@semajgnik Considering the state of medical knowledge when the Book of Psalms was written, I wouldn't be surprised if the writer considered this more than a poetic figure of speech.
@cengime right... because with the state of medical knowledge in today's world NO ONE uses poetic figures of speeches like, "follow your heart","whatever you heart tells you", etc. right???
PSALMS, penned by PSALMISTS, should be taken as scientific statements. Its so reasonable.
@semajgnik Yes, but these figures of speech only exist because doctors and philosophers once thought the heart was literally the seat of thought, reason, emotions, and/or the soul.
Never heard of Negative Atheism. I also don't use the term Strong vs Weak. But to clarify you opinion of "Strong Atheism" If an Atheist says, "There is no god" that is said in practical use. Meaning they are not absolutist! So, are they claiming that they have "absolute knowledge" of their statement, NO! Because, "absolute" is useless and have no meaning in a practical world. Religion is dogmatic and full of absolutist, it's no wonder why 'Strong vs Weak' was created to cater do their mind set.
@judicum technically "supernatural" doesn't even apply in the definition. Not even a Super Natural God...only implied. It only mean belief in a Deity.
This guy did It best. If I was religous I wouldn't be offended at all by this vid. Really there should only be weak atheist and ignorant atheist. No one knows if god is real or fake unless they have died.the Ignorant bash the religous. The weak say "cool. If that's how you think, that's fine." Just sayn.
I dont believe in any god, but athiest, no. I just believe in what I can see, logics, facts and such. I do not believe that people can be called athiest at all for that matter, its thoughed up as you mentioned as something bad. So who ever calls someone that or calls themself that will in fact call themselfs bad. Or in some degree at least. @TheFuckingSuper Let the kids choose themselfs, best way to do things, then they can learn both your ways and say what they believe, just do not force them!
Atheism is modernly defined as the lack of belief in the existence of a deity or deities, so yes, you are an Atheist. You just don't like the negative connotations attached to the word by the Religious and therefore perceive it as a negative word. Not believing in a God does not make you morally abhorrent, being morally abhorrent makes you morally abhorrent. You shouldn't buy into the false Religious definitions of Atheism.
@Kozoi Incase you still living in some cave, which likely is the case with your answer, atheism isn't created by those that do not believe in some magical being protecting us all and specially not trying to call themselfs something that people with believe thought up to make this non-believer group outcasts of any human group. This is thought up not recently but many ages ago. So your comment is flawed already on that. For the rest, well I didn't mention any of that at all. :)
The Oxford definition of Atheism is "Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god." You disbelieve in a God so you're an Atheist. The rest of what you're saying is incoherent, grammatically incorrect and lacks punctuation. Atheism was a word created by the Religious with negative connotations attached and they're still held true to this very day by Theists, even though Etymologists have said the Theists connotations are NOT true.
@Kozoi Oxford can be stolen for all I care, my comment being incoherent is false, it's freedom of speech plus a comment that is allowed. Grammatically incorrect and lacks punctuation, well its Youtube. You obviously did not see the limited signs you are allowed to use in a single comment. So deal with it. And as I said before, the word Atiëst is created by people who believe in a religion to demonize those who do not.
"Etymology is the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time." Etymologists are the group which define what each word means in modern day society. You are the person living in a cave since you do not care about modern advancement and like to cling onto the past. How is Oxford going to be 'stolen?' I don't think people go around stealing buildings in reality. You also do not understand what Incoherent means. Get back to school.
@Kozoi Actually i do care about modern advancements, so another fail on your part. The "Oxford can be stolen for all I care" part is a way of speaking, as in I don't care about that subject, or what this person has to say, etc. For someone that claims to be smart, you really are not so smart.... If you do not know what that word means, why you use it then? Go look it up on Google.
Oxford isn't a person, it's a University in Oxfordshire and it's one of the most popular universities in the world. You're telling me that you want me to do research, yet you don't know what Etymology is, what Oxford is, you've incorrectly defined several words and you can't use even basic English. You have failed at every conceivable angle and yet you think you're on intellectual high-ground. I'm done with you, you're a waste of my time.
@Kozoi I know what Oxford is, dont have to put words in my mouth. That tells more about you then me, read carefully and you see I did not say that. I am Dutch, not English, American or such, so be happy I do not speak Dutch to you instead. Just as scjoiner I have Aspergers, so you actually bashing in on someone that has a disability, meaning you have no regard for anyone. I suggest you stop acting like a jerk and start realizing it isnt all about you. Back to the video now which is the topic.
Now you're just getting defensive over something which holds no bearing on the subject matter. Steven has uploaded many videos on logical fallacies, maybe you should research the following fallacies which you have wagered against me:
@Kozoi I will most deffinately not do something what another tells me to do, that has no bearing on the subject. Nor does it have and sense or logics to it. I seen multiple of his videos, I do NOT say anything bad about his videos at all, I only gave my idea on the subject and my personal feelings in it as he asked. Which you directly took as something that was not right, so it seems. So I would appriciate it if you would not discharge your frustration on me.
Is it rational to believe that there isn't a married bachelor or a square circle in the universe? Yes. In a same way strong atheists may hold that the definition of 'god' is contradictory.
I would say the fact that the laws of physics are incompatible with the existence of a omniscience, omnipotent creature that created the universe is sufficient strong to say that God could not exist.
The whole concept of "weak atheism" is really just a way for atheists to duck any questions that they know they can't answer by saying that they just lack belief in a god. Weak atheism is really just agnosticism.
Atheism is not a religion, if by religion you mean a belief in a supernatural being. But atheism is definitely a worldview, a system of beliefs and presuppositions that affects the person's whole thinking. You can't say that about stevenism.
Agnosticism isn't a position of Religion; it's a word which exists to measure ones level of belief or disbelief so when somebody asks you if you believe in a God, saying you're Agnostic does not answer the question. Saying you're an Atheist, however does. I'm starting to think those who answer the previous question with Agnostic are people avoiding the negative connotations of the word Atheist because they're scared of how the Religious will view them.
@semajgnik that would be an agnostic thought process. You are forgetting the THEIST part of atheist. many people with this thought process are atheists because of their critical thinking and logic.
@poserproductions1 That was my point. "a-theism" is the lack of believe in a god. This means they actively deny the existence of a god. But when pressed, atheists ALWAYS retreat to a more agnostic stance, which they like to call "weak atheism".
"many people with this thought process are atheists because of their critical thinking and logic."
i beg to differ. people are atheists because of their lack of critical thinking and logic. atheism is philosophically absurd.
@semajgnik please explain how witholding judgement is philisophically absurd? But you actually may have a point about weak-atheism as long as the A in A-theism really does make the word signify a total refutal of the existance of god. I would feel foolish and begin to refer to my belief on this subject as agnosticism.
@poserproductions1 Yes Atheism should be the total denial of the existence of a god. Anything less is either agnosticism, or a hasty arrogant assumption of reality (claiming that it is very likely that there is no god, with our very limited knowledge and perspective.
I actually meant that atheism is philosophically absurd. But I can also make an argument that agnosticism is as well.
I'll start by asking you, what is logical and what isnt?
@semajgnik I would consider not jumping to conclusion before you have un-arguable facts to be logical. And any idea you have without 100% rock solid proof would be called a theory, and is subject to change upon farther knowledge. My religion is seeing is believing. Not the other way around.
Your answer begs the question. How do we know if what you "consider" as logical is indeed logical? On what standard can we say that your methodology is indeed logical?
@semajgnik I don't think claiming to know exactly what logical is or isn't would be a very humble claim. Clear and sound reasoning is how the dictionary categorizes it, but you very well could think that a virgin giving birth to a future zombie who created himself out of nothing and created everything is perfectly logical. Do you also think that the man who survived inside of a whales stomach for 2 weeks is a very logical possibility? I simply withhold judgement while you conclude
@poserproductions1 "I don't think claiming to know exactly what logical is or isn't would be a very humble claim."
So you're pretty much saying that logic (the laws of logic) is not absolute and universal then? This pretty much makes anything you or anyone say meaningless, and this goes against basic philosophy. Are thoughts are GROUNDED on the laws of logic.
@poserproductions1 Virgin births and a man surviving inside a whale is not illogical or unreasonable AT ALL (this next part is important) in a worldview where a supernatural being, God, exists.
You keep saying that you withhold judgement, but you are contradicting yourself whenever you practically make a claim that your epistemology, your theory of knowledge is the correct one. Your whole philosophy crumbles and refutes itself here.
You should withhold judgment on withholding judgment then.
@semajgnik Deciding that I am probably wrong about everything in my theories is the best way that I can respond to the questions of the universe without un-justified confidence. But I am probably wrong here too aren't I?
@poserproductions1 It's not so much that you're wrong. The problem is that your philosophy is self refuting.
For example, you're theory of knowledge. You say that the best way to go about things, is to first test things thoroughly, but you did not test if THAT statement is true. You simply presupposed it.
What you need to realize is that you (and everyone else) have basic presuppositions that you did not first "judge" or test.
strong and weak is superfluous. No need for "weak", just "atheism" suffices. As for strong atheism, this would be gnostic atheism. No need to make up false dichotomies. Atheism in itself barely has any meaning. Why splitting a new hair?
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
GOD, HEAVEN, AND SEX: Internet article examines the Biblical possibility of sex in heaven. Human sexuality isn't just for reproduction. There are reasons the Bible requires marriage for sex on earth, but those reasons won't exist in heaven. Scripture teaches, in heaven, we'll be like the angels only in one sense - no marriage, but we won't be like angels in every other way (i.e. Bible says we'll enjoy food and drink). Psalm 16:11 says there will be great spiritual joy and pleasures in heaven.
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
@Mogley52 we dont care about your article... if you want us to read it so bad send us a link or something... btw i believe that world always was and always will be...
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
WHAT ABOUT THE STARS? Gravity explains how the order found in the precise courses of trillions of stars is maintained, but gravity can't explain the origin of that order! Did all the trillions stars agree to get out of each others way? C'mon! Disorder in the universe is because of chance, but the order is because of design. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read my popular Internet articles: ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE!
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument for a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed in design or useless.
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select" from traits having survival value. It doesn't produce those traits. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
INTELLIGENT DESIGN: If you discovered a sand castle on a lonely beach, you can't prove that it was made by either chance or design. No one observed its origins. Either it was designed or the random forces of wind and waves made the castle. You find no fingerprints. Did the wind wipe away the fingerprints? How do we know there were fingerprints in the first place? By chance or design? Both sides should be free to present their case. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article that examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of both transitional forms and lack of sequence of the fossil layers. Discusses mixed species in fossils (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum conveniently ignored by evolutionists).
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
@Mogley52 hey mogley read this : YOU ARE SPAMMING, WASTE OF TIME RETARD CUNT. Get some opinions of your own that relate to the videos you post your copy and paste bullshit to.
Chew on that for a while. Why else would religion be attacking mankind's best method for discerning the truth. They do it constantly. Every time science debunked something that religion holds dear. They don't want you to have the.truth. You wouldn't show up for the.collection plate if you knew the whole truth. Thefts just bad for business.
There will always be people who believe in god as long as there are things that cannot be explained. There are fewer of those things today than there were 100 years ago. There will be even.fewer in another 100 years. That's why religion attacks science so much. It's goal is to explain the nature of the world around us. The more that is known, the less there is to attribute to god. God lives in the unknown therefore science is taking away all the places god likes to hide.
For every supposed proof of god there is a logical REAL WORLD explanation. For the things that CAN'T be explained within the realm of possibility, there are two things to consider. One, did they really happen as they are being described? Two, we don't have a complete knowledge of everything in the universe. We may never have that. That doesn't mean that when something extraordinary happens its god. Some things we don't know yet. I'm sure gravity was once seen as an act of god.
@theModelification If I blelieve that I'm not gonna get raped today is that a religion too? If I believe my wife will have dinner waiting for me is that religion? If I believe you are ignorant of the definition of religion is that religion? Look, the only thing that is common between atheists is they don't BELIEVE that those who claim to know a god exists are using any common sense to come to that conclusion. I don't believe due to the lack of evidence and the common sense explanations.
It is hard being atheist because a lot of people are severely misinformed. Hopefully people like you will help them learn that we (most of us) aren't hateful towards religion.
Thanks for putting the facts out and not your personal beliefs. For some reason it's hard classifiying what I am. Your video helped me with that. Thank You.
Okay BIG question. My boyfriend is.. Athiest. But Im not, I believe in God. And I dont want this to get in between us. Its sort of hard for me to forget about it because, what if we have kids? Am I gonna force them to believe in what I do? or do I want them to believe in what he does? What should I do about this?
@TheFuckingSuper Let the kids choose. Teach them as much as you can about everything and they will be smart enough to think for themselves. Ask your boyfriend why he believes what he does and explain why you believe what you do... you both might learn something!
@TheFuckingSuper Hi, I'm only 16 but my older sister is an atheist and she has a boyfriend that is a christian and they have kids. They let the kids chose, they just tell their stories and tell them at the same time about science and etc. Their kids are only 4 and 3 right now so I don't know how it affects them but IMO, let the kids chose what's most reasonable but try not to "cheat" by saying look candy, this is a gift of God or something like that xD Good luck!
@TheFuckingSuper r u christian? well first of all talk it over with your bf and agree on what you guys are going to do. i would suggest you teach the children (when they are a little older and can grasp what you are teaching them) all the religions what they stand for, what they teach, what do they believe in etc. and let them decide what religion or no religion they would like to follow. and i know you dont want ur kids to be anything other than atheist or christian. talk about it and reason :)
The word atheist means, the lack of belief in god, gods, or any deities meaning that they don’t believe in god. They do not oppose the idea of god existing. They do not believe in any god like a document written by George H. Smith that states “Atheism is the absence of a belief in a god, nothing more.” (Smith)
@TheFuckingSuper My mom is Catholic and my dad was an atheist. My mom raised me Catholic and my dad let me know that he didn't believe in a god when I asked. There was never any issues and both my parents respected my choice w/e it was. By the age of 12 or so I was pretty much an atheist. My dad was never preachy it was just the conclusion I came to myself. I don't regret my mom raising me as a Catholic, it was worth the experience.
@TheFuckingSuper If you really believe in the God of the Bible, then believe what the Bible says and follow it. Break up with your atheist boyfriend.
You and your future husband (as parents) will be your kids' first teachers and it is your responsibility to teach them to lead Godly lives. Having an atheist boyfriend will only hinder your walk with God, let alone marrying one.
Strong Atheists still grant the fact that maybe there is a chance their God exists but its very small. Simply becuz you cant be 100% sure of anything. doesn't seem to make any sense. " you never know" but they are... im assuming... 99.9999% sure its untrue. sooo... there really isn't that much of a difference in weak and strong Atheism.
@Imreason No the definition of a strong atheist is someone who believes that there is definitive, undeniable evidence that there could not possibly be a God, or Gods. That is why the vast majority of atheists are actually weak atheists, even though many call themselves strong atheists. If you admit that there is even the remotest possibility that a God or Gods could exist, you are a weak atheist.
@evejunkie1942 Strong Athiests Also Grant the possiblity of a God. By your definition, you're saying that in order to be a strong Athiest you would have to be an atheist with absoulte certainty (100%). which is most of the time illogical and very Dogmatic. I'd say Weak atheists are the atheists that don't believe and dont really care much, but they do grant the Possibility. Strong Atheists Will Tell you why your God cant Possibly Exist but still.... they also grant the possibility.
Atheists Believe whatever they wanna believe. They DONT believe in God. its not.... "Atheists believe there is no God" its "Athesits Dont belive there is one" Based on the definition of course. Atheism tells you what a person does not agree with or believe (God). It does not tell you what they believe.
Atheism is a Religion, because you believe, you have faith there is no God without proof. When you die, it is only then you see the truth.
Go back to the definition of faith. Faith is believing in something without proof. Religion is a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith. Atheism is defined as the doctrine or belief that there is no God. Therefore Atheism is a religion.
''Stephenism'' xD most people would call it ridiculous but it's odd; your description of a stephenist could as well have been the description of most people 'of the church' or whatever the term is.
@scjoiner vary good comeback :) sadly I'm an atheist. week ideology type. To hold a strong atheistic viewpoint is closed minded and egoistic. Do we know everything? No! and we may never know everything. we are finite.
@Annapolisdweller123 what I think is that the only way to find out is to die, and I think most people got a whole lot to do before they die. And if you are dead there is no way back and no way of knowing that you have lived once.
You can say that atheism is not a religion but to be a true atheist you have to believe there is no God, no heaven, no angels, no satan, no hell, no demons etc. So it is having faith that none of these exist. Of course there is no God involved in atheism just people with a belief system. So while it isn't an organized religion by the general standards you can only accept what your senses tell you is real. I dont have that kind of faith in evolution it isn't in me. Cont.
I just wanted to add that there are groups across the US that get together and have meetings and discuss issues. Also there are conventions where people give talks and sell books and make a lot of money. And TV shows also. But don't call it organized because that would suggest that some people might be getting rich writing books. Don't mention someone like Richard Dawkin's and others who are getting rich writing books and giving speech's to big crowds nothing organized about that is there.
I mean nothing personal but you might want to hire someone to write for you as you seem to take awhile to get to your point. I am a believer in God and I struggle with this issue also. My wife always tells me to get to the point because I tend to throw out to many things that take away from my point. It just takes practice and you will get it. God Bless.
@XFatesAdversaryX Same reason why people will hate Emos, Gays and such. If something is different and opposite from you, it must be wrong. I respect other peoples' beliefs, but I can't stand it if somebody tries to convert me to theirs. You believe what you want to believe and I believe what I want to believe. 'nuff said. -nyancat-
Also, I have a question. As an atheist, how do you know what is right and wrong? What makes you think murdering someone isn't moral? Sure, your parents taught you that, but why did they think that way? There's nothing that says rape is evil except your conscience, but what gave us the ability to perceive right and wrong in the first place?
Sorry, didn't mean to have so many questions originally. I'm just curious to hear your's and others' opinions on the matter if you don't mind.
@ThemForsakenGamers Morality is subjective, meaning that what one person considers to be good is considered by someone, somewhere, to be evil. Not only that, but it is also very inconsistent; Most people would agree that murder is wrong, unless it is done in self defense.
Because of this, I think it is reasonable to assume that morality, or at least objective morality, does not exist, and that what religious people call objective morality is merely survival instinct and/or reciprocal altruism.
I think atheism is a religion. Religion is a belief in something. Strong atheists believe there is no god. Weak athiests don't know what to believe, and therefore they believe in nothing. You don't need a set of rules in order to make a religion. For instance, I could believe that my brother is god and because I am his relative I'll have life after death. That would be a religion in my opinion; no offense to anyone reading this.
@ThemForsakenGamers Not believing in something (or someone) does not make that belief part of a religion anymore than not collecting stamps makes it a hobby. If you don't worship a deity or live by a set of rules set up by a group than you are not in a religion. As much as you want to say "a belief in the non-belief of god" it would be more proper to say " no belief in a god". I don't even think of a god in my day to day life. I am very moral and have good ethics. This is not a religion.
@ThemForsakenGamers That's a very ambiguous definition for religion. If religion is simply a belief in something, then believing that 2+2=4 could be considered a religious belief.
Also, weak atheists do not believe in nothing; that's Nihilism. Weak Atheism is the position that there is not sufficient evidence to prove that a God exists, so it is reasonable to doubt that one does exist.
@Sweetsticks777 Excuse me, but I'll be more than happy to break down your "Lord" as well because any Father who would do that to his own children is still nothing less than disgusting and would be just as evil as the devil in Christian mytholgy anyways. Arrogant, prideful, and abusive. I'm sorry for insulting you, but to be blunt, it's what I really think of you lol, no denying that. But go ahead and quote your big book of multiple choice where it's okay to enslave, rape, and murder for God.
@lpminecraftvideos No, it isn't the same. It can be labeled Agnostic-Atheist but there are Agnostic-Theists as well. Agnostic-Atheists resemble weak Atheism saying that until given proof to believe in a God we'll withold judgement. Agnostic-Theists say they don't know there's a God, and there may very well not be, but they just want to believe anyways because of (insert reason here).
"It's not a religion because there is no dogma or criteria to follow in order to be an Atheist."
Yes, I suppose under the authority if Christianity that is true. But under religions that don't have gods, it is not! Why let others decide for you what you want to define as religion ? They will just keep you from competing with them as a religion. Confucianism is a religion and it is simply humanism.
@kberka Since Atheism doesn't have any structure whatsoever, I don't consider it one. This is mostly to prevent arguments like "your position is based on faith", which is patently false.
" In addition, "the Court has adopted a broad definition of 'religion' that includes non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as theistic ones." The TORCASO v WATKINS
“A religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being, (or beings, for polytheistic faiths) nor must be it be a mainstream faith." Relevant cases include: WISCONSIN v YODER (1972); TORCASO v WATKINS (1961); MALNAK v YOGI (1979) and LINDELL v MCCALLUM (2003).
@Sweetsticks777 We were trying to compare it to human standards of morality. The morality of your god can't live up to your god's teachings is all we were trying to say.
@Sweetsticks777 There is a valid point there. We have an estimated age of the earth, accurately to within a degree of error. The age of the earth won't change, our knowledge of how old it is will be expanded and refined. Saying that because our instruments aren't perfectly accurate doesn't mean our knowledge is false.
@Sweetsticks777 "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV
@scjoiner Really? I hate to play the apologist here, but what you guys cite as an example for misogyny is in fact the exact opposite. That verse is actually, as ridiculous as it may sound, about granting women rights, protection and even social security. What you are doing is taking it out of (it's cultural) context!
I would like to point out to the religious people. You can't deny the atrocities that have been done in every religion. This is why I can not accept you definitions of god/gods because even you can't live up to your own teachings. If you think it's only something that happened in that past, look up Damon Fowler. That's why I oppose religion. If your god did exist by your standards he wouldn't let things like this happen. If god exists we have nothing in common with it.
@scjoiner Are you going to do a follow up, on subjects like agnosticism (and how it pertains to both theists and atheists) and movements like humanism (which try to focus more on the human condition not bound by spirituality and superstition)? Or has the degeneration of your commentators spoiled that? XD
@Tehdarkringmaster No, they are technically still atheist. If they think they can't KNOW for sure, then they are agnostic. If you believe there is at least 1 god, then you are a theist of some kind.
@TheOptimistPrime 2nd comment: Most Christians accuse other Christians of not being "real" Christians to the point where no one besides Jesus is a real Christian lol. I do agree with you on one point, a bad person is bad despite their belief.
@TheOptimistPrime It's very simple. Believe in God or many Gods or any supernatural being of creating us for some divine plan = Theist. Not believing, thinking it's possible but not proven, or thinking it's more likely to not be true = Atheist. Everyone uses labels to help compare other people to others. No one says Hitler is your baggage, but people do use the Bible as a reference such as (Abraham attempting to kill his son) or (The raping, killing, and slavery in the bible)
I like the word atheism. It can easily be wrong if there is a gap between A and theism.
A theism can be cristanity Islam hindu Judaism or believing in ancient greek gods. Where as Atheism is the shortened version of anti Theism (not of god.) Anyway stephen I like the video and I'm a strong Atheist but I believe that people shall have the right to believe in whatever they want to believe. Sure I wish that there was real wishes vampires and stuff just to make the everyday life a little harder.
loool nice steven, you are touching scientology with your "i give you superpower for money" and imho, your are absolutely right, its jsut stupid to believe something that is ont proofen
I know absolutely and for-sure.
The result of "Damage caused by some religion" divided by "the chance that, that religion might be true" says weak atheism is a complete cop-out.
I wish our friends and family's WEREN'T infested by ancient mental viruses. BUT THEY ARE.
To continue the biological analogy, a weak-atheist, is a white-blood cell which doesn't work.
You know, and i know, why, religions convince people, there is no battle over who's-right.
The real battle is for our MORTAL souls.
LukeSchoen 1 week ago in playlist Science, Religion, Intelligence
I'm gonna come from the gut. How fucking clueless can a person be? The fool says in his heart there is no God.
MrJcenter7 1 month ago
@MrJcenter7 Those "fools" don't use their hearts, they technically use their brains. Just saying.
antibarbi03 1 month ago
@antibarbi03 i guess some brains can't understand poetic figures of speech. just sayin.
semajgnik 3 weeks ago
@semajgnik Considering the state of medical knowledge when the Book of Psalms was written, I wouldn't be surprised if the writer considered this more than a poetic figure of speech.
cengime 3 weeks ago
@cengime right... because with the state of medical knowledge in today's world NO ONE uses poetic figures of speeches like, "follow your heart","whatever you heart tells you", etc. right???
PSALMS, penned by PSALMISTS, should be taken as scientific statements. Its so reasonable.
semajgnik 3 weeks ago
@semajgnik Yes, but these figures of speech only exist because doctors and philosophers once thought the heart was literally the seat of thought, reason, emotions, and/or the soul.
cengime 3 weeks ago
@cengime My point is that there is no reason to try to criticize a poem/song about scientific facts.
But let me ask you, where does our thoughts and reason come from?
semajgnik 2 weeks ago
my religeon is seeing is believing
PSYk1ll4h 1 month ago
Atheism doesn't define anyone. Only shows that you don't believe in a deity. Example: Buddhism is Atheistic.
Jayjon81 1 month ago
Never heard of Negative Atheism. I also don't use the term Strong vs Weak. But to clarify you opinion of "Strong Atheism" If an Atheist says, "There is no god" that is said in practical use. Meaning they are not absolutist! So, are they claiming that they have "absolute knowledge" of their statement, NO! Because, "absolute" is useless and have no meaning in a practical world. Religion is dogmatic and full of absolutist, it's no wonder why 'Strong vs Weak' was created to cater do their mind set.
Jayjon81 1 month ago
i would add " the belief os the supernatural" to the definition of theism
judicum 2 months ago
@judicum technically "supernatural" doesn't even apply in the definition. Not even a Super Natural God...only implied. It only mean belief in a Deity.
Jayjon81 1 month ago
alright before you call me stupid or retarded just here me out
at first i though Atheist was a type of yogurt
so every time i got to like a store i always ask the manager where the cherry atheist is
yugioh5432 2 months ago
This guy did It best. If I was religous I wouldn't be offended at all by this vid. Really there should only be weak atheist and ignorant atheist. No one knows if god is real or fake unless they have died.the Ignorant bash the religous. The weak say "cool. If that's how you think, that's fine." Just sayn.
tomahawk7string 3 months ago
most atheists i meat are the 3 kind the HARDCORE most unpleasant people i ever met. wont shut up and think their opinions are godlike (pun intended).
kharu88 3 months ago
yea, but athiests are gay
SlickWillHermsted 4 months ago
@SlickWillHermsted You sire,are 12.
MaxVolumeHD 4 months ago in playlist More videos from scjoiner
@SlickWillHermsted Not all atheists are happy, but many are =).
themongru 3 months ago
I dont believe in any god, but athiest, no. I just believe in what I can see, logics, facts and such. I do not believe that people can be called athiest at all for that matter, its thoughed up as you mentioned as something bad. So who ever calls someone that or calls themself that will in fact call themselfs bad. Or in some degree at least. @TheFuckingSuper Let the kids choose themselfs, best way to do things, then they can learn both your ways and say what they believe, just do not force them!
SIG442 5 months ago
@SIG442
Atheism is modernly defined as the lack of belief in the existence of a deity or deities, so yes, you are an Atheist. You just don't like the negative connotations attached to the word by the Religious and therefore perceive it as a negative word. Not believing in a God does not make you morally abhorrent, being morally abhorrent makes you morally abhorrent. You shouldn't buy into the false Religious definitions of Atheism.
Kozoi 5 months ago
@Kozoi Incase you still living in some cave, which likely is the case with your answer, atheism isn't created by those that do not believe in some magical being protecting us all and specially not trying to call themselfs something that people with believe thought up to make this non-believer group outcasts of any human group. This is thought up not recently but many ages ago. So your comment is flawed already on that. For the rest, well I didn't mention any of that at all. :)
SIG442 4 months ago
@SIG442
The Oxford definition of Atheism is "Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god." You disbelieve in a God so you're an Atheist. The rest of what you're saying is incoherent, grammatically incorrect and lacks punctuation. Atheism was a word created by the Religious with negative connotations attached and they're still held true to this very day by Theists, even though Etymologists have said the Theists connotations are NOT true.
Kozoi 4 months ago
@Kozoi Oxford can be stolen for all I care, my comment being incoherent is false, it's freedom of speech plus a comment that is allowed. Grammatically incorrect and lacks punctuation, well its Youtube. You obviously did not see the limited signs you are allowed to use in a single comment. So deal with it. And as I said before, the word Atiëst is created by people who believe in a religion to demonize those who do not.
SIG442 4 months ago
@SIG442
"Etymology is the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time." Etymologists are the group which define what each word means in modern day society. You are the person living in a cave since you do not care about modern advancement and like to cling onto the past. How is Oxford going to be 'stolen?' I don't think people go around stealing buildings in reality. You also do not understand what Incoherent means. Get back to school.
Kozoi 4 months ago
@Kozoi Actually i do care about modern advancements, so another fail on your part. The "Oxford can be stolen for all I care" part is a way of speaking, as in I don't care about that subject, or what this person has to say, etc. For someone that claims to be smart, you really are not so smart.... If you do not know what that word means, why you use it then? Go look it up on Google.
SIG442 4 months ago
@SIG442
Oxford isn't a person, it's a University in Oxfordshire and it's one of the most popular universities in the world. You're telling me that you want me to do research, yet you don't know what Etymology is, what Oxford is, you've incorrectly defined several words and you can't use even basic English. You have failed at every conceivable angle and yet you think you're on intellectual high-ground. I'm done with you, you're a waste of my time.
Kozoi 4 months ago
@Kozoi I know what Oxford is, dont have to put words in my mouth. That tells more about you then me, read carefully and you see I did not say that. I am Dutch, not English, American or such, so be happy I do not speak Dutch to you instead. Just as scjoiner I have Aspergers, so you actually bashing in on someone that has a disability, meaning you have no regard for anyone. I suggest you stop acting like a jerk and start realizing it isnt all about you. Back to the video now which is the topic.
SIG442 4 months ago
@SIG442
Now you're just getting defensive over something which holds no bearing on the subject matter. Steven has uploaded many videos on logical fallacies, maybe you should research the following fallacies which you have wagered against me:
- Invincible Ignorance
- Irrelevance Fallacy
- Argumentum Ad Misericordiam
Kozoi 4 months ago
@Kozoi I will most deffinately not do something what another tells me to do, that has no bearing on the subject. Nor does it have and sense or logics to it. I seen multiple of his videos, I do NOT say anything bad about his videos at all, I only gave my idea on the subject and my personal feelings in it as he asked. Which you directly took as something that was not right, so it seems. So I would appriciate it if you would not discharge your frustration on me.
SIG442 4 months ago
Is it rational to believe that there isn't a married bachelor or a square circle in the universe? Yes. In a same way strong atheists may hold that the definition of 'god' is contradictory.
TheStickyBomb 6 months ago
I would say the fact that the laws of physics are incompatible with the existence of a omniscience, omnipotent creature that created the universe is sufficient strong to say that God could not exist.
189643478 6 months ago
The whole concept of "weak atheism" is really just a way for atheists to duck any questions that they know they can't answer by saying that they just lack belief in a god. Weak atheism is really just agnosticism.
Atheism is not a religion, if by religion you mean a belief in a supernatural being. But atheism is definitely a worldview, a system of beliefs and presuppositions that affects the person's whole thinking. You can't say that about stevenism.
semajgnik 6 months ago
@semajgnik
Agnosticism isn't a position of Religion; it's a word which exists to measure ones level of belief or disbelief so when somebody asks you if you believe in a God, saying you're Agnostic does not answer the question. Saying you're an Atheist, however does. I'm starting to think those who answer the previous question with Agnostic are people avoiding the negative connotations of the word Atheist because they're scared of how the Religious will view them.
Kozoi 5 months ago
@semajgnik that would be an agnostic thought process. You are forgetting the THEIST part of atheist. many people with this thought process are atheists because of their critical thinking and logic.
poserproductions1 1 month ago
@poserproductions1 That was my point. "a-theism" is the lack of believe in a god. This means they actively deny the existence of a god. But when pressed, atheists ALWAYS retreat to a more agnostic stance, which they like to call "weak atheism".
"many people with this thought process are atheists because of their critical thinking and logic."
i beg to differ. people are atheists because of their lack of critical thinking and logic. atheism is philosophically absurd.
semajgnik 1 month ago
@semajgnik please explain how witholding judgement is philisophically absurd? But you actually may have a point about weak-atheism as long as the A in A-theism really does make the word signify a total refutal of the existance of god. I would feel foolish and begin to refer to my belief on this subject as agnosticism.
poserproductions1 1 month ago
@poserproductions1 Yes Atheism should be the total denial of the existence of a god. Anything less is either agnosticism, or a hasty arrogant assumption of reality (claiming that it is very likely that there is no god, with our very limited knowledge and perspective.
I actually meant that atheism is philosophically absurd. But I can also make an argument that agnosticism is as well.
I'll start by asking you, what is logical and what isnt?
semajgnik 1 month ago
@semajgnik I would consider not jumping to conclusion before you have un-arguable facts to be logical. And any idea you have without 100% rock solid proof would be called a theory, and is subject to change upon farther knowledge. My religion is seeing is believing. Not the other way around.
poserproductions1 1 month ago
@poserproductions1
Your answer begs the question. How do we know if what you "consider" as logical is indeed logical? On what standard can we say that your methodology is indeed logical?
semajgnik 1 month ago
@semajgnik Remember that I didn't ask for what your opinion is on what is logical, I asked what IS logical or not.
semajgnik 1 month ago
@semajgnik I don't think claiming to know exactly what logical is or isn't would be a very humble claim. Clear and sound reasoning is how the dictionary categorizes it, but you very well could think that a virgin giving birth to a future zombie who created himself out of nothing and created everything is perfectly logical. Do you also think that the man who survived inside of a whales stomach for 2 weeks is a very logical possibility? I simply withhold judgement while you conclude
poserproductions1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@poserproductions1 "I don't think claiming to know exactly what logical is or isn't would be a very humble claim."
So you're pretty much saying that logic (the laws of logic) is not absolute and universal then? This pretty much makes anything you or anyone say meaningless, and this goes against basic philosophy. Are thoughts are GROUNDED on the laws of logic.
semajgnik 1 month ago
@poserproductions1 Virgin births and a man surviving inside a whale is not illogical or unreasonable AT ALL (this next part is important) in a worldview where a supernatural being, God, exists.
You keep saying that you withhold judgement, but you are contradicting yourself whenever you practically make a claim that your epistemology, your theory of knowledge is the correct one. Your whole philosophy crumbles and refutes itself here.
You should withhold judgment on withholding judgment then.
semajgnik 1 month ago
@semajgnik Deciding that I am probably wrong about everything in my theories is the best way that I can respond to the questions of the universe without un-justified confidence. But I am probably wrong here too aren't I?
poserproductions1 1 month ago
@poserproductions1 It's not so much that you're wrong. The problem is that your philosophy is self refuting.
For example, you're theory of knowledge. You say that the best way to go about things, is to first test things thoroughly, but you did not test if THAT statement is true. You simply presupposed it.
What you need to realize is that you (and everyone else) have basic presuppositions that you did not first "judge" or test.
Logic is assumed to be true by EVERYONE.
semajgnik 1 month ago
do you believe someone might be "very start" yet a a believer?
annavardanyan4 6 months ago
i didnt know it before, but i guess im an atheist!
nitendo9 6 months ago
strong and weak is superfluous. No need for "weak", just "atheism" suffices. As for strong atheism, this would be gnostic atheism. No need to make up false dichotomies. Atheism in itself barely has any meaning. Why splitting a new hair?
thomazz2000 6 months ago
it ''WHAT'' people think..
mariolocke 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOD, HEAVEN, AND SEX: Internet article examines the Biblical possibility of sex in heaven. Human sexuality isn't just for reproduction. There are reasons the Bible requires marriage for sex on earth, but those reasons won't exist in heaven. Scripture teaches, in heaven, we'll be like the angels only in one sense - no marriage, but we won't be like angels in every other way (i.e. Bible says we'll enjoy food and drink). Psalm 16:11 says there will be great spiritual joy and pleasures in heaven.
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 6 months ago
@Mogley52 we dont care about your article... if you want us to read it so bad send us a link or something... btw i believe that world always was and always will be...
nitendo9 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT ABOUT THE STARS? Gravity explains how the order found in the precise courses of trillions of stars is maintained, but gravity can't explain the origin of that order! Did all the trillions stars agree to get out of each others way? C'mon! Disorder in the universe is because of chance, but the order is because of design. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read my popular Internet articles: ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument for a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed in design or useless.
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select" from traits having survival value. It doesn't produce those traits. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
INTELLIGENT DESIGN: If you discovered a sand castle on a lonely beach, you can't prove that it was made by either chance or design. No one observed its origins. Either it was designed or the random forces of wind and waves made the castle. You find no fingerprints. Did the wind wipe away the fingerprints? How do we know there were fingerprints in the first place? By chance or design? Both sides should be free to present their case. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
MAKING SENSE OF DINOSAURS AND THE BIBLE: Read this Internet article and be ready to be surprised!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article that examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of both transitional forms and lack of sequence of the fossil layers. Discusses mixed species in fossils (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum conveniently ignored by evolutionists).
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 6 months ago
@Mogley52 hey mogley read this : YOU ARE SPAMMING, WASTE OF TIME RETARD CUNT. Get some opinions of your own that relate to the videos you post your copy and paste bullshit to.
ZuluFightrunner 6 months ago
you look like Tom Anderson hahahha
BTW for the dumb ones the inventor of myspace
TheDavionharvey 6 months ago
OK Um Stephan So Atheism is not believing in God and Theism is believing in God
xXxGu3n3tt3xXx 6 months ago
Great topic!!
123moscowman 7 months ago
My one problem with the video is: you need to get yourself a cat. They are fluffy aggregates of awesome.
jjmblue7 7 months ago
Chew on that for a while. Why else would religion be attacking mankind's best method for discerning the truth. They do it constantly. Every time science debunked something that religion holds dear. They don't want you to have the.truth. You wouldn't show up for the.collection plate if you knew the whole truth. Thefts just bad for business.
USHOULDTHINK 7 months ago
There will always be people who believe in god as long as there are things that cannot be explained. There are fewer of those things today than there were 100 years ago. There will be even.fewer in another 100 years. That's why religion attacks science so much. It's goal is to explain the nature of the world around us. The more that is known, the less there is to attribute to god. God lives in the unknown therefore science is taking away all the places god likes to hide.
USHOULDTHINK 7 months ago
For every supposed proof of god there is a logical REAL WORLD explanation. For the things that CAN'T be explained within the realm of possibility, there are two things to consider. One, did they really happen as they are being described? Two, we don't have a complete knowledge of everything in the universe. We may never have that. That doesn't mean that when something extraordinary happens its god. Some things we don't know yet. I'm sure gravity was once seen as an act of god.
USHOULDTHINK 7 months ago
@theModelification If I blelieve that I'm not gonna get raped today is that a religion too? If I believe my wife will have dinner waiting for me is that religion? If I believe you are ignorant of the definition of religion is that religion? Look, the only thing that is common between atheists is they don't BELIEVE that those who claim to know a god exists are using any common sense to come to that conclusion. I don't believe due to the lack of evidence and the common sense explanations.
USHOULDTHINK 7 months ago
@scjoiner where did you bought your t-shirt? it's hilarious
Sixhundredsixtysixxx 7 months ago
For young atheists who are wondering if you should come out, here's a good video:
Young atheist be proud
by OneProudAtheist
ndrthrdr1 7 months ago
The color of bald is invisible(:
This was very informative.
It is hard being atheist because a lot of people are severely misinformed. Hopefully people like you will help them learn that we (most of us) aren't hateful towards religion.
Btw, I subbed(:
musicluvr212 7 months ago
Thanks for putting the facts out and not your personal beliefs. For some reason it's hard classifiying what I am. Your video helped me with that. Thank You.
TheSherminator64 7 months ago
Okay BIG question. My boyfriend is.. Athiest. But Im not, I believe in God. And I dont want this to get in between us. Its sort of hard for me to forget about it because, what if we have kids? Am I gonna force them to believe in what I do? or do I want them to believe in what he does? What should I do about this?
TheFuckingSuper 7 months ago
@TheFuckingSuper Let the kids choose. Teach them as much as you can about everything and they will be smart enough to think for themselves. Ask your boyfriend why he believes what he does and explain why you believe what you do... you both might learn something!
scjoiner 7 months ago 10
@TheFuckingSuper Hi, I'm only 16 but my older sister is an atheist and she has a boyfriend that is a christian and they have kids. They let the kids chose, they just tell their stories and tell them at the same time about science and etc. Their kids are only 4 and 3 right now so I don't know how it affects them but IMO, let the kids chose what's most reasonable but try not to "cheat" by saying look candy, this is a gift of God or something like that xD Good luck!
Undergroundhiphoop 7 months ago
@TheFuckingSuper r u christian? well first of all talk it over with your bf and agree on what you guys are going to do. i would suggest you teach the children (when they are a little older and can grasp what you are teaching them) all the religions what they stand for, what they teach, what do they believe in etc. and let them decide what religion or no religion they would like to follow. and i know you dont want ur kids to be anything other than atheist or christian. talk about it and reason :)
bigwillchill 7 months ago
The word atheist means, the lack of belief in god, gods, or any deities meaning that they don’t believe in god. They do not oppose the idea of god existing. They do not believe in any god like a document written by George H. Smith that states “Atheism is the absence of a belief in a god, nothing more.” (Smith)
bigwillchill 7 months ago
@TheFuckingSuper My mom is Catholic and my dad was an atheist. My mom raised me Catholic and my dad let me know that he didn't believe in a god when I asked. There was never any issues and both my parents respected my choice w/e it was. By the age of 12 or so I was pretty much an atheist. My dad was never preachy it was just the conclusion I came to myself. I don't regret my mom raising me as a Catholic, it was worth the experience.
urantivirus 7 months ago
@TheFuckingSuper If you really believe in the God of the Bible, then believe what the Bible says and follow it. Break up with your atheist boyfriend.
You and your future husband (as parents) will be your kids' first teachers and it is your responsibility to teach them to lead Godly lives. Having an atheist boyfriend will only hinder your walk with God, let alone marrying one.
semajgnik 6 months ago
The Greeks were assholes.
TheEchoSystem 7 months ago
Strong Atheists still grant the fact that maybe there is a chance their God exists but its very small. Simply becuz you cant be 100% sure of anything. doesn't seem to make any sense. " you never know" but they are... im assuming... 99.9999% sure its untrue. sooo... there really isn't that much of a difference in weak and strong Atheism.
Imreason 8 months ago
@Imreason No the definition of a strong atheist is someone who believes that there is definitive, undeniable evidence that there could not possibly be a God, or Gods. That is why the vast majority of atheists are actually weak atheists, even though many call themselves strong atheists. If you admit that there is even the remotest possibility that a God or Gods could exist, you are a weak atheist.
evejunkie1942 7 months ago
@evejunkie1942 Strong Athiests Also Grant the possiblity of a God. By your definition, you're saying that in order to be a strong Athiest you would have to be an atheist with absoulte certainty (100%). which is most of the time illogical and very Dogmatic. I'd say Weak atheists are the atheists that don't believe and dont really care much, but they do grant the Possibility. Strong Atheists Will Tell you why your God cant Possibly Exist but still.... they also grant the possibility.
Imreason 7 months ago
Atheists Believe whatever they wanna believe. They DONT believe in God. its not.... "Atheists believe there is no God" its "Athesits Dont belive there is one" Based on the definition of course. Atheism tells you what a person does not agree with or believe (God). It does not tell you what they believe.
Imreason 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheism is a Religion, because you believe, you have faith there is no God without proof. When you die, it is only then you see the truth.
Go back to the definition of faith. Faith is believing in something without proof. Religion is a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith. Atheism is defined as the doctrine or belief that there is no God. Therefore Atheism is a religion.
TheModelification 8 months ago
''Stephenism'' xD most people would call it ridiculous but it's odd; your description of a stephenist could as well have been the description of most people 'of the church' or whatever the term is.
Verokarhu1 8 months ago
thank you for clearing up this subject to people :)
TBoy623 8 months ago
is it just me or is that a cort x6 in the background? lol
vipirius123 8 months ago
im a christan and i learned a lot...
mr125321 8 months ago
Comment removed
vipirius123 8 months ago
Could you talk about Satanism, and explain the difference between it and devil worshipping?
TheRiffCalendar 8 months ago
Comment removed
TheRiffCalendar 8 months ago
You found the like button! Nice!
Bananadandaman 8 months ago
Hello,
Frist time seeing a video of yours
nice job .
Strong Proud Atheist
allreligionskill 8 months ago
I like how you use so many hand gestures :D
Krasevel 8 months ago
Where's my superpowers. I want my money back. :)
boogerfly100 8 months ago
@boogerfly100 Money back? Try that one at a church :D
scjoiner 8 months ago 13
@scjoiner vary good comeback :) sadly I'm an atheist. week ideology type. To hold a strong atheistic viewpoint is closed minded and egoistic. Do we know everything? No! and we may never know everything. we are finite.
boogerfly100 8 months ago
I am a week Atheist
qwertman99 8 months ago
do you think there is any kind of afterlife?
Annapolisdweller123 8 months ago
@Annapolisdweller123 what I think is that the only way to find out is to die, and I think most people got a whole lot to do before they die. And if you are dead there is no way back and no way of knowing that you have lived once.
Coolman464 8 months ago
@Annapolisdweller123 I don't have any reason to think there is. I'll let you know.
scjoiner 8 months ago
@Annapolisdweller123 Yes I do
arecuk1 6 months ago
You can say that atheism is not a religion but to be a true atheist you have to believe there is no God, no heaven, no angels, no satan, no hell, no demons etc. So it is having faith that none of these exist. Of course there is no God involved in atheism just people with a belief system. So while it isn't an organized religion by the general standards you can only accept what your senses tell you is real. I dont have that kind of faith in evolution it isn't in me. Cont.
arecuk1 6 months ago
I just wanted to add that there are groups across the US that get together and have meetings and discuss issues. Also there are conventions where people give talks and sell books and make a lot of money. And TV shows also. But don't call it organized because that would suggest that some people might be getting rich writing books. Don't mention someone like Richard Dawkin's and others who are getting rich writing books and giving speech's to big crowds nothing organized about that is there.
arecuk1 6 months ago
I mean nothing personal but you might want to hire someone to write for you as you seem to take awhile to get to your point. I am a believer in God and I struggle with this issue also. My wife always tells me to get to the point because I tend to throw out to many things that take away from my point. It just takes practice and you will get it. God Bless.
arecuk1 6 months ago
Great Vid, you should have signed off with "Good night - God Bless"
Five5times18 8 months ago
Rated "G" for "Genius".
ehtuanK 8 months ago
Good Video, But most Theist will continue hating Atheist for no reason.
XFatesAdversaryX 8 months ago
@XFatesAdversaryX Same reason why people will hate Emos, Gays and such. If something is different and opposite from you, it must be wrong. I respect other peoples' beliefs, but I can't stand it if somebody tries to convert me to theirs. You believe what you want to believe and I believe what I want to believe. 'nuff said. -nyancat-
TheNatManRS 8 months ago
@TheNatManRS I agree with you......I understand what being different means as I am Black and an Athiest
XFatesAdversaryX 8 months ago
Also, I have a question. As an atheist, how do you know what is right and wrong? What makes you think murdering someone isn't moral? Sure, your parents taught you that, but why did they think that way? There's nothing that says rape is evil except your conscience, but what gave us the ability to perceive right and wrong in the first place?
Sorry, didn't mean to have so many questions originally. I'm just curious to hear your's and others' opinions on the matter if you don't mind.
ThemForsakenGamers 8 months ago
@ThemForsakenGamers Morality is subjective, meaning that what one person considers to be good is considered by someone, somewhere, to be evil. Not only that, but it is also very inconsistent; Most people would agree that murder is wrong, unless it is done in self defense.
Because of this, I think it is reasonable to assume that morality, or at least objective morality, does not exist, and that what religious people call objective morality is merely survival instinct and/or reciprocal altruism.
cruelzeppelin666 8 months ago
I think atheism is a religion. Religion is a belief in something. Strong atheists believe there is no god. Weak athiests don't know what to believe, and therefore they believe in nothing. You don't need a set of rules in order to make a religion. For instance, I could believe that my brother is god and because I am his relative I'll have life after death. That would be a religion in my opinion; no offense to anyone reading this.
ThemForsakenGamers 8 months ago
@ThemForsakenGamers Not believing in something (or someone) does not make that belief part of a religion anymore than not collecting stamps makes it a hobby. If you don't worship a deity or live by a set of rules set up by a group than you are not in a religion. As much as you want to say "a belief in the non-belief of god" it would be more proper to say " no belief in a god". I don't even think of a god in my day to day life. I am very moral and have good ethics. This is not a religion.
2000bluecrow 8 months ago
@ThemForsakenGamers That's a very ambiguous definition for religion. If religion is simply a belief in something, then believing that 2+2=4 could be considered a religious belief.
Also, weak atheists do not believe in nothing; that's Nihilism. Weak Atheism is the position that there is not sufficient evidence to prove that a God exists, so it is reasonable to doubt that one does exist.
cruelzeppelin666 8 months ago
Kberka
kberka 8 months ago
@Sweetsticks777 Excuse me, but I'll be more than happy to break down your "Lord" as well because any Father who would do that to his own children is still nothing less than disgusting and would be just as evil as the devil in Christian mytholgy anyways. Arrogant, prideful, and abusive. I'm sorry for insulting you, but to be blunt, it's what I really think of you lol, no denying that. But go ahead and quote your big book of multiple choice where it's okay to enslave, rape, and murder for God.
strkszone 8 months ago
Hey man, really well spoken video, kudos!
PLOVAPODA 8 months ago
Isnt "weak atheism" really called being an agnostic.
lpminecraftvideos 8 months ago
@lpminecraftvideos No, it isn't the same. It can be labeled Agnostic-Atheist but there are Agnostic-Theists as well. Agnostic-Atheists resemble weak Atheism saying that until given proof to believe in a God we'll withold judgement. Agnostic-Theists say they don't know there's a God, and there may very well not be, but they just want to believe anyways because of (insert reason here).
strkszone 8 months ago
"It's not a religion because there is no dogma or criteria to follow in order to be an Atheist."
Yes, I suppose under the authority if Christianity that is true. But under religions that don't have gods, it is not! Why let others decide for you what you want to define as religion ? They will just keep you from competing with them as a religion. Confucianism is a religion and it is simply humanism.
kberka 8 months ago
@kberka Since Atheism doesn't have any structure whatsoever, I don't consider it one. This is mostly to prevent arguments like "your position is based on faith", which is patently false.
scjoiner 8 months ago
By the way, I am a member of the Atheist Community of Austin. I am also a founding member of the Atheist Experience.
kberka 8 months ago 3
@kberka Which member? I am a huge fan of the organization and the show.
scjoiner 8 months ago
" In addition, "the Court has adopted a broad definition of 'religion' that includes non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as theistic ones." The TORCASO v WATKINS
kberka 8 months ago
@kberka I am glad that legally, we have this definition, but for common practice it's nice to separate belief systems from the opposite.
scjoiner 8 months ago
“A religion need not be based on a belief in the existence of a supreme being, (or beings, for polytheistic faiths) nor must be it be a mainstream faith." Relevant cases include: WISCONSIN v YODER (1972); TORCASO v WATKINS (1961); MALNAK v YOGI (1979) and LINDELL v MCCALLUM (2003).
kberka 8 months ago
@Sweetsticks777 We were trying to compare it to human standards of morality. The morality of your god can't live up to your god's teachings is all we were trying to say.
Peturs86 8 months ago
@Sweetsticks777 There is a valid point there. We have an estimated age of the earth, accurately to within a degree of error. The age of the earth won't change, our knowledge of how old it is will be expanded and refined. Saying that because our instruments aren't perfectly accurate doesn't mean our knowledge is false.
Peturs86 8 months ago
@Sweetsticks777 "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives." Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV
YOUR BIBLE IS EVIL, BRO.
scjoiner 8 months ago 7
@scjoiner I want to be christian now.
TheRiffCalendar 8 months ago
@scjoiner Really? I hate to play the apologist here, but what you guys cite as an example for misogyny is in fact the exact opposite. That verse is actually, as ridiculous as it may sound, about granting women rights, protection and even social security. What you are doing is taking it out of (it's cultural) context!
Megashockism 7 months ago
@Sweetsticks777 More proof, please. ANY Proof, please. Jesus never existed. Can you show otherwise?
scjoiner 8 months ago
I would like to point out to the religious people. You can't deny the atrocities that have been done in every religion. This is why I can not accept you definitions of god/gods because even you can't live up to your own teachings. If you think it's only something that happened in that past, look up Damon Fowler. That's why I oppose religion. If your god did exist by your standards he wouldn't let things like this happen. If god exists we have nothing in common with it.
Peturs86 8 months ago
@Peturs86 Too true. Thank you for your wisdom.
scjoiner 8 months ago
@scjoiner thanks after I posted that one, I thought I may have went a little too over the top. >.<
Peturs86 8 months ago
@Peturs86 Read your post and tell me who is "over the top".
scjoiner 8 months ago
@scjoiner Are you going to do a follow up, on subjects like agnosticism (and how it pertains to both theists and atheists) and movements like humanism (which try to focus more on the human condition not bound by spirituality and superstition)? Or has the degeneration of your commentators spoiled that? XD
Peturs86 8 months ago
@Peturs86 Yeah, I'll do that tomorrow I hope.
scjoiner 8 months ago
@scjoiner Awesome!
Peturs86 8 months ago
Subbed.
JackMania77377 8 months ago
Hey Steven. If someone is not sure if there is/are a deity/deities, aren't they called agnostics?
Tehdarkringmaster 8 months ago
@Tehdarkringmaster No, they are technically still atheist. If they think they can't KNOW for sure, then they are agnostic. If you believe there is at least 1 god, then you are a theist of some kind.
scjoiner 8 months ago
@Tehdarkringmaster I think that makes you an agnostic atheist.
Toyomo16 8 months ago
@TheOptimistPrime 2nd comment: Most Christians accuse other Christians of not being "real" Christians to the point where no one besides Jesus is a real Christian lol. I do agree with you on one point, a bad person is bad despite their belief.
strkszone 8 months ago
@TheOptimistPrime It's very simple. Believe in God or many Gods or any supernatural being of creating us for some divine plan = Theist. Not believing, thinking it's possible but not proven, or thinking it's more likely to not be true = Atheist. Everyone uses labels to help compare other people to others. No one says Hitler is your baggage, but people do use the Bible as a reference such as (Abraham attempting to kill his son) or (The raping, killing, and slavery in the bible)
strkszone 8 months ago
I like the word atheism. It can easily be wrong if there is a gap between A and theism.
A theism can be cristanity Islam hindu Judaism or believing in ancient greek gods. Where as Atheism is the shortened version of anti Theism (not of god.) Anyway stephen I like the video and I'm a strong Atheist but I believe that people shall have the right to believe in whatever they want to believe. Sure I wish that there was real wishes vampires and stuff just to make the everyday life a little harder.
livedandletdie 8 months ago
I think stephenism sounds 100 times more awesome than any other religion :D
IAmBoogieman 8 months ago
I love you, Stephen.
lizardliza15 8 months ago
Are u a christian
WorldClassReviewMan 8 months ago
@WorldClassReviewMan I used to be for 15 years, but now I am not.
scjoiner 8 months ago
@scjoiner well what changed and are u atheist now?
WorldClassReviewMan 8 months ago
loool nice steven, you are touching scientology with your "i give you superpower for money" and imho, your are absolutely right, its jsut stupid to believe something that is ont proofen
masterdermeanner 8 months ago
btw bro:
most agnosticist are also weak atheists
masterdermeanner 8 months ago