Your series is most beautiful (in my opinion) for one simple reason that you show just how important books are, even in an age of ipods, tivo, and endless other distractions.
You who jest , mock or take warnings lightly can do so while still on this earth because suffering on earth is nothing compared to suffering in hell for all eternity. If you take the warnings lightly, you are likely to miss your chance to be saved and your soul will be tormented in hell for eternity. Cont/..
Cont/..You will then wish you had heeded the warnings you received in your lifetime on earth. Please give your life to Jesus right now, He is the only Way to the salvation of your soul. Pray now and say to Jesus that you want him to be Lord of your life and Saviour of your soul. Luke 16:19-31
Please accept the Lord Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour today, be ready for His second coming. We are living in the last days and the Lord Jesus is coming very soon. I plead with everyone who has not yet accepted Him as their Lord and Saviour. Please do it as soon as possible. May God give you understanding and bless you, in Jesus' name. Amen
Coming from a predominantly Catholic country it always amazes me the Protestant notion that just believing in God is the gate to Heaven. Catholics have to do good deeds to go through the Pearly Gates :)
during attempts to convert me, I find very few educated Christians, a fact politicians prey upon. My world view was formed through "Falconry" in that life feeds off life, always, and there is no such thing as good and evil. I still am searching for the truth. Will it be found through QM, or AI? I do not know. Interestingly, a tangible Soul, which I fail to see is believed by many Atheists? What do u think?
well done, So controversial a topic in that I agree with you. However, I did not go thru the transition you experience. For me, being raised a christian, it just never rang true, and I felt nothing. I thought little about this until my mid 20's when I seriously opened a book. Russell, Dawkins and Hitchens confirmed my Atheism. People try to convert me all the time. I believe they truly believe. I am probably over educated, and I find from my Ethics courses years ago that helpful
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
@Mogley52 You are wrong; Science is not knowledge based on observation. Science makes predictions based on evidence, which can be direct observation. You do not need to directly observe the beginning of the universe to deduce the events during that time. Why is it irrational to believe that gradual change can connect simplistic life with complex life? The evidence in which we have found supports this idea. I have not met a creationist that can explain this irrationality you speak of.
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all its is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
How you found "Marxist propaganda" in a video about atheism is beyond me. True free thought is not the belief in anything you want to, but rather believing according to this principle: "Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out." That is free thought, not, "Believe anything no matter how absurd because anyone who claims to know the truth - and who deems those who deny it ignorant - is arrogant."
Nowhere in this video did Chris imply that the fallacy of "faith alone" logic means Christianity is false. Rather, the fact that all Christian sects demand faith in "the rib story", however implicit, is the problem. It doesn't have to be "faith alone" for the faith to be false.
Ah, but Paul also said in his letters that the sin of Adam was the whole reason Jesus' sacrifice was necessary. If the Genesis stories are fallacious, so is the Resurrection story, without which "[Christians'] faith is in vain".
You are correct that belief in the rib story for salvation would be absurd. I'm glad that is not what the Bible says is necessary for salvation. Paul often criticized people who thought special gnosis or knowledge was needed for salvation. I hate to say it, but this (your) criticism seems to be a straw man. I enjoy the series, but you are in error on this criticism.
Wait wait WAIT!!! so some guys claims to know that God will punish the one who took care of his family, and will reward it... based on that single belief. Odd, as most of what was taught was by word of mouth. The books of the NT were not written until 60 years after Jesus. So this guy is claiming to know how God will judge, then use that as evidence for why God is not just... WTF kind of logic is that? no wonder it wasn't in the library, it is in the comic section.
@bluefootedpig Lets also remember, that salvation though belief alone is only one denomination. And what is funny, is that it isn't pentecostal, the one he claims to be from. Pentecostals / AOG reject salvation through belief alone. So if he was a die hard AOG, why would he look at that as evidence, when his faith currently rejects it as well?
The Adam's rib story is syncretism of 3000BC Egyptian myth of Atum (God) creating or rather cleaving Nut (heaven) from the body of Nut (earth) + the 2000BC Sumerian myth Enki and Ninhursag about Enki's rib hurting him and the term rib meaning "to make life", in short.
@TheBiAtheist Before about 2005-2008, cheap pre-1920s public domain reprints were not being produced by publishers, only in the last few years has this begun to happen, particularly with the invention of Google books and low-cost book scanning machines.
All Christianity wants is your gullibility about sums it up for me. Ingersoll was a truly independent thinker very advanced for his time. Would it be fair t o compare Christopher Hitchens to him? I see definite similarities.
...my initial reaction is just that they're just enjoying themselves, like any other person would, and I am not without similar desires. I think from here, at least, I'm done with religion. It is amazing how one can allow oneself to fall into such prejudices and deceptions.
@hiraikotsuember I find your use of words interesting. "Amazing how one can allow oneself to fall into such prejudices and deceptions" yet we have that happening all the time, to atheist and non-atheists. There is nothing that makes an atheist any more skeptic of deceptions. As for prejudices, that is a mental issue, not religion. It has to do with how your mind decided to quickly judge the properties of someone, and you do it if you think you do or don't.
..the "personal relationship" aspect. I kept thinking that the two times I'd "felt" the Holy Spirit coursing through me were just products of the emotionally trying circumstances at the time. I wouldn't say I'm an atheist yet, but I've been getting there for the past two years. Not to mention my two most devout Christian friends; one is going to a strip club for his birthday, and the other talks about dancing lasciviously a lot lately. Some would say they're not True Christians, but honestly,...
@hiraikotsuember It took me a long time to learn to ignore 99% of Christians out there. It is a club for most, look at non-denominational churches. Their motto is basically "we teach nothing". No core beliefs or theories, just a very in-depth review of a book. And while yes, most are, that is why Jesus mentions that many will try, but few will enter. You are seeing the many, but trying to live the few, and that is how the path is, at least in my experience.
These videos are like a salve to long-open wound. I was never made to follow a certain creed, but my primary religious influence was from my Jehovah Witness father. I almost became one, but did some research and rightfully decided against it. The emphasis they placed on "truth," as they called it, shifted my focus to finding the real truth. I did this the only way I knew how at the time; I tried evangelical Christianity, but kept finding problems there, as well, mostly with prayer and...(cont'd)
I probably am guilty of mocking as my reaction is the same as if a grown adult tried to tell me they really believed there were pots of gold at the end of rainbows or the Easter bunny existed (and I even had eggs as proof on that one) It just seemed like a mental disorder to really believe in a god. After watching your videos (loved the sound-track matching the transition btw) I will endeavour to be more tolerant and understanding.
these videos definitely give me a broather understanding as to why intelligent people can fall into the trap of religion and has helped me be more understanding and patient towards them. These videos should really be publicised in classes in the US, now that would cause some comotion.
I also recomend to anyone who still is in the transitioning phase to atheism or just interested in the topic to read "The God Virus" by Darrel Ray , and "the God delusion" by Richard Dawkings.
@DavidBennell Well, remember it is like any belief. Did the US really attack itself on 9/11 to go into war? some people believe that, while you may or may not. If someone believes it or doesn't, does that make a person dumb or stupid or laughable? At least with 9/11, we have evidence of the truth, with religion you have non, maybe because it is a non-case. murder mystery without a victim. Glad you seek understanding, as that is what everyone should strive for.
Very Interesting set of videos, I just watched them all... I was born atheist in the UK 1980s, no one in my family believed in god or spoke about it... My first real contact with religion was in RE classes in secondary school, I knew about the Norse and Greek gods and thought Christianity was almost dead, we even visited an Anglican church in school as part of a history class, I was shocked to learn how fiercely so many people really still believe in it...
@DavidBennell lol I imagina the shock you must have felt when you realised so many people are still christians. I was also brought up atheist but I was always confronted with religious individuals and always failed to understand how otherwise seemingly intelligent people believed in such absurd things.These videos show exactly how this can happen, and how fortunately there is a way out for theists, even if most of them will never be as open minded or intelligent enough to actually do what he did
I just wanna let you know that I had the exact same problem. I went to my library at Fredonia State University and checked out the book "Some Mistakes of Moses", to find out that I was the only person to read the book in the long history of the book being there. It was published in 1898, it was a first edition, and the pages almost ripped apart as I turned them. Amazing. Nobody checked out the book in over 100 years.... makes you think....
Interesting about Ingersoll's stance on "something from nothing"; I'm often distressed that most people fail to realize that both monotheists and scientists (or followers of science) must have faith enough to believe in the universe coming from absolute nothingness. Without proof, there must be faith, and so there exists faith in everyone.
@KnightOneDark Just want to point out to you that -not- all followers of science have what you call "faith enough to believe" that the universe came from nothingness. Many people believe the universe is infinite, and WITHOUT any beginning or end. (Of course, considering this is punishing to the human mind, mine included, since everything in our lives is so finite... but it does seem to make the most sense in my opinion.)
These videos are wonderful and your story is inspiring, I am fortunate to have a look inside a devout christian upbringing as it has helped me understand what it's like to be christian. I was born into a christian family and we went to church when I was young but I just never really took religion seriously. I really don't even remember to what extent I ever really believed it so to me being atheist has always been natural and fulfilling, though I like to call myself a Secular Humanist.
Unfortunately I've yet to see a video that shows the correct view of heaven and hell. It's not about believing, it's about loving who Jesus is. Whether of not you attach it to His name. Although, the videos that show the absurdity of other views are rather entertaining.
"give this man a harp" God does know your sins. When you try to give excuses for your sins and try to decieve the Lord. He will default your baptism. You will have to start from the beginning.
"to hell with him" is so not true. God has fury but like any "good father" knows why "little children" makes their choices. But making your choice is part of the plan. God dislikes those the most that pretend to be Christians as oppose to those who lived a good life and not seeked God. Those who do evil and not seek God will perish. Those who do good but not seek Christ will still have a kingdom. The Telestial Kingdom.
@doublewhat Presumably you are LDS give your reference to the Telestial kingdom. There is no reference to that kingdom nor any other within the bible and few believe the writings in D&C either, as the author was rather sketchy to say the least. Also your understanding of your own doctrine is weak, same with most. The Terrestrial kingdom is for those who after death accepted Jesus, or would have in life. Telestial is for murderers, rapests, warmongers, etc.
None will perish, unless by perish you mean what will happen to the Sons of Perdition. This would be those who have known God, either by the Holy Spirit which opened the heavens to them or those angels who rebelled. They will be cast into Outer Darkness, it is a very select few. Before you mention Corinthians assuming you have read it, it mentions degrees of glory, I assume Smith interpreted that to mean degrees of heaven, I just remembered that.
@doublewhat In either case you can be as evil as you like in Mormon theology and still attain a kingdom provided you do not see God within your lifetime and still reject him, you need not seek him. Baptist ministers I have meet are quick to point that out, that even Hitler can receive a kingdom in your theology. I believe none of it, but then I know it, what is your excuse?
it's not fork toungues and devils until the very very very end. There is always a chance to believe. A soul is stil learning even after it's vassal has returneed to the earth.
I love ingersoll!! I was a amazed that his criticisms were so old. Thomas Paine was another. I realized two things 1) The arguments brought up in their books have still not been answered by christians. 2) Sadly christians refuse to acknowledge when their sacred beliefs have been proven to be completely absurd.
@Youanden Am I required to answer rhetorical questions such as suggesting that the satirical nature of monty python is demonstrating reductio ad absurdum?
Love your work, and it meshes with mine. I'm a psychologist working with RTS, Religious Trauma Syndrome, and I know your friend, Aaron. This weekend is one of my retreats called Release and Reclaim, in Berkeley, which includes an open event. Please contact me asap. Marlene Winell
Last point: from what objective morality does one draw upon to criticize another? Evid seems to have found some moral absolutes to stand on for him to mock another's perspective. Or at least he became a sheep in ingrells congregation.
A moral system depends on what one values. As such, a moral system cannot ever be objective. Morals are always subjective. If one values truth and freedom of thought, then God (of the Bible) is immoral. If one values the well being of oneself and others, God is again immoral. In fact, most people are much more moral according to these standards than God. Most of us have never committed acts of infanticide, for example.
@smaakjeks: On what basis does one adhere to what one values? If Truth is objective, then morality, from your point of view, cannot be truthful or objective but based upon the subjective whims of what one feels. If so, then how can one, such as yourself, judge one moral system based on the standards of another moral system as you have just done? It cannot be done. For you to be consistent, all moral systems are moral within themselves, though they may contradict other moral sytems.
I explained in my comment how one can judge what behaviour is moral or not. It depends on what one values. If one values human well being and happiness, then one can judge objectively what behaviour works towards or against fulfilling that value. Why is stealing wrong? Because it causes not only economic trouble for the victims, but emotional stress for them.
@smaakjeks yes you do have the "ability" to judge one moral system from the standards of another, but the outcome of such a judgement is subjective not objective because as you mentioned, morals "cannot ever be objective". It's like judging your watch's time based on the standard of the time my watch says. which leads me to ask again, on what basis does one choose a moral? practical outcomes? based on your feelings? practicality is nice, bombing hiroshima was practical
Yes, it's subjective. I subjectively wish to be happy and in good health. I dare say most people do. That's why we form societies with rules to generally enforce these values, and we defend these values against those who wish to harm us. You can go form a society where people value other things and see how far that takes you.
@smaakjeks yes, i agree, all people want to be happy. But the things that make people happy are different. There may be overlap as you have said, but concensus is no measure for determining what is moral. In ghettos around the usa, the ppl living there have there own moral system and even while understanding the alternative systems available, they still prefer to live that "thug life". That's what makes them happy. And I know. its only the larger majority that keeps dem in check..for now
"But the things that make people happy are different."
And as long as they don't infringe on other people's health or happiness, they are generally free to pursue that happiness. Though this assumes that everyone is a well adjusted, sane individual, capable of making decisions for themselves.
"concensus is no measure for determining what is moral"
One's underlying value is, though. Humans value each other. We can establish nigh on objective moral systems on that value.
@smaakjeks Furthermore, your statements about the Bible lead me to believe that you really don't understand the Bible. You seem to think that there's only one way to view it and that any other way to see the Bible must be wrong because they do not fit your preconceptions. For instance, my view holds that, dependng on context, there is no such thing as absolute evil. Why? Crudely put, Absolute good is absolute necessary existence the opposite to which is absolute nonexistence (continues
I understand enough about the Bible and the deity therein to say what I said in my comment. God does NOT respect the freedom of thought, and God does NOT value human life for its own sake. That is not up for any reasonable amount of interpretation. But, I do of course realize that one person cannot fully obey the Bible or adhere to its doctrines without disobeying another part of it.
@smaakjeks: (cont) the existence of absolute nonexistence is contradictory. we might be able to say it, like 4 sided triangles, but the notion does not exist. As such, if evil is equated with absolute nonexistence, then there is no evil. All there really is-to speak of evil in a real or tangible sense is that evil is a lack of existence. Which is the familiar phrase that Evil is the privation of the good. Sin on the other hand is a violation of a commandment. Which is different from evil
Moreover, what is meant by the idea that God creates out of nothing means that God had no pre-existing material from which to use to make the universe. And that's putting it very crudely and superficially.
For example, 'emuwn' is the Hebrew word that is represented by the english word faith, as in duet 32:20. And 'emuwn' means trustworthiness, in the manner that the geyser, old faithful, is depicted as.
This was one of the weakest arguments I have ever heard. There are assumptions on what faith is that do not follow from scriptures. And unfortunately many Christians gave bought into this kierkegardian view....
I grew up in Lawrence and went through a lot the same mental journey as you...thanks for these vids...more proof to ourselves that we're not alone. :)
@managarm1349 Of course you can't, that's because you equate atheism with intelligence. Surely you know that there are atheist that are not very smart.
@daytradingisahabit "And what science cannot discover, mankind cannot know.” " methological naturalism epistemological reach is coextensive only with human sensory faculties and inferences derived from empirical data.
It need not nor does it assume prioi that naturalism is the only source of of truth and that claims purportedly derived from intuition and revelation are false there is no methodology for intersubjectivity upon intutition and revealtion to explain the natural world
In the God virus he explains how the cults get brain washed.
They can't see the world with their own thoughts all the information that comes into their brain gets processed through the brain washing they received. So what ever we say doesn't matter we are not even talking to them and we will hear back what ever they were brain washed to think... It happens to Muslim Fundamentalist why not Christian Fundeamentalist?
The more I see of your work (it's really art you're creating here) the more I wish I could meet you and just talk... hope you keep on working till April 2012, although I would do anything I guess to leapfrog into future and watch all of it at once! :)
I really must say, that your story touches me deeply! I hope you'll read my PM about the art-project. Kisses and hugs from Germany
I am a fan of Ingersoll, I have listened to a number of his addresses from librivox.org including "Some Mistakes of Moses". Ingersoll went the way of Thomas Paine primarily because of the World Wars and the Red Menace. Ingersoll's words represented everything that was contrariwise to the popular mindset of the American Public. With the Red Menace came the destruction of Karl Marx's writings (which were atheistic) along with else that reeked of disbelief. That's my conspiracy theory anyway.
For me, i have no problem with what people believe in, but i have a problem with the bible posing as a science,,, come on,,, the rib story? if god exist, he really has a sense of humor and i m going straight to hell...
@daytradingisahabit Sorry for writing so much again! and for those stupid spaces between my sentences. I didn't mean to do that, try not to let them take away from the force of the arguments, really try and think about what I am saying here.
I look forward to your response.
Maybe we should move this to a PM? I want to talk about the resurrection and tell you some cool things about physics as well.
@daytradingisahabit If Gods nature ensures that He will forbit rape because of how bad
rape is, then Gods command is not needed, to make rape wrong. Rape is immoral
anway, Gods commands are arbitrary, if He has no reason to command one act rather than another, but if he Does have reasons for his commands, then His reasons
rather than his commands are what make rape immoral.
@daytradingisahabit I apologise for overwhelming you, these kinds of topics can go on for months I find so I make sure I state my case from the premise to ensure you understand me. I am not here to play games I want to help people. It really bothers me that Theist do not study atheistic arguments, then expect to debate us with out understanding why we are atheist.
@daytradingisahabit To assume that God is incapable of using another means to provide life free will and happiness to humans with out this Gratuitous suffering we see or with out the suffering of innocent Babies means God is not omniscient.
*I AM PLACING THE SMELLING SALT IN FRONT OF YOUR NOSE!!* Will you wake up from your coma, as me and Evid3n3 did, or will you continue in your pretending God is moral? It is childish to watch unless you can some times admit YOU COULD BE MISTAKEN...
@daytradingisahabit Here is a example do you disagree with the statement that
"Atheist agree with theist that a duty is something that is owed. But something can be owed only to some person or persons. The duty not to rape is owed to the victim
Any kind of statement about God being the cause of Morality is worthless. or to believe In the absence of any people justice itself exists" Means nothing.
Thus Your criticisms of "Atheistic Moral Realism" attack's a straw man.
@daytradingisahabit If God is Immoral.. This would explain his order to the Israelites. If God is not omniscient this would explain why he couldn't think of a better way of dealing with evil humans who threatened the Israelites.
This is logical across the board even ignoring the Bibles absurd barbaric bronze age history. This logic doesn't depend on prior acceptance of atheism or theism as a Axiom. This is called Humanism. Meaning this is objectively true for "US" humans.
@daytradingisahabit Now I must go to the next conclusion because either God is not all good or all powerful. If you say to me God cannot minimize the amount of suffering we see because he has reasons which are a mystery to us then YOUR GOD IS NOT OMNISCIENT! YOU Christians cannot have it both ways.. Im sorry it is not logical and it's absurd I would appreciate if you just admit he is either immoral or not omniscient.
@daytradingisahabit " He cannot have a greater purpose through death like He did with Jesus Christ."
Perhaps he does but look at the evidence we have the logical conclusion is, this is not a way of creating a world with minimal suffering.
When a infant dies and suffers of flesh eating disease, or when a Deer is burned to death in a forest fire, the conclusion is NO intelligence who isboth all good and all powerful would allow such a thing. Its kind of obvious.
@daytradingisahabit Your statement that God allowed the infants to die because he can see the future is absurd. You just knocked out the free will argument in one stroke! I am sitting here shaking me head.. "You make this too damn easy"
So why doesn't God just not have people born who will go to hell, instead cause miscarriage's of all the these future doomed people? This seems much more moral than having to order his thugs to smash a axe through babies heads.
@daytradingisahabit "What you’re not grasping is the fact that in science there is an objective truth to be found, even if scientist X and scientist Y disagree."
WHAT YOUR NOT GRASPING IS I BELIEVE IN OBJECTIVE MORALITY LOL!!
You also are not grasping what I said it is objectively true the earth goes around the sun. Also by it's very definition allowing infants to be slaughtered, before the commit any crime is objectively IMMORAL.. I already explained what morality is.
"I didn't realize atheism had any evidence for it, just the suppression of mine"
Atheism (not believing in God) is the logical consequence of not finding any of the arguments presented for theism convincing. In the same way that not believing in ghosts is a logical consequence of not finding the arguments presented for them convincing. It is because one has high standards of evidence-based reasoning that they would reject such arguments, which are based on sparse evidence.
Actually, the question wasn't about "God's" morality. It was about yours. What would *you* do? You answered that by showing that you think sometimes it is okay to brutally kill infants. That kind of moral axiom ("sometimes it is okay to brutally kill infants") are the types of insidious moral axioms that Bible-based morality slips into our culture. Those kinds of insidious axioms are what make me think religiously based morality is dangerous.
@Evid3nc3 Look at the Hoops theist have to jump through to explain suffering. When I seen those scriptures in the Bible, I started doubting. I spent 23 years of my life believing in God with out knowing this was in the Bible. I even watched my own father say he would kill babies if God told him too when I showed him. It is so strange to think they are trying to harmonize this "Morality" with belief in Heaven, Hell, Eternal Life, Demons among other absurd notions they have no evidence for.
@Evid3nc3 I have to wonder what made me and you different? I completely relate to your videos in regards to the pain and agony when I started doubting, all those hours of studying, just to realize how worthless my beliefs were. Now I see Christianity just as I used too observe Islam, why was this so hard to do in the first place? Some where a Muslim is justifying the morality of stoning his mother for adultery... I just don't understand them, I was never this heartless.
"What are the moral axioms that arise as a result from naturalism and what would make them superior to Christian morality?"
It's not naturalism that is important. It is evidence-based reasoning. I don't care whether reality is entirely natural or has a supernatural. It is irrelevant. What matters is that, whichever version we come to believe, we believe in it based on evidence. As for a demonstrably better system of ethics than Christianity, it will come in a later video.
Well, indulge my simple mind because I am not seeing a clear answer to this question in your comments:
If you were an Israelite in the book of I Samuel (verses 15:2-3), would you have killed infants by God's command?
I'm not seeing how this is a trick question. Would you have killed infants if you were one of those Israelites, yes or no? Would you have walked into that city and buried your axe into an infant's head, yes or no?
"..slay both man and woman, INFANT and suckling.."
Was this a morally acceptable command or not? This command comes DIRECTLY from God in the Bible. Do not dodge this question. Was killing infants a morally acceptable command or not??
@daytradingisahabit Morality in the philosophical sense can be objective, even if peoples beliefs about it are subjective. Even Scientific beliefs have biological and cultural origins, just as it is objectively true that the earth moves around the sun, although biology and culture lead some people to believe otherwise.
THe dilemma appears to be, the Bibles God commands are objectively morally wrong, instead of believing God doesn't exist you deny that any such thing has happened..
When anthropologists talk about cultures morality they describe a group of beliefs about what is right and wrong or good and bad. In contrast when philosophers present a moral system, they seek a set of rules or principles that perceive what is really morally right and wrong or good and bad.
Morality in the philosophical sense can be objective, Even if the origins of those values are biological they still are objective with out God.
Comment removed
LazyOtaku 5 days ago
"TO HELL WITH HIM" *Sephiroth Music Plays"
NuclearRadio 1 week ago
Pick the brunette. Goddamn.
etowncards80 3 weeks ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
you can get Some Mistakes of Moses from google book for free! i have it on my phone now XD
Tekeydieb 1 month ago
Ingersoll at best was arguing against the PROTESTANT doctrine of sola fide.
ThePuppyTurtle 1 month ago
Your series is most beautiful (in my opinion) for one simple reason that you show just how important books are, even in an age of ipods, tivo, and endless other distractions.
qtzlctl2012 1 month ago
'Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the Lord and depart from evil. It will be health to your flesh, And strength to your bones.' Proverbs 3:7-8
KingdomSeeker2012 1 month ago
You who jest , mock or take warnings lightly can do so while still on this earth because suffering on earth is nothing compared to suffering in hell for all eternity. If you take the warnings lightly, you are likely to miss your chance to be saved and your soul will be tormented in hell for eternity. Cont/..
KingdomSeeker2012 1 month ago
Cont/..You will then wish you had heeded the warnings you received in your lifetime on earth. Please give your life to Jesus right now, He is the only Way to the salvation of your soul. Pray now and say to Jesus that you want him to be Lord of your life and Saviour of your soul. Luke 16:19-31
KingdomSeeker2012 1 month ago
@KingdomSeeker2012 Have you considered seeking professional help...i.e. psychiatrist/psychologist?
xusmcguy 1 week ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
This has been flagged as spam show
Luke chapter 16, verses 19 to 31 (New Testament) Luke 16:19-31
KingdomSeeker2012 1 month ago
GET THIS MAN A HARP.
TheJakeRockz 1 month ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Please accept the Lord Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour today, be ready for His second coming. We are living in the last days and the Lord Jesus is coming very soon. I plead with everyone who has not yet accepted Him as their Lord and Saviour. Please do it as soon as possible. May God give you understanding and bless you, in Jesus' name. Amen
KingdomSeeker2012 1 month ago
Coming from a predominantly Catholic country it always amazes me the Protestant notion that just believing in God is the gate to Heaven. Catholics have to do good deeds to go through the Pearly Gates :)
surveyork9 1 month ago
Reductio ad absurdum? Did Sheldon from Big Bang Theory reference that once? Sounds familiar..
Tranquilance 2 months ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
Thanks for your videos, I have enjoyed them so much.
csbarnett1975 2 months ago
during attempts to convert me, I find very few educated Christians, a fact politicians prey upon. My world view was formed through "Falconry" in that life feeds off life, always, and there is no such thing as good and evil. I still am searching for the truth. Will it be found through QM, or AI? I do not know. Interestingly, a tangible Soul, which I fail to see is believed by many Atheists? What do u think?
gyrperegrine 2 months ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
well done, So controversial a topic in that I agree with you. However, I did not go thru the transition you experience. For me, being raised a christian, it just never rang true, and I felt nothing. I thought little about this until my mid 20's when I seriously opened a book. Russell, Dawkins and Hitchens confirmed my Atheism. People try to convert me all the time. I believe they truly believe. I am probably over educated, and I find from my Ethics courses years ago that helpful
gyrperegrine 2 months ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
My mind gets blown everytime I watch one of these videos. Absolutely incredible and thought provoking!
Gearsmeister 3 months ago
Omg. "TO HELL WITH HIM! Next." "Give this man a harp!" That. Is. Amazing. This video serious
xKanariya 3 months ago
"TO HELL WITH HIM!
Next."
LOL! I laughed so hard.
SylviaMarita 4 months ago
Except that in the Christian worldview, there is no such thing as an ethical man.
randplaty 4 months ago
There's plenty of those Ingersoll books on eBay - you didn't have to go to an obscure library to find it :)
Discern4 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
@Mogley52 You are wrong; Science is not knowledge based on observation. Science makes predictions based on evidence, which can be direct observation. You do not need to directly observe the beginning of the universe to deduce the events during that time. Why is it irrational to believe that gradual change can connect simplistic life with complex life? The evidence in which we have found supports this idea. I have not met a creationist that can explain this irrationality you speak of.
ludogogo 3 months ago 9
This has been flagged as spam show
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all its is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless
Mogley52 5 months ago
@ListenConfirmAct
How you found "Marxist propaganda" in a video about atheism is beyond me. True free thought is not the belief in anything you want to, but rather believing according to this principle: "Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out." That is free thought, not, "Believe anything no matter how absurd because anyone who claims to know the truth - and who deems those who deny it ignorant - is arrogant."
ThatGuyWithHippyHair 5 months ago
@bluefootedpig
Nowhere in this video did Chris imply that the fallacy of "faith alone" logic means Christianity is false. Rather, the fact that all Christian sects demand faith in "the rib story", however implicit, is the problem. It doesn't have to be "faith alone" for the faith to be false.
ThatGuyWithHippyHair 5 months ago
@obits3
Ah, but Paul also said in his letters that the sin of Adam was the whole reason Jesus' sacrifice was necessary. If the Genesis stories are fallacious, so is the Resurrection story, without which "[Christians'] faith is in vain".
ThatGuyWithHippyHair 5 months ago
i cant stop watching. your videos are just too good!
MrWaddefak 5 months ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
thisis my favorit part of the process of deconversion. The Changing,where your mind begins to think in a different,and often much more reasonable,way
werewolf873 5 months ago in playlist More videos from Evid3nc3
You are correct that belief in the rib story for salvation would be absurd. I'm glad that is not what the Bible says is necessary for salvation. Paul often criticized people who thought special gnosis or knowledge was needed for salvation. I hate to say it, but this (your) criticism seems to be a straw man. I enjoy the series, but you are in error on this criticism.
obits3 6 months ago
11 people believe the rib story.
ExMormon66 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ListenConfirmAct
ROFLMAO.
Science and education outdates christianity.
PeXis 6 months ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
Wait wait WAIT!!! so some guys claims to know that God will punish the one who took care of his family, and will reward it... based on that single belief. Odd, as most of what was taught was by word of mouth. The books of the NT were not written until 60 years after Jesus. So this guy is claiming to know how God will judge, then use that as evidence for why God is not just... WTF kind of logic is that? no wonder it wasn't in the library, it is in the comic section.
bluefootedpig 6 months ago
@bluefootedpig Lets also remember, that salvation though belief alone is only one denomination. And what is funny, is that it isn't pentecostal, the one he claims to be from. Pentecostals / AOG reject salvation through belief alone. So if he was a die hard AOG, why would he look at that as evidence, when his faith currently rejects it as well?
bluefootedpig 6 months ago
The Adam's rib story is syncretism of 3000BC Egyptian myth of Atum (God) creating or rather cleaving Nut (heaven) from the body of Nut (earth) + the 2000BC Sumerian myth Enki and Ninhursag about Enki's rib hurting him and the term rib meaning "to make life", in short.
HumanChemistry101 7 months ago
I got a 1986 reprint of 'Some Mistakes Of Moses' off Amazon.com
I wonder why it was so hard to find. |:
TheBiAtheist 7 months ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
@TheBiAtheist Before about 2005-2008, cheap pre-1920s public domain reprints were not being produced by publishers, only in the last few years has this begun to happen, particularly with the invention of Google books and low-cost book scanning machines.
HumanChemistry101 7 months ago
Excellent series of videos.
Damienf77 8 months ago
GIVE THIS MAN A HARP!
The humor hurts :X
VapidZero 8 months ago in playlist Why I am no longer a Christian
There are many criticisms of Christianity in the libraries. I agree with you; I was amazed at seeing these too.
iliveon 8 months ago
All Christianity wants is your gullibility about sums it up for me. Ingersoll was a truly independent thinker very advanced for his time. Would it be fair t o compare Christopher Hitchens to him? I see definite similarities.
socksumi 8 months ago
...my initial reaction is just that they're just enjoying themselves, like any other person would, and I am not without similar desires. I think from here, at least, I'm done with religion. It is amazing how one can allow oneself to fall into such prejudices and deceptions.
hiraikotsuember 8 months ago
@hiraikotsuember I find your use of words interesting. "Amazing how one can allow oneself to fall into such prejudices and deceptions" yet we have that happening all the time, to atheist and non-atheists. There is nothing that makes an atheist any more skeptic of deceptions. As for prejudices, that is a mental issue, not religion. It has to do with how your mind decided to quickly judge the properties of someone, and you do it if you think you do or don't.
bluefootedpig 6 months ago
..the "personal relationship" aspect. I kept thinking that the two times I'd "felt" the Holy Spirit coursing through me were just products of the emotionally trying circumstances at the time. I wouldn't say I'm an atheist yet, but I've been getting there for the past two years. Not to mention my two most devout Christian friends; one is going to a strip club for his birthday, and the other talks about dancing lasciviously a lot lately. Some would say they're not True Christians, but honestly,...
hiraikotsuember 8 months ago
@hiraikotsuember It took me a long time to learn to ignore 99% of Christians out there. It is a club for most, look at non-denominational churches. Their motto is basically "we teach nothing". No core beliefs or theories, just a very in-depth review of a book. And while yes, most are, that is why Jesus mentions that many will try, but few will enter. You are seeing the many, but trying to live the few, and that is how the path is, at least in my experience.
bluefootedpig 6 months ago
These videos are like a salve to long-open wound. I was never made to follow a certain creed, but my primary religious influence was from my Jehovah Witness father. I almost became one, but did some research and rightfully decided against it. The emphasis they placed on "truth," as they called it, shifted my focus to finding the real truth. I did this the only way I knew how at the time; I tried evangelical Christianity, but kept finding problems there, as well, mostly with prayer and...(cont'd)
hiraikotsuember 8 months ago 21
Whats more... boy am I glad I did not grow up in bible belt America with religious parents, now that would have been hell.
DavidBennell 9 months ago 2
I probably am guilty of mocking as my reaction is the same as if a grown adult tried to tell me they really believed there were pots of gold at the end of rainbows or the Easter bunny existed (and I even had eggs as proof on that one) It just seemed like a mental disorder to really believe in a god. After watching your videos (loved the sound-track matching the transition btw) I will endeavour to be more tolerant and understanding.
DavidBennell 9 months ago 2
these videos definitely give me a broather understanding as to why intelligent people can fall into the trap of religion and has helped me be more understanding and patient towards them. These videos should really be publicised in classes in the US, now that would cause some comotion.
I also recomend to anyone who still is in the transitioning phase to atheism or just interested in the topic to read "The God Virus" by Darrel Ray , and "the God delusion" by Richard Dawkings.
Dare2Blink 8 months ago
@DavidBennell Well, remember it is like any belief. Did the US really attack itself on 9/11 to go into war? some people believe that, while you may or may not. If someone believes it or doesn't, does that make a person dumb or stupid or laughable? At least with 9/11, we have evidence of the truth, with religion you have non, maybe because it is a non-case. murder mystery without a victim. Glad you seek understanding, as that is what everyone should strive for.
bluefootedpig 6 months ago
Very Interesting set of videos, I just watched them all... I was born atheist in the UK 1980s, no one in my family believed in god or spoke about it... My first real contact with religion was in RE classes in secondary school, I knew about the Norse and Greek gods and thought Christianity was almost dead, we even visited an Anglican church in school as part of a history class, I was shocked to learn how fiercely so many people really still believe in it...
DavidBennell 9 months ago
@DavidBennell lol I imagina the shock you must have felt when you realised so many people are still christians. I was also brought up atheist but I was always confronted with religious individuals and always failed to understand how otherwise seemingly intelligent people believed in such absurd things.These videos show exactly how this can happen, and how fortunately there is a way out for theists, even if most of them will never be as open minded or intelligent enough to actually do what he did
Dare2Blink 8 months ago
I just wanna let you know that I had the exact same problem. I went to my library at Fredonia State University and checked out the book "Some Mistakes of Moses", to find out that I was the only person to read the book in the long history of the book being there. It was published in 1898, it was a first edition, and the pages almost ripped apart as I turned them. Amazing. Nobody checked out the book in over 100 years.... makes you think....
lordofdawhopperz 9 months ago
Interesting about Ingersoll's stance on "something from nothing"; I'm often distressed that most people fail to realize that both monotheists and scientists (or followers of science) must have faith enough to believe in the universe coming from absolute nothingness. Without proof, there must be faith, and so there exists faith in everyone.
KnightOneDark 9 months ago
@KnightOneDark Just want to point out to you that -not- all followers of science have what you call "faith enough to believe" that the universe came from nothingness. Many people believe the universe is infinite, and WITHOUT any beginning or end. (Of course, considering this is punishing to the human mind, mine included, since everything in our lives is so finite... but it does seem to make the most sense in my opinion.)
backinburntcity 7 months ago
Hey I enjoy your videos. I graduated from KU in 2010, rock chalk!
agrove86 9 months ago
LOL-- TO HELL WITH HIM!
KenM66 9 months ago
Awesome song choice at the start there. =)
Rabbitthateats 10 months ago
These videos are wonderful and your story is inspiring, I am fortunate to have a look inside a devout christian upbringing as it has helped me understand what it's like to be christian. I was born into a christian family and we went to church when I was young but I just never really took religion seriously. I really don't even remember to what extent I ever really believed it so to me being atheist has always been natural and fulfilling, though I like to call myself a Secular Humanist.
WampaDubstep 10 months ago
Unfortunately I've yet to see a video that shows the correct view of heaven and hell. It's not about believing, it's about loving who Jesus is. Whether of not you attach it to His name. Although, the videos that show the absurdity of other views are rather entertaining.
BlackEyedGhost 10 months ago
Super video. I think religious should be ashamed of their blind beliefs
srikargottipati 11 months ago
4:12 you sure got good taste !
lemuriavi 11 months ago
Here is the collection of Robert G.Ingersoll
archive. org
vain911 1 year ago
Atheism in the name of God ==> Demolition before Reconstruction.
pcraig92656 1 year ago
This one was oddly funny and fun, compared to the rather stark and heavy atmosphere most of your videos have >__>;
VapidZero 1 year ago
What about that book had to do with Moses or any mistakes about Moses?
starsheild7 1 year ago
@starsheild7 I could and probably am mistaken but I believe its because people think Moses wrote the Torah
midgety1 1 year ago
GOD these videos are pure jewels :D
javonne 1 year ago 102
"give this man a harp" God does know your sins. When you try to give excuses for your sins and try to decieve the Lord. He will default your baptism. You will have to start from the beginning.
doublewhat 1 year ago
"to hell with him" is so not true. God has fury but like any "good father" knows why "little children" makes their choices. But making your choice is part of the plan. God dislikes those the most that pretend to be Christians as oppose to those who lived a good life and not seeked God. Those who do evil and not seek God will perish. Those who do good but not seek Christ will still have a kingdom. The Telestial Kingdom.
doublewhat 1 year ago
@doublewhat Presumably you are LDS give your reference to the Telestial kingdom. There is no reference to that kingdom nor any other within the bible and few believe the writings in D&C either, as the author was rather sketchy to say the least. Also your understanding of your own doctrine is weak, same with most. The Terrestrial kingdom is for those who after death accepted Jesus, or would have in life. Telestial is for murderers, rapests, warmongers, etc.
zacmcscott2 1 year ago
None will perish, unless by perish you mean what will happen to the Sons of Perdition. This would be those who have known God, either by the Holy Spirit which opened the heavens to them or those angels who rebelled. They will be cast into Outer Darkness, it is a very select few. Before you mention Corinthians assuming you have read it, it mentions degrees of glory, I assume Smith interpreted that to mean degrees of heaven, I just remembered that.
zacmcscott2 1 year ago
@doublewhat In either case you can be as evil as you like in Mormon theology and still attain a kingdom provided you do not see God within your lifetime and still reject him, you need not seek him. Baptist ministers I have meet are quick to point that out, that even Hitler can receive a kingdom in your theology. I believe none of it, but then I know it, what is your excuse?
zacmcscott2 1 year ago
@zacmcscott2 1 Corinthians 15:39-41
39All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
doublewhat 1 year ago
@doublewhat Read the rest...
zacmcscott2 1 year ago
it's not fork toungues and devils until the very very very end. There is always a chance to believe. A soul is stil learning even after it's vassal has returneed to the earth.
doublewhat 1 year ago
Ingrol. Now it is starting to get into political thought. Cool. My territory.
doublewhat 1 year ago
I love ingersoll!! I was a amazed that his criticisms were so old. Thomas Paine was another. I realized two things 1) The arguments brought up in their books have still not been answered by christians. 2) Sadly christians refuse to acknowledge when their sacred beliefs have been proven to be completely absurd.
randall93 1 year ago
HAY YOU SHOULD TRY ALLAH
LLiimmzz 1 year ago
@jbiz3 I was adding to the comedy!
Youanden 1 year ago
Why am i reminded of monty python while listening to this?
jbz3 1 year ago
@jbz3 How can you ask yourself a question and not bother answering it for us?
Youanden 1 year ago
@Youanden Am I required to answer rhetorical questions such as suggesting that the satirical nature of monty python is demonstrating reductio ad absurdum?
jbz3 1 year ago
I just finished reading this book. Excelent! It can be found in google books for free. :-D
rafaelhsouza 1 year ago
Please contact me
Love your work, and it meshes with mine. I'm a psychologist working with RTS, Religious Trauma Syndrome, and I know your friend, Aaron. This weekend is one of my retreats called Release and Reclaim, in Berkeley, which includes an open event. Please contact me asap. Marlene Winell
trapezedance 1 year ago 33
Last point: from what objective morality does one draw upon to criticize another? Evid seems to have found some moral absolutes to stand on for him to mock another's perspective. Or at least he became a sheep in ingrells congregation.
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
@tatsumakisempyukaku
A moral system depends on what one values. As such, a moral system cannot ever be objective. Morals are always subjective. If one values truth and freedom of thought, then God (of the Bible) is immoral. If one values the well being of oneself and others, God is again immoral. In fact, most people are much more moral according to these standards than God. Most of us have never committed acts of infanticide, for example.
smaakjeks 1 year ago
@smaakjeks: On what basis does one adhere to what one values? If Truth is objective, then morality, from your point of view, cannot be truthful or objective but based upon the subjective whims of what one feels. If so, then how can one, such as yourself, judge one moral system based on the standards of another moral system as you have just done? It cannot be done. For you to be consistent, all moral systems are moral within themselves, though they may contradict other moral sytems.
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
@tatsumakisempyukaku
I explained in my comment how one can judge what behaviour is moral or not. It depends on what one values. If one values human well being and happiness, then one can judge objectively what behaviour works towards or against fulfilling that value. Why is stealing wrong? Because it causes not only economic trouble for the victims, but emotional stress for them.
smaakjeks 1 year ago
@smaakjeks yes you do have the "ability" to judge one moral system from the standards of another, but the outcome of such a judgement is subjective not objective because as you mentioned, morals "cannot ever be objective". It's like judging your watch's time based on the standard of the time my watch says. which leads me to ask again, on what basis does one choose a moral? practical outcomes? based on your feelings? practicality is nice, bombing hiroshima was practical
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
@tatsumakisempyukaku
Yes, it's subjective. I subjectively wish to be happy and in good health. I dare say most people do. That's why we form societies with rules to generally enforce these values, and we defend these values against those who wish to harm us. You can go form a society where people value other things and see how far that takes you.
smaakjeks 1 year ago
@smaakjeks yes, i agree, all people want to be happy. But the things that make people happy are different. There may be overlap as you have said, but concensus is no measure for determining what is moral. In ghettos around the usa, the ppl living there have there own moral system and even while understanding the alternative systems available, they still prefer to live that "thug life". That's what makes them happy. And I know. its only the larger majority that keeps dem in check..for now
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
@tatsumakisempyukaku
"But the things that make people happy are different."
And as long as they don't infringe on other people's health or happiness, they are generally free to pursue that happiness. Though this assumes that everyone is a well adjusted, sane individual, capable of making decisions for themselves.
"concensus is no measure for determining what is moral"
One's underlying value is, though. Humans value each other. We can establish nigh on objective moral systems on that value.
smaakjeks 1 year ago
@smaakjeks Furthermore, your statements about the Bible lead me to believe that you really don't understand the Bible. You seem to think that there's only one way to view it and that any other way to see the Bible must be wrong because they do not fit your preconceptions. For instance, my view holds that, dependng on context, there is no such thing as absolute evil. Why? Crudely put, Absolute good is absolute necessary existence the opposite to which is absolute nonexistence (continues
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
@tatsumakisempyukaku
I understand enough about the Bible and the deity therein to say what I said in my comment. God does NOT respect the freedom of thought, and God does NOT value human life for its own sake. That is not up for any reasonable amount of interpretation. But, I do of course realize that one person cannot fully obey the Bible or adhere to its doctrines without disobeying another part of it.
smaakjeks 1 year ago
@smaakjeks: (cont) the existence of absolute nonexistence is contradictory. we might be able to say it, like 4 sided triangles, but the notion does not exist. As such, if evil is equated with absolute nonexistence, then there is no evil. All there really is-to speak of evil in a real or tangible sense is that evil is a lack of existence. Which is the familiar phrase that Evil is the privation of the good. Sin on the other hand is a violation of a commandment. Which is different from evil
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
Moreover, what is meant by the idea that God creates out of nothing means that God had no pre-existing material from which to use to make the universe. And that's putting it very crudely and superficially.
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
For example, 'emuwn' is the Hebrew word that is represented by the english word faith, as in duet 32:20. And 'emuwn' means trustworthiness, in the manner that the geyser, old faithful, is depicted as.
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
This was one of the weakest arguments I have ever heard. There are assumptions on what faith is that do not follow from scriptures. And unfortunately many Christians gave bought into this kierkegardian view....
tatsumakisempyukaku 1 year ago
I grew up in Lawrence and went through a lot the same mental journey as you...thanks for these vids...more proof to ourselves that we're not alone. :)
mousers42 1 year ago
cant believe such a smart person was a theist til his 21st (was it?) year
managarm1349 1 year ago
@managarm1349 Of course you can't, that's because you equate atheism with intelligence. Surely you know that there are atheist that are not very smart.
FatalKnight 1 year ago
@FatalKnight i dont necessarily equate atheism with intelligence...rather theism with stupidity
managarm1349 1 year ago
@managarm1349 Haha okay
FatalKnight 1 year ago
People should make a movie about you....
Mswordx23 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit "And what science cannot discover, mankind cannot know.” " methological naturalism epistemological reach is coextensive only with human sensory faculties and inferences derived from empirical data.
It need not nor does it assume prioi that naturalism is the only source of of truth and that claims purportedly derived from intuition and revelation are false there is no methodology for intersubjectivity upon intutition and revealtion to explain the natural world
SuperSharko 1 year ago
Comment removed
NeutroniumIon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SuperSharko That made no sense at all.
And it wasn't because I'm stupid because your language is deliberately obtuse.
NeutroniumIon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@SuperSharko That made no sense at all.
And it's not because I'm stupid; your language seems deliberately obtuse.
NeutroniumIon 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit
In the God virus he explains how the cults get brain washed.
They can't see the world with their own thoughts all the information that comes into their brain gets processed through the brain washing they received. So what ever we say doesn't matter we are not even talking to them and we will hear back what ever they were brain washed to think... It happens to Muslim Fundamentalist why not Christian Fundeamentalist?
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit You tried to some up my arguments....
A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.
-- Bertrand Russell,
You chastised me for questioning your belief system.
The fundamental cause of trouble in the world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.
-- Bertrand Russell,
SuperSharko 1 year ago
Comment removed
SuperSharko 1 year ago
Comment removed
SuperSharko 1 year ago
haha, did I hear a snippet of one winged angel again? it was so brief, I don't know for sure.
wouterW24 1 year ago
The more I see of your work (it's really art you're creating here) the more I wish I could meet you and just talk... hope you keep on working till April 2012, although I would do anything I guess to leapfrog into future and watch all of it at once! :)
I really must say, that your story touches me deeply! I hope you'll read my PM about the art-project. Kisses and hugs from Germany
bobinska 1 year ago
I am a fan of Ingersoll, I have listened to a number of his addresses from librivox.org including "Some Mistakes of Moses". Ingersoll went the way of Thomas Paine primarily because of the World Wars and the Red Menace. Ingersoll's words represented everything that was contrariwise to the popular mindset of the American Public. With the Red Menace came the destruction of Karl Marx's writings (which were atheistic) along with else that reeked of disbelief. That's my conspiracy theory anyway.
geek371 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Do you believe Jesus existed and was crucified Evid3nc3?
jamesluc256 1 year ago
For me, i have no problem with what people believe in, but i have a problem with the bible posing as a science,,, come on,,, the rib story? if god exist, he really has a sense of humor and i m going straight to hell...
weili86 1 year ago
"did you believe the rib story?" FAIL....LMAO! That is fucking funny! Awesome. I love it! this is deep! really really deep!
msaint2326 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Sorry for writing so much again! and for those stupid spaces between my sentences. I didn't mean to do that, try not to let them take away from the force of the arguments, really try and think about what I am saying here.
I look forward to your response.
Maybe we should move this to a PM? I want to talk about the resurrection and tell you some cool things about physics as well.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Even if the Muslim believes, the Sun rotates around the
Earth, or it is Moral to rape ones wife, he is simply wrong for the reasons stated and more.
If you want to dispute with me why you think, the Sun goes around the earth, or raping
your wife is moral, I am open minded that anything is possible, I may be mistaken!"
If God did exists I would agree with his REASONS that made rape immoral. the reasons not God make rape immoral.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Continued..
The victim feels pain, poses
freedom is subordinated, and so on. These harms are not justified by any
benefits to anyone.
You might ask what is immoral about causing serious
harms to other people without justification? But now it is natural to answer
"It simply is objectively don't you agree?"
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Even if atheist were stuck with saying "It just is immoral" that
would be a
problem for atheism only if theist could give a better answer.
Again
Your argument seems to assume the atheist view, assumes rape is
immoral, because of the cost to the Country?
When we agree, what makes rape immoral is that rape harms the victim in terrible ways
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit If Gods nature ensures that He will forbit rape because of how bad
rape is, then Gods command is not needed, to make rape wrong. Rape is immoral
anway, Gods commands are arbitrary, if He has no reason to command one act rather than another, but if he Does have reasons for his commands, then His reasons
rather than his commands are what make rape immoral.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit I asked does God command us not to rape because of the harm or is rape only
wrong because God commands us not to do it? If it's Gods command God could
command, making anything immoral, such as helping a old lady across the street, or
he could make raping your wife moral.
If you respond that God cannot fail to command us not to rape, because He is
good, and rape is bad. That response brings us right back the first part of
the dilemma
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit We both agree that it is objectively true that the earth moves around the sun.
Now if a Islamic Creationist say the earth does not move around the sun, he of course is mistaken.
How do we know they are wrong? Because we have reason and evidence.
You say if God does not forbid rape what makes rape immoral objectively?
My question would be. If God is Allah is it moral for a Muslim Man to rape his wife?
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit I apologise for overwhelming you, these kinds of topics can go on for months I find so I make sure I state my case from the premise to ensure you understand me. I am not here to play games I want to help people. It really bothers me that Theist do not study atheistic arguments, then expect to debate us with out understanding why we are atheist.
If you find the time my arguments wait for you..
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit To assume that God is incapable of using another means to provide life free will and happiness to humans with out this Gratuitous suffering we see or with out the suffering of innocent Babies means God is not omniscient.
*I AM PLACING THE SMELLING SALT IN FRONT OF YOUR NOSE!!* Will you wake up from your coma, as me and Evid3n3 did, or will you continue in your pretending God is moral? It is childish to watch unless you can some times admit YOU COULD BE MISTAKEN...
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Here is a example do you disagree with the statement that
"Atheist agree with theist that a duty is something that is owed. But something can be owed only to some person or persons. The duty not to rape is owed to the victim
Any kind of statement about God being the cause of Morality is worthless. or to believe In the absence of any people justice itself exists" Means nothing.
Thus Your criticisms of "Atheistic Moral Realism" attack's a straw man.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit If God is Immoral.. This would explain his order to the Israelites. If God is not omniscient this would explain why he couldn't think of a better way of dealing with evil humans who threatened the Israelites.
This is logical across the board even ignoring the Bibles absurd barbaric bronze age history. This logic doesn't depend on prior acceptance of atheism or theism as a Axiom. This is called Humanism. Meaning this is objectively true for "US" humans.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Now I must go to the next conclusion because either God is not all good or all powerful. If you say to me God cannot minimize the amount of suffering we see because he has reasons which are a mystery to us then YOUR GOD IS NOT OMNISCIENT! YOU Christians cannot have it both ways.. Im sorry it is not logical and it's absurd I would appreciate if you just admit he is either immoral or not omniscient.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit " He cannot have a greater purpose through death like He did with Jesus Christ."
Perhaps he does but look at the evidence we have the logical conclusion is, this is not a way of creating a world with minimal suffering.
When a infant dies and suffers of flesh eating disease, or when a Deer is burned to death in a forest fire, the conclusion is NO intelligence who isboth all good and all powerful would allow such a thing. Its kind of obvious.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Your statement that God allowed the infants to die because he can see the future is absurd. You just knocked out the free will argument in one stroke! I am sitting here shaking me head.. "You make this too damn easy"
So why doesn't God just not have people born who will go to hell, instead cause miscarriage's of all the these future doomed people? This seems much more moral than having to order his thugs to smash a axe through babies heads.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit "What you’re not grasping is the fact that in science there is an objective truth to be found, even if scientist X and scientist Y disagree."
WHAT YOUR NOT GRASPING IS I BELIEVE IN OBJECTIVE MORALITY LOL!!
You also are not grasping what I said it is objectively true the earth goes around the sun. Also by it's very definition allowing infants to be slaughtered, before the commit any crime is objectively IMMORAL.. I already explained what morality is.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit
"I didn't realize atheism had any evidence for it, just the suppression of mine"
Atheism (not believing in God) is the logical consequence of not finding any of the arguments presented for theism convincing. In the same way that not believing in ghosts is a logical consequence of not finding the arguments presented for them convincing. It is because one has high standards of evidence-based reasoning that they would reject such arguments, which are based on sparse evidence.
Evid3nc3 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit
Actually, the question wasn't about "God's" morality. It was about yours. What would *you* do? You answered that by showing that you think sometimes it is okay to brutally kill infants. That kind of moral axiom ("sometimes it is okay to brutally kill infants") are the types of insidious moral axioms that Bible-based morality slips into our culture. Those kinds of insidious axioms are what make me think religiously based morality is dangerous.
Evid3nc3 1 year ago
@Evid3nc3 Look at the Hoops theist have to jump through to explain suffering. When I seen those scriptures in the Bible, I started doubting. I spent 23 years of my life believing in God with out knowing this was in the Bible. I even watched my own father say he would kill babies if God told him too when I showed him. It is so strange to think they are trying to harmonize this "Morality" with belief in Heaven, Hell, Eternal Life, Demons among other absurd notions they have no evidence for.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@Evid3nc3 I have to wonder what made me and you different? I completely relate to your videos in regards to the pain and agony when I started doubting, all those hours of studying, just to realize how worthless my beliefs were. Now I see Christianity just as I used too observe Islam, why was this so hard to do in the first place? Some where a Muslim is justifying the morality of stoning his mother for adultery... I just don't understand them, I was never this heartless.
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit
Thank you for finally giving me a straight answer.
"you've proven that my worldview is an earthly danger for the Midianites who were slave-traders, aggressed against the Israelites.."
No, the infants were not slave-traders and did not do any of these things.
Evid3nc3 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit
"What are the moral axioms that arise as a result from naturalism and what would make them superior to Christian morality?"
It's not naturalism that is important. It is evidence-based reasoning. I don't care whether reality is entirely natural or has a supernatural. It is irrelevant. What matters is that, whichever version we come to believe, we believe in it based on evidence. As for a demonstrably better system of ethics than Christianity, it will come in a later video.
Evid3nc3 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit
Well, indulge my simple mind because I am not seeing a clear answer to this question in your comments:
If you were an Israelite in the book of I Samuel (verses 15:2-3), would you have killed infants by God's command?
I'm not seeing how this is a trick question. Would you have killed infants if you were one of those Israelites, yes or no? Would you have walked into that city and buried your axe into an infant's head, yes or no?
Evid3nc3 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit
I Samuel 15:2-3:
"..slay both man and woman, INFANT and suckling.."
Was this a morally acceptable command or not? This command comes DIRECTLY from God in the Bible. Do not dodge this question. Was killing infants a morally acceptable command or not??
Evid3nc3 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit
"It wouldn’t be the Bible anymore if it commanded me to kill children.. you can change Scripture to make it dangerous."
What the hell are you talking about? It says right there in black and white in Numbers 31:17 that the Israelites were commanded to kill children!
Was this a morally acceptable command or not?! Stop dodging the question!
Evid3nc3 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Morality in the philosophical sense can be objective, even if peoples beliefs about it are subjective. Even Scientific beliefs have biological and cultural origins, just as it is objectively true that the earth moves around the sun, although biology and culture lead some people to believe otherwise.
THe dilemma appears to be, the Bibles God commands are objectively morally wrong, instead of believing God doesn't exist you deny that any such thing has happened..
SuperSharko 1 year ago
@daytradingisahabit Continued..
When anthropologists talk about cultures morality they describe a group of beliefs about what is right and wrong or good and bad. In contrast when philosophers present a moral system, they seek a set of rules or principles that perceive what is really morally right and wrong or good and bad.
Morality in the philosophical sense can be objective, Even if the origins of those values are biological they still are objective with out God.
SuperSharko 1 year ago