Certified christcuck moment

>>81870280 (OP)
Only the most retarded kind of American protestants say things like this, though.

>>81870289
>though
selfish little fuck, kill yourself

>>81870292
though though though though though though though, fuck you

>>81870316
>though though though ...
you will hang.

>>81870320
>though
lol noob get dunked on though

No actual christian says this. It's not unfathomable for God to create the entire universe. The bible isjust the written word based on the experiences of people at the time. They had limited understanding.

>>81870280 (OP)
that's funny that atheisttards scour youtube comments filled with old boomers to look for enemies to fight because they get their asses beat in any real discussion

>>81870365
atheists win basically every debate against Christians because no Christian can explain his beliefs logically without using logical fallacies and magical thinking.

That's why Christians have started exclusively debating Muslims because it is easier to debate a more inferior and morally bankrupt religion than debate the existence of God in general.

>>81870292
thoughbeit you are retarded o algo or however the chicken is fried

>>81871052
>atheists win basically every debate against Christians because no Christian can explain his beliefs logically without using logical fallacies and magical thinking.
is this a joke? jay dyer makes you clowns look like retards and has never been defeated

>>81871083
Im not gonna watch this retard delusion enjoyer's videos. Give me his talking points.

>>81871052
>>81871119
atheists "win" debates by assuming logic, morality, and truth are valid... while having no foundation for any of them
you borrow tools from a theistic worldview to argue against it
that's not winning, that's parasiting

Christianity grounds reason, logic, and objective morality in something eternal
atheism offers "things just are" and calls that an argument

>>81871168
none of this is an argument against atheism, you are insulting the moral character and debating ability of hypothetical atheists, but you of course will be unable to truly prove the existence of god to any atheist who comes across you

this is why christians are only able to convert other religions to christianity, but basically almost never convert true atheists. you really cannot argue against a secular, scientific worldview

>>81871188
you're dodging the point. it's not about insulting atheists, it's about the foundation of your worldview
you use logic, truth, and morality to argue.. but can't justify why those things exist or matter in a purely material universe

"secular, scientific worldview" presupposes order, reason, and uniformity
but under atheism, everything is random atoms with no ultimate purpose or value
so the question isn't just "can you explain the world?"
it's "can you explain why your explanation makes sense in the first place?"

>>81871257
>you use logic, truth, and morality to argue.. but can't justify why those things exist or matter in a purely material universe
I'm an atheist who doesn't believe in "morality," i don't think morality even exists and is an abstract concept. I disbelieve in God solely based off logical and scientific grounds, and also my own personal observations. Logic and the scientific method are two things in the universe that are not subjective.
>but under atheism, everything is random atoms with no ultimate purpose or value
because there is no ultimate purpose or value to anything, you desperately want to believe there is a purpose to the world so you cling to the religious worldview to give you a sense of purpose of morality, where there is none
>can you explain why your explanation makes sense in the first place?"
again, atheists don't try to explain why they exist. they only try to explain why your particular religion or god does not exist

>>81871268
>i'm an atheist who doesn't believe in "morality"
then you have no basis to say anything is right or wrong, including religious belief
you forfeit moral objections the moment you call morality abstract and meaningless
>logic and the scientific method are two things in the universe that are not subjective
you use logic as if it's universal and immaterial, but your worldview says only matter exists
that's the contradiction, you rely on non-material laws in a materialist system
>because there is no ultimate purpose or value
thanks for proving the point. atheism offers no purpose, no value, no moral truth
you can accept that, just don't pretend it's a rational or hopeful worldview
>atheists don't try to explain why they exist
then you're not offering an alternative, just tearing down
but if you can't explain why reason, logic, or truth work in your worldview, you're debating on borrowed tools

>>81871168
>atheism offers "things just are" and calls that an argument
It's more than an argument it's the state of all existence and everything that is. Things are the way they are. The end.

You can quote ancient scrolls until you're blue in the face, they don't mean anything. They're the equivalent of a fourth grader making rules for his clubhouse, it's all bogus nonsense invented by 70 IQ shepherds that didn't know what a cloud was.

Can we stop framing atheism as its own belief system too? It's merely the rejection of your weird fairy tales from a violent desert. It's not "competing" with your garbage, it's simply the absence of it.

>>81871306
humans have been using logic and reason to discuss the world around them for hundreds of years before christianity. did none of their philosophies count either? or do you believe the world is only 2000 years old or something

>>81871377
>things are the way they are
ah yes, the deep wisdom of "stuff just exists bro"
not an explanation, just intellectual laziness dressed as honesty
>ancient scrolls... 70 IQ shepherds...
and yet here you are, emotionally seething at them 2000 years later
weird reaction to a fairy tale you supposedly don't care about
>atheism isn't a belief system
but you make claims about reality, morality, truth, and logic.. all while denying anything that can ground them
you don't believe in fairy tales, you believe in accidents with opinions
congrats

>>81871388
wow, people used logic before christianity? no way
next you'll tell me they used their eyes before inventing optics
using something doesn't mean you understand where it comes from or why it works
you're flexing borrowed tools while mocking the only worldview that actually explains the toolbox

>>81870365
Truth nuke of biblical proportions

>>81871412
>using something doesn't mean you understand where it comes from or why it works
>you're flexing borrowed tools while mocking the only worldview that actually explains the toolbox
that's, just, like, your opinion, man

>>81871412
You haven't proved or substantiated anything about your religion being true you're just saying that "atheists are dumb haha"

You cannot objectively prove your jewish god exists to me

>>81870320
YOU will hang though

>>81871412
>not an explanation
Neither is your nonsense. The universe existing because "it does" is still far better than saying a giant capricious wizard made it for fun.

>emotionally seething at them 2000 years later
I'm often in pure disbelief that in the post-information age where every human has unfettered access to information that there are still billions of people that would rather sing songs to the men in the sky than accept reality. And these people want to change laws in accordance with what they assume their silent, invisible sky friends want. That annoys me greatly.

>you believe in accidents with opinions
You believe. You have to believe since what you claim is reality is so stupidly outlandish the only way it works is to suspend your disbelief and make-believe it's real in your head. I don't waste any time believing shit, because my senses can detect reality just fine. I don't have to consult an ancient scroll to "understand" what I think. That's just crazy and stupid to me.

>>81870292
Only ESL retards seethe about the word though, though.