DQ YQU AGREE?
(i.imgflip.com)
Comments (30)
sorted by:
The irony of atheism is that it requires a belief...which means it's a religion.
Atheists have to have WAY more faith than christians. faith that everything is a cosmic accident when science proves there is a Creator every day by our complex designs aaaand can't forget nature.
“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.” — Revelation 22:13
Not really. When you deep dive into all religions you discover each of the brainwash the flock in only ONE narrative. They all do it. Each share the same endgame... total control. Also, they each are adament only THEIR BELIEFS are the correct belief and all others are false.
Athiest are really not the right label. Many, just don't buy-into any one system and therefore don't believe in any of them... thus, assumed they believe in nothing. Not actually the case or most so-labelled athiest.
That is not Atheism though. That is agnosticism.
You are correct. However, neither describe the actual position.
What? This statement is confusing. Explain.
Yeah right. Christianity frees.
So? 2+2=4. Trump won the election. People whining about only 1 belief being right is amusing, because that's just how reality works. Pretending or wishing otherwise is like a man trying to be a woman.
Oh, but they do buy into their own beliefs. No one is exempt from having worldviews, except mabye babies and dementia or comatose people.
Sorry if I confused you. Let me be clear.
All religions, bar none, establish the rules given to them by their God. They are absolute. There are no exceptions. Contained within these declarations is the proclamation that these rules, these laws, these scriptures are the correct way, the only way and thus, consequently all other belief systems are then declared wrong, incorrect.
You won't get to heaven unless you adopt these ways... pick any religion, they all make these declarations. Even cults do this. This produces absolute confiction and loyality to only one belief system. This is by definition control. This also causes an absolute division within the world's communities. It is by design. No God would do such a thing. Only humans would do such a thing.
It's not exclusivity that's the problem. It's lack of using argumentation to find truth that's the problem. Why do you think C.Kirk did what he did? You believe your beliefs are objectively true and that anything to the contrary is false.
After interviewing religious leaders of all faiths around the world for 20 years... I have found the problem is "asking the right questions" to be the kryptonite.
Without exception, it shuts them down. They immediately stop. They refuse to answer then walk away.
So, without favor or bias, I have been asking questions that so far, after 25 years, nobody can or will answer.
Consider the teacup in the rings of Saturn...
If I posit that there is a china teacup in the rings of Saturn you can confidently state "I think that is ridiculous." You cannot however say "There is definitely no teacup out there" unless you go and check.
This is why people do not have to prove innocence. Proving something means introducing evidence. There can never be evidence that something did not happen, it is a logical fallacy. Please don't try explaining this to lefttard.
Most atheists have had a bad experience with the churches or have prayed for something that was not granted. Ie, Something terrible happened, God didn't prevent it, therefor God does not exist, because if he did grannie would still be alive.
Interesting you mentioned Saturn...
an absolutely YUGE topic as it relates to religion...
Interesting factoid...The word Shabbot is the ancient Phoenician word for the planet Saturn...
Shabbot became Sabbath...
The Sabbath is on Saturn-day aka Saturday...
The associated color is black. What religious items, clothing are black? What about graduates? Judges?
You can absolutely prove things didn't happen. People do it all the time. I can prove the USA never dropped 4 nukes on Africa in the early 2000s.
Ok, try it.
There is no photographic evidence or news articles of nuke craters in Africa. Africa is un-nuked. Anyone can see for themselves.
That would not hold up in court. Did you inspect the whole continent? Maybe they were air-burst.
Ok, now I know you're taking the piss.
Edit: This comment goes to prove my assertion. "There were no nukes because there is no evidence." Logical fallacy.
Then someone would have recorded it and there would be testimonies.
Meaning what? I don't get your weird metaphor.
No, you misunderstood me. There were no nukes. Humans saw clearly that no nukes were dropped on Africa. The evidence it never happened is our eyes and the Africans' eyes seeing an unnuked Africa. And the Africans being alive.
"Taking the piss" is a colloquial term meaning to either mock at the expense of others, or to be joking, without the element of offence; or to be 'unfair' and take more than is warranted.[1] It is a shortening of the idiom taking the piss out of, which is an expression meaning to mock, tease, joke, ridicule, or scoff.[2] Extracting the urine, taking the Mickey (Mickey Bliss, Cockney rhyming slang), taking the Mick or taking the Michael are additional terms for making fun of someone. These terms are most often used in the United Kingdom, Ireland, South Africa, New Zealand, and Australia.
Maybe they were lost. Maybe it happened in an unpopulated area. Maybe witnesses were assassinated by the illumi-naughty. This would not hold up to debate, as we see.
We could do this all day, but I'm afraid I have other plans.
Then by your logic it is impossible to debunk anything or prove anyone wrong.
Is it possible to give evidence that you cannot give evidence that things didn't hapen?
Willful ignorance.
Yes I agree 100%
1 year prior to my conversion, I told myself "If I ever fall in love with a woman but she's a believer, I'd have to say goodbye to her". I was a fool full of ignorance and arrogance. Atheism requires more leaps of logic and faith than any crappy false religion, because at least religions recognize the truth that there is a realm beyond our sight and touch. They also recognize that EVERYTHING does not spontaneously pop out of NOTHING.
No. Not if it's from a stand point of real study and not just trying to have a good time. Atheism is a conclusion some people come to when looking at the evidence and the corruption of churches and religions. So it's an educated decision, not an ignorant one. But you are correct about most atheists. Most atheists are just doing it so they can just do whatever they want without guilt.
But then again, most Christians are doing what they're doing because they're scared of death and want eternal life. They're not doing it because their heart has been turned to living their life a certain way. If you took eternal life out of the equation they would live like most atheist because they would think, 'what's the point?'
But an atheist that lives a good life will be judged by his works, just like anyone else in the second resurrection. Including those Christians that were just in it for eternal life. They missed the point and will not be in the first resurrection of the Saints.
Rev 20 12⌄ And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Nobody important is telling you to go to church. The most important in the universe is Jesus Christ. He said the kingdom of God is within you. True christians are just thrilled to talk about Him and spread the gospel in the easiest possible way to understand. what He sacrificed for us, and our testimonies.
atheistic or explicitly anti-religious regimes (like the Soviet Union under Stalin, Maoist China, or Khmer Rouge Cambodia) were responsible for tens of millions of deaths in the 20th century, probably hundreds of millions since we're missing history.
Ya, but even normie history puts the number of murders in Soviet Union under Stalin at around 40 mil 60 mil under Mao in China. Khmer Rouge Cambodia is probably the third most but who really knows?
Then they should dig deeper. Psalm 14:1 and Romans 1:20-25
The vast majority aren't these type. I have only met a few, with most (IIRC) of them being on Scored.
Are you saying athiests who remain so can be Saved??
I suggest you stick to Q stuff. This post serves no purpose other than division.
No it doesn't. There is hardly any atheist in the comments. And without Jesus there can be no MAGA movement worth its salt.
And even IF your division claim were true ("if if if if if if if if if if if" - 0bama) there are tons of other things people get divided over. Best if it's over the things that matter most.
Whatever. To me it looks divisive, as it suggests that anyone who is not an atheist is ignorant. Looking at it again, I suppose it could also say that atheism is the fruit of ignorance depending how you interpret it. Either way, I don't see how a blanket discussion of atheism, whether for or against, is helpful. It just looks like all the post can do is spark acrimony. I didn't downvote or deport, I just don't see how it's helpful. I've probably made stupid posts before, so no condemnation, just a suggestion.
Who is unwilling to sacrifice to the emperor?
"According to the historian Dio Cassius, many people who had drifted into the practices of the Jews now found themselves condemned (by Rome) for 'godlessness' or 'atheism' (atheotes - AD 95)."
"This may seem to us a strange charge to be brought against such a highly religious people as the Jews. Yet it was a charge which, in Roman eyes, could very well be brought agaisnt those who refused to sacrifice to the emperor." _ The Jews in the Roman World by Michael Grant
No, I'm not a jew, btw just a messenger, so shoot me.
"Christian Zionism"