#antitheist

[bigmeansweatydyke]

i'm sorry but Trixie Mattel saying "well god's not real and i am" will forever be one of my fave responses to any argument christians give regarding what god wants lol. like it really just cuts to the chase and says i'm not playing by your rules. i'm not interested in entertaining the feelings of a hypothetical invisible dude when it comes to literally anything. i'm not going to prioritize some asshole in the sky over a flesh and blood human being who is right in front of me. it may not be the most Effective or Kind argument but i don't care it's based

[its-terf-or-nothin]

[oceanicmarxist]

1929 cover of Bezbozhnik u Stanka, the magazine of the League of Militant Atheists in the U.S.S.R. Cover depicts industrial workers tipping Jesus into a garbage disposal while another smashes a church bell with a big hammer.

[mitchfynde]

All jokes aside, the current trend of anti-antitheist posts is merely religious people being mad that they can't control you, which is a tale as old as time. Their religion is right, you're wrong, and your reasons for being against their 100% true religion are whatever shit they just made up.

[nebby-the-protogen]

stop putting hijabis in the generic progressive menagerie, it's not cute, it's not empowering, it's not a personal choice, it's a tool of opression. it serves no purpouse beyond the subjugation and objectification of women.

stop normalizing misogyny because, we, the cute harmless arabs that have to be protected by the big strong white people are the ones doing it.

islam is no better than the worst of christianity, stop wokeifying it. i live in a muslim country, born and raised, you don't know jack shit.

[shrimpothy]

[voxpraxis]

lately i've been... idk if you can really call it "debating" but i've been interacting with some muslims in the comments of an instagram reel in which a young girl was speaking to a young boy (i want to emphasize that they are both children) and telling him that she wasn't allowed to speak to boys until she was married, because her parents and her religion said so. the boy was sad but replied with something like "oh, alright" and the caption & comments were all talking about how "sweet" the situation was. i commented that i didn't think it was sweet, and actually that's a horrible thing to put in a child's mind. the post never directly mentioned islam and neither did i, but everyone who's been replying to me is proselytizing islam, so. anyway, these are the points that have been thrown at me so far:

it's not wrong because both genders are forced apart from each other

in response to me saying it still enforces an extreme divide between genders and encourages them to see each other as opposites rather than equals: the separation is necessary to prevent rape

there is no rape in islam because of the separation between men and women, rape only occurs in western society because men and women are not separated (...because apparently we cannot expect men to not rape women unless they're physically kept away from them at all times)

rape does not happen between family members, it's just not a real thing, ever (incest doesn't exist?)

if you're interested in a girl you should marry her immediately, because dating leads to cheating

men and women cannot be just friends because "islam and science and psychology says so." one guy said it's because "women can't talk about cars and sports"

(i also got called a simp for saying i have female friends. can't make this shit up)

in response to me pointing out that what the girl is saying implies that she won't have any say in who her husband is: arranged marriages are better because they always work out and unlike western marriages, they never end in divorce! (i'll give you one guess why that is.)

similarly, single parent families and suicide are solely western problems

men and women are NOT equal

i need to shut up and respect it because that's their religion

islam cannot be questioned because islam says islam is true

and that's not including all the personal insults and threats i've received, in just a few days.

i will say this is one of the least challenging "debates" i've ever had, in the sense that almost no point brought against me has any logical foundation and is easily refutable. but it's one of the most frustrating because the problem is that they won't hear me at all, because islam teaches its followers to never consider anything else. it teaches them to accept exactly what they are spoon-fed as the ultimate truth. and this is by no means a problem exclusive to islam, but islam does this kind of control better than any other religion i know. people raised into islam are not taught to think in any logical terms - in fact, they're deliberately taught to avoid thinking logically. logical fallacies are the rule. so not only can they barely form a coherent argument in favour of their beliefs, but they have absolutely no clue how illogical they sound sometimes. when i point out a lapse in logic in something they've said, the response i get is "no, that's true because islam says it's true." no other explanation required. at least, i've sometimes heard people of other religions attempt to use logic or science to prove their beliefs, but with the muslims in these comments, those are unnecessary things to be absolutely avoided - it's like they don't even understand why i'd bother to use them. you can't use logic to get through to them because they've been taught to avoid logic and cling to the mantra of islam-is-true-because-islam-says-so.

[shroobles]

Christmas is a stolen pagan holiday anyways.

[pdasex]

Can’t regret sincerity, it’s our best.🤘🏽🖤𖤐

#genuine #neurodivergent #HSP #HighlySensitivePerson #introvert #RSD #RejectionSensitiveDysphoria #PDA #PathologicalDemandAvoidance #PersistentDriveforAutonomy #rebel #heart #atheist #AntiTheist #Satanist #HailSatan !

[mitchfynde]

I would literally die for this. Fuck you. Come kill me if you want me to shut up. That's the only thing that will ever stop me.

You are the bigots here. My belief is intolerable to you. I want all of you to live your life freely, religion or not! You can't say the same for me. You're asking for me to be silenced. It's you who is the bigot.

Remember, I'm the one being clear that I don't hate anyone for being religious. But you DO hate me for my beliefs.

i fucking can’t stand antitheists like genuinely from the bottom of my heart shut up about hating all religion so much that you can’t help being a bigot about it

[mitchfynde]

Question: what does being antitheist mean to you, as opposed to being merely an atheist?

I want the people of this world to make the choice and leave their religions. Every single one of them. I think religion, on its face, is bad. I think it necessarily brings superstition, even in the most secular religions. I believe superstition to be a threat to human progress. Superstition justifies racism and xenophobia. It justifies all fear of the unknown. It justifies intellectual laziness. It prevents people from facing the reality of death and this one life we're living.

I want all religion gone. But it has to be by choice. That's why I take serious issue with people calling me a bigot or saying I'm talking about genocide. Individuals choosing to change their mind isn't a genocide.

[jadore-la-mort]

people loveeeeee to call me stupid until I ask them to explain the difference between literal/physical and conceptual.

[voxpraxis]

[video of two muslim women in full-coverage outfits]

commenter 1: sister your dress needs to be longer, your feet should be covered

commenter 2: sister your dress is too long, it is dragging on the floor

commenter 3: sisters neither of your outfits are proper hijab

commenter 4: sisters being on social media is immodest and distracting

verdict: you can't win

[dss-master]

Mark 2:26 "Abiathar high priest" passage does not contradict with 1 Samuel 21:1

A lot of atheist skeptics, even the famous Bart Ehrman, an atheist New Testament manuscripts scholar, would like to mention the supposed Bible contradiction of 1 Samuel 21:1 with Mark 2:26. Mark 2:26 reads

"How was it that he went into the House of God during the lifetime of Abiathar the high priest and ate the Bread of the Presence, which was not lawful for anyone but the priests to eat, and gave some of it to his companions?”

The atheist skeptics or any skeptic in particular but lets call them "the skeptics" will jab at this noting how Abiathar was in fact not the high priest who gave David (the "he" in this verse) the bread of the presence. But rather it was Ahimelech who did.

Abiathar was the son of Ahimelech. Ahimelech was high priest at the time. Sons of the high priest usually help the high priest preform ritual duties, and sons thus tend to be priests themselves. Only priests are allowed to be in the Taberknackle or in the Temple.

Now to the solution.

Mark 2:26 only says "during the life of..." which is true, because Abiathar was Ahimelech son, and was alive during the time Ahimelech was alive.

However later in this verse, it then says "Abiathar the high priest..." the word "the" grammatically indicates a singular. As if Abiathar was the high priest of the time.

However, singular use of titles are common in Biblical literature. For instance, David in the New Testament was called David the king. Was there only one king?

No. It is a title to specify who this David was. People back then could have same names you know. This Abiathar son of Ahimelech was not the only Abiathar in existence. Jesus here in Mark 2:26 was specifying who this Abiathar was by saying "Abiathar the high priest," because everybody knows who Abiathar is. The succeeding high priest of King David after Ahimelech the first high priest during the time of David was killed.

So the only question remaining is, why didn't Jesus just say David ate the bread given by the high priest Ahimelech, instead of David ate the bread of the presence that occurred during the time of who we know as Abiathar as the high priest?

The reason why was because Ahimelech did not adhere to the law as well as his son Abiathar. Abiathar was known as a renowned priest for his adherence to the law. Adherence to the law is one of the most important things during the time of the second temple to Jews. This was because Jewish thinking of the law was if bad things happened, which did for centuries to the Jews, from the division of Israel into Judah and Samaria, to the Babylonian exile, to captivities of captivities as nations moved in and out, the Jews saw their solution to this issue by turning to the law, becoming more and more pious for the Torah. So a high priest who holds to the law more than another high priest who does not, is considered more revered.

So when Jesus spoke to the Pharisees in Mark 2, he decided to chose a more renowned and law abiding figure to fully detail the account of David eating the bread. Describing figures from the past, usually when doing so associates them with another figure from the past. Like an example would be in Hosea 1:1, "A message from the LORD came to Beeri’s son Hosea during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and during the reign of Joash’s son Jeroboam, who was king of Israel."

This sort of language of acquanticing a specific figure with another figure living during the same time was common Jewish rhetoric. And so Jesus did the same here.

Final note. Some Bibles translate verse 26 as "was the high priest." This translation was the translation Ehrman in fact used when he was in seminary. However, this reading is entirely unnecessary. The renowned manuscript scholar and even long time good friends with Ehrman since seminary, Daniel B. Wallace, states this reading is unnecessary, and a better translation would be "during the lifetime of Abiathar the high priest."

In conclusion, there is no contradiction in Mark 2:26 and 2 Samuel 21:1.

[autisticdoomslayer]

I hate hate hate antitheists.

"religion is blind obedience to gods!"

Jewish culture is looking to the sky and asking "hey what the fuck?? Stop being such a dick?"

Navajo religion has Coyote, whose main role is to be a little shit.

Traditional Mayan religion has gods like Buluc, who was feared and not really respected, and was considered more of a powerful threat than anything else.

That's not to mention religion types outside of monotheism and pantheism, such as animism (which has no "gods").

"religion is about condemning people you don't like to hell!" Most religions don't have a hell at all.

"religion is about controlling people!" MOST RELIGIONS DON'T EVEN HAVE SET MANUSCRIPTS OR COMMANDMENTS.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CHRISTIANITY, AND MAYBE ISLAM SOMETIMES. STFUUUUUUUUUUUU

[pouryourselfacupoffuckrightoff]

The only church that illuminates is burning. I’m stealing that.

my most antitheist opinion is that hell is like. a cartoonishly evil thing to believe in and insanely abusive to teach children about