Once you see atheism for what it is as a new retarded religion you can never unsee it.
Discussion
Once you see Abrahamic religions as totalitarianism you can never unsee it.
Are you atheist ?
No idea. I only believe in the nonaggression principle and oppose totalitarianism.
Civilization cannot be built on a subjective ideal such as the nonaggression principle. Without an objective moral framework, we canāt define good vs. bad. It just becomes a matter of opinions, and whoās to say which opinions are better than others? Even philosophers like Aristotles acknowledged God (unmoved mover) even though they lived before Jesusā time.
Yea but isnāt that the point too? You cannot create an āobjective moral frameworkā because the world doesnāt work like that. Humans are human, and there is ALWAYS some form of bias or opinion or feelings that get in the way. Even those speaking of and for god are stillā¦.human.
You cannot create a moral vacuum for an imperfect world to live by. You are set up for failure from the start!
Are you a bitcoiner? Reminds me of the idea of inherent value in something. And the Kaynsian idea that everything has an objective agreed upon value that the market has to discover. But thats the thing, the entire framework is the wrong framework. Its more like the Austrian way where the value is different and personal for each individual unique person. Each persons daily life, background, family, morals, circumstances, and opinions and thoughts ALL help to create what value is for them.
I say that to say this. You are trying to create a kaynsian āthis is good and bad for every person no matter the person, no matter the circumstance, no matter whatā framework for the world. But when people experience life in completely different ways all around the world, even with different religions and gods as their way to view the world, it makes it impossible to create that āone for allā objective framework.
Yes, and your point would make more sense if I were claiming I or any other human could create or decide what is objectively good or bad. Iām saying that without God, morality is subjective, and if morality is subjective, then societies crumble because who is to say that someoneās opinion that killing and stealing being bad is objectively true?
Oneās experience does not make 2+2 equal anything other than 4. All Iām saying is that without God morality is subjective.
Yea i agree. Thats what i was thinking as well, and was trying to explain in the other response to you about the chef analogy, and i didnāt respond in time haha. But great that we are thinking along the same lines to talk about it haha
To not have an objective moral framework? I donāt think so. Itās not my objective.
We donāt create an objective moral framework, correct. It was given to us by our creator. Having an objective moral framework is not in conflict with humans existence.
Bingo!!! We cannot indeed follow the law given down to Moses (objective moral framework). Thatās why Jesus died on the cross to atone for humanityās sin so that we may be in heaven with him and the Father should we choose to accept his gift (salvation).
Yea i see what you mean. Not creating that objective moral framework, and that it is being given to us. But i mentioned that part as well, which still just makes too big of a leap. When i was saying āeven those speaking of and for god areā¦humanā.
The man Moses you mention, and the man that was Jesus are both still just humans that were living in that time. Any message delivered that is ādivineā is being delivered through the wrong vessel. So that is still putting your trust and faith in humans and not a divine entity.
Its like saying you are going to get a great fantastic meal for dinner from a world renowned chef, then the goes into a dumpster on the side of the road to make the meal. You still eating that thing?
Well no, Jesus was and is God. He just happened to also be fully man. People hearing Godās word from Moses and directly from God himself via Jesus is not putting your faith in humans. If what you were saying was an accurate representation of Christianity I would agree with you, but itās not.
That dumpster birthed the greatest civilizations known to man. Of course, the church did many bad things throughout history, itās full of flawed humans after all, but the beauty and greatness that came from Christianity is undeniable even if you donāt personally believe in it.
Yea i agree iām not making an accurate full representation of the religion, but theres thousands of years of backstory thats been added by humans, so that would be very hard for either of us to do.
Iām just saying all the things you talk about and mention are still human based. Any description of Jesus as god is all human based. Everything.
I would have more of an open mind if it was a more general discussion, but Christianity to me is just one of the many man-made businesses/companies of the religion industry. One of the best, most successful and profitable, yes. Making it one of the most popular. But i just canāt take anything said serious when theres so much bullshit to wade through.
I get you have parts and portions that you agree with and hold on to, i respect that. I just canāt do the same. We just different in that way i guess.
Faith isā¦.a complicated word in generalā¦at best haha
I donāt know what you mean by human based. We are Godās creation and because of our fallen nature (Adam and Eve) he had to send his only Son to atone for our sins so we could be reunited with Him. I understand the concept of the trinity can be confusing for unbelievers. If you refuse to believe Jesus when he said he was God, then your argument about human made/based is accurate. But Christians with good reason believe Jesus when he told us who he was.
The question of God canāt be generalized. If there is a God then itās natural for people to want to know who is this God. All religions canāt be true at once. There is only one God, so the conversation has to be specific. It is my claim that Christianity is true.
I donāt think thereās bullshit to wade through in the Bible or in the theological doctrine of the Catholic Church. Canāt speak for other branches of Christianity that go against the Bible.
I donāt have parts and portions I agree with. One has to accept all of it or reject all of it. Picking and choosing what you like is a sure way to go to hell. One is better off rejecting all of it than being lukewarm.
I forgot the original point, but specifics of religion is irrelevant if one does not believe there is a God.
I mean it just sounds like we are so far off base from one another, i donāt know how to even continue this conversation haha.
By human based, I mean everything you are referencing is still coming from humans. The Adam and Eve stuff is Bible (human written), God sending his son to save us is part of the background story we are told, again by tales passed down by humans. And thats what I mean too when you are saying āto believe Jesus when he said he was Godā. You are using your Faith in that scenario to rationalize your faith. Its faith rationalizing faith. From my perspective, you not being able to simply see that concept is like how you see me not being able to accept God and accept Jesus as our savior and therefore believe Christianity. Its the same thing, just coming from different bases of experience and knowledge and influence. That is my claim.
I was raised Christian. The stories and character arcs and rules and guidelines were all carefully explained to me. The trinity is not a foreign or confusing concept, i just reject it based on lack of anything substantial to sway me. The best I heard it described was actually from an anti-religious documentary (albeit by a very Christian person that was trying to explain the concept to them). The religious man in the documentary described it as the transformation of water. It can either be in a liquid solid or gas state. The melted ice is water. The heated water is gas. They are all the same and equal parts of the same thing. They are all the same yet still different forms.
So returning to the part you mention in that section, saying āChristians with good reason believe Jesus when he told us who he wasā. I just mean to say, to me, a PERSON with good reason does not believe him. The fact that you view the reasoning process there already from a Christian perspective means, to me, that you are already too thick in the weeds at that point, and there is no use of āreasoningā anymore.
It was passed down by humans, but it came from God. I donāt see why that would inherently discredit Godās existence or that Christianity is or at least could be true in principle.
The historical accounts of Jesus are not fairy tales. Historians donāt dispute that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person that really existed. Itās just that some people disregard the historical accounts that claim and confirm Jesusā deity.
The historical evidence and some of the physical evidence such as the shroud of Turin is actually quite substantial. People as yourself are free to not be persuaded, of course, but to claim itās all based on blind faith is not really true.
Iām not trying to convert you. If you looked at the evidence deeply and canāt get behind the God of the Bible, then thatās fine.
I was an atheist for many years too, so I can understand where you are coming from.
I donāt deny Jesus or the existence of these people, just the cosmic baggage that was attached to them. Theres a chance its all true, just too small of a chance for me to run with. Like you said, thats ok either way. On your end and mine.
And I know you arenāt trying to convert me, and I appreciate that. For what itās worth, iām not atheist. To me thats almost the same as Christianity in terms of faith and belief. Thats what i meant when I was saying i would be more open minded if it was a more general religious discussion than just āhis god or her god. That religion or this oneā type vibes.
Well i appreciate the good conversation and your ability to understand and empathize and just talk with a different view. Have a good one! š
š¤š¼
Authoritarian not totalitarian
Arent they all š¤ retarded AF
I fall somewhere between Pascal's wager and Marcus Aurelius.
I love that Marcus Aurelius quote.
The issue is, how can you know that you are living a good life? To what standards? Who decides that you lived a good life?
Read Meditations.
Stoicism is commendable particularly self-control and resilience.
The good life is one lived in accordance with nature and reason .
Human reasoning is valuable but limited and fallen. The standard of goodness must come from outside ourselves.
Therefore the good life is not defined by human reason alone more-so by the will of God, who created all things.
āFor all have sinned and fall short of the glory of Godā Romans 3:23
The logos is revealed in the person Jesus Christ.
āIn him all things hold togetherā Colossians 1:17
āChrist is the wisdom of Godā 1 Corinthians 1:24
May GOD save you from your stupid beliefs!
I donāt follow a traditional religion ā Bitcoin is the only truth I need.
Truth
Atheism religion only have one principle -
Deny everything, even own existence, so no need of an awareness and no burden of improvements.
Now that Hodl is a christian (about 6 months now) he has license to chastise all the unbelievers.
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqtxwaehxw309anxjmr5v4ezumn0wd68ytnhd9hx2tmwwp6kyvtjw3k8zcmp8pervct409shwdtwx45rxmp4xseryerdx3ehy7f4v3axvet9xsmrjdnxw9jnsuekw9nh2ertwvmkg6n5veen7cnjdaskgcmpwd6r6arjw4jsqgq6lcx8fc7h0p8t4ya9u0a92jnwavqe9rgjwwdw3wjgxfuxsz8rd5mths8c is basically a boomer. he believes in judeo christian values and trump restoring the republic.
I believe in one of those things
hmm tell that to the religious leaders
Organized religion was fostered as a form of social control and to facilitate trade. Amazing all of ya'll that can't see THAT.
Thatās why it has endured for millennia, people need their trade lol
Couldnāt be that God is real and they want to spread the word and worship him.
Itās not a religion per se since a religion is the habit of virtue that inclines the will to give God the worship he deserves, and they donāt believe in a God. I would say itās a coping mechanism for not wanting to adhere to an objective moral standard and instead be able to justify oneās actions regardless of how morally corrupt and deranged they may be.
They do have a god everyone has one. It may not be a common one though.
Poking the hornets nest, please carry on š
You misspelled statism š
Atheism is a license for nihilism and self centered living
No such thing as atheism. God exists whether you acknowledge it or not.
Anti-theists are what they are called.
š
Show me something in this world that is not a retarded religion. lol
Is there a religion that isnāt retarded?
Need a Mount Rushmore of retarded religions
Stack your way up to heaven HodlBoy. We don't need your metaphysical insights, your practical advice is damaging enough as it stands.
His predictions are some of the worst. He bet that bitcoin would hit $300k in 2021 and he has said it'll hit $1million in this cycle. No one should take what he says seriously.
Science is yet another religion. Look at how St Einstein and St Darwin are worshiped as prophets, and look at how many believers trust the dogma of global warming or relativity or evolution (or many more) with no empirical understanding of any of these ideas.
Science is the study of physical characteristics and funcyions of cosmos that Jesus Christ made and rules over.
Scientism is a dogmatic false religion. Its altars of worship are right beside those of statism and modern enlightened people love to offer their devotion and sacrifices to the gods of both religions.
The burden of proof is on those that claim that there exists a āgodā that you cannot see, or touch.
Those who believe in the Christian god are atheist to certain degree. As a true atheist, I just believe in one less god than a Christian.
I donāt chastise anyone for their beliefs, as long as they are not forced upon meā¦Christianity has a long history of āuse of forceā. But not all christians are ābadāā¦after all it is just a coping mechanism and a business adventure for some.
All that to say, atheism cannot be a religion. As always, Iām open to discussionā¦having studied the Bible for 15 years, it is interesting to me.
I believe we are all in this together, whether you believe in a god, gods, or whatever your spiritual journey is.
God guides and gives us oportunities to repent, we ignore them at our own peril. I pray constantly for my heart to be open and see the spiritual Truth of Christ in everything ā¦ļøšš»
I think Atheism is as fucking stupid as believing in God with conviction. To pretend you can take either position as a definite is some of the most low IQ shit I've heard.
Agnostic all the way š
Antitheism!
It's observable and empirically verifiable that people who believe there is a god, they can do many things armed with that belief, good or bad, and many times these people do real acts that affect real people and have real-world consequences. Atheism is a denial of this impact. Antitheism is an acknowledgement of its impact on the world good and bad.
But that's just my take on the matter.
Atheism equals believe in and worship of false gods.
I always thought you were just a naive bag of douche that showed up on various podcasts and panels for weak comic relief over the years. Stay in your lane. Youāre the court jester not the cleric.
All religions are completely moronic if you look at it. Just ask nostr:nprofile1qy28wumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytn00p68ytnyv4mqz9nhwden5te0dehhxarjv4kxjar9wvhx7un8yqqzpkdr9xh6hvnr4zhjz6pcadz7ruzvcvqqwpzxf9rufwg8uxl0tqxhxjfxyc about that.
AmericanCHRISTR has entered the chat.
Wow you touched a nerve ššæ
Why are atheism and antitheism still bundled under the "atheism" label? (Or atheist and anti-Christian, for that matter)
A false religion and mental illness. In modern America it is mostly a reaction to the weird heretical forms of Christianity we are popularly familiar with. Then again, atheists have made the first step of at least attempting to reject nonsense in favor of reason and logic, if it they only fallen into yet another nonsense in the process
Is there such thing as a monetary atheist in regards to what is the ultimate form of money that has been evolving for the past 15 years? And if so what would we call them ā¦ Shitcoiner?
That is to say obviously bitcoin is not God, but it is a result of there being a divine being
christcucks cant handle simulation theory
Simulation theorists canāt handle a world without intelligent design so they recreate it for nerds.
It is a part of science religion.
I would genuinely, and respectfully, like to start a discussion on this kind of thinking.
Of all the people on earth Bitcoiners espousing "Don't trust, verify", claiming to value verification of truth over trust of arbitrary claims, should be in alignment with athiestic views. Views that are simply stating that without actual verifiable proof of existence any and all theological beliefs should be viewed as mythological and nothing more.
Atheism is literally the absence of belief in the supernatural. To claim atheism is a religion is nonsensical, religions make claims and atheists decline to agree with those claims until they are provided with sufficient reasoning to adopt them as their own.
Everyone is an atheist to an extent, throughout history humanity has developed countless numbers of supernatural beings and theologies surrounding them.
When it comes to Norse, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, or other "dead" theologies almost everyone is athiestic and declines the existence of their pantheons of gods.
Some of us just go a step further and apply the same thinking to all living theologies with large numbers of believers as well.
It is surprising to me how so many Bitcoiners are still heavily religious and speak hateful rhetoric towards a group that simply asks for proof of religion, in addition to proof of work for value.
Religions in general are more like FIAT money than they are like Bitcoin, there are many and they all eventually go to zero (believers). Viewing the world through a lense of the scientific method, verifying claims before adopting them as true knowledge, is in alignment with Bitcoin's ethos of Don't Trust, Verify. All religions should be discarded without proof of the claims that are made.
I'm open to counter arguments that you personally find compelling, my beliefs are ever evolving based on things I learn and to which I am exposed.