I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist (Frank Turek)

[henf5671]

Atheism is a religion. Agnosticism on the other hand is not a religion. We are all wired for god. Atheists are mad dogmatic bigots.

[caseyspaos]

@henf5671 Atheism is a religion in the same sense that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

[Bystronicman08]

@henf5671 What?Atheism is a religion in the same way that bald is a hair color

.re·li·gion/riˈlijən/

Noun:

The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.

Atheists neither believe in a personal god nor worship one.So,therefore,by definition,atheism is not a religion.

[uscjd2004]

@henf5671 Callow piffle. Turn in your rational card.

[lukose2007]

Why can't we have youth pastors in America do what Frank is doing in this lecture ?

[lukose2007]

thank you frank. great lecture...good humor too.

[Iceland1944]

military and football...yuk

[Hollow33N]

The one way you can prove to me god exists is telling me how god himself came into existance

[TruthIsLife7]

@philosophizer149 Maybe explain your question in more detail. But, I'll take one more stab. Re: complexity, I deal with it by using the weight of evidence. How many functioning systems with interacting parts such as information systems, transportation systems using kinesins(watch?v=Nz6ti0AR1co),­ production systems, processing systems etc. do we find coming from intelligence vs. unintelligence? Follow the weight of evidence.

[TruthIsLife7]

Universal common descent does not explain the origin of the universe or life. So, it can't be compared to the creation of the universe (Hebrews 1:2) which could have happened billions of years ago or 1000s or the act of the creation of life (1000s of years ago). It's only rival is creationist natural selection (speciation from the species to ~family levels) pioneered long before Darwin by John Wilkins, Patrick Matthew, Edward Blyth, Alfred Wallace, etc. But, there are 6 kinds of evolution.

[TruthIsLife7]

So compare:

Creation of the universe vs. cosmic evolution&steady state.

Act of creation vs. abiogenesis/spontaneous generation

Creationist levels of natural selection vs. Universal common descent.

Which has the weight of evidence? All sides have some hard questions since we don't know everything (and this gives us good areas to research more)..but creation has much more evidence in every area than it's rivals overall.

I’m working on a video on this…maybe will be done in a couple months or so.

[TruthIsLife7]

@philosophizer149 I don't understand the problem you have very well it seems. The same arguments for the universe are quite valid for the solar system as well as I understand it. This is the anthropic argument. There are over 26 physical constants that make life possible (the 3 dimensions, the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, the force of gravity, the cosmological constant, force of gravity,the fine structure constant and others).

[TruthIsLife7]

We also live in the universe in an ideal location to observe stars, galaxies and solar systems as well as the nature of our own planet. By the use of Occam’s razor, the simplest explanation for all these amazing coincidences are a God creating life and nature so that we can observe, study and understand it. This argument is often used (see Lee Strobel's "The Case for the Creator", but I think it's stronger if we connect it to Occam's razor. Do you think it's not strong? Why?

[DanielAnchondo]

Can anyone explain whats self refuting in the Simpsons clip?

[philosophizer149]

There are a few issues with the teleological argument which I can't seem to find an answer to. First of all, evolution explains that we are fine tuned for the environment around us not the other way around. Evolution is not meant to explain the origin of the universe. And complexity is relative and therefore cannot be used to identify purpose in the universe. What is a good response to these issues?

[TruthIsLife7]

@philosophizer149 1st, evolution doesn't explain how the environment got here and is so precisely set up for life. Cosmic/Stellar evolution & other ideas try to. The Bible states the universe had a beginning and the Big Bang seems to have confirmed that (although it's not a perfect explanation and has some problems) prediction.2nd,where does the weight of evidence point when we look at the origins of complexity &esp. systems with functioning and interacting parts, delivery&info systems, etc.

[philosophizer149]

@TruthIsLife7 Ok you misunderstood, evolution describes how life developed for its environment, while I understand how the fine tuning of the universe is a valid evidence for God, the fine tuning of the solar system doesn't seem to work. The evidence points to evolution by the way, there is simply too much evidence to show that evolution did happen, both micro and macro, that to disprove it by casting doubt as to how it happened won't work.

[TruthIsLife7]

@philosophizer149 I'm EXTREMELY busy now...but the fine tuning of the solar system also is very valid. I believe a 1 degree great orbit from the sun would freeze everything on our planet and a degree closer would make it too hot for most life. Then there's water and all it's amazing properties..and a recent Cal Tech study showed that it's very unlikely our world got water from comets since we don't show enough deuterium which we should see.

[philosophizer149]

@TruthIsLife7 Yes but you see evolution adapts life for certain environments, little is understood about the limits of the environments life could develop in. So to say our Earth Moon and Sun etc... are at just the right place and in the right conditions is a bit preempted in my opinion. But to a certain extent I agree with you if the Earths conditions had been different, perhaps not as slightly as you imagined, we could very well have ended up like Venus or Mars.

[TruthIsLife7]

@philosophizer149 As far as creation is concerned, it has 3 rivals, steady state, spontaneous generation and universal common descent. The 1st 2 have been debunked as pseudoscience already and the 3rd has been falsified and yet evolved so many times (Lamarckism, pangenesis, transmutationism, recapitulation, exogenesis, orthogenesis, modern synthesis, PE, saltational and now a new one self-organization, etc.), that it's about time people realize it's also pseudoscience.See my creation playlists.

[philosophizer149]

@TruthIsLife7 Dude I know, I wasn't talking about the creation of the universe. But I'll make sure to check those videos out!

[TruthIsLife7]

For just one of MANY areas, this one is the record of the plants in the fossils, see this seminar by Dr. Wise, Ph.D. in zoology from Harvard who is EXTREMELY kind to evolution, yet shows how the fossils match creation science far better. See my playlist, creation-evidence for the flood.

/user/TruthIsLife7#g/c/14FDE27­6E5C97E24

[TruthIsLife7]

@philosophizer149 @philosophizer149 Trying to falsify the act of creation with universal common descent is like trying to falsify universal common descent with string theory. They don't even deal with the same question. The act of creation and abiogenesis are the rivals since they deal with the origin of life. Creationist speciation (from species to ~family) pioneered LONG before Darwin by creationists is the rival of universal common descent and in most areas has much more evidence than UCD.

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

Also, there's the fact that, according to chapter four of the book of Matthew, "Jesus" and "the devil" apparently flew to the highest point of the temple, without anyone seeming to notice. In addition, "the devil" is said to have taken "Jesus" to a mountain from which he could see all the kingdoms of the Earth, which would have been completely impossible.

[IloveYOUviruses]

2:37:00 the question about morality: TOTAL ATHEIST FAIL!

[robvlob]

"I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist" Is kind of like saying "I believe you when you tell me you have a bridge to sell me because I'm not gullible enough to not believe you when you say you have a bridge to sell me"

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

I will mention what I have discovered as to why the book of John refers to Jesus as the word of God. In the book of Zechariah, there are instances in which someone states "and you will know that YHWH has sent me to you", after a prophetic message prefaced with "the word of YHWH came to me, Zechariah", etc. I have come to realize that it is "the word of YHWH", meaning the agency responsible for conveying the prophecy, which is making the statement as to verification of the fact that YHWH sent it.

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

...impairment. He states that the man's lifelong blindness is not the product of the sin of either his parents or himself, but occurred purely to facilitate "Jesus'" miraculous curing of his affliction.

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

Another point, which does not necessarily call into question Christian doctrine, but does call into question the morality thereof, along with that of the character Timaeus and his wife. Apparently, bar Timaeus' parents lived within walking distance of the area in which their blind from birth son was. The gospels would have us beleive that, in spite of this, they refused to take care of him. In addition, "Jesus" makes a shocking but often overlooked statement regarding bar Timaeus' lifelong.... 

[metaljacket1983123]

Good video. I didn't enjoy the commercialism for the first 10 mins, but the rest of the talk was great!

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

"plus these texts were written before the Roman world even accepted Christianity, after all these were written during a period where the Romans killed those who believed it." Exactly. As I said: "these "historical" documents just happen to contain demands from their primary character that his followers acquiesce to being subjugated, robbed, killed, made to walk a certain distance with a person (a practice exclusive to the Romans who would have subjugated peoples do this very thing), etc.."

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

....of the flesh itself being partially from the Creator, & yet dying. ("...the di-c-(v)inity")

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

...the dicinity would be bestowed by way of conception. This would mean that whatever of "Jesus" was divine died with the human half on the cross. It is a ridiculous concept that anything which is comprised partially of the substance of the Creator, such as "Jesus'" body would have to be according to the virigin conception story, could possibly die. Understand that this is not a matter of human flesh containing a divine spirit with the divinity leaving the body upon death, this is a matter....

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

Believe in the Creator, do not believe in "Jesus".

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

Somehow, this Greek word for thanksgiving came to be applied to the body and blood ceremony prescribed by Paul. Remember, this thanksgiving sacrifice was the only one observed by this group of Jewish Messianists, & the "Lord's Supper" was the only one being observed by those who adopted Paul's Christianity, with it winding up in the gospels, which, in spite of the claim of inspiration by the Holy Spirit, disagree as to the day of the institution of this observance, along with many other errors.

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

Let's take the fact that the Jewish Messianists, who honored Jesus the servant (not son) of God, in the original portion of the Didache, gave instructions for the only sacrifice that they observed. This observance contained no reference to the bread and cup as the body and blood of anyone. It was called, due to the Didache having been written in Greek, the eucharistos, which means thanksgiving. The list of sacrifices in the Torah also contains a thanksgiving sacrifice, which includes bread.

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

Let's say that these "historical" documents just happen to contain demands from their primary character that his followers acquiesce to being subjugated, robbed, killed, made to walk a certain distance with a person (a practice exclusive to the Romans who would have subjugated peoples do this very thing), etc.. Let's take the fact that the word "legion" is Latin, that it does not exist in Greek or Aramaic, and is, nonetheless transliterated in Greek letters and placed into a demon's mouth.

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

As for the argument for the composition of much if not all of the New Testament prior to 70 A.D., the fact that the destruction was not mentioned aside from the "prophecy" of "Jesus", let's say someone attempted to create the impression that something had happened forty or so years prior to such an event. Let's say access to the area by those to whom the stories are being told has been prohibited. Let's say that they have access to the work of an historian like Josephus.

[theDracoIX]

What is our purpose? To glorify God? Ok, then what is God's purpose? God wasn't created therefore God cannot have a purpose... since nothing ever intended God to be or do anything.

And, by the way - why does something exist instead of nothing? Because of God? That doesn't answer the question because God is something that exists. Why does God exist instead of nothing? Without a universe, God isn't necessary, so don't even try to rape that term to make an argument.

[Tsadi9Mem9Khet9]

1:20:09 Why would he lie about miracles? Because the entire religion was created by the Romans, with Rome having adopted essentially every mystery religion of every land it had conquered. The only exception was the second temple Jewish religion. Therefore, they created an anti Jewish pro Roman exoteric mythology with a partial Jewish basis. They used suggestion and psychic energy manipulation, just like the Wiccans do, for example, to bring about their "miracles".

[stephjh2006]

@Tsadi9Mem9Khet9 Yeah that is an interesting theory but you have to follow the evidence. Look up what historians and scholars feel about that theory, it's popular amongst imaginative writing but not based on history. Christianity is clearly influenced by Judaism and not Pagan religion plus these texts were written before the Roman world even accepted Christianity, after all these were written during a period where the Romans killed those who believed it.

[DanielAnchondo]

I really enjoyed the historical aspect in his presentation if only a small problem on one of the points in the excruciating testimony.

[brantk81]

LOL Thank God for Jupiter!

[AuntyMabele]

I watched the entire thing, very interesting thanks for the upload.

[IsaacP150]

Yeah I've got blind faith when I don't believe in unicorns and fairies as well.

[rfvidz]

@IsaacP150 Uh, yeah, but you think nothing created everything. That's worst than fairies and unicorns.

[superman79015]

@rfvidz What about people who are agnostic towards the existence of a generic God (deism) but are atheists with respect to Christianity? Do they have blind faith?

[rfvidz]

@superman79015 I'd have to know them. But it's not impossible for an agnostic to have blind faith.

[superman79015]

@rfvidz What about deists, then (belief in a generic God but atheistic with respect to Christianity)?

[timmyinfrantry]

@superman79015 Deism = Jesus is a lie. I'm not a deist.

[treasuredroperX]

@rfvidz Lol, you Christians seem to like nothingness considering your God would also be made of nothingness. You don't get anywhere by saying God did it. Because it begs the question. Wait, GOD IS ETERNAL, right? Multiverse is eternal. There, I just made a claim that has no evidence. "God created the heavens and the Earth", is that evidence?

[rfvidz]

@treasuredroperX "You don't get anywhere by saying God did it." So I should take it the atheist way then, that deadandblindandunintelligent nature did it? You can find the evidence, just be sure not to plug your ears when you hear it, okay?

[superman79015]

@rfvidz I'm curious, would you say that the nonexistence of God is impossible?

[JOKACRAZY25]

@treasuredroperX you fail to notice that there is evidence for a timeless, inspacial, being of immense power. there is no evidence for a multiverse, besides, a universe by definition is matter, space, and time. those are finite entities. its impossible to have an infinite amount of finite things. did u see the video?

[Murchad99]

@JOKACRAZY25 "you fail to notice that there is evidence for a timeless, inspacial, being of immense power."

I know you're busy preparing your Nobel Prize acceptance speech for one of the greatest discoveries in the history of man, but could you take a moment to share with us intellectual schleprocks what this evidence is?

(The answer "The Bible" will result in ridicule, fair warning)

[caseyspaos]

@rfvidz Well, you think nothing created God. Or do you think God created God? Or do you think God is uncreated? Well, that doesn't answer ANYTHING does it? Most atheists are rational people who just want a better explanation than "God went BING!"

[uscjd2004]

@rfvidz Learn something about modern astrophysics.

[RBHILL300]

@IsaacP150 throughout time names of animals have changed. Unicorns could have been Rhino's maybe?

[buffboynick]

atheism = CULT of hypocrisy and ignorance

[Jcm9991]

@buffboynick Don't you mean "Christianity"?

[theDuctapeUnion]

@buffboynick

Atheism is a faith in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

[Hollow33N]

@buffboynick that makes you a ignorant hypocrite as well for saying that you dumb fucking cunt.

[uscjd2004]

@buffboynick Ironic troll is ironic.