Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday singing, “yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up must come down. Amen!” If they did that, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.
If we look at 1 Cor.15 we see "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death" So an ETERNAL hell cannot be so furthermore the greek for endless is ATELEUTETOS yet jesus used AIONIOS.
furthermore the wicked in Matthew 25 go to "aionios kolasis" which is greek for age-enduring PUNISHMENT/PRUNING, so utter destruction cannot be so, since the wicked are NOT nuked/destroyed utterly.
Eventually ALL will be saved- PLEASE SEE 1 Cor.15:22
@makeitatriple I wonder what Rush thinks about the recent stupidfuckingshitthatcanadadid after they got superbutthurtbecausetheylostAFUCKINGHOCKEYGAME.
@projectlevydelta If a God works in such a way that we have not one shred of evidence that they exist, what difference is it over there not being one? The only so-called evidence of a God so far are books full of empty claims for specific Gods. None are backed by any evidence, they all contradict each other (and the individual books like the Bible and Qur'an contradict themselves repeatedly) and generally are wrong about even basic history often times.
@JohnF30Music The different is believing there is no god(s) requires some knowledge that the statement is true. Not believing in a God only requires that you not believe a claim put to you.
"Do you believe in the Christian God?" "No" is an example of not believing in a god. I don't need to know anything except that the claim being made is not believable. Believing there are no gods would go beyond simply rejecting a claim as it implies the person claiming it can (hopefully) justify that belief.
@KazeKirin Yes but atheism does not reject a single God, but reject all Gods. You can be a weak atheist and accept the possibility that a God could exist (also known as agnostic atheism) but this is still believing that deities do not exist.
So many atheists say these claims aren't equivalent, and I've yet to see a real argument on how they aren't. All I've ever heard is "there is a big difference" and "atheism is a LACK of belief" Both of which assume they aren't equivalent in the first place.
@CK3890 It's really easy to reject all God claims equally. Not one piece of evidence. The most we have is books full of claims with no evidential backing. Lacking belief in something is the default position, just like you wouldn't believe in Invisible Pink Unicorns, Underpants Gnomes, or Shoe Tying Faeries unless you were given evidence.
If you could prove a God existed we'd likely accept it. But no one ever has despite centuries of trying. Without evidence, all God claims are equal.
@CK3890 Actually I was trying to cover my bases over what you think is equivalent (the rejection of all over one, or the two types of atheists) in two different responses. Since you don't seem to understand, try this:
"I believe there are no Gods" - "I do not believe there are any Gods."
In this context the closest word relation is knowledge, so let's replace believe with know.
"I know there are no Gods" - "I do not know there are any Gods."
Now you should be able to spot the key difference.
@CK3890 That key difference is there even with the word believe. One is an assertion (asserting to believe something about a subject), the other is stating one lacks an assertion or belief on the subject. They are fundamentally different statements, it's just that belief means many things to many people, so the words ends up only being vaguely understood. It becomes easy to misunderstand as you have.
@CK3890 They are different in claiming that "there are no Gods" is a positive assertion. "Not believing in any Gods" is rejection of one or more positive assertions made by others. The first might be something the person might claim to base on evidence or reason, the second is simply a sign of skepticism.
The only true wisdom is in knowing that you know nothing. This is the basis of scientific research. You don't know, and that is why you search. Similarly, we don't know if God is real or not. If you examined this truth with the realization of Socrate's famous quote, you come to find that it does in fact take faith to be atheist.
You must have faith that there is no punishment for bad deeds, and that you aren't missing out on reward for good deeds. And you must until God has been disproven.
@CK3890 No, because as you just said "The only true wisdom is in knowing that you know nothing". We don't even know if a Hell exists, or any punishment. So in one paragraph you start with one premise, then break it in the next. There is no evidence or justification to believe there is an afterlife or punishment in it. Thus it only requires faith to believe there is.
@KazeKirin Exactly. We don't know, and a rational person would account for it's possibility in their actions. I didn't break the premise. There is no evidence or justification to believe there isn't an afterlife, and this is why so many rational people follow religions. They are just covering their bases. Thus you are an idiot.
@CK3890 Ah, the appeal to Pascal's Wager. Rather than use the limited text to explain why this "covering your bases" approach is nonsense, I will provide a link (plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/).
In essence, you are only justified in believing when there is evidence, and thus a reason to believe. Using your logic, if I told you you had to give me $100 dollars or my pet dragon would eat you, you would have to work on the assumption such a thing could be true.
@KazeKirin Atheism doesn't reject one claim of a God though, it rejects all claims of Gods. And a simple rejection of one God is justified, whereas rejecting all Gods is a leap of faith. It has no evidential support. I don't understand what you wrote at the end here, using my logic I have to work on an assumption? Assuming that God's existence is a possibility is actually not an assumption, it's a presumption. An educated guess.
@CK3890 You are working on the presupposition that you have a true claim. The only way a claim can be true is if it is verifiable via evidence. There is no evidence of any God of any kind, only claims made by theists. This is a comfortable delusion made on emotional grounds in the hopes to make them feel better about questions they do not have answers for (safety blanket). I need no leap of faith to not believe in any Gods any more than I need one to believe there are no unicorns or pixies.
@CK3890 Your entire argument is essentially a giant argument from ignorance in that "because you can't prove me wrong, it is (or might be) true" and then claiming it takes faith. Faith is a word for believing something for emotional reason without evidence (ie. no good one). I have no faith of any kind, I only have honest skepticism. Give us some evidence and I might be able to justify treating a god hypothesis as credible. Until then, we don't need your safety blanket.
"You cannot use leprechauns and pixies as an argument for there is no God. " You absolutely can. God is magic and supernatural. Since the 2 concepts cannot be proven scientifically, unicorns are just as plausible as any God (there have been too many to count...but of course "my God" is the only right one..LOL) Even if God is more "likely" than unicorns, God still is in the same category...as the supernatural or magic. You cant jump to conclusions if you don't have an answer to something.
cont-> The two (God & unicorns for example) seem to be very different because many people "believe" in God, or God is "MUCH more likely". It is hard to understand why the two could be considered to be in the same category, but they are. Example: If you cannot prove something, it is useless to try to use it to explain something else. Since God & unicorns are not proven, it is pointless to explain anything by using either example because it does not advance understanding of the question.
@orangemod When people have NDE's they do not see pixies and leprechauns. They see Heaven and Hell. Cases in the millions account for this. I personally even know a former atheist that became a Christian because of a Near Death experience in 94'.
@SuperGuitarman69 Perhaps SG....I am not sure what ALL of them see. If it is heaven & hell, that would unfortunately prove nothing. Because our minds are so full of pre-conceived stuff, memories, fears, etc. there really is no telling what might pop up. Mine would probably have me meet Led Zeppelin...LOL
If it did turn someone religious, I don't see anything wrong with that because I don't think that religious beliefs in and of themselves are all that harmful. It is an anomaly to us so far.
Sorry to take up so much space. There have been many interesting articles on the subject in modern psychology etc. So far, they haven't claimed anything supernatural so far. And yes, it is a regular science study so you wouldn't expect that. But there are explanations available. You may not agree, but no one really knows for sure.
@orangemod Well at least you are objective. That is a good thing. I just feel it's odd that even atheists experience these things. To me? I think it is out of the realm of hallucinations and "dreaming". Especially when this happens so frequently in NDE's. It really isn't the "proof" I require to believe in God. My truths are many outside of NDE's that have nothing to do with convincing me. But, I find it compelling to ponder. NDE's in which I am speaking.
@SuperGuitarman69 Thankls SG, I try to be objective. If I wasn't, I'd feel like a shill with my mind made up. Seriously, I have no real stake in Religion or Atheism. Whatever happens to be the "truth" or "facts"..I guess I'll eventually find out....or not. Either way, I've been an okay person...I figure I'll do ok.
You have a great attitude. My problem is that I am constantly fighting against the "morality" that Christians in the USA keep passing into law. Because of this, I argue aggressively against them and tend to forget that there are good Christians and other theists out there. Unfortunately, they're not usually the loudest ones on YouTube, so I have to keep reminding myself. :)
@papadrugio Thanks, well...it is just a difference of opinion and debate ensues. I agree, it doesn't have to be some big acrimonious thing...just civil debate. It's just b.s. anyways...who knows eh?
See this is where Matt loses everytime. You cannot use leprechauns and pixies as an argument for there is no God. The fact is there is plenty of scientific reasoning to believe in a creator. Now using logic you can debate on what that creator is, but you cannot use unicorns etc... to debate it. NDE's all around the globe from atheists to muslims. Christians you name it have occurred with the same accounts. Heaven and/or Hell. And they use the brain is not dead argument. Untrue.
@papadrugio Yeah that is the usual response. Only used by atheists oddly enough. And no, when you literally have millions of accounts? These people are not hallucinating or dreaming. Atheists (former), children, Muslim, Christian, Buddhists and on and on and on have had virtually the same experience or a variation of, of a Heaven or Hell. No if it were biology why didn't they go to Pizza Hut or Sea World? Doctors that deal with this will tell you it is not biological.
I take that as a compliment. However, I get your point and I apologize for the snarky tone.
Anyhow, I find the similarity of all these NDEs to be more telling of the fact we are all human than as evidence of an afterlife. When the brain is dying, it's trying to make sense of something that has never happened to it before. Richard Kinseher has a very compelling theory that addresses the NDE.
That Kinseher's theory has merit? That's overreaching? I disagree. One plausible, scientifically-based hypothesis that is open up to peer review easily trumps millions of testimonials.
Heck, I see that Dr. Lakhmir Chawla found more evidence towards it being a brain-based phenomenon. Yeah, I'll stick with Occam's Razor on this one.
I just read up on Pam Reynolds' NDE. I admit that the Wikipedia entry for it genuinely piqued my interest. I say "genuine" because I had no desire to debunk it, only to learn more about it.
Unfortunately, it doesn't hold up to scrutiny; everything can be explained by non-spiritual means. The fact that she was already participating in an NDE study taints her objectivity.
@papadrugio Actually no I have not heard about her. But now I'm interested, thanks for the heads up. No my friend, just keep an open mind. You strike me as someone who cannot be tainted by an atheist or a Christian. Open your mind and heart and the truth will be revealed. Remember, it is not the mind that calls out truth, it is your heart. And I can tell my friend you definitely have that as well as your mind! Good to have both!
@papadrugio Exactly Papa... one cant just simply "jump to conclusions" when we see an interesting anomaly no matter how "compelling" we "believe" it to be. I'm not mocking anyone. I am simply saying that we use science to investigate these things, not so mystical belief. If we jumped to conclusions while making cancer drugs...we'd all be in trouble !! How bout all the people who experience "angels"? Should I just assume that angels are visiting people!?!? Space aliens? maybe..but..
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
Christians just don't understand that we don't believe in God for the very same reasons why we don't believe in pixies ... or Zeus. I'm sure Christians don't believe Zeus exists. If they can somehow look inside themselves and see why they don't believe in Zeus, then they just might have a fighting chance of understanding why we don't believe in God.
It doesn't take any leap of faith to think Zeus is just a made up character. Ditto with God. Or any other supernatural being made by mankind.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours - Stephen Roberts
great episode, although the guy on the phone didn't understand the difference between faith and truth. ...or reality and fantasy either.....I do believe in fairies, I do.... I do.....
I want to be wrong. If I happen to be wrong, this means I am god. Because, only my own mind could mister up a god this pathetic.
Seriously, he can't even make a universe that is self-sustaining. Arthritis is proof god either does not exist, has no effect in the universe, or is a drunk old man that's pretty confused.
@Flem1337 Really....arthritis....god's mistake...ahahahhhaah....try excersizing and eating real food...thats a product of the human condition....how boring would life be if it was perfect
to the pluto theory- that doesnt cover the possiblity that pluto has not finish an orbit, due to not existing yet or not being within the sun's gravity feild ect. id like more info on that please
@supersach123 Based on what You have written You would call me an Agnostic Atheist. I question any god's existence because there isn't Verifiable Factual Proof. Therefor I choose NOT to believe.
You said atheists should not try to justify their beliefs in Science.
Atheists are not trying to prove a god does not exist.
They question theistic claims that a god exists.
How should theists try to justify their absolute belief in creationism to atheists ?
@1954phyllis If it's obvious that a supreme being exists,Then You should have NO problem providing plenty of Verifiable Factual Proof (NOT the bible) to prove it's existence !
@tranquility4all Yes a Supreme Being does exist. He is all powerful, all knowing. His knowlege is beyond mankind's. He was able to create all things by just speaking it into existence. Why dont you porve to me that He doesnt exist. I happen to know that He is alive because I know that He has everything in control. I'll believe in HIm because I choose to. Why dont you and other GOD haters stop shoving your godless agenda down our throats.
@1954phyllis You're STUPID to suggest i hate a god whose existence I question.
Because You're the one who believes with absolute certainty a god exists, The burden of proof is yours to provide Verifiable Factual Proof to support Your belief.
If I told You I believe Fire Breathing Dragons exist Would the burden of proof be on You to prove it doesn't? Or would the burden of proof be on me to prove it does exist ?
Learn how to QUESTION Your beliefs instead of accepting them based on blind faith &
@tranquility4all "The fool has said in his heart, There is no GOD. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquitY: there is none that doeth good. " Psalm 53:1
Yes I believe that GOD exists. Why do you think He doesn't exist just because you cant see Him.? No man can stand in the presence of GOD and live. Well actually if you believe in a fire breathing dragon then that is your chose. It is my chose to believe in GOD. If there wasnt a GOD then we wouldnt be here.
Maybe people of faith should stop shoving their imaginary gods down societies throat ! I asked for proof & all You can provide is You know he has everything in control & You choose to believe in him. Blind faith is NOT VERIFIABLE FACTUAL PROOF !
How do You know Your imaginary god's gender ? Did You meet him or her ?
Atheists don't claim with absolute certitude that a god does NOT exist.
@tranquility4all You are the one that is willfully ignorant. Only fools believe that there is no GOD. Dont you know that it took a Supreme Being to create all of creation. Why do atheists continually try to take Christians rights away? It is none of their business if we choose to believe in GOD. You believe what you want to and I will continually believe in GOD.
God is not some kind of entity that is external of ourselves!!! We all came from the same place, and this place of pure energy that we all have inside us, is god. The potential inside all of us is "god", or whatever you want to call it.
Religion uses the idea of god to divide people, but really, we are all connected :)
If a tornado is coming at me(an atheist), I'm heading for the cellar. I have faith in science that tells me that if I stay above ground there's a good chance that I will die. I'm talking about 300 mph winds which have been recorded, and all the stuff that the wind throws at you. For you to stand above ground and expect god and prayer to save you, that's FAITH. That's the FAITH that believers talk about. No. We don't have that form of faith. We KNOW better. Natural selection in action.
Actually, I think there are a whole set of non-rational beliefs where people don't expect other people to justify their positions. Most people think that their wives/girl friends are beautiful, that their kids are above average, that their countries are exceptional, that their sports teams are winners.
None of those beliefs are rational, but try discussing it with a guy who has an ugly wife, stupid kids, who comes from Bosnia and is a Red Sox fan.
he has to be, if you bring emotion into it then your ideas hold less weight, why? cuz youre biased. you cant see that maybe ur wrong andits nesasary to consider you can be wrong.
The natural disposition of a human from birth is atheism, a-theism means 'lack of belief', and people are not aware of God from birth, but come to believe in God via their cultural background, and a need for explanation up to a certain point, but since science has grown to fill the gaps in knowledge, there is less room for a necessary God, and there is no evidence for him either.
I'm actually a theist but i do have a large respect for this organisation - philosophical debate without pompousness and a mutual want to build on their knowledge. People are allowed to challenge belief in search for justification. Although, too often there is direct marginalisation of other's theist beliefs. Coming back to the Big Foot statement, it would be appropriate if the vast majority claimed to have seen this creature (experiences), and a number of groups had varying ideas on appearance.
@phatphace I don't think that vast belief based on observations are appropriate data to claim the belief tangible. Everyone knew that the Earth was flat some hundred years ago; they could clearly see it with their own eyes! Well, bad example, but you know what I'm sayin
@Pomme843 Observation is the basis for scientific experimentation, therefore i see your cynicism toward the fact that not much concrete evidence for religion has fully satisfied scientific theory. I could name many theologists that can prescribe logical (not crack-pot) theories to outline the co-existence of scientific theory and religion, although in man's ultimate quest for truth, no two people have the exact viewpoint for every argument; that interpretation is made by one's own experiences.
There is no way (as for now) to disproof any religion, so I think that science and religion are well compatible; why can an event have both a scientific and a religious explanation? The problem with religions in mutual exclusiveness to each other, is that if one is true, then the others are false. But as you say; everyone has his view, which is a bigger problem for religion than for science, I dare; in science, there are ways of disproving a thesis.
cont. In religion, contrarily, you can't say who's wrong, which creates consequencial issues. Most Christians approve of human responsibility, but there are always some who lay all responsibility to their gods; look to Islam! Christians 2000 years ago understood this principle; they acted, took ownership of their lives and prayed to God only for what didn't stand in their power. Now we have technology, but still some Christians prioritize mission before providing for basic human needs.
cont. 2 Looking at the vast number of mutually exclusive religions, chances are pretty slim one has picked the right one, and as every religion is as faith-based and therefore intangible as the other, chances are almost equally low going to the "right" paradise. Thus, one should base decisions on the knowlegde of human needs before on belief of salvation, particularly in politics.
cont. 3 Science is based on observations i.e. examination and thorough search for evidence, but also on analysis - synthesis. Bigfoot is based on vitnesses having seen - not examined - the creature on distance, plus superstition and more random theorization. I perhaps should not have said observations, but rather - speculated envitnessing.
for that one person who wrote there is no live after, YOUR WRONG! many people are lost from not believing in god. many think that just because god won't slap you in the head and say "hey i'm god!' does not mean he doesn't live. if there wasn't a god, than how do christians speak in tongues? how can someone speak a different language? it's not like a few words. it's not like an american trying to speak some spanish. when they holy spirit is in them they speak pure verbaly different language.
True story: My grandmother and my aunt once accompanied another relative to her Pentecostal church. At one point the relative urged my aunt up for an alter call. At the alter, everyone started jabbering away and speaking in tongues and of a sudden my aunt did, too! She's Christian, but fairly skeptical. My grandmother asked her later what had happened, what it felt like. My aunt said that she was just talking gibberish because everyone expected her to.
@oraclecrank That's really interesting! There are lots of ways to influence the behavior and belief of a human so strongly that it seems as if the belief was based on something more true that truth itself, and that the coincident behavior would therefore have to be inherently related to this "truth", pagan religions all over the world have sign of this phenomena
Who said speaking in tongues is a different language? Everytime I hear a Christian speaking in tongues it comes out as pure nonsense. People get lost in their delusions, it happens all the time. And even if speaking in tongues were caused by some divine being that would not be proof of any sort of after life at all.
Actually people have done studies on speaking in tongues and it is just gibberish. They're not speaking words they're just throwing out random sounds. If it was an actual language then we would be able to bring in linguistic experts to interpret them.
There is ZERO evidence for the existence of the Christian god. Don't tell me that I need to prove that God doesn't exist because the burden of proof does not rest on me.
Somehow, I find it difficult to believe that the noise that those ostensibly insane individuals make has any information content. Tell me, have you ever seen two people talking to each other in tongues? I doubt it.
This was a great episode. I really like the Atheist experience. The host is an amazing thinker. It is too bad this show is not on Prime Time. It would really help people in the U.S. to understand what Atheism truly means.
Atheism=lack of belief in God. To say an atheist believes there is no God, is similar to saying a Christian believes in Giant Intelligent Termites who rule the universe. You can't say you believe in something when there is no evidence to it's antithesis.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Also, you're saying that the only way you'll believe me is if you see me work a miracle? That's pretty shallow and hypocritical, right? Jesus demanded your faith to be seperate of the miracles he worked. He worked those miracles out of compassion, not to gain your faith. You're supposed to have that anyway. Remember Thomas?
I can perfectly say that I am Jesus and you should have faith in me just because, because that's what Jesus demanded. Supposedly, the miracles weren't the main attraction.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You're right about the first commandmet. However, when Jesus came to this earth, He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the light. No one shall enter into heaven, except through Me." Right there, Jesus is stating that there is ONLY ONE way, ONLY ONE religion (which for Christianity, I prefer to call a way of life). The rest of the false religions, are as you say, "fiction."
You're believing one dude, one guy. He might be Jesus, but does that really matter? I can say I'm Jesus and say that everyone else is wrong. And, from my viewpoint, that makes me more valid than everyone else. Fuck you and your beliefs, fuck you and your fictitious religion. I'm right and your wrong.
You left out the fact that Jesus could manipulate molecules at will. So no, YOU can't just SAY you are Jesus. Go walk on water and raise dead children. Then I might follow you. Thanks.
That's 2000 year old bull that was documented by only a few sources, most of which capitalized one the account of one person (Mark), four decades after the supposed events happened, and not in any other records. The evidence that the man existed is shaky at best. The evidence that he could resurrect dead and/or decaying cells, is non-existant.The only explanation you have is that he was God. That's the rough equivalent of "just because".
Not really BlueMonkey, that's what you get for assuming (something atheists rely on quite a bit actually). I think the very nature of what really happened back then has been so distorted (on purpose) by certain higher ups in ALL churches that it is close to impossible to have a real debate about this stuff anymore. We need to identify our true COMMON enemy instead of bickering about affiliation (crips & bloods tactics). Our enemy is the church and their "scientific" counterparts.
Science - that is the scientific process - is not a counterpart to the church. Just because scientific study doesn't verify your angel/alien delusions does not make it an enemy.
I'm not one to assume anything about someone I don't know. I don't know how much you have truely studied the nature of what "angels" actually are. What we (in our modern age) consider extraterrestrials are actually angels that we read about in the Bible and every other ancient "holy" book. The name we give them isn't important, what's important is that they are the same entities. 6,000 year old cave paintings with "Greys" with glowing heads doesn't lie. Connect the dots.
So, because I don't accept earth visiting aliens, angels, and magic sky faeries that means I have no imagination and don't know how to live? That's false dichotomy isn't it? You can live a great, happy, and fullfilled life full of imagination without clinging to every happy myth that comes your way. Imagination obviously has it's place but so does a recognition of what is real and what is fantasy. If a healthy imagination was ALL that mattered then we'd have schizophrenics running the world.
hmmm live a little that's exactly what im doing because you only have 1 life no after life so live your live to the best that you can . as for your life is all facts ya duh we live in reality we are not in fantasy candy lane with magic fairies
Look Monkey (fitting name BTW), don't confuse me for the average believer who believes simply because their parents did or because they were told enough times to do so while in church. I've been to church once and hated it and never returned. Your assumptions that people were stupid and primitive back then is where you stray from reality. These depictions of these beings AND their crafts have been depicted in art of all forms well THROUGH the 19th century! Was Einstein or Tesla primitive?
It doesn't matter what your reasons for believing. The still believe the based on extremely shaky reasoning. You made your own delusions instead of having them handed to you. No big difference.
Of course people 6,000 years ago were primitive. By the very definition they were primitive. That not an insult, it's etymology.
One more thing. Where did Einstein ever talk of visiting aliens in non-hypothetical terms? Don't just throw names in.
You misunderstood why I brought up Tesla and Einstein (it's ok, I'll try to talk slow). At first, you implied that people 6,000 ago are "primitive" and lacked the reasoning we super humans have today, so that's an escape for you to explain away the NUMEROUS forms of art all depicting beings that look exactly like our "Greys" do today. I said this artwork can be seen from artists all the way up through the 19th century (the time of Einstein). So what "influenced" THOSE artists? Roswell circa1947?
First - knock off the little jabs. We aren't in 4th grade.
It's not an escape to say that freaking CAVEMEN were primitive. You must be hung up on this newage concept that ancient equals wise. Have you actually looked at the cave paintings: very little actually looks like what it's supposed to. Deer don't look like deer. Mammoths don't look quite like mammaoths. Why would people look exactly like people? Kids draw funky looking figures and we don't claim they see aliens because of that, do we?
Examples, please? Don't bother with the story of Ezekial, or the painting of the Madonna with a circle in the sky behind her, or that one with all the black and white circles in the air. Give me something unquestionably alien.
Then John Doe came along, and stated "A disco-dancing pink elephant shall trample upon thee." Hence, it MUST be true! Spread the word! Convert! Convert!
So I'm just wondering. If there was NO GOD....NO CREATOR....and all of this (everything! every partical in the universe and outside of our universe) was formed from out of NOTHING ("big bang" THEORY); then how did the "first organism" that was a non-living organism some how become living? I don't know about the rest of you? But that to me shouts that THERE IS A CREATOR!! That ALWAYS WAS, IS, AND GOING TO BE!! THE I AM!!
You want meaning? Follow the ten commandments. Love thy neighbor with your whole heart. Just remember that all that's really out there is us, see how precious we are, and act accordingly.
There's your fucking meaning. Stop trying to get people to conform to something that has no proof ignorantly and instead realize that all we've got is each other and we have to look out for each other.
Sorry, Big Bang does not involve anything being made out of nothing.
Please learn what the scientific theory that you are using actually states instead of making up wrong versions of it.
Big Bang Theory is nothing like what you portrayed it as, uwwarhawk1; talking about something which you then demonstrate to know nothing about makes you look stupid, so please try and look up what the theories (like big bang) actually says instead of bashing your own fabricated misconceptions about them
Sure, religions CLAIM to have absolute truth in them, and under that context, sure, only one religion can be right.
But if you step outside the box and look at the whole scheme of things, does it really have to be the case? Most modern religions all carry certain threads of similar patterns in them. If all of these religions agree on THAT particular truth, the CORE truth, then the rest simply becomes bunk.
I myself am perfectly content and have come to terms life's meaning, is, in fact, having no real meaning.
But the beauty of life is the fact that we can DEFINE what it means. Life's meaning isn't implied upon us by some God, because, personally, if I was all powerful and all knowing, I wouldn't know why I would give a fuck about human beings.
But do you know who gives a fuck about human beings? Other human beings. You want a meaning for life? Love everybody. We're all we got.
I STRONGLY DISAGREE!! I, for one, believe that there IS a God. And for the reason of why are human beings on this earth? Or what is the meaning of LIFE?
Does there have to be a meaning? Look at the world for a second and look at how fucked up it is. You know why it's fucked up? Because they don't have meaning, or focus.
God is a selfish concept because we created it to give us that meaning, or that focus. And guess what? God has led to wars. God has led to ignorance. God has led to brainwashing. Life, with or without God, sucks. There is still no meaning.
Idiot. You made yourself look like a fool. Go back to school and learn our origins. Better yet, go read some science books. Moron, just dont come here again until you learn something.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
omg that fat man is soo stupid do u believe in leprechauns leprchauns and GOD are totally different, people have seen Jesus Christ no one saw a leprchaun the stories of leprchauns no one claims they are true and they play no signifigance roll in our lives God is their he created us he made this planet if their is no GOD why does most of the world belive in one they have to evidence proving that their is no God
THANK YOU!!if he's so real then how come none can agree with the other?why are they so afraid of researching?y do they talk like "i don believe in that research" plz!they need to stop being ignorant and cowardly and face their faith.
We want to know that all that we believe is true, but we live by faith, not by sight. But not believing leaves you with no answers at all. Where did we come from? why are we here? How can he say that he's okay not knowing the answers about origins, but he's not okay with believing in God (of any type) either? He has a double standard.
Unfortunately, the man on the phone got kinda lost...
I believe. Any questions? Please come in a calm manner.
Haha when he was talking about bigfoot that idiot had no clue what to say.
arnoldab95 4 weeks ago
Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday singing, “yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up must come down. Amen!” If they did that, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.
–Dan Barker
cavemantiger 3 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Hell is NOT the FINAL plan of God.
If we look at 1 Cor.15 we see "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death" So an ETERNAL hell cannot be so furthermore the greek for endless is ATELEUTETOS yet jesus used AIONIOS.
furthermore the wicked in Matthew 25 go to "aionios kolasis" which is greek for age-enduring PUNISHMENT/PRUNING, so utter destruction cannot be so, since the wicked are NOT nuked/destroyed utterly.
Eventually ALL will be saved- PLEASE SEE 1 Cor.15:22
motibi 6 months ago
Great vid - made even greater by Rush!!
makeitatriple 9 months ago 2
@makeitatriple I wonder what Rush thinks about the recent stupidfuckingshitthatcanadadid after they got superbutthurtbecausetheylostAFUCKINGHOCKEYGAME.
HoLOLcaust 8 months ago
@HoLOLcaust Whatever; I'm pretty sure Vancouver rioted when KFC discontinued the Double-Down sandwich
makeitatriple 8 months ago
01:23 exactly. And thats why you dont get it, because you are not being honest, and thats what they should have smashed down on.
gulbirk 10 months ago
matt dillahunty and rush? this video will be liked by me!
itsuyo211 10 months ago
@projectlevydelta If a God works in such a way that we have not one shred of evidence that they exist, what difference is it over there not being one? The only so-called evidence of a God so far are books full of empty claims for specific Gods. None are backed by any evidence, they all contradict each other (and the individual books like the Bible and Qur'an contradict themselves repeatedly) and generally are wrong about even basic history often times.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
what's the difference between believing there is no god and not believing there is a god? it's the same thing. lol...
JohnF30Music 11 months ago
@JohnF30Music The different is believing there is no god(s) requires some knowledge that the statement is true. Not believing in a God only requires that you not believe a claim put to you.
"Do you believe in the Christian God?" "No" is an example of not believing in a god. I don't need to know anything except that the claim being made is not believable. Believing there are no gods would go beyond simply rejecting a claim as it implies the person claiming it can (hopefully) justify that belief.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
@KazeKirin Yes but atheism does not reject a single God, but reject all Gods. You can be a weak atheist and accept the possibility that a God could exist (also known as agnostic atheism) but this is still believing that deities do not exist.
So many atheists say these claims aren't equivalent, and I've yet to see a real argument on how they aren't. All I've ever heard is "there is a big difference" and "atheism is a LACK of belief" Both of which assume they aren't equivalent in the first place.
CK3890 11 months ago
@CK3890 It's really easy to reject all God claims equally. Not one piece of evidence. The most we have is books full of claims with no evidential backing. Lacking belief in something is the default position, just like you wouldn't believe in Invisible Pink Unicorns, Underpants Gnomes, or Shoe Tying Faeries unless you were given evidence.
If you could prove a God existed we'd likely accept it. But no one ever has despite centuries of trying. Without evidence, all God claims are equal.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
@KazeKirin You just strengthened my argument with this one.
CK3890 11 months ago
@CK3890 Actually I was trying to cover my bases over what you think is equivalent (the rejection of all over one, or the two types of atheists) in two different responses. Since you don't seem to understand, try this:
"I believe there are no Gods" - "I do not believe there are any Gods."
In this context the closest word relation is knowledge, so let's replace believe with know.
"I know there are no Gods" - "I do not know there are any Gods."
Now you should be able to spot the key difference.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
@CK3890 That key difference is there even with the word believe. One is an assertion (asserting to believe something about a subject), the other is stating one lacks an assertion or belief on the subject. They are fundamentally different statements, it's just that belief means many things to many people, so the words ends up only being vaguely understood. It becomes easy to misunderstand as you have.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
@CK3890 They are different in claiming that "there are no Gods" is a positive assertion. "Not believing in any Gods" is rejection of one or more positive assertions made by others. The first might be something the person might claim to base on evidence or reason, the second is simply a sign of skepticism.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
The only true wisdom is in knowing that you know nothing. This is the basis of scientific research. You don't know, and that is why you search. Similarly, we don't know if God is real or not. If you examined this truth with the realization of Socrate's famous quote, you come to find that it does in fact take faith to be atheist.
You must have faith that there is no punishment for bad deeds, and that you aren't missing out on reward for good deeds. And you must until God has been disproven.
CK3890 1 year ago
@CK3890 No, because as you just said "The only true wisdom is in knowing that you know nothing". We don't even know if a Hell exists, or any punishment. So in one paragraph you start with one premise, then break it in the next. There is no evidence or justification to believe there is an afterlife or punishment in it. Thus it only requires faith to believe there is.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
@KazeKirin Exactly. We don't know, and a rational person would account for it's possibility in their actions. I didn't break the premise. There is no evidence or justification to believe there isn't an afterlife, and this is why so many rational people follow religions. They are just covering their bases. Thus you are an idiot.
CK3890 11 months ago
@CK3890 Ah, the appeal to Pascal's Wager. Rather than use the limited text to explain why this "covering your bases" approach is nonsense, I will provide a link (plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/).
In essence, you are only justified in believing when there is evidence, and thus a reason to believe. Using your logic, if I told you you had to give me $100 dollars or my pet dragon would eat you, you would have to work on the assumption such a thing could be true.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
@KazeKirin Atheism doesn't reject one claim of a God though, it rejects all claims of Gods. And a simple rejection of one God is justified, whereas rejecting all Gods is a leap of faith. It has no evidential support. I don't understand what you wrote at the end here, using my logic I have to work on an assumption? Assuming that God's existence is a possibility is actually not an assumption, it's a presumption. An educated guess.
CK3890 11 months ago
@CK3890 You are working on the presupposition that you have a true claim. The only way a claim can be true is if it is verifiable via evidence. There is no evidence of any God of any kind, only claims made by theists. This is a comfortable delusion made on emotional grounds in the hopes to make them feel better about questions they do not have answers for (safety blanket). I need no leap of faith to not believe in any Gods any more than I need one to believe there are no unicorns or pixies.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
@CK3890 Your entire argument is essentially a giant argument from ignorance in that "because you can't prove me wrong, it is (or might be) true" and then claiming it takes faith. Faith is a word for believing something for emotional reason without evidence (ie. no good one). I have no faith of any kind, I only have honest skepticism. Give us some evidence and I might be able to justify treating a god hypothesis as credible. Until then, we don't need your safety blanket.
KazeKirin 11 months ago
"I don't see the direct equivalence between physics and theology..."
"You know WHY? Because one is REAL and one is NOT"
PWNT!
Eniacbc 1 year ago
"You cannot use leprechauns and pixies as an argument for there is no God. " You absolutely can. God is magic and supernatural. Since the 2 concepts cannot be proven scientifically, unicorns are just as plausible as any God (there have been too many to count...but of course "my God" is the only right one..LOL) Even if God is more "likely" than unicorns, God still is in the same category...as the supernatural or magic. You cant jump to conclusions if you don't have an answer to something.
orangemod 1 year ago
cont-> The two (God & unicorns for example) seem to be very different because many people "believe" in God, or God is "MUCH more likely". It is hard to understand why the two could be considered to be in the same category, but they are. Example: If you cannot prove something, it is useless to try to use it to explain something else. Since God & unicorns are not proven, it is pointless to explain anything by using either example because it does not advance understanding of the question.
orangemod 1 year ago
@orangemod When people have NDE's they do not see pixies and leprechauns. They see Heaven and Hell. Cases in the millions account for this. I personally even know a former atheist that became a Christian because of a Near Death experience in 94'.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69 Perhaps SG....I am not sure what ALL of them see. If it is heaven & hell, that would unfortunately prove nothing. Because our minds are so full of pre-conceived stuff, memories, fears, etc. there really is no telling what might pop up. Mine would probably have me meet Led Zeppelin...LOL
If it did turn someone religious, I don't see anything wrong with that because I don't think that religious beliefs in and of themselves are all that harmful. It is an anomaly to us so far.
orangemod 1 year ago
Sorry to take up so much space. There have been many interesting articles on the subject in modern psychology etc. So far, they haven't claimed anything supernatural so far. And yes, it is a regular science study so you wouldn't expect that. But there are explanations available. You may not agree, but no one really knows for sure.
Cheers.
orangemod 1 year ago
@orangemod Well at least you are objective. That is a good thing. I just feel it's odd that even atheists experience these things. To me? I think it is out of the realm of hallucinations and "dreaming". Especially when this happens so frequently in NDE's. It really isn't the "proof" I require to believe in God. My truths are many outside of NDE's that have nothing to do with convincing me. But, I find it compelling to ponder. NDE's in which I am speaking.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69 Thankls SG, I try to be objective. If I wasn't, I'd feel like a shill with my mind made up. Seriously, I have no real stake in Religion or Atheism. Whatever happens to be the "truth" or "facts"..I guess I'll eventually find out....or not. Either way, I've been an okay person...I figure I'll do ok.
Cheers
orangemod 1 year ago
BTW, impressive resume regarding the guitar work professionally. I'm just an ametuer drummer myself...but I like to play as well.
orangemod 1 year ago
@orangemod
You have a great attitude. My problem is that I am constantly fighting against the "morality" that Christians in the USA keep passing into law. Because of this, I argue aggressively against them and tend to forget that there are good Christians and other theists out there. Unfortunately, they're not usually the loudest ones on YouTube, so I have to keep reminding myself. :)
papadrugio 1 year ago
@papadrugio Thanks, well...it is just a difference of opinion and debate ensues. I agree, it doesn't have to be some big acrimonious thing...just civil debate. It's just b.s. anyways...who knows eh?
Cheers.
orangemod 1 year ago
See this is where Matt loses everytime. You cannot use leprechauns and pixies as an argument for there is no God. The fact is there is plenty of scientific reasoning to believe in a creator. Now using logic you can debate on what that creator is, but you cannot use unicorns etc... to debate it. NDE's all around the globe from atheists to muslims. Christians you name it have occurred with the same accounts. Heaven and/or Hell. And they use the brain is not dead argument. Untrue.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69
There are a few biology-based hypotheses about Near Death Experiences. Each are far, far more likely to be true than a god or afterlife.
There is a reason why testimonials are not valid scientific evidence. Oddly enough, that's the only kind of "evidence" that religious people have.
papadrugio 1 year ago
@papadrugio Yeah that is the usual response. Only used by atheists oddly enough. And no, when you literally have millions of accounts? These people are not hallucinating or dreaming. Atheists (former), children, Muslim, Christian, Buddhists and on and on and on have had virtually the same experience or a variation of, of a Heaven or Hell. No if it were biology why didn't they go to Pizza Hut or Sea World? Doctors that deal with this will tell you it is not biological.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69
"Only used by atheists oddly enough."
I take that as a compliment. However, I get your point and I apologize for the snarky tone.
Anyhow, I find the similarity of all these NDEs to be more telling of the fact we are all human than as evidence of an afterlife. When the brain is dying, it's trying to make sense of something that has never happened to it before. Richard Kinseher has a very compelling theory that addresses the NDE.
papadrugio 1 year ago
@papadrugio No it's an overreach to even suggest that.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69
That Kinseher's theory has merit? That's overreaching? I disagree. One plausible, scientifically-based hypothesis that is open up to peer review easily trumps millions of testimonials.
Heck, I see that Dr. Lakhmir Chawla found more evidence towards it being a brain-based phenomenon. Yeah, I'll stick with Occam's Razor on this one.
papadrugio 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69
I just read up on Pam Reynolds' NDE. I admit that the Wikipedia entry for it genuinely piqued my interest. I say "genuine" because I had no desire to debunk it, only to learn more about it.
Unfortunately, it doesn't hold up to scrutiny; everything can be explained by non-spiritual means. The fact that she was already participating in an NDE study taints her objectivity.
I'm sure you've heard this, but extraordinary claims really require extraordinary proof.
papadrugio 1 year ago
@papadrugio Actually no I have not heard about her. But now I'm interested, thanks for the heads up. No my friend, just keep an open mind. You strike me as someone who cannot be tainted by an atheist or a Christian. Open your mind and heart and the truth will be revealed. Remember, it is not the mind that calls out truth, it is your heart. And I can tell my friend you definitely have that as well as your mind! Good to have both!
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@papadrugio Exactly Papa... one cant just simply "jump to conclusions" when we see an interesting anomaly no matter how "compelling" we "believe" it to be. I'm not mocking anyone. I am simply saying that we use science to investigate these things, not so mystical belief. If we jumped to conclusions while making cancer drugs...we'd all be in trouble !! How bout all the people who experience "angels"? Should I just assume that angels are visiting people!?!? Space aliens? maybe..but..
orangemod 1 year ago
Interesting choice of music. RUSH are all Christians. Wonder if Getty and Neil know their music is used on this crappy show.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
Holy fucking shit: "I`ve seen some short Irishman before". This guy should not reproduce
BillHicks420 1 year ago
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
-Stephen Roberts
LucasI3434 1 year ago
Lol so when Christians are confronted with calm, sound logic, they explode! "I'll punch your fat head in for Jesus!" LMFAO!
2nDoppelganger 1 year ago
Is this the same caller who wanted to punch Matt's head in for Jesus?
Mark2790 1 year ago
Christians just don't understand that we don't believe in God for the very same reasons why we don't believe in pixies ... or Zeus. I'm sure Christians don't believe Zeus exists. If they can somehow look inside themselves and see why they don't believe in Zeus, then they just might have a fighting chance of understanding why we don't believe in God.
It doesn't take any leap of faith to think Zeus is just a made up character. Ditto with God. Or any other supernatural being made by mankind.
lesliekwan80 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lesliekwan80
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours - Stephen Roberts
rvbapocalypse 1 year ago
great episode, although the guy on the phone didn't understand the difference between faith and truth. ...or reality and fantasy either.....I do believe in fairies, I do.... I do.....
chatelaine19 1 year ago
you cannot compare belief in God to belief in big foot . Its not the same .
Hillbillykid2000 1 year ago
@Hillbillykid2000
it is exactly the same thing.
both have no evidence and both are thought to be true by uneducated hillbilly's
sykeo123 1 year ago
@sykeo123 Actually, it is not the same, because more people believe in God than bigfoot and people have all sorts of different definitions of God.
nowayout001 1 year ago
@nowayout001
doesn't matter how many fucking people believe in bigfoot or gawd.
It is called argument from popularity and is a logical fallacy
sykeo123 1 year ago
I want to be wrong. If I happen to be wrong, this means I am god. Because, only my own mind could mister up a god this pathetic.
Seriously, he can't even make a universe that is self-sustaining. Arthritis is proof god either does not exist, has no effect in the universe, or is a drunk old man that's pretty confused.
Flem1337 1 year ago
@Flem1337 Really....arthritis....god's mistake...ahahahhhaah....try excersizing and eating real food...thats a product of the human condition....how boring would life be if it was perfect
kikme420 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Girls That Love Handbags, confirm here. * GirlieRewards. Info *
Zeke5486 1 year ago
That was a great discussion, and Matt raised some points I didn't really think of before, and I like the intro music with the odd time signature. :P
cybrmynd 1 year ago
@cybrmynd
Doh!. Didn't realize it was Rush.
cybrmynd 1 year ago
@dragondoubt I think there is blood in my heart, is this ok or would god prefer something else?
Analphabet1337 1 year ago
@dragondoubt Pascal's Wager, really? That has to be one of the worst arguments ever.
Analphabet1337 1 year ago 20
@Analphabet1337 In the words of Jen Peeples, "That's Pascal's Wager. That's bullshit."
acrazyone1 7 months ago
I cheer for your selection of the theme song "Free WIll" by Rush. :)
cooper79jeffr 1 year ago
wooo rush
Breadfan01 1 year ago
to the pluto theory- that doesnt cover the possiblity that pluto has not finish an orbit, due to not existing yet or not being within the sun's gravity feild ect. id like more info on that please
snakeeyes119 1 year ago
@supersach123 Yes there are many things beyond our perception.
However Technological Advancements thru Science have expanded Our Ability to perceive Observations & Continually test Laws in an attempt to explain.
Scientific theories are supported by continual testing in an attempt to explain Laws.
Creationism is NOT supported by anything accept faith & scripture !
tranquility4all 1 year ago 2
@supersach123 Based on what You have written You would call me an Agnostic Atheist. I question any god's existence because there isn't Verifiable Factual Proof. Therefor I choose NOT to believe.
You said atheists should not try to justify their beliefs in Science.
Atheists are not trying to prove a god does not exist.
They question theistic claims that a god exists.
How should theists try to justify their absolute belief in creationism to atheists ?
Can creationism be scientifically supported ?
tranquility4all 1 year ago
Ah nuts! They ended it before the caller said he was going to punch Matt's head in for Jesus. That's the best part!
jvondd 1 year ago
Atheism is so stupid. They might call Christians retards but its obvious that a Supreme Being created all things.
1954phyllis 1 year ago
@1954phyllis How is it obvious? (Let me guess: beauty in nature?)
jvondd 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1954phyllis Support your claim with evidence.
Hammurabanon 1 year ago
@1954phyllis If it's obvious that a supreme being exists,Then You should have NO problem providing plenty of Verifiable Factual Proof (NOT the bible) to prove it's existence !
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all Yes a Supreme Being does exist. He is all powerful, all knowing. His knowlege is beyond mankind's. He was able to create all things by just speaking it into existence. Why dont you porve to me that He doesnt exist. I happen to know that He is alive because I know that He has everything in control. I'll believe in HIm because I choose to. Why dont you and other GOD haters stop shoving your godless agenda down our throats.
1954phyllis 1 year ago
@1954phyllis You're STUPID to suggest i hate a god whose existence I question.
Because You're the one who believes with absolute certainty a god exists, The burden of proof is yours to provide Verifiable Factual Proof to support Your belief.
If I told You I believe Fire Breathing Dragons exist Would the burden of proof be on You to prove it doesn't? Or would the burden of proof be on me to prove it does exist ?
Learn how to QUESTION Your beliefs instead of accepting them based on blind faith &
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all "The fool has said in his heart, There is no GOD. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquitY: there is none that doeth good. " Psalm 53:1
Yes I believe that GOD exists. Why do you think He doesn't exist just because you cant see Him.? No man can stand in the presence of GOD and live. Well actually if you believe in a fire breathing dragon then that is your chose. It is my chose to believe in GOD. If there wasnt a GOD then we wouldnt be here.
1954phyllis 1 year ago
@1954phyllis Willful IGNORANCE !
Maybe people of faith should stop shoving their imaginary gods down societies throat ! I asked for proof & all You can provide is You know he has everything in control & You choose to believe in him. Blind faith is NOT VERIFIABLE FACTUAL PROOF !
How do You know Your imaginary god's gender ? Did You meet him or her ?
Atheists don't claim with absolute certitude that a god does NOT exist.
We QUESTION theists' claims that a god exists !
PEACE !
tranquility4all 1 year ago
@tranquility4all You are the one that is willfully ignorant. Only fools believe that there is no GOD. Dont you know that it took a Supreme Being to create all of creation. Why do atheists continually try to take Christians rights away? It is none of their business if we choose to believe in GOD. You believe what you want to and I will continually believe in GOD.
1954phyllis 1 year ago
@1954phyllis Only stupid people believe something with absolute certainty when there ISN'T ANY VERIFIABLE FACTUAL PROOF to support it !
Atheists are NOT trying to take your or anyone's rights away !
Questioning your beliefs is NOT attempting to take your rights away.
Why CAN'T provide proof to support Your belief ?
Scripture is NOT proof !
Believing is NOT Proof !
Learn how to QUESTION before Accepting !
You will be better off IF You do !
tranquility4all 1 year ago 9
God is not some kind of entity that is external of ourselves!!! We all came from the same place, and this place of pure energy that we all have inside us, is god. The potential inside all of us is "god", or whatever you want to call it.
Religion uses the idea of god to divide people, but really, we are all connected :)
79vmc 2 years ago
If a tornado is coming at me(an atheist), I'm heading for the cellar. I have faith in science that tells me that if I stay above ground there's a good chance that I will die. I'm talking about 300 mph winds which have been recorded, and all the stuff that the wind throws at you. For you to stand above ground and expect god and prayer to save you, that's FAITH. That's the FAITH that believers talk about. No. We don't have that form of faith. We KNOW better. Natural selection in action.
yeshuahfullofit 2 years ago
bzzzzt
secularenegadether 2 years ago 2
I think Matt could do stand-up comedy. He's got very quick wit!
mrgrant888 2 years ago
dont beleave thos athiests! worship my channel! I AM GOD!!!!
theorderoforange 2 years ago
I Am My Own God!!
Emblemz 2 years ago
Matt is such an intense PWNER!! Gotta love it(at least I do)!!
5/5
99minerkc 2 years ago 31
Actually, I think there are a whole set of non-rational beliefs where people don't expect other people to justify their positions. Most people think that their wives/girl friends are beautiful, that their kids are above average, that their countries are exceptional, that their sports teams are winners.
None of those beliefs are rational, but try discussing it with a guy who has an ugly wife, stupid kids, who comes from Bosnia and is a Red Sox fan.
NMS
prodprod 2 years ago
Great host!
Pomme843 2 years ago
Matt's so good at discussing things calmly.
billywig2 2 years ago 8
he has to be, if you bring emotion into it then your ideas hold less weight, why? cuz youre biased. you cant see that maybe ur wrong andits nesasary to consider you can be wrong.
adzug 2 years ago
The natural disposition of a human from birth is atheism, a-theism means 'lack of belief', and people are not aware of God from birth, but come to believe in God via their cultural background, and a need for explanation up to a certain point, but since science has grown to fill the gaps in knowledge, there is less room for a necessary God, and there is no evidence for him either.
kitchenaut 2 years ago 4
I'm actually a theist but i do have a large respect for this organisation - philosophical debate without pompousness and a mutual want to build on their knowledge. People are allowed to challenge belief in search for justification. Although, too often there is direct marginalisation of other's theist beliefs. Coming back to the Big Foot statement, it would be appropriate if the vast majority claimed to have seen this creature (experiences), and a number of groups had varying ideas on appearance.
phatphace 2 years ago
@phatphace I don't think that vast belief based on observations are appropriate data to claim the belief tangible. Everyone knew that the Earth was flat some hundred years ago; they could clearly see it with their own eyes! Well, bad example, but you know what I'm sayin
Pomme843 2 years ago
@Pomme843 Observation is the basis for scientific experimentation, therefore i see your cynicism toward the fact that not much concrete evidence for religion has fully satisfied scientific theory. I could name many theologists that can prescribe logical (not crack-pot) theories to outline the co-existence of scientific theory and religion, although in man's ultimate quest for truth, no two people have the exact viewpoint for every argument; that interpretation is made by one's own experiences.
phatphace 2 years ago
@phatphace You see my cynicism as what?
There is no way (as for now) to disproof any religion, so I think that science and religion are well compatible; why can an event have both a scientific and a religious explanation? The problem with religions in mutual exclusiveness to each other, is that if one is true, then the others are false. But as you say; everyone has his view, which is a bigger problem for religion than for science, I dare; in science, there are ways of disproving a thesis.
Pomme843 2 years ago
cont. In religion, contrarily, you can't say who's wrong, which creates consequencial issues. Most Christians approve of human responsibility, but there are always some who lay all responsibility to their gods; look to Islam! Christians 2000 years ago understood this principle; they acted, took ownership of their lives and prayed to God only for what didn't stand in their power. Now we have technology, but still some Christians prioritize mission before providing for basic human needs.
Pomme843 2 years ago
Comment removed
Pomme843 2 years ago
cont. 2 Looking at the vast number of mutually exclusive religions, chances are pretty slim one has picked the right one, and as every religion is as faith-based and therefore intangible as the other, chances are almost equally low going to the "right" paradise. Thus, one should base decisions on the knowlegde of human needs before on belief of salvation, particularly in politics.
Pomme843 2 years ago
cont. 3 Science is based on observations i.e. examination and thorough search for evidence, but also on analysis - synthesis. Bigfoot is based on vitnesses having seen - not examined - the creature on distance, plus superstition and more random theorization. I perhaps should not have said observations, but rather - speculated envitnessing.
Pomme843 2 years ago
Oh man. I've enjoyed this video so much.
Vislav 2 years ago
Matt is so on the ball here. Its awesome.
ByTor190 2 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
for that one person who wrote there is no live after, YOUR WRONG! many people are lost from not believing in god. many think that just because god won't slap you in the head and say "hey i'm god!' does not mean he doesn't live. if there wasn't a god, than how do christians speak in tongues? how can someone speak a different language? it's not like a few words. it's not like an american trying to speak some spanish. when they holy spirit is in them they speak pure verbaly different language.
timianos 2 years ago
The only "speaking in tongues" I ever saw were people speaking gibberish. What language are they supposed to be speaking?
mtanti87 2 years ago 4
Retard :)
SomeGuyInWhite 2 years ago 2
True story: My grandmother and my aunt once accompanied another relative to her Pentecostal church. At one point the relative urged my aunt up for an alter call. At the alter, everyone started jabbering away and speaking in tongues and of a sudden my aunt did, too! She's Christian, but fairly skeptical. My grandmother asked her later what had happened, what it felt like. My aunt said that she was just talking gibberish because everyone expected her to.
That's probably what most people do.
oraclecrank 2 years ago 4
@oraclecrank That's really interesting! There are lots of ways to influence the behavior and belief of a human so strongly that it seems as if the belief was based on something more true that truth itself, and that the coincident behavior would therefore have to be inherently related to this "truth", pagan religions all over the world have sign of this phenomena
Pomme843 2 years ago
Who said speaking in tongues is a different language? Everytime I hear a Christian speaking in tongues it comes out as pure nonsense. People get lost in their delusions, it happens all the time. And even if speaking in tongues were caused by some divine being that would not be proof of any sort of after life at all.
AHPMB 2 years ago 2
'Tongues' is not a language, it's gibberish.
I can speak in tongues, but without claiming god made me do it, I'd be hospitalized.
BlackNBloodyRoses 2 years ago
Actually people have done studies on speaking in tongues and it is just gibberish. They're not speaking words they're just throwing out random sounds. If it was an actual language then we would be able to bring in linguistic experts to interpret them.
There is ZERO evidence for the existence of the Christian god. Don't tell me that I need to prove that God doesn't exist because the burden of proof does not rest on me.
schwan023 2 years ago 4
@timianos
Somehow, I find it difficult to believe that the noise that those ostensibly insane individuals make has any information content. Tell me, have you ever seen two people talking to each other in tongues? I doubt it.
julianalmasude 2 years ago
what happened to the rest of the answer?
NegativeNick 2 years ago
goddamn this guys a genius
Conquestidore 2 years ago 3
No kidding! Matt's damn good at this.
chazdrumzalot 2 years ago
This was a great episode. I really like the Atheist experience. The host is an amazing thinker. It is too bad this show is not on Prime Time. It would really help people in the U.S. to understand what Atheism truly means.
turkeyburgers 2 years ago 28
Atheism=lack of belief in God. To say an atheist believes there is no God, is similar to saying a Christian believes in Giant Intelligent Termites who rule the universe. You can't say you believe in something when there is no evidence to it's antithesis.
WeSpeak 2 years ago
hmm, I like that analogy!
am03ph 2 years ago
And hopefully it will spread the True Gospel of the Giant Intelligent Termites! =]
WeSpeak 2 years ago
Yes. Yes it is.
QregTheBlueMonkey 2 years ago
Aww. It sucks that you cut off the end where the caller gets verbally abusive and Matt hangs up on him. That was the funny part of the call.
xxFortunadoxx 2 years ago
i've seen some short irishmen before...hahaha.
canuckman87 2 years ago 2
POWNED - go and pray to big foot LOL
mongoblaugrana 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Also, you're saying that the only way you'll believe me is if you see me work a miracle? That's pretty shallow and hypocritical, right? Jesus demanded your faith to be seperate of the miracles he worked. He worked those miracles out of compassion, not to gain your faith. You're supposed to have that anyway. Remember Thomas?
I can perfectly say that I am Jesus and you should have faith in me just because, because that's what Jesus demanded. Supposedly, the miracles weren't the main attraction.
Arkanj3l 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You're right about the first commandmet. However, when Jesus came to this earth, He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the light. No one shall enter into heaven, except through Me." Right there, Jesus is stating that there is ONLY ONE way, ONLY ONE religion (which for Christianity, I prefer to call a way of life). The rest of the false religions, are as you say, "fiction."
uwwarhawk1 2 years ago
Funny thing is all the other religions
You're believing one dude, one guy. He might be Jesus, but does that really matter? I can say I'm Jesus and say that everyone else is wrong. And, from my viewpoint, that makes me more valid than everyone else. Fuck you and your beliefs, fuck you and your fictitious religion. I'm right and your wrong.
That's what Jesus is saying.
Arkanj3l 2 years ago
You left out the fact that Jesus could manipulate molecules at will. So no, YOU can't just SAY you are Jesus. Go walk on water and raise dead children. Then I might follow you. Thanks.
ghostgate82 2 years ago
That's 2000 year old bull that was documented by only a few sources, most of which capitalized one the account of one person (Mark), four decades after the supposed events happened, and not in any other records. The evidence that the man existed is shaky at best. The evidence that he could resurrect dead and/or decaying cells, is non-existant.The only explanation you have is that he was God. That's the rough equivalent of "just because".
Arkanj3l 2 years ago 10
Yet you believe the Bible is the word of God because it says it's the word of God, I assume?
QregTheBlueMonkey 2 years ago
Not really BlueMonkey, that's what you get for assuming (something atheists rely on quite a bit actually). I think the very nature of what really happened back then has been so distorted (on purpose) by certain higher ups in ALL churches that it is close to impossible to have a real debate about this stuff anymore. We need to identify our true COMMON enemy instead of bickering about affiliation (crips & bloods tactics). Our enemy is the church and their "scientific" counterparts.
ghostgate82 2 years ago
Science - that is the scientific process - is not a counterpart to the church. Just because scientific study doesn't verify your angel/alien delusions does not make it an enemy.
QregTheBlueMonkey 2 years ago
I'm not one to assume anything about someone I don't know. I don't know how much you have truely studied the nature of what "angels" actually are. What we (in our modern age) consider extraterrestrials are actually angels that we read about in the Bible and every other ancient "holy" book. The name we give them isn't important, what's important is that they are the same entities. 6,000 year old cave paintings with "Greys" with glowing heads doesn't lie. Connect the dots.
Peace.
ghostgate82 2 years ago
Anatomically inaccurate cave paintings done by primitive people prove the existence of angels? That a bit of a leap isn't it.
QregTheBlueMonkey 2 years ago
see the problem with people like you is that you believe life is all facts and proof. live a little...
proserpinaballerina 2 years ago
So, because I don't accept earth visiting aliens, angels, and magic sky faeries that means I have no imagination and don't know how to live? That's false dichotomy isn't it? You can live a great, happy, and fullfilled life full of imagination without clinging to every happy myth that comes your way. Imagination obviously has it's place but so does a recognition of what is real and what is fantasy. If a healthy imagination was ALL that mattered then we'd have schizophrenics running the world.
QregTheBlueMonkey 2 years ago
Clearly you didn't understand my point, but alright.
proserpinaballerina 2 years ago
hmmm live a little that's exactly what im doing because you only have 1 life no after life so live your live to the best that you can . as for your life is all facts ya duh we live in reality we are not in fantasy candy lane with magic fairies
fortefayte 2 years ago
Look Monkey (fitting name BTW), don't confuse me for the average believer who believes simply because their parents did or because they were told enough times to do so while in church. I've been to church once and hated it and never returned. Your assumptions that people were stupid and primitive back then is where you stray from reality. These depictions of these beings AND their crafts have been depicted in art of all forms well THROUGH the 19th century! Was Einstein or Tesla primitive?
ghostgate82 2 years ago
"Look Monkey (fitting name BTW)" Erm... Good one?
It doesn't matter what your reasons for believing. The still believe the based on extremely shaky reasoning. You made your own delusions instead of having them handed to you. No big difference.
Of course people 6,000 years ago were primitive. By the very definition they were primitive. That not an insult, it's etymology.
One more thing. Where did Einstein ever talk of visiting aliens in non-hypothetical terms? Don't just throw names in.
QregTheBlueMonkey 2 years ago
You misunderstood why I brought up Tesla and Einstein (it's ok, I'll try to talk slow). At first, you implied that people 6,000 ago are "primitive" and lacked the reasoning we super humans have today, so that's an escape for you to explain away the NUMEROUS forms of art all depicting beings that look exactly like our "Greys" do today. I said this artwork can be seen from artists all the way up through the 19th century (the time of Einstein). So what "influenced" THOSE artists? Roswell circa1947?
ghostgate82 2 years ago
First - knock off the little jabs. We aren't in 4th grade.
It's not an escape to say that freaking CAVEMEN were primitive. You must be hung up on this newage concept that ancient equals wise. Have you actually looked at the cave paintings: very little actually looks like what it's supposed to. Deer don't look like deer. Mammoths don't look quite like mammaoths. Why would people look exactly like people? Kids draw funky looking figures and we don't claim they see aliens because of that, do we?
QregTheBlueMonkey 2 years ago
Examples, please? Don't bother with the story of Ezekial, or the painting of the Madonna with a circle in the sky behind her, or that one with all the black and white circles in the air. Give me something unquestionably alien.
QregTheBlueMonkey 2 years ago
Then John Doe came along, and stated "A disco-dancing pink elephant shall trample upon thee." Hence, it MUST be true! Spread the word! Convert! Convert!
IyotenX 2 years ago
So I'm just wondering. If there was NO GOD....NO CREATOR....and all of this (everything! every partical in the universe and outside of our universe) was formed from out of NOTHING ("big bang" THEORY); then how did the "first organism" that was a non-living organism some how become living? I don't know about the rest of you? But that to me shouts that THERE IS A CREATOR!! That ALWAYS WAS, IS, AND GOING TO BE!! THE I AM!!
uwwarhawk1 2 years ago
You want meaning? Follow the ten commandments. Love thy neighbor with your whole heart. Just remember that all that's really out there is us, see how precious we are, and act accordingly.
There's your fucking meaning. Stop trying to get people to conform to something that has no proof ignorantly and instead realize that all we've got is each other and we have to look out for each other.
Nothing else matters.
God is ignorance.
Arkanj3l 2 years ago
Sorry, Big Bang does not involve anything being made out of nothing.
Please learn what the scientific theory that you are using actually states instead of making up wrong versions of it.
Big Bang Theory is nothing like what you portrayed it as, uwwarhawk1; talking about something which you then demonstrate to know nothing about makes you look stupid, so please try and look up what the theories (like big bang) actually says instead of bashing your own fabricated misconceptions about them
mhrby1985 2 years ago 3
"geared at an atheist and non-atheist audience"
so... everyone?
MathiasTillington 2 years ago 3
What a fucking retard.
"how can we test things?"
IDIOT. Its called the SCIENTIFIC METHOD, go back to school and learn about it.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
That doesn't necessarily have to be the case.
Sure, religions CLAIM to have absolute truth in them, and under that context, sure, only one religion can be right.
But if you step outside the box and look at the whole scheme of things, does it really have to be the case? Most modern religions all carry certain threads of similar patterns in them. If all of these religions agree on THAT particular truth, the CORE truth, then the rest simply becomes bunk.
Arkanj3l 2 years ago
I agree with your notion that not every religion can be right, but you forget that they all can be wrong as well.
JoesGuy 2 years ago
if you think many people are gullabale and there is no God tell me where do you think we came from how did all this stuff just end up here?
danyella1993 2 years ago
Randomness.
I myself am perfectly content and have come to terms life's meaning, is, in fact, having no real meaning.
But the beauty of life is the fact that we can DEFINE what it means. Life's meaning isn't implied upon us by some God, because, personally, if I was all powerful and all knowing, I wouldn't know why I would give a fuck about human beings.
But do you know who gives a fuck about human beings? Other human beings. You want a meaning for life? Love everybody. We're all we got.
Arkanj3l 2 years ago 3
I STRONGLY DISAGREE!! I, for one, believe that there IS a God. And for the reason of why are human beings on this earth? Or what is the meaning of LIFE?
uwwarhawk1 2 years ago
Does there have to be a meaning? Look at the world for a second and look at how fucked up it is. You know why it's fucked up? Because they don't have meaning, or focus.
God is a selfish concept because we created it to give us that meaning, or that focus. And guess what? God has led to wars. God has led to ignorance. God has led to brainwashing. Life, with or without God, sucks. There is still no meaning.
Arkanj3l 2 years ago 2
Then where did your god come from and how did he end up here.
You are using a circular argument, you fail.
tnuctnuc1 2 years ago
LOL
"i dont know, so god musta done it."
Idiot. You made yourself look like a fool. Go back to school and learn our origins. Better yet, go read some science books. Moron, just dont come here again until you learn something.
crackerkiller89 2 years ago
As much as I enjoy this show and enjoy Matt's intelligence, it drives me crazy when he constantly cuts people off. Does that bother anyone else?
lundenmetal 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
omg that fat man is soo stupid do u believe in leprechauns leprchauns and GOD are totally different, people have seen Jesus Christ no one saw a leprchaun the stories of leprchauns no one claims they are true and they play no signifigance roll in our lives God is their he created us he made this planet if their is no GOD why does most of the world belive in one they have to evidence proving that their is no God
danyella1993 3 years ago
Actually people did claim to see leprechauns, and they play a strong role in Irish folklore.
Most people believe in DIFFERENT gods. If He was so obvious, why doesn't everyone agree?
Oh, by the way, Matt Dillahunty is waaaaay smarter than you. He can spell.
Cheers!
Kieranfoy 3 years ago 13
THANK YOU!!if he's so real then how come none can agree with the other?why are they so afraid of researching?y do they talk like "i don believe in that research" plz!they need to stop being ignorant and cowardly and face their faith.
sillysylviesly 2 years ago
"But not believing leaves you with no answers at all."
You say this as though 'believing DOES provide _real_ answers.
It definitely makes those who subscribe to a belief FEEL like they have 'answers', but that doesn't = actually _having_ true answers.
AxeGrrrl 3 years ago 2
We want to know that all that we believe is true, but we live by faith, not by sight. But not believing leaves you with no answers at all. Where did we come from? why are we here? How can he say that he's okay not knowing the answers about origins, but he's not okay with believing in God (of any type) either? He has a double standard.
Unfortunately, the man on the phone got kinda lost...
I believe. Any questions? Please come in a calm manner.
ju87divebomber47 3 years ago
1. Faith is the antithesis of reason. Not a good basis to form your life on.
2. Have no idea where we came from, aside from ape-like creatures.
3. Why does there have to be a 'why'?
4. How is that a double-standard?
Good questions, hope that helped.
Kieranfoy 3 years ago
1. True, however, I know th