Tell me it's going to be alright

Tell me it's going to be alright.

Attached: IMG_847920.png (1024x576, 594K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/Ebh-hSCSdv0
youtu.be/SdJVI5zpra8
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I'll be alright, if you make it alright.
Not according to "society", but according to your own ablities and standards.
Cut yourself some slack, be patient and love yourself.

Why did you kill him Op and yes as long as you dispose of him correctly it will be alright.

die in a fire a little bit

ok basically
>learn to stop loving yourself for your own sake
>learn to love God for your own sake, to save yourself
>learn to love God for God's own sake, for His eternal glory
>ultimately come to love yourself for God's sake. for you He suffered and died, for you he became man,
though you yourself may not know it, God sees and loves you because you have worth, no matter what you have done, you are His creation and have the same right to be here as the birds and the trees. you too are a blessing of the Lord.
because God has shown you worthy of agape (unconditional love), you must come to love yourself

oh then go to confession faggot

Nothing is gonna be alright, there will always be problems coming your way, while your clock is ticking and the time you have is the seconds of a fart compared the every fuckin else in the universe. Eventually after you’re dead even the things you did and what you were will be forgotten like footprints on the sand, be it some weeks or some hundred years it doesn’t really matter. When you will come to terms with this, is when you finally can get some peace

Amen brother, I pray that Christ bless you with His grace and mercy today.

Everything you have done and said, doesn't matter. It is forgiven.

Attached: jesus2.jpg (857x1200, 138K)

youtu.be/Ebh-hSCSdv0

How's that soul crushing nihilism working for you? You sound miserable. You need Jesus Christ in your life.

Even Jesus tried to teach something along those lines, while instead you worship him as a god the almighty christ in hope he solves your problems in your stead

Cringe at the religious fags

Cringe at the depressed nihilistic retards who will die alone and unhappy

Weeping and gnashing of teeth

Attached: 1575422055688.png (347x1023, 178K)

Prove God exists

fuck me daddy jesus fill me up with spirituality! hhhnnnnnngggg

>Prove God exists
Prove love exists

>Christtard instantly changes subject

Prove God exists.

Relax, you are loved anyway.

God is self-evident.

now repent and submit to the pope

Which god?

God’s nonexistence is self-evident.
See how that works, retard?
Prove God exists.

Don’t care. Prove God exists.

based

*retarded

In the general sense, the debate of whether it's one monotheistic creator vs a litany of polytheistic gods was settled 4,000 years ago. There can be only one first cause. You don't know anything more about our creator than I do, but His existence is Self-evident by our existence in a finite universe that indisputably had a beginning. Unless you're arguing that you don't exist, there is no other tenable and defensible position. Creation demands a creator. You are in a state of creation. These things are Self-evident.

it's not going to be alright

It will NEVER be alright. Just kys.

Oh did he? Tell us more about the time you and jesus kicked back and chatted

Ok, so if that's 100% true and everything that exists requires a creator (which is demonstrably bullshit) then what created god? Or is that somehow an exception to the rule you're basing your entire premise on?

>There can be only one first cause.

Prove it.

> but His existence is Self-evident by our existence in a finite universe that indisputably had a beginning

The universe also indisputably has no cause, since time is part of the universe and positing causality existing independent of time is at best laughable. Looks like God is disproven. Oh well.

>Proving a negative
>A negative being Self-evident
user, what are you 12? Please think before you reply again.

>Proving a negative

Worst pop-logic meme in history. You can prove negatives in many contexts.
Now, get to proving God exists.

All throughout history, civilizations even with no contact have all believed in some sort of gods or god. Scientists, creators, inventors, scholars, all believed. You are somehow smarter than they are? You’re smarter than the brightest minds all throughout history? Why because you have the internet which connects you to other retards and their retarded theories? If you actually weren’t a retard, you wouldn’t ask anyone to prove god or his existence. Do some research instead of listening to everyone else. Start with the definition of a belief and work from there

>then what created god
I'm glad you asked. Instead of using a proper noun starting with a 'g', we'll leave it at a creation force that is necessary in a finite universe. Here is a formalized proof.

A1a: we live in a causal universe
A1b: every effect has a cause
A2a: if we follow that chain back far enough we reach “the beginning of our universe”
A2b: If an in-universe cause preceded this, it is not “the beginning of our universe”
Therefore our universe began with an external cause;

B1: premise A1 is foundational to discerning truth through science
B2: premise A2 is a tautology.
Therefore arguing against A requires you to argue against the validity of the foundation of using science to discern knowledge.

Funny thing is, most atheists met with this logical proof tend to determine that science is invalid.

Attached: 1542494363327.jpg (618x494, 55K)

One day you will be dead. No pain, no sorrows, no sadness, no anger anymore. Just deep sleep forever.
Life is a cruel punishment.

Blasphemy!

Wow dude, that's fucking deep as fuck, this is a great advice, of all 4 chan I never though I would find this gem in fucking Cred Forums of all places

Attached: splinter.jpg (396x359, 55K)

...

>Ad hominem shitpost

Prove God exists.

>You'll make it according to your own ablities and standards.
That's called Pride, it's a dead end. Without Christ you have nothing.

> you are somehow smarter than they are?


Yes, being first doesn't mean you're right.
Think about it dumbass. The Egyptians thought the sun was Ra and that he got devoured every night and reborn the next day. Were they correct? Of course they weren't, you massive retard. Ancient people didn't have the correct answers so they substituted their own, that's why all of their gods were different. You MIGHT have a point if they all came to the same conclusions or had the same gods/beliefs. But they fucking didn't, did they?

Your entire argument is based on bullshit, use some basic reasoning skills and grow up.

God might be created by us one day in the future. IT might be a multidimensional being able to move in both directions of time. Thus, able to create the universe which would mean that the universe created itself.

> A1a: we live in a causal universe

This is a fallacy of composition. Causality existing inside of the context of the universe does not mean that causality applies to the universe itself. There is no possibility of the universe having a cause because time is part of the universe, and there is no causality independent of time.

> A1b: every effect has a cause

This is a tautology, but what doesn’t follow is that the universe is actually an “effect”, which has never been proven and is impossible in the context of modern knowledge of physics.

Sorry for killing your retarded argument from centuries ago.

There's a literal formalized proof of God's existence above that you ignored, perhaps try to refute the axioms faggot?

>There's a literal formalized proof of God's existence above that you ignored

I just demolished it.

That's not really an answer to my question though is it?

If an external force initiated the current universe that we live in that's just moving the goalposts.

Aquinas proved it centuries ago. Educate yourself.

Prove he did. Explain how he did so.

Fukken LOGOS amirite?

Who? Einstein did not believe in a biblical god. He believed in the devine which is different.
Also a smart physicist or chemist or engineer can be a complete retard in other areas.
Sartre was sure that no god exists.

God cannot be proven or disproven. As it is true for all things one can make up. Like invisible snakes on the moon.

>Different names
How is this proof? The underlying point is they all recognized the Self-evident nature of a creator. Only a brainlet would would ignore the profound implications of that to say "hurr different names"

God be with you user, now kindly fuck off

>Like invisible snakes on the moon.

In principle much more possible than God since it is possible that matter exists which doesn’t interact with electromagnetism whereas the concept of a God is not coherent at all if we assume it’s supposed to be an entity outside of time and space.

No, do the work yourself

>The underlying point is they all recognized the Self-evident nature of a creator.

Asserting something is “Self-evident” doesn’t make it self-evident.

>He proved it
>Just trust me I refuse to explain

I disproved God. Don’t ask me for evidence. Just accept it.

Slit your wrists. What is it going to take other than 30 minutes of agonizing pain, then you are going to fall into deep sleep and all your problems will go away. Nobody is going to bother you.

Cant handle all this responsibility so we say God made everything intentionally and that he loves us.
Reality hurts and your coping mechanism is outdated.
Jelly-spine pricks

it's NOT going to be alright. Everything gets worse from day to day. It might seem like it gets better but you only gets a little be less worse than things being at their worst but nothing ever gets better. Think of it as going down a hill, you're speeding to the bottom but it levels out in a few spots and that's when you think things are better but there's an even bigger incline after those flat spots that leads you straight to the bottom and that's it

Kek nice "logic"

Attached: giphy.gif (245x300, 1.91M)

That's not the point you. Their belief systems were fundamentally different, their creation stories were different, their gods were different.

I didn't even mention different names you strawman making fuckwit, so i don't know why you think that's any kind of valid response or criticism.
Not knowing where we came from therefore substituting a fairytale in place of a real explanation isn't any kind of proof or a reason to believe the fairlytale, if you don't understand why then you're beyond help.

No lol
youtu.be/SdJVI5zpra8

Thanks! I learned it from the christians.

>Denial of causality
Well that didn't take long. If you reject the idea that effects follow cause, then you reject the foundation of science itself as a meaningful persuit to discern knowledge. Why do you hate science user?

Literally the same logic he's responding to.

>Denial of causality

I didn’t deny causality. This is a lie you’ve chosen to perpetuate because you see no possible angle of attack without being dishonest.

> If you reject the idea that effects follow cause

I never did.

Just do what you love to do user, the only real meaning to life is how you enjoy it. This world is a shithole and it's not going to change so no point worrying over something you can't change so, fuck it have fun while were still here. You'll be fine i know you will.

Attached: 1536687600825.gif (200x194, 559K)

god is everything, your 'god' is just imagenation to protect the ego

That creation force is Self-evident, I cannot speak about things outside the natural universe anymore than you can. I choose to name that creation force with a proper noun beginning with a "G", but you cannot deny it's Self-evident nature.

this

I think you're misunderstanding what user is saying. Causality is based on how time works within our universe, time is an emergent property of space. What we consider as 'time' wouldn't have existed before space did, so trying to imply that causality would be the same without time/space functioning as it currently does is flawed logic. This is why we try to simulate the universe 0.00000001 microseconds AFTER the big bang, because it's literally impossible to simulate anything beforehand because it happened before time.

>That creation force is Self-evident

Asserting things are self-evident will never make them so.

You keep saying that with zero proof, if it was self evident you wouldn't need any.

Except you aren't a well known theologan, philosopher, and literal saint. Read Aquinas.

You did it again user, how can I take you seriously now? All cultures that have existed on Earth recognized a creator. You cannot even acknowledge that, except to call ALL men that ever existed stupid and you yourself smart and unique

they found dust in the ice on mount Kilimanjaro that proves the story in the book of genesis about joseph and the seven year famine

Please see A1, think before you reply again user

> What is buddhism?

The absolute state of you. Clearly have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

the self is imagined, and we choose to say that imagined self is us, when there current awareness is the only thing that exist

>Except you aren't a well known theologan, philosopher, and literal saint.

Appeal to authority fallacy.

>Read Aquinas.

Post Aquinas’ proof of God here yourself so we can examine it together.

>Just do what you love to do user
That's called hedonism user, it's a blind alley. Without Jesus Christ you have nothing.

No, user. It is up to you to "do the work"

>Please see A1

A1 is a fallacy of composition. Causality existing inside of the context of the universe does not mean causality applies to the universe itself, and there is no possibility of there being a cause of the universe because causality requires time, itself part of the universe. Address my specific statements, coward.

“Think before you reply again user”

That’s a cool story. Please link me the relevant scientific study.

I do what i please user, no god will tell me otherwise.

Attached: 1540872290329.jpg (666x450, 23K)

Not how thew burden of proof works you dumb cunt. If it was every debate ever could end in a wild goose chase looking for answers that don't exist.

You made a claim, you provide proof for the claim.

>No, user.

Okay, bye.

if your religion was all lies to protect ego could you accept it?

No. Read Aquinas. Do the work. Then we can talk.

>Read ancient texts to have a Cred Forums argument. I refuse to just copy-paste a paragraph that describes the entirety of Aquinas’ argument because uhhhhh I don’t know

Learn what the burden of proof works, I'm not reading your bullshit without a good reason.

The natural world is defined as everything that exists, ie the universe. Things outside the universe, ie the cause of the first cause, are by definition supernatural. We cannot define anything in the supernatural or say whether causality exists outside the universe.

But maybe you have recognized that we have reached the first cause already and dealing with external causes (ie God) is unfruitful because we lack any basis to discuss it.

By agreeing with me, though, you've made an important first step, you just seem to get hung up when I start naming things with a proper noun starting with "G". Welcome to monotheism though.

In a finite universe, it is necessarily so, but even basic logic seems beyond your grasp.

>The natural world is defined as everything that exists, ie the universe. Things outside the universe, ie the cause of the first cause, are by definition supernatural.

Please read what you typed carefully. By the definition of “universe” you gave, and by the definition of “supernatural” you gave, by definition, the supernatural DOES NOT EXIST.

>In a finite universe, it is necessarily so

It is necessarily the case that God exists in a “finite universe”?

Elaborate, and avoid insulting me like a child.

Top fucking kek look at these faggots trying to talk about God when they haven't even read Aquinas. Stay pleb, anons

>What is buddhism?
Proto nihilism. A shitty philosophy, but not a religion.

>Read muh ancient texts!

No. The concept of “god” exists independently of Thomas Aquinas’ shitty arguments.

> we don't know and can't know, therefor god did it.


Yeah, no. I reject that premise purely because it's a placeholder argument with no basis or good reason to assume that's true.

Having an external prime mover doesn't equate to 'god' in any form unless you reduce what you consider a 'god' to something as minute a s a quantum fluctuation, at which point calling it a god in any form completely negates the meaning of the word

Now you're on to something. This is actually a concept expressed by Aquinas himself. There may be hope for you.

Yeah, because the guy I responded to said all cultures believe in a creator, not all religions. Please try reading before you respond.

Not an argument. Prove Aquinas’ arguments to be valid. If you like, I’ll copy-paste them and you can explain why you think they’re valid.

>The self is imagined
An atheist arguing we don't exist? So unique user!
You are confusing the internal and external. The natural world ie the universe has causality, which you seem to be denying. The only one discussing the external (ie the nature of God) is you, just now, with definitions you apparently don't understand. You cannot deny the first cause without a direct denial of causality and science.

nothing chooses to be aware

God says you're worth of a gape....go get the lube

No,he's not, you don't seem to understand the concept. He's not denying the universe works under the basis of causality, learn to fucking read.

An atheist arguing we don't exist? So unique user!
no god is everything

That's like saying everything is art or nothing is. pointless distinction and worthless.

You recognize the first cause but persist in wanting to discuss the nature of the external. You keep placing your own ideas into the undefined external as well as confusing undefined with non-existent. Given a finite universe that actually exists, an external first cause is necessary. Arguing for the infinite is a denial of Causality also.

>You are confusing the internal and external

No, I am not.

> The natural world ie the universe has causality

There is causality IN the universe, in spacetime. To assert that causality applies to the universe itself is a fallacy of composition.

A is part of B.

A has property X.

Therefore, B has property X.

This is a fallacy. It does not follow.

what is really being created?

>You recognize the first cause

Prove there is a first cause.

You are confusing terms. You are the only one discussing God. I'm discussing an external first cause that is Self-evident and you have been given a formalized proof that you have yet to refute.

>I'm discussing an external first cause

There’s no “external to the universe”. When you say something is not in the universe, you are saying it occupies no position in spacetime.
If something is not in space, it exists nowhere.
If something is not in time, it exists never.
Tautologically, something that exists nowhere and never does not exist.

>external prime mover, but it's not God
We agree. I just named that thing we both agree exists a proper noun starting with a "g".

" you have been given a formalized proof that you have yet to refute"
please prove your "self evident" axioms first

No, it won´t.
God is not real, if you die you disappear - unless ALCOR is involved in your death, which is highly unlikely - and everything is meaningless until you hit state toes, then they´ll hit you with the police.

there is no proof for someone who belives in nothing

Why not just call it Barry or Steve then to avoid misconceptions? This kind of reasoning just leads 'tards to say 'hurr durr god exists' as a result of the exact same reasoning you're using purely based on the way you're labeling it.

You don't need belief if you have proof. That's the beauty of it.

If there was proof, there wouldn’t be “belief” at all.

>assert that causality applies to the universe itself
The natural world has causality, the idea that effect follows cause, it is the nature of the internal, the natural world, ie the universe. You seem to unknowingly jump to the external and anticipate that things work the same there, you're wanting to discuss things outside existence, outside time, ie the external, ie the supernatural, ie God. We cannot speak of anything that isn't inside the universe, outside causality beyond the first cause that we both agree exists.

right...

what is proof? ideas? words? whats the eys see? there is just thoughs

The only one discussing the nature of the external is you. The existence of the eternal is Self-evident by the finite nature of the universe. Please see A1.

>the idea that effect follows cause

That’s just a tautology. Effects by definition follow causes, but not all events and things are necessarily “effects”.

> You seem to unknowingly jump to the external

I reject the concept of an “external” to the universe entirely. There is no such thing.

> you're wanting to discuss things outside existence, outside time, ie the external, ie the supernatural, ie God

So God is outside of existence, meaning God does not exist.

Thanks for agreeing, I suppose.

> beyond the first cause that we both agree exists.

There’s no “first cause”.

my only contention with that is your use of the term 'first cause'. We don't know that there ever was one, the multiverse could have always existed. Even by going within the CURRENT rules of our universe mater and energy only change forms. Stating an initial cause as if it's fact is dangerously presumptuous.

>what is proof?

Empirical evidence that a claim is congruent with what is actual.

i think you just dont wanna see your ideas are just guess work and there no way to validate them that doesent fit your concepts

Something you can test repeatedly that gives the same result regardless as to who does the test.

>It’s self evident because I say so

This is all your argument boils down to, isn’t it?

You keep saying that but I don't think you know what self evident means. Because it's not. you dumb cunt.

what is actual?

Again you are discussing the external, things outside of the universe. Show me on the doll where causality touched you. Why do you deny science as a fruitful persuit to discern knowledge?

edgy

Guess work and reaching logical conclusions based on available evidence aren't the same thing genius. Good attempt to devalue viewpoints that aren't yours though, 5/10

>Again you are discussing the external, things outside of the universe

I have no idea how I could discuss something as grammatically meaningless as “things outside the universe”. I don’t know of any things that don’t occupy a position in spacetime.

> Show me on the doll where causality touched you

Not an argument. Why do you believe that causality exists independent of time?

>I reject the concept of an “external” to the universe entirely. There is no such thing
This is claiming the universe to be infinite ...which is a direct denial of causality...along with being in opposition to the phenomenon of entropy, thermodynamics, and GR.

WHY DO YOU HATE SCIENCE?

You're not getting what causality is.

Causality is defined as the origin of an effect.
Its main property is that the origin and the effect cannot be the same.

It follows that:
If A has an effect, it has a cause by definition.
If the cause, say B, is also an effect, it also has a cause.

By definition, the universe is the set of all effects that have a cause.

It follows that:
The universe, which belongs to its own set (the universe), has a cause, by definition.
The cause of the universe cannot belong to the set, or else you could find an effect that is its own origin, contradicting with causality's property.

We decide to name this origin not belonging to the causal universe God.

The aforementioned line of reasoning is why you're retarded.

> Why do you believe that causality exists independent of time?

I'd like to hear the answer to this too.

>This is claiming the universe to be infinite

Nope.

why does evidence and conclusion even matter?

>If A is* an effect

Ok, so this goes back to what caused the FIRST cause or 'God'?

Think before you say something that spasticated again.

>We don't know that there ever was a first cause
Whether you are claiming we don't exist...or claiming the universe to be infinite...both deny causality directly. Please read the proof again.
>the multiverse
You are discussing the external, things unprovable and beyond the universe. Please stop embarrassing yourself.

You don't understand what causality is. Again.

God doesn't have an origin, thus isn't caused by definition.

it allows you to let go

Again you discuss things outside time, outside the universe. You seem confused. Please join the discussion in the natural world which is finite and created.

>You're not getting what causality is.

Painful irony.

> Causality is defined as the origin of an effect.

No, that’s the definition of “cause”. Causality is the phenomenon of events leading to future events.

> By definition, the universe is the set of all effects that have a cause.

.....No, that’s not the definition I see in any dictionaries. Sorry, but please stick to using definitions of words that other people actually use, and don’t make up your own on the spot.

By your own definitions he must have an initial cause, as everything does in your model.

> Whether you are claiming we don't exist...or claiming the universe to be infinite...both deny causality directly

only if you're a dumb cunt who doesn't understand the concept that I'm talking about causality working within the confines of our current space-time.

If we're talking about unproveable concepts, then I'll just point to your 'first cause' that you literally can't prove, not sure how or why you'd be this hypocritical without being self aware enough to realize it. Tell me again about how much smarter you are than me though.

Why do you believe causality exists independent of time? Elaborate.

Discussing things outside of the is discussion on the external. Discussing things outside the natural world ie the universe is impossible. You persist in discussing the nature of the supernatural world. You are a special kind of brainlet.

>"What caused God then?"
>the sentence is wrong by definition
>"HURR CAUSALITY NOT CAUSE"
Yes, i gave you the definition of a cause instead of causality, but the point was to show you you can't say God has a cause, by definition.

By the way, the definition of causality is the property of having a cause.

Why do you believe causality exists independent of time? Elaborate.

>but the point was to show you you can't say God has a cause

I’d agree, since God supposedly exists outside of space and time, which means God does not exist, and things that don’t exist necessarily don’t have causes either.

Existence implies being the effect of a cause. God doesn't have a cause, but its existence is by definition necessary to the existence of what have causes, by virtue of being its origin.

One could say God simply is, rather than exists.

>Existence implies being the effect of a cause

Prove it does.

> God doesn't have a cause

Because God does not exist, and is not.

>Prove it does.
The definition of an effect is something that is of a certain state.

A exists.
Existence is a state.
A is thus an effect by definition (in the state of existence).

Then either:
1. A doesn't belong in the universe, thus A is God.
or
2. A does, and thus A has an origin by definition.

Thus existence, which is a state, implies either being God or having a cause.

It won't because it never was.

Also wanted to add the term "existence" is ill suited for God, which, as i said before, simply is.

The state of being is more powerful than the state of existing, since being doesn't require a cause, while existence does.

discussion on things outside of time is by definition discussion of things outside the universe. You are embarrassing yourself user.

No, kinetics are an entirely legit aspect of physics that make abstraction of time (or rather freeze it) to discuss states of potential (non-)equilibrium.

That's not how it works user, you need to make things happen, so get up and make things alright

Yeah, suuuure..... everything is gonna be alright.
>spoiler alert: it's not.

is it? because im confused

And retake jerusalem from the hands of the infidel
>pic unrelated

Attached: IMG-20200222-WA0023.jpg (720x1280, 103K)

or you can let go like it doesent matter :)

If it's really bad you've got to stop all alcohol and if you can't you've got to start smoking cigarettes knowing you will need to kick that habit too. Alcohol makes desperation much worse and your body will feel the negative effects of not eating and drinking good stuff

That only makes things worse user

it doesent feel like it

at least that guy has a couch and hair and his sight and he's presumably not in a wheelchair.
shit could always be worse.

The fact there’s a pic of your girlfriend fucking someone else on the daily it’s what you call proof

says the mind

How much Jesus in your asshole do you get usually to have not heard about the gospels over the sound of lord J banging your buttcheeks

Yes my friend the truth hurts sometimes