Re: 5 Questions From 2 Christians 4 Atheists

[BreakoutLuceal]

I would like you to answer some questions of my own, if you don't mind:

1. Based on our scientific understanding of singularities and logic itself , Do you accept that the big bang singularity could not of caused itself to expand?

[PlasteredDragon]

@BreakoutLuceal : Ouch! You stepped on my language peeve... please don't use the word "of" when you mean "have" -- "of" isn't a verb. :-) Regarding your question (as you have chosen to frame it <-- that's important) then I must answer "no" on both counts. If you would like me to go into detail, or you'd like to converse further, please contact me via private message. YouTube comments are largely unsuited to carrying on a conversation. Be advised, a first-cause argument is unlikely to obtain.

[BreakoutLuceal]

@PlasteredDragon

Before we converse further in PM, I need you to clarify your response:

Do you accept that there is a cause for the singularity to expand?

[PlasteredDragon]

@BreakoutLuceal if you can demonstrate with empirical evidence that the initial expansion of the universe was caused, then most likely the answer to that question is "yes". If your intent is to go Kalām on me, you can stop right now, you are wasting your time (and mine). If you cannot demonstrate with empirical evidence that the initial expansion of the universe was caused, then the answer is "no". Bald assertions do not obtain. Once again I can explain in more detail. PM me if you care.

[juanhjay]

@plastered dragon. You have no fate and no faith in anything except of that, that is tangible, measured or otherwise proved. You can't possibly live life without worry free that tomorrow isn't granted then I find it hard to believe that you don't believe in anything without facts or at least you don't believe In God without tangible proof. I think it's all just an act to fit your lifestyle and persona because you primitively lack character and imagination to adopt a better personality. So you

[PlasteredDragon]

@juanhjay Hi Juan. Actually there's nothing inferior about my "personality" and I don't need to adopt a "better" one by your standard. You don't know me well enough to make such presumptuous speculations about what I do or don't believe, whether or not I am being truthful, and the nature of my character. Stop acting like an ass.

[aMayzism]

There is no claim of an eternal hell in the bible. It says death. The old testament says those who break these commandments will die. The new testament says those who Love God and everyone as they love themselves (which fulfills the old testament commandments) will live forever. The lake of fire is the second death.

[PlasteredDragon]

@aMayzism regardless, most modern Christian sects buy into eternal damnation. Anyway, since the Bible isn't empirical evidence, what it says interests me only from an anthropological perspective.

[aMayzism]

There is no claim of an eternal hell in the bible. It says death. The old testament says those who break these commandments will die. Those who Love God and everyone as they love themselves will live forever. The lake of fire is the second death.

[85Whit]

@plastereddragon..one day u will see god is real..till then, try n find sime decent evidence than ur science bullshit, that makes no sense. Like miracles r not from god they r from science!lmfao...

[PlasteredDragon]

@85Whit you just lost all credibility. Troll elsewhere please.

[85Whit]

@plastereddragon ..whoa sry! Y so angry! Im not tryin to convert u, I jus think u shud atleast try, try wat I saod, u will lose mothing but u might gain something! I asked u to take a challange, u completly flipped, n im tryin to convrert, uh no dude ur the one makin makin claims that god is jus in our head!

[PlasteredDragon]

@85Whit You have it backwards. You are the one claiming something exists. I don't have to accept that claim without proof. That's the way it works. I never said "God doesn't exist", nor did I say he is "only in your head". Your comments betray the fact that you aren't paying attention to what I'm saying and then criticizing my position based on your own misunderstanding. That would irritate anybody--so spare me your passive-aggressive faux surprise at my irritation.

[PlasteredDragon]

@85Whit: Please pay attention to the bit on the "fallability of the human brain" and "independently verifiable evidence". Your "feelings" exist entirely within your brain. Just because you _feel_ some sort of numinous connection with the divine doesn't mean you actually have one. There is a region of the brain associated with numinous feelings. It can be artificially stimulated with drugs. If god can be experienced in pill form, I don't think that lends a lot of weight to "feelings".

[PlasteredDragon]

@85Whit: and further, please don't call me "sweetie" you don't know me and I find your condescension insulting. We are equals you and I. And no I won't be "talking" to something I have no evidence for. What a pointless waste of time. If you want to convert me, come back when you have empirical evidence. Hocus-pocus and emotional appeals are not going to resonate with me. Personally I'd appreciate it if you would simply let me be who I am. After all, I am not trying to convert you, am I?

[85Whit]

@plastereddragon^comments below

[85Whit]

I will take on any challange u hv..if u will take mine to plead with god n try n feel the holy spirit..sweetie I wud not lie to.u, if there were no god, I wud except it n leave u alone but pls, pls talk to god, pray to him n see wat happens:)

[85Whit]

so I take it that u hv nvr felt the holy spirit? Ur puttin so called facts over faith n thats sad...ask to feel god sweetie,turn on a splritual song n ask to feel gods presence..its amazing.."ask n u will recieve"..ur to smart n kind to not believe...good luck to u dear..n may u feel god n may he bless u..

[LocustFurii]

If you really examine the evidence and really try and see how science views the brain, humans with their localized awareness which we call "I" doesn't really exist.Consciousness arose somehow to give us this sense of independent self called the ego.The universe is simulated in our minds and we assume this universe exists and is verifiable.You have faith that it exists because your senses tell you it does but outside your mind there is no proof that it isn't a virtual simulation made to seem real

[KalyaHarmony]

very very nicely put. up with the thumb

[Epydemic2020]

Nice video, very well made.

If I had a sound deductive argument, would it persuade you?

Here is a nontheistic example

1. All men are mortal

2. Socrates is a man

Therefore Socrates is mortal.

Evidence supports the premises, and if the premises are true the conclusion must also be true.

I disagree with much that you said about philosophical arguments as well (I think you have at least some minor misconceptions). We can get into that if you want.

[PlasteredDragon]

@Epydemic2020 I'm surprised you asked me this question given the number of times I told you what I would require to ascribe to such a belief.

EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE

Games of logic need not apply. I've listened to many many such arguments and every one I've heard contains either an error, a deception, or a leap to a conclusion. I've already "gotten into that" with plenty of other theists.

I'm an atheist, and you don't have the evidence. Don't sweat it. "Live and let live" suits me just fine.

[Epydemic2020]

@PlasteredDragon

Empirical evidence applies to the premises of a deductive argument. The conclusion of a deductive argument presents no new information. Evidence for the premises IS evidence for the conclusion.

[PlasteredDragon]

@Epydemic2020 the conclusion of a deductive argument must be testable. So, upon reaching a conclusion, there must be some independent test that we can devise which will confirm or deny the conclusion. This test would be an experiment.

If your conclusion isn't testable I'm not interested.

Philosophy is a product of the human mind, the universe is not. As a result any philosophical games you play with me are likely to fall short of reality. Remember Haldane's "queerer than we CAN suppose"?

[Epydemic2020]

@PlasteredDragon

The conclusion does not need to be proven by outside means. Here is the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy's words "the premises are intended to provide support for the conclusion that is so strong that, if the premises are true, it would be impossible for the conclusion to be false."

If you believe the premises but reject the conclusion, then you have by definition thrown logic out the window. The conclusion rests on the testing the premises.

[PlasteredDragon]

@Epydemic2020 I have already told you that my grounds for acceptance is empirical evidence verifiable by testing, not "philosophistry". Given this I'm not sure why you continue to harass me on this point. My criteria for belief are not up for debate. If your deity of choice was a self-evident phenomenon you wouldn't need to dog me about my criteria. I find your behavior arrogant.

But, since you can't seem to live and let live, link me to your argument. ONE video please, my time is precious.

[Epydemic2020]

@PlasteredDragon

I don't mean to harass you, it just seems this this particular issue is not a religious one that we should be able to agree. What I fail to see is how empirical evidence and deductive arguments are different, considering no new information is given by a deductive argument, and the premises must rely on evidence.

watch?v=flz6KwR9UDM

[PlasteredDragon]

@Epydemic2020 that's it? Seriously? I'd like that 9 minutes of my life back please. Your syllogism includes no proof at all for its first premise (and indeed that premise contains exactly the sort of leap to a conclusion I warned about). Further, this is not an argument for the existence of the Christian deity, again exactly as I expected.

If this is what you have to offer then please leave me alone. You are welcome to jump to conclusions to support your belief. I will not be joining you.

[DrMomentum]

Well said. Your anecdote at the end illustrates why many people choose not to "come out" as atheists. It's not any shame about being an atheist, it's having to deal with pervasive ignorance over what atheism is.

When atheists give sincere explanations of themselves, it helps dispel some of that ignorance. OTOH, there's a whole lot of people out there who seem to make it their business to perpetuate fear and ignorance about atheism because it helps them proselytize for their own religion.

[draagon66]

Really good.

I DID enjoy this video.

I have to ask, though - is that smug-looking guy on the right evolved from a giraffe?

[PlasteredDragon]

@draagon66 now now, be nice.

Glad you enjoyed the video!

[draagon66]

@PlasteredDragon

You are right.

I was being just too evil.

Thus, in penance, I wander outside into the tropical breeze, hang my head in shame and say three Bloody Marys.

Still, he doesn't have to stretch himself too far when it comes to sticking his neck out, does he?

Oooops ! Sorry !! There I go again. Make the four Bloody Marys.

[Epydemic2020]

@draagon66

In times of famine my people will have a distinct advantage over those of you who share a common ancestor with apes.

[draagon66]

@Epydemic2020

You, young bright spark, are a mammal, an advanced primate, evolved from lesser species into the only surviving branch of humanoids, as the Neanderthals, our nearest relatives in the chain, died out.

'Your people" - an advantage? What would that be? Manna from heaven, perhaps? Or are you referring to the suggestion that 'your people' are descended from the same line as giraffes?

Apes can climb. Giraffes cannot. You can climb - ergo, you are apelike, despite appearances.

[PlasteredDragon]

@Epydemic2020 Humans are in the taxonomic family Hominidae (a.k.a. the "great apes"). I don't share a common ancestor with apes. I **AM** an ape. So are you. We share common ancestors with other genera in the Hominidae family (chimps, gorillas, orangutans), and we share more distant ancestors with creatures in other families. In this the evidence is clear--if you're going get delusional about scientific theories well supported by physical evidence, please do it on your own channel.

[Epydemic2020]

@PlasteredDragon

Calm down bro, I was making a joke about you saying that I descended from a giraffe. I am quite aware, and in agreement with modern scientific viewpoints.

[PlasteredDragon]

@Epydemic2020 I didn't say you descended from a giraffe. That was draagon66, and I chided him for the remark.

Glad to hear your haven't forsaken physical evidence and the scientific method.

[Epydemic2020]

@PlasteredDragon

ah in that case, sorry I responded to the wrong person.