The Origin of God - Douglas Adams (Hebrew Sub)

[cjfilmproductions]

are there planets ousside our solar sytem? why does your bible not mention them???did your god create those other galaxies also? why is it not mentioned in the bible? it doesnt matter you dont care about facts you believe in magic.........and i dont so who is the fucking idiot. your beliefs would get you comitted to a mental institute under any real scrutiny because the belief in the obiously false is just crazy and on that not i am done with your crazy deluded ass dont bother replying .

[cjfilmproductions]

are there planets ousside our solar sytem? why does your bible not mention them???did your god create those other galaxies also? why is it not mentioned in the bible? it doesnt matter you dont care about facts you believe in magic..........

[cjfilmproductions]

proving there is no god is simple..because you are the one that claims he exists and you have zero evidence. your lack of evidence is my proof that you are wrong. zero evidence does equal a falsehood......and you still have ignored every question i posed and chose to personally insult me instead again very Christian of you.....you want proof go to a fucking science or natural history museum...

[cjfilmproductions]

and as for your question philosophy by any name isn't science because as you say it cant be falsified isn't testable.....lets stick to basic science no need to go further than the high school level to prove my points...

[cjfilmproductions]

religion has always fought to control science and information. not to further it or make it credible as you claim what world do you live in? a fantasy world were magic is real?. here is another question for you to ignore.. if science discovers life on a new planet where would god fit into that picture?

[cjfilmproductions]

lets see i disagree with you so my life has no meaning. how very religious of you thank you for proving my point..when you calm down go back and read our interaction with a clear mind..look at how you never really responded to any of my questions and only came at me with rhetoric. reapeating what you heard is not evidence .. we know the world isnt flat..

[cjfilmproductions]

in true christian fashion you contradict yourself with your own words. you dont have time to type?????your comments to me alone add up to an essay....your entire religion is based on the idea that seeking knowledge is the ultimate sin. you guys have no interest in the truth.........facts are the antithesis of religion nothing you say can change that..your case doesn't hold up in court for lack of any evidence..tell me this did god create the fifty other planets we know about on day 6 or 7?

[cjfilmproductions]

in true christian fashion you contradict yourself with your own words. you dont have time to type?????your comments to me alone add up to an essay....your entire religion is based on the idea that seeking knowledge is the ultimate sin. you guys have no interest in the truth.........

[ivb1973]

So, do you think that with scientific explanations of everything you could reach the limits of knowledge?

---

Así, pensáis que con explicaciones científicas podéis llegar a los límites del conocimiento?

[Hanahleia]

Early man was also imbibing entheogenic plants such as ayahuasca, and indulging in psychedelics such as peyote, psilocybin mushrooms, etc. Adams completely overlooked that! Perhaps, if Adams had a little ayahuasca, then he'd know where the true origin of the divine takes place.

[cappastrano]

There are many many instances in nature of seemingly organized structures nd arrangements, that have natural origins. DNA is just part of the crowd.

As for random codes, go read about the 'Methinks it is like a weasel' simulation.

[ChristianVoice08]

Now you are the one assuming that DNA is an example of a randomly selfgenerated code. Nice try. Give it up, Cap. You know there is a God and your objections are not intellectual, they are emotional. You are hiding your eyes from the truth. You are condemned of yourself. You can have the last word. Again, I hope you quit lying to yourself before you die. Fare well.

[cappastrano]

Theology taken up when your pretenses are knocked down.

DNA is randomly generated, as has been shown. It can randomly change, adding new information. All of this is clear when you look at it without bias, but your religion forces you to assume an outcome and ignore anything that contradicts it. Like Galileo, this too shall pass. Your religion will find a way to accept evolution, and pretend like it was in the Bible all along. The rest of us will chuckle.

[cjfilmproductions]

@ChristianVoice08 haha here you are projecting. you know there isnt a god and your entire exsistence has been based on lies and fairy tails.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

False. I know God personally. You are the brainwashed and self-deceived rube who has BLIND FAITH in the unknowable and unprovable. I posted videos on logical fact that atheism can never be proved or evidenced. it is, by definition, BLIND FAITH, the worst kind of faith known to man. The koolaid of the cult member and the nectar of the madman. We have no such delusions. We have evidence and personal interaction with God. You just have your wicked dreams. Deal with it!

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

I have no time for deluded fools who having no argument and no proof of their world view simply lash out at us. How pathetic. The boy with no argument taunts and slanders those of us who have valid and logical arguments with evidence to boot. Prove me wrong! Show me how there is no God. Where's the proof for your wicked pipe dream??? Prove there is no God or shut up. Don't discuss my real world view. Prove yours or you are a hypocrite trying to hide his nakedness!

[cappastrano]

The premises are assumed to be true. It assumes a lot. t assumes we have access to all code. It also takes a subjective view of what a 'code' is. This is important, especially considering our neurological bias toward finding patters, even if there are none.

[ChristianVoice08]

FALSE. You must prove that a random formed code exists. NONE do. You are denying known fact to avoid refutation, Cap.

[ChristianVoice08]

And that is an empirical fact, Cap, IRREFUTABLE! Every coding system containing information in HISTORY had an intelligent encoder who intentionally and with design and forethought, designed the code. Now explain to me again how the information to build complex molecules and assemble them arose without intelligence and coded itself in a way to be decoded by the first replicating cell.

[cappastrano]

Every coding system that we have ever created has had a creator... congrats on a circular argument.

[ChristianVoice08]

My bad. I mistated my argument as a circular one. Sorry. I realized my error after I reread my post, Cap. I am restating properly now. Still, you can't prove an encoded system arises out of chance. That is the cornerstone of abiogenesis and absolutely necessary for evolution as an explanation of real variety in life. Evo means nothing without spontaneous generation of life which is impossible according to real foundational science and logic.

[cjfilmproductions]

@ChristianVoice08 so who created god? if everything complex has to be designed ?why does god get a free pass ?how did something as complicated as god come into existence without being created? who wrote his code as you put it? if god created all of this he sure went through a lot to hide the evidence..no wait i forgot thats the devil. but god doesn't make mistakes and he knows everything so he made the devil on purpose? your bronze age beliefs have no place here enough with the bullshit

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

God gets no free pass (as in your straw man query). He is a logical necessity. A single self-actuated Cause with no need of a cause or beginning. Had you studied this and not parroted pet answers of ignorant atheists, you would know not to ask foolish questions. Theists make no claim that everything has a cause. ONLY those things which have a beginning have a cause (the foundational principle of science). Had you studied theism & theology, you would know this.

[ChristianVoice08]

Also, Cap, you have to provide a valid AND true argument proving answering that question. You cannot have any error in science or logical fallacy. So, get to it. Prove how that could ever happen without intelligent effort from an intelligent pre-existent Entity and I will surrender. I will tell you now that you will duck this challenge as it is a scientific impossiblity. So, you will change the subject or deny the issue. Still, I publicly issue the challenge.

[ChristianVoice08]

Cap, you guys keep throwing shovel of manure after shovel of manure without smelling what you are shovelling. DNA cannot come without an encoder. AND the mechanism for the encoding and the information being encoded MUST come from a designer/encoder as NO information is stored FROM ANY RANDOM CAUSE. SO, rather than give me videos as though they are proof,

ANSWER that one point! Tell me how information and the code for it could arise without intelligent input. If you can, then, I will surrender.

[cjfilmproductions]

@ChristianVoice08 you keep using the word code out of context my friend just like you love to do with the word theory.

[ChristianVoice08]

Atheists are so ignorant of biology and logic that it amazes me the extent to which they are brainwashed or simply refuse to see the evidence of science. Anyone with a brain and understanding of BIO101 knows that DNA codes for EVERYTHING in the cell function INCLUDING its construction and hourly functions. You don't get a DNA sequence from primordial ooze or chance when the protein synthesis for cell construction is coded and requires assembly. BIO 101. No DNA, no cell wall, no nothing!!!

[cappastrano]

You seem to be referring to abiogenesis, which is a separate theory, NOT evolution.

Did you watch the video I linked on transitional fossils?

How about this one?

watch?v=JgyTVT3dqGY

[ChristianVoice08]

Evolution is part of the explanation of origins. It is an integral part of the assinine doctrine of abiogenesis (Greek- no life beginning). I don't need videos, Cap. I started college at the third ranked university in the country in Marine Biology as a Mar. Bio. major. We were in the same bio program as the PreMed students. I don't need propaganda on a model that fails on its basal level. NO LIFE comes from NONLIFE! EVER! Cell theory, law of biogenesis + the refutation of spontaneous refutation.

[cappastrano]

A bio major that doesn't know the separation of abiogenesis and evolution, sad really. Your professors would be ashamed of you.

Cell thoery also has nothing to do with abiogenesis, and barely any relevance to evolution. I doubt your word on your education, anyone with a good grounding in Biology wouldn't be making such inane statements.

Pick a lie that you can actually defend, don't just wiki a subject and spout jargon.

[ChristianVoice08]

I was educated prior to that assinine doctrine. We were subjected to the other assinine dodge of the issue, panspermia. So, get back to the issue that proves that abiogenesis and evolution for origins has a chance. Prove that information can spring from a nonpersonal and nonintelligent source by RANDOM PROCESS and then code itself. If you cannot prove that, then, all the smoke and mirrors of abio and evo are myths!!!

[cappastrano]

ahh, there's your problem. Education only helps if you keep it up to date.

Abiogenesis has been demonstrated in a lab, and mutations add new information to DNA all the time(the average human has 150 mutations that their parents did not have).

Panspermia's not that asinine, especially considering new findings of organic building blocks in meteors and comets. Still though, even if Panspermia were true you would still have to explain how life started somewhere else, and abiogenesis still fits

[ChristianVoice08]

AHH, there's your problem, Cap, arrogant ignorance. Proving abiogenesis in a lab ONLY proves Creationism! Your stupidity is amazing given your insolence. Panspermia is NOT an answer it is a dodge of the origin of life question. SO, prove the core issue or shut up. Prove to me that information can arise and encode randomly by a nonpersonal, nonintelligent and random process. If you can't prove that, all your obfuscation is a dodge of the basic fallacy of abio and evo!

[cappastrano]

I just SAID the panspermia was a dodge.

No, it doesn't prove creationism, it doesn't 'prove' abiogenesis either. What the experiemnts do is provide a possible scenario in which non-organic molecules can, without intervention, become self replicating pre-organic molecules.

It provides a POSSIBLE explanation, one that is more reasonable than to assume that a magic man spoke life into existence.

[cappastrano]

Mutations add information, and abiogenesis can arrange organic molecules into the situations that allow mutations. Tada, proof!

The research is out there, its not new and its not controversial(except to people with a religious bias). Just go read it.

[ChristianVoice08]

I don't want to hear about ANYTHING AFTER the encoding. HOW DO WE GET THE SYSTEM FIRST, Cap??? It cannot come from chance. Admit it.

[cappastrano]

Yes it CAN. Are you listening? abiogenesis provides the first self-replicating protein chains. That IS the system, its all you need to get started.

[ChristianVoice08]

NO, abiogenesis PROVES that an intelligent being can manipulate the formation of some proteins at best. IT INVOLVES INTELLIGENCE! It fails to prove anything can happen on its own in the universe. Give me a real and valid random process that produces complex information and the system to code that information on its own without ANY intelligence at ALL, Cap. Cells don't have brains. So, no intelligence can be involved.

[cappastrano]

Go read the experiments. They set up an an environment the is similar to early earth and observe what happens. They don't manipulate the formation, the simulate natural conditions that do not exist on this planet anymore and observe the results.

[ChristianVoice08]

That doesn't matter. If YOU set up ANYTHING, intelligence is involved. You would have to observe it in the wild and prove that your observation DIDN'T affect the results in order to have a legitimate claim.

AGAIN, Cap, you are failing to recognize the facade you are standing in front of. Wake up. You can't get complex information, let alone, a coding system for that information from ANY chance random event. EVERY CODE...EVERY CODE HAS ALWAYS HAD AN INTELLIGENT ENCODER!

[cappastrano]

Par for the course for creationists, I know I'm not going to convince you. however what I can do is show any third parties your mistakes and flawed arguments. I think I've shown everyone your hand, and its nothing worth betting on.

[ChristianVoice08]

You can't convince me, Capp, because you haven't presented ANY valid and true evidence to support your foundational claim WHICH is contingent on the ability of information to rise out of nothing and encode itself within a cell without intelligence. I told you before that you would dodge that issue or deny and run when you were forced to look at reality. It's a shame that you guys are so blind yet accuse us of being out of touch with reality. Truth is staring you in the face & you look away.

[ChristianVoice08]

I dare you to set aside your bias and read some books NOT VIDEOS, books like Darwin's Black Box and see what is being said by intelligent design proponents and Creationists. Forget Hovind. Read a book. Obviously there are problems with your world view. You need to take a long hard look at it and forget the stereotypes of Christian theism you have heard about and find out what we really teach and how that answers the questions of life WITHOUT violating science or logic.

[cappastrano]

I've read Behe, and even if I hadn't, you've pretty much laid out most of his 'arguments'

Not impressed. It still makes a lot of ungrounded assumptions and willfully ignores hard evidence.

[ChristianVoice08]

Then you are the intentionally deluded person, Cap. When presented with valid arguments and real evidence, you would rather believe a lie than deal with facts. God says that you are doing that because you are sinful and love your sin and do not want your sins exposed by Him. He says that you run from the light so that your evil deeds may not be illuminated. He said that you know in your heart that He exists but you hate Him and love your sin. Fare well. I hope you be honest with you before death

[cappastrano]

Ahh, there we go, abandoning all pretense of logic and science and going right for the theology.

This is what creationism and ID is folks, just religion trying to fake science.

[ChristianVoice08]

That is a strawman! We do not hold to magic, Cap. You are the one with the mythological origin story that violates natural laws. I will not reply to you anymore until you answer my challenge. Why? because everything you say is crap unless you can demonstrate that coded information can arise from a chance random process without intelligent origin. And, we both know that is scientifically, mathematically and logically impossible. Therefore, discussion of other topics is irrelevant. Prove or cede

[cappastrano]

I've already proved it. Abiogenesis provides the catalyst and mutations increase the information.

Just because you happen to think those things don't happen, I've still shown HOW they could, and what the effects would be. In this case the predicted effects of random mutations selected by environmental pressures matches exactly with the way we observe the world.

If speaking the world into existence isn't magic, then what is it, exacty?

[ChristianVoice08]

FALSE. You are still talking about those processes AFTER a codified system of information for the construction of cell parts and necessary enzymes. Abiogenesis DOES NOT demonstrate the formation of protein based codes of the information on the construction of a cell OR the means to decode and use that information to construct a cell. Admit the truth. Coded information cannot rise from chance processes, Cap.

[cappastrano]

Uh, dude, abiogenesis doesn't make cells on day one. If that's what you think abiogenesis means, then you are correct i calling it bullshit.

However, that is NOT what the idea states. We start with simpe organic chains self-replicating chains. Cells come in WAY alter, and not the complex things we have now.

[ChristianVoice08]

That is a logical contradiction! More and higher order DO NOT come from simple and less ordered systems WITHOUT INTELLIGENT INTERVENTION, Cap. You are shoveling it again. If cells DON'T have the ability to code for the enzymes they need to function or the organelles they possess, THEY DIE long before they can reproduce or develop a coded system. Show how a coded information system rises from random chance or recognize the impossibility of your claims!

[cappastrano]

Oh, the good old tired 2nd law of Thermo argument, goody. You are reading it wrong. Order can and does come from putting energy into a system. It jus so happens that earth has a huge natural energy source pouring down on is all the time ,not to mention the heat from the core.

Cells did not start with the organells, or need them originally. That came much later, and developed naturally.

You keep saying the same thing over and over again, ignoring any information given.

[ChristianVoice08]

By that I mean, without an intelligent entitity creating a code for information, NO TIME IN HISTORY has a codification of information occured on its own. You don't get language from random phonetics or gene sequencing from nothing. Genetics can't even emerge without design. A single cell will NEVER generate without DNA and DNA cannot come without a cell with the necessary components & original DNA sequence. Your whole argument is ridiculous and anti-scientific, Cap.

[cappastrano]

Wrong,stop copypasting Kent Hovind.

[cappastrano]

=F9729F67CD4034C9

You cannot use god as an explanation for anything without first explaining/proving god. Evolution via natural selection explains the evidence, while creationism has to ignore reality in order to make their theory stick.

[ChristianVoice08]

We have proof of God. Still, you are wrong as we use the evidence of design in nature as evidence of God and you ignore it, we have de facto evidence of God. You just refuted your own argument but not mine. If we have to completely prove God in spite of the clear evidence of design in the universe, then, you sure as crap have to prove a common ancestry by producing the common ancestor, Cap. You are making a pathetic attempt to sidestep refutation.

[ChristianVoice08]

I am not copying Kent. I am speaking on my own knowledge and college training in biology as well as research presented by Behe and many others of far greater credentials in biology than you, Cap. If you don't understand what I am saying, then, you demonstrate either an abject lack of understanding of logic or biology OR BOTH! DNA does not spring up on its own AND since ALL components are the cell INCLUDING ITS BASE PROTEINS, NO CELL can emerge from nothing and reproduce with a codified data set!

[dunbar9finger]

"ChristianVoice" - I thought your religion considered lying to be a sin - so why do you do insist on doing it, with a statement like this: "there is a God but that YOU'RE not Him and since you wanted to be Him". You and every other propaganda-spreading bullshit artist who make that claim know perfectly fucking well your claim that atheists want to be god has no basis, since you know perfectly well no atheist has said this.

[dunbar9finger]

And before you give a knee-jerk reaction take a look more carefully at what I said I'm not calling you a liar for claiming god exists - you probably genuinely believe that. I'm calling you a liar for your claim "you wanted to be him", directed at Douglas Adams. I do not tolerate that dishonest strawman argument that propagadists use against atheists. Don't make up claims we never made and think that by shooting them down you win. Instead, you could try the path of honesty for once.

[ChristianVoice08]

Douglas Adams believes in God now!!! How sad to die and not only find out there is a God but that YOU'RE not Him and since you wanted to be Him, you ended up in hell by choice. Nevertheless, the choice is ours and we can only blame ourselves for our lives and the consequences of our actions.

[mapmanic]

Can anyone translate these subtitles into Arabic?

[Tomerico]

I wish, that could be great, but i don't know Arabic, only Hebrew and English..

[MultiPropagandaPanda]

@Tomerico you should learn arabic, israel will become islamic state

[Tomerico]

@MultiPropagandaPanda why do you think so? i think i should learn arabic cuz hopefully one day will be at peace with all of the arabs countries around us

[bonangusacdc]

Everybody is born an atheist. Unfortunately, some do not have long to wait before the beliefs are thrust upon their developing minds.

[ChristianVoice08]

Only god can heal a broken heart or broken soul and transform the most wicked man in the world into the gray to say we've ever seen.

Did you realize that the son of Sam killer, Steve Berkowitz, now serves Jesus as God. He has it knowledge to is sin and that justice demands his death. This is not announced by the news or the press because they like the sensationalism of the murders that he committed.

[LinearCarp1209]

why the heck is there only one super intelligent species/genus/kindgdom what ever we are on this planet? why not more? maybe doug asked that question himself, and thats why he made the dolphins and mice out to be so smart. why are people so reluctant to allow the idea of a god? its as if its not right unless we think things through so much that we come to the conclusion NOTHING has any meaning and nothing is really worth being here. that sounds like a depressing way of life.

[Towelietowel]

If you need God to have meaning in your life, then you're like a drug addict that cant enjoy life when they arent doped up. LIFE IS AWESOME. You don't need God to think that.

[LinearCarp1209]

of course life is great. having god only makes it better. but god is the one thing that doesnt want to hurt you for no good reason. he only wants to help. life, on the other hand, by itself is destructive without god. you may not think so, and it may not seem so to you, but look at the bad in the world. many bad things are caused in godless situations. and I'd have to be more specific. only the one true christian god is the perfect existing, god. well I'm out of chars. now, so reply if you want.

[MuckupAgain]

"many bad things are caused in godless situations"

And many bad things happen in 'godful' situations. In fact,many bad things happen because of differences in religious beliefs;who's God is the correct God,etc.

That's not to suggest that all wars/conflicts are due to religion....far from it. I believe that, even in the absence of religion, humanity would at this point in our evolution still find reason to make war. But, religion is a good catalyst at this point in time.

[LinearCarp1209]

the crusades and genocides were pretty bad. but there is disagreement among a religion. the last way I would think of trying to tell someone about god is to threaten them with a knife and tell them to believe or die. God doesnt want anybody to kill someone in his name unless he tells them to. and sometimes people get the message from the other end of the spectrum. thats why it can be hard to discriminate.

[MuckupAgain]

Isn't that the key problem? All religious texts that in some way deify an entity (physical or non-corporeal) are open to a wide range of interpretation. Even going beyond the differences between the separate religions, there is discord.

Followers of the same basic text have developed into groups with sometimes wildly different views of the world, their rights within 'Gods' word, whether those who believe differently should be permitted to do so or marginalised.

[LinearCarp1209]

now, this may sound strange. but there is one truth. that one truth is the one that can use science, logic, historical reliability, and other things to PROVE it is the one truth. would you agree that IF there is a truth, nothing can stop that truth from eventually becoming known? now, you and I have diff. ideas of what the truth is, but this was just an explanation/answer to your comment. you know, we really need a diff. video to comment on. we're running out of space.

[MuckupAgain]

I'm not sure that i follow you? Do you mean that, regardless of what any of us believe (god, allah, fairies, evolution, absence of a super-being) only one will be true?

That does casue a problem, as most religions are based on the fundamental base that their deity cannot be discovered until the 'soul' is released. Tus how would the deity ever be proven to exist?

I believe that, with time, all that can be known will be known. But i've no idea how long that will take.

[ChristianVoice08]

All world religions have internal contradiction in regard to God or not God. And they all disagree with each other. However, Biblical Christianity is not a religion. You see, religion is man's way to work to rech God. But, God's way to reach man was Jesus, God come in the flesh. Biblical Christians cannot kill to evangellize, though they are wellknown for building schools and hospitals around the world. They also are known for founding the US based on religious freedom and liberty.

[ChristianVoice08]

Muckup, If you are an atheist, you can't make that judgment. For you, there is no bad, no worse and no awful. There is only IS. Without God, there is no moral judge and therefore no morality. You can do as you please and live like Hittler or some saint somewhere and it doesn't matter. All is pointless. You should eat drink and be merry for tomorrow you die.

[MuckupAgain]

"For you, there is no bad, no worse and no awful"

Excuse me?! Are you suggesting that the only way to tell good from bad, moral from immoral, is to have some form of religious belief?

To put it bluntly, that's a crock. God/Jesus/Whoever doesn't define good and bad; moral behaviour comes out basic necessity. In order for people to survive,they need to help each other.

[ChristianVoice08]

Then I can kill you right now and take all your possessions because I need more money?

[MuckupAgain]

CV, i'm very surprised that you would resort to such a poor argument to support your belief.

How does that make your point correct?

In fact, i'm not even sure how you expect that argument to convince anyone the religion is responsible for defining good and bad.

[ChristianVoice08]

Men don't recognize evil until they are the victim of it. Only then can you recognize the absolute nature of evil. Good and that cannot be anything arbitrary. It must be transcended more to having real meaning. If their set by society than one society's vice is another's virtue. Therefore morality must be transcendent.

[MuckupAgain]

"Men don't recognize evil until they are the victim of it"

I don't agree. As you point out, people don't recognise those acts that they would rather not be subject to UNTIL they are subjected to it or witness others subject to it. At that point, depending on the person, it is labelled 'evil'.

Not so much 'Do unto others as you would have others do unto you' [Matthew 7:120] but 'What one does not wish for oneself, one ought not to do to anyone else...' [Confucious]

[ChristianVoice08]

My authority is the Word of God. It presents logical arguments. And, I see that you have not answered the argument that God presented.

If you wish to dispute my statement, that's fine. It an be better worded, "Men most effectively identify evil when they are the target of evil.". Either way it is a nonissue in our discussion.

[MuckupAgain]

And which question was that? The one about 'the son of Sam killer'? Or another buried amongst your sermon? And, not to put to fine a point on it, why am i answering God's question(s) and not yours? Other than that i don't believe in him, of course.....

"Men most effectively identify evil when they are the target of evil." How has that clarified your point?

[ChristianVoice08]

You have to answer to God, not to me. I am not presenting my message, but, His. I am only obligated to express my love and concern for you by sharing the Gospel and His Word with you. I am not allowed to alter the message or ammend it. You already know that God exists. Whether you deny Him to assuage guilt or justify lifestyle is between you and Him. It is not my choice or life, but, yours.

[MuckupAgain]

"You have to answer to God"

'fraid not. I'll answer to the appropriate corporeal authority figures and that's about it.

"You already know that God exists"

That's somewhat presumptuous, isn't it? I could equally say 'you already know that God is a figment of your imagination' but i don't, because it's your right to believe what you will. HOWEVER, do not presume to judge my lifestyle or reasons for not choosing YOUR belief system.

[MuckupAgain]

You know, from working with colleagues who have faith or follow any religion, they are all of the belief that what others choose to do is just that, a choice. I have not met anyone that presumes to assign thoughts to someone elses head or judge their lifestyle based on a differing belief system.

Part of me wonders whether you are just a kid trying to bait others into a more strongly worded argument.

[ChristianVoice08]

I perceive that you have not met Christian apologists who have the certainty of their convictions and the umistakable commission of their God in their hearts. We, Christians in America, have been ground down for a century now to relegate absolutes to ambivalence in order to not be objectionable to others. Unfortunately, that is not what God called us to do. I guess that you have not met a Christian that was completely confident of their world view and able to defend it. I don't have blind faith

[MuckupAgain]

"I don't have blind faith"

I beg to differ (again). ALL religion requires it to one extent or another.

From your statement, i gather that you believe that your 'calling' is to introduce others to the word of God. And fair play to you for trying. But what happens when someone isn't convinced? Are they any lesser a person? Are they any less deserving of life and a place on this Earth? Are they less moral?

Why is a non-Christians confidence in THEIR world-view any less correct than you?

[ChristianVoice08]

You would need blind faith to accept something that you cannot prove. Also, without the word of god to stand on, any other position is not absolute and it's origins or in its nature. I have not and anytime said that any human that disagrees with me is of lesser value. All I have stated is that they don't have a strong moral ground to stand on as Biblical Christians. We have confidence of absolute truth. Without god, there is no absolute truth.

[MuckupAgain]

"You would need blind faith to accept something that you cannot prove"

Yep, that's exactly what i was referring to.

The rest of your post is a bundle of contradictions. At once stating that "without the word of god to stand on, any other position is not absolute" whilst suggesting that you do not deem any human that disagrees with you as being of "lesser value".

How do you balance non-Christians and their opinions as being less than 'absolute' but not 'of lesser value'?

[ChristianVoice08]

That's not a contradiction. As an American, I give equal value to everyone's opinion whether or not it is valid or true. They have their right to their own view. You are accusing me of lying NOT refuting my argument. There is no contradiction.

[MuckupAgain]

It's a clear contradiction. A right to a point of view is one thing, it's your treating the resulting opinion with equal validity depending on the persons religion that is in question.

You never did answer one of my questions; given your efforts to bring people into the fold,what if someone doesn't want to believe in your religion?

Are they any different a person at at that juncture? If they say 'yes' do they gain a sense of moral absolute?

[MuckupAgain]

"As an American, I give equal value to everyone's opinion whether or not it is valid or true"

Nationalility is irrelevant. Unless you want to get into a discussion about what comes first?

[tmaxdevlin]

Without God, there is no need of absolute truth. Actual truth will do just fine. It allows empiricism, which allows knowing things without any faith, blind or otherwise, in anything. Biblical Christians don't have any moral ground, strong or otherwise, they just have dogma.

[TheSharkWrangler]

Is your statement on absolute truth true, devlin?

[ChristianVoice08]

Good point.

[tmaxdevlin]

Only empirical observation, not divine revelation can reveal that. So, yes.

[ChristianVoice08]

Written records ARE empirical observation unless you can prove that the written account is false. And, since you weren't in 30AD Judea, you don't have the ability to prove them false as they conform to all other accounts of that period and region, Max. Also, what we know as our foundational principles CANNOT be empirically observed or proven by the scientific method. You need to study epistemology before making a selfrefuting claim like the need for empirical evidence for something to be true!

[dreamy2]

@ChristianVoice08 : you are about to accept islam by that because the quran is also an "empirical observation" by your (rather low and tailor-made) standard.

no, the bible is not entirely consistent with history, such as census never happen when King Herod was in his throne. there are thousands of contradictions in the bible, rendering it a myth.

[ChristianVoice08]

False, Dreamy2. The Kuran not only contradicts itself repeatedly on issues of historical accounts (such as a collapsed timeline with Old Testament people made contemporary to New Testament people), it also lacks ANY historical or archaeological anchors. Also you need to watch the Naked Archaeologist who despite his disregard for Jesus admits to such a census & MULTIPLE Herods on the throne. You need more research. None of your rebuttal is true. Kuran is not comparable to the 66 Biblical books.

[dreamy2]

@ChristianVoice08 : as a matter of fact, the one who did the census was Augustus, not Herod. The bible contains thousands of contradictions. Please check the history, Reason Project and your brain.

Needless to say, the killing of male infants is purely made up. It just couldn't be done.

Reference:

Raymond Brown, Christ in the Gospels of the Liturgical Year, (Liturgical Press, 2008), page 114.

[cjfilmproductions]

@ChristianVoice08 i dont need to read any book to know that magic isnt real.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

Good because the Bible declares that MAGIC IS NOT REAL! It declares that evil spirits attempt to use false magic to deceive people but that magic is a lie. There are no laws of the universe that state that if you make incantations or spells that the physical universe will be altered in any way as a result.

Maybe if you'd read some of the 66 books we read, you would have evidence for your claim! Atheism CANNOT disprove Magic or the old pagan mtyhs!

[cjfilmproductions]

@ChristianVoice08 read your bible.the pharos magicians turned their staves into snakes. they also turned water to blood thats magic walking on water requires magic a spontaneously burning bush requires magic. you are right on one thing spells and incantations do not work including the type you call prayer....atheism is the lack of belief in god. there is no proving shit. As it is not a dogma. it is the act of rejecting assertions without evidence. that simple.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

That is not all magic and the Bible does NOT claim this is magic. It claims these are demonic activity and Divine power. Magic is the belief that there are natural laws governing the universe that can be used to alter the universe through incantations, mental power, etc.

If you had studied the Bible and not taken the stupid magic bullet claims that hold no water, you might have made a real argument. All you did was make false claims.

[cjfilmproductions]

Respond to this video... the bible declares magic is not real part deux. trumpets that knock down walls magic,water from a stone magic,raising the dead magic,mana from the sky magic,man living inside a fish magic,and here is an inportant one . creating a world then erasing all evidence of creation and making it look natural yeah that would take some magic unless thats just the way it is.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

I don't have to respond to straw men! Do yourself a favor, go take an Old Testament Survey Course. Cuz, you don't know squat about the Bible! I have no more time for the uneducated. Strawman fallacies do not warrant rebuttal.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

I SAY THAT AGAIN!

Atheism CANNOT disprove Magic or the old pagan myths! IT WAS CHRISTIAN THEISM that destroyed magic, the dark ages and the old pagan myths that promulgated Roman Catholicism! The reformation movement and the return to Biblical Christianity brought about confidence in science & the refutation of the magic and mysticism incorporated & utilized by Catholicism in its mystical pagan traditions. The Age of Faith brought about the Age of Enlightenment!

[cjfilmproductions]

@ChristianVoice08 religion has done nothing if not stifle knowledge and progress.you forget that your chritians used to burn people at the stake hang them or worse for blasphemy.

second if you knew anything. you would know that christians didn't do away with paganism they assimilated it into their religion. even your christ has a pagan a pagan heritage. faith has only brought war and separation how very enlightened. we're killing the ecosystem because to many idiots are waiting for miracles.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

FALSE! Bad religion has been damaging NUT NO WHERE NEAR THE DAMAGE OR BODY COUNT OF ATHEIST FASCIST GOVERNMENT! Communism and atheism have slaughtered over 100 million people in the last century! The pagan Roman Catholic Church couldn't kill that many in decades of Inquisition.

Christian theism (the Age of Faith) brought about the Age of Enlightenment. Go get a few history books and learn something before making such ignorant claims!

[cjfilmproductions]

Respond to this video... atheism claims no assertions except that more evidence than the current zero should be necessary before you can make an affirmation.

second to argue that your faith is based on empirical falsifiable evidence is completely ignoring the definition of faith.look it up.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

Atheism is nothing if it makes no assertions. That is Flew's Folly AND I DID A VIDEO ON THAT LIE! If you want this stuff, watch my videos! I address all this and expose the blind faith of atheists. I don't have time to type stuff I already produced in a video.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

If you disagree, then, you must list a number of scientists and philosophers from the Age of Enlightenment that were not theists or Christian theists but were ACTUAL atheists. If you can't, then, you have no answer but to accepted ACCEPTED history which says what I say! Now, I know that you won't do that. You will squirm and writhe like a demon possessed voodoo worshiper when hit with this truth. You won't concede historic fact. You will blindly lash out w/hopeless denials.

[cjfilmproductions]

@ChristianVoice08 again if any of them were athiest they would of been hard pressed to admit it. and even if they were theist it was not their religion that lead to scientific enlightenment. demon possesed vodoo worshiper?? shure buddy you stay in that padded room as long as you like.Demons would require magic i already told you i dont buy it. invisible creatures from another dimention that take over your body to make you do evil things sure ok guy.

[cjfilmproductions]

@ChristianVoice08 just as you have no way of proving that the author wasn't writing fiction....and they dont conform just so you know the fossil records and strata show the earth and life developed slowly over billions of years but your book says it was made in six days... your book says light came before the sun. it says the moon has its own light. it say the stars are in our solar system.it says natural disasters are caused by god having tantrums.. i t says we are the center of the universe

[cjfilmproductions]

do i need to continue ? because the truth is in your face everywhere you are the one choosing to ignore it.....religion is nothing more and nothing less than a way to control large sections of the willfully ignorant population and their indoctrinated offspring. that is why they always demonize and more often kill others who dont think exactly like they do , or dare question their assertions. religions bigest enemy is knowledge and truth. eve ate an apple now people die.huh??.............

[cjfilmproductions]

Respond to this video... uhm in order for something to be considered by science it has to be falsifiable..why are you making me go here we can all say things" i own three pink unicorns i will pay you to prove that i don't in fact own pink unicorns you cant it isn't falsifiable.there are many many collaborating stories of alien abductions and historically dragons are written about in all cultures...way more than jesus who is only mentioned abrahamic texts.

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

FALSE, you rube! Falsification cannot pass its own test! You cannot hold some unproven arbitrary standard to everything. What epistemology to you hold to? Falsification isn't an epistemology!

[cjfilmproductions]

if only you were this dedicted to things that really mattered. 

[ChristianVoice08]

@cjfilmproductions

How insolent and foppish! I am dedicated to the most important issues! Our issues are of life and death! We provide the evidence that science is trustworthy and we build the hospitals, orphanages & give away our money and food to help the poor and homeless! We try and drag you out of the mouth of hell itself. And you want to call that unimportant? Thou hypocrite! If there is no God, WHY ARE YOU WASTING OUR TIME WITH MEANINGLESS RHETORIC? Your life has no meaning in atheism

[ChristianVoice08]

So yes to what, devlin???

[ChristianVoice08]

Yes, Max. Is your first statement about absolute truth true or false?

[ivb1973]

@MuckupAgain You ask if non-believers are less than humans... well, obviously not.

In return I ask you another question. Are believers of one or another religion more primitive and limited than atheist people? In case the answer is yes. Don't you think that way of thinking devaluates the human value of religious people?

(3 years, well I came a bit late for responding XD)

[mapmanic]

This is "absolute" rubbish. You don't really believe your imaginary big daddy exists, do you? & the only people doing the "grinding down" are the Christians. This was a happily secularist society before you fucks started intruding your god into OUR government. Crawl back under your rock, you stoneage nitwit.

[ChristianVoice08]

Kindly cite the texts on the founding fathers of America who were all secular and a citation that refutes all the theistic references and assertions of the Declaration of Independence, US Constitution. You will also have to present an answer for the 2000 years of Christian theism on the GLOBAL scale it has existed. Even Catholicism which is not truly Christian is still theistic and you certainly can't explain away its existence or mass influence on 1700 years of history. I await your citations

[cappastrano]

Catholics are not Christians in the same way that humans are not monkeys.

[ChristianVoice08]

Catholics are professing Christians who (some unknowlingly) violate the commandments of God and the direct commandments of Jesus. Roman Catholicism DOES NOT teach the Gospel of Christ (required to be Christian) but teaches a world religion with the common failing of a works based system of salvation NOT a totaldependency on the Christ for salvation. It boasts of being a mix of Christianity and paganism, the dipole of Jesus the Christ. If you knew about religions, you would know this.

[ChristianVoice08]

Also, humans are NOT monkeys or even chimpanzees. If you knew biology, then, you would have known that.

[cappastrano]

Humans are a subset of apes, which are a subset of monkeys. Does a van ever stop being an automobile? Humans are apes and monkeys, and Catholics are still christian

[ChristianVoice08]

That is an assumption based on an assumption of a common ancestor WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN, Capp! LOL. If we made claims based on speculation alone, you guys would crucify us. But we are expected to have faith in your unproven theories (dogmas) based on the assumption of a failed theologian (Darwin)??? How pathetic. That is intellectual suicide! Humans ARE HUMANS! Catholics are members of a pagan religion not holding to the fundamentals of Christ, see the Council of Trent!

[cappastrano]

Your science is out of date, it has been proven.

Deny it all you like, apparently I know the history of your religion better than you do. You must have forgotten where Christianity came from

[ChristianVoice08]

FALSE. NO missing link has been found. You cannot PROVE your claim without the actual common ancestor and genetic samples. If you had a real knowledge of science you would understand that modern science is INDUCTIVE not deductive. We DO NOT have access to the whole set of ALL outcomes in 99% of research. THerefore, we speak with terms like correlation, probability, likelihood. However, in forensic science like paleontology, we have to have the fossils to back the claim. You don't have a fossil.

[cappastrano]

The 'missing link' doesn't need to be found, there is enough evidence backing the claims of common decent and evolution that actually finding it, while cool, wouldn't really add to the science as a whole.

[ChristianVoice08]

FALSE, Cappastrano. Since common function or design is more logically an evidence for a common Designer NOT a common ancestry as NO missing links are available to give any evidence for ancestry as the cause for commonality, THEN, proof of common ancestry is absolutely necessary before you can make any reasonable claim! No links, NO DICE. I can more logically explain genetic commonality by God than by ancestry as NOWHERE is there any scientific evidence for DNA codification WITHOUT a CODER!

[MuckupAgain]

Now, i will admit that religion does a very good job of forwarding that message to as many people as possible. But don't mistake 'communication' of a message for 'creation' of the message.

[ChristianVoice08]

You are absolutely right. We did not create the message of God, we merely convey it. In order to have transcendant truth, it must be received from a transcendant being, One above all things at all times.

[MuckupAgain]

Is that message universal; common to all religions in modern society? I would wager taht each different religion claims so.

In which case,unless all religions are exactly the same (and they are not),how can the message be transcendental?

For that message,the basic defintions of good and bad, to be at the root of every 'modern' religion,it must be basic to human kind. It must have existed BEFORE religion in some form.

Religion just codified it and sent it out to the masses.

[ChristianVoice08]

No. The moral argument for God's existence only applies to montheism particularly orthodox Judaism/Christianity. It only applies to a personal God who creates a personal creation and that is pursley of all that creation. That basically only applies to Biblical Christianity the logical fulfillment of Judaism.

[MuckupAgain]

Perhaps you can clarify your point....are you saying that the boundary between good/evil, right/wrong is defined ONLY in Christianity and no other religion in any way sets to distinguish between the two?

[ChristianVoice08]

Now that would be incorrect. Zoroastrians are dualists because Zoroaster was trying to solve the problem of evil. Many religions attempt to explain the problem of evil, however only montheists have that ground to stand on. With one God you can have one set of laws above all men above all times.

[MuckupAgain]

Then perhaps you can explain how, without the influence of 'God' or Christianity in my life, i've managed to keep from falling into the clutches of evil?

Good/bad, right/wrong, you don't need religion to know how to treat others with respect.

[ChristianVoice08]

For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. Romans 2:14-17

[ChristianVoice08]

You're right, muck. We don't need religion. God is written his truth in our hearts such that all men no evil and good and are without excuse. That is how we know there is a God. You see a religion is man's way to work his way to God. But Jesus Christ was god's way to reach man. Religion is not a solution to any problem. Even though some religions can bring moral lifestyles, they do not bring the transformation of the individual.

[MuckupAgain]

Each to their own then, i guess. I see my parents and being responsible for my upbringing and, seeing as neither of them was in any way closely associated with any religion (no bibles in the house, for example) at best God's 'truth in my heart' is a third generation genetic trait.

Besides, how can it be written in all our hearts and yet murderers et all still exist. This would tend to disprove the existence of a universal word for good and evil 'pre-installed' in each of us.....

[ChristianVoice08]

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

John 3:17-19

[MuckupAgain]

I'm sure that you must be capable of constructing your own argument, rather than picking scripture.

[ChristianVoice08]

No. Neitzhe pointed out that if God is dead, then, man is dead. No God, no meaning in life with a capital M. You can give superficial meanings and worship yourself or your car, but, that is meaningless. According to the atheistic world view, if a comet doesn't smash earth into oblivion, then, in 1000 years everyone you know will be dead and your life meant nothing. I think it was Sartre or Kamut who said the real question is "Why not suicide?" as there is no God.

[Matur1n]

Douglas Adams is a very funny humorist. His books are hilarious. But he isn't a deep thinker. He sees incongruities and is very wry. I wouldn't want to follow his lead on meaningful religious thought anymore than I would Woody Allen or Dave Barry.

[Tomerico]

Who said you need to?

He's just giving you one idea..

It's just something to think about, I was an atheist much before i saw this video.

And by the way, it isn't his idea, the puddle concept is a well known idea, so the "not deep thinker" argument is irrelevant.

[Censeo]

Todays task for humankind to make the world fit themselves perfectly. To really grasp our history, not deny anything from pride, religion or nationalism. To yet again focus on liberty, as it was just before WW1. To make a peaceful world from knowledge of our misstakes.

[Matur1n]

"To yet again focus on liberty, as it was just before WW1. "

A time when women couldn't vote and blacks had virtually no right at all. Liberty just before WWI wasn't that great.

[Censeo]

It wasn't all great just before WW1, that is true.