Joined May 2013
Tax the fucking churches.
If your pastor votes Democrat, I’m sorry but your pastor isn’t a Christian.
32
237
2
4,997
35,894
The fun thing about religion is that scripture can be selectively interpreted to justify almost anything, including completely opposing moral positions.
20
17
2
111
1,665
SG retweeted
There’s a third option: Reject this insane religious fearmongering and live a free life without worrying about imaginary threats of eternal torture.
Your only two options: - Follow Jesus - Burn in hell
17
74
3
485
3,553
Terrorist epistemology: “Believe or be damned.”
Jesus Christ is the only way to God, and every person who rejects Him will face eternal conscious judgment in hell.
13
9
2
73
1,607
I genuinely see no good reason to believe in a god. I’ve heard the arguments, questioned the claims and examined the supposed evidence. None of it has convinced me. A belief being ancient, popular or deeply personal doesn’t make it true. I’m open to being proven wrong, but my standards of evidence aren’t changing just because religion is involved.
33
17
3
117
2,122
Dear theists: You can usefully counter my disbelief by producing actual evidence for God that goes beyond mere hearsay, anecdote, and argument—attempting to diagnose my pride, anger, childhood, or motives simply confirms that you've run out of such evidence.
38
17
3
97
1,982
Atheism requires no worship, scripture, rituals or belief in the supernatural. You lot are so desperate to make atheism a religion because then you can pretend we’re all operating on faith. Unfortunately for you, redefining atheism won’t make your creation story any more credible.
Atheists are religious people. Atheism is a religion.
8
15
1
105
1,899
France, right now.
🇫🇷 La alcaldía de Limoges se desploma esta noche tras haber sido incendiada. Siguen los destrozos en otras ciudades a esta hora.
3
2
13
377
Calling atheism a religion is like calling an empty witness stand a competing testimony.
18
8
3
129
1,827
Atheism neither presents nor espouses any theory—atheism merely rejects or fails to accept the theory that any gods exist. That is all. Implying that atheism is, or needs be, anything more is a strawman. Theists love strawmen because they can't plausibly defend their own faith.
Replying to @McClureShawn
Can atheism give a cogent theory of anything?
29
18
3
98
1,735
Nobody chose humans to be the most intelligent species. It wasn’t design. It was evolution doing what evolution does. Intelligence gave our ancestors a survival advantage. Problem solving, communication and tool use helped us survive and reproduce. Over generations natural selection favoured those abilities. We’re not the pinnacle of evolution. We’re not the main characters of the universe. We’re just one species whose circumstances favoured the development of exceptional intelligence.
Dear Atheists, why did evolution choose humans as the most intelligent species? Why aren't monkeys or dogs as smart as humans?
6
13
1
85
2,344
Greatest community note ever.
Only low IQ people don’t believe in God.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Research actually shows a modest negative correlation between IQ and religiosity (in other words, people with higher intelligence scores tended to report lower levels of religious belief). pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC88… pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23921675/
39
292
9
5,405
154,923
the main difference between christianity and islam is that christianity has had more time to be housebroken by secularism
60
41
5
425
6,665
There isn’t any *good* evidence that any of Jesus’ chosen 12 disciples died for believing in the Resurrection. We have good grounds to believe that Peter was killed, but not that he was killed for that reason (and he may have been killed by rival Christians). 🧵 1/n
What is the evidence that the apostles were all willing to suffer and die for Jesus’ resurrection?
10
8
7
79
5,624
Christians have to see atheists as broken, evil, or fools. Otherwise, if they see us as normal rational people who look at the universe and say “I don’t believe you”, then they’re forced to face their biggest weakness, their own lack of evidence.
149
70
16
624
15,315
Really? That's wild. I mean, I would have said some shit like: 1. Pain is intrinsically bad to the person experiencing it. 2. It violates autonomy by imposing suffering without consent. 3. It erodes trust and cooperation, making relationships and societies worse. 4. It normalizes cruelty, making further harm easier to justify. But I guess that's all just wrong, because you need God for pain to be bad. Unless there is an all-powerful man in the sky saying, "Pain is bad," there's just no way to determine that it's bad. But, actually, does God say pain is bad? Does God condemn causing pain to others? Because when one looks at the bible, it doesn't really seem like he's that adverse to it.
Atheists can’t tell you why it’s wrong to cause pain.
77
61
3
903
35,353
SG retweeted
God’s not real, but he’s got one hell of a PR team: credit for everything good, blame for nothing bad.
12
44
3
476
5,672
Even if a first cause were established, "therefore God" would remain a non sequitur. Nothing in "first" entails conscious, personal, moral, omniscient, omnipotent, loving, singular, or interested in human behavior—those attributes are merely contraband added after the argument.
13
9
70
1,087
Contra Aristotle, the Christian God is anthropocentric. Christians want a God who flatters them with attention, who centers them in creation, who nurses them like a father or mother (hello, Mary), who alleviates their fear of death. Christianity relies on psychological appeal.
12
3
2
24
1,150
"Science can't detect the immaterial" isn't a defense. Science detects unseen things through observable effects: electrons, fields, neutrinos, black holes. If your proposed realm affects reality, evidence is possible. If no evidence is possible, knowledge of it is impossible too.
17
19
4
110
2,042