Added: 2 years ago
From: dohboy3000
Views: 1,760,383
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (21,939)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • God doesn't make anyone an atheist. All humans have free will, and atheists choose to believe there is no God.

  • @bellabelieber98 We are all born atheist. If you are raised by religious parents, you are almost always going to believe in whatever your parents believe in. But if you are raised as an atheist, you are also as likely to be an atheist. You only know what you are taught.

  • Comment removed

  • Best part "If there is a god.... why did he make me an atheist? "

  • It's sad to think that I ll have to live in the world that is full of believing fuks

  • @Helptheherd Care to expound on that thought? I would love to know how that works. Not believing in imaginary friends is evil?

  • @saxmanchiro try the fact that you spread evil belief systems to children

    God bless

  • @Helptheherd trollol

  • @1NSHAME atheist

  • @Helptheherd Please share with me(THE EVIL ONE) a list of 'belief systems', as a biology teacher, that I would expose to children. This should be good. Also, while you are at it, please give your opinion on why all civilized, non-Theocratic gov school boards require the current biology curriculum that is taught in my class. That should be interesting too.

  • @Helptheherd evil beliefs.. yes atheists tell children the story about how drowning all but 2 people is normal and acceptable behaviour.

  • @neverfearchrisishere absolutely- atheism is the path to suicide- atheism is evil

    God bless

  • @Helptheherd absolutely- christianity is the path to suicide- christianity is evil

    God bless

  • @MobiusCoin go find someone else to troll

    God bless

  • @Helptheherd The irony

    God bless

  • @Helptheherd Irony that I was telling you the story of Noah, and you say it's evil. Guess you worship an evil God - though atleast he doesn't ask people to sacrifice their children to him, now THAT would be really evil.. oh wait, he did that too.

    Have you considered a more peaceful and loving God, like that of the Aztecs?

  • @Helptheherd Atheism is the truth, if your atheist your not living a lie. It's funny how most people nowadays are atheists and yet most people haven't commit suicide. Atheists don't believe in Satan, so how can it be evil?

  • @CounrtyGirl479 what world are you living in? most people are atheists? nope 90 percent of the people on this planet are believers- you must be talking about a different planet- atheism is the path to suicide- meaning true atheists commit suicide- you are not a true atheist

    God bless

  • @Helptheherd

    "most people are atheists?"

    Most people in the first world/civilized society are not fundamental believers in mainstream religions. The more knowledge and technology a society has, the less they rely on religions.

    Religion is a means of comfort, and this is why we find the highest incidence of theism in poverty stricken, poor, less educated regions.

    The USA is a bit more theistic than other advanced countries because our science education is totally inadequate

  • @Helptheherd

    "meaning true atheists commit suicide"

    Suicide, divorce rates, pedophilia/child molestation, and rate of crime is higher for theists (adjusted proportionally).

  • @neverfearchrisishere That sounds like my bed time stories, good times

  • @Helptheherd

    Ahahahahha.

  • @JnThreesixteen1 As for Alexander, there is some controversy about his existence. But there is evidence that suggests parts of what he's believed to have done actually happened. Can you say that about Jesus? And even if you could prove he existed, does that prove he is the son of god?

    What does it matter how many copies there are of the Bible? Do you know how many copies of Harry Potter have been sold?

  • @JnThreesixteen1 Last time I cheched a circle was 2 dimensional, IE flat.

    300 was a number I read somewhere. I think that was around the time the Roman Catholic church compiled the first Bible. This may be off though.

    The reason people don't question the existence Caesar is because there are statues, government records, personal diaries, his face on coins etc. Jesus is historically irrelevant whereas the Caesar had a big impact on the world.

  • It would seem pointless arguing with any religious person. Their is no excuse for their being as ignorant and completely void of independent thought in this modern age. They are a breed to their own. What is concerning is how much longer are we as Atheists going to tolerate a modern world being guided by these morons. How much longer are we going to sit back content while these freaks, clinging to their ancient and barbaric traditions/beliefs and impose their crap on the world?

  • Oh wow. I`ve talked enough to atheists. I thought I was gonna leave a comment but.. lol these people are blocked. Giving absurd qualities to randomness. (white noise). What I don`t know is how these people don`t realize that they are wrong. But God created it this way yes. And Godfearingness makes people behave, realize positive/negative consequence of what they do. Ofcourse if these people had a mind, neg/post consq. of their "whitenoise universe" would be just as "valid". Not coherent ppl.

  • Seems everyone who is an atheist always says that, why did God make me an atheist.What a dismissal of responsibility for your choice in choosing Him or choosing yourself. If He isn't your God, something else in your life will be, typically yourself first.

  • @JnThreesixteen1

    "Seems everyone who is an atheist always says..why did God make me an atheist"

    your problem is not in what atheists say, but your inability to understand that - if you invoke an all-knowing, all powerful creator, then you have just EXCLUDED the possibility of free will.

    It's a simple logical process - an all knowing creator knows exactly the ramification of any "tweak" he might make in your creation, and how that impacts your choices.

    it's you, not me.

  • @TheRealityofNature I find anytime I write something atheist either call me vile names or question my intelligence, naturally, you don't disappoint.I am never suprised at "scholars" trying to understand free will from an omnipotent God, an entity that is infinite and our fininte minds.Because you say it can't be true then it isn't, who is god now?This is just one arguement you touch on which even if you heard the other side, I doubt you would even hear, you've already convinced yourself.

  • @JnThreesixteen1 It's not a choice to be atheist. I can't simply start believing in God bacause I want to. Since I wasn't brought up to believe in God, the people who believe in him seem as deluded to me, as the people who believed in Zeus or Thor do to you. Could you make a choice to start believing in Zeus?

  • @gellendar420 There is some semblance of truth to what you say,I would find a mature Christian to discuss the "elect".

    I was a stauch atheist for 32 years saying the same things you say and I studied everything I could about it, the validity of the Bible, philosophy, logic, science anthropology and archaeology.I couldn't get past the proof or the cosmological, teleological arguments.As a medical pract and engineer, the human cell/DNA strand can't be overlooked.My daughter created and born.

  • @gellendar420 Zeus&Thor R made up fiction, the Bible is 99% accurate by atheist textural critics that for hundreds of years have tried to disprove&can't.They say there R many errors but theyR only stylist changes.If we throw out eyewitness testimony from a substantiated book,then we have no basis for our courts today.I'll ask what some1 asked me,put as much time and effort 4 1 year to prove there is a God,the Bible is accurate& Christ is who He said He was,U owe that2 Urself 2B fair4 both sides

  • @JnThreesixteen1 Oh boy...The awkward moment when someone thinks the bible's accurate in any way.

  • @UberREDKitteh I realize you might think I am in the minority in thinking the Bible is accurate but if you listen to Respected scholars then they can substantiate. Time Magazine on several occasion published articles of the authenticity.If you are going to say it isn't, then you better have some proof, that no one else has come up with.

  • @JnThreesixteen1

    They can substantiate that certain figures existed. For example, a person named Jesus may have existed. However, you can't substantiate the supernatural events which most of the bible hinges upon. This is where people have issues with the bible.

  • @UberREDKitteh the bibles the most inaccurate peice of shit ever to be written by man. fucking ideot

  • @MiloMatrataMusic Wait...We're on the same team here man.

  • @UberREDKitteh im sorry dude. I didnt read that correctlty. I read your comments and im 100 percent in agreement with what your saying. Im athiest as well. I wast trying to reply to the ideot who was claiming that everything in the bible is correct. Which we have already proved is not thr case. So if the book of "truth" has one lie in it then its not the book of truth

  • @JnThreesixteen1 99% accurate? It says the Earth is flat and the moon is made of light. Wouldn't the guy who made them know this?

    To follow your argument about eyewitness testimony; considering stories about Jesus were passes down by word of mouth for 300 years before ever being written down they'd be classified as hearsay at best. Which, in case you didn't know, is inadmissable in courts today even if the gap is only one person as opposed to the 300 years in this case.

  • gellendar Is.40:22 "circle of earth".Of course God knows what He created,whether the Greek language could encompass.

    Not sure where you get 300 when most would say 30-70 years.Compared to Alexander the Great's 1200 years or Caesar's 950 years, that is hot off the press!!But, not one questions them, why?There isn't even enough copies of Aristotle(400) or Plato(550) to substantiate they existed.There are over 25,000 copies of the Bible! What more do you need man?

  • @gellendar420 To this day I listen to atheist & their arguements b/c I can't believe it something that is not real,Christians don't have blind faith like most people think.Take care and Godspeed

  • Without the 99% incomplete fossil record creation hypothesis has nothing

    Without the fossil record evolution theory still has dozens of other fields relating to genetics and observations of species and their geographic distribution that independently support it

    Creationists fail to show the chemistry that says abiogenesis can't happen, while scientists have shown short ribozymes/RNA strands can fold over on themselves and act like enzymes for replicating other RNA strands (first step to life)

  • @confettibrains Creationists need to take a long hard look at virions and prions which effectively blur the line between organic molecules and what we would consider to be "alive".

  • LMFAO! "I worked it out, and I was atheist in an hour"

  • Occam's razor tells us a supernatural entity has far more impossibilities and implications than a system of infinite energy that is governed by random laws of physics or quantum fluctuations, or newtonian determinism where every possible position of any atomic particle anywhere in space already exists in a 4th dimension

    Any of these do well to complete the equations

  • @confettibrains

    after u shaved u might consider God to represent the energy, e.g. the big electron. do not now why u want it to be supernatural and why u talk about random laws of physics.

  • @fourteatwo

    "u might consider God to represent the energy, e.g. the big electron. do not now why u want it to be supernatural and why u talk about random laws of physics"

    I have considered it, and it makes no sense no matter how you look at it. The only way it could make sense is with childhood naivety, the same way Santa and the Easter Bunny made "sense"

    God could not be the energy, because then God wouldn't have consciousness. Intelligence needs an organized medium for exchange

  • @fourteatwo

    "random laws of physics"

    The 3 forces in our universe, the weak force, the strong force and the force of gravity, were actually just one force which broke down into 3 and taking on random values of each force. This could be why the strong nuclear force is so much stronger than the gravity force, because it took that strength into its own. In another universe, gravity could have inherited more strength and so atoms would not be bonded, but instead grouped by gravity

  • @confettibrains

    The 3 forces in our universe

    oops.. there are four.

    strong, weak, electromagnetic and gravitational.

  • I wish I could like this a thousand times.

  • If man was created from gods perfect image, does god shit?Just curious.... there is a terribly racist joke somewhere in here.

  • I've wondered, who the hell created gods in the first place? Was it like two cavemen? cause one of the others must have said like: what you're joking right? You actually think a man is sitting on his cloud making it rain and throwing lightning bolts at your ass?

    They say people were just as smart 5000 years ago or something but I think that's bullcrap, they must have had SOME brain functions missing. Then again some people DO still believe in an angry superbeing so I may be wrong.

  • @bramlegend Richard Dawkins proposes that explaining observed events (the sun, rain, natural disasters, etc) with supernatural forces is because our brain is inherently gullible when we are young. Nature selected for it because it allowed adults to communicate information (i.e., danger) and the kids would simply listen rather than test it for themselves (and presumably die). Pair that with our brain's tendency to create stories (TED talk on that somewhere) and you birth religion.

  • @xdopiex

    if you want to base your atheism on some facts and understand the reasons for our ability to observe the exception you better read Konrad Lorenz and don't waste your time on dawkins. Lorenz explained things far better because he was a real scientist.

  • @fourteatwo

    Lorenz? The racist nazi dude?

  • @berealisticdemandthe go get me sum fish n chips little bitch. Get off this guys dick b4 u have 2 get knee surgery. Ohh look I'm british and I love dick blah blah blah

  • If god created humans, why did he make them susceptible to illness? Why make humans capable of having cancer or aids. If god had the power to create the universe and the billions and billions of stars and planets some of which are thousands of times bigger than our own sun then surely he's capable of making humans unsusceptible to illness? If your answer is that he is testing us or punishing us then this makes god sadistic and if I was to inflict the same pain that he has i'd be locked up.

  • @berealisticdemandthe And if i was to be locked up by inflicting the same pain and misery that god has then it makes a mockery of christian claims that we get our morals from god.

  • Comment removed

  • @berealisticdemandthe

    high you bright spark. U do not need to reply to your own comments. If you were to think logically about it you would ask why he makes living creatures die in the first place. How they die is of minor importance unless it involves prolonged physical pain. Sure u can come up with a better idea then death, but perhaps the biological life is not the be all and end all you think it to be and there is an everlasting life to be had, just not as u understand it

  • @berealisticdemandthe Perhaps you should try reading the bible. It explains these things VERY clearly. In fact, there's a good chance you'll find more answers in the bible then you will ever get from science. I know; I was once an atheist, big bang, natural selection and evolution believer. I even studied those subjects for many years.

  • @5570933zQ

    "In fact, there's a good chance you'll find more answers in the bible then you will ever get from science"

    LOL! Ok. Stop using all the technology science has bestowed you, then. Or else stop talking shit about the community which has given you the technology to do so

    "I even studied those subjects for many years"

    Bullshit. Christians love to say they got their faith after studying science, but really that's just BS so they don't look like a bunch of close-minded idiots

  • @confettibrains

    agree if the bible is science i would like to see the "hidden superstring explanation" found in it

  • @5570933zQ

    So can you explain the logic of this to me? You believe humans require a creator because of our complexity (really just your inability to understand chemical affinity), yet a supernatural entity who PHYSICALLY LOOKS like a male human, requires no creator for himself? Where is the logic in saying a God looks like his own creation? How does a supernatural male human appear?

    And, since the first homo sapiens were black-skinned, does this mean God is a supernatural black man?

  • @5570933zQ

    Also, can you explain facts such as shared ERV insertions between distinct but related species, 100% accurate predictions made by molecular phylogenetics, biogeography (where species are found in strata and locations at predicted evolutionary origins), fusion of 2 ape chromosomes into 1 human chromosome, human embryonic stages that show vestigial development as amphibians, or why ALL living species today can be traced back to a predecessor, NO completely novel organisms?

  • @confettibrains Honestly, I have studied them. I was completely fascinated with the science behind evolution. I still love science, but I found the flaws in evolution, big bang, etc. If you watch documentaries on it, you will hear the scientists say that they have no factual proof to back up their THEORIES. They keep digging for the missing link, but lie to get grants when they say they finally found something. Look outside your window, if evolution were real you should see

  • @5570933zQ

    "I still love science, but I found the flaws in evolution, big bang, etc"

    I've heard this from other people, when I ask to see their sources I always get non-peer reviewed papers and non-scientific opinions and biased documentaries like whatever that one was from Ben Stein.

    Show me any well-founded rebuttal to evolution theory that ISN'T from a religious person (due to confirmation bias and distortion of evidence)

  • @5570933zQ

    Can you please explain facts such as shared ERV insertions between distinct but related species, accurate predictions made by molecular phylogenetics, biogeography (why species are found in strata and locations at predicted evolutionary origins), fusion of 2 ape chromosomes into 1 human chromosome, human embryonic stages that show vestigial development as amphibians, or why all living species today can be traced back to an ancestor, w/ no genetically unique organisms?

  • @5570933zQ

    "They keep digging for the missing link"

    Missing link for what? Human ancestral species are well documented transitions, as are whales (they have at least 20 transitional species last I checked).

    Keep in mind the fossil record is over 99% incomplete, and incomplete data is not grounds for any conclusions. The fact is, they have found transitions, just not for each of the 1 billion species to ever live (we only have 200 million fossils total, most are marine animals)

  • @5570933zQ

    "Look outside your window, if evolution were real you should see different stages of the evolution process walking around you right now"

    There are. All the birds are related to one another, each bird you see is a transition.

    We do see animals intermediate between stages. No, the earlier stages don't always die off, they just go a separate way and speciate in their own unique style (but still sharing a general form, as in birds)

  • @5570933zQ 'but I found the flaws in evolution'

    Oh, did you? Then the Nobel Prize awaits you, and worldwide fame and wealth. You will be as celebrated as Darwin! All you have to do is document your flaws with the evidence, and bingo! What? You have no evidence? Only gullible crap from creationists websites? Ho ho! No Nobel Prize for you! Funny, that!

  • @Oldtinear You're a funny one. Do fossils of extinct creatures prove your evolution theory? Perhaps lucy can prove it? Some of "her" bones were found large distances away from the initial find. Not to mention the huge depth discrepancies. The scientist that found these bones openly admitted this during a conference. I shouldn't have to provide you with evidence to disprove evolution. Our scientists do this on a regular basis.

  • @5570933zQ Also, regarding Lucy, I find it hilarious that the bones they found are severely corroded. It's not even remotely close to a full skeleton. They have to "reconstruct" the whole thing to prove their evidence. Wake up already.

  • @5570933zQ 'Do fossils of extinct creatures prove your evolution theory?'

    Absolutely! We have hundreds of thousands of fossils from all over the world, and every month brings thousands more. The world being what it is, with plate movements and erosion, digging up stuff millions of years old throws up the occasional odd fossil in an unexpected position. Such is life. YOU ignore the thousands of fossils which fit evolution perfectly, and focus obsessively on the odd ones. Perverse!

  • @Oldtinear "YOU ignore the thousands of fossils which fit evolution perfectly" No I don't. I've seen far more fossils of extinct species. I focus on Lucy, Neanderthal man, etc because they are the most accepted specimen. People tend to focus on the homo genus because they are supposedly our closest ancestors. Anyways, the ocean fossils are usually the most preserved. Again, they lack evidence of intermediate evolution stages despite the overwhelming amount of them.

  • @5570933zQ

    There are over 25 transitional species from pakicetus --> modern whales

    Pakicetus > nalacetus > ichthyolestes > gandakasia > ambulocetus > himalayacetus > attockicetus > remingtonocetus > dalanistes > kutchicetus > andrewsiphius > indocetus > qaisracetus > takracetus > artiocetus > babiacetus > protocetus > pappocetus > eocetus > georgiacetus > natchitochia > dorudon > zygorhiza > saghacetus > chrysocetus > gaviacetus > pontogeneus > basilosaurus > basiloterus

  • @confettibrains I hate to repeat myself, so I think I'm done with this debate. I'll be exiting, stage right.

  • @Oldtinear If anything, they are proof of an intelligent designer. They are created in a way to keep ecological balance.

  • @5570933zQ 'they are proof of an intelligent designer'

    Mate, for you, ANYTHING is 'proof' of a designer. But anything which looks a bit odd for a loving, all-knowing designer - such as rabies, malaria, earthquakes, back pain, and so on, you just ignore, or come up with a tale saying God created the world & us, but the evils of the world are OUR fault!

  • @5570933zQ

    "Do fossils of extinct creatures prove your evolution theory? Perhaps lucy can prove it?"

    Actually, we can disregard the fossil record and still have mountains of supporting evidence for it that are not specific to fossils.

    Lucy is one of hundreds of human ancestral fossils, why do you only focus on that particular one?

  • @confettibrains different stages of the evolution process walking around you right now. Did the earlier stages just die off? Has evolution all of a sudden found perfection and decided to stop? The most important question: How did nothing become something? I think it takes quite a bit of faith to believe something like that... so stop ridiculing those of us that believe in God.

  • @berealisticdemandthe why would he make out "perfect eyes" so faulty :p

  • @berealisticdemandthe The answers you'll probably get are "We were made susceptible after Adam and Eve were cast out of Eden as part of their/our punishment" and "You can't judge God by human standards". Stuff along those lines.

  • @195ashes Either that or "God works in mysterious ways".

  • Fuck this British cock sucker. What he needs 2 do is get the dick out of his ass cuz its making him talk stupid.

  • Comment removed

  • @PorkFrog I'M not denying that a lot of atheists rant as well.But thats also because in terms of the subject,us atheists are a minority and trust me it gets really pissing off when you're abused from every side just because you have a different point of view.

    And yeah i dont read alot of the comments on YT.Its always one against the other,fight fight fight.

    And you're right,the acrimony surrounding it is infact the main attraction.

  • Why are these fuckers laughing?!

  • @Yahtzoom Because it's funny as hell!

  • Why the fuck do god believers have a problem with anyone and everyone who is an atheist?Do we atheists keep calling you people names and abusing you just because you believe?Grow up and accept different point of views.Stop being narrow minded for FFS.You believe,we dont.Lets respect each other's opinions instead of saying atheists are dumb and stupid.

    And for people saying everyone needs something to believe in,then i'd rather believe someone i can see and feel the presence of(living being)

  • @suhaas080309 ''Do we atheists keep calling you people names and abusing you just because you believe?''

    can't say about 'real life' because such a thing generally doesn't come up, but on YT? you must not read here much I figure, since you ask the question..

    an atheist once told me to suck my God's dick on here

    but the acrimony surrounding the subject is one of its attractions

  • fat piece of shit.

  • @pastohh Lol do a quick google search for "Ricky gervais 2012". Dude is 50 and in better shape than most people will be all their life. Also, u mad even a comedian knows your stone age book is nonsense?

  • I can assure you even though im only 14, im not an idiot, I can say I truly don't understand why you're so threatened/ call it what you want, by my belief or other's in God. and if you were to make an attempt to advertise atheism, you wouldn't be doing a good job, you're just consistently using your "amaziiiiiing" logic to disprove things you're not even familiar with.. so what's your goal in this? cause provoking conversion certainly can't be it lol

  • @MrMwakajumba and yeahhh dude im sooo desparate, im just longing to be pretentious, and logical just like YOU! =)

  • Go Ricky,there is no devil and there is no god FACT and even a few of you religious types are finally realizing that Atheists are not angry people but merely those in touch with reality.:-)

  • @Tindting its funny how people who are atheists are just as dogmatic about their beliefs as religious people are.

  • @thuglifenos

    can I ask you a question tindting?

    Are you just trolling, or are you genuiniely ignorant about what atheism is? Here's a tip, despite the ongoing ranting and trolling on intellectual giants like porky et al. Atheism is simply not a belief, there is no "belief" involved.

    I really don't understand why people get so adamant about this stupid mistake, it actually completely confuses me. It's no more a belief than not-collecting stamps is a hobby.

    wake up to yourselves.

  • @TheRealityofNature 'Atheism is simply not a belief'

    I am an atheist, but, sorry, it is'.

    We use 'belief' to mean anything we hold to be true. I say 'I believe pruning my roses will produce more flowers'. In this case, based on evidence/experience, belief means a conclusion. While a believer saying 'I believe God exists in three parts', is taliking about faith - belief which is not evidence-based.

    Because there is no evidence, atheists believe/conclude God does not exist.

  • Comment removed

  • @TheRealityofNature 'Because there is no evidence for his existence, atheists believe/conclude God does not exist'

    You say you are an atheist, but say this statement is nonsensical. You say your atheism is not a belief. OK - go for it - express your views on the existence of God without using the words, 'I believe'

    Secondly, I know of no atheist who rules out the possibility of God. If evidence such as an angel-filled charriot descending on my garden emerged, I would convert

  • @Oldtinear

    "say 'I believe pruning my roses will produce more flowers'. ... belief means a conclusion"

    That your roses produce more flowers after pruning is a logically-inducted assertion. It's not something you hold as absolute truth. Theists DO hold their god's existence as absolute truth. A theist interprets "belief" as "assertion of absolute fact" .

    "atheists believe/conclude God does not exist"

    No, they suppose as reasonable, one does not. there's a lot of unspoken language.

  • @TheRealityofNature I said, 'We use 'belief' to mean anything we hold to be true'

    You called me nonsensical, and stated 'Theists hold their god's existence as absolute truth.' These look exactly the same to me. I don't see any difference between believing something to be true and believing it to be absolutely true.

    You shied away from my challenge, 'express your views on the existence of God without using the words, 'I believe'. Funny that!

  • Comment removed

  • @fourteatwo 'theists think that God exists whilst atheists-if they use their brain- think that God does not exist'

    Take our the sneer at atheists, and I agree with you. But theist believe God exists despite there being no evidence for it - their belief is faith-based, not evidence-based. Whereas atheists base their belief that God does not exist on the fact that there is no evidence while you would reasonably expect some. Their belief is evidence-based.

  • @Oldtinear

    I would have thought take the existence of the creation as evidence of a creator as I define God as the origin of the universe. Atheists can not deny the existence of the universe so they can not argue the no existence of God based on the absence of evidence for god but an alternative of the origin of the universe. Our current knowledge suggests that it had a beginning. Now can you please explain what evidence you have.

  • @fourteatwo 'Our current knowledge suggests that the universe had a beginning'

    It began with the Big Bang, but at that time energy/matter already existed - after the BB it expanded. There is no evidence that there was a time when matter did not exist, or that it was subject to a process describable as creation.

    'I define God as the origin of the universe'

    You define a set as containing beings with the attribute of creating the universe. Great! Now show that this set is not empty!

  • @Oldtinear

    So you believe in an infinite universe not created but allways existing. I guess you have as much evidence of that as I have. I actually thought there might have been energy, i.e. God that turned into matter or as Carlin said, the big electron. Now the philosophical question is if that cration had a purpose. If not that you have no purpose either or where would that purpose come from?

  • @fourteatwo

    "If not that you have no purpose either or where would that purpose come from?"

    Do you really need a bronze-age religion to find purpose in life?

  • @fourteatwo 'you believe in an infinite universe not created but always existing.'

    Nope. The universe is big and expanding, but not infinite.There is no evidence it was 'created'

    'I guess you have as much evidence of that as I have'

    Nope. The universe is self-evidently here. I do not need to provide evidence that it is. You claim that there was a time when the universe was not here. You have no evidence for this claim

    By the way, did God need creating? If so, who by? If not, why not?

  • @Oldtinear

    you can not have it both ways it either was created or it allways existed thus is infinite. Now be it as it is, what does your worldview then tell you about your purpose.

  • @fourteatwo ''you believe in an infinite universe not created but always existing.'

    I thought you meant infinite in size rather than time.

    Time is funny - it is not as simple as you think intuitively. Einstein showed that speed and gravity affect time. Many scientists believe that time started with the Big Bang. Yes this sounds odd, but time stops under huge gravitational force.

    But go for it - if you think time stretches back infinitely, show us your evidence for this view.

  • @Oldtinear

    Show us time had a beginning than. Thought this was one of the philosophical things in worldviews. Guess the concept of infinity was not apparent when people stated to think about God. They even had truoble to imagine the timescale of the earth history so they called it six days and I guess it is beyond our capabilities to settle that

  • @fourteatwo My view is that energy/matter exist now, and have since the beginning of time

    Yours is that if you go back far enough in time, matter vanishes. A fabulously-powerful invisible human-lookalike being exists with the power to create universes. If you continue to go back in time, you never reach a point where this being did not exist

    My view is weak on the start of time. I admit there is stuff we do not know. Yours requires fabulous beings and the destruction of the universe.

  • @Oldtinear

    why do i have to think of a human lookalike God and why would I have to believe in infinite regression? Just because u belive so?

    Indeed if it all existed since the beginning of time, what was there before the beginning of time? why are u afraid of imagening a pont of creation? call the cause the big eletron if that helps u.

    do u think u have an obligation to look after others and if so why, because if u do the spirit is with u anyhow

  • @Tindting i beg to differ, look at the Buddhist teachings, study it in depth, and u will get what hell is on earth XD, fact is not ultimate truth, BTW i have not had someone yet explain to me what logic is where it comes from, so i propose a challenge (friendly challenge, im not attacking any beliefs, just want a solid argument for once) (BTW i know where it comes from, a test maybe then, got there through poetry XD)

  • Your guys argument is pointless, everyone who believes in god is trying to shove your religion down the people who don't believes throat. It's there choice to believe or not to believe..... That said i do have to ask how people who don't believe explain how we are here at this moment, how we have been here for years and how thousands of other animals got here?

  • Ricky Gervais is so awesome.

  • @Ecocide112 Jesus himself wasn't religious. He taught about the kingdom of god, which isn't a religion. It is a kingdom. With God being the king of his territory (Earth and the universe) and the kingdom's citizens (people) obeying his rule; not members of a church/religion. A kingdom is a government. And the issues in the bible that Jesus had were not religious issues. They were political issues. And politics are part of a government. The kingdom he talks of.

  • I think the best spokesperson for atheism and scientism is Nikita Khrushchev who said that "Gagarin flew into space, but did not see any god there."

  • but I fully respect others beliefs as well.. Maybe once we do begin to understand each other's beliefs than maybe we will finally begin to change/manipulate this world, riding it of hate, selfishness,racism,RELIGION, and just obtainig hope and understanding for all humans. As for the "christians" who shove their beliefs towards others, while living an entirely contradicting life and judging others, I apoligize, "christians" such as myself exists, and are only growing in numbers.. Jesus>religion

  • @MrMwakajumba So wait, i dont fully understand. you say you believe in jesus and god, but not religion? How is that not religious? Do you believe there is a heaven and a hell and god created the world and if you dont follow his rules you will go to hell?

  • @Ecocide112 Well first of all, I believe that there are a lot of things that i'll never understand, but I certainly accept that fact. And having a relationship with Jesus is much different than following a religion, we "christians" have basically had wrong for so many years, and now(finally) we're in the midst of understanding God's true nature, the new testament portrays how Jesus simply came to serve and love. That's how I carry myself, and please don't think im trying to preach cause im not. 

  • @TheRealityofNature its a choice not a rejection, for if one were to reject his brother, and in his absence pick another, would that man still not be his brother, and the other, just a pick of the bunch, for one cannot dismiss any other, nor can he decide who was whom as of birth, tis neither his will nor hi right, to say another is yet to come, or has already been, to pick a few words, and to answer them as only what they are, is to ignore the depth, and what they may hold.

  • @MsMi321

    "its a choice not a rejection"

    nope. rejection. I reject as valid, unsubstantiated claims to the existence of an unprovable and mythical god.

    I don't "choose" logic any more than I chooose math. I "choose" to apply logic, because if we don't use logic, then we're reduced to meaningless babble.... funny that.

  • @TheRealityofNature are u seriously that much of an ignorant cherry picker, words on themselves mean nothing when taken from a verse can mean anything from a insult to a compliment, logic is a result of the creative mind, XD it derives from the irrational, next time actually read what i say instead of answering a few words, XD, i never claimed god to be real now did i , so i suggest u actually learn to interpret words and not the amateur cherry picking technique XD

  • @MsMi321

    "logic is a result of the creative mind"

    perhaps, but it's also a tool, like math, that works.

    you don't get to define math. you also don't get to define logic. it's already defined for you.

    If you don't want to be logical, fine, the conversation is over - I can listen to my 2 year old niece if I want to listen to meaningless, logic-less babble.

  • @TheRealityofNature plus the most wise men on earth have been talking in illogical ways for centuries "funny that", logic in itself wont solve the math problem for u its the creative side of ur mind that actually lets u understand the problem

  • @MsMi321

    "plus the most wise men on earth have been talking in illogical ways for centuries"

    they have?

    I assume you can validate this claim with an example? yes? please do.

    "logic in itself wont solve the math problem"

    I see, so when you do a google search, for example, for math logic, do you actually see the results, or do you just ignore they are there?

    Being creative is fine, but if you want to creatively mount a point and expect it to be understood, you have some homework to do.

  • @TheRealityofNature u really are hoggishly ignorant cherry picker, actually understand what i say as a whole verse, the least understood ppl are : Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Einstein, and many more, i see the results but, any math problem has many if not infinite ways of being solved, more proving that logic comes from the irrational, logic in itself wont solve the problem since, u need to use and rearrange functions in such a way that they are as simple as possible to solve

  • @MsMi321

    "hoggishly ignorant..."

    if you like, but how about you give me the names I asked for anyhow?

    "any math problem has many if not infinite ways of being solved,"

    yes, and ALL of them adhere to strict rules. Infinite ways of doing things, it doesn't mean ANY way of doing it is appropriate.

    You actually agreed with me: "u need to use and rearrange functions in such a way.." i.e. there are "correct" ways of applying math and logic, and there are INCORRECT ways of doing it.

  • @TheRealityofNature AGAIN U USE SINGLE VERSES WHICH ARE NOT INDIVIDUAL IDEAs, XD, i gave u the names XD either learn to read, or stop cherry picking, appropriate ways of doing things is of no importance, and my quote continues, "u need to use and rearrange functions in such a way that they are easiest to solve"

    no one is falling for discrimination of the idea by the pick of the words, i will give u the names again: SOCRATES< ARISTOTLE< PLATO< EINSTEIN, ETC. i will continue

  • @MsMi321

    "AGAIN U USE SINGLE VERSES"

    huh? I'm not using any "verse". I've concluded you're a fruitloop.

    "or stop cherry picking"

    huh? cherry picking? Telling you that logic is math with well-defined rules is.. cherry picking? more fruitloopery.

    "no one is falling for discrimination"... is this even english?

    "i will give u the names again.." righto, now show me EXACTLY where these guys misused logic to conclude a point.