else did. I merely stated that from my point of view, it isn't inherently right and wrong. Same with suicide, because every person owns their life and has a right to their own death.

As an atheist: don't. Remain in your peaceful illusion of a meaningful existence and life after death. Avoid the gripping terror a while longer.

I don't see why you guys are putting a continuum between veganism and atheism.
Atheism finds his necessity, most of the time, in gnoseological arguments, while veganism finds its foundations in ethical ones.

It makes sense to be a militant vegan in a nation in which eating meat is normal, it makes less sense being a militant atheist in a secular nation.

Dude that's just, like, fucked up. lol. I don't even have an argument, man. You're wrong because I say so.

Guess we're done, then.

Not that guy, here's my argument:
chances are that if you want to cut your dick you're suffering from some sort of mental illness, which could be cured.
Since your agency could be hindered doing nothing about that guy is no more a morally neutral stance.
A moral person would try to help that guy either by denouncing him to the police (which is something you can do) or pay for the (hypothetical) drugs that could save his penis and (Eventually) even his life.

What about this?

You lose your faith and don't substitute it with another faith, that's it. The rest is just internet arguments to entertain oneself.

Fuck off Kant, or rather, Cant.

Of course. I presented the hypothetical scenario that he was of sound mind and unaffected by drugs or other psychotropics. If we assume that he was suffering from a mental illness (and I won't accept that his choice MUST mean that he did), then it becomes an entirely different scenario. Then he becomes a man in need of help, not a man whose fondest dream happens to be having his cock eaten.

Can you truly rid yourself of all faith?