At which age did you grow out of atheism?

>>17828256 (OP)
Through my 20s.
God is the sum of universal conscious energy that is emergent through localized forms of life and other beings we may or may not be aware

>>17828275
By emergent you mean manifesting or do you actually mean he exists thanks to living beings?

>>17828256 (OP)
>christcuck discord shill 1
>>17828275
>christcuck discord shill 2

very organic

>>17828256 (OP)
When I realized I'd be sad if God didn't exist therefore He must exist.

>>17828256 (OP)
>>17828275
So uh... What was he thinking when he made them?

>>17828280
Consciousness is an inherent energy of the universe that is expressed through sufficiently advanced beings, whether by chance or design
>>17828289
More akin to buddhism or maybe straying into gnosticism depending on whether the universe itself was designed by a subbeing of energy

>>17828256 (OP)
By 35 or so I realized I'm not as smart and clever as I thought I was and decided to read the entire King James Bible and find out who Jesus actually was, since I ridiculed it for years without having really read the book(s)
By the end I was praying nonstop and felt a real freedom from the tyranny of the Self for the first time in my life

>>17828289
>nigger 1 and 2

>>17828298
>Consciousness is an inherent energy
So you're not really even describing pantheism, right? It's more of a regular polytheistic model where there just so happens to be one god whose domain is consciousness?

>>17828292
He thought "Imma make one looking like >>17828292's mom"

>>17828256 (OP)
>Yes, I believe in God
>And I am MUCH smarter than him.
Tick tock.

>>17828442
Get saved for real.

If God isn't real then why atheists exist

>>17828256 (OP)
The fact that you'd put that argument to represent the high IQ shows you don't understand it and you're a midwit.

>>17828256 (OP)
It has yet to happen because I've yet to hear a convincing argument why I should.

>theist logic

>>17828256 (OP)
Atheism is the most rational belief concerning religion

What evidence of God is there? None

>>17828275
ah yes the god that isn't a god and doesn't even fit into this conversation
very enlightened, you absolute fucking retard

Idk I think I was a cringy staunchy atheist in school. So below 18

But now I'm open to HaShem but I'm not sure.

They/them don't really answer my prayers and in general I have trouble feeling they/them?

I did lots of meditation and would call it some form of spiritual experience. But I can't say there was HaShem involved

>>17828256 (OP)
in my 20s when I realized I was not as strong as I thought to be and, indeed, needed to cope

>>17828307
Jesus literally eats shit, tortures animals for fun, has a rage attack against a tree because it's not fig season, pilfers the public coffers to buy wine and perfume, you must be pretty demented.

>>17828256 (OP)
Do you even know what those logical symbols mean?

>>17828256 (OP)
Jewish fairy tale nogs are beyond annoying. You deserve a million godjak threads.

When I learned that Christianity is more than just science denial, prosperity gospel, and obsession with Israel.

>>17828256 (OP)

When I was baptized as an infant and had the Holy Spirit instilled into me. Christ is King.

>>17828502
Blacklisted. Enjoy Hell. :)

Mellowed out into agnosticism in my mid teens, but it took years of synchronistic moments and unraveling past childhood trauma where dogma was used as justification in order to fully open back up to there being a greater will at work.

>>17828256 (OP)
27yo.

>>17831051
>childhood trauma where dogma was used as justification
I wish you knew how cringe this sounds. Please, furnish us with an example. This should be rich.

>>17830721
agnosticism is the only intellectually honest answer to the question of ontological certainty
if you ascribe that the science method will reveal the secrets of the universe you must affirm that it has not yet done so; therefore we lack the necessary knowledge to answer the question
and must be agnostic
(gnosis means knowledge and the “a” prefix depicts not having it)

>>17831463
Agnosticism is atheism

>>17831467
no atheism says I know for certain this that gods do not exist

agnosticism says there is no evidence
there’s a difference

>>17831472
>no atheism says I know for certain this that gods do not exist
no it doesn't, retard

>>17831476
yes it does, retard

>>17831482
You are not an intelligent person anon. Learn the meanings of words first and then come back. Atheism is a lack of belief for lack of evidence, when you say agnostics say they believe we can never know whether or not God exists, it's describing the same exact thing. Atheism is a lack of belief without evidence, Agnosticism is a lack of belief without evidence AND the belief we will never have evidence, it's a form of atheism anon, many scholars smarter than you have written thoughouly about this already. Get over it

>>17831467
This is shitty bait. Also why does this thread imply there’s only one god in the maturing mind of a person? Damn christcucks

>>17831499
>This is shitty bait.
I swear to God the average IQ of this board is easily under 100
>Theism
"I believe a God or Gods exist"
>Explicit Atheism (Antitheism)
"I Believe God does not exist"
>Implicit Atheism (Agnosticism)
"I do not believe God exists simply for lack of reliable evidence"
>Apatheism (what most retards mean when they call themselves Agnostic)
"I don't actually give a shit either way and just want to sit on my fence"

It's that simple, Learn. The. Meaning. Of. Words.

>>17830721
Comparing science and religion is like comparing Usain Bolt and Mike Tyson. Which one will win? It's a nonsensical question. Both will win in their own sport. Both science and religion will win. They are both great. Science is knowledge and religion is faith. Completely different things like Usain Bolt and Mike Tyson. You can't compare the two.

>>17831493
no anon, you’re wrong etymologically

A- (lack of) -theo- (dio : god) -ism : affirmation of concept

“No gods exist”

A- (lack of) -gnostic (gnosis : knowledge) -ism : affirmation of concept

“I do not know”

or are you saying you have discovered evidence proving a negative concept?

I was raised atheist and by the time I was in highschool (where everybody was christian) I was feeling pretty lonely. I almost went into one of their little meeting but caught myself, now I'm just agnostic

>>17831525
Anon, shut the fuck up. Your problem is you think all atheists are Hard Atheists (Antitheists) instead of Soft Atheists or Implicit Atheists, Agnosticism describes a form of implicit atheism. I do not give the slightest fuck what you personally think it means. Learn what words mean.

>>17831528
>now I'm just agnostic
Sucks that now you can't make friends with literally anyone but that's your choice friend.

>>17831537
I learned a long time ago faking interest in something is not the way to make friends

Agnosticism is actually way more anti-theist than atheism is. Atheism just says you shouldn't believe in a God without evidence, Agnosticism also believes that but they also believe we CAN'T even even find evidence by necessity. Atheism at least opens up the possibility that you can believe in God if the evidence is convincing enough, agnostics think the evidence can never be convincing enough, they believe in lacking knowledge.

>>17831549
Modern American atheism is literally marxist atheism "religious people are dumb and should be destroyed". Maybe you should learn what you're talking about faggot and realize why so many people ditched it

>>17831532
words don’t care how you feel about them or if your dick is soft or hard anon
words mean what they mean independent of your erectile disabilities

>>17831552
>Modern American atheism is literally marxist atheism
I'm an atheist and I have never read Marx, your move faggot

>>17831561
You don't need to read Marx to be wholly enveloped in left wing Marxist propaganda. Anything that tells you to hate something for no reason is wrong

>>17831493
>Atheism is a lack of belief
Yes.
>for lack of evidence
No, that's literally not what the word means.
Atheism means lack of belief.
A - lack of
Theism - theistic belief
>Agnosticism is a lack of belief
No. Agnosticism has nothing to do with belief at all.
>without evidence
Also no.
Agnostic means lacking knowledge.
A - without
Gnosis - knowledge
Agnostic means that you hold to a philosophical position that knowledge is impossible. It has nothing to do with religion in particular.

>>17831565
>Anything that tells you to hate something for no reason is wrong
I don't particularly hate you because you're faceless and anonymous and I don't know who you are in real life. Most religions have given me ample reason to hate them though, and it's not even necesarilly because of God

>>17831549
>Atheism just says you shouldn't believe in a God without evidence
No it doesn't. Atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist. It doesn't mean that your belief that God doesn't exist is reasonable or evidence-based, it just means that you don't believe that God exists. Refer to. >>17831567
You can't just change the meaning of a word because you think it looks or sounds better.

>>17831571
Point being the nog standard package atheism that most people get is literally that, hate religion for no reason. That's wrong because Christianity was a net positive in the end.

That said you can definitely still hate Christianity for choices it made along the way.

>>17831567
>No, that's literally not what the word means.
they lack belief
because
there is a lack
of
credible evidence
Most atheists, are not antitheists, they aren't out to actively oppose God or assert with certainty God doesn't exist
>Agnostic means lacking knowledge.
You believe you can never have evidence that God exists, thus you're an atheist when you call yourself Agnostic, in fact you actually lean closer to Antitheism in this regard

>>17831574
>Atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist.
>Refer to. >>17831567
>"a lack of belief..."

There is no way you aren't a troll, 10/10 bro because you fucking got me, there is no way anyone is this oblivious unless it's on purpose

>>17831587
Well he is in a christard thread

>>17831587
A belief that God doesn't exist is the same thing as a lack of belief that God exists. I'm not sure you have the cognitive power to be participating in this kind of discussion.

>>17831590
>A belief that God doesn't exist is the same thing as a lack of belief that God exists
Lmao no it absolutely is not

>>17831582
>because
Show me where in the definition of the word atheist you see the word "because".

>>17831591
He might be esl.

>>17831592
Having a lack of belief implies they can be convinced one way or another, because they aren't actively choosing to not believe something, they simply lack belief, because they haven't been given valid reasons (evidence) to believe either way

>>17831591
A lack of belief that God exists refers to non-sentient objects like rocks, which lack thoughts.
A belief that God does not exist describes human beings which have religious thoughts and opinions.
Which one of these definitions do you think is most applicable to our discussion?

>>17831595
>Having a lack of belief implies they can be convinced one way or another
No it doesn't. Lacking belief means lacking belief. It doesn't mean anything else. Unless you mean to tell me that people who already have beliefs cannot be convinced of things.

Guenon refutes all the hylics and christcucks on this board.

>>17831590
>A belief that God doesn't exist is the same thing as a lack of belief that God exists.
Not necessarily, though most atheists claim to be the latter despite being the former.

>>17831594
Maybe, but it also seems like people who use the term "agnostic" to describe themselves genuinely think that agnosticism is some middle-of-the-road position, which is simply not true, as others have already pointed out, agnosticism might actually lean more into hard atheism if anything. Most people who call themselves agnostic are actually either apatheist or deist and aren't smart enough to call themselves either.

>>17831607
Yup. Atheism, like all leftist ideologies, is poorly defined. People gravitated towards it for one reason or another in the past but as soon as the internet exposed it for how silly most people were that processed to be atheist it ceased being culturally relevant and simply became part of the background like it should be

>>17831607
I conflated the two because people use them interchangeably. Strictly speaking, a lack of belief that God exists only refers to objects which lack beliefs, namely inanimate objects which are incapable of having beliefs. However, there is no point in using the word in that way, so I conflated the two terms which is technically incorrect, which the other anon was quick to point out. If you are an atheist, it means that you believe that God doesn't exist, unless you are braindead, in which case you lack a belief that God exists since you are braindead.

>>17831619
I'm agnostic and I don't care to define myself as anything else spiritually because I'm not a spiritual person. I'll keep my ear out for the second coming

>>17831619
The word "agnostic" does not refer to a religious position. Like you said, people who call themselves that generally do not know what it means and may be under the impression that it is a "middle of the road" position when in reality it is a totally different, separate position entirely.

>>17831628
So why not just call yourself an atheist at that point? Because atheism carries a different connotation? Not calling a spade a spade because of word association alone is midwit behavior.

>>17831641
Because atheism is hateful

>>17831643
[citation needed]

>>17831643
>Because atheism is hateful
see
>>17831641
>Not calling a spade a spade because of word association alone is midwit behavior.

>>17831644
I was raised atheist. My father was atheist because of something that happened in his life. He hated God for it. He didn't deny God existed. He hated God for taking something from him.

I don't hate God

>>17831646
Your father wasn't an atheist, hatred of God is Misotheism, not atheism.

>>17831650
Right atheism doesn't actually mean anything.

>>17831651
Well of course it doesn't to people that don't read like (you). Atheists can't hate God if they believe God doesn't exist or lack belief he exists. That's contradictory

>>17831653
Wow good for you restating the obvious. Like I said all leftist philosophies are ultimately just a random collection of loosely associated ideas, like atheism. A word so irrelevant it has probably had 20 definitions

>>17831656
I think words with broad definitions scare you because you're stupid and refuse to learn what words mean and are more likely to define words based on emotional associations rather than definitions.

>>17831659
One reason I didn't like atheism was because it was almost too easy to debate religious people. It felt cruel

>>17831662
>it was almost too easy to debate religious people
I know you're lying, because religious people always make it a point to be difficult to debate with, 4/10

>>17831663
Please don't make me laugh, or do, actually. Laughing is good... I think

>>17831659
You accuse your opponent of what you are guilty of. You've made up new words throughout this thread without referring to a dictionary even once. Probably because you are incapable of reasonable debate as your position is not rational.

>>17831666
Other anons already provided dictionary definitions as a gotcha even though they agree with what I've been saying lmao

>>17831664
Also debating religious people is so easy and that's why it got so popular. That's also why people ditched it because they saw it was just a hateful attack. After I witnessed what so called atheists represented I stopped associating myself with that. Out of a general philosophy to try a remove as much hate out of my life as possible, which sounds gay

>>17831662
>>17831672
NTA but
>identifying as atheist is hateful because it's basically bullying the retarded
I think you've invented a whole new level of atheism

>>17831689
No? It's scientifically impossible to prove God doesn't exist.

>>17831692
atheists aren't saying that god does or does not exist, they simply don't concern themselves with the existence of god and dismiss the idea of god for lack of evidence

>>17831698
Well those people are imbeciles and shouldn't be a concern

I think where a lot of theists get confused about the nature of atheism is that while it's impossible to know whether or not God exists, and thus can be dismissed according to atheism, specific religions like Christianity and Judaism DO make real, testable claims about reality, and when those claims turn out to be false, theists naturally will feel attacked. God can still be real even if Christianity and Judaism specifically are bullshit

>>17831671
That's exactly what I mean. That's not a dictionary, it's literally AI slop. You are either not smart enough to be debating in the first place, or you are extremely intellectually dishonest, in which case you are not to be taken seriously.

>>17831692
I think the epicurean paradox pretty well disproves the personal omni-God, or at least it disproves any notion of an all powerful, omniscient entity that is benevolent in any human sense of the word, so different as to be basically amoral. And if God is basically amoral with respect to us, then I don't see why you would include him in your world model if you don't have to.

>>17831698
You just keep repeating the same lies.
>for lack of evidence
Remind us where in the definition of the word "atheist" you see the word "because". Not even the AI slop definition you provided has the word "because" in it.
>>17831671
>>17831567

>>17831728
It's entirely possible that god, or gods, are dead and we would never know even if we became 5th dimensional beings

>>17829963
They're demons

>>17828256 (OP)
I have never been atheist in the sense that I denied the existence of God but I have gone in and out of irreligion

>>17831744
Just imagine the entire human race, on every planet, just blasting resources into some void furnace, just to pop one guy into the 5th dimension

>>17831779
also, even then, the human race can't theoretically colonize every known planet, let alone perfectly efficiently, because there are parallel dimensions that do exist that we're not harvesting resources from. We just got unlucky and landed on a lower plane of existence

>>17831791
but that's just in theory

>>17831791
then just on the hard science part, I doubt we'll reach the edge of the of the universe we see today, let alone where it will be if we set out today with light speed.

Then you have the concept that our universe "bubble" is just one of many expanding spheres, which creates an infinite amount of possibilities even on our plane of existence.

And even if at the end we somehow devised a way to sense if there is a God, it could not work because of something we did along the way.

>>17831725
> You are either not smart enough to be debating in the first place, or you are extremely intellectually dishonest, in which case you are not to be taken seriously.
You're flailing dude