Any other good anti-religion movies? Trying to save my tradlarping friend from falling for the christcuck meme
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Any other good anti-religion movies? Trying to save my tradlarping friend from falling for the christcuck meme
kys
oy vey!
meanwhile in reality:
I like how you didn't include percentage of the population.
Yeah imagine when that bottom bar is 100% of the population. There won’t be anyone complaining about immigration then.
>a single digit portion of the population will become 100% because... it just might okay!
isn’t that what you actively want
yes, it would be great if people rejected bullshit.
no one cares about america
that's why you learned its language and post on its websites
ok then
What a coincidence. According to the archives, this meme only dates back to an entire month ago. Recently after the whole Israel-Gaza conflict. It's almost as if someone is pushing some sort of agenda here.
>original content bad
Christians are the only ones supporting Israel.
https://israelallies.org/israels-top-50-christian-allies-2023
Idiocracy
Dogma is not an anti-religion movie. It literally has God in it.
>includes judaism and islam
At least he had the balls for that, and not the usual only Christianity is le bad.
>only christianity is le bad
Atheists will say other religions suck too. Don't know where you're getting that from that only Christianity gets picked on.
>Atheists will say other religions suck too
The honest ones will pay lip service to "all religion is bad" but that only goes as far as saying they don't care for Islam and Judaism. They never have the endless parodies and documentaries for them that they do for Christianity because they're afraid of getting killed for Islam or cancelled for Judaism. They know Christians won't do anything so they hit them the hardest. Only the original four horsemen dared criticize Islam and They shut up after charlie Hebdo. Now the immigration is so fricked in Europe they'll get cancelled at the very least, even though Islam is 10× more doctornially violent then Christianity ever was. They almost never say anything about Hinduism and Buddhism because they don't know that much about them. The fact that almost everything every "far right" Pastor in the 90s claimed would happen, is now happening and it's propents intersect almost perfectly with Atheisim has pushed me further back into Chrisitanity than anything.
its almost as if you're only interacting with western atheists on western media platforms on a daily basis, so naturally they mock the religion they grew up with all their lives the most
if you wanna see islam geting mocked, you have to learn to read persian twitter
atheists always attack the culture of their host nation and destabilise it, yeah, that’s accurate
>don't point out bullshit, more bullshit relies on it! its destabilizing!
>it’s bullshit! despite all the morality and stuff, we are going to keep all that even though it’s impossible to justify coherently, but we’ve modified it so you need to import 500000 Black folk and say that men who cut their wieners off are women!
Totally not a mind virus to destroy societies lmao
Not that anon but atheism is societal rot.
you literally live in the best era of history moronic chud
>commie just admitted the trump era is the best era of human history
we got him, boys
>period with the highest prevalence of mental illnesses, suicide and other signs of unhappiness
>’B-but you can buy more funkopops now chud!’
Do you keep sucking out the poison over and over again, or do you stop hanging around with snakes?
It’s difficult when these snakes and their good goys are everywhere.
>Women can have penises
>Millions of people invading your lands yearly but it's not an invasion
>But you need to give billions to other counties because your responsible for their defense
>Strangers on gossip sites can get you fired and ruin your life if disagree with any of the above
>Less time off and property rights than a literal medieval peasant
>There's no mystery or meaning to the universe, only endless science and vaccines all the way down
>And that is objective. Until it isn't. But that's ok since it can change. So believe us no matter what and be ready to change your mind when we say so.
Truly a time of wonders.
>there's no mystery or meaning to the universe
Lol are you serious? There is tons of that and I don't think even a materialist would argue that there wasn't. That's your projection.
Not him but there is a certain kind of solidity to materialism. You have a formula for the universe of which there can be no deviation anywhere whatsoever. There can’t be a single fairy hiding in a flower in the whole vastness of it, you have to outright deny that. The universe is large, and full of many configurations of things, but you already know the laws of what can conceivably be configured, and there is nothing outside of it. You can’t speculate on immaterial laws or the way our sense perception creates an image that may not be directly representative because if you do you’re engaging in continental language games or whatever.
It's a tool, just like any other tool. It's not an all encompassing view that you have to apply to everything, which is where religious people get caught up commonly I think.
that’s science, I am talking about materialism as a philosophical stance
You don't have to apply a philosophical stance to everything. A philosophical stance is also a kind of tool, or I think it will be one day when more of us know what we're doing.
people do this. science isn’t a stance but a set of descriptions and analogies useful for their own time. materialism is the stance that only matter exists. people conflate the two for ideological reasons
>There can’t be a single fairy hiding in a flower in the whole vastness of it, you have to outright deny that.
You are literally complaining about problems you just made up. No one is stopping you from claiming fairies aren’t real lmao, you just can’t prove it so no one cares about your opinion. You know fairies aren’t real, that’s why you are projecting your own short-comings in belief onto society as a whole, even though lots of people still genuinely believe in ghosts, fairies and other moronic shit, they even write books and have discussions about it, there’s a whole industry related to the paranormal and supernatural. In the arts, people still deal with the mysteries of life and reality. In religion, billions of people still believe in some kind of god, even those that don’t adhere to any religion, because they know that the true mysteries of life cannot and will not be explained by science. You on the other hand want to extrapolate you incapacity of believing in the mysteries to society because deep down you know that what you can’t see can’t be proved and therefore is not real. The problem is not society, it’s you.
>women can have penises
Gender isn’t the binary cavemen thought it was. This is just biology. Our names for things don’t determine physical reality
>invasion
They are here to work and do the jobs you don’t want to. Society would collapse with out them but be fine without you
>billions to other countries
It’s called diplomatic strategy
>gossip sites
Ie, people finding out that i’m a rapist has social consequences now, oh no
>less time off
This is pure chud logic. Kind arthur wasn’t real. Christianity and the wealthy european elite kept people in chattel slavery and now you want to go back to it
>no mystery
We understand how stuff works now? This is a complaint?
>all that is objective
Yes
>until it can change
Yes
>They are here to work and do the jobs you don’t want to. Society would collapse with out them but be fine without you
Biggest cope ever posted on Cinemaphile
>not basing your entire life on lies is rot
>nothing created everything
lie one
>despite this, and the fact that we are the result of random atomic collisions, my moral and political beliefs, in my causally determined chemical thought sequences, are objectively true
about 500 lies in here
>we haven't explained everything therefore magic skydaddy
That’s not what I said at all. If the way you defend your metaphysical and moral axioms is to appeal to “we don’t know yet” btw, that’s literally equivalent to appealing to magic. Oh why should I do X? Here’s an IOU for an explanation, in the meantime just obey me
>anything you don't know is magic
this reminds me of that pasta about sherlock, dumb people writing smart people, where intelligence is literally magic.
Intelligence is being able to follow a coherent train of thought which you clearly are not capable of. And the pasta you’re talking about contrasted having a thorough explanation (no country for old men) to one that appeals endlessly to some oncoming explanation to string viewers along (sherlock) which is literally what you are doing
So now you've just called secular study of the universe, science, to endlessly stringing people along. As opposed to simply lying to people.
No I never said anything about science, I said it about you. Odd that you conflate the two
>why are your moral and metaphysical beliefs correct
>I don’t know yet, but they are
There’s nothing scientific about that at all
>see these things you didn't say? you said them.
thanks for summarising all of your posts for me, it makes responding much quicker
>no you
Are you a christian?
>lies
>implying
All this aside it’s obvious that since atheist thought took root the western world had gone to absolute shit and probably won’t exist in a century at most.
Why is that bad? The western world is built on slavery, exploitation and superstition. It’s time for it to go.
>it was better when we were lying to everyone and everyone believed the lies. the lies being exposed? no that wasn't the cause of anything.
religion is a lie no matter how straightedge punk rock it makes you feel
I disagree. What now
You are objectively wrong and in denial, and its quite sad.
What a compelling argument, clearly you’ve got it all figured out
I would ask you to explain why you think your religious beliefs have merit. Would you indulge me or deflect?
Because literally nothing about atheism makes epistemological sense. Let’s just take sense information to start with. Your model is essentially arguing that spilled milk can give you an accurate map of london, that completely aimless chemical causality has constructed a 1:1 representation of ideal and physical laws to you, which are taken as axiomatic. You cannot coherently articulate terms like logical or true without circular reasoning, these functions are built in to the organ which developed aimlessly by random chance to help you eat and have sex, at best we can call these constructions useful, but certainly not infallible. It’s the problem descartes describes, unless there is some compelling, extra sensory objectivity to these models, they can’t be trusted. If you want mathematics, you need a platonic model where mathematics is a set of objective, immaterial laws instructive upon our minds and reality, or else it’s just the random effect of pulsating meat becoming self aware. That’s not even getting into contingency, and how a series of contingent, non self justifying things suddenly gain the ability to autonomously justify and create themselves given the name “universe”, instead of the logical follow through that matter is in fact conditioned on immaterial existence. But just ignore all that and call it brainwashing
>axioms are circular
>the bible being true according to the bible? that's not circular because it says it isn't.
yes maybe you’re starting to get it. what you’re accusing them of, you are doing constantly but shifting the fulcrum from a book to… I don’t know. nothingness? our senses and ideal intonations are objectively true because… nothingness made them that way.
>you see, its all "NO YOU!"
Do you think these posts convince anyone reading them? I’m giving you an account of actual philosophy and you respond by deflecting which is the entire premise of the initial post, that you commit to them same unjustifiable axiomatic thinking you accuse others of. At least their model is coherent, and they give absolute truth value to ideal laws by making them baked in to the immaterial source of reality itself. They don’t just tell people to shut up and spam meme phrases
you seem to be assuming alot about my beliefs. I asked you why your religious beliefs make sense, not why atheism doesn't make sense. What religion do you consider yourself to be a part of?
It’s implicit. If a model of reality under materialism makes no sense, then dualism is true. This is all just plato, so it’s not even specific to one religion.
So what do you think about partical physics?
Analogies to describe relations between things. We have moved past a world of solid, reducible objects, particle physics is really just a language of flux in relation to flux. It’s a process of in relational changes like everything we experience
You just need to make a couple of assumptions.
1) you exist
2) your senses are reliable
And then from that you can build these hopefully accurate models of reality.
You can say, there's nothing to justify that you exist or that your senses are accurate. What are you arguing then? That you don't exist? That literally can't know anything about anything? I don't understand what the alternative is here.
>your senses are reliable
Whats funny is the scientific method is built around the assumption our senses aren't reliable. An assumption that's been proven over and over.
How are you doing science if your senses aren't reliable? Please don't make responses like these.
by collecting hard data that can't be changed just because you don't like how it feels.
If you can collect hard data, your senses are reliable.
No, it means the data is reliable.
If your senses aren't reliable then you can't collect the data. You have to use your senses for everything. If they're not reliable you can't do anything. I'm not gonna keep repeating this, if you're just gonna obtusely refuse to understand this simple axiom then, y'know, it's a waste of time.
our senses aren't reliable. therefore information needs to be reduced to terms that our feelings can't change.
the scientific method is built around peer review, so the aggregate of our senses. its the best we have
what you meant to say is reproducibility.
which is proven through... peer review.
>reproducibility is proven by reproduction
wow
And the peers say... men can be women!
everything related to transgenderism is part of the reproducibility crisis
Not that anon, but isn't it even worse? AFAIK the whole "gender" concept lacks any evidence whatsoever. So it's not that we can't reproduce the research; there simply is *no* research. All I can find is some insane claims, without any data, that were accepted as facts since the 60s or so.
It wasn't pushed until after john money and his test subjects were dead.
What if some things are true that aren't repoducible
like what things?
>I can’t help but believe in these things which I use to navigate reality
>If I am coherently to believe in them, I must assume they are objective
>the only way they can be objective is to be inherent to the structure of reality on a metaphysical level
>therefore in order for any of my beliefs or actions to make sense materialism cannot be true
>the only way they can be objective is to be inherent to the structure of reality on a metaphysical level
sorry, its all just dust in the wind. youre just a really complicated flurry or sound and could be represented with a string of numbers
I agree with that. I just think that the numbers are platonic and literally instructive on the workings of physics themselves rather than being nominative. This isn’t some weirdo stance among mathematical circles, but for some reason among atheists it becomes outrageous.
You might enjoy Our Mathematical Universe by Max Tegmark. Also Permutation City by Greg Egan
I must exist to be able to exist.
Ok, actually, it could be that I don't have to exist to be able to do things, like argue that I exist, and I just think that I do because they do in the world as I know it. But if I'm wrong about everything then I can't use my model of the world to retroactively justify myself.
But then what?
>They almost never say anything about Hinduism and Buddhism because they don't know that much about them.
This isn’t really that crazy. Most English speaking atheists are reacting to their society and Christian dogma they’re exposed to. When Christianity dies/is marginalized to a small percentage of elderly people and is replaced by the other hoodoo nonsense you’ll see more people pointing out the problems with vishnu and buddai or whatever.
What really makes Christianity and atheism interact so much (besides the west just being more Christian) is that Christianity has traditionally spread through verbal proselytizing more when compared to Islam spreading through the sword and Judaism being an ethnic/cultural thing that doesn’t even try to recruit outsiders. Muslims don’t even engage in debate (just behead) and israelites are overwhelmingly atheist themselves (besides reclusive Hasidic sects).
Well, that is the thing that Christians will always have a harder life than Muslims ( inb4 muh constant wars boohoo Palestine Genocide) because they cannot kill their opposition in the strictest sense. 1000 years ago they did but there was always considered "evolution" and now Christians are "christlike" by rarely ever intimidating people.
What is really getting fricking annoying in society is the entitlement to mock Christians and so we may see violence again because there is no other choice. Like people who get mad that you are mad Lil Nas X became a gay sexual object Jesus. Like, OMG I thought this was THE WEST you are allowed to make Jesus suck dicks here hump pumph.
Thing is IRL most Christians would be agreeable to peoples questions and admit there are some mysticism in the faith that cannot be proven. But I bet most Atheists would never enjoy agreeing they are wrong on The Bible when they say its 99% lies. When we are always scientifically proving every story after story. Like how we found the real Sodom and Gamorrah and the sand had been crystalized by extreme heat? hmmm
We also found some old ass city in Numbers IIRC it was a recent news story.
Christians created a society that allowed them to be questioned and everyone benefited from the free exchange of ideas. Meanwhile state atheists in china and the soviet union were murdering hundreds of millions for wrongthink. It’s the strength and gentility of christianity that atheism, like it does with all of its components, parasitically adopted and used to garrotte the hand which gave it the wire. It’s entirely self destructive, it attacks the epistemology it is based on. It’s like israelites benefiting from western civility and simultaneously attacking it until the system removes them or collapses. They constantly go on about the church persecuting heretics and then actively court the revival of such practices, and at this point I myself don’t think it’s such a bad idea anymore.
you're missing the part where everyone with an IQ above 100 knows religion is gay and moronic but required for social cohesion and that israelites have been doing everything in their power to undermine western values and european identity ever since the Holocaust became their new foundational myth
The others don't post gay shit like this on the Internet.
Why are atheistcucks so fragile ?
You sound like a poor friend if you picking out anti-religion moves for your friend for the sole purpose of making him atheist.
it's to save him from brainwashing. he's going to see the light from his closed-minded bullshit
>it's to save him from brainwashing
The only one who's been brainwashed is you, moron, and now you're literally trying to brainwash your friend too with shitty movie propaganda. I swear atheists are the dumbest idiots in the world.
3 Idris elbas?
did anyone except /r/atheism watch it?
My dad took me to see this in theaters. The next week he took me to see W. He does not have good taste.
We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God, begotten not made, one in being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven;
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered, died, and was buried.
On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.
He has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come.
Amen.
Amen
Zeitgeist
>Trying to save my tradlarping friend
Save him from what? You are atheist and you cant even google anti-religion movies list on imdb. He might be tradlarping but you are smartlarping.
>no you can’t have meaning your life beyond being a consumer of the newest product
I genuinely hate atheists. Ever since atheism spread to normal people the world has become a soulless mess that’s slowly dying out.
Truth. Atheism is cancer for both the individual mind and for society at large.
Atheism only gave the hedonism that was reserved for religious leaders to the common man.
Why not worship The Sun?
>exists
>literal life-giver
>reulates time itself
>impossibly old
>virtually endless
>incomprehensibly powerful
>provides those who worship it (sunbathe) with tangible gifts (sexy tan)
>punishes those who overuse its generosity (burns and cancer)
>does not care about offerings and sacrifices
I dare you to find a better god
Jesus
disqualified by the very first criterium
>A criterium, or crit, is a bike race consisting of several laps around a closed circuit, the length of each lap or circuit ranging from about 400 m to 10,000 m.
Nice one ESL
yeah he meant criterion, probably a typo on his part.
>virtually endless
>I dare you to find a better god
I worship Debicki. She's bigger, too.
>does not care about offerings or sacrifices
source?
God created the sun after he created light just to mock sun-worshipers.
The moon is pretty neato too
>inb4 just reflecting the sun
>"At that time, saith the LORD, they shall bring out the bones of the kings of Judah, and the bones of his princes, and the bones of the priests, and the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, out of their graves: And they shall spread them before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and after whom they have walked, and whom they have sought, and whom they have worshipped: they shall not be gathered, nor be buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth. And death shall be chosen rather than life by all the residue of them that remain of this evil family, which remain in all the places whither I have driven them, saith the LORD of hosts."- Jeremiah 8:1-3
>"And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the Lord thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven."- Deuteronomy 4:19
Atheists know nothing about the faith that they so vehemently hate. You are pawns of the devil, you believe the lies of the devil because he claims he can make you better than other people, he appeals to your pride and you believe him because you are proud.
The vilification of pride is one of the central themes of Christianity and one of the most evil things about it. The Christian is convinced that everyone equally deserves eternal torment from the moment of their birth and that no one has any merit or worth of their own. It is a resentful ideology designed to mentally beat down and demoralize.
>Everyone equally deserves eternal torment
Sin makes us worthy of God's judgement, God is infinitely righteous and Holy and just, hell is the just punishment for sinning against a perfectly righteous and Holy God.
>No one has any worth of their own
Wrong, we all have worth but because of sin our worth is corrupted and made worthless. Our purpose was to worship God, to rejoice in His love to live and give praise the Lord not for His benefit but for our own benefit. Satan in his hatred for God and his pride in himself took man's eyes off of God and caused man to look at himself and become puffed up and prideful instead of looking to God who gave man all that he had.
>Sin makes us worthy of God's judgement.
Except this is 'original sin'. You are just born with it. So everyone is supposedly deserving of hell from conception and God just gives out grace, apparently at random, to some instead of others. So, it is even denied that the saved have done anything to contribute to their own salvation.
It's so horribly bleak!
It only makes sense if you realize this ideology is the product of misanthropic, resentful minds who hated humanity and wanted to subvert people's esteem of themselves and their nations.
>describes specifically calvinism
>attempts to apply this to a millennia + of history where arts, philosophy and europe flourished
it’s never gonna work champ. people look at the secular world today and can see it’s objectively a self hating trashfire totally unlike the religious society that came before it. you’re trying to make people hate chartes cathedral and love brutalism. it’s not going to convince anyone
>oooo pretty building
>that means Jehovah definitely chose the Tribe of Abraham as the chosen people!
yes, if I want the truth about an epoch of history, should I believe what some ideologically zogged homosexual says about it, or should I believe the actual material evidence it left, the buildings put up by it? I will believe the buildings
>yes, if I want the truth about an epoch of history, should I believe what some ideologically zogged homosexual says about it, or should I believe the actual material evidence it left, the buildings put up by it? I will believe the buildings
>shows an image from modern secular society
yes, my point exactly
>describes specifically calvinism
Been reading Aquinas. I'm getting this from his explanation of predestination.
Every soul is saved or damned for certain from eternity. We have some limited free choice that doesn't change the final outcome only the details of how we get there. But it's OK because the baseline is deserving to go to hell, so there's no injustice on God's part.
Why is there evil? I ask.
Because God wanted some 'different grades of being'.
I will never understand how this doesn't cause depression in Christians because it is certainly depressing to me.
Thomas Aquinas was just a gay with nothing to do with Jesus or the Apostles. Who cares about him? His entire MO was to give credence and authority to the Pope under the guise of scholarly reason.
Aquinas didn’t believe in predestination, free will was pretty central to his doctrine, to the point where he ascribes the renegade angels as having free will to reject God.
>Only an agent endowed with an intellect can act with a judgment which is free, in so far as it apprehends the common note of goodness; from which it can judge this or the other thing to be good. Consequently, wherever there is intellect, there is free-will. It is therefore manifest that just as there is intellect, so is there free-will in the angels, and in a higher degree of perfection than in man.
So I don’t know who you were reading, but it wasn’t him. He takes the socratic view of morality, ie, that it is a kind of knowledge. Aquinas contends that in every action we, in this platonic chain of affections you have described, strive for God, the source of good itself, truth itself, being itself. These affections can be disordered (desiring lust instead of seeing the divine beauty through eros), thus leading to sin out of a kind of ignorance. There is a kind of determinism there, in that the more we choose to learn and contemplate, the more we will automatically align with the will of God. I actually disagree with this, and think ockham had it correct where he said knowledge has frick all to do with morality and it is infact the movement of the will in assenting to grace (both argued, unlike you are saying, that God supplies sufficient grace to everyone at all times), and not some passive intellect. People can know a thing is wrong and do it anyway. In either case, they are determinists like you are saying
I like that "serious" theology relies upon schools of thought that basically no christian today follows or is even aware of.
>I pretended to read aquinas and got called out
>this means no christian is aware of aquinas
???
Or I'm commenting on how deep down the well you need to go to find something remotely coherent in religious thought.
aquinas isn’t really deep down the well. if you look up a history of philosophy, he’s usually right in the middle of it. anyone remotely educated knows who he is
>almost eight centuries? that's like yesterday!
>dude plato lived like a billion years ago therfore nobody know who he is
I forgot the roman pantheon is still worshiped and the temple system still exists.
neoplatonists certainly do exist. but platonism exists in every system of theology alive today because it was so influential, so yes, there’s a bit of paganism present in all religion because religion is originating from the same ideas and impulses
>Aquinas didn’t believe in predestination
https://sacred-texts.com/chr/aquinas/summa/sum026.htm
"I answer that, It is fitting that God should predestine men. For all things are subject to His providence, as was shown above (Q[22], A[2]). Now it belongs to providence to direct things towards their end, as was also said (Q[22], AA[1],2). The end towards which created things are directed by God is twofold; one which exceeds all proportion and faculty of created nature; and this end is life eternal, that consists in seeing God which is above the nature of every creature, as shown above (Q[12], A[4]). The other end, however, is proportionate to created nature, to which end created being can attain according to the power of its nature. Now if a thing cannot attain to something by the power of its nature, it must be directed thereto by another; thus, an arrow is directed by the archer towards a mark. Hence, properly speaking, a rational creature, capable of eternal life, is led towards it, directed, as it were, by God. The reason of that direction pre-exists in God; as in Him is the type of the order of all things towards an end, which we proved above to be providence. Now the type in the mind of the doer of something to be done, is a kind of pre-existence in him of the thing to be done. Hence the type of the aforesaid direction of a rational creature towards the end of life eternal is called predestination. For to destine, is to direct or send. Thus it is clear that predestination, as regards its objects, is a part of providence." -Summa Theologica Q23 A1
>Now the type in the mind of the doer of something to be done, is a kind of pre-existence in him of the thing to be done. Hence the type of the aforesaid direction of a rational creature towards the end of life eternal is called predestination. For to destine, is to direct or send
He’s not saying people don’t have free will here. He’s saying that human ideation, ie, what we seek and what we want, exists from eternity in the totality of God. That your thoughts and actions, parasitic on God, will by definition lead you back to and toward God. This is why he uses the analogy of a bow and arrow, the source of the momentum determines the landing. He’s not saying the landing in hell or heaven here, but as a general circumscription on the limit of human thought and action. People are free to assent to or reject grace, but they aren’t free to create themselves or exist independently from God, as in
>The other end, however, is proportionate to created nature, to which end created being can attain according to the power of its nature
In articles 6 of the same question he goes on to make his opinion clear that the reprobation of sinners and the salvation of the saved are certain and not changable. Aquinas manages to believe in predestination AND free will by describing a sort of limited free will that only changes the details of how we get to our final end - which in pre-determined for us.
It’s not predestination in the calvinistic sense. God is not temporal, or existing within the sequential (or relative, however time works) world of contingent events. In that sense all of material existence is occurring at once from his perspective, or rather he is present across every moment of time coequally. This doesn’t mean your decisions aren’t free, just that from a perspective outside of time, you have already made freely every decision you are going to make.
No that's what I thought he was saying at first - the outside of time thing. But in article 5 Aquinas is adamant that merit is not a cause of predestination; and in reply to objection 3 that God's choice of some over others is simply a matter of His will.
>This doesn’t mean your decisions aren’t free
can god be contradicted?
I read Nietzsche too 😀
Try to think of original sin as a kind of transmission of sinful proclivities, or proclivities that miss the mark of the perfect and good will of God which we ought to follow, and our inevitable deaths. If you don't believe in God it initially appears as absurd, but try to see past your antagonism towards Christianity and towards a kind of anthropology of the world through Christian eyes, which well explains our behavior even if you don't believe the origin of the explanation.
Disgusting. Utilitarianism has ruined so many minds.
>you're antagonistic if you call bullshit
I'm being generally antagonistic, why not own up to it? By calling bullshit you're opposed to the creed of original sin. I still posit it's not a bad explanation of human behavior from the perspective of believing in the Christian God.
Try not to be a fundamentalist moron?
I know next to nothing about you. Why do we engage with others on a Cinemaphile image forum? It's a forum of conversation, interacting with other dynamic personalities. Doesn't mean we know the other person well, though we might make generalizations, such as that all people follow a "religion", though it might not include supernatural metaphysics.
>I know next to nothing about you.
at least you admit it. doesn't stop you from making inane assumptions and instantly believing them though.
>Assumptions for me but not for thee
Please tell me some of the assumptions the version of me that lives in your head has made.
so why did jehovah send down the she-bears to kill those kids for making fun of elijas bald head?
Because anyone NW3+ has suffered nearly as much as Jesus
a lot of indigenous tribes do worship the sun, specially in south america.
>dude we live in a simulation
who made the simulation then?
The God of the Hebrews, clearly.
a few hundred indian programers in the real worldade the simulation
You sound like a giant homosexual
If nothing matters why do you care? Another moronic atheist
>i will use movies to change his mind!
fricking moron
I’m sure with israeli midwit slop will really convince him. Definitely won’t consolidate his commitment to doing the opposite of whatever that slimy israelite maher tells him
>all the limp dick /misc/tards ITT
frick your phone god
Atheism is another religion, you just dont want to admit it.
It's a blanket term for several different religions I'd say actually.
Without this meaningless term these people would eat each other alive.
>I want to save my friend from a lifestyle and belief system that is demonstrably good for like 99% of people who adhere to it
Yeah but it’s not what I think so he can’t do that
in english, doc?
It's a larping bating israelite
>especially good for the pedophiles that run every single major religious power structure
>westminster dossier? haha, they destroyed that and the media memoryholed it. that means secular power structures aren’t run by pedos. but look at this scandal from the 80s! that’s so much worse!
Whoa i didnt say pedos dont run the govt too
you didn’t say it because you’d rather focus on what the media tells you to
NOOOO STOP HATING DRUG AND PORN
BECOME LIKE ME
You have so little respect for your "friend" that you think a movie will change his values and beliefs? Wew.
op has to use a movie because he can't actually formulate any arguments himself
I would say he has enough respect to show him compelling arguments that might contradict he beliefs. I'm sure there is something that could be improved about how he goes about it but I don't think it's fundamentally disrespectful at all.
it’s the equivalent of a christian showing an atheist gods not dead instead of just respecting their opinion. I mean at least engage in a discussion instead of resorting instantly to the propaganda tapes
Bill Maher being smug isn’t going to lead anybody to atheism.
Same with dawkins or hitchens its just atheists preaching to the choir and feeling superior
honestly if you really want to be a homosexual and attack someone who has found hope and structure in their life why not recommend nietzsche or something instead of ricky gervais tier shit
Is it really attacking someone to present an argument to the contrary?
Like if a friend of mine had joined an objectively destructive cult, I would do my best to convince them to leave. How I went about that is up for debate but there is nothing wrong with trying to convince someone of a different view.
Everything you watch or read is going to have some kind of effect on your thinking, so it's not either/or. People are slowly influenced to change their views all the time.
>objectively destructive cult
It’s not objectively a cult because it’s literally not a cult. You can leave any time you want with no repercussions. As for destructive, I don’t know where you’re deriving that. It did a damn good job of creating and running society, and it has a demonstrably positive effect on mental health and well-being for its adherents. Your issue is that it’s not what you think, just cut the bullshit fake concern because that’s not where this is stemming from at all. It’s fine to discuss things with people but showing them this facile, smug israeli movie is insulting to his intelligence and your own. It’s an admission you can’t make your own arguments and that you think so little of him that this hit piece by a “comedian” is going to utterly 180 his viewpoint. Why don’t you take the initiative and read to try and understand his views instead of instantly getting defensive about it?
No where in my post did I refer to any specific religion. It was an example.
I also didn't really hint at what my view was either... I was arguing that trying to convince someone of a viewpoint other than their own is not inherently wrong. That's a whole lot of projection on your part.
>a viewpoint other than your own is not inherently wrong
take your own advice then
Uhh.... what?
Your point is that people are mostly rational, reasonable beings and have good reasons for whatever they believe in that we should consider. Take your own advice and consider that people who are religious aren’t just brainwashed “cultists” but human beings who have considered their views as much as anyone else. Instead of getting defensive and demanding your fiend submit to the ordeal of this awful movie, read augustine, aquinas, thomas more, leibniz. Try to understand his perspective on reality. That’s not me saying share his perspective, but at least attempt to understand it, before you start attacking him and it.
You should read this.
A book by a devout christian about the tragedy of chivalric values becoming a joke? The entire point is that quixote would have been a hero a century prior and now is a subject of ridicule. His death is meant to be terribly sad. If you come away from this book going “haha, im glad that moron is dead” you’ve utterly failed to comprehend what it’s about
>you’re like this noble larger than life hero in a decadent cynical world
Thank you
the religious perspective: comforting lies are better than uncomfortable truths.
>dude, consider other peoples perspectives and don’t dismiss them out of hand
>anyone who doesn’t have my perspective is a liar
And by extension, so are you!
>its another feeble "no you"
It’s called a syllogism actually. You set up conditions for your own argument which you then contradicted
>it’s important not to dismiss alternate perspectives out of hand
>does that
You genuinely seem unintelligent at this point
>describing a perspective is dismissing it
>the truth dismissive
>describing anything I don’t think as “false” and “lies” is just an impartial perspective, anything I say is by definition the nominative truth of that thing
this is the guy calling you a dogmatist kem
>and another "no you" from the religious camp
golly gee how will i recover.
>if you don’t automatically accept my self contradictory remarks i’ll reply “no u” to you
oh god how horrifying, what a mind I am up against
You get what you put in bruh. this simplistic language game you're playing exists only to prop up your false beliefs.
>I describe your belief as a lie, which makes it a lie
How is that not a language game
Jesus is "no you" the only thought you're capable of?
when hypocrisy is all you are capable of it becomes obligatory
the religious perspective is: it's pointless to waste time on shit you can't do anything about.
e.g., you're going to die. that's really worrying. what are you going to do about it? you can't do anything about it. but it's a really big problem so you still want a solution. so they just go: no problem buddy, we got you covered; after you die you go to heaven. now you can stop thinking about this shit.
meanwhile, the atheists spend all their time spazzing out about transhumanism or genociding humanity so that nobody will be born into a life where knowledge of death makes life pure suffering, or they want to "upload" (i.e., replace) themselves into computers to become immortal that way, etc. so much of the insane shit atheists do is because they can't cope with the fact that they're going to die some day.
I'm amazed you managed to apply "cope" to a group looking for real solutions to the mortality problem, but not to the one that decided to make shit up to placate people's fear of death.
I wonder which camp you belong to.
You're describing a rotted religious perspective. When religions were about being humble, in the sense you owed it to god to do everything you could every day, was when civilization grew and prospered. Decay crept in when that definition of humble inverted, to it not being your place to do anything, to passively trust in a non-existent entity to solve all problems.
no actually, the self confidence of that model was what prompted it to conquer the world in the 19th century. I think you’ll find society went to shit in the 20th century, the second your own views became popular
you know "god is dead" isn't an atheist stance, right? It was commenting (clumsily) on how religious servitude shifted from active to passive. That religions were literally dead.
and i’m saying this didn’t happen. i’m saying the west was proactive and vital and now secularism is taking over it is self destructive and paralysed
>a tiny percentage of people caused the fall of the west
>no it wasn't the massive group of people who went from active to passive due to a change in religious thought
>a minority can’t massively influence world politics
ever heard of israelites?
no idea where you got that from, man
>blame atheism for societal decay
>atheism arose when religions shifted from active to passive
I'm saying societal decay made people atheists. which then makes them even more insane. which makes society decay even more, and so on. negative feedback loop.
>religion tells people to be passive
>people reject it
There is nothing uncomfortable about the idea that life is meaningless or about the idea that you can do whatever you want here on earth that you will not suffer judgement from God after you die you will just cease to exist.
It is a much more uncomfortable idea that everything that you do here on earth is known by God and that when you die you will stand before God and give an account to Him of all of the things that you did here.
>There is nothing uncomfortable about the idea that life is meaningless
nihilism and its consequences
Is it really uncomfortable? I rarely meet a Christian who expects to be condemned. Do you expect to be condemned?
I expect to be held accountable for my actions, I believe in Christ, He is my savior, my spirit is bought with His blood and yet I am still here in this flesh which is full of sinful desires. We as Christians are called to deny the sinful desires of our flesh by staying close to God and relying on Him for our strength to resist temptation, this is easier said than done as any born again Christian will tell you. The bible describes the Christian life as a battle, we battle against our sin we love Christ and desire to live for Him but our fleshly desires are pulling us in the opposite direction all the time.
It would be much easier in this life to simply deny God's will and live only to please the flesh but we would be damning our souls to hell, not simply by living in sin to please the flesh but because in order to do so we would have to deny God which is the unpardonable sin.
Sounds comfy.
>the religious perspective: comforting lies are better than uncomfortable truths.
As someone who has been both an atheist and a devout Catholic, the exact opposite of this is true: atheism is the comforting lie, theism is the uncomfortable truth.
both can be taken either way. although if I wanted a religion to comfort me, I wording pick christianity. I mean half the time these people are seething over how harsh hell is, how unfair, as their justification for hating the religion. you can’t call it a comforting lie and then proceed to recoil in horror at the consequences it prescribes to moral failure
>to moral failure
read: not telepathically being chill with his wife's son
in that case it’s even less comforting? do you have a consistent point here?
>its less comforting for there to be basically no barrier to entry into heaven
but you just described one
>it doesn't matter how good a bad a person you are, just be cool with my wife's son
>a barrier
well yes it is by definition a barrier, and one most people alive don’t clear. which goes back to what I was saying earlier about it not being comforting at all
Its a barrier anyone can pass.
>there's nothing after death: comforting
>there's eternal paradise after death: uncomforting
:/
's nothing after death so I can do literally whatever I want while I'm alive and I won't be held accountable for anything: comforting
's potential eternal paradise after death but only if I become a saint by purifying myself of sin through a long and excruciating process which will involve lots of suffering, and if i don't engage in this process but instead just enjoy life in shallow ways, seeking pleasure instead of virtue, i will end up suffering in hell for eternity: uncomforting
ftfy
>but only if I become a saint
Not a requirement according to scripture.
Yes, it very clearly is.
You seem to be an example of the fact that most atheists are former moronic Protestants, typically evangelicals and fundamentalists, who have rejected Christianity based on their moronic, nonsensical, unhistorical, very recent version of Christianity.
Either that or you're just an atheist who attacks the dumbest belief system that claims to be Christian, the lowest hanging fruit, while ignoring what actual Christians have actually believed for 2,000 years.
Oh right, I forgot that we need to ignore the most common religious ideation to talk about religion. We have to focus on aquinas, who hasn't been relevant for centuries, and generally describes a completely different form of the religion that exists today.
thomism is the standard in catholic dogma today. almost all of catholic theology is still thomistic, if not that, then augustinian. he is literally baked into the belief system at this point.
>pretending there's no difference between the modern church and the writings of aquinas
>pretending you know anything at all about Thomism or Catholicism
you've already revealed that you have no idea what you're talking about, so it's pointless to go on. just stop, you're embarrassing yourself.
>posts aquinas quotes
>isn't that at odds with current christian philosophy?
>you're embarrassing yourself!
>thinks "current christian philosophy" is evangelical protestant fundamentaism
fyi im done replying to you now.
enjoy being a moron.
you'll stop preaching at me? Yeah we know you won't.
>Oh right, I forgot that we need to ignore the most common religious ideation to talk about religion
That's Catholicism, moron.
>We have to focus on aquinas, who hasn't been relevant for centuries, and generally describes a completely different form of the religion that exists today.
He describes Catholicism, moron.
Why are atheists so fricking stupid? Seriously. Is it just that you're so full of pride you can't possibly see your own stupidity and ignorance? You're unironically out of your element, so shut the frick up Donnie.
>the good are rewarded, the wicked are punished: comforting
>the good are rewarded, the wicked are punished: comforting
this is only comforting if you conform to God's morality and stop sinning, and I'd wager that you sin almost constantly every day of your life. do you accept that gluttony is a sin? pride? lust? envy? lying? jerking off? sex outside of marriage? missing Mass on Sundays? using condoms? getting drunk? all of these things are morally "wicked" and will be punished, is that comforting to you?
Hey you forgot the blended fabrics, thats in The Book!
it’s also an assumption that our definition of good matches God’s, or the objective good. a large part of religion is that it does not organise itself around you, but you around it. you alter your convictions and assumptions in line with divine intellect above the remit of your own limited mind. that is very difficult and humbling for people who like to assume the infallibility of their existing conceptions of things. christianity is partly accepting that how you inevitably conduct yourself is not good, despite the convenience of believing so. if you wanted comfort, you’d follow some new age do what thou wilt philosophy
I do not accept that sin is punished by god, no. Thats is not comforting to me.
Ameritards are the biggest Christgays in the entire world.
TAD
Im from france and hate atheists and americans
Good. You can stay.
>I'm from France
allahu ahkbar
not a brown muslim either, although thank you secularists for repeatedly voting to import them.
The atheist meme had a good run but it's in its final season OP.
Dawkins has held pretty much the same stance for a decade at least, all religions are false but some are the lesser/necessary evil to keep more moronic ideologies at bay. It's a healthy conclusion.
>some lies are okay to keep worse lies from taking hold
>dissident dialogues
this dude really thinks he’s “against the system” lmfao
A whole thread with out anyone mentioning Life of Brian
it's shit that we have to pretend to be religious when burying our loved ones
if you’re such a truth seeker then don’t. just let them rot in a wood, it’s what science would want
Maybe i'll wear their skin as a coat
Some people just aren't worth talking to.
this you should exist in an echo chamber that only reinforces what you already think
The entirety of the left is one huge creepy religion that pretends male children are women. That would be the religion I’d avoid.
you know what really wild? growing up raised as a jehovah's witness. probably why im here forever
The jehova's witnesses I've known were socially very stunted, as were a lot of the other fundamentalists I grew up with. They are usually nice people though.
Materialism is a lie and is largely proliferated for nefarious purposes. Personally I don't believe in any single religion, yet I take them into account in determining what I believe is vital and true in life, along with philosophy (Jung in particular), art (not bullshit art), and other various lessons one hopefully learns during their lifetime. That is, if they're not totally corrupted. When there are so many similarities in the mythologies and beliefs of ancient cultures that have echoed throughout time to present day, one would be a fool to dismiss it. The past is full of mysteries humanity will always wonder about. We know a great deal but not everything, it is not possible for us. In other words, there will never be a point at which science can explain everything.
>Materialism is a lie
what does this even mean
>Materialism is a lie
Why are you here in this thread if you're not willing to look it up
I want to read your words idiot
I suggest you look it up. You did read my words. I wrote what I wanted to say. You're in no position to demand anything from me, especially answers to stupid questions. Sit down.
>can't parse his beliefs into his own words
Agora
>Christian morons destroy the Library of Alexandria
which never actually happened, but keep lying about history in the name of truth lmao. the building they are supposed to have burned was a temple on the other side of the city, the library itself in the palace having been
a)burned by julius caesar already
b)in horrible decline for centuries with most of its stock already moved or copied
You don't need a movie for that. Just ask your friend why he thinks Paul et al. are more trustworthy than L. Ron Hubbard, Joseph Smith, Muhammad, etc. Believing in god(s) as your faith can be helpful, it's worshipping other people who claim they speak on behalf of god(s) that's insane. Ancient schizo israelites and 19th century teenagers don't have magical powers.
The Invention of Lying
Lots of anime is anti-Christianity, but that’s what you get when your missionary representatives murder a couple of Japanese prostitutes in cold blood
Damn you got some good christuck seethes out of this one
>t. homosexual manlet gaytheist r*dditor
Tell him to tell you that you're a nerd and should shut up
>peer review
>it's another atheist has israeli roots episode
It seems like everything I dislike has israeli roots.
I can smell you from here
t. seething incel
every human being is wired to have a* religion; and if not, they tend to kill themselves.
even modern "trust the science" types are following a* religion; a set of regular beliefs and practices which are derived from a presupposition about the fundaments of reality.
It is inescapable.
took a while for "not collecting stamps is a hobby."
not an argument.
But you do engage in another hobby, albeit it's not collecting stamps.
Please tell me about this version of me that's living in your head
The thing about materlalists, and the wider secular part of society, is that their own particular brand of dogma forever seeks happiness through consumption. That is how they're socially engineered. They believe it's about capturing happiness rather than truth and understanding. Told they will be happy if they do this or that, consume that or this, and then they're fed a diet of straight-up poison, albeit tasty poison, figuratively and literally.
>conflates universe governed by physical laws/axioms with capitalism
That is not at all what I did. You have bad reading comprehension.
>doesn't understand a difference between materialism and being materialistic
I understand there's a difference. Yet there's a direct link. It fosters people to be materialistic, the way people are taught these days. In the past there were many spiritual, religious scientists, especially the early pioneers of that field. Before it was called science. Today there seem to be very few around. You're making many grand assumptions on what I believe, misinterpreting it. It's understandable up to a point considering the subject and its myriad complications.
you're again blaming not believing in your god for the crimes of capitalism.
I'm not talking about capitalism. It's clear that you're socialist or communist, that's where you're coming from. Thread ain't about economic systems. Furthermore, my God? I believe in a God of sorts, but as I said earlier it is not a God from any particular religion or philosophy. You are narrow minded. I'm telling you this because you'd be better off not being narrow minded.
>I'm not talking about capitalism
you're talking about the degradation of the sciences as a direct result of attaching a monetary "incentive." So, yes, you're talking about capitalism, whether you want to admit it or not.
One should be able to conduct good truthful science whilst earning an income both for personal gain, improvement for one's family, and furthering understanding of the world. Monetary incentive is not corruptive on its own. Hardly.
The reproduction crisis and the failure of the peer review system is a direct result of said monetary incentive. Peer review doesn't pay, publish or perish, even if you're publishing nonsense.
You're just reiterating your position that I've addressed. I'm no longer going to entertain your attempt to bog down the thread into a communism vs capitalism false dichotomy and further deliberately ignorant, arrogant, faulty interpretations of what I've been saying. Sit down.
I accept your concession.
That's a really cringe, even corny, lol even, and coping response and everyone knows it.
Thanks for conceding again.
And yet I'm still arguing with you. Weird way to concede... Are you upset? How are you feeling my precious little communist
>stops posting arguments
>i'm still arguing!
You don't need to concede more than once.
There are many other elements at play that leads to corruption of just about anything. It is not boiled down to "welp its capitalism's fault", as communists are wont to do. That is their thought-terminating cliche. Very narrow minded.
>There are many other elements at play
such as?
Such as the general complexity of life in its entirety, as we know it and feel it.
nice non-sequitur.
Apparently this person believes life and the universe is not complex. How bizarre.
You were asked for other factors contributing to the failure of the peer review system, aside from the hard financial incentive to publish bullshit studies. You started waxing poetic about the complexity of the universe.
Waxing poetic? It's poetic fantasy to say life is complex? You believe the path towards evil is so simple? The root is simply monetary gain? Then you would be condemning every single person who wants to work for monetary gain for the sake of their livelihood and family. Where is your critical thinking skills?
>why is the peer review system failing
>uh... the universe is like... complex and stuff
You are being told this is a complete non-sequitur, irrelevant to the question you're trying to avoid answering.
Tradlarping Cinemaphile """christians""" are the cringiest shit
Hating Rick & Morty doesn't make you a crusader
>anyone who disagrees with me is faking it
why is this moronic attitude so common on this board specifically? you see it mainly with movies and TV of course, "anyone who likes X is lying" "anyone who doesn't like X is lying" but here it's manifesting even in regards to religious beliefs.
tell me, why are you such an idiot? how did this happen?
They are probably at least somewhat sincere. I have a friend who makes these same arguments and I've known him my whole life so I know he isn't just trolling. He lies a lot though.
Kys israelite
Only anti-Christian. Atheists, as usual ate complete hypocrites and utter cowards when it comes to mocking Islam. They know what would happen to them if they did. Instead they target Christians because they know we won't hunt down their family and behead them.
Did Maher even have the balls to insult Islam in this movie? I thought he spends 99% of the movie visiting Christian places like protestant megachurches and Christian amusement parks.
Let your friend believe what they want. You trying to "convert" them is as bad as being a christian. Let him find out on his own.
tell him that religion is a dead end and only national socialism can save the west.
religion is a coping mechanism for humans, the very existance of countless religions all naturally sprouting throughout all human history proves that.
You obly think Christianism and the current adjacent religions have validity because you were born in the era in which they are the current coping mechanism. In a few thousand years people will see all of them the same way we see greek, norse, egyptian mythology, etc.
It's all gay and straight bs for low iq people.
>inb4 le reddit wojack
nice argument gay.