ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
GOD, HEAVEN, AND SEX: Internet article examines the Biblical possibility of sex in heaven. Human sexuality isn't just for reproduction. There are reasons the Bible requires marriage for sex on earth, but those reasons won't exist in heaven. Scripture teaches, in heaven, we'll be like the angels only in one sense - no marriage, but we won't be like angels in every other way (i.e. Bible says we'll enjoy food and drink). Psalm 16:11 says there will be great spiritual joy and pleasures in heaven.
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
WHAT ABOUT THE STARS? Gravity explains how the order found in the precise courses of trillions of stars is maintained, but gravity can't explain the origin of that order! Did all the trillions stars agree to get out of each others way? C'mon! Disorder in the universe is because of chance, but the order is because of design. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or living cell works, but it's irrational to believe that undirected natural laws can bring about an airplane or a living cell. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read my popular Internet articles: ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE!
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument for a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed in design or useless.
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select" from variations produced having survival value. It doesn't produce variations. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of transitional forms and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discusses mixed species in fossils (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum conveniently ignored by evolutionists).
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
NOT ALL EVOLUTIONISTS even agree on the fossils used to support and reconstruct human evolution. The bones are incomplete. There's no certainty of the bones belonging to the same creature. They can reconstruct whatever they want from these bones, and they have. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read my article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
@Theprophetzarat Well, yes and no. Humans have been in the process of defining ethcis for millenia. Our earlier attempts were the code of Hamarrabi, the Tao, the teachings of Confuscious, the Jewish Torah (the old testament), the new Testament, The Koran, etc. etc.
Some could say that one code of ethics is to cause the least harm, and the most good, others say our current system of laws is our last/best attempt to codify our commonly agreed upon ethical behaviour.
i jus wanna know who wrote the bible then? did one man write the bible? did a group of dudes come together and say to themselves...lets write a fucking epic, right now! i wanna know...
Sounds like Buddhism.. They don't believe in God (Buddha in his writings says specifically that he's NOT a god), but they do believe in Reincarnation.
Umm Doubter, where exactly did you read in the Koran that the earth was flat. I mean I read it and I know for a fact that it describes the earth a sphere and it and the moon each float in an orbit. Peace.
LOL It's not okay to say that when you die theres nothing left. Nobody knows what happens when we die. It's ignorant to say you know when you don't. No offense meant. I'm not saying there's heaven, but there might be something else. We just don't know. Science can't prove everything, but neither can 'Faith.'
In fact, science proves nothing. It can only disprove flawed hypotheses by contraring evidence. Other hypotheses (which survived testing, scrutiny and falsification) contribute to models and theories that led to "wonders" like the one on which you submitted your comment.
Example: neurology shows that near-death experiences and jet-pilot brownouts have one main cause: lack of blood circulation in the brain. So it's rational and parsimonious to assume no afterlife considering the evidence.
Science has proven some things but you cannot prove theres no life after death. However, we can't prove it, nor can we disprove it. I'm not saying I believe in one. I'm just saying, we can't prove nor disprove something we cannot actually touch. Some things might just be in our minds, a fantasy, and some things might be real. But there's no real way to prove or disprove something like that. This is my thoughts.
Tabatha, are you a mathematician? Only within math and logic, absolute proof can be provided for some (!) theorems. The natural sciences have nothing like that.
For example, evolution is an established fact beyond any real doubt; the theory of natural selection is viable -- all because of much corroborating evidence in several fields of science.
But it's all provisional. What if we find enough contradictory evidence underneath Antarctica or in some DNA strand: game over.
So what can be said about an afterlife? No evidence exists for heaven, hell, rebirth, nirvana, valhalla, hades, duat or swarga. Incidentally in 2007, catholics changed the weird teaching of Limbo of infants, invented arout 1300, into a mere hypothesis: it "remains a possible theological opinion".
Setting aside these "opinions", it's safe to say that there is no afterlife, given the evidence of billions of deaths and lack of evidence for ghosts, souls, demons and reborn humans.
Sometimes we can't prove things that exist. Only time will give us all the answers. Also, most sciences do indeed use a lot of math to prove the facts.
Numerology, astrology, "2012ers", Kabbalistic and Islamic mysticism all use mathematics to legitimize their work. The math in itself is meaningless. It's us who interpret the results, and we often are wrong.
Take statistics. The math may be sound, but the base data may have errors; the result be wrong or even meaningless when interpreted.
Just because natural sciences use math to test and apply their models, they still are vulnerable in the face of new evidence. That's how it should be.
Tabatha, I've just listened to the most recent podcast from "The Skeptics' Guide 5x5 -- 5 minutes with 5 skeptics" named "Skepticism 101 - Scientific Theory". The Novella brothers do a really good job, as always. I'm a fan of their podcasts for years now.
Just thought it would be à propos for our discussion here. Enjoy! :-)
christ and word(bible) are proved by-1000s of biblical prophecies fulfilled,by more than 300 messianic prophesies fulfilled by jesus&1000s of miracles that happen in the name of jesus everyday around the world.if u really believe in science and logical reasoning u will accept jesus as messiah.
You are right. It's heartbreaking that so many people continue to be harmed and enslaved by religion. But you know, these are also videos that provide hope. They illustrate how simple it is to refute the lies of religions, and how just a little education, a little knowledge, can help the average person overcome superstition.
"Christianity is now discovered to be fictitious...and treated as if, in the present age, this were an agreed point among all persons of discernment, and nothing remained but to set it up as a principal subject for mirth and ridicule, as it were by way of reprisals for its having so long interrupted the pleasures of the world." Bishop Butler in 1736
It has taken 271 years for the TV-watching plebs to catch up to this civilization's actual middle class.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"The THEORY of Evilution is UNPROVED and UNPROVEABLE WE BELIEVE IT ' ONLY ' BECAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE IS SPECIAL CREATION...." Quote from Sir Arthur Keith ; Author of the Foreword for the book "Origin of Species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of ' FAVORED RACES' " by Charles Darwin (100th Edition).
It seems doubtful that Sir Arthur Keith would write a foreword at the age of 88 just before his death in 1955 and it wouldn't appear until 1959 - four years later!
Most references to this questionable quote are from creationists, who are notorious for inventing facts to prove a point!
I dunno, I think you might be surprised to hear that there is nothing higher in science than a theory. Like, gravity is just a theory. I dunno, this could be argued, but I personally see theory of gravity being more vague and having less evidence for it, compared to theory of evolution.
Theory:''A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.'' (this is a translation from RAE, a spanish dictionary...but any cientific nows this definition)
In a few words, a THEORY is a conjunt of LAWS or principles, and laws are hypothesis that have been proven and demonstrated. But ordinary people misunderstand the word, and use it as "something that is not proven".
The way you word it,a "thoery" is something someone thinks of in the middle of the night while drunk. Here's a shocker: OUR UNDERSTANDING OF GRAVITY IS ONLY A THEORY.
I watched up to part 3 so far, If only I had this about oh say 16 years ago. I am putting everyone of these vids. in my Favorites - thanks for showing them:)
I thought that the extraneous extremities on Hindu deities were metaphorical representations of the aspects of that god. A student of a brand of Hinduism also told me the gods weren't literal, but abstractly represented states of awareness, but I don't know whether this is a popular idea. This video's a bit too folksy and broad for me.
I would like to say that although I agree with many of the points this video made, I do not think it is entirely representative of atheist thought around the world, and should not be taken to be so.
There is no one truely unified atheist movement. And the brilliant thing is that there doesn't need to be.
Nothing represtents the atheists in the world except a lack of belief in god. Nothing else. Stop grouping atheists by anything other than that. You are part of the problem.
Hitler was indeed a catholic and the German Army's motto, as inscribed on their belt buckles was "God is with us." Also, Stalin had a seminary education before embracing communism.
"I know Herr Hitler very well personally and am quite close to him. He has an unusually honourable character, full of profound kindness, is religious, a good Catholic."
--Rudolph Hess
Ltr to PM of Bavaria, 1920
"I shall remain a Catholic forever."
Spoken by Hitler to his adjutant, General Gerhard Engel, 1941
Richard Dawkins' latest, The God Delusion, addresses this issue in detail. I highly recommend it.
i spent an hour today in town looking for the god delussion and never found it although not sure if i am that bothered about reading it although might just add some added ammo against religions in debates.
cool i recently got a book called the end of faith by sam harris. Its all to do with the wars, terrorism and the effects of religion. Its a very good attack against religion and i have found it enjoying. But i will pick up the god delusion at some point.
I would also recommend Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark". Excellent reading about the harm that comes from religion (and pseudo-science).
cool will have a look for it. my gf went to a faith school and is an kinda moderate christian as she got the belief hammered into her over 5 years o i hate faith schools there just ways to brainwash the young.
I hope you'll do you're own research on it. That's one of the main reasons I did the series. So that people WON'T take on faith what others say. Study, research, find out what is true for yourself. :)
Yes, he was. "Gott Mit Uns" means "God is with us." This was written on the beltbuckles of EVERY NAZI SOLDIER. I am very bored with Christian propagandists committing the double fallacy of "argumentum ad Nazium" and irrelevance through simply being WRONG in stating that the Third Reich was an athiest state. THE NAZIS WERE DEEPLY BELIEVING CHRISTIANS! No way around that truth.
He was a devout Catholic. The Catholic Church and the Nazi party were huge supporters of eachother. At that time, it was common Church doctorine that Jesus was killed by the Jews. Even the belt buckle said, "Gott Mit Uns".
If you don't believe me, Good, never just believe anyone, go and look it up yourself.
Hitler basically used Catholicsm to forward his own agenda, which more resembled a form of Aryian occultism, but "faith" could easily blend the two seemingly contradictory beliefs together. Also, Hitler had a plan to make the Church a body of the State and eventually dissolve it into pure Nazism. Although not all catholics at the time approved of Hitler, not even in the Vatican, but still.
It still doesn't make Hitler a Catholic. Belief is self-proclaimed, and that is the only thing that maters when deciding whether a person is of that faith. Regardless of Hitler's intentions, if he believed that he was a Catholic, then he was a Catholic.
Eventhough I do not consider myself Atheist, I would suggest this video to anyone who's on a "soul-searching" quest to find their faith. I think this is a beautifully put together vid and it makes so many GREAT points. I consider myself simply spiritual. Thanks for checking out my vid, by the way!
Yes, I know Atheism is LACK of faith and rejects the concept of a soul. Read my comment. I would URGE any person exploring faith to also explore it's opposite in order to make a more informed decision. I AM SPIRITUAL, hence my dialogue uses phrases such as "soul-searching".
Yes, I am not an atheist, but I do have faith as well in human reason and treating others how I want to be treated and strive to be those things in all my undertakings...
Bekll did not reason to that conclusion until halfway through our comments, and I do understand that Faith is a word that doesn't necessarily go hand in hand with God.
I think you misunderstood her. Haven't you ever been in a place where you were just trying to figure out what to believe? To see through the BS and find the Great Whatever? Almost no one just blindly excepts Atheism, there's too much religion not to wonder. Some time "soul-searching" (read: thinkin' *real* hard. It's just a figure of speech.) leads you to...nothing.
Good video! I get sick of that what's the meaning of life question. Why do people need their life to be predesined. Is it all that mind conformity? We'll be lost if we can't know what happens next. Get your ass out and live life that's the meaning. Use your damn brains and try and think. One source of knowledge has weakend people's abilities greatly to think and reason.
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
GOD, HEAVEN, AND SEX: Internet article examines the Biblical possibility of sex in heaven. Human sexuality isn't just for reproduction. There are reasons the Bible requires marriage for sex on earth, but those reasons won't exist in heaven. Scripture teaches, in heaven, we'll be like the angels only in one sense - no marriage, but we won't be like angels in every other way (i.e. Bible says we'll enjoy food and drink). Psalm 16:11 says there will be great spiritual joy and pleasures in heaven.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 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, reproducing if their reproductive system, vital structures, and organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT ABOUT THE STARS? Gravity explains how the order found in the precise courses of trillions of stars is maintained, but gravity can't explain the origin of that order! Did all the trillions stars agree to get out of each others way? C'mon! Disorder in the universe is because of chance, but the order is because of design. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 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
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read my popular Internet articles: ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM, ANY LIFE ON MARS CAME FROM EARTH, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE!
Mogley52 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 for a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed in design or useless.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BLIND WATCHMAKER NO ARGUMENT. Natural selection is no "blind watchmaker" because it can only "select" from variations produced having survival value. It doesn't produce variations. It only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't be involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it living! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION DOESN'T HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 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), arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of transitional forms and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discusses mixed species in fossils (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum conveniently ignored by evolutionists).
Mogley52 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
NOT ALL EVOLUTIONISTS even agree on the fossils used to support and reconstruct human evolution. The bones are incomplete. There's no certainty of the bones belonging to the same creature. They can reconstruct whatever they want from these bones, and they have. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read my article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE
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 creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God is real. John 3:16 (New International Version, ©2010)16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Hebrews 11:6 (New International Version, ©2010)6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.
Blessings.
TheIggy457 1 year ago
Q: One of the ten commandments is :though shalt have a personal code of ethics, could ethics be defined?
Theprophetzarat 1 year ago
@Theprophetzarat Well, yes and no. Humans have been in the process of defining ethcis for millenia. Our earlier attempts were the code of Hamarrabi, the Tao, the teachings of Confuscious, the Jewish Torah (the old testament), the new Testament, The Koran, etc. etc.
Some could say that one code of ethics is to cause the least harm, and the most good, others say our current system of laws is our last/best attempt to codify our commonly agreed upon ethical behaviour.
Doubter5 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i jus wanna know who wrote the bible then? did one man write the bible? did a group of dudes come together and say to themselves...lets write a fucking epic, right now! i wanna know...
syrensounds 1 year ago
Thank you Larry Rhodes for sharing this expression of your unusual clarity of thought.
loneknight100 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
For a respectful, less confrontational look at Atheism and Christianity, check out "The God Debate" on my channel.
atheistfriends 2 years ago
Atheists FTW!!
ArrogantAtheist 2 years ago 3
i'm an atheist, but i do believe in reincarnation, i wanna know whats that called?
quisqueyatv 2 years ago
Sounds like Buddhism.. They don't believe in God (Buddha in his writings says specifically that he's NOT a god), but they do believe in Reincarnation.
Later!
Larry
Doubter5 2 years ago
oh thats great, then i'm a buddhist :), exept i won't practice it's beleifs that often hehe
quisqueyatv 2 years ago
The annotation about linking Hitler to Christianity is broken, that video has been removed from youtube.
MotionFur 2 years ago
I appreciate the Heads-Up... I'll find another source.
Thanks!
Doubter5 2 years ago
Umm Doubter, where exactly did you read in the Koran that the earth was flat. I mean I read it and I know for a fact that it describes the earth a sphere and it and the moon each float in an orbit. Peace.
penintech 2 years ago
LOL It's not okay to say that when you die theres nothing left. Nobody knows what happens when we die. It's ignorant to say you know when you don't. No offense meant. I'm not saying there's heaven, but there might be something else. We just don't know. Science can't prove everything, but neither can 'Faith.'
somechick73 3 years ago
In fact, science proves nothing. It can only disprove flawed hypotheses by contraring evidence. Other hypotheses (which survived testing, scrutiny and falsification) contribute to models and theories that led to "wonders" like the one on which you submitted your comment.
Example: neurology shows that near-death experiences and jet-pilot brownouts have one main cause: lack of blood circulation in the brain. So it's rational and parsimonious to assume no afterlife considering the evidence.
leporidus 2 years ago
Science has proven some things but you cannot prove theres no life after death. However, we can't prove it, nor can we disprove it. I'm not saying I believe in one. I'm just saying, we can't prove nor disprove something we cannot actually touch. Some things might just be in our minds, a fantasy, and some things might be real. But there's no real way to prove or disprove something like that. This is my thoughts.
somechick73 2 years ago
Tabatha, are you a mathematician? Only within math and logic, absolute proof can be provided for some (!) theorems. The natural sciences have nothing like that.
For example, evolution is an established fact beyond any real doubt; the theory of natural selection is viable -- all because of much corroborating evidence in several fields of science.
But it's all provisional. What if we find enough contradictory evidence underneath Antarctica or in some DNA strand: game over.
leporidus 2 years ago
So what can be said about an afterlife? No evidence exists for heaven, hell, rebirth, nirvana, valhalla, hades, duat or swarga. Incidentally in 2007, catholics changed the weird teaching of Limbo of infants, invented arout 1300, into a mere hypothesis: it "remains a possible theological opinion".
Setting aside these "opinions", it's safe to say that there is no afterlife, given the evidence of billions of deaths and lack of evidence for ghosts, souls, demons and reborn humans.
leporidus 2 years ago
Sometimes we can't prove things that exist. Only time will give us all the answers. Also, most sciences do indeed use a lot of math to prove the facts.
somechick73 2 years ago
Numerology, astrology, "2012ers", Kabbalistic and Islamic mysticism all use mathematics to legitimize their work. The math in itself is meaningless. It's us who interpret the results, and we often are wrong.
Take statistics. The math may be sound, but the base data may have errors; the result be wrong or even meaningless when interpreted.
Just because natural sciences use math to test and apply their models, they still are vulnerable in the face of new evidence. That's how it should be.
leporidus 2 years ago
Tabatha, I've just listened to the most recent podcast from "The Skeptics' Guide 5x5 -- 5 minutes with 5 skeptics" named "Skepticism 101 - Scientific Theory". The Novella brothers do a really good job, as always. I'm a fan of their podcasts for years now.
Just thought it would be à propos for our discussion here. Enjoy! :-)
leporidus 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
christ and word(bible) are proved by-1000s of biblical prophecies fulfilled,by more than 300 messianic prophesies fulfilled by jesus&1000s of miracles that happen in the name of jesus everyday around the world.if u really believe in science and logical reasoning u will accept jesus as messiah.
alrok777 3 years ago
but what would make humans so special as to give them souls but not anything else?
mharris187 3 years ago 2
These just get better and better.
TheLogicJunkie 3 years ago 15
Heartbreaking videos.
primummovens 4 years ago
You are right. It's heartbreaking that so many people continue to be harmed and enslaved by religion. But you know, these are also videos that provide hope. They illustrate how simple it is to refute the lies of religions, and how just a little education, a little knowledge, can help the average person overcome superstition.
seathanaich 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
"Christianity is now discovered to be fictitious...and treated as if, in the present age, this were an agreed point among all persons of discernment, and nothing remained but to set it up as a principal subject for mirth and ridicule, as it were by way of reprisals for its having so long interrupted the pleasures of the world." Bishop Butler in 1736
It has taken 271 years for the TV-watching plebs to catch up to this civilization's actual middle class.
neothomist1275 4 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ROMAN Catholics and Christians are 2 different things!
av1611truth 4 years ago
Explain how.
Same Book. Same God. Same Jesus. Same History.
Different habits, sure...
BibleMaggot 4 years ago
Hitler was a roman catholic. Maybe this will help teach people a little more accurate history.
Sumwun22 4 years ago 3
nope they will just say your lying and not look into it at all
zbambam5 4 years ago
you're not your.
humanist7117 3 years ago
You're not you're.
BryceOfByrden 3 years ago
Thank you both for the correction.
zbambam5 3 years ago
Delightful, Gentle, Considered. A fine example.
sloppymove 4 years ago
I love the model of religion as a person who cuts you then tries to sell you a bandage. Great metaphor. Down with theism I say.
Zed1967 4 years ago 5
Excellent video. Not quite as good as No. 2, but still excellent.
Highly recommended!
pseudotruth 4 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"The THEORY of Evilution is UNPROVED and UNPROVEABLE WE BELIEVE IT ' ONLY ' BECAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE IS SPECIAL CREATION...." Quote from Sir Arthur Keith ; Author of the Foreword for the book "Origin of Species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of ' FAVORED RACES' " by Charles Darwin (100th Edition).
av1611truth 4 years ago
Av1611truth
Stop spamming this!
It seems doubtful that Sir Arthur Keith would write a foreword at the age of 88 just before his death in 1955 and it wouldn't appear until 1959 - four years later!
Most references to this questionable quote are from creationists, who are notorious for inventing facts to prove a point!
It wouldn't be the first time!
pseudotruth 4 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The THEORY of Evilution [SIC] or EVOLUTION is just that - A THEORY! Doh!
nigex 4 years ago
I dunno, I think you might be surprised to hear that there is nothing higher in science than a theory. Like, gravity is just a theory. I dunno, this could be argued, but I personally see theory of gravity being more vague and having less evidence for it, compared to theory of evolution.
Just to give you some sort of perspective.
gJonii 4 years ago 5
Theory:''A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.'' (this is a translation from RAE, a spanish dictionary...but any cientific nows this definition)
Timelessdarkness 4 years ago 3
In a few words, a THEORY is a conjunt of LAWS or principles, and laws are hypothesis that have been proven and demonstrated. But ordinary people misunderstand the word, and use it as "something that is not proven".
So a theory is a FACT.
Timelessdarkness 4 years ago 4
The way you word it,a "thoery" is something someone thinks of in the middle of the night while drunk. Here's a shocker: OUR UNDERSTANDING OF GRAVITY IS ONLY A THEORY.
dynamitespoony 4 years ago 8
This argument is frequently posed and is based on not understanding the difference between a scientific theory and a hypothesis.
daichi2097 4 years ago
and religious retart are just retarts Doh!
having a theory of something is better then saying god did it don't you think?
MiNg0o 4 years ago 2
the·o·ry
Pronunciation: \ˈthē-ə-rē, ˈthir-ē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural the·o·ries
Etymology: Late Latin theoria, from Greek theōria, from theōrein
1: the analysis of a set of FACTS in their relation to one another
Your a fucking idiot
Mexican602G 3 years ago
Name one thing in the theory of evolution, that has not been proven and also, you selled evolution wrong.
Mexican602G 3 years ago
"Name one thing in the theory of evolution, that has not been proven and also, you selled evolution wrong."
Reread that, is there something you SPELLED wrong?
Darklust413 3 years ago
awesome! i hope that you continue to create these wonderfully educational videos! thanks.
marklethanarkle 4 years ago 3
This has been very well thought out and put together. Thank you!
emeraldaubergine 4 years ago
very interesting.
mfischer1 4 years ago
Only the ignorant have the luxury of chooseing to believe what they believe.
dechha1981 4 years ago
There should be points to living because there are points to be had.
Kriact 4 years ago
I watched up to part 3 so far, If only I had this about oh say 16 years ago. I am putting everyone of these vids. in my Favorites - thanks for showing them:)
religionhumbug 4 years ago
I thought that the extraneous extremities on Hindu deities were metaphorical representations of the aspects of that god. A student of a brand of Hinduism also told me the gods weren't literal, but abstractly represented states of awareness, but I don't know whether this is a popular idea. This video's a bit too folksy and broad for me.
mdcaigoy 4 years ago
I would like to say that although I agree with many of the points this video made, I do not think it is entirely representative of atheist thought around the world, and should not be taken to be so.
There is no one truely unified atheist movement. And the brilliant thing is that there doesn't need to be.
MikeT2005 5 years ago 2
Nothing represtents the atheists in the world except a lack of belief in god. Nothing else. Stop grouping atheists by anything other than that. You are part of the problem.
vastib 5 years ago
Hitler was indeed a catholic and the German Army's motto, as inscribed on their belt buckles was "God is with us." Also, Stalin had a seminary education before embracing communism.
Godsfree 5 years ago
Yeah i just looked it up and he indeed said he was although it is rumored that he hated all religion and just went with the catolicism to look good.
goodfellamatt 5 years ago
"I know Herr Hitler very well personally and am quite close to him. He has an unusually honourable character, full of profound kindness, is religious, a good Catholic."
--Rudolph Hess
Ltr to PM of Bavaria, 1920
"I shall remain a Catholic forever."
Spoken by Hitler to his adjutant, General Gerhard Engel, 1941
Richard Dawkins' latest, The God Delusion, addresses this issue in detail. I highly recommend it.
Godsfree 5 years ago
i spent an hour today in town looking for the god delussion and never found it although not sure if i am that bothered about reading it although might just add some added ammo against religions in debates.
phillippassmore 5 years ago
It's worth reading. I didn't think I'd gain anything from it either, but he has some arguments I never even thought of.
XOmniverse 5 years ago
cool i recently got a book called the end of faith by sam harris. Its all to do with the wars, terrorism and the effects of religion. Its a very good attack against religion and i have found it enjoying. But i will pick up the god delusion at some point.
phillippassmore 5 years ago
I would also recommend Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark". Excellent reading about the harm that comes from religion (and pseudo-science).
Doubter5 5 years ago
cool will have a look for it. my gf went to a faith school and is an kinda moderate christian as she got the belief hammered into her over 5 years o i hate faith schools there just ways to brainwash the young.
phillippassmore 5 years ago
I find these videos interesting but im pretty sure it made an error when it said hitler was catholic.
goodfellamatt 5 years ago
I hope you'll do you're own research on it. That's one of the main reasons I did the series. So that people WON'T take on faith what others say. Study, research, find out what is true for yourself. :)
Doubter5 5 years ago
Hitler WAS a Catholic.
user192021 5 years ago
Yes, he was. "Gott Mit Uns" means "God is with us." This was written on the beltbuckles of EVERY NAZI SOLDIER. I am very bored with Christian propagandists committing the double fallacy of "argumentum ad Nazium" and irrelevance through simply being WRONG in stating that the Third Reich was an athiest state. THE NAZIS WERE DEEPLY BELIEVING CHRISTIANS! No way around that truth.
AltaMirage 5 years ago
So what.
thinkpinkwink 5 years ago
He was a devout Catholic. The Catholic Church and the Nazi party were huge supporters of eachother. At that time, it was common Church doctorine that Jesus was killed by the Jews. Even the belt buckle said, "Gott Mit Uns".
If you don't believe me, Good, never just believe anyone, go and look it up yourself.
dechha1981 4 years ago
"He was a devout Catholic. The Catholic Church and the Nazi party were huge supporters of eachother. "
Can you provide evidence that Hitler was a Catholic?
RebelRay 2 years ago
Look it up yourself.
dechha1981 2 years ago 4
fuck.... What a fucking retarded thing to say......
Unknnnnn 2 years ago
The evidence is Mein Khamph, Hitler's autobiography.
captyour 2 years ago 4
"Can you provide evidence that Hitler was a Catholic?"
That evidence is very easy to find. Do you really want the evidence to be presented to you?
BohemianBlasphemy 2 years ago 3
Hitler basically used Catholicsm to forward his own agenda, which more resembled a form of Aryian occultism, but "faith" could easily blend the two seemingly contradictory beliefs together. Also, Hitler had a plan to make the Church a body of the State and eventually dissolve it into pure Nazism. Although not all catholics at the time approved of Hitler, not even in the Vatican, but still.
tacopylas 4 years ago
It still doesn't make Hitler a Catholic. Belief is self-proclaimed, and that is the only thing that maters when deciding whether a person is of that faith. Regardless of Hitler's intentions, if he believed that he was a Catholic, then he was a Catholic.
augustus063 4 years ago 2
Sorry, I meant that it doenst make Hitler not a Catholic.
augustus063 4 years ago
Seriously, man. These vids or something similar should be a dvd series, it would really help atheists in religious families.
VincatScientia 5 years ago
Dan Barker, "Losing faith in faith"... gonna go check that out!
Bekll 5 years ago
Eventhough I do not consider myself Atheist, I would suggest this video to anyone who's on a "soul-searching" quest to find their faith. I think this is a beautifully put together vid and it makes so many GREAT points. I consider myself simply spiritual. Thanks for checking out my vid, by the way!
rmrsgirl 5 years ago
Soul seraching? Find faith?
This video doesn't really support those. Did you even watch it?
Atheism is LACK of faith. Atheism rejects the concept of a soul.
Bekll 5 years ago
Yes, I know Atheism is LACK of faith and rejects the concept of a soul. Read my comment. I would URGE any person exploring faith to also explore it's opposite in order to make a more informed decision. I AM SPIRITUAL, hence my dialogue uses phrases such as "soul-searching".
rmrsgirl 5 years ago
By the way... the creator of this vid says right in his vid that he has FAITH in Humanity...
rmrsgirl 5 years ago
I have faith in humanity too... to help one another for the good of mankind.
Bekll 5 years ago
Good deal ;)
rmrsgirl 5 years ago
I meant lack of faith in religion/God.
Atheists do have faith in human reason however, and treating others how you want to be treated.
Bekll 5 years ago
Yes, I am not an atheist, but I do have faith as well in human reason and treating others how I want to be treated and strive to be those things in all my undertakings...
rmrsgirl 5 years ago
The word FAITH does not have anything to do with god. You have FAITH in something that you believe in. Humanity is obviously real.
jerryreiner 5 years ago
Bekll did not reason to that conclusion until halfway through our comments, and I do understand that Faith is a word that doesn't necessarily go hand in hand with God.
rmrsgirl 5 years ago
Wrong meaning of "faith". Faith doesn't always have a religious meaning, and in this case, his use of the word is completely secular.
dynamitespoony 5 years ago
I think you misunderstood her. Haven't you ever been in a place where you were just trying to figure out what to believe? To see through the BS and find the Great Whatever? Almost no one just blindly excepts Atheism, there's too much religion not to wonder. Some time "soul-searching" (read: thinkin' *real* hard. It's just a figure of speech.) leads you to...nothing.
Perfectly acceptable.
shamelessbookworm 5 years ago
Great explanation! :)
rmrsgirl 5 years ago
Nice gentle presentation. It seems so obvious, doesn't it?
ikamoj 5 years ago
Great video. I have no idea how so many people can believe in such a rediculous concept.
xmikex95 5 years ago
Good video! I get sick of that what's the meaning of life question. Why do people need their life to be predesined. Is it all that mind conformity? We'll be lost if we can't know what happens next. Get your ass out and live life that's the meaning. Use your damn brains and try and think. One source of knowledge has weakend people's abilities greatly to think and reason.
vomitfeeder 5 years ago
Yes! I thought no one would get around to exposing religion to be the real dehumanizer.
Hats, caps, visors, yarmulkes, pope hats and all off to you, sir.
PinocchiOpiate 5 years ago