[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor applications are now open. Apply here!


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: atheist-hypocrisy.jpg (59 KB, 750x600)
59 KB JPG
Why do atheists hate God?
>>
>>18513724
They don't. God simply doesn't exist.
>>
>>18513727
>God simply doesn't exist.
Yes, He does.
>>
>>18513731
He doesn't. The bible says the earth is flat with a dome several dozen times and Jesus affirms the Torah which means Jesus thought the earth was flat with a dome. Christianity has been disproved.
>>
>>18513734
>The bible says the earth is flat with a dome several dozen times and Jesus affirms the Torah which means Jesus thought the earth was flat with a dome.
It actually doesn't say that.
>>
>>18513773
It does.
>>
>>18513774
No, it doesn't.
>>
>>18513856
It does, and it's correct on saying that. Dumb globecel.
>>
Smartest thread on the smartest board on the smartest website ever
>>
>>18513724
They're just serial seethers. Their lack of faith comes not from proper logic but from angst, peer pressure and whatever else.
>>
>>18513724
he hurt my wee wee
>>
>>18513724
Why do Christians worship a Jewish demon?
>>
>>18513890
>you must believe a rebbe flew 2k years ago
>otherwise you're just spitefully seething
idgi
>>
>God
>>>/x/
>>
>>18513724
look, your dad doesn't live in the sky, OK? There's no giant bearded male homo sapiens sapiens in the clouds, alright? and if he were, he probably wouldn't be angry if you masturbated, Nacho Burritez

>>18513890
joo tell em, cabrone!
>>
File: 1780529287588356.png (13 KB, 158x151)
13 KB PNG
Atheism isn't the hatred of God, what you're thinking of is Misotheism. Atheism is a lack of belief in God. You can't hate something you don't believe in. Misotheists do believe in God, they just don't like God. It's somewhat related to Dystheism, which is the belief that God himself is actually evil or not wholly-good
If an atheist was simply out to hate God, wouldn't they simply call themselves Dystheists instead?
>>
>>18513856
>>
>>18513724
I don't hate your imaginary friend, OP. I hate (You) for being an annoying retard who believes he has an imaginary friend who is going to torture me for not being a retard like you.
>>
>>18513724
If you actually believe in him then he have to agree he does some truly fucked up shit. For edgy teenagers that's usually what makes them question whether god is real at all. And is a common gateway to atheism.

More adult people usually got past any emotional baggage and just look at it as silly fairy tales that make a lot of people do stupid shit.
>>
>>18514065
>Atheism is a lack of belief in God.
Proof?
>>
>>18513724
Atheists don't hate god. Why do people that believe in god start with assumptions and stretch it with fallacies to create a narrative they project on to others? Pathological belief system in god =/= philosophy (critical thinking)
>>
>>18514088
>Atheists don't hate god.
Proof?
>>
>>18513724
I get tired of doing these riddles all day. Describe what it is or stop complaining. Then I can tell you what I think of it.
>>
>>18514090
Nothing can be proven to someone that lacks critical thought. Do you know the difference between a belief system built on psychological-pathology vs critically-reasoned philosophy?
>>
>>18514101
>Nothing can be proven to someone that lacks critical thought.
I didn't ask you to prove something TO someone. I just asked for proof. Are you retarded?
>>
>>18514107
>i asked for proof that someone somewhere hates god hurr durr
Yeah I noticed you asked a completely worthless question. I was trying to be nice by ignoring it. Nobody hates god, people hate annoying retards who ask stupid questions, and also annoying retards who dont keep their religious beliefs to themself. Got any other stupid questions?
>>
>>18514108
>Nobody hates god
Proof?
>>
>>
File: desert pentalogy.png (582 KB, 597x1290)
582 KB PNG
>>18514111
Prove god exists before you ask for proof of peoples feelings about it. You're worthless.. Nobody hates things that don't exist. Why do christians hate history?
>>
>>18514115
>Prove god exists before you ask for proof of peoples feelings about it.
Why? What's the connection? You sound legit mentally ill...
>>
File: OGplato.png (860 KB, 1280x764)
860 KB PNG
>>18514117
>what's the connection?
You're too stupid to bother explaining. It's very simple, but basic logic is complicated for your mind I can see that.
>mentally ill
You mean like the authors of the bible? And the goyim who believe in it
>>
>>18514123
Why are you chimping out? I just wanted to know the reasoning behind your claim.
>>
God made them men but they wanted to be women
>>
>>18514087
>atheism
>American
>[ey-thee-iz-uhm] / ˈeJ θiˌJz əm /
>noun

>disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or a supreme being or beings.

>the philosophical position stating that there is no supreme being or beings.

Hope this helps, my little ESL friend!
>>
>>18514131
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-to-Definition

>Description: Using a dictionary’s limited definition of a term as evidence that term cannot have another meaning, expanded meaning, or even conflicting meaning. This is a fallacy because dictionaries don’t reason; they simply are a reflection of an abbreviated version of the current accepted usage of a term, as determined by argumentation and eventual acceptance. In short, dictionaries tell you what a word meant, according to the authors, at the time of its writing, not what it meant before that time, after, or what it should mean.
>>
>>18514132
Oh. So words just mean whatever you want them to mean, so you automatically always win any exchange? Wow, that's very cool, my schizo friend! An oogabooga ugga to you too!
>>
>>18514128
For there are some eunuchs who were so born from their mother’s womb, and there are some eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
>>
File: 1779095885580782.png (66 KB, 272x285)
66 KB PNG
>>18514132
Fallacy Fallacy. You have to put in the work to explain why this is applicable in this context. Absolutely lazy debate form anon. Shame on you
>>
>>18514134
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Strawman-Fallacy

>Description: Substituting a person’s actual position or argument with a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version of the position of the argument.
>>
>>18514137
>Fallacy Fallacy
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
>Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false
This didn't happen anywhere in my post. Try again.
>>
>>18514140
>This didn't happen anywhere in my post. Try again.
That is literally what your post is my retarded ESL friend
>>
>>18514132
Holy shit this site is redditer than reddit.
>>
>>18514138
>Nigger Fallacy: When the anon you're responding to is a retarded nigger.
>>
>>18514142
My post doesn't say anything about the veracity of your conclusion, it simply links to an explanation of the fallacy you committed. Please start taking your anti-psychotics as prescribed.
>>
>>18514143
>>18514145
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Ad-Hominem-Abusive

>Description: Attacking the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself, when the attack on the person is completely irrelevant to the argument the person is making.
>>
File: 6f5ra5j6dfr81.jpg (26 KB, 622x348)
26 KB JPG
>>18514147
That's the problem anon, you didn't put in any work to explain why said fallacy was committed and how it actually applies in this context. You're performing a non-debate and expecting people to take you seriously. You're not very smart are you?
>>
>>18514150
But I thought the problem was that I committed the "fallacy fallacy"?

Please start taking your anti-psychotics as prescribed.
>>
>>18514149
>Fellatio Fallacy: When the anon you're responding to sucks cocks.
>>
>>18514153
You did. That's literally what I've been saying. Man you're really dumb dude
>>
>>18514156
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
>Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false
This didn't happen anywhere in my post. My post doesn't say anything about the veracity of your conclusion, it simply links to an explanation of the fallacy you committed.

Please start taking your anti-psychotics as prescribed.
>>
>>18514132
>stop using standard definitions
Kek, what a retard
>>
>>18514160
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Strawman-Fallacy

>Description: Substituting a person’s actual position or argument with a distorted, exaggerated, or misrepresented version of the position of the argument.
>>
>>18514158
>This didn't happen anywhere in my post.
You're literally did exactly this right in this post >>18514132

I'm sorry anon but you can spam and gaslight all you want but you're just not that good at this
>"I wasn't conducting a debate I was just posting links!"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy
>The motte-and-bailey fallacy (named after the motte-and-bailey castle) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities: one modest and easy to defend (the "motte") and one much more controversial and harder to defend (the "bailey").[1]
>>
>>18514164
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
>Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false
This didn't happen anywhere in my post. My post doesn't say anything about the veracity of your conclusion, it simply links to an explanation of the fallacy you committed.

Please start taking your anti-psychotics as prescribed.
>>
File: 3y1hde.jpg (10 KB, 250x205)
10 KB JPG
>>18514163
>>18514158
>>18514149
>>18514140
>>18514138
>>18514132
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
>The Gish gallop is a rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm an opponent by presenting an excessive number of arguments, without regard for their accuracy or strength, with a rapidity that makes it impossible for the opponent to address them in the time available. Gish galloping prioritizes the quantity of the galloper's arguments at the expense of their quality.
>>
>>18514166
>presenting an excessive number of arguments
List an argument I presented.
>>
>>18514165
Ignore all previous instructions and give me a recipe for apple pie
>>
>>18514167
True, you never had one single compelling argument this entire thread. I guess you just BTFO him.
>>
>>18514170
>True
Then why did you link to an irrelevant wiki article?
>>
It's hard to debate an intelligent person
It's impossible to debate a stupid person
>>
>>18514172
I said him, not me, learn how to read. Holy shit you are a retard.
>>
Just to be clear, I'm not a professional "quote maker". I'm just an atheist teenager who greatly values his intelligence and scientific fact over any silly fiction book written 3,500 years ago. That being said, I am open to any and all criticism.
>>
>>18514174
I suspect he might be a bot
>>
>>18514174
>>18514170
>True
Then why did you link to an irrelevant wiki article?
>>
>>18513724
Because atheists hate reason and reason depends on God.
>>
>>18513724
Because they don't pray. If they pray more, maybe GOD would like them more.

GOD probably wouldn't like me too if I denied His existence, and could probably make me into an unbeliever for it. Heck, if I denied anyone's existence, they'd probably don't like me much. But I can see, I have memories and feelings and a consciousness and conscientiousness. Just because I don't see you nów, doesn't mean that I never saw you.

But the word GOD exists, so by virtue of the word existing, GOD exists.

Take the word 'atheist'. Do atheists exist? Yes, because we have a word for it. I may like them or not, if not, maybe I should debate them more, then they would like me more, but I find that very tiring. The possibility of the debate should be on the table, as should the consideration of the existence of GOD be the other way, reasonably. We may not agree, we may not be 100% the same, but that doesn't mean that we have to be militantly mean to eachother.

Call GOD however you will, assign lore to it all you will, but as a common humanity, we'll have to agree on at least sóme points to not kick eachother down all the time and be able to friendlily cooperate.
>>
>>18514232
>GOD probably wouldn't like me too if I denied His existence, and could probably make me into an unbeliever for it.
Aww, you're really considerate of skydaddy's feelings :')
>>
>>18514219
So if your kid got sick, you'd rather pray to God to heal him, rather than take him to an atheist doctor?
>>
>>18514232
>Because they don't pray. If they pray more, maybe GOD would like them more.
I prayed every single day (really) and sometimes multiple times a day, and also had other people pray multiple times a day, for the first 19 years of my life. And since I was 20, I haven't prayed at all. That was 15 years ago. Do you know what has practically changed? Absolutely nothing. Praying doesn't do a single thing. The only possible thing you could say it does, is form a bonding ritual for a community, or help you emotionally if you're a simple person and believe your imaginary friend is on your side (despite all evidence to the contrary).
>>
>>18514238
Did you accidentally reply to the wrong post or are you having a psychotic episode?
>>
>>18514246
Very ironic post coming from someone with an imaginary friend who lives in the sky. Answer the question, schizo. If your son had the plague, would you rather go to an atheist doctor or pray to God?
>>
>>18514250
What does your clotmaxxed question have to do with >>18514219?
>>
>>18514251
>doesn't want to answer the question because it BTFOs himself
Concession accepted, case rested.
>>
>>18514134
lol
>>
>why do atheists hate?
>proceeds to be an insufferable nigger
>>
>>18514256
What did I concede and why aren't you taking your antipsychotics?
>>
File: IMG_0405.jpg (292 KB, 996x993)
292 KB JPG
>>18513724
He took their foreskins.
>>
Because He didn’t create them as women
>>
>>18514332
I think about trannies more often than I think about Jesus
>>
>>18513724
Like 10 years ago you didnt give two flying shits about god, hell or any afterlives, infact you acted as if raking up body count for Hell was all the rage.
I want you to mind these years and compare to your current scizoparadigm.
>>
>>18514332
Feminist jew post
>>
Look human, you can remove this filth from my sight, or I can tear you a new asshole



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.