If atheism was intellectually and morally superior to christianity they wouldn't be a bunch of postmodernized demoralized midwit consoomers simping for feminism and Soy Wars/Soy Trek while bitching about imagined Christian evils as Muslims toss faggots off rooftops.
Not an atheist, but while a not-insignificant percent of atheists like to believe>atheism is intellectually and morally superior to christianity
thats not an attribute of atheism, thats an attribute of douchebags who happen to be atheists.
I mean, I could castigate Christians as all being choir-boy rapists, but I have enough intellectual integrity to recognize it's a very small subset of Christians who have engaged in such behavior, rather than the entire group.
Lazy/juvenile rhetoric such as OP's statement really have no place in the perception of individuals who are actively seeking to improve themselves.
>>340569>Christians as all being choir-boy rapists
Thats called catholicism, which isn't christianity>douchebag atheists
thats almost all of them. to be an atheist, you must engage in in the mental circle-jerking ring of pseudo-intellectualism. Friendship is Optimal is one such example of the circle-jerk ring easily found in this fandom.
big paint brushes work when there are obviously large surfaces to cover.
Bible study thread fag here. The hell is this thread? Not only does it not belong on the main board here, but what on earth are the intentions with this? Are you trying to make people that view religion as elitist and needing to be removed seem all the more validated? Honestly, this is a pain to see and I highly doubt you even understand the basics of any religion to counter atheism to begin with.
Your arguments boil down to: your side let bad stuff happen.
Guess what? Christians let both that and atheism take hold and expand and they haven’t and still will not do a damn thing to halt it, meaning that should your claims even be correct, you have implicated yourself as the means to it even being a factor.>>340571>Catholics aren’t Christian
Even if you want to make a theological argument here, which you aren’t prepared to do without more irrational finger pointing, you are still wrong as they are built on the foundation of worshipping Christ. Just as you pumped all atheists into a singular entity, Christianity is the same when dealing with such a broad topic as all atheists, including users of this site which don’t support any of the aspects of the world you claimed they do.>large paintbrushes
Don’t even get me started on the amount of people that claim to worship Christ and are incredibly horrid people. Again, we are talking about the entire collective with no nuance as to true or fake because the same can be applied to atheists. I can make the same claim about all Christians believing they are above moral reproach based on interactions with several. This is a fallacy in reason.
>>340569>I have enough intellectual integrity to recognize it's a very small subset of Christians who have engaged in such behavior, rather than the entire group
Congrats, you are smarter than the atheists who say all Christians are bad
And what of the Christians who say all atheists are bad?
Why would I hate atheists? Nihilism was an important part of the path that ultimately led me to God, yet away from ecclesiasticism.
Christianity is completely indistinct from them in nearly all ways that are important, and all ""right wing"" conservative differences from them are a clown show cope to deal with the fact that marxism has been their steady diet of indoctrination since childhood.
The average christian thinks>race doesn't matter>christ forgives everyone>die for israel.>I bad, jews good>women can do what they want>gay is okay if you pray>circumcision good
Christianity is nothing more than a venear over the behavior of the white race. Having it or taking it away would change basically nothing about us. We lived in places where you have to get a long with your neighbor because food was relatively scarce and you where iced in for a third of the year. No idea where the seething self hatred comes but original sin has been a comment way before the times of Christ and whites definitely have an inferiority complex a mile wide.
If you look at the appeal points of Christianity and Atheism it's all the same shit. >big unfathomable entity/place>to feel small and unworthy>reason to care about based blackmen and the disabled
about the only thing they used to differ on was women and gays but go back even just 50 or so years and athiest groups used to laugh at the idea of women being intellectuals so it's clearly a different pathos.
>>340571>catholicism isn't christianity
then nothing is christianity, marxist.
I think he means it's not the same thing, just a subgroup. You can't generalise all catholic traits to apply to every christian sect>>340651
You opened this thread with "then [other group] wouldn't be a bunch of [insults]">>340697
It really is the most insane shit. I hate jews but hail yeshua bar yoshef our lord and saviour
There is neither jew nor gentile, neither free nor slave, neither man nor woman, for all are one in jeshua, but also I want Whites to be allowed to exist on their own
This is my representative from god but we're so much more based and trad than those tree worshipers larping as their own people instead of larping as desert jews
The deontological morality, or slave morality, of Christianity, was a direct precursor to the Enlightenment, deconstructionism, and, finally, Cultural Marxism. Christian morality espouses the ideal that there are inherent metaphysical properties of "good" and "evil", a baseless absolutist assumption that has no social utility and also pays no heed to the limitations of human perspective. Christians are taught that pride is a sin, no matter the context or result of their action. They are taught to be charitable to the weak, no matter the context or result of their action.
A more useful way to derive morals is to define them teleologically, by their utility. Is pride in one's self to the point that one is unable to recognize their own faults "sinful"? Yes, as this has a negative social and personal impact. Is pride in one's family, nation, or race, sinful? No, as these feelings generally lead an individual to feel a desire to be more productive.
This is an argument that predates Christianity, that has been waged in the west for millennia. It may seem familiar to Europeans now, but the reality is deonotological morality is a foreign set of ideals that was propagated throughout Europe by Semites, via a Semitic religion. Hence Christianity needing to adopt so many pre-Christian European cultural nuances and aesthetics to even be palatable to European peoples. Christianity is proto-Communism. God is dead and Europe and her colonial daughters desperately need a religious revival, but not a Christian revival.
I'm glad this is generating legitimate discussion, but if possible, could you try and steer clear of posting "_____ Hate Threads"? It's very 4/pol/ tier.
OP is clearly a 90 IQ emotionally charged edgelord that is incapable of having meaningful thoughts. Can't expect them to post anything worthwhile.
>>340572>Not only does it not belong on the main board here
Idk. I would consider the topic of atheism, as well as "hate C group" to be native /pol/ content.
>>340713>baseless absolutist assumption that has no social utility
Social utility is only relevant in "moral" arguments when it's used in law. Morality isn't necessarily defined by how useful things are to people, especially when you consider that you have to then find boundaries between the priorities of individual liberty and collectivism.
I agree, however OP did a piss-poor job of starting a discussion thread (assuming it wasnt intended as a "Grrrrrr, I hate this thing, we all hate this thing right?" thread)
I mean, it's no different from the tranny hate thread in terms of OP quality, but does that really matter?>Christianity needing to adopt so many pre-Christian European cultural nuances and aesthetics to even be palatable to European peoples.
Deontological concepts of metaphysical good and evil aren't native to Christianity, or even Semitic religions. It's seen in eastern and western religions alike. Norse mythology had it, Greeks had it, slavic pagans had some, and even more in ways that are just different in ways you don't recognize. To say that pre-christian morality was based on "social utility" is really giving them too much credit: a lot of pagan morality is based largely on arbitrary superstition.
Judaism as well puts a bit less emphasis on good/evil deontology than Christianity does, as because they as an ethnic religion really define their own deontology by whatever is good for their own tribe, and define all gentiles as evil.
The deontology of abrahamic religions is largely derivative of similar religions in the region, most notably Zoroastrianism, which has a strong emphasis on deontology as it has a creator deity as the force of good, and an equivalent to devil/Satan as a force of evil. Zoroastrianism , however, defines morality in a peculiar way as it's based on animism reverence of the elements and the innate sacredness of nature: preserving the purity of fire/water/air/earth is good, polluting, corrupting or disrespecting it is nature.
Jews came in contact with Zorastrians a while ago, and appropriated the idea of their tribal deity being a force of good from them, and went on to use that mindset to say that everything they do it justified because Jews are good and gentiles are evil.
Christianity diverts from that concept a bit, as it starts off by saying that everything about this world is corrupt and sinful, because all humans are sinners, and instructs its followers to try to become better versions of themselves by admitting to and atoning for their sins. It also puts a lot more emphasis on the outcome of heaven and hell for souls, much like Zorastrianism does, but deviates from the elementalist animism of morality because it presents this life as transitory for the true purpose of creation, rather than afterlife purely as a punishment or reward for behavior in life as Zorastrian does.
Top part of this is meant for >>340734
You learn mathematics from books, geography from maps and human past from history. But no book in the world holds knowledge of how to be a good person. It's mainly because such notion is prone to subjectivity. That's why religion exists to throw the human factor out of the equation and judge our actions by someone a milestone ahead of our own capabilities. Atheism is bad because it allows people to withdraw themselves from following moral obligations that they've themselves wrote in the bible. Religion helps us see through the indifference of the world through a more welcoming, human-friendly light. But atheism, while rightfully pointing out the blanks, sends us back flying into the obsecurity of sin.
And for someone who cums inside rainbow dash twice a day, you fly into the obseurity of sin quite often, fellow brony enthusiasts.
I have no reason to think theyre larping as some desert jew at all, did you even read my post? from the start I am saying that white people are incapable of acting any other way than true to their own nature. Ergo any religion they have will be expressed and continue to be expressed in the ways they find pleasing, weather they prostrate themselves before odin or the universe or jeshua
>>340737>Atheism is bad because it allows people to withdraw themselves from following moral obligations that they've themselves wrote in the bible
So, you are of thr position that atheism is inherently a/immoral?>atheism, while rightfully pointing out the blanks, sends us back flying into the obsecurity of sin
Ill take that as a yes>for someone who cums inside rainbow dash twice a day
Speak for yourself, degenerate
I didn't say you were. I agreed and then made my own point ontop
God I want to breed book hrose
Catholicism > satanism > atheism > all other "religions" > agnosticism.
You either submit to Christ or you dont, being lukewarm is cringe
Wait, why is Satanism higher on the list than the others?
Satanism has the most material reward, but it doesnt beat the reward of salvation. with agnosticism there is no material reward nor salvation so whats the point.
Have you read the bible in which the reference post has made?
Anyway, the imitators get nothing special. Unless it's useful.
The premises is that if the bible is real, the devil's principality is over Earth.
As in people getting in contact with the devil (and fellow fallen angels) get lots of stuff. Granted the devil more or less despises the dust (aka physical stuff, which means you).
That interpretation and spiritual contact is a pretty raw deal. As in it's a terrible contract.
Better to go to the one above that.
That's where the spiritual muddling happens, as in the who or what or whatever.
If it's book dude, get ready to get bundled up in soul clothes. Also rules and regulations and stuff.
If it's dead but actually alive dude, same thing just lot of the paper work is filed correctly.
If it's other interpretations maybe more meta or maybe more literal maybe something else.
Or another option which could be the same option depending on how wacky the reasoning is. Is self reliance. (This can go extremely far if done right. It just doesn't happen because inevitably shit happens.)
The next step is contractual NAP quid pro quo and rules lawyering. Technically optional step.
The next is developing relationships. Mutual aid and fun times.
That's about the quick and dirty of it.
Bitch, I'll be Atheist until we create the machine god, praise the machine spirit !
You don't need to wait, because time shit is wack anyway.
Besides the Omnissiah is with us at least in spirit and diminutive forms.If you don't consider biological to also fall within that domain as well.
It all depends on how far you're willing to go. Granted there are beings that would like to take underserved credit and be fake and gay. So be aware.