Added: 3 years ago
From: SkepticSage
Views: 1,999
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (120)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • shockofgod is ignorant tard. He blocks comments and ratings because he is afraid of being proven wrong. Atheism and other religions are not a fitness club with different benefits. I would just rather not lie to myself.

  • Great video. Near the ending it was like looking in a mirror. I happened to read GING, share your views on the conflict reduction and I'm balding with facial hair as well, so 3/3.

    Above all, I'm also one of those who was poisoned (Islam) and managed to finally get rid of it. Watching videos like these can really help, but only if one has an open mind, which is unfortunately not the case for the majority of believers as they are blinded by faith, fed by ignorance. Take 5tonyvvvv. Nuff said.

  • It benefited Jim Baker, to name one. How about Benny Hinn? Think he's benefiting?

  • skepticuniverse and stramster thats spot on. as far as this video goes bravo. Coming from a sraight man i must say, i love this guy.

  • atheism is the best way

  • atheism doesnt give one's life meaning. neither does christianity. how you life your life is what gives it meaning. you could say life means nothing to a person who thinks they will be ressurected. in some cases its true. in others it isnt.

  • I love the fact that you put it in the education category.

  • So there has to be a carrot on the end of stick? So it's all about reward, eh? And as far as happiness goes...just because you are happy, doesn't make it true. A drunk man is happier than a sober man, but the drunk man has a false sense of reality.

  • "You think its stupid to imagine there is no god, probably because YOU can't imagine it. "

    i can imagine all the other stars and all the other planets in all the other universe are just dead and always have been since forever and we are the first

    we just sprang up out of random reactions

    .

    it would of course be very narrow and self centered of me though

  • @o0lBobl0o What is "narrow" about facing our limitations about what we can and cannot know? Is not that part of the virtue of humility? What is self centered about not believing in god?? In fact, I think the belief in god is self centered. People usually beleive in god due to their own emotions and are less concerned about how their religion affects others emotions. "So what if my religion teaches homophobia and destroys people's happiness and self esteem, if it makes ME happy, who cares?"

  • @SkepticSage ...so what evolved first RNA..or the repair mechanisms..or the molecular machines??...u have a Major Paradox....lets hear some more assumptions..

  • @5tonyvvvv Scientist have come up with multiple theories about the origin of life. Do you not think they have considered these "paradoxes" you speak of? And yet they still beleive we came from the ground. Why would they beleive this if it were not the most logical and empirically valid theory? You seem to insinuate that scientists are biased in some way. How so?

  • In regards to RNA/DNA - could you please explain the problem of Chirality?

    Although Miller and Urey formed amino acids in their experiments in 1952 - all the amino acids that formed lacked Chirality.!!

    It is a universally accepted fact of chemistry that chirality cannot be created in chemical molecules by a random process.or in a test tube

    they  believe in some chemistry unknown to science.

  • @5tonyvvvv But what is your conclusion? That the absence of knowledge of how life began makes a creator a viable hypothesis. And if you are not saying that, then what is your alternative? Since we know the creation hypothesis is bullshit, what are we let with? We are left with a planet that is made fo the same thing we are and plenty of time for processes to occur that could bring us about. Where else would life come form but the universe around us?

  • @SkepticSage You have nothing more than assumptions with ZERO testable chemistry to back it up..I dont see how that is testable science?..bullshit theory, Yes...

  • @5tonyvvvv Again, you miss the point and you refuse to answer my questions. What is your alternative? Do you truly beleive that the absence of a chemical theory fo the origin of life means it isn't possible? And again I ask, what is the alternative, a creator? You fail to fathom how there is chemistry (as yet unknown) that can explain the beginnings of life? Why dismiss something believed by most scientists, and again, what is the alternative?

  • @SkepticSage As For the universe,that is laughable..nothing exploded into everything over time..atheist have their own,imaginary atheist chemistry..and philosophy..on how the universe came into existence..from NOTHING!..Yeah Iam not one your mental patients..dont try to brainwash me with your bullshit psychology..

  • @5tonyvvvv You are showing your ignorance of science. The BBT does not say that everything came form nothing- that is a common argument of fundamentalist Christians and shows their ignorance. The BBT is based on the evidence and has been revised repeatedly. What is it that you know that scientists do not? Why are scientists wrong about the data but your not? What is the alternative? Why can you not answer these questions?

  • @SkepticSage Sir,Iam saying there is a cause an intelligence behind it..and yes you dont know your own atheist religion..nothing exploded,all mater come together to form planets..and the first self replicating cells..came from this..which is more atheist bullshit assumptions with ZERO testable chemistry to back it..the better explanation is intelligence!!..why are your assumptions allowed..but if u mention intelligence its not allowed? homochirality proves intelligence not chance

  • @5tonyvvvv "Intelligence" has less evidence than the theory you criticize. Why is intelligence necessary? And again, please explain how all our scientists are getting it wrong. Intelligence is believed by almost no scientists. You claim there is ZERO testable chemistry. If you were truly up on the science you would know that is not true. If that were true, why do scientist beleive in the theory? Now intelligence has ZERO evidence, but that does not seem to bother you.

  • @SkepticSage I have mental patients that are atheist at the hospital I work in..your argument is not valid

  • @5tonyvvvv So the existence of a few mental patient atheists proves research wrong? If you had any scientific background you would know that anecdotes don't' trump data. In the video I report that atheism is associated with certain things and belief is associated with certain things in the population as a whole. A good counter argument would be to find a study that says otherwise. Anecdotes mean nothing in science. This shows me you don't understand what science is.

  • ask yourself how many universes are there?

    ask yourself how old is life really?

    how much better than you could life be?

    it's stupid to imagine there is no God

    it makes no difference if you like it or not

  • @o0lBobl0o You are right about one thing. What we feel says nothing about what is true. That is why I think your wrong. You think its stupid to imagine there is no god, probably because YOU can't imagine it. But why? Surely one can imagine there being no god, its not hard. I assume you cant imagine it because the very idea depresses you deeply. So you refuse to imagine. Well I can imagine there being no god and I can handle the emotional consequences. As a result, I don't beleive.

  • @o0lBobl0o "ask yourself how many universes are there?" Even assuming a system of parallel universes exists, they would all be superfluous at best.

    "ask yourself how old is life really?" Life has been on earth for the past ~3.7 billion years.

    "how much better than you could life be?" To attempt against the incoherence: life is infinitely great, filled with unlimited choices leading to happiness.

    "it's stupid to imagine there is no God" No; it's stupid to imagine there are no pixies.

  • @o0lBobl0o Q1 answer is I don't know.

    Q2 answer is i don't know.

    Q3 answer is i don't know.

    Your next statement is a non sequitur and your last remark is the only common ground we have.

    There is more integrity in "I don't know" than "god did it" and i refer u to the afore mentioned common ground.

  • verry true. i was once deeply religiouse and trying to follow the bible to a T. during that time i was hospitalized for depression, skitsofrania*,bi-poler disorder, and a few other illnesses. i was admitted to psych-wards about 15 times. no joke. after i started looking at what other people thaught about religion and the arguements from the other side, i became MUCH more stable and have been hospital free almost 3 years now. SUBSCRIBED

  • Great video.

  • I don't slave over a God, that's all I love. I love every human being, no matter religion. We're humans, not religious slaves. I don't care if you're Islamic, Christian, Buddhist, Atheist, Agnostic, I think every human being is good. Morality will start the minute you are born. Because human beings have emotion. Love, Hate, Anger, ect. Caring is an emotion and unless you're psychologically disabled, then you were born with morality, no matter what religion.

  • the sole benefit is reality!

  • my mother although she states she's atheist sheis really more a misotheist in that she believes god scorns her , often people believe me , like all others to be in a state of denial because i can not logicaly have faith in souls or conscious perpetuity, i am of really more of a moral, and logic based atheist rather than scientific, my limited perspective more based in psychology and philosophy give me resolution in lifes questions.

    please read and respond

  • I am the the only atheist in a large family, my father is a repressed bigot brought up baptist, my brother closest to my age often speaks of a violent hatred for non chiristians and at any point when i am to speak of views not to his liking am dealt with the threat of violence, i am younger than stated, i often deal with an extreme contempt for compromising my perspective apparently if i am to not get along it doesnt matter my position in any argument,

  • Most of the Christians I know constantly have their hands out, be it prayer, salvation, or anything else they can create in their minds.

    I've had only one belief that has produced an actual benefit where I get something.

    I believe I'll have another sammich :)

    Great video!

  • I believe I will maybe myself a delicious sandwich as well. That's almost never a bad idea.

  • Wow. Ok, I said "maybe" when I meant to say "make"

    Perhaps I should refrain from posting before I'm fully awake.

  • How do you draw the conclusion that the more religious a person is the more unhappy they are? That's a new one!

  • Religious people may not be more unhappy. But they are certainly less educated!

  • No, it is not new. It is a statistic that is very old. When people become unhappy they are drawn to religion in order to reduce their sadness with delusion. It is not clear how well it works. I think not.

  • @SkepticSage I think it can. But it is not because a God is making them happy. It's a psychological thing I'd think. Like when people do something wrong but will feel nothing if they rationalize it in their mind. Kind of like people in religion. They try to rationalize good things and have "feelings" things happens. Doesn't mean it's Divine of course. Good vid though. :D

  • I think there are other reasons why people become Christians bur certainly it is one reason.

  • GREAT VIDEO BRO. i am a born again christian and live for Christ. CAn i tell you just one thing? anyone who wants benefits from Christianity, never became a christian. promise. the bible says christians are promised to suffer. it promises no happiness.

    your so true. absolutely i am however more content. its still hard

    it can be rough. we have to give up on all of the desires that WE want.

    many benefits to atheism.

    just no eternal benefits. just my opinion

    i appreciate this video. thank u

    grant

  • There are no eternal benefits to Christianity, only empty lies.

  • @grant9120 hi grant. i personally have not met a single christian who gives up on all his desires.

    and if by voicing the opinion that there are no eternal benefits to atheism, you are also saying that the god you believe in will reward you at the end of your life for having given up on all your desires - then i hope for your sake that youre having quite a rough time indeed, because jesus as described in the bible sets a high standard in terms of having a rough time.

  • Thank you, that was well put and I second your views. I often feel that it is unfair and bigoted of me to accuse people of faith of being irrational and overtly suppressive, when they can easily state "I don't do those things, I don't bomb abortion clinics or condemn gay people".

    But as a whole, and individually, what are they contributing to the greater good?

    If I can be said to have faith in anything, I believe in a future for our species.. through our own hard work and faith in each other.

  • Someone please tell me this is a joke.

  • criticism is self criticism I sorry that you are ugly

  • I am sorry that you are an idiot.

  • Atheists have higher IQs? More educated? More emotionally stable? This is a very, very big assumption, Skeptic....

  • It is not an assumption. It is based on statistics gathered by social scientists, mostly psychologists. Look it up!

  • there are no atheist benefits the richest person in the world is a christian

  • The only people who beleive that are Christians. Atheist usually feel that Christians are guilt ridden and emotionally tortured. Ill make you a deal, if you don't stereotype Christians as all perfectly happy, I wont stereotype them as all selfish, stupid, boorish, and ignorant.

  • we are not all happy but most of us are i can't say that for atheists

  • Of course you cant because you don't know anything about atheists, you are running off stereotypes, not facts. The stats show that atheists are as happy as anyone else. Atheist also have higher IQs, are more educated, and tend to be more emotionally stable than the religious. If these things make for a happy life (which is a big assumption) than atheists are happier.

  • jesus and i are friends with benifits

  • you know what's the biggest idiotic irony?

    doctors and nurses wearing crosses and hijabs...

  • Number one benefit of atheism: Sleeping in on Sunday.

  • @GoblinXXX BEST... COMMENT... EVER!

  • Question: you said when you got religion out of your life you were no longer poisoned...were you once religious?

  • As a small child.

  • However, regarding the middle of the video, I came to a sudden hault. I believe both atheist and Christians can both be morally good, etc., it appears that you feel that their exlusion & differences supercede this in that Christians are inherently bad, simply b/c we are a majority voting against your rights...by this logic, and correct me if I'm wrong, no Christian is a good person because they are the epitome of what you can't stand? Am I right? What about the Christian who does not vote? Hate?

  • Nowhere in my video do I say that anyone is inherently bad. I say that Christian writings and beleifs have within them the potential for evil. I disagree with those who claim that Christians writings and beleifs must be distorted to be misused. Also, I beleive that certain ideas are more easily distorted than others and have been historically distorted. This in no way says that I beleive ALL Christians are inherently immoral. What is common is an unwillingness to discuss these issues.

  • Okay, perhaps I was too hasty in saying that. But, I'm not so sure your analysis is much different from what I inferred, excluding that ALL Christians were bad. But, it seems to be the case that any Christian who abides by the Bible is the antithesis of all you believe, thus all Christians believe or act in evil ways, regardless of the misuse or distortion you speak of, true? This is not much different than saying that Christians, overall, are immoral. I'm Christian, and I discuss these issues?

  • I do not beleive all Christians are evil since none of them completely abides by the bible. If people abided by the bible they would sell their daughters into slavery, kill there children for back talk, kill their neighbors for working on the sabbath, have multiple wives, never shave, etc. These are not distortions but direct commandments form Moses.

  • It is ironic that Christians who think nothing of defaming and traumatizing young gays by telling them they are evil and hell bound, are so concerned about this. Apparently the morality of Christianity is about making sure no one defames you while not caring about who you defame or hurt with your words. Christians routinely say things to young gay people that directly contribute to their suicides.

  • It is perverse that theses same people care so much about being so treated themselves (even when they are not). I will make you a deal. I will stop telling the truth about the contents of the bible when you stop telling lies about the contents of my character and other gay persons.

  • You use very good logic, Skeptic. I'm not convinced, however that there is a positive correlation between Christianity and feeling bad. There are a number of reasons for this easily made assumption/possibility, however.

  • I am extremely liberal in my views and I a little confused about gay people.

    I mean why should society tolerate gays who basically have perverted sexual preferences and abhor paedophiles who also have perverted sexual preferences ??

  • Perverted based on what? I beleive your views of gays are perverted. Who is to say what is right? Is it not common sense to make everyone equal before the law regardless of the specific beleifs of a group of people and their particular subjective view of supposed "perversion." Only 100 years ago it was widely believed that marriages between blacks and whites were perverted and that their mixed-race children were called abominations. That would make our current president an abomination.

  • Pedophilia is a behavior that harms another and is predatorial and exploitative. It is a behavior between an adult and a vulnerable child. Homosexual behavior is between consenting adults and is intended to enhance those involved with no exploitation involved. Why would you compare these almost completely opposite sexual behaviors?

  • I am comparing the behaviours because the they are not opposite.

    Biologically and evolutionarily a man and woman come together to have sex for the purpose of reproduction and hence, propogation of their gene pools.

    Now what is the purpose of gay sex ??

    Paedophiles and gays, according to me, have experienced events in their lives that cause them to behave out of the ordinary. Such people need therapy, not rights !

  • The purpose of gay sex is to express love and friendship. It does not require any other purpose. Only a prude would beleive that sex is only for reproductive purposes.

    How do you know that gays have had negative developmental experiences, have you done some research Dr. Vjszq4? Of course you haven't. You are talking out of your ass. You are creating self-serving theory out of thin air to justify your hatred.

  • You simply cant make everyone equal before the law.

    I have heard of people who have a fetish towards dead bodies(Sick !!). Can we make them equal before the law ???

    Your argument is that gays do not cause any harm. Sex with dead bodies dosent cause any harm either. So, should this kind of behaviour be considered fine ?

  • If we start making exceptions of who is equal and not equal before the law, where will it end?

    Your being illogical. Having sex with a dead body is with a person who is not consenting. I doubt very seriously that dead person or their relatives would want people having sex with them after their deaths.

    Laws are created to stop harm. If something that someone does harms no one, it is no one's business. Society is in no place to decide what is right or wrong for everyone beyond preventing harm.

  • I watched a film called "Quills" recently. It touched on this subject in a scene.

  • skeptic sage we are all aware their is only one benefit of atheism for you and that is no one is going to denounce you for having sex with other men. lets be frank about this.

  • You know nothing of the sort. You do not know me and yet you make a wild assumption based on nothing. You did not even bother to ask. Please stop reading other people's minds, you lack the insight necessary. If you had bothered to listen to my video you would have noticed that a scientific worldview and education are the reasons I am incapable of believing in fairytales. But then again people like you don't listen, you just judge to make yourselves feel better.

  • I have a theory. You emotionally want me to be an atheist for the reason you describe because that way you can dismiss my atheism as motivated by something other than logic and can simply ignore my arguments (which you have already done). If you ingore them you cannot be persuaded by them or troubled by them. This is all about you feeling less threatened by ideas that might make you doubt your beleifs. Otherwise why would you make such an assumption based on no evidence.

  • So, how does it feel to have someone make assumptions about your motivations?

    By the way, If escaping evil homophobia and prejudice were the only reason to reject and condemn Christianity, that would be enough. It just does not happen to be my personal reason, which you would know, had you bothered to ask. For you information I became an atheist long before I knew I was gay. So I did not care what ignorant Christians thought. I did not have to suffer abuse from people like you.

  • so your telling me your love of men had nothing to do with you rejecting religion, it did not even have the slightest role in your decision considering all major religions reject your way of life. i would like to believe you but sadly i don't. the fact is even if you wanted to embrace one of the popular major religions the chances are you would be rejected. i think you are just defensive and hostile towards religion because you know their is no chance.

  • What you beleive is of no concern to me since you clearly lack any logical faculty. Not all the major religions reject gays, only some do- the evil ones. If a religion were to reject me, that would be all the more reason to know it is bullshit. Truly moral and spiritual people don't reject others over trivial matters and they are not bigoted. Racism and sexism have been taught by many traditions proving their lack of moral content. The same is true for those traditions that promote homophobia.

  • no you lack logical faculty. forget religious scripture, i am not going to debate you on those grounds. your very way of life contradicts evolution and survival of the fittest to pass on genes (something you cannot do, no matter how hard you try!). no baby is going to come out of your boyfriends ass. furthermore, a range of sexualities exist, why should anything other than heterosexuality be normal. would you as a psychologist say someone who engaged in necrophillia is normal?

  • Your statement shows an incredible ignorance of genetics and sociobiology. E. O. Wilson, the scientist and "father of sociobiology" states in his book "On Human Nature" that homosexuality has survival benefits for first degree relatives of gays who share the same genes. Having a gay relative without children affords one an extra protector, increasing chances of survival. Also, Gay people marry and pass on their genes as do their sisters and brothers who share similar genes.

  • Comparing the deep love a man has for another man with having sexual relations with a corpse is crude, mean-spirited, a sign that you are a mean depraved person. How ironic that a person as depraved as yourself would cast aspersions on other people. I would never lower myself to compare you to a necrophiliac, but then again, unlike you, I have morals.

  • Masters and Johnson the famous sex researchers state that "the only unnatural sex acts are those it is impossible to perform." You seem to equate abnormality with immorality. Why? Jews are out of the norm and thus "abnormal." To call them evil because of this fact is antisemitism. To say that gays are bad because they are out of the norm is homophobia. Bigotry is bigotry. You cant hide behind an "abnormality" argument to justify your depraved hatred.

  • "no baby is going to come out of your boyfriends ass." Why would you ever say something so obvious except to be vulgar and disrespectful, you are a nasty piece of work.

  • I hate when people attribute their life satisfaction to being "saved" or being Christian simply because they are Christians, not because they make good choices or anything else.

    Agreed that the question is flawed, but basically I would say the lack of fear would make being atheist "better." I'm currently dealing with this issue of God myself so I'm not atheist, but I can definitely understand it. It seems to make much more logical sense.

  • i completely agree, Christians tend to put forward the question "what are the befits?"...it doesn't have anything to do with benefits you backward thinking Christians, belief isn't like buying a car, if you believe something solely on its benefits is amazingly shallow. good words sir.

  • well spoken ,greetings from holland

  • Im 16 and I moved to Ireland from Austria when I was about 7 or 8. I have been an athiest all my life, I never practised religion or had anything to do with it.

    But whenever I tell anyoe at school or someone finds out, as I don't really advertise it, but when someone brings it up I tell them I don't believe in anything and the first question they always ask is "why?" or "how?"

    They can't unserstand that I just don't.

    I also think athiesm has given me a better sense of morality!

  • Why are you sorry to quote Hitchens? He is a brilliant man :)

  • You want God to reveal Himself to all.

    Live to Zechariah 12:10.

  • I want him to ravel himself LITERALLY in person, RIGHT NOW. Otherwise, he is not serious about wanting to be followed and I cannot take him seriously. In fact, I see no reason to even believe in his existence if he cannot bother to come to my house. God is like a dead beat dad. he creates you then takes off, never to be seen from again and yet expects to be respected and obeyed.

  • It would pay for the homosexual to remember that Jesus pushed up on nails in His feet and pulled with nails in His hands to say, "Forgive them for they know not what they do." Thus Jesus loves sinners, but you will chose men who let you do the wish of your heart as oppose to one who desires to forgive your sins.

    If men reach Psalms 51:17 they are humble, but likely still sinners.

    If men aren't humble you get behavior towards no flesh.

  • Behavior towards the flesh is natural, produces happiness, and is psychologically healthy. Christianity's morbid preoccupation with sex and its supposed evilness is unnatural, produces sexual repression, unhappiness, and psychological dysfunction. Gays don't need to remember anythign because Jesus never had anythign to say about gay people. Besides, what would a man from 2000 years ago have to say about a modern sophisticated gay urban man or woman? Surely moral philosophy has progressed since.

  • In Revelations the behavior is toward "no flesh" and that means that save Zechariah 12:10 occurs men would completely vanish from the Earth.

    I'm not telling you to not have sex, but keep in mind that you must needs choose your partners carefully as 8 out of 10 homosexual males have a sexual disease at some point in their life through this progress you speak of here.

    Still my best friend is gay so realize I'm merely saying take care as I love you though not as much as Jesus maybe.

  • Please don't tell me what is happening with gay folks. You are clearly not an expert and not up on the research. I am a psychologist and a gay man and can tell you, as a matter of fact, that you are ignorant. Your 8 out of 10 comment is laughably funny.

  • Glad to hear I'm misinformed on the gay community. Better statistics is always good.

    One would laugh about why try to study lights on a screen with wires hooked to a head 200 yrs ago, but with technology psychology will advance.

    I am not sure if souls can be detected, but science would not laugh if it stumbled on or by effort found such a thing.

    I think search for evidence of God is going on so no laugh would be emitted if one published on a worthy find conclusive or not.

  • How would one attempt to gain evidence about the existence of a being that no one has ever seen? How does one publicly observe a religious experience? Why does not God show himself to whole entire multitudes of people now? Why does God not grow back severed limbs on national TV? Proving the existence of an vaguely defined invisible legendary figure who does not make house calls is impossible. Do you know of a way? I wait excitedly for an answer!

  • I appreciate the question, but God raises the dead so limbs are but a small thing that he doesn't deal with today.

    He isn't your servant that you command; though He instituted the servant relationship for those in authority.

    Science might find a soul. Beyond that if one is indwelt by the Holy Spirit it might be possible to find that too. Like you I sort of doubt we'll get there, but that doesn't mean it can't be found. That is like saying we won't get to the moon in 1950.

  • Why doesn't he raise the dead now, on national tv? God is my servant like my father is my servant. If God created us he has an obligation. SO far he has shirked his responsibilities.

    The moon actually exists and can be seen. The soul is a folklorist artifact of cultural imagination. It cannot be seen and their is no evidence of its existence and we have many emotional reason to have created it in an act of mythologizing. We might as well expect for science to find ghosts or bigfoot.

  • Thanks for reminding me. You don't have to live to Zechariah 12:10 to know God exists as Revelations 11:8-11 happens first.

    If your smart you'll know that for this quote in Revelations to make sense you need T.V., internet, and overnight shipping. How a man writing in 80 A.D. would write of something requiring all these things is beyond me unless there is a God.

    Perhaps He has revealed Himself and if you want to hear Him just open your Bible.

  • Christianity benefits people not in this world, other than by peace & mercy.

    Jesus' life goal was John 10:10b.

    You thus avoid Luke 12:5 which is explained by Matthew 10:28. Loss of eternal life is an eternal punishment.

    Or you avoid Romans 7:15 & Romans 7:24 by way of Psalms 51:17 requiring merely self knowledge.

    Benefit of Christianity is proper definition of man & salvation from death.

    One must needs determine if it is true or not that man sins, will die, & might have eternal life.

  • But how could such a thing be determined? What does "eternal life" mean? You are asking whether we can determine whether vague nebulous fairy tales from thousands of years ago are true when we know, from a scientific perspective, it is highly unlikely if not impossible. Man DOES sin, we don't need fair tales to tell us that. What we need to do to prevent or lessen human sin and misery should be assessed scientifically not determine by age old legends. Bible quotes are beside the point.

  • Understood SkepticSage that the gospel is foolish to one who thinks they sin not or thinks man can resolve anything.

    If instead nuclear bombs take out 1/3 of men per Revelations 9:16-19 as number of men is equal to TNT rating prior to TNT and America is gone and world is working towards no flesh it is likely man's response will be Revelations 9:20, but nuclear bombs killing a 1/3 of men are merely the beginning of sorrows and man will need Zechariah 12:10 to stop man's no flesh behavior.

  • Actually most atheists believe that man is quite sinful. The only people I have ever met who act morally superior, as if they have no sin, have been Christians. Your last paragraph is christobabble and religiobabble. There is no evidence that any of this is true. Please stop arguing by quoting bible quotes, the bible is not a source of truth and cant be used as evidence. Also, using such quotes is very tiresome. You are like the Jehovah's Witness at the door who wont shut up.

  • Good for you SkepticSage, indeed Jesus was very harsh with religious elite of His day calling them "white-walled sepulchres" & I believe He was in business of hanging out with sinners who were hated by the legal system & the religious system.

    Mind you He told them to "sin no more." I bet it was for their benefit.

    I have not attained full obedience to this task & few do who follow Him.

    He's pretty merciful & longsuffering though. 40 yrs for Canaanites to get out of town.

  • The answer to the last line is yes, yes, and no. Please explain how the conscious processes of the human cerebral cortex will survive after the cortex has rotted away. Think on how bizarre this is! Again please stop with the torturous bible quotes. These quotes prove nothing accept the contents of the bible. In other words, they prove nothing at all.

  • SkepticSage,

    Matthew 10:28 infers there is a soul that can die or can live eternally per other verses in the Bible like John 10:10b.

    Perhaps you should be a skeptic over a soul or maybe science will find it soon and you will change your mind.

    Job and Paul talk about being raised from the dead and that spans quite a timeframe. Our history of science is pretty new, but might catch up.

    1st soul, then God, then resurrection for science to find. Tough task indeed.

  • Why would science want to try to discuss such unscientific concepts as "resurrection," "soul," and "God?" It would make just as much sense to discuss reincarnation, ghosts, and Zeus. For that matter why not study unicorns, leprechauns, and trolls? By its very definition, science does not study things that have no evidence for their existence. Discussing things that are obviously imaginary makes little sense unless we are studying myths and their negative psychological effects on societies.

  • Offering benefits in return for believing something is a religious concept. Without it how would they suck new converts into their ranks?

    Atheists are nothing more then those who see that religions benefits are merely an illusion and therefore reject the bogus offer.

  • Well said. You make perfect sense.

  • Well said.

  • One of my co-workers is an evangelical christian and he keeps talking shit about gays. "They're sick", "it's a choice"...etc.

    And when i try talk some sense to him, he starts saying i'm gay. Being called gay doesn't bother me, allthough i am a heterosexual. It's the untrue statement that bothers me. He keeps telling that because i am atheist, i suport everything that is immoral in the world. How can you use reason to talk to someone like that?

    Good luck with your life. I love the vids!

  • "assume on faith that the bible is inerrent". You abound in cockiness and twisted lies now dont you?! Reality is..that YOU are assuming that they are assuming! lol You never regarded the possibilities that these intellectual conservative scholars rely on much more than 'assumptions'? Your pompous ass must think that you know more than they too? It would not surprise me in the least!"All hail the wanna be scholar;the homosexual psycho therapist whom has more 'issues' than his own patients!"

  • You have crossed the line you stupid asshole. You have been blocked. I was trying to introduce you to new ideas and scholars and instead you became defensive, belligerent, and have resorted to personal attacks. Now you have lowered yourself to the level of a schoolyard bully. If we had discussed this like adults we could have exchanged ideas and BOTH learned something. But you got scared and defensive and had to go there. Good luck, my friend, hope our mind opens to new ideas, though I doubt it.

  • the Tacticus I was referring ot of ocurse was not the one born in 300bc! duh!Try the one born 56AD. So your are saying then that an ancient historian(s) of the 1st century arent considered reliable in the sources they chose? Yet you are arrogant enough to make judgment against them about 2000 yrs later? Josephus and Tacticus are considered to be VERY accurate and reliable historians. They didnt write about fairy tells..they lived during the times of many surviving witnesses of Jesus. You did not

  • Sorry..but I would rather rely on non-christian sources like well regarded historians of the 1st century(and earlier), that explored the facts of their day, than to believe on the testimony of a highly skeptical homosexual whom would obviously rather wish for God to 'just go away'(wishful thinking wont get rid of God) in the 21st century!(that would be You!).Even without reliable historians(though they existed), evidence of God is excellent. You fight Truth, 'coz it is a threat to your lifestyle

  • Typical christian, you are losing a debate, so you make up facts and make person attacks. You can't attack my arguments, so you attack me. Again let me quote from a mainstream source:

    Irving, Amy-Jill (1999). M. Coogan et al.:"The Oxford History of the Biblical World: ..academic studies remain INCONCLUSIVE about the chronology, the CENTRAL MESSAGE of Jesus' preaching, his social class, cultural environment, and RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION"

    Personal attacks on me will not change mainstream history.

  • Anyone born at the year 56 would have written at least 40 years after the death of Jesus and would have to rely on other people as witnesses. Witnesses of a movement are very unreliable and the Romans would also have been biased. The general historical belief is that we have no real historical Jesus beyond the basics since Jesus did not author a book or have people author one for him. The bible was written down many years after Jesus' death. Mainstream historical opinion. See below.

  • Irving, Amy-Jill (1999). M. Coogan et al.:"The Oxford History of the Biblical World: "Most critical scholars believe that ancient texts on Jesus' life are at least PARTIALLY accurate, agreeing that Jesus was a Jew, teacher, and healer, was baptized by John the Baptist, crucified by Pontius Pilate. Aside from these few conclusions, academic studies remain INCONCLUSIVE about the chronology, the CENTRAL MESSAGE of Jesus' preaching, his social class, cultural environment, and RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION"

  • Yes,the Romans WOULD be biased,they would have LOVED to have crushed the 'rebellion' known as Christianity! No person(Jesus) has been a bigger influence in the HISTORY of this world. To say the NT was written "many years after Jesus death" is not accurate at all. Many scholars believe that Paul's 1st writings(Corinthians)were written within just a few years after Jesus' death(and more importantly His RISING from death!)As I said before..you exchange Truth for lies,to fit your skeptical worldview

  • The Complete Gospels, Robert J. Miller ed: Unlike the Twelve Apostles, there is no indication that Paul ever met Jesus before the latter's crucifixion. Paul asserts that he received the Gospel not from man, but by "the revelation of Jesus Christ".

  • Fourteen epistles in the New Testament are traditionally attributed to Paul, THOUGH IN SOME CASES THE AUTHORSHIP IS DISPUTED. Paul ONLY OCCASIONALLY WRITING HIMSELF. As a sign of authenticity, the writers of these epistles sometimes employ a passage presented as being in Paul's own handwriting."

    In other words they forged his writing, many years after Paul's death. At least half of what is attributed to Paul was written by others.

  • Yes..I shall now discard all my past beliefs of Paul, and now believe everything this liberal Miller fellow has to say! NOT!

  • Oh by all means you would never want to consider the words of a learned scholar and check out his ideas. Oh no, better to dismiss it out of hand. I mean come on, if you read his stuff you might see he has been objective and, dare I even say it, you might even come to believe what he says. And then where would you be. You might have to change your beliefs. Why that is unthinkable- HOW HORRIFYING!!!!!

  • Though all of that chatter, Just admit your homosexual and you will continue to be homo. Be a man and say the truth. Stop trying to justify a state of mind that's stupid!! You enjoy men up your butthole, which is perverted and you have no intention on trying to stop. Christianity, catholic, muslim, buddah, sunworship. nothing will stop you from being a homo. Just say I don't acknowledge God but to say there is no God , is dumb!

  • Your mean-spirited homophobic response proves nothing save the fact that you are an ignorant insensitive bigoted asshole. My reason for not beveling in God is that I believe in nothing without evidence, and as yet no one has supplied evidence of a god's existence. Many religions condemn gay behavior, supplying more evidence that these religions are evil. Condemning entire groups of people and calling them perverts just because they're sexually different is bigotry, by definition.

  • My advice is: NO ONE should be a patient of this dude. He is one confused puppy. By the way..happiness and being at peace are 2 different things. I can be happy..then another moment un-happy(due to a response of stress,etc) yet in both instances still be at peace inside due to Jesus being with me thru it all. wait..did i hear you say you are gay here on this video? :0 YOU are dangerous to those whom are still confused yet are considering christianity. You will only confuse them more. God help u

  • Lol, typical Christian argument.

    Maybe this "god" should help you instead. :)

  • I agree fully, I used to be a Christian, I went to youth group and Church til I was 17 and even tho my church was no fundamental I still could not give in and have "faith" because I know that there were happy people else where without. On reading the Bible I was disgusted that one passage about gay activity (very debatable based on the Hebrew original)was picked out of the old testament but most of the rest was discarded as being things that can't apply today.

  • Then you were never a true Christian. You do not and cannot 'use to be' a Christian.

  • "Then you were never a true Christian. You do not and cannot 'use to be' a Christian."

    Holy shit, a Christian being intolerant and pompous? That's new. Kudos.

  • I am only intolerant of lies.Pompous? Naw..but sorry if you think so. It isn't my own opinion..the Bible teaches that once you are born again, you just wont reject God and 'turn away' from being a christian any more. Some people 'think' intellectually that Jesus died on the cross and that He is Lord and Savior of fallen mankind(so does the devil), but yet there is no true repentence. Was this the case with Stelly? I do not know. My point is- not ALL that SAY they are a christian truly are.

  • Lol, I guess you're too Biblewashed to use common sense now.

  • God gives us common sense. I make use of it all the time. I once didnt believe in God. By stopping being biased against God(like you) and using common sense and logic, I found the truth and had no choice but to become a christian. Thank you.

  • Well you see, common sense and logic wouldn't lead you to theism, much less Christianity.

    And I'm certainly not biased against god, you're biased against atheists.

  • Common sense and logic cant lead you to God? You must mean in your case. Because it was a big factor in leading me to God, and you cant tell me otherwise. How can I be biased towards atheist? I once was one! You have any other meaningless(wrong) opinions of me? :)

  • ""Then you were never a true Christian. You do not and cannot 'use to be' a Christian.""

    Oh but sir, you can't USED to be an atheist by your logic. Yes, you are biased against atheists. If these are meaningless opinions I'm sure you would've ignored me by now.

    (And you do realize Jesus never existed, right? So even if god was real, why would Christianity be correct? Why not Judaism or Islam?)

  • Yes.Good point.I feel ALL believe in God in their heart but just deny it in their mind(as I once did also). What I am saying..not EVERYONE who makes a CLAIM to be a christian, truly was one. The Bible has examples of this as well.And yes..it IS very logical to believe that Jesus DID exist..and that He even died and rose from the dead. Both Christians, Jews, and muslims believe Jesus exist. The latter deny His deity, not His existence.(I am still shocked some deny in Jesus' existence at all!)

  • *facepalm*

    Dude, if you want to be so closed-minded then go right ahead. I've been open to everything you've said and it still doesn't sound logical to me.

  • It is your opinion that I am close-minded, but of course, that does not make it a fact. But this is coming from a guy who says"And you do realize Jesus never existed, right?" Even most other religions and atheist agree that Jesus walked this earth before! Saying Jesus never existed would be in comparison like the Iranian President saying that Hitler never had the Jews mass murdered! And yet you say you are open- minded? Your true colors are really coming out now eh?- a skeptic to the core! :)

  • Lol, whatever you want to think dude.

    If fairy tales help you sleep better at night, then so be it.

  • I WAS living the 'fairy tale' life.I came TO reality and found God.I sleep peacefully at night, but when I am wide awake I am at peace also.I have been where u have been before..but you have yet not been where I now am(born-again and sealed with the Holy Spirit). You are walking around but you are still asleep to the reality that is all around you. It's your choice..seek God now and get saved; or not, then die, and reality will be found then as you are judged by God.Your on the wrong path..DUDE

  • There's no one "right" path. The right path to you might be eating a delicious sandwich to someone else. Kind of an absurd comparison, but still.

    You walk your path an I'll walk mine. Even though I'm a good person and do good things in life, I'm still going to hell so don't worry about me. I'm an evil-spirited person capable of no good apparently. Even if the possibility of a god was out there, I sure as hell wouldn't consider it to be the Judaeo-Christian god. But whatever...we're just human.

  • Why do "good" Christians always resort to scare mongering and name calling to get others to convert. Yet I do not think that was the real motivation of your response.I think you want to put down, disrespect, and even scare the person you spoke to. That's the funny thing about Christians. What they say is always incongruent with how they say it. They tell you about damnation as if they have concern for you when in fact they get off on scaring you. They say you're sinful as a way to feel superior.

  • Your comments are self serving opinions..not fact..simply fiction. Thats the funny thing about skeptics..they make facts to be fiction..and they make fiction to be facts! lol. I dont feel superior to you..but I DO feel sorry for you. You should read your text though..and truly see whom is 'attempting' to come across as a superior being. I don't put you 'down' for being a homosexual..I am simply pointing out to you..that you arent going 'up'if you remain as so! You have motivation to deny God!

  • You are lying to yourself and me. You put me down for being gay repeatedly. Anyone reading your mean-spirited remarks can see that. I am quoting from the "Oxford History of the Biblical World," a major mainstream source on the bible in the English world. Why do you insist on disagreeing with a scholar with a doctoral degree who clearly has read sources you have not? Do you deny that the oxford history says this, or have you simply neglected to read that in your "studies."

  • Aww..so you have 'faith' in Oxford History? So what they say is indisputable fact? Even if other sources dont see it as 'they' do? 'Mainstream' is a word that can be deceiving. Mainstream media is known to be liberal(which you MUST love!), but doesnt make it factual in all regards also..since there is a 'leaning' towards its liberalism.I am sure I havent read all of YOUR liberal sources, nor must I do so for your benefit. But thanks for proving my point that you think you are 'superior'! lol

  • Mainstream media is only considered liberal by the far right and the uneducated. Few people take that seriously outside of fox news which is an arm of the republican party. My sources are mainstream in that they come from universities which have the integrity to put empirical truth before tradition. The only people who disagree with the views I have expressed are those in conservative literalistic theological seminaries who assume on faith that the bible is inerent.

  • This is the most ridiculous thing I've heard you say Skeptic...I expect more than this from you, regardless of our differences. Christians tell others because they care, its sure not to win a popularity contest or feel superior (or at least it shouldn't be)

  • I know, but if they're going to start telling people something they need to be sure of it, and then give proof. otherwise they're just telling people a load of old poppycock and the delusional imaginings of another mans mind. And it's aggravating to people, especially if they start with the hell stuff. I just wish they'd stop it, if they must, teach it to their kids but leave everyone else alone,if people want religion in their lives they will find it on their own.The rest of us are quite happy.

  • Christians condemn others for selfish reasons. They care about their own anxiety and fears and nothing else. Their fairytale beleifs help them feel less afraid of death and the uncertainties of life. If gay young people have their minds poisoned in the process, well they're ok with that. These are heartless selfish comments made by people who care nothing for the people they emotionally destroy. If you beleive such statements are caring, you have little insight and are astonishingly naive.

  • Statements of hatred for gays are evil, by definition, but are also incredibly selfish as well. Christians make anti-gay statements in an effort to shore up their faith, and remove doubts that gay people could be right. Gay people are walking evidence that Christian beleifs are wrong. Faith is a drug that reduces fear of death and other insecurities. Condemning gays is emotionally damaging another just to get your delusion fix. This is very similar to the selfish behavior of drug addicts.

  • It inst so much that Jesus never existed, but that we have very little information to go on. And the information we have is not reliable. The bible is not a very good source of information, it is filled with mythological stories that defy the laws of physics like most religions. There is one line about Jesus in Josephus the historians writings. Other than that the only thing we have to go on is the gospels. They might be inspiring reading but they are hardly proof of who Jesus really was.

  • I guess you 'convienently' forgot to mention Tacticus, , Pliny the Younger, Phlegon, Thallus, Suetonius, Lucian,Celsus, Mara Bar Serapion, The Jewish Talmud, BESIDES Josephus?! Those are all non-Christian sources that have cited Jesus.I suppose that if someone wanted to be skeptical enough, NO source would be acceptable as a good source of info! Seeing that your name here has 'Skeptic' in it, it would seem you are proud to be one..even as far to deny truth for a lie! Wake up to the Truth...Jesus

  • You conveniently forgot that none of these men lived at the time of Jesus and had to rely on the bible as their only comprehensive source- a poor source. There are no other eyewitness accounts. Some of these guys lived before Jesus! Aeneas Tacticus-300 BC, Aelianus Tacticus-2nd century, Pliny the Younger-born 63AD, Phlegon- 2nd century, Suetonius-born 69AD, Lucian- born 125AD, Celsus-lived 2nd centruy, Mara Bar Serapion-late 1st century, Talmud (2 parts): Mishnah- 200 BC, Gemara- 500BC.

  • Irving, Amy-Jill (1999). M. Coogan et al.:"The Oxford History of the Biblical World: "Most critical scholars believe that ancient texts on Jesus' life are at least PARTIALLY accurate, agreeing that Jesus was a Jew, teacher, and healer, was baptized by John the Baptist, crucified by Pontius Pilate. Aside from these few conclusions, academic studies remain INCONCLUSIVE about the chronology, the CENTRAL MESSAGE of Jesus' preaching, his social class, cultural environment, and RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION"

  • Exactly who are you referring to and what do you consider "closed-minded?"

    Word of advice: "Don't be so open minded that your brains fall out of your head."

  • I consider closed minded to be people like Miked518 there, whose defense for Christianity is jamming their fingers in their ears and yelling loudly that they can't hear you.

    He's very pompous because he supposedly used to be an atheist and converted somewhere along the way. He also has it fixed in his head that the Judeo-Christian god is the only possible god and Jesus is the way.

    If there's a possibility for a god, I think it would be more complex than humans could ever hope to comprehend.

  • Very intelligent response. It is also possible that the origin of all things is a process that is not conscious or maybe not aware of us. Are we aware of the inner lives of bacteria? It is also possible that the universe is completely material and that there is no consciousness besides that which resides inside animals like us on this planet- and maybe other planets. I find all these possibilities intriguing and am perplexed by people who need for only one explanation to be true.

  • If you believe that everyone believes in God, you have little insight or empathy into others. Some atheists believe that deep down everyone is an atheist and that theism is a form of denial, a way to remove fear of life and death from the persons life. I think there are latent atheists and theists and true believers of both. But what I know for sure, theism is not based on evidence or logic but blind faith. The responses on this page have only solidified that belief.

  • It is difficult for me to understand what you mean. There is no scientific evidence for God's existence. The definitions of God and the stories about him told by religions are logically contradictory. The fact that god is defined as all loving, omnipotent, and powerful does not logically gibe with a world of disease and suffering. Yet you say that "common sense and logic" led you to god? Do you have your own definition of logic? How do you explain the above contradictions and lack of evidence?

  • The perfect video response! ★★★★★

    Katalyzt

  • Top response from SkepticSage there, my thoughts were yeah I could come up with loads of benefits, but then thought the question doesn't make much sense when atheism is just a disbelief in god(s) and not a religious doctrine.

  • In my video I talk about the homophobia of Christianity. How fitting that such a stupid homophobe as yourself should give such a typically mean-spirited and ignorant response. Your perception that gay men "think they're women" shows that you know as little about gay people as you do religion or anything else. Typical religious idiot.