Re: 3 Intelligent questions EVERY Athiest should answer

[ozzyfest1989]

l'

[KEEETARO]

Shees People, The universe itself is the existence. There is no outside the existence. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". We can't disprove your God theory because there is this rule that the one who claim should present the evidence since the burden of proof is in you. Thats the default position.

[larkfeast]

your belief system is about self.

[TheTrueJBV3737]

skip to 9:57 to skip all the bullshit.

[lookout5610]

If you haven't taken Salvation.

[lookout5610]

But Jesus is longsuffering and will accept you till your last breath. Then you are own your own.

[lookout5610]

Snoman we have all eternity to win you other hand will have all eternity with satan,angels, and the world religions to lose. You will feel the flames of the Lake of Fire. Because you you will have your sins to pay for and by rejecting Jesus when you should have accepted His free gift. You will pay for eternity for that.

[Luigi84289]

@lookout5610 What is your goal? No one is going to buy into your blind speculation on a thinking channel. No one cares about it. You keep saying god is a selfish tyrant and that people should place themselves under him?

[lookout5610]

Snoman you claim because of what you don't see you will not believe. Since you only have one life that's pretty flimsy. You have never died so you don't know what awaits do you? But one came back from the dead and Him you don't believe. Interesting

[aifammafiaaifam]

WHAT THE EARTHS NOT FLAT.......

[Danmill23]

Hey MenO. Thanks for your response to my "3 questions .. " video. Startlingly it's been there for a while and I have missed it? Sorry about not geting to see it sooner.

Anyway you provided a great load of answers and ideas as I would expect from your good self. And no you did not tread on already covered ground. Cheers!

[davecyco]

You sir, have created a strawman of your own, in your implicit suggestion that 'theists' do not think rationally.

Otherwise you were doing well.

[MenoftheInfinite]

I'm quite explicit in my view that theists, at best, are conveniently, or compartmentalizationly (I think I just invented that word) rational.

[snoman99991]

Strawman or not as a point of argumentation, it's pretty true lol

[davecyco]

What? Because you say so?

[snoman99991]

Fair enough. It's pretty well understood that debates between atheists and creationists are won on youtube by atheists. I point at youtube debates such as the ones on videos by TheAmazingAtheist, and Cdk007, Thunderf00t, and others. It's not like it's all bulletproof, there's still the impossibility of proving a negative, but it's because of creationist idiocy that atheists consistently win debates here on youtube.

To put it simply, I've never seen a creationist win on content, only debating

[davecyco]

That may be so, but it is not creationism that won me over to Catholicism, I began to learn about that stuff after.

However, considering the undeniable history of lies and distortion that evolution has (and as many creationist apologists are guilty of as well), I don't think it is wise to use the discussion of origins in an attempt to prove or disprove either side.

[snoman99991]

I can't just take your word for it, I need to know what lies you speak of. Even if there were inaccuracies in previous theory (or previous versions of it), the current theory is tested, and re-testable. Evolution is an undeniable fact, even though it has nothing to do with the origin of life. The creationist anger towards evolution is simply in response to the fact that evolution somewhat points towards abiogenesis as being a likely source for life on this Earth. There is evidence for it too

[snoman99991]

I guess what I'm saying is that when the scientific community gets fire from the religious right, it's fair game. Naturally atheists on youtube are going to want to debate creationists who take their perceptions as granted, without ever questioning it themselves.

Those who do question it, are generally prepped for debate. Those who debate the atheists generally lose because the atheists have both logic and evidence as support. Blind faith is not compelling evidence, so debate is useless.

[dablue1]

@davecyco

Theists do not think rationally because they have faith in a god.

Faith is belief without proof.

Rational is exercising reason(a basis or cause of belief).

Religion while maybe sound and rational to you personally does not fit any model or criteria for proof, basis or cause of belief by any other standards.

Apply the same scrutiny that you give an email offering you a million dollars to help someone out in nigeria to your own religion. If you dont then you do not act rational.

[davecyco]

@dablue1 Faith is belief in something we do not see, in the presence of EVIDENCE. As such, we believe things to be true, rather than "knowing" them to be true.

There is evidence for their existence, but have YOU ever SEEN a Yangtze River Dolphin or a Javan Rhino? If not, then according to your logic you are irrational if you believe in them nonetheless.

In fact, if you read the website listed in my channel, you will see that it truly IS you who are irrational.

Ciao.

[Luigi84289]

@davecyco What a bunch of malarky. Faith in the normal sense is belief in something with quantifiable evidence to warrant it. If I place my fork on the table I have faith it won't move because the metallic make up of the fork makes it impossible. I can see the fork. If it gets up and dances it has just proven the evidence incorrect.

[Luigi84289]

@davecyco Theists are inherently close minded out of fear and or a want to remain ignorant in that department. Anything that ventures into a taboo zone that they have erected through their faith is ignored or marginalized.

[davecyco]

@Luigi84289 You are generalizing. Surely your label applies to most theists; indeed most theists have slef conflicting beliefs. But your label applies equally to atheists and anyone else who has a vested interest in an untenable position.

Lastly, not all "theism" is untenable, and there is more than enough information at my channel and my blog to demonstrate this empirically and philosophically.

Ciao.

[Luigi84289]

@davecyco The only way to see any sort of real god and not have doubt (be certain of said god's existence) is to see it as the Universe. The totality of everything. If not then God must be finite.

[davecyco]

@Luigi84289 I disagree, and what you say is apparently based upon an untenable proposition, viz. that the universe is infinite. I put it to you the other way: If God is everything, then the universe is nothing. It so happens that God IS everything, and he created the universe from nothing, with Him as its end.

Secondly, my dear man, it is not a question of WANTING something to be true, but wanting to believe and live according to what IS true.

[Luigi84289]

@davecyco Explain how you get something from nothing. You can say it is true all day. Explain to me. The universe is infinitely expanding. It is infinite. I'll accept whatever is true. If God was proven to exist (nonexistence was proven to be existence) I would be against him, against control. Death or torture before submission. Being a tool is not something I want.

[KEEETARO]

@davecyco

another argument based on ignorance T.T

So you mean God existed before he existed.

Its either a simple God who is not worth worshiping or a Complex God who doesn't exist

[davecyco]

@KEEETARO The fallacy in your comment is the implication that simple is somehow bad. Yet every engineer I've ever spoken with proclaims the excellence of simplicity. Yes, God is simple, and the most worthy being, having never been without existence, having neither beginning nor end. He is the only being that can give truth to the principle of cause and effect. No fallacies here, only logic. The only rational worldview (which does not require one to deny logic) is the theistic worldview.

[KEEETARO]

@davecyco

No obviously theres already a fallacy at your 4th statement. Its your Assertion of how you describe God as has no beginning and no end. You are arguing at yourself, so youre god came from nothing because breaking the law of cause and effect is also breaking the law of the universe and if you do so... Everything wont exist as it exist right now. Its the simple logic here, It doesn't mean something is unknown therefore God did it. We simply don't know is the best ans.

[davecyco]

@KEEETARO Look I'm not interested in playing ping pong with you, so this is my last reply to you: Without a self existing eternal being, there cannot be any other beings, otherwise the principle of cause and effect is broken, and thus is false. Yet it is accepted as an axiomatic truth.

[KEEETARO]

@davecyco

You believed that we are perfect creation of God? since you believe we are his children created by his own image. Thats the best lie I've ever heard. Humans are not even near. The universe is very harsh that it took 9 billions of years before a planet suitable for life exist. It is a product of an uncountable fail planets over 9 billion years. It took a billion years for earth to produce life and Human evolution took 10 million years to achieve this certain form.Did you ever consider?

[ozzyfest1989]

@davecyco But, god isn't real, you or any other christian have no evidence of one. So believing in "god" is irrational.

[davecyco]

@ozzyfest1989 No, π (pi) is irrational, denying the law of cause and effect is irrational, denying the law of non-contradiction is irrational and denying, denying the law of identity is irrational. And if you deny God, then guess what: You necessarily deny the last three things mentioned.

[Luigi84289]

@davecyco People should not want a conscious controlling force that is greater than them to exist. That's saying you want to be below something else on the food chain. If something is more powerful than you it will always see you as inferior. Think of dictators. They are not as bound as the average citizen so they use their new powers to attain what they desire for themselves and their family. This is just looking at what the structure of the relationship between a god and human soul would be.

[Ozzyman200]

Very well reasoned answers. I completely agree.

[MenoftheInfinite]

Xianity never claimed the Earth to be flat. Xian scholarship was essentially Greek scholarship and the Greeks knew full well the Earth is spherical. As stupid as Xianity may be, and has been, that is not a legitimate flaw to assign them.

The meaning of the rest of your "critique" escapes me.

[MrDriizzet]

@MenoftheInfinite haha finally someone who knows the truth !!! atlast someone who knows what there onabout

[ScottySrch]

you thought this video out very well. i like the way you say that no body can be sure that any theory is correct. it is insane to say that one theory is correct and say another is wrong because one theory is just as good as another. anything can be proven false no one knows the truth no one should claim to know truth.

[Censeo]

Have you done a video about big bang yet?

[MenoftheInfinite]

Not yet, no. Not sure what I'd say in one, other than perhaps attempting to clarify what BB theory says and doesn't say. Maybe also what the natural limitations of cosmology itself are.

I'll give it some thought.

[KasparHauser4]

Part 1

I can live with doubt and uncertainty and not knowing. I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I have approximate answers and possible beliefs and different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything and there are many things I don't know anything about,

[KasparHauser4]

Part 2 such as whether it means anything to ask why we're here.... I don't have to know the answer. I don't feel frightened by not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose, which is the way it really is as far as I can tell. It doesn't frighten me. -- Richard Feynman (interview with Christopher Sykes, in "The Pleasure of Finding Things Out," BBC-TV, 1981

[MenoftheInfinite]

Things don't have reasons, they have causes. There is no "why" we're here. It's not that some questions cannot be answered so much as some questions are falsely conceived from the outset.

Thanks for the intelligent comments. Youtube could frankly use a lot more of it :)

[MenoftheInfinite]

Ah, yes, I agree with you. Not knowing, yet still striving, is far better than knowing falsely. False knowledge is, of course, not knowledge at all. It's just belief. Certainty in the philosophical realm is possible; one should never give up on it. Certainty in the empirical realm isn't actually applicable so we needn't worry about it. There we must simply work for the greatest utility possible.

[KasparHauser4]

Great video! You are correct that atheists existed way before there even was a science:

Anaxagoras, Greek philosopher (500?-428? BCE).

. . . probably the first freethinker we know of to be condemned for his beliefs." "He regarded the conventional gods as mythic abstractions endowed with anthropomorphic attributes. His writings led him to a dungeon, charged with impiety, probably about the year 450 B.C.E."

[MenoftheInfinite]

If you look at the attitude Socrates took to the so-called "Gods" you'll find that he'd qualify as an atheist as well. The main point being that rejection of the God concept is something one ultimately does on philosophical/logical grounds, not empirical ones. Evolutionary theory and Big Bang cosmology could be overturned tomorrow, and theists could not take an ounce of succor from that.

[mjdoyza]

Good honest answers, and not too hurty on my brain.

[Danmill23]

Great answers.  Very good. I to often think about athiests in the past who did not have scientific explinations as crutches. They must have strong convictions.

Good explination of "scientific concensus".

Thanks Man! (men)

[MenoftheInfinite]

They had strong logic more than strong convictions :)

I hope to do a vid specifically on God in the near future, outlining the essential ideas that really matter and why God can be shown to not exist, or to otherwise be of no philosophical import.

Interesting channel you have.

[Cafeeine]

A good and interesting response