JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
There is far too much stigma attached to the word 'atheist' Every single christian is an atheist to every other religion even within the big 3.The jewish god hasn't sent a saviour yet so all those who believe that jesus is the way might find themselves in the jewish hell.Muhammad assured his followers jesus was not divine (Koran 5;71-75;19;30-38) and those who believe otherwise will spend eternity in hell.I was indoctrinated a catholic but I kicked it and am now an atheist, thank god.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible
buahahahah the middle age was called the dark ages because of atheists?
The Inquisition was lead by atheists?
Was Hitler atheist?
You`re an idiot. Keep on talking with your imaginary friend in the sky. And please don`t tell us neither how your 5 days journey in the stomach of a whale was nor what the talking snake said.
@ThreeLions89 : Hitler spoke publicly of God, but privately may have been an atheist. It's unclear what he really was.
"Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery..."-
@gregg0325 He mocked christianity (in fact he stated that Europe would`ve been better as a muslim continent etc...), not religion. He even sent nazis in Tibet in the hope to find something that would show the reason why he was incarnating God`s will. His soldiers had written on their belts "Gott mit uns" = God with us.
It`s quite clear that he USED the christian faith but it`s also clear that he believed in some sort of deism.
@ThreeLions89: Valid point. The gift of reason allows us question the truth of claims and accept it when a valid conclusion has been reached. If only religious people could do this.
@gregg0325 They could theoretically do the same (because as human beings they have reason) but they prefer not to use it or to use it in a limited way in order not to get in conflict with their (unproved) dogmas.
It is in fact you who come out as an idiot when suggesting that Hitler was not atheist or agnostic Stalin, Mao and all the other major contributors to the human kind were atheists/agnostics
"Fundamentally in everyone there is the feeling for this almighty, which we call 'God' (that is to say, the dominion of natural laws throughout the whole universe). The priests, who have always succeeded in exploiting this feeling, threaten punishments for the man who refuses to accept the creed they impose"
@RasputinStream read hitlers book and you will know he was not a atheist. IN his book he says that he is going gods willl and kill in the jews. erveryone in his army took a oath and it began like this "with all mighty god on our side" every belt buckle that the army wore it said god on our side. the first treaty made by hitler was with the catholic church. he came from a roman catholic family in roman catholic bovaria. so get you head out of you ass
@RasputinStream also mal and stalin were gods there self tot here people. they didnt tell there people that there is no evidence that there is a godas a atheist would . what they said is that they were gods and everyone must bow under there rule. they were just like the north korean rulers with they think there are god. what i found out is anyone who brings up hitler mal and stalin in a debate about atheitism allready loose the debate
"It is said that every man needs a refuge where he can find consolation and help in unhappiness. I do not believe it! If humanity follows that path, it is solely a matter of tradition and habit. That is a lesson, by the way, that can be drawn from the Bolshevik front. The Russians have no God, and that does not prevent them from being able to face death. We do not want to educate anyone in atheism."
@dacer71 you`re a big fan of the imaginary friend, aren`t you?
Correct: Intelligence isn`t a priviledge of atheists. On the other hand there are far more idiots among believers so that despite my previous comment the truth is that nowadays there`s a negative correlation between religion and intelligence.
I know about Huxley etc... wanna compare that to what religion did/does/will do to the human race and all other spiecies of this planet? eheheh you better shut up bible thumping idiot!
It's time that people grew up and, rather like taking away a baby's dummy or weaning it, there will be resistance. Religion has passed its sell-by date. The monotheistic religions were great for creating cohesion amongst tribes and for fostering racism; especially useful for slavers. We can and must do better.
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
@cuevarap Even a huge group of believers is not a problem, its the point when they cross the line from belief to fact, when they act as if their truth is actually truth that we run into issues.
People claiming to know things they cannot possibly know
A lot of the reasons dawkins gave here for questioning religion as a child are similar to mine but the main reason was when i realised that christianity {the religion i was taught to follow in school} made me feel obligated to follow because a man was turtured and crucified for my benefit and that made me feel obligated even though i knew somehow it was all rubbish.{it's psychological abuse}.
According to the vast majority of biologists, evolution does not satisfy origins. Thus, it is irrational to pretend that the theory of evolution has any relation to the existence or non-existence of God. Richard Dawkins needs to go back to logic 1-A school and start over. Anyone with half a brain can easily grasp that what religious people do or do not do has no bearing on the existence of God and, anyone pretending otherwise is clearly a liar. DAWKINS = OBVIOUS LIAR.
Modern atheists are like one of the estimated 10 trillion microscopic organisms living inside their guts, strutting around trying to pretend that human beings don't exist, except for infinitely more ignorant. If one wants to embrace worthless superstition, that is their God-granted choice, but don't try pretending around the average truck driver or biker that atheists are anything other than liars of the most extreme and perverse kind. ATHEISM = GROSS SUPERSTITION = BULLSHIT.
There is a great set of lines in the book shantaram by Gregory Roberts. he quotes a character saying " the Cosmos started simple and is expanding and becoming complex..it will continue to become more and more complex until it reaches its next stage. That point is God, or the paradox of increasing complexity", and it satisfies both evolution and religon. Anything that stops that move to compexity is evil, and anything that moves us closer to it is good.
@TheEddmon I liked the poerty of that passage in Shantaram, but it at best is some really nice waffle. If the almost infinitely hot and infinitessimally small energy fog from which the comos exploded was simple, I'm pretty sure there are hundreds of cosmologists around the world who'd love you to explain it to them.
@MrKGatl No... not all Americans are brainwashed... but more Americans are uneducated and brainwashed than is normal in a developed country. One of their most obvious, saddening and bewildering traits.
@2001Horatio Its amazing that a country like america can be so smart and dumb at the same time. Religions is what's standing in the way of education here. Im an american, living in the south, where the most fundamentalists live. America has such potential, its sad to see it destroyed by fairy tales
@MrKGatl Yes! When I lived there I found this amazing too. America has astonishing potential - but, imagining external enemies, many Americans fail to even see the real enemies within. The American middle class has literally been raped and pillaged by the Upper Class - a class many deny even exists - since the early 70's... that was the decade the real American Dream died. So sad.
@MrKGatl Yup... I've known people who lost their jobs once it became known they were atheists - and I think you have a few Muslims in Congress... but any 'outed' Atheists? Don't think so. Such are Theocracies
@NitsuaNaed no eventually the roles will switch. Over centuries and millenia, as human intellect and knowledge grows, our need for magical answers diminishes. Christians, Jews, and Muslims will be no different than those who believed in the greek and roman gods. Bronze Age Mythology.
dawkins says design is not a good explanation because you need to explain a designer. Evolution is the same. It doiesn't say what created the first species.
Right, that's biogenesis's job ^^ (and it's almost done by the way, even thought they are some tricky parts)
The main difference is that evolution is a *mechanism* and that's very important. The role of sciences is not to give the ultimate cause ! That would be impossible. The role of science is to replace a fact with a another link fact, but with a explanation of the process leading from one fact to the other.
@Arsenal252 Design is therefore not a scientific explanation because you change a fact "there are many forms of life" by the other linked fact "there is god, and the diversity of life come from him" but does not give any explanation of the process.
@Arsenal252 Evolution change the fact "there are many forms of life" by the fact "there was a very primitive unique form of life and it became the diversity we know” BUT GIVE A EXPLANATION OF THE PROCESS ! And THAT does all the difference . That’s what Dawkins is talking about when he means “You still have to explain the designer” not only the origin of the designer, but what make a DESIGNER (and not just a entity) which is the way he designed, the process he used.
@Arsenal252 But Dawkins can’t afford to spend so much time explaining this each time he wants to say “Design is not a good explanation” simply because he has to say it way to often.
Having a belief in faith, isn't a bad thing it's what done in the name of religion war, death, gives murderer's and other evil doers an escape goat it's as bad as the greed of money. Also not giving the younger generation who will be looking after the older generation and the planet..should have the free mind to be given an equal opportunity to learn about life and actual facts not fiction.
This is where the moral arguement that atheists do not have the same moral fortitude as do Christians. I do not agree with the Iraq war. But, if he thinks that Saddam Hussain and Bin Laden are not "evil"? Then that is the only arguement that needs to be displayed to show the difference in basic morality between the atheist and the Christian. They are both evil to thier very cores.
@SuperGuitarman69 What they were saying is that "evil" is nothing more than a word used to judge others. There's no doubt that Saddam & Bin Laden are people who condone & promote violence, murder & misery...but then so do the supposedly "good" leaders of the World. We ought to be judging people by their acts, regardless of their religion, politics or nationality. The idea of "evil" lets people off the hook...it legitimizes evil as a counter force to good.
unfortunately it would appear some are just born evil bastards who are happy to stomp around our planet with no remorse.i see no reason to doubt the possibility of multiple universes,infinite planes,inter-dimensional beings,or even some sort of 'cosmic conciousness',but even if these things are REAL then they are natural - so i still see no need for some guy in the clouds..i think believers just have a hard time with the idea that everything 'just is' -and i think 'just is' is incredible enough
people who need religion are like children, they need/want to be told what to do & relinquish the burden of personal responsibility...i have no need of a book or imaginary friend to know right from wrong. if people would just wake up and see we're all made of starstuff we could crack on with developing our minds instead of wasting time...
THIS IS PROOF THAT ONLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IS TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST AND HIS HOLY SACRAMENTS!!!
youtube. com/ watch?v =jqsRDD6kXWY
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body." Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Matthew 26:26-28
Kinda weird that Dawkins says that positing God as the designer is regressive. Then he asserts Atheistic Evolution as a superior alternative, which is also intrinsically regressive. In other words, all epistemological beliefs are subject to
Dawkins believes that his own atheism is the logical extension of his understanding of evolution.
All knoweldge is regressive. All language is regressive. I took it that Dawkins was using that word in the sense that an explaination needs to be explained by another explanation ad infinitum.
Can you cite for me where Dawkins stated his belief was founded on evolution, rather than on the idea of God being bullshit? Because I think you're mistaken about what Dawkins believes.
The explanation for the diversity of life from a common ancestor is evolution: namely the observations that traits are hereditary, the DNA that causes the traits changes over time, and traits are selected by the environment. It does not need another explanation to explain it. It's done.
@rkyeun Why don't you do some research on "Dawkins believes that his own atheism is the logical extension of his understanding of evolution." Do your homework next time.
Laura: "Is atheism the logical extension of believing in evolution?"
Richard: "They clearly can't be irrevocably linked because a very large number of theologians believe in evolution. In fact, any respectable theologian of the Catholic or Anglican or any other sensible church believes in evolution. Similarly, a very large number of evolutionary scientists are also religious. My personal feeling is that understanding evolution led /me/ to atheism."
What I take from that is that Dawkin's disbelief is not actually founded upon evolution, but upon knowledge in general and that evolution was merely a causal factor, not the basis from which all else stems.
@rkyeun You said “selection” which I assume to mean Natural Selection. Can you explain where Natural Selection came from? Is Natural Selection a self existing mechanism that has no beginning and no end? Or does Natural Selection depend upon the existence of Nature? Because I want an explanation of your explanation, please. Thank you.
Nature exists. Natural selection exists. These are observations. Evolution doesn't depend on how those things exist, merely that they do. What you've asked for isn't needed to explain nor a part of evolution. If I chose to answer it, it wouldn't be an explanation for evolution. You might wish to ask how life or the universe started, which are different theories.
@rkyeun Natural Selection is a metaphor. You can’t touch it, smell it, taste it, hear it, or see it. It is not nature but an abstract idea. Natural Selection is a tautology. It is defined as, “the survival of those who survive.” Furthermore, Natural Selection is not Evolution no more than heredity is. You have not explained anything.
I have other things to do and can’t continue this. There are academic debates on both sides of this issue. You can take the side of whatever champion you want.
Selection and heredity are both prerequisites for evolution. The definition you've given for natural selection is incorrect. Natural selection is not a metaphor. Nature is the selecting factor for which genes propagate. It is not purely random chance that determines what survives, nor survival itself. Organisms must match the environment. Those that don't are the ones selected against.
There are only academic debates on one side of the issue. The other side has religious assertions.
@rkyeun Your last comment you use words, “random”, “chance”, “determines”, and “selected”.
A word or explanation always depends upon other words and explanations.
If you don’t believe in random chance, then you are a Determinist or Creationist.
If you believe that Evolution is not totally random, then you have to explain how non-random processes arose from pure randomness. You still haven’t explained your explanation.
BTW, Darwin said Natural Selection was a “metaphorical expression.”
It was Dawkins that opened this can of worms by rejecting God on the basis of the philosophical conundrum, “who designed the designer.”
I have demonstrated that everything, at some point, has an infinite regress of explanations. The “proof” of a concept relies on other proofs, etc. This has been a debate in science and philosophy for centuries. Dawkins is entitled to his opinion, of course, and you will have your own level of tolerance of what you believe
You have not demonstrated that everything has an infinite regress. You have asserted it. The proof of a concept does rely on other proofs, but the original source is observation of reality, which produces facts. If you doubt the half-life of a certain isotope, you may measure it and receive the same fact as everyone else. You may ask why or how isotopes decay, but that will have no impact on the fact that they do.
@rkyeun Are you unaware of the problem of causation and induction in the sciences? Methinks you exhibit a shallow naiveté. There is a term for it: “cum hoc ergo propter hoc.”
“Science is an infinite regression - behind each answer lurks a question, and behind that, another.”
Science as a whole is. Evolution in particular is not.
The individual pieces of science are complete and based upon demonstrable fact of which there is no regression. It is the continuing process of scientific advancement which enables us to ask deeper and more meaningful questions at each turn.
@rkyeun You pretend Natural Selection is a "demonstrable fact" but have not proven it how it is guided. You fail to understand that N.S. has nothing to do with Evolution. You have no idea of the problem of causation (Hume) especially when dealing with thousands of years of N.S. which is not observable. You ignore that all concepts have an infinite regression of explanations yet apply it only to God. Heredity is real data but N.S. is an irrelevant inference. cum hoc ergo propter hoc
@rkyeun Funny. Though I am not a Creationist, chronic masturbator, porn connoisseur, flatulence sniffer, or pedophile, either. All those rumors are false.
I doubt that few of us could imagine no greater "evil" than the murder of countless men, women and children. Yet, this is exactly what the mosaic god is recorded as doing.
People who worship as "the most high" such a ruthless deity, have raised "evil" to a place of holy righteousness. This can not help but negatively effect the sensitivities of the human mind and soul, and opens the door wide for man's inhumanity to man as we blindly follow our beloved god.
Religoin is a byproduct of false hope and self preservation. It is a selfcentered selfserving entity that thrives on peoples fears. Old testiment: Eye for an eye tooth for a tooth. New testiment: If slapped turn the other cheek there are many more contridictions as these all through the bible with this knowledge is it not reasonable to assume that it may not be of a devine conscience but rather the writings of primitive opportunistic, charlatans. Too many Gods not enough time.
Bush was never naive. Don't buy into the image, look at the man. You don't get into a position of such power if you're stupid, ignorant and naive. Bush raped the US economic system six ways from Sunday, collected the loot and retired to his ranch. Hardly the acts of a foolish, naive individual. See Michael Parenti on this subject.
@yatter1@yatter1 That's a rather large assumption you're making there. Tell me, what makes you assume that religion is "a load of shit" ? Just to be clear, whether or not I'm religious has absolutely no relevance to this conversation. I would also add that even if you're very naive assumption that religion is a load of shit was actually true, does that merit immature, petty and rude behavior? I think not.
It's anyone's right or privilege to believe in some form of predominance after physical death and/or the existence of an invisible 'cosmic intelligence' called God or whatever. The problem is grouping in blinded herds of fact deniers called religions which have so much harmed human brotherhood.
English Biologist is an atheist? No such thing, atheists believe in a supernatural entity (the primoridal* soup) that somehow caused the first living organisms to form. Oh, what about the infinitely complex and small "big bang"? Somehow, their magical big bang entity somehow turned cosmological matter, ie. rocks, dust to living organisms.
@CMVD777 how do you explain the greek mythology? those were written way before the bible. the egyptian even before the egyptians, those were before the bible or adam and eve. so you're what you call an ignoramus for knowing the truth and still believing and supporting the fairytale stories in the bible. I have one question. when you do a good deed, do you do it because you feel like doin it, or you do it because god told you that it was a good thing?
@CMVD777 how do you explain the greek mythology? those were written way before the bible. the egyptian mythology were also written before the bible.so you're what I wud call an ignoramus b/c eventho u kno the truth, u still believing and supporting the fairytale stories in the bible. I have one question. when you do a good deed, do you do it because you feel like doin it, or you do it because god told you that it was a good thing?
3. Blasphemies: if anybody will do it, is puniched very soon and anybody is free to try it, even right now! This one can come immediatly or later and it doesn't mean death or going to hospital (but can also happen).
4. In Bible, we find two (2) candidates to be called GOD, but atheists are arguing just with ONE,not with other pretendent.
1. In Bible we find a lot of prophecies which happened and are happening, examples: vatican, midle east, united states etc.
2. If anybody will follow what God asks (ex: praying), everybody will have whatever they want (ask). Note:Praying in a right form,following the INSTRUCTIONS in the Bible.
Surely the Iraq war was more inspired by greed for oil, than some idea of good & evil? Theorising can be a very speculative. The world order however, is dictated by economics, and thereby would suggest you discover the why & what for.
Surely the Iraq war was more inspired by greed for oil, than some idea of good & evil? Theorising can be a very speculative. The world order however, is dictated by economics, and thereby would suggest you discover the why & what for.
It's no suprise that of the hundreds of interviews I've watched with the great Richard Dawkins, it's the great Jonathan Miller who asks the most interesting, intelligent questions. 5 stars.
@ryko26 THIS IS PROOF THAT ONLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IS TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST AND HIS HOLY SACRAMENTS!!!
youtube. com/ watch?v =jqsRDD6kXWY
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body." Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Matthew 26:26-28
@ryko26 b/c he is the only one he's interviewed with a comparable education...he used to be a physician and it's obvious that he knows much about history and philosophy..he's probably smarter than Dawkins actually..
@ryko26 The American johnathan Miller is probably working in a mid-level university making 100 K a year: whereas Limbaugh makes 40 million. Vive la difference!!!!! Hahahahahah
No, everyone has seen Ken Ham and Kent Hovind. Its just that most people don't fall for thier lies, half truths, and misinformation. Unfortunelty, i did for about three years. What a waste of time that was.
you should make a big chart and do calculations from the bible at least like all the other people who have been using this nonsense to convince people that the end is nigh.
Of course, since 1857 when the last big hoowop over a theologist and hobby mathematician predicting the end date down to the time of day. Lots of unhappy campers.
If you read the new testament, not just the catchy parts but the whole thing, it's clear that Christ believed he would return within a generation.
and the video is a well-known fake. The original footage is available on his website uncut with an introduction by Dawkins. You'll notice that not only is it edited, but the interviewer is a male. Dawkins stopped the cameras because he didn't know they were creationists. His book "unweaving the rainbow" has the answer. DNA is *constantly* receiving new information and incorporating it. All of which is explained scientifically in Rainbow.
he's watching everything, make sure you be really dramatic and try to talk like a 1st century rabbi. Christ would've turned the other cheek on you. And only because, although he obviously did not historically exist (this is well proven but never proven enough), he couldn't kick you in the eyes.
Dimwitted people like you make upstanding Christians who read the bible and actually try to understand what it's *really* about (peace in Christ's case). Study the history of Sun Gods.
What's your point??? I might be a few decades younger than you..my apologies. I hope you are not one of those religious people who act like like the little boys...Matter of infact , it is the little boys these days who are asking the real questions.. questioning the stupidity and absurdities of religion..
@ashy6793 THIS IS PROOF THAT ONLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IS TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST AND HIS HOLY SACRAMENTS!!!
youtube. com/ watch?v =jqsRDD6kXWY
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body." Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Matthew 26:26-28
Religion made never sense to me despite a christian elementary. My dad was raised very religious same thing, it never made sense. There are probably a lot of people who it never made sense to, but before you could never say that out loud.
You are so right, It is the intellectuals and people of courage like Miller, Dawkins, Hutchson that have stepped up to expose the fraud of religion...The so called believers try to make feel that are somehow retarded or evil not to believe. It is insane to believe in something imaginary and the so called holy books which when scrutinized or read by those who care to understand are just stupid, rubbish, and absurd.
I agree with you..every intelligent person will question religion. The truth is that there is so much that the human race has yet to discover, we are a tiny tiny tiny speck of dust in the grand scheme of thing. I refuse to accept that there is dead or living human being who can has been in contact with the divine to tell us who the creator is and what she expects from us.
I don't understand Johnathan Miller's confusion: we don't catch atheism. We start atheist and catch religion or have it shoved down our throats (speaking from experience). Do babies believe fresh from the womb? No.
Babies aren't born religious OR atheist as they cannot comprehend religion or the alternatives. Babies are born neutral to both and it is their subsequent surroundings that influence whether or not they oppose or believe in religion.
@BlackSabbath86 - I think we differ in our definition of 'atheism'.
By definition, an atheist is someone who does not believe in god(s), and this is what I mean when I use the word. It is not a matter of comprehension. Nobody has to claim atheism to be an atheist.
E.g. If you, like Tarzan, were raised by apes, would you come to believe in the Judeo-Christian god? Barring some unlikely plot twist, no. You would, quite naturally and without actively meaning to, be an atheist.
I've given your definition a great deal of thought and the only answer I can give you is that there is no simple answer to that question. It is highly subjective to the situation and people involved. Comparing atheism to neutrality is too complex for a yt comment. An essay might do it, at a pinch.
But that's beside the point. My original comment was in response to the Johnathan Miller's strange assertion that atheism is caught, like a disease.
I think we can sum up atheism very simply thus:
* Unless a person actively believes in a god, they are, by definition, atheist. *
This covers babies, voluntary atheists, people forced to follow a religion out of fear, people who "don't care either way", and even those who are unaware of religion.
Agreed, I think atheism is a term that didnt need to exist until recently. Atheist was not needed as a term any more than someone who didnt believe in mermaids was a amermaidist. The atheist means a=not or no theism=religious subscription. The term would be the same for one who never knew a deity and one who rejected the notion of a deity.
@jns124able Voltaire used the word atheist (or a french version of it, at any rate) in the 18th century. Indeed, the in the late 1700s, atheism, agnosticism, and secularism were actually very common in the learned. Even the American founding fathers Washington, Adams, and Jefferson were at the very least, staunch secularists.
@PDelta41 Im sure it did exist...I was referring more philosophically to the "need" for the word. Thanks for the info tho...I find that stuff interesting...
This has been flagged as spam show
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
GET READY FOR THE GREAT WARNING NOW!!!
thewarningsecondcoming . com
JezusSlave 4 weeks ago
WTF? Wheres part 2????
RasputinStream 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
There is far too much stigma attached to the word 'atheist' Every single christian is an atheist to every other religion even within the big 3.The jewish god hasn't sent a saviour yet so all those who believe that jesus is the way might find themselves in the jewish hell.Muhammad assured his followers jesus was not divine (Koran 5;71-75;19;30-38) and those who believe otherwise will spend eternity in hell.I was indoctrinated a catholic but I kicked it and am now an atheist, thank god.
tonyp1945 2 months ago
Dawkins is as naive when he talks about politics as people who take religion literally.
dragan221 2 months ago
The same as me i always knew my mum and dad were bullshiting me about father xmas but i went a long with it until i was eight or nine lol
blindinglights02 3 months ago
@dacer71 is that what your imaginary friend asked you? well according to your comments if I was you I would answer with a resounding NO.
Disgusting bible thumping idiot.
ThreeLions89 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Dead-to-the-spirit deluded "God Delusion" author & blithering fool scientist goon Richard Dawkins another "leader" given to the profane masses is another useful idiot for Jesuit machinations"-C.O.
Jesuitical: pertaining to the Jesuits or their principals; designing; cunning; deceitful; prevaricating
The Jesuits completely altered the education system to suit their evolution agenda to discredit the Bible. They cant have a Satanic society of 'Do as Thou Wilt' if people still follow the Bible
SpencerBenedict2nd 4 months ago
@dacer71
buahahahah the middle age was called the dark ages because of atheists?
The Inquisition was lead by atheists?
Was Hitler atheist?
You`re an idiot. Keep on talking with your imaginary friend in the sky. And please don`t tell us neither how your 5 days journey in the stomach of a whale was nor what the talking snake said.
IDIOT.
ThreeLions89 4 months ago 14
@ThreeLions89 : Hitler spoke publicly of God, but privately may have been an atheist. It's unclear what he really was.
"Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery..."-
Adolf Hitler
gregg0325 2 months ago
@gregg0325 He mocked christianity (in fact he stated that Europe would`ve been better as a muslim continent etc...), not religion. He even sent nazis in Tibet in the hope to find something that would show the reason why he was incarnating God`s will. His soldiers had written on their belts "Gott mit uns" = God with us.
It`s quite clear that he USED the christian faith but it`s also clear that he believed in some sort of deism.
ThreeLions89 2 months ago
@ThreeLions89: Valid point. The gift of reason allows us question the truth of claims and accept it when a valid conclusion has been reached. If only religious people could do this.
gregg0325 2 months ago
@gregg0325 They could theoretically do the same (because as human beings they have reason) but they prefer not to use it or to use it in a limited way in order not to get in conflict with their (unproved) dogmas.
ThreeLions89 2 months ago
Comment removed
RasputinStream 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
It is in fact you who come out as an idiot when suggesting that Hitler was not atheist or agnostic Stalin, Mao and all the other major contributors to the human kind were atheists/agnostics
"Fundamentally in everyone there is the feeling for this almighty, which we call 'God' (that is to say, the dominion of natural laws throughout the whole universe). The priests, who have always succeeded in exploiting this feeling, threaten punishments for the man who refuses to accept the creed they impose"
RasputinStream 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@RasputinStream read hitlers book and you will know he was not a atheist. IN his book he says that he is going gods willl and kill in the jews. erveryone in his army took a oath and it began like this "with all mighty god on our side" every belt buckle that the army wore it said god on our side. the first treaty made by hitler was with the catholic church. he came from a roman catholic family in roman catholic bovaria. so get you head out of you ass
bgeezy1983 3 weeks ago
@RasputinStream also mal and stalin were gods there self tot here people. they didnt tell there people that there is no evidence that there is a godas a atheist would . what they said is that they were gods and everyone must bow under there rule. they were just like the north korean rulers with they think there are god. what i found out is anyone who brings up hitler mal and stalin in a debate about atheitism allready loose the debate
bgeezy1983 3 weeks ago
@ThreeLions89
"It is said that every man needs a refuge where he can find consolation and help in unhappiness. I do not believe it! If humanity follows that path, it is solely a matter of tradition and habit. That is a lesson, by the way, that can be drawn from the Bolshevik front. The Russians have no God, and that does not prevent them from being able to face death. We do not want to educate anyone in atheism."
- Adolf Hitler
RasputinStream 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@dacer71 you`re a big fan of the imaginary friend, aren`t you?
Correct: Intelligence isn`t a priviledge of atheists. On the other hand there are far more idiots among believers so that despite my previous comment the truth is that nowadays there`s a negative correlation between religion and intelligence.
I know about Huxley etc... wanna compare that to what religion did/does/will do to the human race and all other spiecies of this planet? eheheh you better shut up bible thumping idiot!
ThreeLions89 4 months ago
It's time that people grew up and, rather like taking away a baby's dummy or weaning it, there will be resistance. Religion has passed its sell-by date. The monotheistic religions were great for creating cohesion amongst tribes and for fostering racism; especially useful for slavers. We can and must do better.
ritchloui 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: DEADLY ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
@cuevarap Even a huge group of believers is not a problem, its the point when they cross the line from belief to fact, when they act as if their truth is actually truth that we run into issues.
People claiming to know things they cannot possibly know
shandcunt 6 months ago
A lot of the reasons dawkins gave here for questioning religion as a child are similar to mine but the main reason was when i realised that christianity {the religion i was taught to follow in school} made me feel obligated to follow because a man was turtured and crucified for my benefit and that made me feel obligated even though i knew somehow it was all rubbish.{it's psychological abuse}.
funkyleaf 6 months ago
According to the vast majority of biologists, evolution does not satisfy origins. Thus, it is irrational to pretend that the theory of evolution has any relation to the existence or non-existence of God. Richard Dawkins needs to go back to logic 1-A school and start over. Anyone with half a brain can easily grasp that what religious people do or do not do has no bearing on the existence of God and, anyone pretending otherwise is clearly a liar. DAWKINS = OBVIOUS LIAR.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Modern atheists are like one of the estimated 10 trillion microscopic organisms living inside their guts, strutting around trying to pretend that human beings don't exist, except for infinitely more ignorant. If one wants to embrace worthless superstition, that is their God-granted choice, but don't try pretending around the average truck driver or biker that atheists are anything other than liars of the most extreme and perverse kind. ATHEISM = GROSS SUPERSTITION = BULLSHIT.
richardaberdeen 8 months ago
There is a great set of lines in the book shantaram by Gregory Roberts. he quotes a character saying " the Cosmos started simple and is expanding and becoming complex..it will continue to become more and more complex until it reaches its next stage. That point is God, or the paradox of increasing complexity", and it satisfies both evolution and religon. Anything that stops that move to compexity is evil, and anything that moves us closer to it is good.
TheEddmon 8 months ago
@TheEddmon I liked the poerty of that passage in Shantaram, but it at best is some really nice waffle. If the almost infinitely hot and infinitessimally small energy fog from which the comos exploded was simple, I'm pretty sure there are hundreds of cosmologists around the world who'd love you to explain it to them.
AdamZae 8 months ago
I'm laughing at the prospect of an American audience trying to follow this interview! Really!!! No chance.. ever!
2001Horatio 8 months ago
@2001Horatio not all americans are brainwasheed, bible thumping idiots.
MrKGatl 7 months ago
@MrKGatl No... not all Americans are brainwashed... but more Americans are uneducated and brainwashed than is normal in a developed country. One of their most obvious, saddening and bewildering traits.
2001Horatio 7 months ago
@2001Horatio Its amazing that a country like america can be so smart and dumb at the same time. Religions is what's standing in the way of education here. Im an american, living in the south, where the most fundamentalists live. America has such potential, its sad to see it destroyed by fairy tales
MrKGatl 7 months ago
@MrKGatl Yes! When I lived there I found this amazing too. America has astonishing potential - but, imagining external enemies, many Americans fail to even see the real enemies within. The American middle class has literally been raped and pillaged by the Upper Class - a class many deny even exists - since the early 70's... that was the decade the real American Dream died. So sad.
2001Horatio 7 months ago
@2001Horatio atheists are now the most discriminated against group in america, more than muslims or gays
MrKGatl 7 months ago
@MrKGatl Yup... I've known people who lost their jobs once it became known they were atheists - and I think you have a few Muslims in Congress... but any 'outed' Atheists? Don't think so. Such are Theocracies
2001Horatio 7 months ago
@2001Horatio As much as it pains me to say, an Atheist wouldnt stand a chance in the American political scene right now. Maybe in a few years.
MrKGatl 7 months ago
@MrKGatl It's a singularity
2001Horatio 7 months ago
@MrKGatl atheists will be the worlds last oppressed people. bet my life on it.
NitsuaNaed 4 months ago
@NitsuaNaed no eventually the roles will switch. Over centuries and millenia, as human intellect and knowledge grows, our need for magical answers diminishes. Christians, Jews, and Muslims will be no different than those who believed in the greek and roman gods. Bronze Age Mythology.
MrKGatl 4 months ago
@MrKGatl i sure hope so cuz man...if america is really still 90% religious i dont think i can have much hope at all!
NitsuaNaed 4 months ago
@MrKGatl not really. Unfortunately these idiots keep on breeding ,much more than intelligent (or atheist) people. This means:
- Powerful politics
- Tax examption ecc...
I can clearly tell you that if social dawrinism would`ve lasted a little bit longer , idiots like Wendy Wright wouldn`t exist.
But unfortunately if you let religious idiots in and pay for them it`s going to be a weight for the whole intelligent society.
ThreeLions89 4 months ago
I don't think Bush was evil, just stupid.
desasterz 10 months ago
@desasterz...thats the problem..u think!!! read up about his family!! and your think will be "ohh shit that bastard"
freedomland11 9 months ago
I'd like to see the Incredible Hulk fight Whitney Houston.
procommenter 1 year ago 12
@procommenter Crack!!! right in her nose!!! HAH
wondergundy 3 months ago
dawkins says design is not a good explanation because you need to explain a designer. Evolution is the same. It doiesn't say what created the first species.
Arsenal252 1 year ago
@Arsenal252
Right, that's biogenesis's job ^^ (and it's almost done by the way, even thought they are some tricky parts)
The main difference is that evolution is a *mechanism* and that's very important. The role of sciences is not to give the ultimate cause ! That would be impossible. The role of science is to replace a fact with a another link fact, but with a explanation of the process leading from one fact to the other.
wjk72 1 year ago
@Arsenal252 Design is therefore not a scientific explanation because you change a fact "there are many forms of life" by the other linked fact "there is god, and the diversity of life come from him" but does not give any explanation of the process.
wjk72 1 year ago
@Arsenal252 Evolution change the fact "there are many forms of life" by the fact "there was a very primitive unique form of life and it became the diversity we know” BUT GIVE A EXPLANATION OF THE PROCESS ! And THAT does all the difference . That’s what Dawkins is talking about when he means “You still have to explain the designer” not only the origin of the designer, but what make a DESIGNER (and not just a entity) which is the way he designed, the process he used.
wjk72 1 year ago
@Arsenal252 But Dawkins can’t afford to spend so much time explaining this each time he wants to say “Design is not a good explanation” simply because he has to say it way to often.
wjk72 1 year ago
"What an unpleasant and Illogical thing it was"
SRCervecero58 1 year ago
7:40 - John Miller/Chris Tarrant??
RevNTheogen 1 year ago
Having a belief in faith, isn't a bad thing it's what done in the name of religion war, death, gives murderer's and other evil doers an escape goat it's as bad as the greed of money. Also not giving the younger generation who will be looking after the older generation and the planet..should have the free mind to be given an equal opportunity to learn about life and actual facts not fiction.
Jarrowism 1 year ago
This is where the moral arguement that atheists do not have the same moral fortitude as do Christians. I do not agree with the Iraq war. But, if he thinks that Saddam Hussain and Bin Laden are not "evil"? Then that is the only arguement that needs to be displayed to show the difference in basic morality between the atheist and the Christian. They are both evil to thier very cores.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
@SuperGuitarman69 What they were saying is that "evil" is nothing more than a word used to judge others. There's no doubt that Saddam & Bin Laden are people who condone & promote violence, murder & misery...but then so do the supposedly "good" leaders of the World. We ought to be judging people by their acts, regardless of their religion, politics or nationality. The idea of "evil" lets people off the hook...it legitimizes evil as a counter force to good.
tupperwararty 1 year ago
@tupperwararty There is evil and good. It shows legit intent. It can be weighed. To not identify the distinction is simply ludicrous.
SuperGuitarman69 1 year ago
good interview
b45100 1 year ago
unfortunately it would appear some are just born evil bastards who are happy to stomp around our planet with no remorse.i see no reason to doubt the possibility of multiple universes,infinite planes,inter-dimensional beings,or even some sort of 'cosmic conciousness',but even if these things are REAL then they are natural - so i still see no need for some guy in the clouds..i think believers just have a hard time with the idea that everything 'just is' -and i think 'just is' is incredible enough
onion66966 1 year ago
@onion66966 really well put. I agree with everything you wrote.
pesahson 1 year ago
people who need religion are like children, they need/want to be told what to do & relinquish the burden of personal responsibility...i have no need of a book or imaginary friend to know right from wrong. if people would just wake up and see we're all made of starstuff we could crack on with developing our minds instead of wasting time...
onion66966 1 year ago
So, Entropy56.......because you're too stupid to understand science, then by default, your god did it?? Of course you're a schizophrenic.
JstNEarthling 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THIS IS PROOF THAT ONLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IS TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST AND HIS HOLY SACRAMENTS!!!
youtube. com/ watch?v =jqsRDD6kXWY
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body." Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Matthew 26:26-28
God bless You
JezusSlave 1 year ago
Dear spaghetti monster, help these misguided people. We will bow down in your holy sauce and worship you forever. Ramen
Exlemic 1 year ago
5:15
Kinda weird that Dawkins says that positing God as the designer is regressive. Then he asserts Atheistic Evolution as a superior alternative, which is also intrinsically regressive. In other words, all epistemological beliefs are subject to
regressive analysis. He just spoke in circles.
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
I'm afraid I haven't heard of Atheistic Evolution.
Are you claiming that atheism is regressive, or that the scientific Theory of Evolution is regressive?
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun
Dawkins believes that his own atheism is the logical extension of his understanding of evolution.
All knoweldge is regressive. All language is regressive. I took it that Dawkins was using that word in the sense that an explaination needs to be explained by another explanation ad infinitum.
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
Can you cite for me where Dawkins stated his belief was founded on evolution, rather than on the idea of God being bullshit? Because I think you're mistaken about what Dawkins believes.
The explanation for the diversity of life from a common ancestor is evolution: namely the observations that traits are hereditary, the DNA that causes the traits changes over time, and traits are selected by the environment. It does not need another explanation to explain it. It's done.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun Why don't you do some research on "Dawkins believes that his own atheism is the logical extension of his understanding of evolution." Do your homework next time.
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
Okay, I will.
Laura: "Is atheism the logical extension of believing in evolution?"
Richard: "They clearly can't be irrevocably linked because a very large number of theologians believe in evolution. In fact, any respectable theologian of the Catholic or Anglican or any other sensible church believes in evolution. Similarly, a very large number of evolutionary scientists are also religious. My personal feeling is that understanding evolution led /me/ to atheism."
rkyeun 1 year ago
@Entropy56
What I take from that is that Dawkin's disbelief is not actually founded upon evolution, but upon knowledge in general and that evolution was merely a causal factor, not the basis from which all else stems.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun You said “selection” which I assume to mean Natural Selection. Can you explain where Natural Selection came from? Is Natural Selection a self existing mechanism that has no beginning and no end? Or does Natural Selection depend upon the existence of Nature? Because I want an explanation of your explanation, please. Thank you.
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
Nature exists. Natural selection exists. These are observations. Evolution doesn't depend on how those things exist, merely that they do. What you've asked for isn't needed to explain nor a part of evolution. If I chose to answer it, it wouldn't be an explanation for evolution. You might wish to ask how life or the universe started, which are different theories.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun Natural Selection is a metaphor. You can’t touch it, smell it, taste it, hear it, or see it. It is not nature but an abstract idea. Natural Selection is a tautology. It is defined as, “the survival of those who survive.” Furthermore, Natural Selection is not Evolution no more than heredity is. You have not explained anything.
I have other things to do and can’t continue this. There are academic debates on both sides of this issue. You can take the side of whatever champion you want.
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
Selection and heredity are both prerequisites for evolution. The definition you've given for natural selection is incorrect. Natural selection is not a metaphor. Nature is the selecting factor for which genes propagate. It is not purely random chance that determines what survives, nor survival itself. Organisms must match the environment. Those that don't are the ones selected against.
There are only academic debates on one side of the issue. The other side has religious assertions.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun Your last comment you use words, “random”, “chance”, “determines”, and “selected”.
A word or explanation always depends upon other words and explanations.
If you don’t believe in random chance, then you are a Determinist or Creationist.
If you believe that Evolution is not totally random, then you have to explain how non-random processes arose from pure randomness. You still haven’t explained your explanation.
BTW, Darwin said Natural Selection was a “metaphorical expression.”
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
No, explaining how is the prerequisites are met is not the burden of the theory. It is enough to observe that they are.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun Not, explaining how the prerequisites of God are met is not the burden of the theory. It is enough to know that he does.
Entropy56 1 year ago
@rkyeun Back to the original topic…
It was Dawkins that opened this can of worms by rejecting God on the basis of the philosophical conundrum, “who designed the designer.”
I have demonstrated that everything, at some point, has an infinite regress of explanations. The “proof” of a concept relies on other proofs, etc. This has been a debate in science and philosophy for centuries. Dawkins is entitled to his opinion, of course, and you will have your own level of tolerance of what you believe
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
You have not demonstrated that everything has an infinite regress. You have asserted it. The proof of a concept does rely on other proofs, but the original source is observation of reality, which produces facts. If you doubt the half-life of a certain isotope, you may measure it and receive the same fact as everyone else. You may ask why or how isotopes decay, but that will have no impact on the fact that they do.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun Are you unaware of the problem of causation and induction in the sciences? Methinks you exhibit a shallow naiveté. There is a term for it: “cum hoc ergo propter hoc.”
“Science is an infinite regression - behind each answer lurks a question, and behind that, another.”
- Hans Christian von Baeyer
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
Science as a whole is. Evolution in particular is not.
The individual pieces of science are complete and based upon demonstrable fact of which there is no regression. It is the continuing process of scientific advancement which enables us to ask deeper and more meaningful questions at each turn.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun You pretend Natural Selection is a "demonstrable fact" but have not proven it how it is guided. You fail to understand that N.S. has nothing to do with Evolution. You have no idea of the problem of causation (Hume) especially when dealing with thousands of years of N.S. which is not observable. You ignore that all concepts have an infinite regression of explanations yet apply it only to God. Heredity is real data but N.S. is an irrelevant inference. cum hoc ergo propter hoc
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
Each and every sentence in that comment is a false assertion.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun Put it up on your web page that you pwned another one on YouTube. You will impress your friends.
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56
This one's just for you.
watch?v=IBHEsEshhLs
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rkyeun Funny. Though I am not a Creationist, chronic masturbator, porn connoisseur, flatulence sniffer, or pedophile, either. All those rumors are false.
Entropy56 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rkyeun I heard Richard Dawkins is a chronic masturbator, porn connoisseur, flatulence sniffer, and pedophile. Any truth to that?
Entropy56 1 year ago
@Entropy56 The regression Dawkin's talking about is not what you are talking about. And you know that.
gobsbsdvfas 1 year ago
Perhaps Dawkins missed it.
I doubt that few of us could imagine no greater "evil" than the murder of countless men, women and children. Yet, this is exactly what the mosaic god is recorded as doing.
People who worship as "the most high" such a ruthless deity, have raised "evil" to a place of holy righteousness. This can not help but negatively effect the sensitivities of the human mind and soul, and opens the door wide for man's inhumanity to man as we blindly follow our beloved god.
JamesThomas 1 year ago
Religoin is a byproduct of false hope and self preservation. It is a selfcentered selfserving entity that thrives on peoples fears. Old testiment: Eye for an eye tooth for a tooth. New testiment: If slapped turn the other cheek there are many more contridictions as these all through the bible with this knowledge is it not reasonable to assume that it may not be of a devine conscience but rather the writings of primitive opportunistic, charlatans. Too many Gods not enough time.
Destroe1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Discovered in the 21stC: The Underlying Law of Nature.
The underlying law of nature may be the world's most useful, profitable and encouraging knowledge.
The top 3 General Characteristics of The underlying law of nature are:
#1. The Way of All Things
#2. The Basis of All Laws and Principles
#3. The Basis of All Health, Growth, Efficacy and Efficiency
Google it – as a start.
The empirical process for identifying the underlying law of nature was discovered in 2008.
Soon we may all do so.
TedDGPoulos 1 year ago
Bush was never naive. Don't buy into the image, look at the man. You don't get into a position of such power if you're stupid, ignorant and naive. Bush raped the US economic system six ways from Sunday, collected the loot and retired to his ranch. Hardly the acts of a foolish, naive individual. See Michael Parenti on this subject.
colourmegone 1 year ago
@valma1208 I think that's rather rude. I would also propose that you're as irrational as any religious person who walks the streets......
irishmagic88 1 year ago
@irishmagic88 It may be rude, but it´s still true
yatter1 1 year ago
Comment removed
xirishmagicx 1 year ago
@yatter1 @yatter1 That's a rather large assumption you're making there. Tell me, what makes you assume that religion is "a load of shit" ? Just to be clear, whether or not I'm religious has absolutely no relevance to this conversation. I would also add that even if you're very naive assumption that religion is a load of shit was actually true, does that merit immature, petty and rude behavior? I think not.
xirishmagicx 1 year ago
why is he fidgeting that much at the beginning?
753hill 1 year ago
It's anyone's right or privilege to believe in some form of predominance after physical death and/or the existence of an invisible 'cosmic intelligence' called God or whatever. The problem is grouping in blinded herds of fact deniers called religions which have so much harmed human brotherhood.
cuevarap 1 year ago 31
I love how Miller pronounces "evil." He's straight off of Austin Powers. Word. Ey-vell.
blackrosesandthorns 1 year ago
@valma1208
-no, the invisible pink unicorn loves me.
tictactoechicken123 1 year ago
5. Mostly atheist, are against GOD's morality and justice but never refer the same to other candidate: satan.
6. Bible maintans evolution after creation, earth have billions of years etc.
Atheism is a dead concept.
CMVD777 1 year ago
English Biologist is an atheist? No such thing, atheists believe in a supernatural entity (the primoridal* soup) that somehow caused the first living organisms to form. Oh, what about the infinitely complex and small "big bang"? Somehow, their magical big bang entity somehow turned cosmological matter, ie. rocks, dust to living organisms.
TruthfulChristian2 1 year ago
@TruthfulChristian2
-the primoridal soup is a reference to the early atmosphere of earth.
tictactoechicken123 1 year ago
@TruthfulChristian2
This primordial soup that you seem to be so uniformed on, has been tested in a lab.
It shows how at that time, "No plants yet, little to no oxygen" electricity can produce the building blocks of life. Amino acids.
4me2cclearly 1 year ago
@CMVD777 how do you explain the greek mythology? those were written way before the bible. the egyptian even before the egyptians, those were before the bible or adam and eve. so you're what you call an ignoramus for knowing the truth and still believing and supporting the fairytale stories in the bible. I have one question. when you do a good deed, do you do it because you feel like doin it, or you do it because god told you that it was a good thing?
Atheist603 1 year ago
@CMVD777 how do you explain the greek mythology? those were written way before the bible. the egyptian mythology were also written before the bible.so you're what I wud call an ignoramus b/c eventho u kno the truth, u still believing and supporting the fairytale stories in the bible. I have one question. when you do a good deed, do you do it because you feel like doin it, or you do it because god told you that it was a good thing?
Atheist603 1 year ago
3. Blasphemies: if anybody will do it, is puniched very soon and anybody is free to try it, even right now! This one can come immediatly or later and it doesn't mean death or going to hospital (but can also happen).
4. In Bible, we find two (2) candidates to be called GOD, but atheists are arguing just with ONE,not with other pretendent.
CMVD777 1 year ago
God exist! evidences:
1. In Bible we find a lot of prophecies which happened and are happening, examples: vatican, midle east, united states etc.
2. If anybody will follow what God asks (ex: praying), everybody will have whatever they want (ask). Note:Praying in a right form,following the INSTRUCTIONS in the Bible.
CMVD777 1 year ago
mohammed gave me a wicked blow job this morning.
blackfrancis55 1 year ago
I agree that that what Dawkins really opposes is tribalism. He uses a fairly philosophical doctrine of rationalism based on western society.
FaerieLinn 1 year ago
I find it hard to believe that people leaving such stupid comments actually watched this video. At least you are trying I guess.
g00glian0 1 year ago
google Doe's Account.
Wintblash 1 year ago
@Wintblash doe's account...you mean the christian fundamentalists from america who claim the LHC is a secret "multiverse" machine. LMFAO
7StoryMagnet 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Surely the Iraq war was more inspired by greed for oil, than some idea of good & evil? Theorising can be a very speculative. The world order however, is dictated by economics, and thereby would suggest you discover the why & what for.
richwarth 1 year ago
Surely the Iraq war was more inspired by greed for oil, than some idea of good & evil? Theorising can be a very speculative. The world order however, is dictated by economics, and thereby would suggest you discover the why & what for.
richwarth 1 year ago
0:00 - 0:20 - why is he shaking?
lifemetall 1 year ago
cos hes an old dude probably. someold guys do that
DarkKnightBob1o1 1 year ago
@lifemetall cos he shagged his maid in the back room 10 seconds before filming. leg and hand tremmors means it was a good one.
userwl2850 1 year ago
@userwl2850 hehe, i guess that's why he pressed his legs so hard together, to hide his boner
lifemetall 1 year ago
maybe he needs to pee really badly
hardleecure 1 year ago
@lifemetall
because he's brilliant and can't contain it
snowbeerd 1 year ago
It's no suprise that of the hundreds of interviews I've watched with the great Richard Dawkins, it's the great Jonathan Miller who asks the most interesting, intelligent questions. 5 stars.
ryko26 1 year ago 36
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryko26 THIS IS PROOF THAT ONLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IS TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST AND HIS HOLY SACRAMENTS!!!
youtube. com/ watch?v =jqsRDD6kXWY
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body." Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Matthew 26:26-28
JezusSlave 1 year ago
@ryko26 b/c he is the only one he's interviewed with a comparable education...he used to be a physician and it's obvious that he knows much about history and philosophy..he's probably smarter than Dawkins actually..
gottspieler 1 year ago
@gottspieler er...well done
ryko26 1 year ago
@ryko26 Dawkins spends his time lecturing to American universities in order to sell books.
Miller doesn't.
Nuff said.
tupperwararty 1 year ago
Since Jonathan Miller has not published fashionable atheist tomes in America & promoted them on US tv, he is not a recognisible figure in the US.
It's up to you to consider whether this is a bad thing or good thing.
For instance, I am a total unknown in the US...yet with a few words I've already educated receptive Americans to something worthwhile.
Simon Cowell or tupperwararty?
tupperwararty 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tupperwararty what the fuck are you talking about you boring pompous pseudo twat?
ryko26 1 year ago
@ryko26 The American johnathan Miller is probably working in a mid-level university making 100 K a year: whereas Limbaugh makes 40 million. Vive la difference!!!!! Hahahahahah
2001Horatio 8 months ago
"I'm an atheist with respect to the Judeo-Christian God, because there is not a shred of EVIDENCE in favor of the Judeo-Christian God."
~ Richard Dawkins
...Dawkins, that's because you have not visited my channel.
Eye2EyeIIIV 2 years ago
No, everyone has seen Ken Ham and Kent Hovind. Its just that most people don't fall for thier lies, half truths, and misinformation. Unfortunelty, i did for about three years. What a waste of time that was.
aSkepticalTruth 2 years ago
@Eye2EyeIIIV do tell...what proof does your channel provide?
jns124able 2 years ago
This is a great interview, it shows the human side of dawkins.
itsabomberscope 2 years ago
@ergotrof Great, then we'll finally be able to see evidence of his supposed existence.
But to be fair, if he DOESN'T come in the time frame you mention, could you people please stop whining about him all the fucking time?
wrongwayup 2 years ago 2
@ergotrof
you should make a big chart and do calculations from the bible at least like all the other people who have been using this nonsense to convince people that the end is nigh.
Of course, since 1857 when the last big hoowop over a theologist and hobby mathematician predicting the end date down to the time of day. Lots of unhappy campers.
If you read the new testament, not just the catchy parts but the whole thing, it's clear that Christ believed he would return within a generation.
songcycle 2 years ago
@ergotrof
and the video is a well-known fake. The original footage is available on his website uncut with an introduction by Dawkins. You'll notice that not only is it edited, but the interviewer is a male. Dawkins stopped the cameras because he didn't know they were creationists. His book "unweaving the rainbow" has the answer. DNA is *constantly* receiving new information and incorporating it. All of which is explained scientifically in Rainbow.
Yes, little Johnny, Christians lie.
songcycle 2 years ago
@ergotrof
he's watching everything, make sure you be really dramatic and try to talk like a 1st century rabbi. Christ would've turned the other cheek on you. And only because, although he obviously did not historically exist (this is well proven but never proven enough), he couldn't kick you in the eyes.
Dimwitted people like you make upstanding Christians who read the bible and actually try to understand what it's *really* about (peace in Christ's case). Study the history of Sun Gods.
songcycle 2 years ago
I think you will all find that it is the Lord Mouse.And if you don't all start worshiping Him, you're all in ghastly trouble.
ilkinond 2 years ago
Some truth to that.... But he is not an idiot.
ilkinond 2 years ago
sphagetti monster is the only true God...
ashy6793 2 years ago 40
Amen
anonymous1trgb 2 years ago
I have been touched by his noodly apendage!
chunderville 2 years ago 2
where the fuck is part 2?
IHyRaXI 2 years ago
@ashy6793 naah its the toothfairy
Freethinker12341 1 year ago
@ashy6793 RAmen
KodierungHerz 1 year ago
@ashy6793 that joke is so old and not funny anymore...dont act like a little boy!
Uensalhoodstar 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Uensalhoodstar You have NO evidence that the spaghetti monster is NOT the only true God. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Mirror4u2 1 year ago
@Uensalhoodstar
What's your point??? I might be a few decades younger than you..my apologies. I hope you are not one of those religious people who act like like the little boys...Matter of infact , it is the little boys these days who are asking the real questions.. questioning the stupidity and absurdities of religion..
ashy6793 1 year ago
@ashy6793 Be funny if it actually were
charlesmar 1 year ago
@ashy6793 THIS IS PROOF THAT ONLY CATHOLIC CHURCH IS TRUE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST AND HIS HOLY SACRAMENTS!!!
youtube. com/ watch?v =jqsRDD6kXWY
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, "Take and eat; this is my body." Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." Matthew 26:26-28
JezusSlave 1 year ago
O ergotroj only The Flying teapot is LIGHT of this WORLD
DAdZor 2 years ago
Religion made never sense to me despite a christian elementary. My dad was raised very religious same thing, it never made sense. There are probably a lot of people who it never made sense to, but before you could never say that out loud.
DoomNoMore 2 years ago
You are so right, It is the intellectuals and people of courage like Miller, Dawkins, Hutchson that have stepped up to expose the fraud of religion...The so called believers try to make feel that are somehow retarded or evil not to believe. It is insane to believe in something imaginary and the so called holy books which when scrutinized or read by those who care to understand are just stupid, rubbish, and absurd.
ashy6793 2 years ago 3
@DoomNoMore
I agree with you..every intelligent person will question religion. The truth is that there is so much that the human race has yet to discover, we are a tiny tiny tiny speck of dust in the grand scheme of thing. I refuse to accept that there is dead or living human being who can has been in contact with the divine to tell us who the creator is and what she expects from us.
ashy6793 1 year ago
Fools. Marduk is the only true god.
Solstafirr 2 years ago 3
No THOR is the only true god.
DoomNoMore 2 years ago 4
Prove it.
akinadownhillace 2 years ago
I don't understand Johnathan Miller's confusion: we don't catch atheism. We start atheist and catch religion or have it shoved down our throats (speaking from experience). Do babies believe fresh from the womb? No.
genericmeatunit 2 years ago
Babies aren't born religious OR atheist as they cannot comprehend religion or the alternatives. Babies are born neutral to both and it is their subsequent surroundings that influence whether or not they oppose or believe in religion.
BlackSabbath86 2 years ago
@BlackSabbath86 - I think we differ in our definition of 'atheism'.
By definition, an atheist is someone who does not believe in god(s), and this is what I mean when I use the word. It is not a matter of comprehension. Nobody has to claim atheism to be an atheist.
E.g. If you, like Tarzan, were raised by apes, would you come to believe in the Judeo-Christian god? Barring some unlikely plot twist, no. You would, quite naturally and without actively meaning to, be an atheist.
genericmeatunit 2 years ago
So what you're saying is, we're all born atheist by default?
BlackSabbath86 2 years ago
By definition, yes.
genericmeatunit 2 years ago
Therefore atheism is neutrality?
BlackSabbath86 2 years ago
What is neutrality?
genericmeatunit 2 years ago
Having no opinion one way or the other, or not having the ability for such an opinion.
BlackSabbath86 2 years ago
I've given your definition a great deal of thought and the only answer I can give you is that there is no simple answer to that question. It is highly subjective to the situation and people involved. Comparing atheism to neutrality is too complex for a yt comment. An essay might do it, at a pinch.
But . . . (continued in next comment)
genericmeatunit 2 years ago
. . . (continued from previous comment)
But that's beside the point. My original comment was in response to the Johnathan Miller's strange assertion that atheism is caught, like a disease.
I think we can sum up atheism very simply thus:
* Unless a person actively believes in a god, they are, by definition, atheist. *
This covers babies, voluntary atheists, people forced to follow a religion out of fear, people who "don't care either way", and even those who are unaware of religion.
genericmeatunit 2 years ago
You've certainly given me something to think about! Cheers.
BlackSabbath86 2 years ago
Agreed, I think atheism is a term that didnt need to exist until recently. Atheist was not needed as a term any more than someone who didnt believe in mermaids was a amermaidist. The atheist means a=not or no theism=religious subscription. The term would be the same for one who never knew a deity and one who rejected the notion of a deity.
jns124able 2 years ago
@jns124able Voltaire used the word atheist (or a french version of it, at any rate) in the 18th century. Indeed, the in the late 1700s, atheism, agnosticism, and secularism were actually very common in the learned. Even the American founding fathers Washington, Adams, and Jefferson were at the very least, staunch secularists.
PDelta41 2 years ago
@PDelta41 Im sure it did exist...I was referring more philosophically to the "need" for the word. Thanks for the info tho...I find that stuff interesting...
jns124able 2 years ago