i have not met one christian that lives in a way that i think is in line with the bible, but than again, i have met very few christians who have read the bible (in person of coarse). it doesnt really affect my disbelief in god, but it does make greater my disdain for religion and specifically christianity
you couldnt convince me of an all-loving and all-powerful god because i think if a god existed like that there would be no starving children and children being raped on a daily basis. a logically argument could convince me that some super natural deity exists but i have not seen one that comes even close from apologists or regular guys like yourself. if a believed an all-loving god existed of coarse i would want a relationship with it, i would want to learn what it knows.
A lot of question videos are "Haha i stumped you with my questions now you should become a christian you silly atheist". I think many people came in with the unshakable assumption that that is what this video was as well.
2) words? No. Have god in your next video and I'll be convinced.
3) If your biblical god did exist in this space/time I'd have many more than 5 questions about his actions
4) I never met Albert Schweitzer but think he met your criteria. The Italian/Americans I grew up with were no better nor worse than the eastern European Jews.
5) Based on my homey's Xians r ok but the right wing fundies and pedophile protectors give other Christians a bad name. BTW I'm Erisian not Atheist.
Thanks. Do you think any reasonable standard of evidence would persuade you, or are the only things that would persuade you be the things you mentioned?
@Epydemic2020 don't talk of love lasting through time .... show me! I read the bible cover to cover and if a god who would destroy a friends (Job) life on a bet and throw his son/self "under a bus" advocate murder and rape ( Numbers 31:17-18) self mutilation (Matthew 18:8-9) cannibalism (John 6:53-58) and child abuse (Proverbs 23: 13) does exist this space/time is a dark and scary place.
Maybe there’s a God above But all I’ve ever learned of love ---- It’s not a cry you can hear at night It’s not somebody who has seen the light It’s a cold and it’s a broken Hallelujah
how are you defining "reasonable standard of evidence"...? Sounds a bit subjective.
it sounds like what you are saying is "is there any argument or *thing I can say* that will convince you?"
if it is the above, then I would have to tell you NO.
there is nothing you can say, nor any logical argument you can make that would convince me... you are going to have to actually provide evidence - not sentences, to prove your god.:3
What is reasonable is not subjective. People can have different ideas about what is reasonable, but some people may be wrong.
You are trying to set up a dichotomy between arguments and evidence, those two are the same thing. If you prove an argument, you necessarily have evidence for your premises.
You seem to equate an argument to sentences. Assertions are akin to sentences, arguments are not.
Even if all parts for *any* argument for god were all eternally consistent (and I'm not saying Kalam is completely internally consistent either) a argument alone makes no attempt to demonstrate anything tangible in nature regarding the manifestation of a actual god.
Well, the KCA is a sound argument and proves the existence of a personal, omnipotent, super intelligent, eternal, immaterial Creator of the universe - God. If you can't defeat the argument, you can't remain an atheist.
Not to be technical, but someone doesn't have to defeat an argument in order to not accept its conclusion. They could, for example, just be uncertain as to whether or not the argument is true.
I think thats the camp you actually find people in a lot of the time. Perhaps they don't understand the argument enough to accept or reject it, or perhaps they just haven't though about it enough to accept it wholesale.
Oh, pooh pooh to you. The form of the argument is sound. If one does not dispute the premises, they must accept the conclusion. Perhaps our difference of opinion here is just about timing. I assumed he had fully investigated the argument and come to a conclusion about it.
Special pleading? No. The infinite regress argument effectively discounts the possibility of a universe that extends infinitely into the past, but has no bearing on a changeless, immaterial being.
Counterargument fails because it construes S2 to be temporally prior to the creation of the universe, which is nonsense, since there was no prior time.
KCA is not sound - but lets say I agree with all the premises and the conclusion also follows - all you have is an *argument* for a god, but you don't have a shred of *evidence*.
You cannot magically wish god into existence with clever argument.
I have a BS in physics, please let me know how we can get in contact so as to answer your 5 questions. I would be more than happy to. Thank you and have a great day.
before i answer any of your questions, find me a "god" that hasn't in the passed drowned his creation, burned cities, told some of his "people" to destroy other people that he created, doesn't kick people out of paradise for breaking stupid rules that he knew they were going to break anyways, doesn't shift all blame to an archangel he kicked out of heaven for making suggestions, isnt homophobic, genocidal or infanticidal or negligent to his creation, but i digress, this list could go on forever.
Question 2: How do you justify an allegedly all-loving deity committing those atrocities?
Question 3: Why do you believe in your god?
Question 4: If faith is your determiner in believing in your god - how do you know your god is the only true god? I mean, every religion requires faith...
Question 5: Were you raised in your religion or did you discover it? If raised, have you examined evidence contrary to it? If discovered, how vulnerable were you?
1.) At least the same type of evidence I have to believe that anyone else exists and has a mind. i.e the physical construct of which that mind is an emergent property of.
2.) An argument alone? Not without solid evidence I could confirm and evaluate on my own. Provide the same kind of evidence that I have that other things exist.
3.) That really depends on what he is really like. If he is an asshole, I doubt it. I would oppose him. Powerful or not.
1. Anything supernatural described in the bible. Moving mountains, talking donkeys, parting the ocean, talking bushes on fire... 2. No you're a superstitious fool (sorry) 3. No because he allows pain death suffering even though he could stop it 4. No! Christians are the least Christ -like people 5. Yes, I seek moral perfection rather than blindly follow a book written by barbaric people. Morality is doing what is right despite what you are told - you do what you are told despite what is right.
Ok. I'm not a Christian, nor am I an Atheist, but seriously. This is just stupid. Why cannot we simply accept that there are varying systems of belief on this planet, and that's just how it is! Let people believe what they believe and stop trying to convince others that what you believe is right, and what they believe is wrong! Freedom of religion is a basic human right. To try and encroach upon that is a violation of those rights!
This vid is not trying to convince anyone, but is just trying to better understand the views of people who consider themselves atheists. But there is nothing wrong with trying to convince people of your views, or having conversations about the evidence for and against certain views. Freedom of religion is a right... and talking about religion doesn't violate that in any way.
@Epydemic2020 I agree, discussion of religion is not a rights violation, so long as one person is not trying to force their views upon someone else who does not want those views. My question to you though is, and this is coming from someone who believes in God, but is not a Christian or a member of any organized religion. Why do you even care what the views of Atheists are, if you believe that Christianity is the only right path, and that all others are wrong?
I have yet to experience when better understanding those who disagree with you is a bad thing. It seems to help with evaluating your own beliefs, as well as having more meaningful discussions with people of different views.
@ExposeChosunNinja "Why do you even care what the views of Atheists are, if you believe that Christianity is the only right path, and that all others are wrong?"
If you were of the opinion that a person would be tortured forever due to how they were living their lives, would you not warn them about this? Are you devoid of compassion? This is really no different than warning a blind person if you believe that they're in danger of being run over by a truck.
@Epydemic2020 And please do not say that you are trying to save all of us from damnation! Salvation is a choice. Every individual on this planet must make that choice on their own. It is no one else's place to try and make or influence that choice for anyone else! Belief is a personal thing, and I feel that this is something that needs to be preserved. It is one of the things that makes us individuals!
1) Direct evidence; such as god revealing herself to us.
Direct revelation to information as yet unattained by man.
An alien race found to be worshipping the exact same god as any religion.
A holy book from any religion that does not contain inaccuracies, and whose knowledge was not limited to the knowledge of the humans at the time the book was written.
Any verifiable piece of evidence for any god or gods. (none so far)
3) Probably. Though if by “all loving god” then the Christian god, then definitely not. I would at least like to have a conversation with such a god to try and figure out why she allowed so much cruelty in the world.
4) Again, if you mean the Christian heaven, then I definitely would not want to go there. Such a horrible place would be unimaginably horrible, and hell is by far the lesser evil. So, it would definitely be for another reason besides that.
5) Yes. Seeing people like this caused me to doubt my belief in god to the point that I looked up scientific evidence for god and thus, became an atheist upon realizing that there was none.
@ExposeChosunNinja "Let people believe what they believe and stop trying to convince others that what you believe is right, and what they believe is wrong!"
My God tells me I should murder people like you. Do you still think it's my right to believe this and that people, including yourself, are immoral to try to convince me otherwise? If you have objections to this, realize that the texts of the most popular religions contain plenty of such commands.
@ExposeChosunNinja "Freedom of religion is a basic human right. To try and encroach upon that is a violation of those rights!"
Freedom of religion is not a goal in itself. It's just an attempt to avoid bloodshed. The law of non contradiction tells us that almost all humans must be wrong about their religious views by logical necessity. because of this, what everyone should primarily be concerned about is figuring out what's true. The way to do this is to challenge beliefs.
@ExposeChosunNinja Unfortunately, most religions try to oppose discussion by containing strong emotional memes that prevent the believers from critically examining their beliefs. Such religions are merely damaging control devices that hold humanity back, and we would be immoral and uncaring if we did not challenge people with such views.
@jordie0bogart - Noone has ever been able to create life from non-life. And no one has ever provided a prove-able theory. The fact that the simplest living organisms have been been found to contain irreduceable complexity which cannot be explained by any chemical reaction presents an insurmountable problem for proponents of abiogenesis.
I'm not actually trying to guess your #1, but I'd bet if you actually tried to come up with a number you'd just pick "pie" rather than sit down and right out 50 numbers.
Ok - too tough I understand, I would guess a number it would just be a bitch to have to write all out.
7 numbers - each number can be between 1 and 1,000,000.
In order.
First try.
If you pray to your god, and it gives you the answer, AND it's right....?
The chances of you guessing right are astronomical. Beyond astronomical.The only way I could explain it is that you were in communication with some vast greater being.
Because it would be a **simple** demonstration that you actually have a real relationship with a being of vast intelligence and power.
It requires no tortured logic, or long drawn out arguments - just can your relationship with this "being" actually pass a very simple test that would take 5 minutes.
The problem is however, is that you can't pass it... you won't even try... because you KNOW deep down that you cannot.
You are just making up requirements for God. If God did exist, who would you be to decide what he should or shouldn't do? You are saying that if God did exist, he would just reveal himself to us...so we obviously aren't referring to the same god. Maybe you should try to understand Christianity before you try to disprove it...
What you are saying is like me saying "If God didn't exist, then I wouldn't exist, so that is proof that God exists."
But when did I say I had a 'personal relationship' with God anyway? And what is your definition of 'personal' and what is your definition of 'relationship'?
It should be obvious that I do not believe in a God who simply wants everyone to know he exists. If an omnipotent God just wanted you to know he exists, he would reveal himself to you. So doesn't the fact that God hasn't revealed himself to everybody in the world suggest that I do not believe in a God who's only goal is to make people believe he exists?
"God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
Basically we all know that some sort of creator/higher power exists. God does not appear to every person and say "I am God I created you, love Jesus now or go to hell." You would not love God just because he commanded you to love him.
htt p : / / msc . gutenberg . edu / 2001 / 02 / testing - god / (stupid links :P)
I understand what you're saying - I'm just pointing out that God DOES want everyone to know he exists, and he HAS revealed Himself to everyone, just not fully, as you pointed out. And I agree, his goal is not mere knowledge, but love.
I would want you to to honestly, with all your heart, ask your god what the answer is... pray for the soul of this poor atheist and ask your god to have mercy on me and save my soul with the correct answer.
Do you seriously think God just wants you to know he exists? If all he really wanted was for you to know he exists, don't you think he would have revealed himself to you already? Obviously if God does exists, this is not his intention, so stop pretending that's what we believe.
"Do you seriously think God just wants you to know he exists?"
Well, obviously not me... but that is not what my test is designed to do.
My test is a demonstration that *YOU* have an actual real relationship with a vastly powerful being... and not just listening to the rattlings within your own mind.
I was asking if you really believed that Christians believe that all we have to do to be saved is just "believe that God exists." If this were the case, wouldn't it be extremely obvious that if God wanted to reveal himself to us, he would have done so by now?
But when christians preach all day long John 3:16 (the gospel in a nutshell quote) yet never ever once reveals himself in a tangible way then you are in the grips of a delusion.
But long story short... it is the simplest, fastest way to verify that you have a real relationship with your god - something *every* christian admits to having.
If you claim to have a relationship with something that cannot give you any information that obviously came from outside your mind then you are hopelessly deluded - my test is an easy one for your god........ if he exists.
@Epydemic2020 Believe it nor not, I've actually been able to convince a few atheists of theism on youtube (including a few hard atheists) -my arguments are rather unconventional though:
watch?v=Kj8UdHuP5l8
&
watch?v=_cKj3kx4NTY
The second is trippier than the first.
One thing I've noticed with atheism, is that our normalcy biases works in it's favor. So you have to undercut these, and this usually requires something a little unusual.
1 - Yes... If you could ask God while in prayer to tell you what the random, 50 digit number I created just now is - and you get it right.
2 - Refer to the above - it's really quite simple.
3 - Yes. Because I would love to understand the mind of my creator... especially how a perfect being could produce such a sad, suffering, imperfect world.
4 - Sure - but I can say the same for followers of other religions, and of atheists.
1. Empirical testable and re-testable evidence proving the existence of your deity.
2. Refer to the above answer and provide empirical evidence.
3. Not if it is the evil not all loving god of the judeo-christian god of the old testament
4. Yes. I know quite a few people. And even the ones who do not act as though they are religious has had no effect. I simply don't believe because there is no reason to believe. I happen to believe things upon evidence and not blind faith.
I have a question for @SaintKimbo. Do you require 'verifiable evidence' in order to believe any thing? Do you believe in abiogenesis? If so, I'd be interested in seeing your evidence.
@tdrake59 Um, the fact that abiogenesis has been tested and proven to be possible would be a good reason to believe... I have read and seen the evidence; therefore, I believe. Can you demonstrate that some sort of magical being created life? No. No one can.
@tdrake59 Nature 459: 239–242. This was published in the science journal Nature and demonstrates that ribonucleotides can polymerize to form RNA. There is still a lot of work to be done, but at least it is possible to test the theory of abiogenesis and not the creation myth.
.There could be no relationship with a 'God' if he exists, due to the vast difference in intellect.
Could you have a relationship with an ant? An ant is much more intelligent than we are in relative terms, if God created what YOU think he did and resides where YOU think he does.
If you are curious about things, start asking yourself this, and the infinite amount of logical questions, that are never posed by 'believers', if you DO really believe that a God exists.
To have a relationship with anything you require a certain level of intelligence. Human's possess more than that level. The reason ants don't have relationships with human's isn't because we are so much more intelligent than them relatively speaking, but because they lack that minimal threshhold of intelligence. (that'd be true IF we grant your assumptions about ant intelligence in the first place).
@Epydemic2020 What could you say to someone that already knows what you are going to say?
The ants are relatively smarter than humans, in the sense that human intelligence would be as non existent to a being that created the Universe.
Except an ant, would sound more interesting to us, than a human would to God, because, apparently, he already knows everything about us, we didn't make the ants, YOUR logic, at work.
3) This is not logical. Short of being shown the evidence I would require for questions #1 and #2, I will not 'realize that God existed'. Assuming that the evidence from questiosn #1 and #2 was provided, then yes, I would accept the existance of a deity and 'believe' in it because it has been been demonstrated to be accurate.
4) No.
5) No. My atheism is rooted in the study of science and a requirement for evidence.
1) Yes, any repeatable, verifiable, potentially falsifiable and peer reviewed evidence that showed the existance of any deity.
2) Yes, show me repeatable, verifiable, potentially falsifiable and peer reviewed evidence to support your claim regarding the existence of your deity.
...to be continued in a 2nd comment due to YT restrictions
Thanks for taking the time to respond. It is interesting to add "peer reviewed" to your list of required evidence. Do you think you would be persuaded by any reasonable standard of evidence, or do you think something must first be peer reviewed to meet any reasonable standard of evidence?
@Epydemic2020 The two go hand in hand. I would not accept a non peer reviewed 'reasonable standard of evidence' for a deity any more than I would accept one for biological evolution, gravity, star formation, etc. If the ideas of a select few are able to withstand the academics and process of peer review, then they gain the validity required to be classified as a reasonable standard of evidence. Most anything else is opinion.
Yes christians had a big impact on me becoming an anti-theist. However they only got me from christian to spiritual to a deist who hated religion with passion. (If you had my teachers you would understand. You cannot possibly contradict yourself that much, be this ignorant and have the ethics of a 12-year-old and get away with it UNLESS you're a pastor. I still find his sense of moral superiority revolting.) It was hitch who made me give up deism though.
1) I have absolutely no idea. I can't think of anything short of meeting and conversing with such a being that couldn't simply be something we don't understand yet.
2) Yes... but again, I have no idea what. It would take more than a perfect logical argument though, since logic alone can only show what is plausible.
3) Of course, who wouldn't? I'm quite comfortable with my mortality though, so really it would be for the same reason that I desire a relationship with all decent and loving people...
5) No, why would it? I'm an atheist because I see nothing that convinces me that gods have ever interacted with our world, the behviour of other humans is only proof of their behaviour and has no bearing on the existence of gods.
Thanks for taking the time to answer. I disagree with what you said in number 2 about logic tho. The laws of logic only show us what is possible, but sound logical arguments can show us what is actual.
True, but sound logic references real world data. What I meant was that arguments like the kalaam cosmo argument and similar arguments wouldn't convince me, as even when the argument is valid, it's impossible to show that the premises are all true. That's why I said "logic alone," I probably should have been more specific, but I'm trying to train myself to make shorter comments. :P
A decent argument for design would probably be the best thing you could give me. (Decent, as in, NOT the argument from complexity/Paley's Watchmaker analogy, though feel free to advance those if you disagree.)
5. The presence of confusing Christians has influenced my atheism in the sense that they have failed to increase my (currently zero) belief in any Christian definition of God. The presence of impressively kind, loving, and selfless Christians has influenced it in the same regard, since their explanations for their nature seem to attach the label of "God" to impulses not demonstrably divine.
@YaleBreaker No Christian has ever made any attempt to increase your belief in any "Christian definition of God." That's probably why it hasn't happened -- Jesus never recommended that Christians do any such thing. Christians can't be expected to do something that Christ never mentioned.
Theism and Christianity are not about belief in definitions -- that is your own personal bizarre notion.
Theism and Christianity are about developing loving relationships with God.
@1GodOnlyOne I never said any Christian made such an attempt, and I never said I expected them to. Epy asked if any Christian had increased my belief, and I said no.
How is the notion of belief in definitions bizarre? How can you have a relationship with God, or construct arguments about him, without having some definition of him? And where's your proof that all forms of theism are about loving relationships with God?
I don't agree with your clarification. I've never met a Christian who makes it clear that they believe in an all-loving God, since their explanations for how an all-loving God allows suffering in a world built according to rules he set inevitably confuse me. However, I HAVE met Christians who were impressively kind, loving, and selfless - it's just that I have yet to hear one satisfactorily show that it necessarily derives from their belief in such a God.
@YaleBreaker No Christian worth his salt has ever argued that a belief in God is the source of objective moral ideals. In fact, Christians are constantly clarifying that that strange scenario is nothing but an atheistic red-herring and strawman logical fallacy.
The fact is that, completely aside from all belief and disbelief, God's factual existence is the only rational explanation for the factual existence of objective moral ideals.
@1GodOnlyOne "No Christian worth his salt has ever argued that a belief in God is the source of objective moral ideals." *sigh* Again, I never said anything like that. Epy asked if I met Christians who clearly believed in an all-loving God. I said no, because no Christian could make it clear to me that they believed this in a non-contradictory way.
"God's factual existence is the only rational explanation..." How do you know that?
Knowledge of God's all-loving nature is more important than any "belief," because the knowledge of God is backed by scientific evidence, whereas your "beliefs" have no evidence to support them.
@1GodOnlyOne "How is it that you do not know that?"
No one has made a convincing argument or provided evidence confirming such an idea. Moreover, precisely what do you mean by "your beliefs"? I don't believe there is no God, I merely don't believe there is one.
@YaleBreaker Yes, people have -- that is why the vast majority of intelligent human beings on the planet accept the scientific facts of Theism and reject atheist Dogma wholesale.
I haven't posited any beliefs, I merely responded to your gratuitous claims regarding belief. Belief is in your consciousness, not mine -- I rely on scientific evidence, and the evidence clearly indicates that God's factual appearance and activities are more certain than your own supposed existence.
@1GodOnlyOne "the vast majority of intelligent human beings on the planet" Evidence, please.
"clearly indicates that God's factual appearance and activities" Evidence, please.
"I haven't posited any beliefs" You've said there is hard evidence confirming God's existence and activities without providing any. As far as I'm concerned, a rose by any other name is still not proof for God.
"your own supposed existence" My existence is one of only two things that are certain.
@YaleBreaker I don't waste my time on intellectually dishonest trolls like yourself.
I share important information with honest seekers who, unlike you, don't merely ask questions in order to argue and crap all over anyone who you disagree with.
I am done with you, but someone will clue you in some day -- I just don't have as much respect for you as I would need to care about your silly troll questions.
@1GodOnlyOne You're claiming knowledge. I don't have that knowledge. I ask how you arrived at that knowledge. You call me a troll and claim you're "done" with me like it's some kind of disciplining exercise.
Firstly, If I'm a troll, you're the one who fed me. Secondly, how am I being intellectually dishonest? Thirdly, for the self-evident love of God, where the flying spaghetti monster is your evidence?
3. Yes, and I would want a relationship with him for maximum benefit, up to and including an eternal existence of infinite bliss. I'd settle for some answers, though, because with all due respect this world sure doesn't feel like it was created by someone all-loving. So my consolation prize if it weren't eternal bliss would ideally be some expansion of my mental faculties.
@YaleBreaker You posit the two personal beliefs that God somehow "created" the universe, and that God could somehow be less than all-loving. Do you have any evidence for those two personal beliefs, or did you just make them up?
@1GodOnlyOne They're not my beliefs. They're yours. If your definition is of a transcendent God, then physical reality is contingent on him - hence, he gave rise to or in some sense is responsible for the existence of physical reality. You define God as necessarily all-loving, and I can't accept that definition without some demonstration that the opposite is true. Moreover, that the universe is imperfect is to me evidence against that notion.
(1 cont'd). Also, a valid argument for how an entity that is non-physical and non-conceptual (as in, exists outside of our conception of it) can influence the physical world.
@YaleBreaker The human consciousness is non-physical, and it influences the physical world by controlling the material body. God influences matter in the same way.
1. You would have to demonstrate that the universe could not be more perfect - that the Universe is necessarily a perfect place, and cannot be anything else. You would have to demonstrate that the Three Logical Absolutes are contingent upon God. You would have to demonstrate that there is or must be such a thing as an infinite quantity present in reality.
In terms of physical evidence I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure I'd be on the way after valid arguments for all of these.
Thanks for taking the time to answer. Do you think Christians believe that the universe is a perfect place or an infinite quantity is present in reality?
Def. no on the first count; however, I don't yet see how the notion of a perfect God can logically terminate in an imperfect Universe. As for the second...all right, I retract that infinite quantities bit - that was a misinterpretation on my part. Rather, I'd like you to clarify what you mean by "eternal".
@1GodOnlyOne The perfection of the Universe does, however, have something to do with God's perfectness, something which Epy has (indirectly) included in his definition of God. The Transcendent Argument for God is by no means water-tight. And again, the existence of some infinite quantity relates to God's ability to be eternal.
I am glad you told me. This is one of the few videos I have on "auto allow video responses" and unfortunately that feature makes it so I don't get notifications when new videos responses come in.
The first question I have for Christians is: Did you objectively read the entire Bible before deciding it was God’s exclusive, unique, and infallible set of doctrinal instructions? “No“ has been the answer in every case.. The second question is: Did you objectively and exhaustively examine several religions before adopting Christianity? Again, “no” is the inevitable answer. Christianity seems to largely depend on childhood indoctrination or sudden emotional decisions for adherents.
1. To me there are two concepts at play here to which I subscribe:
a) "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - Carl Sagan
b) "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke
Given a) and all the "omnis" you plugged into the definition of your god concept I'd require quite a bit of evidence. Rearranging the stars in the night sky to spell out "I am the Christian god that Epydemic2020 believe in" would be a start.
@ixiwildflowerixi This would also have to be independently verifiable by other people, in particular those not in my usual circles, to reduce the likelihood of me or us suffering from a (mass-) delusion.
At this point I have to admit that, given b), even in the event I described there'd still be doubt in my mind and you asked for the one thing to convince me. Well, not all is lost... Fortunately, all the "omnis" you used allow me to state the following:
@ixiwildflowerixi I'd be convinced by whatever it is that would convince me and I'm sure your god knows exactly what it is. I'm here waiting.
2. Of course and it should be rather easy, especially if you are the kind of people having a "personal relationship" with that god character: Pray that it will provide you with the knowledge of what I'd need to be convinced and for the ability to perform whatever is required.
@ixiwildflowerixi Given the nature of the thing you described, I'm also sure that it will be able to communicate with you in a clear and unambiguous way to compensate for humankind's inherent fallibility.
That's why I'll then give you a single shot to make your case: Afterwards, I'll either be a believer, or - since that would follow from your inability to deliver - I'd be forever convinced that your particular god does in fact not exist.
@ixiwildflowerixi 3. All-loving is quite a hurdle to jump. If there's only a single life form suffering for only a nanosecond anywhere in the universe, that god is either not all-loving or not omnipotent. And no: "free will" does not justify an infant drowning in a flood, nor does "the fall of mankind" justify the same happening to a dog... let alone potential alien life.
If your "but the logically contradictory" qualification wasn't just meant to clarify the omnipotence category but to
@ixiwildflowerixi safeguard against defining your god out of existence due to the above inconsistency, then you're left with an well-meaning but fairly impotent, if not incompetent, being. Would I like a relationship? Sure, just like I'd like to have one with a decent fellow human.
As for heaven: Assuming the existence of any kind of hell, be it physical or a metaphorical "being away from god's side", I so far haven't come across a single concept of heaven that I find even remotely compelling:
@ixiwildflowerixi It would either not be "me" in heaven, or it would be just another form of hell.
4. Let me answer with another quote which also reflects my experience: "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg
5. No, claims have to stand on their own regardless of who makes them.
Google: Martha Laura Granados Immigration Prostitute
The VAWA Immigration Loop-hole:
If you are a woman, pretend to be in love with a US citizen or a Legal Resident, get him to marry you. As soon as you got the marriage certificate dial 211 and falsely accuse him of Domestic Violence and Rape and move to a VAWA shelter.
You will be on a fast-track for a Green-Card and US citizenship - all expenses paid for by the US tax payer and as a bonus you will be getting full social benefits.
5. Somewhat, those 'bad' Christians inspire me to NOT act like them and highlight what the religion can entail, however, the 'good' ones are great company and great examples for what people should strive to be and help me understand that religion itself is not inherently 'bad' but dogma is definitely something to be weary of. Sorry for not making a video response, I'm not very camera friendly.
2. I've heard many and remain unconvinced but I'm always up to hear what theists have to say on the matter (I sometimes defend their positions when misguided atheists misunderstand a theistic argument or do the appeal to ridicule schtick)
3. Depends, would this, "all loving God" be the equivalent to a celestial dictator? If so, I would adhere to Mikhail Bakunin's statement, "If there is a God, it would be necessary to abolish him.
4. I would say so, I've met all kinds ranging from good to bad
1. If God were to appear and be able to show some of his powers, for example being able to end all suffering (even for a temporary bit of time) or just make the 'standard miracles' (amputees regrowing limbs, bringing back the dead, you know pretty extraordinary stuff) and do this publicly and with scientists present to at least make sure this isn't a hoax. I would be very hard pressed to not believe if I witnessed that.
i have not met one christian that lives in a way that i think is in line with the bible, but than again, i have met very few christians who have read the bible (in person of coarse). it doesnt really affect my disbelief in god, but it does make greater my disdain for religion and specifically christianity
wearestarstuffsagan 14 hours ago
you couldnt convince me of an all-loving and all-powerful god because i think if a god existed like that there would be no starving children and children being raped on a daily basis. a logically argument could convince me that some super natural deity exists but i have not seen one that comes even close from apologists or regular guys like yourself. if a believed an all-loving god existed of coarse i would want a relationship with it, i would want to learn what it knows.
wearestarstuffsagan 14 hours ago
I don't know why this has so many dislikes.
highlender45 16 hours ago
@highlender45
A lot of question videos are "Haha i stumped you with my questions now you should become a christian you silly atheist". I think many people came in with the unshakable assumption that that is what this video was as well.
Epydemic2020 16 hours ago
This video is great, it truly reflects how you can't understand what it would be like for there not to be a god.
maxgud 2 weeks ago
1) FORENSIC
2) words? No. Have god in your next video and I'll be convinced.
3) If your biblical god did exist in this space/time I'd have many more than 5 questions about his actions
4) I never met Albert Schweitzer but think he met your criteria. The Italian/Americans I grew up with were no better nor worse than the eastern European Jews.
5) Based on my homey's Xians r ok but the right wing fundies and pedophile protectors give other Christians a bad name. BTW I'm Erisian not Atheist.
moldrad 2 weeks ago
@moldrad
Thanks. Do you think any reasonable standard of evidence would persuade you, or are the only things that would persuade you be the things you mentioned?
Epydemic2020 2 weeks ago
@Epydemic2020 don't talk of love lasting through time .... show me! I read the bible cover to cover and if a god who would destroy a friends (Job) life on a bet and throw his son/self "under a bus" advocate murder and rape ( Numbers 31:17-18) self mutilation (Matthew 18:8-9) cannibalism (John 6:53-58) and child abuse (Proverbs 23: 13) does exist this space/time is a dark and scary place.
HAIL ERIS! ALL HAIL DISCORDIA!
moldrad 1 week ago
@Epydemic2020 see my video response. BTW
Maybe there’s a God above But all I’ve ever learned of love ---- It’s not a cry you can hear at night It’s not somebody who has seen the light It’s a cold and it’s a broken Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
Hallelujah, Hallelujah
You say I took the name in vain
I don't even know the name
But if I did, well, really, what's it to you?
There's a blaze of light in every word
It doesn't matter which you heard
The holy or the broken Hallelujah
moldrad 6 days ago
@Epydemic2020
how are you defining "reasonable standard of evidence"...? Sounds a bit subjective.
it sounds like what you are saying is "is there any argument or *thing I can say* that will convince you?"
if it is the above, then I would have to tell you NO.
there is nothing you can say, nor any logical argument you can make that would convince me... you are going to have to actually provide evidence - not sentences, to prove your god.:3
Nihm420 1 day ago
@Nihm420
What is reasonable is not subjective. People can have different ideas about what is reasonable, but some people may be wrong.
You are trying to set up a dichotomy between arguments and evidence, those two are the same thing. If you prove an argument, you necessarily have evidence for your premises.
You seem to equate an argument to sentences. Assertions are akin to sentences, arguments are not.
Epydemic2020 1 day ago
@Epydemic2020
LoL, first you say: "What is reasonable is not subjective."
Then in the next sentence you say: "People can have different ideas about what is reasonable"
cut to the chase - what do you mean by "reasonable standard of evidence"?
Nihm420 23 hours ago
@Epydemic2020 wow... actually.... your whole post is garbled...!
What is reasonable *IS* subjective. To suggest otherwise is to say that there is an objective standard. There is none.
"If you prove an argument, you necessarily have evidence for your premises."
There is no evidence for any god. None.
*No* argument for god has *any* evidence for god contained within it.
Nihm420 23 hours ago
@Nihm420
What about the Kalam Cosmological Argument?
damntull 23 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@damntull
"What about the Kalam Cosmological Argument?"
What about it?
It's failed to convince me.
It's failed to convince *many* people.
Even if all parts for *any* argument for god were all eternally consistent (and I'm not saying Kalam is completely internally consistent either) a argument alone makes no attempt to demonstrate anything tangible in nature regarding the manifestation of a actual god.
Even much less, *your* god.
Nihm420 22 hours ago
@Nihm420
Well, the KCA is a sound argument and proves the existence of a personal, omnipotent, super intelligent, eternal, immaterial Creator of the universe - God. If you can't defeat the argument, you can't remain an atheist.
damntull 18 hours ago
@damntull
Not to be technical, but someone doesn't have to defeat an argument in order to not accept its conclusion. They could, for example, just be uncertain as to whether or not the argument is true.
I think thats the camp you actually find people in a lot of the time. Perhaps they don't understand the argument enough to accept or reject it, or perhaps they just haven't though about it enough to accept it wholesale.
Epydemic2020 17 hours ago
@Epydemic2020
Oh, pooh pooh to you. The form of the argument is sound. If one does not dispute the premises, they must accept the conclusion. Perhaps our difference of opinion here is just about timing. I assumed he had fully investigated the argument and come to a conclusion about it.
damntull 17 hours ago
@damntull
I have. KCA is unsound.
Nihm420 8 hours ago
@Nihm420
I'd LOVE to hear your arguments against the KCA. Send me a PM, if you are confident in your assessment of the argument.
damntull 6 hours ago
@damntull
goto Iron Chariots Wiki.
Look up Arguments for God
Read all about Kalam - (pssst only believers and apoligists think Kalam has merit.)
Nihm420 5 hours ago
@Nihm420
I read the article. Let's begin with a few of its assertions:
Barker's argument is easily dismissed since there are many things which did not begin to exist, such as the laws of logic.
Charges of equivocation or fallacy of composition have been addressed by Craig - see drcraigvideos' series "10 worst objections..."
False dichotomy, no. The universe is all matter, energy, and space. A natural cause is ruled out, since it's part of the universe.
damntull 4 hours ago
@damntull
Why only one cause - occam's razor.
Special pleading? No. The infinite regress argument effectively discounts the possibility of a universe that extends infinitely into the past, but has no bearing on a changeless, immaterial being.
Counterargument fails because it construes S2 to be temporally prior to the creation of the universe, which is nonsense, since there was no prior time.
damntull 4 hours ago
@damntull
I should also ask you, who authored the IronChariots article?
damntull 4 hours ago
@Epydemic2020
By the way, love your videos. And your attitude. Peace.
damntull 15 hours ago
@damntull
thanks :)
Epydemic2020 14 hours ago
@damntull
KCA is not sound - but lets say I agree with all the premises and the conclusion also follows - all you have is an *argument* for a god, but you don't have a shred of *evidence*.
You cannot magically wish god into existence with clever argument.
Nihm420 8 hours ago
@Nihm420
No one says arguments bring God into existence - they lead us to discover it.
Look up any definition of the word "evidence" and you'll find that sound arguments do, in fact, constitute evidence.
damntull 6 hours ago
@damntull
10 dollars says you cant provide tangible evidence - only arguments.
Nihm420 5 hours ago
@Nihm420
Is it your position that we should only things for which there is direct physical evidence?
damntull 4 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@damntull
"Is it your position that we should only things for which there is direct physical evidence?"
For "things" like god - certainly:3
Nihm420 1 hour ago
@damntull
correction...
*BAD* arguments
Nihm420 5 hours ago
@Nihm420
Also, in case you don't believe the universe began to exist:
watch?v=etSAvcslxag&feature=g-like&context=G2d0aae8ALTyrnDwAAAA
damntull 3 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@damntull
"eternally consistent"
I meant internally consistent.:3
Nihm420 22 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Epydemic2020 But this...
"You seem to equate an argument to sentences. Assertions are akin to sentences, arguments are not."
Are you saying that an argument is not made up of sentences...?
Men are mortal.
Aristotle is a man.
therefore, Aristotle is mortal.
three! three sentences! Ha Ha Ha. (Sesame Street Count)
Nihm420 23 hours ago
I have a BS in physics, please let me know how we can get in contact so as to answer your 5 questions. I would be more than happy to. Thank you and have a great day.
lahinadivers13 3 weeks ago
@lahinadivers13
Thanks, comments, videos, or private messages are fine with me. If you want to talk in person I also have a skype by the name of epydemic2020.
Epydemic2020 3 weeks ago
before i answer any of your questions, find me a "god" that hasn't in the passed drowned his creation, burned cities, told some of his "people" to destroy other people that he created, doesn't kick people out of paradise for breaking stupid rules that he knew they were going to break anyways, doesn't shift all blame to an archangel he kicked out of heaven for making suggestions, isnt homophobic, genocidal or infanticidal or negligent to his creation, but i digress, this list could go on forever.
naturalistmind 1 month ago
Question 1: Have you ever really read the bible?
Question 2: How do you justify an allegedly all-loving deity committing those atrocities?
Question 3: Why do you believe in your god?
Question 4: If faith is your determiner in believing in your god - how do you know your god is the only true god? I mean, every religion requires faith...
Question 5: Were you raised in your religion or did you discover it? If raised, have you examined evidence contrary to it? If discovered, how vulnerable were you?
TheBasementAtheist 1 month ago
1.) At least the same type of evidence I have to believe that anyone else exists and has a mind. i.e the physical construct of which that mind is an emergent property of.
2.) An argument alone? Not without solid evidence I could confirm and evaluate on my own. Provide the same kind of evidence that I have that other things exist.
3.) That really depends on what he is really like. If he is an asshole, I doubt it. I would oppose him. Powerful or not.
4.) No. Not really.
5.) No. Not really.
Nitelurker1 1 month ago
1. Anything supernatural described in the bible. Moving mountains, talking donkeys, parting the ocean, talking bushes on fire... 2. No you're a superstitious fool (sorry) 3. No because he allows pain death suffering even though he could stop it 4. No! Christians are the least Christ -like people 5. Yes, I seek moral perfection rather than blindly follow a book written by barbaric people. Morality is doing what is right despite what you are told - you do what you are told despite what is right.
EVILERNIE01 1 month ago
Ok. I'm not a Christian, nor am I an Atheist, but seriously. This is just stupid. Why cannot we simply accept that there are varying systems of belief on this planet, and that's just how it is! Let people believe what they believe and stop trying to convince others that what you believe is right, and what they believe is wrong! Freedom of religion is a basic human right. To try and encroach upon that is a violation of those rights!
ExposeChosunNinja 1 month ago
@ExposeChosunNinja
This vid is not trying to convince anyone, but is just trying to better understand the views of people who consider themselves atheists. But there is nothing wrong with trying to convince people of your views, or having conversations about the evidence for and against certain views. Freedom of religion is a right... and talking about religion doesn't violate that in any way.
Epydemic2020 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020 I agree, discussion of religion is not a rights violation, so long as one person is not trying to force their views upon someone else who does not want those views. My question to you though is, and this is coming from someone who believes in God, but is not a Christian or a member of any organized religion. Why do you even care what the views of Atheists are, if you believe that Christianity is the only right path, and that all others are wrong?
ExposeChosunNinja 1 month ago
@ExposeChosunNinja
I have yet to experience when better understanding those who disagree with you is a bad thing. It seems to help with evaluating your own beliefs, as well as having more meaningful discussions with people of different views.
Epydemic2020 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ExposeChosunNinja "Why do you even care what the views of Atheists are, if you believe that Christianity is the only right path, and that all others are wrong?"
If you were of the opinion that a person would be tortured forever due to how they were living their lives, would you not warn them about this? Are you devoid of compassion? This is really no different than warning a blind person if you believe that they're in danger of being run over by a truck.
Gnomefro 3 weeks ago
@Epydemic2020 And please do not say that you are trying to save all of us from damnation! Salvation is a choice. Every individual on this planet must make that choice on their own. It is no one else's place to try and make or influence that choice for anyone else! Belief is a personal thing, and I feel that this is something that needs to be preserved. It is one of the things that makes us individuals!
ExposeChosunNinja 1 month ago
@ExposeChosunNinja
Questions answered in order.
1) Direct evidence; such as god revealing herself to us.
Direct revelation to information as yet unattained by man.
An alien race found to be worshipping the exact same god as any religion.
A holy book from any religion that does not contain inaccuracies, and whose knowledge was not limited to the knowledge of the humans at the time the book was written.
Any verifiable piece of evidence for any god or gods. (none so far)
MrMusicalAtheist 1 month ago
@MrMusicalAtheist
2) Show me the evidence aforementioned.
MrMusicalAtheist 1 month ago
@MrMusicalAtheist
3) Probably. Though if by “all loving god” then the Christian god, then definitely not. I would at least like to have a conversation with such a god to try and figure out why she allowed so much cruelty in the world.
MrMusicalAtheist 1 month ago
@MrMusicalAtheist
4) Again, if you mean the Christian heaven, then I definitely would not want to go there. Such a horrible place would be unimaginably horrible, and hell is by far the lesser evil. So, it would definitely be for another reason besides that.
MrMusicalAtheist 1 month ago
@MrMusicalAtheist
4-2) Yes, though I would say that the ones who did believe deeply were not at all kind, loving, or selfless.
MrMusicalAtheist 1 month ago
@MrMusicalAtheist
5) Yes. Seeing people like this caused me to doubt my belief in god to the point that I looked up scientific evidence for god and thus, became an atheist upon realizing that there was none.
MrMusicalAtheist 1 month ago
@ExposeChosunNinja "Let people believe what they believe and stop trying to convince others that what you believe is right, and what they believe is wrong!"
My God tells me I should murder people like you. Do you still think it's my right to believe this and that people, including yourself, are immoral to try to convince me otherwise? If you have objections to this, realize that the texts of the most popular religions contain plenty of such commands.
Gnomefro 3 weeks ago
@ExposeChosunNinja "Freedom of religion is a basic human right. To try and encroach upon that is a violation of those rights!"
Freedom of religion is not a goal in itself. It's just an attempt to avoid bloodshed. The law of non contradiction tells us that almost all humans must be wrong about their religious views by logical necessity. because of this, what everyone should primarily be concerned about is figuring out what's true. The way to do this is to challenge beliefs.
Gnomefro 3 weeks ago
@ExposeChosunNinja Unfortunately, most religions try to oppose discussion by containing strong emotional memes that prevent the believers from critically examining their beliefs. Such religions are merely damaging control devices that hold humanity back, and we would be immoral and uncaring if we did not challenge people with such views.
Gnomefro 3 weeks ago
1:
1 - Well making me see something that
i cant explain with any form of science.
2 - Never i would have the need to make
the thing that is supposed to be real
to convince me it exists (the alchemist in me ^^)
3 - Definately, because as many people
i would love to learn myself what it means to
watch this planet and try to guide it
so i understand why things are the way they are.
Cheerok 1 month ago
@Cheerok 2:
4 - I know many such christians and theyre good people
mostly people from "free chruches" not catholics or
evangilsts. I respect their need to believe in something
as long as they dont try to convince me its the only/best way.
5 - As above mentioned no, it was my personal decision.
But that doesnt mean its eternal. Alchemists can change their
theories thats what makes us evolve further and further.
Cheerok 1 month ago
@jordie0bogart - Noone has ever been able to create life from non-life. And no one has ever provided a prove-able theory. The fact that the simplest living organisms have been been found to contain irreduceable complexity which cannot be explained by any chemical reaction presents an insurmountable problem for proponents of abiogenesis.
tdrake59 1 month ago
Oh... and my number 1.
... you got to get it right on the first try.:3
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420
I'm not actually trying to guess your #1, but I'd bet if you actually tried to come up with a number you'd just pick "pie" rather than sit down and right out 50 numbers.
Epydemic2020 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020
Ok - too tough I understand, I would guess a number it would just be a bitch to have to write all out.
7 numbers - each number can be between 1 and 1,000,000.
In order.
First try.
If you pray to your god, and it gives you the answer, AND it's right....?
The chances of you guessing right are astronomical. Beyond astronomical.The only way I could explain it is that you were in communication with some vast greater being.
I would convert here on youtube instantly.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420 Thou shalt not test the Lord thy God.
yistackness 1 month ago
@yistackness
Ha Ha Ha...:)
What a pathetic cop-out... and you KNOW it!:3
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420 why is that a cop-out?
yistackness 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@yistackness
"why is that a cop-out?"
Because it would be a **simple** demonstration that you actually have a real relationship with a being of vast intelligence and power.
It requires no tortured logic, or long drawn out arguments - just can your relationship with this "being" actually pass a very simple test that would take 5 minutes.
The problem is however, is that you can't pass it... you won't even try... because you KNOW deep down that you cannot.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420
You are just making up requirements for God. If God did exist, who would you be to decide what he should or shouldn't do? You are saying that if God did exist, he would just reveal himself to us...so we obviously aren't referring to the same god. Maybe you should try to understand Christianity before you try to disprove it...
What you are saying is like me saying "If God didn't exist, then I wouldn't exist, so that is proof that God exists."
dragonking700 1 month ago
@dragonking700
Bottom line, do you talk to god, and does god talk back?
Can he tell you answers to things that couldn't possibly originate from your mind?
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420
I do not "talk to God." I trust him with everything, and he teaches me through his word.
Can he? Yes. Will he? Probably not.
dragonking700 1 month ago
@dragonking700
"I do not "talk to God."
Then you don't have a "PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP" with god.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420
John 3: 16
How can you get more 'personal' than that?
But when did I say I had a 'personal relationship' with God anyway? And what is your definition of 'personal' and what is your definition of 'relationship'?
dragonking700 1 month ago
@dragonking700
Woo - you are off the deep end if you need definitions of common concepts like "personal" and "relationship"...
But hey... least now we are not talking about my fool-proof test amirite...?:3
Nihm420 1 month ago
It should be obvious that I do not believe in a God who simply wants everyone to know he exists. If an omnipotent God just wanted you to know he exists, he would reveal himself to you. So doesn't the fact that God hasn't revealed himself to everybody in the world suggest that I do not believe in a God who's only goal is to make people believe he exists?
dragonking700 2 days ago
@dragonking700
So you believe in a god that doesn't want you to know that he exists?
... then no evidence could prove him if he wished to remain hidden...
Whats the difference between a god that doesn't want you to know he exists, and nothing at all?
Nihm420 1 day ago
@dragonking700
If you're a Christian, shouldn't you believe that God HAS revealed himself to everyone, based on Romans 1:20?
damntull 23 hours ago
@damntull
"God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
Basically we all know that some sort of creator/higher power exists. God does not appear to every person and say "I am God I created you, love Jesus now or go to hell." You would not love God just because he commanded you to love him.
htt p : / / msc . gutenberg . edu / 2001 / 02 / testing - god / (stupid links :P)
dragonking700 22 hours ago
@dragonking700
I understand what you're saying - I'm just pointing out that God DOES want everyone to know he exists, and he HAS revealed Himself to everyone, just not fully, as you pointed out. And I agree, his goal is not mere knowledge, but love.
damntull 22 hours ago
@yistackness
Besides... Matthew 21:22.
"You can pray for anything, and if you have faith, you will receive it."
Now put up, or shut up and admit you have a "relationship" with the echo's of your own mind.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420 And? your point is? The verse you posted clearly says "if you have faith", so maybe I lack the faith to guess the numbers.
yistackness 1 month ago
@yistackness
You lack the faith to pray for the answer... because you lack the courage to face the truth.
When you pray, you are talking to yourself.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020
No. I would use a random number generator.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020
But I wouldn't want you to guess...
I would want you to to honestly, with all your heart, ask your god what the answer is... pray for the soul of this poor atheist and ask your god to have mercy on me and save my soul with the correct answer.
Nihm420 1 month ago
Do you seriously think God just wants you to know he exists? If all he really wanted was for you to know he exists, don't you think he would have revealed himself to you already? Obviously if God does exists, this is not his intention, so stop pretending that's what we believe.
dragonking700 1 month ago
@dragonking700
Who is this "we" exactly?
Epydemic2020 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020
oh haha, sorry, this comment was supposed to be addressed to Nihm420, not you XD
Good video by the way.
dragonking700 1 month ago
@dragonking700
"Do you seriously think God just wants you to know he exists?"
Well, obviously not me... but that is not what my test is designed to do.
My test is a demonstration that *YOU* have an actual real relationship with a vastly powerful being... and not just listening to the rattlings within your own mind.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420
I was asking if you really believed that Christians believe that all we have to do to be saved is just "believe that God exists." If this were the case, wouldn't it be extremely obvious that if God wanted to reveal himself to us, he would have done so by now?
dragonking700 1 month ago
@dragonking700
I don't believe in the christian god...
But when christians preach all day long John 3:16 (the gospel in a nutshell quote) yet never ever once reveals himself in a tangible way then you are in the grips of a delusion.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@dragonking700
But long story short... it is the simplest, fastest way to verify that you have a real relationship with your god - something *every* christian admits to having.
If you claim to have a relationship with something that cannot give you any information that obviously came from outside your mind then you are hopelessly deluded - my test is an easy one for your god........ if he exists.
But he doesn't.
Care to prove me wrong?
Then prove me wrong.
Nihm420 1 month ago
Comment removed
JohananRaatz 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Epydemic2020 Believe it nor not, I've actually been able to convince a few atheists of theism on youtube (including a few hard atheists) -my arguments are rather unconventional though:
watch?v=Kj8UdHuP5l8
&
watch?v=_cKj3kx4NTY
The second is trippier than the first.
One thing I've noticed with atheism, is that our normalcy biases works in it's favor. So you have to undercut these, and this usually requires something a little unusual.
Tell me what you make of those videos. ;)
JohananRaatz 1 month ago
1 - Yes... If you could ask God while in prayer to tell you what the random, 50 digit number I created just now is - and you get it right.
2 - Refer to the above - it's really quite simple.
3 - Yes. Because I would love to understand the mind of my creator... especially how a perfect being could produce such a sad, suffering, imperfect world.
4 - Sure - but I can say the same for followers of other religions, and of atheists.
Nihm420 1 month ago
@Nihm420
thanks for responding.
Do you think any reasonable standard of evidence would convince you, or just getting the right 50 digit number?
Epydemic2020 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020
If you pass that *new* version of my test, no "reasonable standard of evidence" would be further required for me to believe.
Nihm420 1 month ago
1. Empirical testable and re-testable evidence proving the existence of your deity.
2. Refer to the above answer and provide empirical evidence.
3. Not if it is the evil not all loving god of the judeo-christian god of the old testament
4. Yes. I know quite a few people. And even the ones who do not act as though they are religious has had no effect. I simply don't believe because there is no reason to believe. I happen to believe things upon evidence and not blind faith.
jordie0bogart 1 month ago
I have a question for @SaintKimbo. Do you require 'verifiable evidence' in order to believe any thing? Do you believe in abiogenesis? If so, I'd be interested in seeing your evidence.
tdrake59 1 month ago
@tdrake59 Um, the fact that abiogenesis has been tested and proven to be possible would be a good reason to believe... I have read and seen the evidence; therefore, I believe. Can you demonstrate that some sort of magical being created life? No. No one can.
jordie0bogart 1 month ago
@tdrake59 Nature 459: 239–242. This was published in the science journal Nature and demonstrates that ribonucleotides can polymerize to form RNA. There is still a lot of work to be done, but at least it is possible to test the theory of abiogenesis and not the creation myth.
jordie0bogart 1 month ago
.There could be no relationship with a 'God' if he exists, due to the vast difference in intellect.
Could you have a relationship with an ant? An ant is much more intelligent than we are in relative terms, if God created what YOU think he did and resides where YOU think he does.
If you are curious about things, start asking yourself this, and the infinite amount of logical questions, that are never posed by 'believers', if you DO really believe that a God exists.
.
SaintKimbo 1 month ago
@SaintKimbo
To have a relationship with anything you require a certain level of intelligence. Human's possess more than that level. The reason ants don't have relationships with human's isn't because we are so much more intelligent than them relatively speaking, but because they lack that minimal threshhold of intelligence. (that'd be true IF we grant your assumptions about ant intelligence in the first place).
Epydemic2020 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020 What could you say to someone that already knows what you are going to say?
The ants are relatively smarter than humans, in the sense that human intelligence would be as non existent to a being that created the Universe.
Except an ant, would sound more interesting to us, than a human would to God, because, apparently, he already knows everything about us, we didn't make the ants, YOUR logic, at work.
SaintKimbo 1 month ago
3) This is not logical. Short of being shown the evidence I would require for questions #1 and #2, I will not 'realize that God existed'. Assuming that the evidence from questiosn #1 and #2 was provided, then yes, I would accept the existance of a deity and 'believe' in it because it has been been demonstrated to be accurate.
4) No.
5) No. My atheism is rooted in the study of science and a requirement for evidence.
stankhat 1 month ago
1) Yes, any repeatable, verifiable, potentially falsifiable and peer reviewed evidence that showed the existance of any deity.
2) Yes, show me repeatable, verifiable, potentially falsifiable and peer reviewed evidence to support your claim regarding the existence of your deity.
...to be continued in a 2nd comment due to YT restrictions
stankhat 1 month ago
@stankhat
Thanks for taking the time to respond. It is interesting to add "peer reviewed" to your list of required evidence. Do you think you would be persuaded by any reasonable standard of evidence, or do you think something must first be peer reviewed to meet any reasonable standard of evidence?
Epydemic2020 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020 The two go hand in hand. I would not accept a non peer reviewed 'reasonable standard of evidence' for a deity any more than I would accept one for biological evolution, gravity, star formation, etc. If the ideas of a select few are able to withstand the academics and process of peer review, then they gain the validity required to be classified as a reasonable standard of evidence. Most anything else is opinion.
stankhat 1 month ago
Yes christians had a big impact on me becoming an anti-theist. However they only got me from christian to spiritual to a deist who hated religion with passion. (If you had my teachers you would understand. You cannot possibly contradict yourself that much, be this ignorant and have the ethics of a 12-year-old and get away with it UNLESS you're a pastor. I still find his sense of moral superiority revolting.) It was hitch who made me give up deism though.
ForYeensSake 1 month ago
1) That is too big of a question. If you'd give me an example I could answer with yes or no.
2) No. Because to many observations contradict a loving god. To be honest if he did exist he could fuck off and just destroy me straight away.
3) No and no. Like I already stated he could fuck off.
4) I've met people who acted like their moral code was 2000 years old, I haven't really met any that made me think, man that guy is so inspired.
ForYeensSake 1 month ago
1) I have absolutely no idea. I can't think of anything short of meeting and conversing with such a being that couldn't simply be something we don't understand yet.
2) Yes... but again, I have no idea what. It would take more than a perfect logical argument though, since logic alone can only show what is plausible.
3) Of course, who wouldn't? I'm quite comfortable with my mortality though, so really it would be for the same reason that I desire a relationship with all decent and loving people...
athywren 1 month ago
...because spending time with them is pleasant.
4) No.
5) No, why would it? I'm an atheist because I see nothing that convinces me that gods have ever interacted with our world, the behviour of other humans is only proof of their behaviour and has no bearing on the existence of gods.
athywren 1 month ago
@athywren
Thanks for taking the time to answer. I disagree with what you said in number 2 about logic tho. The laws of logic only show us what is possible, but sound logical arguments can show us what is actual.
Epydemic2020 1 month ago
@Epydemic2020
True, but sound logic references real world data. What I meant was that arguments like the kalaam cosmo argument and similar arguments wouldn't convince me, as even when the argument is valid, it's impossible to show that the premises are all true. That's why I said "logic alone," I probably should have been more specific, but I'm trying to train myself to make shorter comments. :P
athywren 1 month ago
A decent argument for design would probably be the best thing you could give me. (Decent, as in, NOT the argument from complexity/Paley's Watchmaker analogy, though feel free to advance those if you disagree.)
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker You think that design doesn't exist?
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne I mean design by God.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
I'd be happy to clarify any of these answers.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
5. The presence of confusing Christians has influenced my atheism in the sense that they have failed to increase my (currently zero) belief in any Christian definition of God. The presence of impressively kind, loving, and selfless Christians has influenced it in the same regard, since their explanations for their nature seem to attach the label of "God" to impulses not demonstrably divine.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker No Christian has ever made any attempt to increase your belief in any "Christian definition of God." That's probably why it hasn't happened -- Jesus never recommended that Christians do any such thing. Christians can't be expected to do something that Christ never mentioned.
Theism and Christianity are not about belief in definitions -- that is your own personal bizarre notion.
Theism and Christianity are about developing loving relationships with God.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne I never said any Christian made such an attempt, and I never said I expected them to. Epy asked if any Christian had increased my belief, and I said no.
How is the notion of belief in definitions bizarre? How can you have a relationship with God, or construct arguments about him, without having some definition of him? And where's your proof that all forms of theism are about loving relationships with God?
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
I don't agree with your clarification. I've never met a Christian who makes it clear that they believe in an all-loving God, since their explanations for how an all-loving God allows suffering in a world built according to rules he set inevitably confuse me. However, I HAVE met Christians who were impressively kind, loving, and selfless - it's just that I have yet to hear one satisfactorily show that it necessarily derives from their belief in such a God.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker No Christian worth his salt has ever argued that a belief in God is the source of objective moral ideals. In fact, Christians are constantly clarifying that that strange scenario is nothing but an atheistic red-herring and strawman logical fallacy.
The fact is that, completely aside from all belief and disbelief, God's factual existence is the only rational explanation for the factual existence of objective moral ideals.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne "No Christian worth his salt has ever argued that a belief in God is the source of objective moral ideals." *sigh* Again, I never said anything like that. Epy asked if I met Christians who clearly believed in an all-loving God. I said no, because no Christian could make it clear to me that they believed this in a non-contradictory way.
"God's factual existence is the only rational explanation..." How do you know that?
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker How is it that you do not know that?
Knowledge of God's all-loving nature is more important than any "belief," because the knowledge of God is backed by scientific evidence, whereas your "beliefs" have no evidence to support them.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne "How is it that you do not know that?"
No one has made a convincing argument or provided evidence confirming such an idea. Moreover, precisely what do you mean by "your beliefs"? I don't believe there is no God, I merely don't believe there is one.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker Yes, people have -- that is why the vast majority of intelligent human beings on the planet accept the scientific facts of Theism and reject atheist Dogma wholesale.
I haven't posited any beliefs, I merely responded to your gratuitous claims regarding belief. Belief is in your consciousness, not mine -- I rely on scientific evidence, and the evidence clearly indicates that God's factual appearance and activities are more certain than your own supposed existence.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne "the vast majority of intelligent human beings on the planet" Evidence, please.
"clearly indicates that God's factual appearance and activities" Evidence, please.
"I haven't posited any beliefs" You've said there is hard evidence confirming God's existence and activities without providing any. As far as I'm concerned, a rose by any other name is still not proof for God.
"your own supposed existence" My existence is one of only two things that are certain.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker I don't waste my time on intellectually dishonest trolls like yourself.
I share important information with honest seekers who, unlike you, don't merely ask questions in order to argue and crap all over anyone who you disagree with.
I am done with you, but someone will clue you in some day -- I just don't have as much respect for you as I would need to care about your silly troll questions.
I will pray for you, though!
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne You're claiming knowledge. I don't have that knowledge. I ask how you arrived at that knowledge. You call me a troll and claim you're "done" with me like it's some kind of disciplining exercise.
Firstly, If I'm a troll, you're the one who fed me. Secondly, how am I being intellectually dishonest? Thirdly, for the self-evident love of God, where the flying spaghetti monster is your evidence?
Have a wonderful day.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker Lunch is over, troll.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne But it seems I still got dessert. Zing!
Enjoy a life of not justifying your knowledge.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
3. Yes, and I would want a relationship with him for maximum benefit, up to and including an eternal existence of infinite bliss. I'd settle for some answers, though, because with all due respect this world sure doesn't feel like it was created by someone all-loving. So my consolation prize if it weren't eternal bliss would ideally be some expansion of my mental faculties.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker You posit the two personal beliefs that God somehow "created" the universe, and that God could somehow be less than all-loving. Do you have any evidence for those two personal beliefs, or did you just make them up?
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne They're not my beliefs. They're yours. If your definition is of a transcendent God, then physical reality is contingent on him - hence, he gave rise to or in some sense is responsible for the existence of physical reality. You define God as necessarily all-loving, and I can't accept that definition without some demonstration that the opposite is true. Moreover, that the universe is imperfect is to me evidence against that notion.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
2. Present the above.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
(1 cont'd). Also, a valid argument for how an entity that is non-physical and non-conceptual (as in, exists outside of our conception of it) can influence the physical world.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker The human consciousness is non-physical, and it influences the physical world by controlling the material body. God influences matter in the same way.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne a) How do you know that? and b) How are you arguing anything other than a God who is abstract/conceptual?
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
1. You would have to demonstrate that the universe could not be more perfect - that the Universe is necessarily a perfect place, and cannot be anything else. You would have to demonstrate that the Three Logical Absolutes are contingent upon God. You would have to demonstrate that there is or must be such a thing as an infinite quantity present in reality.
In terms of physical evidence I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure I'd be on the way after valid arguments for all of these.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker
Thanks for taking the time to answer. Do you think Christians believe that the universe is a perfect place or an infinite quantity is present in reality?
Epydemic2020 1 month ago 2
@Epydemic2020 No problem!
Def. no on the first count; however, I don't yet see how the notion of a perfect God can logically terminate in an imperfect Universe. As for the second...all right, I retract that infinite quantities bit - that was a misinterpretation on my part. Rather, I'd like you to clarify what you mean by "eternal".
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
@YaleBreaker Whether or not the universe is perfect has nothing to do with God's factual appearance and activities.
Only a transcendent mind could arrange for the working of logic, and only God's mind can be transcendent.
The existence of an infinite quantity also has nothing to do with God's factual appearance and activities.
1GodOnlyOne 1 month ago
@1GodOnlyOne The perfection of the Universe does, however, have something to do with God's perfectness, something which Epy has (indirectly) included in his definition of God. The Transcendent Argument for God is by no means water-tight. And again, the existence of some infinite quantity relates to God's ability to be eternal.
YaleBreaker 1 month ago
Hey so i made a response to this video here:
/watch?v=tloCyEOlwzg
Hope you like it :)
TeamAwesomePanda 2 months ago in playlist Liked videos
@TeamAwesomePanda
I am glad you told me. This is one of the few videos I have on "auto allow video responses" and unfortunately that feature makes it so I don't get notifications when new videos responses come in.
Epydemic2020 2 months ago
question two: watch?v=lgi2dyOC9Z0
EpicPhalosophy 2 months ago
@EpicPhalosophy
I get an error when I try to follow that link.
Epydemic2020 2 months ago
@Epydemic2020 Interesting. Well, it's the one upload I have on my channel so far.
EpicPhalosophy 2 months ago
1.seeing him
2.no
3.yeah i would to what on earth is he playing at,sending people toburn in hell just because they don't believe in him(i'm mean that kind of sick)
4.yeah but good people are good people, i'm a good person and i don't need to be a christian to be a good person
5.no because i got a mind of my own
manc650 2 months ago
The first question I have for Christians is: Did you objectively read the entire Bible before deciding it was God’s exclusive, unique, and infallible set of doctrinal instructions? “No“ has been the answer in every case.. The second question is: Did you objectively and exhaustively examine several religions before adopting Christianity? Again, “no” is the inevitable answer. Christianity seems to largely depend on childhood indoctrination or sudden emotional decisions for adherents.
Cathmoytura 3 months ago in playlist More videos from Epydemic2020
1. To me there are two concepts at play here to which I subscribe:
a) "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - Carl Sagan
b) "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke
Given a) and all the "omnis" you plugged into the definition of your god concept I'd require quite a bit of evidence. Rearranging the stars in the night sky to spell out "I am the Christian god that Epydemic2020 believe in" would be a start.
ixiwildflowerixi 4 months ago
@ixiwildflowerixi This would also have to be independently verifiable by other people, in particular those not in my usual circles, to reduce the likelihood of me or us suffering from a (mass-) delusion.
At this point I have to admit that, given b), even in the event I described there'd still be doubt in my mind and you asked for the one thing to convince me. Well, not all is lost... Fortunately, all the "omnis" you used allow me to state the following:
ixiwildflowerixi 4 months ago
@ixiwildflowerixi I'd be convinced by whatever it is that would convince me and I'm sure your god knows exactly what it is. I'm here waiting.
2. Of course and it should be rather easy, especially if you are the kind of people having a "personal relationship" with that god character: Pray that it will provide you with the knowledge of what I'd need to be convinced and for the ability to perform whatever is required.
ixiwildflowerixi 4 months ago
@ixiwildflowerixi Given the nature of the thing you described, I'm also sure that it will be able to communicate with you in a clear and unambiguous way to compensate for humankind's inherent fallibility.
That's why I'll then give you a single shot to make your case: Afterwards, I'll either be a believer, or - since that would follow from your inability to deliver - I'd be forever convinced that your particular god does in fact not exist.
ixiwildflowerixi 4 months ago
@ixiwildflowerixi 3. All-loving is quite a hurdle to jump. If there's only a single life form suffering for only a nanosecond anywhere in the universe, that god is either not all-loving or not omnipotent. And no: "free will" does not justify an infant drowning in a flood, nor does "the fall of mankind" justify the same happening to a dog... let alone potential alien life.
If your "but the logically contradictory" qualification wasn't just meant to clarify the omnipotence category but to
ixiwildflowerixi 4 months ago
@ixiwildflowerixi safeguard against defining your god out of existence due to the above inconsistency, then you're left with an well-meaning but fairly impotent, if not incompetent, being. Would I like a relationship? Sure, just like I'd like to have one with a decent fellow human.
As for heaven: Assuming the existence of any kind of hell, be it physical or a metaphorical "being away from god's side", I so far haven't come across a single concept of heaven that I find even remotely compelling:
ixiwildflowerixi 4 months ago
@ixiwildflowerixi It would either not be "me" in heaven, or it would be just another form of hell.
4. Let me answer with another quote which also reflects my experience: "With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil—that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg
5. No, claims have to stand on their own regardless of who makes them.
ixiwildflowerixi 4 months ago
@Epydemic2020 :
Sorry... I am NOT an Atheist, but I must say that your questions demonstrate that YOU do not understand WHO God is.
Sorry...
Take another look at Deut 20....
VAWAImmigrProstitute 4 months ago in playlist More videos from Epydemic2020
Google: Martha Laura Granados Immigration Prostitute
The VAWA Immigration Loop-hole:
If you are a woman, pretend to be in love with a US citizen or a Legal Resident, get him to marry you. As soon as you got the marriage certificate dial 211 and falsely accuse him of Domestic Violence and Rape and move to a VAWA shelter.
You will be on a fast-track for a Green-Card and US citizenship - all expenses paid for by the US tax payer and as a bonus you will be getting full social benefits.
VAWAImmigrProstitute 4 months ago in playlist More videos from Epydemic2020
5. Somewhat, those 'bad' Christians inspire me to NOT act like them and highlight what the religion can entail, however, the 'good' ones are great company and great examples for what people should strive to be and help me understand that religion itself is not inherently 'bad' but dogma is definitely something to be weary of. Sorry for not making a video response, I'm not very camera friendly.
Christ724 5 months ago
@Christ724
Thanks for taking the time to respond via comment tho. Your answers were quite interesting.
Epydemic2020 5 months ago
2. I've heard many and remain unconvinced but I'm always up to hear what theists have to say on the matter (I sometimes defend their positions when misguided atheists misunderstand a theistic argument or do the appeal to ridicule schtick)
3. Depends, would this, "all loving God" be the equivalent to a celestial dictator? If so, I would adhere to Mikhail Bakunin's statement, "If there is a God, it would be necessary to abolish him.
4. I would say so, I've met all kinds ranging from good to bad
Christ724 5 months ago
1. If God were to appear and be able to show some of his powers, for example being able to end all suffering (even for a temporary bit of time) or just make the 'standard miracles' (amputees regrowing limbs, bringing back the dead, you know pretty extraordinary stuff) and do this publicly and with scientists present to at least make sure this isn't a hoax. I would be very hard pressed to not believe if I witnessed that.
Christ724 5 months ago