Because I can
the argument from design has been DEBOONKED hundreds of times. Complexity does not exist in the universe because everything is complex, therefore nothing is complex.
Atheists are not soy you retard
N
Fuck both
You cant verify the existence of God the same way you cant disprove it. Just because you didnt saw something it doesnt mean it doesnt exist. Maybe its only matter of time. Both have retarded arguments.
Russell's teapot - Wikipedia
intelligent design is interstellar IQ but the sandniggers point doesnt even make sense
Interesting.Russell's teapot - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
True. Thats why im against preaching of the religion, religion is based purely on faith, you cannot convince someone of it, he must come up with his own believes.
B
They're both correct in some respects, but incorrect in others.
The factory analogy is poor, since you can't access the "universe factory," as it were, from the outside, but I get the point that he's trying to make. He's simply alluding to inductive inferencing.
Epistemically, what he's saying is far from airtight. Inductive inference isn't a very robust means of acquiring the truth value of propositions (see: black swan), but it is helpful in developing an intuition (a pragmatic heuristic) for many things. We do this in life every day as we learn things and gain life experience.
The atheist is only half right when he says that you can't prove God's existence. God is a concept. You cannot empirically prove a concept, and demanding empirical "proof" for the existence of God is inherently illogical (at best, you can only demand evidence). That's as nonsensical as hearing colors.
What you can do, however, is logically prove God's existence a priori, or from first principles, and many philosophers, theologians, and other thinkers have done exactly this in the past. The "Big Four" are the ontological argument, the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, and the moral argument. The strength of each of these arguments varies, and the question of God's existence basically boils down to, "are any of these reasons sufficient for you in order for you accept the conclusion: God exists?"
Anything else is cope - and probably wrong.
Last edited:
B
You can, technically, convince someone of religion. That's why proselytizing missions and gaining converts are a thing.
But you're right. You can't make anyone believe anything. That's something they have to do on their own, like bringing a horse to water.
People are indoctrinated at an early age to follow their parents religion, if the white Christian American child was born in Afghanistan instead of America they would be Muslim. Nobody comes up with their own religion and beliefs, they are sheep and follow mainstream religions.
Yeah, thats why most of the religious people are the poor, sick, addicts etc, because they actually need something, someone to give them strength. Nowadays everyone have enough information to decide for themselves, chasing someone and showing it down their throat will have the opposite effect, if anything it will drive them away.
B
That's all for you to decide either way.
Theres a difference imo, i noticed that the one who follow in their people's footsteps see it more as a national tradition, while the one that chooses, find their religion, believes more in their religion.
people Ali dawah have ruined speakers corner behold the new european intellectualism 
I’m inherently biased against western atheists cause they tend to be soycucks so I chose Dawah and I prolly won’t even watch the vid since I’m not Muslim. I can deal with an agnostic person cause they usually just don’t care, but they’re my limit
In the West it’s actually the more wealthy people who tend to be religious. Part of that is due to older people being more religious, but irreligion is mostly cultural here. For instance, most unaffiliated Americans are not atheists even if they don’t adhere to Christianity anymore
He looks like the average redditor JFL
One can't defend religious beliefs no matter how educated they are. It's just a coping mechanism humans developed when they became too sentient. It also helped control the masses so there is that.
Islam is low iq religion even though it can be based sometimes
Islam is low iq religion even though it can be based sometimes
This is a shit analogy.Russell's teapot - Wikipedia
Glad you know that.
You haven't explained anything.
Lmao you’re so predictable. You give me an emoji and I bait a typed response out of you by saying “we agree”.You haven't explained anything.
Proving my point.
Imagine wanting to abolish religion like a Stalinist freak. Kys.
Bad analogy on the point of the muslim.
I would have argued that the Big-Bang Theory (What many athiests believe in) isn't verifiable either. There are many holes in the belief and we can't verify "Conditions were right and an explosion happened"
I would have argued that the Big-Bang Theory (What many athiests believe in) isn't verifiable either. There are many holes in the belief and we can't verify "Conditions were right and an explosion happened"
B
Rent free, femdom cuck.
Dnw bc god doesn't exist
You said you did in your intro thread, the “AMA” one. That thread is now gone for some reason.
C
if anything, abrahamic religions are giga soy
You’re not a leftie? What are your views now and what made you change?
Please do.
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
