the human body is made up of base elements..yet we are self aware and can think and create. the universe is infinately more complex ...is it possible that the universe itself by its complexity could have such a nature?
listen God is the way the truth and the life tell me wat other religion talks about a GOD who is alive who will prove miracles and who died for your sins and gives eternal life thats the only question i got prove it
I can understand agnostics. They admit not to know if there is a God or not. But atheists say there is no God. Isn't there even a chance in some of your minds that God exists. I admit, many religious people have a very limited view of God. Man in the sky type stuff. This is wrong too as the Creator of all would be a being that we could not begin to comprehend.
Also, I don't blame people who have problems with religion...lots of abuse and corruption. Men lie all the time for power.
You said "disprove it!!". Shifting the burden of proof, I see!
I hate to burst your bubble, but It's YOUR job to convince us atheists that theism is more rational than atheism!! Where's the evidence that theism is more rational, logical, scientifically testable, repeatable, & falsifiable?!
Actually, reason, logic and science (as it advances...slowly, but surely) are more and more on the side of the believers. Check out Anthony Flew, leading atheist for 50 years and his conversion.
Question...
Does anything in nature come from nothing? No.
Did we create ourselves? No.
Where, in nature do we see such perfect order come from caos (example: Human DNA)? No where.
So, there must be a creator that is not part of this creation.
- An example of argumentum ad populum (logical fallacy). "Did we create ourselves? No"
Doesn't mean u should pull a god-of-the-gaps argument.
..."we see such perfect order from chaos"
This may sound like a red herring, but ever hear of vestigial organs? Also, look at the volume of places where life will presumably never exist (most planets).
Man, lots of labels being thrown around there. Can you argue your point without them...without sounding like a college philosphy or logic 101 class?
"Places where life presumably never existed"? What does that matter...it either exists or it doesn't.
Please tell me. If we didn't create ourselves, how were we created?
Also, I was expressing an opinion ( you called it argumentum ad populum) based on observations, reading, etc.... isn't that what critical thinking people do?
Yes, I could, but I think it addresses your comments/questions the most directly. I just think u should be familiar with at least some of these. For the record, I have not memorized this list completely.
Source: Wikipedia - "List of Fallacies".
My point about the dead planets is that they don't seem to be vital for the survival of earth's living organisms, so what purpose would they serve? Who/what will occupy them in the afterlife??
The dead planets: If u believe that God will destroy these planets (according to Psa. 102:25-26, Matt. 24:35 & others), then isn't that like God beating a dead horse (in the literal sense)? Why does God need to erase/destroy something he already created? - How does that coincide with his alleged "perfection" / "omniscience"?? If you're perfect, you don't make mistakes ('out with the old & in with the new') suggests that God made a mistake & is NOT omniscient either!
(cont'd) "How were we created?" I honestly don't know (that's a topic related to abiogenesis). To my knowledge, most scientists don't know that yet; that doesn't mean there isn't a natural explanation.
Speaking of human DNA, our DNA & the chimp's DNA are different only by a factor of under 2%!! I recommend watching Kenneth Miller (a theist evolutionist) videos on chromosome #2 (assuming u don't believe in evolution). (?)
Scientists do not know exactly what prompted the Big Bang. They are still trying to figure that out. Science doesn't claim to have all of the answers; that doesn't mean that [insert religious text here] does!
You assume wrong. I don't see why the belief in a creator means I don't believe in evolution. I also don't assume that religious people have all the answers. I simply use reason and common sense to try and see the truth.
Science has done great things for me personally. I have not problem with science. It is limited as man is limited. Religion in an attempt to put God into language and actions (creeds, rituals, etc.) It is also limited because it attempts to express the inexpressible.
How can u justify that science is compatible with religion? I know many people believe that, but why? How is it 'reasonable' to believe in something / someone with which there is no empirical evidence (only anecdotal, 2nd-hand stories)?
What do u mean by "it attempts to express the inexpressible"?
By, "it attempts to express the inexpressible"...I am saying that we humans, limited by our languages, senses, etc. are not able to explain a being who created all things, who is all-knowing and without limitations. It is beyond our understanding and means of expression.
Science and religion mainly deal with different things. Science with the physical and religion the spiritual. Many religious and spiritual people search for knowledge and though many do not that scientifically, many do.
I'm sure this is on the list of fallacies but the Creator has been with us for centuries, in different parts of the world, in different traditions, well before globalization...Isvara, Yahweh, Allah, The Great Spirit, etc. I am open to that possibility.
If u don't mind my asking, are u a deist / pantheist /other? I'm just curious.
If you're "open to that possibility", then that is up to you (to each his own). I do hope you seek out the truth in the creation / atheism 'debate'. Skepticism is not a vice, despite what you've heard before.
The closest thing that could describe my beIiefs would be a spiritual monotheist. I study different traditions (Xianity, Islam, Hindu, Nat. Amer. Sprituality, Buddhism) and mix practices...the extremists like to call it cafeteria style.
I am absolutely a believer in the possibility that I could be wrong about God, but I put my faith in His existence, and I do believe in "to each his own", and most importantly seek truth.
From your name I must ask, do you believe in prophecies?
I do not believe in any prophecies of any kind whatsoever anymore. However, if there are good predictions of things to come that are based on good evidence, then I am open to those predictions. In other words, I go with probabilities; not prophecies. Hope that answers your question.
Let me clarify my 2nd to last sentence. I certainly won't always rely on probabilities, as in the case of gambling. I used to gamble a little, but I don't do it too much anymore - most times the risk outweighs the reward (at least in my experience).
YOU are the one who made the claim of having proof, not I, I merely said that science has some possible answers that do not involve nor require a magical being with magical powers. So again, what is YOUR proof that something cannot come from nothing??
And yes, I most certainly do "deny the possibility of intelligent design", and in the strongest possible sense! Because "Intelligent design" might as well include daydreams and nightmares as well as Zeus and Vishnu!
@MrPoopybum im not really the religious type, but i think erradicating traditional religion is too extreme. u said u were agnostic in a post to a different person, meaning u feel there is not enough proof to confirm or deny a higher power. it therefore surprises me how adament u r about the erradication of religion. i myself dont believe in organized religion. out of curiosity, r u against all personal theist spectrums or just the structure and side effects of organized religion?
Simply put, my personal take on agnosticism is this:
I 'believe' the existence of any ultimate reality (god) is unknown, and (more importantly) unknowable. I also firmly believe that anyone who says otherwise and claims to know "god" is an outright liar and a miscreant.
Eradicating traditional religion isn't all that extreme, afterall, christianity and islam have been doing it all along! But, rather than burning people alive or beheading the Kafir, I would prefer we try education, not murder.
@MrPoopybum idk if its that black and white or even that simple, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. i do agree with u that some type of re education is needed to find common ground bt ppl to transverse some of the lines drawn by orthodox religion. im not so sure that the basic theist belief is detrimental all by itself.
It's only that black and white, or simple, when one steps back and takes a cold hard look at The Big Picture. But, yes you're right, in reality, nothing is that clear, or simple, and everyone should indeed be entitled to their opinion.
However, I remain firmly convinced that "the basic theist belief is detrimental all by itself"; primarily because (IMHO) they're all either irrelevant diversions, or outright barriers, to any and all so-called 'Truths', and thus, complete and utter wastes of time
@MrPoopybum yea, there prolly are some cultures that might be better off without such intense religious oversight, the taliban would be a good example (if u can even call that perversion a religion)
That's funny, because your description of the Taliban, as being a perverse religion, again reminded me of the conquest of South America, and how the conquistadors most likely perceived the religions that they encountered..
Isn't it clear by now that all religions are ultimately perverse? Ultimately have the blood of innocents on their hands? And are therefore ultimately evil??
An intense secular oversight of the religious is what all cultures would be better off with, and the sooner the better.
u do have a point, but i still have a hard time believing that an unreligious group in ancient times wouldve acted much differently when encountering a different culture. from the most primitive aspects of social relations throughout the human population and animal kingdom, different=bad. it evolved as a survival technique in order to distinguish who is and isnt in the "in" group. in short, no one wants to befriend someone they presumably cant trust.
@MrPoopybum depending on ur religious practices, religion doesnt have to be a waste of time. even if god isnt real, its still very theraputic for some people to pray. some ppl really need religion in their life to be sane. as pathetic as it sounds, its the truth. complete erradication of religion is somewhat unethical and almost impossible. u can give it a shot tho lol.
Yes, well, it may very well be "therapeutic" for some, but, that ultimately meaningless and obviously delusional benefit for them, always inevitably comes at a great cost to many, many others.
However, I completely understand what you're trying to say, and perhaps it is a part of the human condition, and beneficial on a personal level to many, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be recognized for being, on the whole, not only unethical, but perhaps even an evil we would all be best to be without.
As far as I know, there is, in reality, no such thing as "nothing", therefore, the answer to your woefully ignorant and/or obviously loaded question is, Neither. Look, you show me "nothing", and I'll show you something! Deal??
Now, why don't YOU at least try to give some intelligent and reasoned answers to some of the many intelligent and reasoned questions that have been put to you for a change!
Science has nothing substantial when it comes to scientifically explaining what caused life to begin. No one knows. So, why all the authoritative stances by many in the science establishment? Why the name calling for people who leave the door open to the possibility. There is a lot left unanswered, many seek the truth. I seek it as you do. So why the hostility?
Can people not question scientific theory? I thought that WAS part of science.
The hostility is due to the fact that, in seeking "the truth" by "opening the doors" to mystical/magical/superstitious thinking, you ignorantly, and to the detriment of all mankind, disregard and reject the "scientific method" (wikipedia . org/wiki/Scientific_method).
A time proven methodology that has always had as it's primary goal, the pursuit of knowledge and "Truth"!
Science does indeed have something "substantial to scientifically explain what caused life to begin".
When you say "No one knows", you disingenuously assert science is attempting to answer unanswerable questions, however, Prof. Jack Szostak's work with fatty acids for the "Origins of Life Initiative" (origins . harvard . edu) at Harvard University has, among other things, repeatedly replicated primitive cell membrane formation, as well as primordial cell division using artificial proto-cells.
The team working with the Prof. of genetics at Harvard Medical School, Dr. George Church, has built a near complete genetic blueprint for the construction of an entirely new life form in the lab, the first new living cell in perhaps billions of years! Which is actually now being regularly referred to as the "Second Genesis".
With synthetic DNA we can create synthetic Ribosomes, the critical component of any living and evolving cell..
..and in a very short time, this team will have the rest of the components necessary to complete the task of creating the first ever man-made living cell, ..Life itself.
Before you start talking nonsense about something, educate yourself about the facts, not everyone on youtube is a gullible delusion-prone moron.
So this man-made cell has a creator, doesn't it (Dr. Szostak)? What did he use to create the cell? Did it come from nothing? Does that answer the question where the first cell came from?
In all seriousness, you my friend, need an edumacation! It's obvious the topics of this discussion are, at present, beyond your comprehension. If you had understood what I had explained to you, you wouldn't be asking these inane questions.
Simply put, this collaborate effort WILL demonstrate AND duplicate "where the first cell came from". And it'll also show that rather than arising miraculously from "nothing" it instead occurred in a natural process from naturally occurring materials in Nature.
I'm finding it a bit difficult to have a civil conversation with you. You may know a lot about science but you need some work on interpersonal skills. I read plenty of books and am educated...not in the areas of science, but I do not like your insulting language. This is one reason why religious and scientic people have a hard time having some kind of constructive dialogue on the subject. Both sides are so entrenched. You have a lot to offer on this subject. Disrespect is not necessary.
Given what you've said here, and elsewhere, the "insulting language" and "disrespect" ~ that you will now continue to find in my replies to you ~ should be of no surprise to anyone.
Contrary to what you'd like everyone believe, it is insultingly obvious that you have little or no knowledge about the science you continue to consistently and inanely deride, nor any intention of having a "constructive dialogue".
Religious and scientific people have a hard time ~ because of the religious mindset.
Sad thing about atheists is that most of them worship science as the end all be all guide post to truth. But in the end many scientists will tell you...We know very little, in the big scheme of things, about our world...from the tiniest particle to the large space that surrounds us. But these same people will ridicule traditions that are thousands of years old as stupid.
Sorry, but Science is NOT a belief system, it's the pursuit and collection of knowledge and facts.
You are trying, falsely and disingenuously, to imply that atheists simply replace the worship of a deity with a "worship of science" or material things, when in fact what they're doing is ABANDONING and REJECTING any and all such blind allegiances to any and all deities and/or mystical beliefs.
Your reasoning has obviously been distorted by your extremely delusional mystical belief system!
A big part of science is theory...the knowledge and facts usually come later or not at all. How many times have you heard..."We have not even began to scratch the surface" (of whatever area of study)?
But you must admit that most atheists worship Science in the sense that they have a great admiration or devotion to it. Even to the level of believing that Science has all the answers or will one day have all the answers. There are millions more mysteries than answers at this point in time.
And your reasoning is distorted by your belief that if you can't see it, or if scientists don't have some theory about it or have a theory against it, then it doesn't exist. There is a lot we don't know. But you don't even leave the door open for the possibility that there is a God. I however do say that maybe there isn't a God...Who is the extremist here?
Strictly speaking, I'm an agnostic, however, I do admit to not leaving "the door open for the possibility that there is a God" as described in any book and/or by any person.
I 'believe' that the existence of any ultimate reality (as in "god") is unknown and probably unknowable.
#2 video done. This must be atheist answers for grade two; because you are using a kindergarten level understanding of religion and God to make these responses. Onto #3. At least I'm watching the videos.
Grade two? Interesting you used that. Being that to stop following religion is about a second graders intelligence level. So yeah, an elementary approach is understandable. It really doesn't take much to disregard religion.
Geeze I hate it when those grade 3'ers use dat advanced reversed logic on me. I can't wait til next year when I gets a chance to learn it two. He's so smart and now I looks right dum.
Was that satire? You prove nothing and are no longer worth any time. People reading this take note, when 39knights is insulted for stupidity he overly drops back to even more stupidity (spelling errors included) from his lack of ability in actually answering anything intelligently. This way he seems so sarcastic that he has to know what he is talking about. Failure mate, sorry. Bye
And what exactly was I suppose to answer? You may need to reword your reply for me to figure it out. If there was really any kind of sensible question or comment there I would have answered in kind. As it was, I did.
if there isnt a god, people who worship him arent necessarily wasting their lives. some people feel great comfort in believing in a higher power, their lives are given meaning. religion can also b the motivation for good deeds, like the man who gives money to a religious charity. dont call religious ppl insane. anyone who is so quick to stomp on someones beliefs is cruel and childish. maybe u need to grow up a little.
False comforts and False meanings from a belief system that is ultimately responsible for most if not all of the suffering mankind has ever experienced.
@MrPoopybum can u support your claim? its true that many evil acts have been motivated by religion, but its not fair nor is it logical to say it is responsible for the majority of human suffering. i think the bubonic plague is still in first place in that category. btw ur barking up the wrong tree if ur looking for a fight bc im not a fundamentalist lol
I'm not looking for a fight, I merely replied to your comment.
If it were not for religion, mankind would be far more advanced in the sciences than we are today, if, 2,000 years ago mankind put all of it's efforts towards the advancement of science and completely rejected mysticism in all it's forms, there would have been no "Dark Age", and most if not all "plagues" could have been averted..
Ultimately, religious myths have always been, and will always be, detrimental to the welfare of mankind.
@MrPoopybum the plague was a disease that originated in china and was carried by rats to europe and rapidly spread via trading routes. how is this religions fault? u cant blindly tie negative events to religion just bc u dont like it.
I contend that Europe was ill-prepared for this because of the stifling influence religious beliefs had upon science in all of the previous ages.
I contend that every single strongly held religious myth that has ever been successfully passed on has ultimately been a detriment to the progress of knowledge and society as a whole.
Primitive delusional thinking has unnecessarily crippled science for thousands of years. Had it not, things would have been much different. IMHO, plagues are preventable.
@MrPoopybum i disagree with the notion that we as modern ppl in society would be much more prepared to deal with such an epidemic as the plague. the bacteria that causes the plague is still in existence in the natural world and has migrated to the united states. u have to catch it early to have any hope of survival, even with the technology we have today. the plague might actually be MORE dangerous in modern society since it would be able to migrate faster around the world via airplanes
We have not, until now, been referring to modern times in regard to plagues. But, again, I contend that the detrimental effect religion has had throughout history on science has left us today with the short end of the possible sticks we could have had, had we chosen not to draw the stick of superstitious religious beliefs.
.."the technology we have today" would be far more advanced if it were not for humanity's history of delusional superstitious thinking, a.k.a., religion.
"the technology we have today would be far more advanced if it were not for humanitys history of delusional superstitious thinking"
this assumption is a little off in respect to the fundamentals of microbiology. as human society advances, we develop cures and immunities to once detrimental diseases, but they dont just go away. like the rest of life on earth, they evolve to be able to infect formerly resistent animals and plants. thats how we end up with variations of the h1n1 virus like h2n1
Were it not for superstitious religious thinking, Polio would now have been completely and forever eradicated from the face of the Earth, as in extinct.
Win some, and you lose some, eh?
The knowledge that has been denied us now in modern times as a direct result of the influence that religion has had on societies, is, in my opinion, perhaps the greatest crime against humanity that religion is guilty of.
And I sincerely feel a sentence of death is long past due.
@MrPoopybum thats sort of a bad example. weve got vaccines for polio. i get what youre saying about what u think of religion, but do u also understand that religion and science were practically synonymous at the time due to lack of an alternative? also, the mayan thing was the result of the european philosophy of manifest destiny. their religion was a secondary motivator for inflicting suffering AFTER the conquests had already occured. remember, correlation does not always equal cause and effect
No, it is NOT a bad example. It's a fantastic example of how ignorant superstitious religious fanaticism has thwarted science's best effort to eradicate a terrible illness.
Polio should be extinct, there should be no need for any Polio vaccine in this day and age!
The only reason it persist to this day is the influence religion has on those who still carry it.
The Maya religion was seen by most catholics of the time as being demonic and thus their entire culture was almost completely erased.
@MrPoopybum actually, there ISNT a need for the vaccine for the most part in modern society. since the development of the vaccine in 1953, it became a mandatory juvenile vaccination like the vaccination for the chicken pox. it has all but ceased to exist in the natural world. kids stopped getting shots after the sixties. my dad has a vaccination mark bc he was born in 1953, but my mom was born in 1966 so she doesnt have it. she didnt need it.
@MrPoopybum i used the reference to modern times to demonstrate how even a highly scientific society can have many of the same problems possesed by religious and less advanced ones. to be fair, it was hard not to be supersticious back then bc there was little actual and legitimate scientific knowledge available even to top scholars. i will admit that religion may have forced science to take a back seat, but its considered a vicious cycle since its hard to say if religion caused ignorance or was
I know! As atheists, let's be just as bigoted and deriding of people who don't share our own beliefs as the most vehement believer until we are almost indistinguishable from a religion ourselves! You people forget how much faith it takes to believe in science. ( before you write me off as a crackpot bible basher note that I am not a religious person and I study ecology.) I think that trying to convert people away from their beliefs is just as annoying as religions trying to do the same.
There's a big difference you're overlooking - we try to get people to be rational and sane! Gathering and testing actual evidence is clearly the only logical way to formulate ANY "belief".
NO ONE who is sane should believe in an invisible floating man in the sky, end of story. If you can't prove something exists, for all intents and purposes, it doesn't exist! i.e. we don't have any proof Santa exists, so we all rightly believe he doesn't exist.
What is rational and sane about the universe? You may say the big bang theory proves there is no god, but what if the bigbang was god creating the universe? Does science not teach us about the way Gods world works? Your quest for understanding the universe and your place in it involves gathering and testing evidence. Great. Millions before you have done the same (and some of them thought the earth was flat.) Others find belief in the divine a comfort and a way to explain the world.
No one said the universe is rational and sane - I'm saying we humans should be. Whatever is irrational and chaotic about the universe, science can (and will) eventually figure it out, like we've figured everything else out.
And you're right - millions of people have gathered and tested evidence (and some of them thought the earth was flat) - now we know the earth is NOT flat... that's science! We constantly update and renew what we know, unlike religion, which is stuck on it's outdated rails.
Everyone seems so mad about NOTHING. Fellow christians don't be mad about these things they are saying. Jesus would want us to love them, so let them argue all they want. Cause I know that in the end we all know the truth weather you belive it or not.
you know, these videos are great! i wish there were more, and everyone would watch them. but i know that that will never happen. religious people wont even scroll there mouse over a link talking about athiest's. unless it is to argue till there blue in the face, that there religious belief is the correct one. life would be much easier without religion. i really feel sorry for the people that waste half there lives going to church and praying to someone they have never seen.
wrong. I´m religious and I watched the video. Sounds like you have some issues with and feel threatened by religion. For many, religion is not an attempt to take over the world but rather to help us through life.
You call me ignorant for believing in something that you don´t. And I´m sure you´re a person who considers himself to be tolerant. You are the one who speaks from ignorance because you don´t know me or my particular beliefs. All you know is that I´m part of a religion. I guess that label is all you need to know, huh? Many of us search for the truth. We do it in different ways. Why not respect that instead of being so arrogant to assume that you possess the REAL truth?
history would disagree with you. Did the catholic church help anyone through life during their centuries of murder and oppression? Did the terrorists help us through life by their attack on 9/11? Do christians help us through life by hindering scientific breakthroughs, forcing their beliefs down everyone's throat, and being bigoted pricks? No is the answer to these questions. Weigh this out with how many people religion has actually "helped" and see which one tips the scales.
Your comments show a very limited view of religion and history. The Catholic Church has helped billions of people throughout the ages. Of course, as a world organization with power, run by men, there have been many who have used that power for evil. But to just say the Church has never helped anyone is wrong and extreme. There are good and bad in any group...no matter how big or small but that doesn´t mean it´s all bad.
ya by raping, plundering and still believing in something with no evidence. if religion did not attempt to take over the world then why has it through human history war has been created just because of a different believe, or why bushs policy stating its gods will, as they attacked iraq in a illegal war. knowledge has help us through life and science. religion has done absolutly nothing. pick up a book and get some education in yourself.
There are things that science cannot explain. Science examines things through the limited senses of man and the machine he has created. There are mysteries that science cannot explain. So, by only believeing in things that can be sensed or proven you limit yourself and a whole person (body, mind and spirit). You seem to have a very limited view of what religion and spirituality is. Obviously, religion and spirituality has done nothing for you but this doesn´t mean it hasn´t for others.
So GTosca10, you admit that we are limited to our 5 senses. Good, but this in no way proves a god. At best it proves we can't sense some things (Are you saying you can sense god btw?).
Also note that we have plenty of machines that can "sense" things we can't (Various forms of electromagnetic radiation besides visible light, for example) and then we can easily convert that information into something we CAN sense.
No, it doesn't prove that there is a God. But it does prove our limitations as humans. It also explains the fact that there may be things out there that we don't know about.
"No, it doesn't prove that there is a God. But it does prove our limitations as humans. It also explains the fact that there may be things out there that we don't know about."
I rest my case.
"The fact that people have come to conclusions that are different from yours doesn't mean they were not reached by critical thought."
I didn't say anything about critical thought, but critical thought based on non-factual information should not be the basis for your understanding of reality.
Essentially nothing can be proven in an absolute sense, this is why we rely on evidence.
The problem comes about when we look at the complete lack of evidence for god. In the case of something like emotions, we see acts that demonstrate they exist, we can form methods of testing for their existence and we have the fields of neuroscience and psychology which explain them to a good degree and continue to make advancements.
God claims tend to be unfalsifiable and are thus baseless speculation
So you can't prove love exists...you (or rather neuroscientists and psychologists) can only identify acts that may be present when a person is feeling certain emotions.
If you do find a falsifiable god claim and test for it, let me know. Once you have evidence I will readily move over to your side.
The problem is that without evidence, you cannot make any accurate assertions concerning its existence. I simply assert that there's no reason to even consider the claim until evidence supporting it has been presented. Science is whittling away at every claim made by religion. Things once thought to be impossible to explain naturally keep being explained naturally.
The real problem here is that what you accept as evidence and what I accept as evidence are vastly different.
You cannot disprove santa, fairies, leprechauns, etc. That lends no credibility to my claim that they exist, sorry son. If you want to believe it that's fine, just don't expect me to take you seriously until you have a good reason to believe what you're believing.
That is the problem...we believe in different things. But it's not a problem...it's just different. We cannot disprove or prove one side is right. No science can do that. The real problem is when people don't respect those difference. Like you calling me boy and comparing my faith in God to Santa Clause. That's not respect. That's bullshit.
I haven't said anything that required even the slightest bit of bravery. You're getting all worked up over a conversation that I, quite frankly, am finding enjoyable and downright hilarious.
Look son, you just don't get it. I'm sorry that you don't and I can only hope that you actually go learn something about evolution because that question about monkeys completely proves you haven't the slightest understanding of the theory (Well, that or you're a troll with a LOT of time on your hands).
(cont.'d). I hope that these videos will reach even the non-inquiring minds of the vast majority of xians/theists. Critical thought vs "I believe whatever my 'expert' apologist has to say' is truly the past & present issue at hand. I really hope that science/discoveries will one day soon trump the religious fanatacism of this present day in age!
You can't disprove that I'm an alien capable of changing my form like a super chameleon to appear human. That still lends no credibility to my claim. The fact that you can't disprove something in no way demonstrates its validity.
5/5 stars! What really pisses me off is that I am surrounded by so many NON-Truth-seekers (most of which are in my family) that REFUSE to investigate about how their sacred-text [the holy Buy Bull}can hold up under scrutiny. If they only took the time to actually research their "holy" text, they would probably realize that it was stolen from earlier religions (Epic of Gilgamesh) vs Noah's Flood. I used to believe everything [in xian dogma] that they believe. -
I haven't actually watched any of your videos yet, just saying that having 'faith' or simply believing in something is not necessarily a bad thing.
Some ignorant average person who is a believer will do less bad in general just because of his beliefs.The wrong part comes when people believe in a fanatic way and all that fairy tale bullshit and rituals, cause they are OBVIOUSLY thought out by humans.Even people like Pope etc. do not really believe in all that stuff, they aren't that stupid.
I completely disagree the second you can make a case that a person should not believe in god for the better of society it makes sense no one should since we should never hold people down to a level with something like religion. A doctor or scientist who sees someone healed from cancer with no cases of this happening should never stop at its a miracle of god since this will slow the search for the cure from this cases. Plus this type of faith allows the unquestioning of the fanatics.
We dream 1/3 of our lives. In our dreams we create worlds where people we never met exist. in your dream you are like god. This world is gods dream that advanced and evolved.God is within us, he evolves and learns like we do. God Is the energy that connects every person together. People that have a religion need that religion so when they die and lose their physical body, the dream they have can be peaceful,the way they wanted it. The afterlife and a relationship with god is personal and unique
Some people say that religion gives them purpose - I find the idea that I was born to do a purpose really uncomfortable - I much prefer the idea of cutting my own path through life, with me in charge of it
in the future religion would be viewed in history as a psychological anomaly by early humans that were believing on mystical things than the scientific process. Science would be so dominant at that time that people started to realize that most unexplained instances in religion is well understood through science.
A computer is a product of science. So anyone who thinks scientific books are wrong are fools and still stuck in the bronze age.
one day the word atheist will disappear. And the word theist will only used in history class for those people who still believed in old books long after they were proven wrong.
all these questions that I've seen are NOT common questions. These questions were put on there to belittle Christians and make them seen downright ignorant, when the truth is, the good question will be asking much more elaborate questions than "don't you worship satan?" and so on. This is insulting. He just put the easiest questions in christians mouths and answered them himself. And notice he never answers his questions with evidence, rather opinions.
Our brains are perfect? Why are babies born with birth defects involving the brain? Why do people die due to inhereted, brain diseases? Why are some people retarded?
We already know why and how the sun "goes down." What kind of stupid question is that?
Why are we here on earth? No one knows. We know that "why" is even the correct question to ask.
calitz science is not faith based in the sense that religion is. We gather a large amount of evidence, for example, for evolution we have so much evidence that species evolve over a period of time. Through natural selection, mutation, we can look at fossil records and examine common ancestors. Although the evidence is great, we remain humble and besides, science constantly grows and learns whereas religion does not.
Closest thing to a God was Caesar.. he had fallowers,rules to live by,and his judgment was the final judgment. He had the same mind set as God has as its been written.
What if a man lives his whole life as a good person, never doing anything that the Bible says is wrong, but never once in his life sets foot in a church or even considers begging Jesus for forgiveness? Technically, he'll still go to hell!
number 3 about knowing that we are trying to take a free ride into heaven of course its free all you have to do is believe jesus and repent and know you are a sinner and ask him to come into his heart
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Religion itself is an endeavor to solve human problems. If religion is responsible for human backwardness, atheism is equally responsible for promoting hatred and selfishness. All religious reformers had but an honest heart to save mankind from suffering, giving codes of ethics and social principles. Atheists want us to jump out of ethics for nothing--just to serve "I, Me, & Myself". It's poor thinking!
The ethics religion claim to be so proud of their ethics and morale, but these etics and morale was long before religion took place. It is in our genes, it is naturale for us to follow most of the ten commandments and you would see that an atheist world would not be a world filled with anarchy.
How the heck is saying 'Believe what i believe or you're damned to Hell' solving human problems?
Also, all these religious fanatics who are spreading the word of Jesus, and telling people to confess their sins, are only doing so because they think it will save them from an eternity of Hell!
They're the ones who are only looking out for themselves!
Why do a lot of atheists believe religion is responsible for ALL evil? That is a very poor assesment of reality. No one can explain our root perception flaw (all humans). And no one can explain where this universe comes from, and why it's here. At least religion offers a very deep and intriguing explaination to these fundamentally human questions
cruelfate45:"Why do a lot of atheists believe religion is responsible for ALL evil? " If you used to be an atheist you should have an answer your self. Read Bible in Noah story God even killed the innocent birds that is EVIL.
why does a court of law consider testimony of a credible witness to be admissible evidence and the atheists reject the testimony of Albert Einstein about God as non-admissible and of no value? what logic is that?
because you can't convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced, besides, self deceit is the strongest form of delusion known to man. many atheists will never accept God no matter how much evidence is thrown at them, because they have convinced (and they even use this wording) themselves there is absolutely no God. atheist - "I am covinced there is no God."
why atheists need en commandments to follow if atheism is not a religion? It's good to see atheists who care about the fate of humanity, but why? We all die and they believe there is nothing supernatural about our existence. Why not just live selfishly until death? It's really weird to me. I mean where does our drive to live a full life come from if we are just "animals" evolving at the mercy of natural selection? Explain it to me someone...
Because I see that you are like me. Like me, certain things make you suffer. I remember the pain I've felt, and I empathize with you. So I try to minimize your suffering and the suffering of humanity in general. Also, if everyone acted selfishly, it is unlikely we would survive for long. Humans are social animals that must work together to survive. We have evolved this way. It's deeply ingrained in us. Just as your heart pounds when you are scared, you feel bad when you act selfishly.
What is making us work together to survive? and by the way it seems more like we are working against eachother (war and all that). nature is fortunately strong enough to handle it, at least for now. human nature is not, we seem to have the deep psychological desire to destroy ourselves
the human body is made up of base elements..yet we are self aware and can think and create. the universe is infinately more complex ...is it possible that the universe itself by its complexity could have such a nature?
gmanw3 1 month ago
listen God is the way the truth and the life tell me wat other religion talks about a GOD who is alive who will prove miracles and who died for your sins and gives eternal life thats the only question i got prove it
1997jesus 3 months ago
I love all of these, the commandments was my favorite part.
yashaouchan 6 months ago
Here is the answer to all ur questions: diarrhea
Afraid0fGhosts 1 year ago
Girls, stop arguiing. There are no gods, so just relax and enjoy life.
v4641 1 year ago
I can understand agnostics. They admit not to know if there is a God or not. But atheists say there is no God. Isn't there even a chance in some of your minds that God exists. I admit, many religious people have a very limited view of God. Man in the sky type stuff. This is wrong too as the Creator of all would be a being that we could not begin to comprehend.
Also, I don't blame people who have problems with religion...lots of abuse and corruption. Men lie all the time for power.
GTosca10 1 year ago
@ GTosco10,
You said "disprove it!!". Shifting the burden of proof, I see!
I hate to burst your bubble, but It's YOUR job to convince us atheists that theism is more rational than atheism!! Where's the evidence that theism is more rational, logical, scientifically testable, repeatable, & falsifiable?!
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
Actually, reason, logic and science (as it advances...slowly, but surely) are more and more on the side of the believers. Check out Anthony Flew, leading atheist for 50 years and his conversion.
Question...
Does anything in nature come from nothing? No.
Did we create ourselves? No.
Where, in nature do we see such perfect order come from caos (example: Human DNA)? No where.
So, there must be a creator that is not part of this creation.
Big Bang? What started that action?
GTosca10 1 year ago
@GTosca10
..."are more on the side of the believers"
- An example of argumentum ad populum (logical fallacy). "Did we create ourselves? No"
Doesn't mean u should pull a god-of-the-gaps argument.
..."we see such perfect order from chaos"
This may sound like a red herring, but ever hear of vestigial organs? Also, look at the volume of places where life will presumably never exist (most planets).
"So there must be a creator..."
Argument from credulity / god-of-the-gaps.
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
Man, lots of labels being thrown around there. Can you argue your point without them...without sounding like a college philosphy or logic 101 class?
"Places where life presumably never existed"? What does that matter...it either exists or it doesn't.
Please tell me. If we didn't create ourselves, how were we created?
Also, I was expressing an opinion ( you called it argumentum ad populum) based on observations, reading, etc.... isn't that what critical thinking people do?
GTosca10 1 year ago
Yes, I could, but I think it addresses your comments/questions the most directly. I just think u should be familiar with at least some of these. For the record, I have not memorized this list completely.
Source: Wikipedia - "List of Fallacies".
My point about the dead planets is that they don't seem to be vital for the survival of earth's living organisms, so what purpose would they serve? Who/what will occupy them in the afterlife??
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
The dead planets: If u believe that God will destroy these planets (according to Psa. 102:25-26, Matt. 24:35 & others), then isn't that like God beating a dead horse (in the literal sense)? Why does God need to erase/destroy something he already created? - How does that coincide with his alleged "perfection" / "omniscience"?? If you're perfect, you don't make mistakes ('out with the old & in with the new') suggests that God made a mistake & is NOT omniscient either!
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
@GTosca10
(cont'd) "How were we created?" I honestly don't know (that's a topic related to abiogenesis). To my knowledge, most scientists don't know that yet; that doesn't mean there isn't a natural explanation.
Arg. ad populum is an appeal to popularity.
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
@GTosca10
Speaking of human DNA, our DNA & the chimp's DNA are different only by a factor of under 2%!! I recommend watching Kenneth Miller (a theist evolutionist) videos on chromosome #2 (assuming u don't believe in evolution). (?)
Scientists do not know exactly what prompted the Big Bang. They are still trying to figure that out. Science doesn't claim to have all of the answers; that doesn't mean that [insert religious text here] does!
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
You assume wrong. I don't see why the belief in a creator means I don't believe in evolution. I also don't assume that religious people have all the answers. I simply use reason and common sense to try and see the truth.
Science has done great things for me personally. I have not problem with science. It is limited as man is limited. Religion in an attempt to put God into language and actions (creeds, rituals, etc.) It is also limited because it attempts to express the inexpressible.
GTosca10 1 year ago
How can u justify that science is compatible with religion? I know many people believe that, but why? How is it 'reasonable' to believe in something / someone with which there is no empirical evidence (only anecdotal, 2nd-hand stories)?
What do u mean by "it attempts to express the inexpressible"?
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
By, "it attempts to express the inexpressible"...I am saying that we humans, limited by our languages, senses, etc. are not able to explain a being who created all things, who is all-knowing and without limitations. It is beyond our understanding and means of expression.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Oh, okay. Thanks for clarifying that.
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
Science and religion mainly deal with different things. Science with the physical and religion the spiritual. Many religious and spiritual people search for knowledge and though many do not that scientifically, many do.
I'm sure this is on the list of fallacies but the Creator has been with us for centuries, in different parts of the world, in different traditions, well before globalization...Isvara, Yahweh, Allah, The Great Spirit, etc. I am open to that possibility.
GTosca10 1 year ago
If u don't mind my asking, are u a deist / pantheist /other? I'm just curious.
If you're "open to that possibility", then that is up to you (to each his own). I do hope you seek out the truth in the creation / atheism 'debate'. Skepticism is not a vice, despite what you've heard before.
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
The closest thing that could describe my beIiefs would be a spiritual monotheist. I study different traditions (Xianity, Islam, Hindu, Nat. Amer. Sprituality, Buddhism) and mix practices...the extremists like to call it cafeteria style.
I am absolutely a believer in the possibility that I could be wrong about God, but I put my faith in His existence, and I do believe in "to each his own", and most importantly seek truth.
From your name I must ask, do you believe in prophecies?
GTosca10 1 year ago
I do not believe in any prophecies of any kind whatsoever anymore. However, if there are good predictions of things to come that are based on good evidence, then I am open to those predictions. In other words, I go with probabilities; not prophecies. Hope that answers your question.
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
Let me clarify my 2nd to last sentence. I certainly won't always rely on probabilities, as in the case of gambling. I used to gamble a little, but I don't do it too much anymore - most times the risk outweighs the reward (at least in my experience).
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
Nevermind about your username question...I read your channel.
Thanks for challenging me in this debate. If people can do this in a civil manner, I really believe it is a growing experience. Take Care.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Sounds good. I enjoyed the chat. Take care.
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
"Science...it is limited as man is limited". I can't argue that. I'm glad science has done great things for you.
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
What is your proof that "No" is the answer to the question you ..err ..posed, "Does anything in nature come from nothing?"
What, besides your biased beliefs leads you to that conclusion?
Science already has some very likely answers to what causes "Big Bangs" without involving mysticism, or "creators".
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
So where in science is it proven that something comes from nothing?
Do you deny the possibility of intelligent design?
GTosca10 1 year ago
YOU are the one who made the claim of having proof, not I, I merely said that science has some possible answers that do not involve nor require a magical being with magical powers. So again, what is YOUR proof that something cannot come from nothing??
And yes, I most certainly do "deny the possibility of intelligent design", and in the strongest possible sense! Because "Intelligent design" might as well include daydreams and nightmares as well as Zeus and Vishnu!
Are you just a troll? or what?
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum im not really the religious type, but i think erradicating traditional religion is too extreme. u said u were agnostic in a post to a different person, meaning u feel there is not enough proof to confirm or deny a higher power. it therefore surprises me how adament u r about the erradication of religion. i myself dont believe in organized religion. out of curiosity, r u against all personal theist spectrums or just the structure and side effects of organized religion?
louib716 1 year ago
Simply put, my personal take on agnosticism is this:
I 'believe' the existence of any ultimate reality (god) is unknown, and (more importantly) unknowable. I also firmly believe that anyone who says otherwise and claims to know "god" is an outright liar and a miscreant.
Eradicating traditional religion isn't all that extreme, afterall, christianity and islam have been doing it all along! But, rather than burning people alive or beheading the Kafir, I would prefer we try education, not murder.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum idk if its that black and white or even that simple, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. i do agree with u that some type of re education is needed to find common ground bt ppl to transverse some of the lines drawn by orthodox religion. im not so sure that the basic theist belief is detrimental all by itself.
louib716 1 year ago
It's only that black and white, or simple, when one steps back and takes a cold hard look at The Big Picture. But, yes you're right, in reality, nothing is that clear, or simple, and everyone should indeed be entitled to their opinion.
However, I remain firmly convinced that "the basic theist belief is detrimental all by itself"; primarily because (IMHO) they're all either irrelevant diversions, or outright barriers, to any and all so-called 'Truths', and thus, complete and utter wastes of time
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum yea, there prolly are some cultures that might be better off without such intense religious oversight, the taliban would be a good example (if u can even call that perversion a religion)
louib716 1 year ago
That's funny, because your description of the Taliban, as being a perverse religion, again reminded me of the conquest of South America, and how the conquistadors most likely perceived the religions that they encountered..
Isn't it clear by now that all religions are ultimately perverse? Ultimately have the blood of innocents on their hands? And are therefore ultimately evil??
An intense secular oversight of the religious is what all cultures would be better off with, and the sooner the better.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
u do have a point, but i still have a hard time believing that an unreligious group in ancient times wouldve acted much differently when encountering a different culture. from the most primitive aspects of social relations throughout the human population and animal kingdom, different=bad. it evolved as a survival technique in order to distinguish who is and isnt in the "in" group. in short, no one wants to befriend someone they presumably cant trust.
louib716 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum depending on ur religious practices, religion doesnt have to be a waste of time. even if god isnt real, its still very theraputic for some people to pray. some ppl really need religion in their life to be sane. as pathetic as it sounds, its the truth. complete erradication of religion is somewhat unethical and almost impossible. u can give it a shot tho lol.
louib716 1 year ago
Yes, well, it may very well be "therapeutic" for some, but, that ultimately meaningless and obviously delusional benefit for them, always inevitably comes at a great cost to many, many others.
However, I completely understand what you're trying to say, and perhaps it is a part of the human condition, and beneficial on a personal level to many, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be recognized for being, on the whole, not only unethical, but perhaps even an evil we would all be best to be without.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
Can something come from nothing? Everything, as far as science has proven, comes from something. Does it not? Then, please enlighten me.
You seem a little confused in the last part about what intelligent design is.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Enlighten yourself, get an education, and smarten up.
Or at least try reading a real book or two or three.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
So, yes or no...can something come from nothing?
GTosca10 1 year ago
?????
As far as I know, there is, in reality, no such thing as "nothing", therefore, the answer to your woefully ignorant and/or obviously loaded question is, Neither. Look, you show me "nothing", and I'll show you something! Deal??
Now, why don't YOU at least try to give some intelligent and reasoned answers to some of the many intelligent and reasoned questions that have been put to you for a change!
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
Science has nothing substantial when it comes to scientifically explaining what caused life to begin. No one knows. So, why all the authoritative stances by many in the science establishment? Why the name calling for people who leave the door open to the possibility. There is a lot left unanswered, many seek the truth. I seek it as you do. So why the hostility?
Can people not question scientific theory? I thought that WAS part of science.
GTosca10 1 year ago
The hostility is due to the fact that, in seeking "the truth" by "opening the doors" to mystical/magical/superstitious thinking, you ignorantly, and to the detriment of all mankind, disregard and reject the "scientific method" (wikipedia . org/wiki/Scientific_method).
A time proven methodology that has always had as it's primary goal, the pursuit of knowledge and "Truth"!
Science does indeed have something "substantial to scientifically explain what caused life to begin".
Continued.. (1 of 4)
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
[Continued (2 of 4)]
When you say "No one knows", you disingenuously assert science is attempting to answer unanswerable questions, however, Prof. Jack Szostak's work with fatty acids for the "Origins of Life Initiative" (origins . harvard . edu) at Harvard University has, among other things, repeatedly replicated primitive cell membrane formation, as well as primordial cell division using artificial proto-cells.
Continued..
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
[Continued (3 of 4)]
The team working with the Prof. of genetics at Harvard Medical School, Dr. George Church, has built a near complete genetic blueprint for the construction of an entirely new life form in the lab, the first new living cell in perhaps billions of years! Which is actually now being regularly referred to as the "Second Genesis".
With synthetic DNA we can create synthetic Ribosomes, the critical component of any living and evolving cell..
Continued..
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
[Continued (4 of 4)]
..and in a very short time, this team will have the rest of the components necessary to complete the task of creating the first ever man-made living cell, ..Life itself.
Before you start talking nonsense about something, educate yourself about the facts, not everyone on youtube is a gullible delusion-prone moron.
~Peace~
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
So this man-made cell has a creator, doesn't it (Dr. Szostak)? What did he use to create the cell? Did it come from nothing? Does that answer the question where the first cell came from?
GTosca10 1 year ago
In all seriousness, you my friend, need an edumacation! It's obvious the topics of this discussion are, at present, beyond your comprehension. If you had understood what I had explained to you, you wouldn't be asking these inane questions.
Simply put, this collaborate effort WILL demonstrate AND duplicate "where the first cell came from". And it'll also show that rather than arising miraculously from "nothing" it instead occurred in a natural process from naturally occurring materials in Nature.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
I'm finding it a bit difficult to have a civil conversation with you. You may know a lot about science but you need some work on interpersonal skills. I read plenty of books and am educated...not in the areas of science, but I do not like your insulting language. This is one reason why religious and scientic people have a hard time having some kind of constructive dialogue on the subject. Both sides are so entrenched. You have a lot to offer on this subject. Disrespect is not necessary.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Given what you've said here, and elsewhere, the "insulting language" and "disrespect" ~ that you will now continue to find in my replies to you ~ should be of no surprise to anyone.
Contrary to what you'd like everyone believe, it is insultingly obvious that you have little or no knowledge about the science you continue to consistently and inanely deride, nor any intention of having a "constructive dialogue".
Religious and scientific people have a hard time ~ because of the religious mindset.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
If we evolved from monkies...why are there still monkies?
GTosca10 1 year ago
Your smegma breath is really nasty btw, son. Why do you have smegma breath, son?
mindsmirror 1 year ago
So, you can´t answer the question about evolution.
GTosca10 1 year ago
I did answer your question about evolution btw. The answer was "Read a book".
mindsmirror 1 year ago
The other modern species of apes are, to put it simply, our cousins.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
Sad thing about atheists is that most of them worship science as the end all be all guide post to truth. But in the end many scientists will tell you...We know very little, in the big scheme of things, about our world...from the tiniest particle to the large space that surrounds us. But these same people will ridicule traditions that are thousands of years old as stupid.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Atheists do not worship.
Worship, is a theist thing.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
Actually worship can be an atheist activity. Worship is sometimes great admiration or devotion to something, like money, for example.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Wrong.
Sorry, but Science is NOT a belief system, it's the pursuit and collection of knowledge and facts.
You are trying, falsely and disingenuously, to imply that atheists simply replace the worship of a deity with a "worship of science" or material things, when in fact what they're doing is ABANDONING and REJECTING any and all such blind allegiances to any and all deities and/or mystical beliefs.
Your reasoning has obviously been distorted by your extremely delusional mystical belief system!
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
A big part of science is theory...the knowledge and facts usually come later or not at all. How many times have you heard..."We have not even began to scratch the surface" (of whatever area of study)?
But you must admit that most atheists worship Science in the sense that they have a great admiration or devotion to it. Even to the level of believing that Science has all the answers or will one day have all the answers. There are millions more mysteries than answers at this point in time.
GTosca10 1 year ago
How's the weather way out there on the fringe?
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
And your reasoning is distorted by your belief that if you can't see it, or if scientists don't have some theory about it or have a theory against it, then it doesn't exist. There is a lot we don't know. But you don't even leave the door open for the possibility that there is a God. I however do say that maybe there isn't a God...Who is the extremist here?
GTosca10 1 year ago
Wrong again.
Strictly speaking, I'm an agnostic, however, I do admit to not leaving "the door open for the possibility that there is a God" as described in any book and/or by any person.
I 'believe' that the existence of any ultimate reality (as in "god") is unknown and probably unknowable.
You, are the "extremist" here.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
#2 video done. This must be atheist answers for grade two; because you are using a kindergarten level understanding of religion and God to make these responses. Onto #3. At least I'm watching the videos.
39knights 2 years ago
Grade two? Interesting you used that. Being that to stop following religion is about a second graders intelligence level. So yeah, an elementary approach is understandable. It really doesn't take much to disregard religion.
AtheismAnswers 2 years ago
Geeze I hate it when those grade 3'ers use dat advanced reversed logic on me. I can't wait til next year when I gets a chance to learn it two. He's so smart and now I looks right dum.
39knights 2 years ago
Was that satire? You prove nothing and are no longer worth any time. People reading this take note, when 39knights is insulted for stupidity he overly drops back to even more stupidity (spelling errors included) from his lack of ability in actually answering anything intelligently. This way he seems so sarcastic that he has to know what he is talking about. Failure mate, sorry. Bye
AtheismAnswers 2 years ago
And what exactly was I suppose to answer? You may need to reword your reply for me to figure it out. If there was really any kind of sensible question or comment there I would have answered in kind. As it was, I did.
39knights 2 years ago
This guy talks alot of sense. As G-love said it could be so nice but the world is not ready
11floatylight 2 years ago
if there isnt a god, people who worship him arent necessarily wasting their lives. some people feel great comfort in believing in a higher power, their lives are given meaning. religion can also b the motivation for good deeds, like the man who gives money to a religious charity. dont call religious ppl insane. anyone who is so quick to stomp on someones beliefs is cruel and childish. maybe u need to grow up a little.
louib716 2 years ago
False comforts and False meanings from a belief system that is ultimately responsible for most if not all of the suffering mankind has ever experienced.
Maybe you need to smarten up.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum can u support your claim? its true that many evil acts have been motivated by religion, but its not fair nor is it logical to say it is responsible for the majority of human suffering. i think the bubonic plague is still in first place in that category. btw ur barking up the wrong tree if ur looking for a fight bc im not a fundamentalist lol
louib716 1 year ago
I'm not looking for a fight, I merely replied to your comment.
If it were not for religion, mankind would be far more advanced in the sciences than we are today, if, 2,000 years ago mankind put all of it's efforts towards the advancement of science and completely rejected mysticism in all it's forms, there would have been no "Dark Age", and most if not all "plagues" could have been averted..
Ultimately, religious myths have always been, and will always be, detrimental to the welfare of mankind.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum the plague was a disease that originated in china and was carried by rats to europe and rapidly spread via trading routes. how is this religions fault? u cant blindly tie negative events to religion just bc u dont like it.
louib716 1 year ago
I contend that Europe was ill-prepared for this because of the stifling influence religious beliefs had upon science in all of the previous ages.
I contend that every single strongly held religious myth that has ever been successfully passed on has ultimately been a detriment to the progress of knowledge and society as a whole.
Primitive delusional thinking has unnecessarily crippled science for thousands of years. Had it not, things would have been much different. IMHO, plagues are preventable.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum i disagree with the notion that we as modern ppl in society would be much more prepared to deal with such an epidemic as the plague. the bacteria that causes the plague is still in existence in the natural world and has migrated to the united states. u have to catch it early to have any hope of survival, even with the technology we have today. the plague might actually be MORE dangerous in modern society since it would be able to migrate faster around the world via airplanes
louib716 1 year ago
We have not, until now, been referring to modern times in regard to plagues. But, again, I contend that the detrimental effect religion has had throughout history on science has left us today with the short end of the possible sticks we could have had, had we chosen not to draw the stick of superstitious religious beliefs.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
.."the technology we have today" would be far more advanced if it were not for humanity's history of delusional superstitious thinking, a.k.a., religion.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
the result of ignorance
louib716 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"the technology we have today would be far more advanced if it were not for humanitys history of delusional superstitious thinking"
this assumption is a little off in respect to the fundamentals of microbiology. as human society advances, we develop cures and immunities to once detrimental diseases, but they dont just go away. like the rest of life on earth, they evolve to be able to infect formerly resistent animals and plants. thats how we end up with variations of the h1n1 virus like h2n1
louib716 1 year ago
Were it not for superstitious religious thinking, Polio would now have been completely and forever eradicated from the face of the Earth, as in extinct.
Win some, and you lose some, eh?
The knowledge that has been denied us now in modern times as a direct result of the influence that religion has had on societies, is, in my opinion, perhaps the greatest crime against humanity that religion is guilty of.
And I sincerely feel a sentence of death is long past due.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum thats sort of a bad example. weve got vaccines for polio. i get what youre saying about what u think of religion, but do u also understand that religion and science were practically synonymous at the time due to lack of an alternative? also, the mayan thing was the result of the european philosophy of manifest destiny. their religion was a secondary motivator for inflicting suffering AFTER the conquests had already occured. remember, correlation does not always equal cause and effect
louib716 1 year ago
No, it is NOT a bad example. It's a fantastic example of how ignorant superstitious religious fanaticism has thwarted science's best effort to eradicate a terrible illness.
Polio should be extinct, there should be no need for any Polio vaccine in this day and age!
The only reason it persist to this day is the influence religion has on those who still carry it.
The Maya religion was seen by most catholics of the time as being demonic and thus their entire culture was almost completely erased.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum actually, there ISNT a need for the vaccine for the most part in modern society. since the development of the vaccine in 1953, it became a mandatory juvenile vaccination like the vaccination for the chicken pox. it has all but ceased to exist in the natural world. kids stopped getting shots after the sixties. my dad has a vaccination mark bc he was born in 1953, but my mom was born in 1966 so she doesnt have it. she didnt need it.
louib716 1 year ago
@MrPoopybum i used the reference to modern times to demonstrate how even a highly scientific society can have many of the same problems possesed by religious and less advanced ones. to be fair, it was hard not to be supersticious back then bc there was little actual and legitimate scientific knowledge available even to top scholars. i will admit that religion may have forced science to take a back seat, but its considered a vicious cycle since its hard to say if religion caused ignorance or was
louib716 1 year ago
Historically, religion has not only been murdering science, it has murdered scientists.
To say that science took "a back seat" to religion is to ignore all of the atrocities, and their still stinging aftermath.
Centuries of higher learning were brutally and sadistically subjugated and forever wiped from the face of the Earth because of religion.
Just look at what the catholics did in fairly recent times to the Maya, in the name of their "god".
Religion is a poison to everything it touches.
MrPoopybum 1 year ago
I know! As atheists, let's be just as bigoted and deriding of people who don't share our own beliefs as the most vehement believer until we are almost indistinguishable from a religion ourselves! You people forget how much faith it takes to believe in science. ( before you write me off as a crackpot bible basher note that I am not a religious person and I study ecology.) I think that trying to convert people away from their beliefs is just as annoying as religions trying to do the same.
sjcousins 2 years ago
There's a big difference you're overlooking - we try to get people to be rational and sane! Gathering and testing actual evidence is clearly the only logical way to formulate ANY "belief".
NO ONE who is sane should believe in an invisible floating man in the sky, end of story. If you can't prove something exists, for all intents and purposes, it doesn't exist! i.e. we don't have any proof Santa exists, so we all rightly believe he doesn't exist.
"god" is absolutely no different.
siciliano29 2 years ago
What is rational and sane about the universe? You may say the big bang theory proves there is no god, but what if the bigbang was god creating the universe? Does science not teach us about the way Gods world works? Your quest for understanding the universe and your place in it involves gathering and testing evidence. Great. Millions before you have done the same (and some of them thought the earth was flat.) Others find belief in the divine a comfort and a way to explain the world.
sjcousins 2 years ago
No one said the universe is rational and sane - I'm saying we humans should be. Whatever is irrational and chaotic about the universe, science can (and will) eventually figure it out, like we've figured everything else out.
And you're right - millions of people have gathered and tested evidence (and some of them thought the earth was flat) - now we know the earth is NOT flat... that's science! We constantly update and renew what we know, unlike religion, which is stuck on it's outdated rails.
siciliano29 2 years ago
Everyone seems so mad about NOTHING. Fellow christians don't be mad about these things they are saying. Jesus would want us to love them, so let them argue all they want. Cause I know that in the end we all know the truth weather you belive it or not.
capncummings 2 years ago
another brainwashed. so what do you really know then? instead of making a statement why dont you open up alittle bit more
ericjmartin89 2 years ago 2
Atheists FTW!!
ArrogantAtheist 2 years ago 3
you know, these videos are great! i wish there were more, and everyone would watch them. but i know that that will never happen. religious people wont even scroll there mouse over a link talking about athiest's. unless it is to argue till there blue in the face, that there religious belief is the correct one. life would be much easier without religion. i really feel sorry for the people that waste half there lives going to church and praying to someone they have never seen.
hfootball75 2 years ago 3
wrong. I´m religious and I watched the video. Sounds like you have some issues with and feel threatened by religion. For many, religion is not an attempt to take over the world but rather to help us through life.
GTosca10 2 years ago
Fortunately there are millions and millions of people in the world that choose NOT to live in "the matrix" of religion.
Ignorance is bliss, yes, but the search for the REAL truth is even more invigorating.
siciliano29 2 years ago
You call me ignorant for believing in something that you don´t. And I´m sure you´re a person who considers himself to be tolerant. You are the one who speaks from ignorance because you don´t know me or my particular beliefs. All you know is that I´m part of a religion. I guess that label is all you need to know, huh? Many of us search for the truth. We do it in different ways. Why not respect that instead of being so arrogant to assume that you possess the REAL truth?
GTosca10 2 years ago
history would disagree with you. Did the catholic church help anyone through life during their centuries of murder and oppression? Did the terrorists help us through life by their attack on 9/11? Do christians help us through life by hindering scientific breakthroughs, forcing their beliefs down everyone's throat, and being bigoted pricks? No is the answer to these questions. Weigh this out with how many people religion has actually "helped" and see which one tips the scales.
mcneely2818 2 years ago
Your comments show a very limited view of religion and history. The Catholic Church has helped billions of people throughout the ages. Of course, as a world organization with power, run by men, there have been many who have used that power for evil. But to just say the Church has never helped anyone is wrong and extreme. There are good and bad in any group...no matter how big or small but that doesn´t mean it´s all bad.
GTosca10 2 years ago
ya by raping, plundering and still believing in something with no evidence. if religion did not attempt to take over the world then why has it through human history war has been created just because of a different believe, or why bushs policy stating its gods will, as they attacked iraq in a illegal war. knowledge has help us through life and science. religion has done absolutly nothing. pick up a book and get some education in yourself.
ericjmartin89 2 years ago
There are things that science cannot explain. Science examines things through the limited senses of man and the machine he has created. There are mysteries that science cannot explain. So, by only believeing in things that can be sensed or proven you limit yourself and a whole person (body, mind and spirit). You seem to have a very limited view of what religion and spirituality is. Obviously, religion and spirituality has done nothing for you but this doesn´t mean it hasn´t for others.
GTosca10 2 years ago
So GTosca10, you admit that we are limited to our 5 senses. Good, but this in no way proves a god. At best it proves we can't sense some things (Are you saying you can sense god btw?).
Also note that we have plenty of machines that can "sense" things we can't (Various forms of electromagnetic radiation besides visible light, for example) and then we can easily convert that information into something we CAN sense.
mindsmirror 1 year ago
No, it doesn't prove that there is a God. But it does prove our limitations as humans. It also explains the fact that there may be things out there that we don't know about.
GTosca10 1 year ago
"No, it doesn't prove that there is a God. But it does prove our limitations as humans. It also explains the fact that there may be things out there that we don't know about."
I rest my case.
"The fact that people have come to conclusions that are different from yours doesn't mean they were not reached by critical thought."
I didn't say anything about critical thought, but critical thought based on non-factual information should not be the basis for your understanding of reality.
mindsmirror 1 year ago 2
How does that rest your case. It doesn´t prove that God exists, but neither does it disprove it.
Can you prove that love exists? No...but it does. The critial thinking comment was for WntrSolstice 2012
GTosca10 1 year ago
We weren't talking about love, we were talking about a supernatural entity. Again, I rest my case.
mindsmirror 1 year ago
My pointt is that there are some things that cannot be proven yet still exist. God included.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Essentially nothing can be proven in an absolute sense, this is why we rely on evidence.
The problem comes about when we look at the complete lack of evidence for god. In the case of something like emotions, we see acts that demonstrate they exist, we can form methods of testing for their existence and we have the fields of neuroscience and psychology which explain them to a good degree and continue to make advancements.
God claims tend to be unfalsifiable and are thus baseless speculation
mindsmirror 1 year ago
So you can't prove love exists...you (or rather neuroscientists and psychologists) can only identify acts that may be present when a person is feeling certain emotions.
GTosca10 1 year ago
If you do find a falsifiable god claim and test for it, let me know. Once you have evidence I will readily move over to your side.
The problem is that without evidence, you cannot make any accurate assertions concerning its existence. I simply assert that there's no reason to even consider the claim until evidence supporting it has been presented. Science is whittling away at every claim made by religion. Things once thought to be impossible to explain naturally keep being explained naturally.
mindsmirror 1 year ago 2
"Science is whittling away at every claim made by religion"
For example? And please don't come with that earth is round or flat shit. Let's hear something good.
GTosca10 1 year ago
The real problem here is that what you accept as evidence and what I accept as evidence are vastly different.
You cannot disprove santa, fairies, leprechauns, etc. That lends no credibility to my claim that they exist, sorry son. If you want to believe it that's fine, just don't expect me to take you seriously until you have a good reason to believe what you're believing.
mindsmirror 1 year ago
That is the problem...we believe in different things. But it's not a problem...it's just different. We cannot disprove or prove one side is right. No science can do that. The real problem is when people don't respect those difference. Like you calling me boy and comparing my faith in God to Santa Clause. That's not respect. That's bullshit.
GTosca10 1 year ago
I didn't call you boy, son.
mindsmirror 1 year ago
Same fuckin thing
GTosca10 1 year ago
This is the problem with your grasp on reality, son. Son does not equal boy. You can be an adult and still be my son.
mindsmirror 1 year ago
I'm not your son. What kind of fucking reality is that?
GTosca10 1 year ago
Now you're just being a brave at a computer screen. Wouldn't say that shit face to face or you'd get slapped like a little bitch.
GTosca10 1 year ago
I haven't said anything that required even the slightest bit of bravery. You're getting all worked up over a conversation that I, quite frankly, am finding enjoyable and downright hilarious.
Look son, you just don't get it. I'm sorry that you don't and I can only hope that you actually go learn something about evolution because that question about monkeys completely proves you haven't the slightest understanding of the theory (Well, that or you're a troll with a LOT of time on your hands).
mindsmirror 1 year ago
You´re right you haven´t said anything that requires bravery...that´s why you can get away with it writing at your computer.
You got one thing right...it´s a theory...not proven at all. Guess it doesn´t exist. I´m done with you now.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Ah yes, the argument from semantics games. If you define theory as hypothesis, then sure.
If you define theory the way that it is defined in reference to evolution and gravity, then no.
I'm glad you've given up, smegma son.
mindsmirror 1 year ago
What is not proven? Gravity? Atomic theory?
morganbath 1 year ago
(cont.'d). I hope that these videos will reach even the non-inquiring minds of the vast majority of xians/theists. Critical thought vs "I believe whatever my 'expert' apologist has to say' is truly the past & present issue at hand. I really hope that science/discoveries will one day soon trump the religious fanatacism of this present day in age!
WntrSolstice2012 2 years ago
The fact that people have come to conclusions that are different from yours doesn't mean they were not reached by critical thought.
GTosca10 1 year ago
Prove it!!
WntrSolstice2012 1 year ago
Disprove it!!!
GTosca10 1 year ago
You can't disprove that I'm an alien capable of changing my form like a super chameleon to appear human. That still lends no credibility to my claim. The fact that you can't disprove something in no way demonstrates its validity.
mindsmirror 1 year ago
Oops, I forgot to call you son, son.
mindsmirror 1 year ago
Why would you do that?
GTosca10 1 year ago
5/5 stars! What really pisses me off is that I am surrounded by so many NON-Truth-seekers (most of which are in my family) that REFUSE to investigate about how their sacred-text [the holy Buy Bull}can hold up under scrutiny. If they only took the time to actually research their "holy" text, they would probably realize that it was stolen from earlier religions (Epic of Gilgamesh) vs Noah's Flood. I used to believe everything [in xian dogma] that they believe. -
WntrSolstice2012 2 years ago
but did you know that the man at 3:14 is the most intelligent one?
Dreamerx47 2 years ago
I haven't actually watched any of your videos yet, just saying that having 'faith' or simply believing in something is not necessarily a bad thing.
Some ignorant average person who is a believer will do less bad in general just because of his beliefs.The wrong part comes when people believe in a fanatic way and all that fairy tale bullshit and rituals, cause they are OBVIOUSLY thought out by humans.Even people like Pope etc. do not really believe in all that stuff, they aren't that stupid.
ModeLTU 2 years ago
I completely disagree the second you can make a case that a person should not believe in god for the better of society it makes sense no one should since we should never hold people down to a level with something like religion. A doctor or scientist who sees someone healed from cancer with no cases of this happening should never stop at its a miracle of god since this will slow the search for the cure from this cases. Plus this type of faith allows the unquestioning of the fanatics.
izbo10 2 years ago
those ten commandments really suck balls.
if you hate organized religion then don't make fucking commandments
jesperdepesper 2 years ago
We dream 1/3 of our lives. In our dreams we create worlds where people we never met exist. in your dream you are like god. This world is gods dream that advanced and evolved.God is within us, he evolves and learns like we do. God Is the energy that connects every person together. People that have a religion need that religion so when they die and lose their physical body, the dream they have can be peaceful,the way they wanted it. The afterlife and a relationship with god is personal and unique
Lunento 2 years ago
what you just said has nothing to do with the bible so it has nothing to do with god
....but whatever
Dreamerx47 2 years ago
Very good!
It does not ridicule.
it breaks it to the Theist gently.
gjsterp 3 years ago
Some people say that religion gives them purpose - I find the idea that I was born to do a purpose really uncomfortable - I much prefer the idea of cutting my own path through life, with me in charge of it
buckethearrocks 3 years ago 3
in the future religion would be viewed in history as a psychological anomaly by early humans that were believing on mystical things than the scientific process. Science would be so dominant at that time that people started to realize that most unexplained instances in religion is well understood through science.
A computer is a product of science. So anyone who thinks scientific books are wrong are fools and still stuck in the bronze age.
schrutzen 3 years ago
one day the word atheist will disappear. And the word theist will only used in history class for those people who still believed in old books long after they were proven wrong.
jamyfromfin 3 years ago
Oh come on, we all know that sickness is caused by sin, not micro organizms like viruses or bacteria. The Bible rocks... Get sum !
flubno 3 years ago
all these questions that I've seen are NOT common questions. These questions were put on there to belittle Christians and make them seen downright ignorant, when the truth is, the good question will be asking much more elaborate questions than "don't you worship satan?" and so on. This is insulting. He just put the easiest questions in christians mouths and answered them himself. And notice he never answers his questions with evidence, rather opinions.
AcousticProject2010 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
your an idiot
god is real
KeithPower37 3 years ago
Well, the burden of proof is on you isn't it?
rbz123 3 years ago 3
Our brains are perfect? Why are babies born with birth defects involving the brain? Why do people die due to inhereted, brain diseases? Why are some people retarded?
We already know why and how the sun "goes down." What kind of stupid question is that?
Why are we here on earth? No one knows. We know that "why" is even the correct question to ask.
Jeremyguru 3 years ago
Education doesn't START until the last day of school.
At least in America.
Anon1696 3 years ago
LOL!
Classic!
Same in England too!
Bowmaj21 3 years ago
calitz science is not faith based in the sense that religion is. We gather a large amount of evidence, for example, for evolution we have so much evidence that species evolve over a period of time. Through natural selection, mutation, we can look at fossil records and examine common ancestors. Although the evidence is great, we remain humble and besides, science constantly grows and learns whereas religion does not.
armen925 3 years ago
Closest thing to a God was Caesar.. he had fallowers,rules to live by,and his judgment was the final judgment. He had the same mind set as God has as its been written.
ScottyJive 3 years ago
What if a man lives his whole life as a good person, never doing anything that the Bible says is wrong, but never once in his life sets foot in a church or even considers begging Jesus for forgiveness? Technically, he'll still go to hell!
How is that fair?
Bowmaj21 3 years ago
number 3 about knowing that we are trying to take a free ride into heaven of course its free all you have to do is believe jesus and repent and know you are a sinner and ask him to come into his heart
wfl18 3 years ago
Wow... This is great man!
DaveJW2 3 years ago
... Ugth.
randomlyindie 3 years ago
one of my favorite quotes:
"Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned." -Unknown
Alek900 4 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Religion itself is an endeavor to solve human problems. If religion is responsible for human backwardness, atheism is equally responsible for promoting hatred and selfishness. All religious reformers had but an honest heart to save mankind from suffering, giving codes of ethics and social principles. Atheists want us to jump out of ethics for nothing--just to serve "I, Me, & Myself". It's poor thinking!
amazing1982pak 4 years ago
The ethics religion claim to be so proud of their ethics and morale, but these etics and morale was long before religion took place. It is in our genes, it is naturale for us to follow most of the ten commandments and you would see that an atheist world would not be a world filled with anarchy.
plecto1234 4 years ago 4
You missed the point. Or denied it.
TAKENnameARGH 4 years ago
How the heck is saying 'Believe what i believe or you're damned to Hell' solving human problems?
Also, all these religious fanatics who are spreading the word of Jesus, and telling people to confess their sins, are only doing so because they think it will save them from an eternity of Hell!
They're the ones who are only looking out for themselves!
Bowmaj21 3 years ago
The Largest Atheist / Agnostic Populations Top 20 Countries (Zuckerman, 2005) Nonbelievers in God
1= Sweden- 85% 2= Vietnam 81% 3 =Denmark 80%4= Norway 72% 5= Japan 65%
6= Czech Republic 61% 7= Finland 60% 8= France 54% 9=South Korea 52% 10= Estonia 49% 11= Germany 49% 12= Russia 48% 13=Hungary 46% 14= Netherlands 44% 15=Brita44% 16= Belgium 43% 17=Bulgaria 40% 18= Slovenia 38%19= Israel 37% 20 = Canada 30%
babri62 4 years ago 2
Finland and Estonia have more than that.
TAKENnameARGH 4 years ago
this is from year 2005 Zuckerman.
babri62 4 years ago
Why do a lot of atheists believe religion is responsible for ALL evil? That is a very poor assesment of reality. No one can explain our root perception flaw (all humans). And no one can explain where this universe comes from, and why it's here. At least religion offers a very deep and intriguing explaination to these fundamentally human questions
cruelfate45 4 years ago
cruelfate45:"Why do a lot of atheists believe religion is responsible for ALL evil? " If you used to be an atheist you should have an answer your self. Read Bible in Noah story God even killed the innocent birds that is EVIL.
babri62 4 years ago 4
'god' killed all the babies in Egypt bcause of Pharaoh, that's EVIL.
BelieveNoGod 3 years ago
why does a court of law consider testimony of a credible witness to be admissible evidence and the atheists reject the testimony of Albert Einstein about God as non-admissible and of no value? what logic is that?
az101010 4 years ago
because you can't convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced, besides, self deceit is the strongest form of delusion known to man. many atheists will never accept God no matter how much evidence is thrown at them, because they have convinced (and they even use this wording) themselves there is absolutely no God. atheist - "I am covinced there is no God."
cruelfate45 4 years ago
wow that is so well said..
az101010 4 years ago
why atheists need en commandments to follow if atheism is not a religion? It's good to see atheists who care about the fate of humanity, but why? We all die and they believe there is nothing supernatural about our existence. Why not just live selfishly until death? It's really weird to me. I mean where does our drive to live a full life come from if we are just "animals" evolving at the mercy of natural selection? Explain it to me someone...
cruelfate45 4 years ago
Because I see that you are like me. Like me, certain things make you suffer. I remember the pain I've felt, and I empathize with you. So I try to minimize your suffering and the suffering of humanity in general. Also, if everyone acted selfishly, it is unlikely we would survive for long. Humans are social animals that must work together to survive. We have evolved this way. It's deeply ingrained in us. Just as your heart pounds when you are scared, you feel bad when you act selfishly.
lookoutbeeeelllooow 4 years ago
What is making us work together to survive? and by the way it seems more like we are working against eachother (war and all that). nature is fortunately strong enough to handle it, at least for now. human nature is not, we seem to have the deep psychological desire to destroy ourselves
cruelfate45 4 years ago