I read the book on the recommendation of Albert. Its a good book and makes a good point about how moderate atheists have as much disdain for new atheism as most moderate theists do.
Many of the atheists I speak to here on YT simply prove their lack of understanding of both the Bible and of theology in general. Many atheists congradulate themselves on their abilities to dispatch any theist arguments and yet all they do is prove they have no idea what they are talking about.
Thanks for making this video. I look forward to the next part. I have one book by McGrath and hope to get a few more soon. This one looks like it would be a good read.
Doubtful, since this would poke holes in their belief system and worldview. Rational thinking people can certaintly disagree on beliefs and yet it is the atheist who continue to show such disrespect towards any belief system. Harris and dawkins are bigots against faith. They lack any real understanding of what they write of (and it shows) and far to many people appear to follow them rather blindly instead of doing the critical scholarly research needed to look into theology.
@jfrontier1 It's only atheists that do that you are right, can't think of a single time in history where Christians have done that to atheists except for the past 3000 years or so.
Atheists have always been around and there has ALWAYS been religious bashing all the way back to the xenophanes. So please stop playing victim it makes me sick when atheists try and play victim. All I hear in the media is constant Christian bashing, and if you want to be fair I advise you to LOOK around and see what I mean.
@jfrontier1 It's a little difficult to respect a belief system that has completely eradicated the beliefs of atheists for 3000 years through murder and torture, really amazing tolerant belief system you guys have there, don't know why anyone would want to disrespect that.
The New Atheism = The New Philistinism. I find it interesting that I as a Christian am asked to think for myself, and if I do then I will come to the obvious conclusion that atheism is correct. Dawkins and the new philistines rarely make good use of the arguments they present and when I point out the obvious flaws I am told that I am just irrational. So, will the new atheists actually do the scholarly work presented by McGrath, Feser and other writers of today? cont.
A group of atheists went on a church burning spree, in Norway. This just shows that extremists are not limited to just religion. As, there can be extreme atheists who are willing to resort to violence inorder to eradicate religion.
UnFFWildcard, made a brilliant video, on the benefits of religion to society and to individuals.
@MegaExelo Your first paragraph is more of an attack on extremism/fundamentalism than anything. Which I agree with extremism is bad with pretty much any belief, as everything must be in moderation.
Religion is useful in dealing with death and attempting to explain away the unknown, and build community. But it also can be divisive, lead to anti-science, and may cause people to persecute others over such beliefs. There are always 2 sides to a coin and that goes for everything.
@TimelessApologist What examples are you asking for? Do you want examples of the anti-scientific nature of some creationists and hardcore believers who will not accept medicine? What examples do you want over divisive societies over religion, because there are many examples? You do not have to search far in the news to see the turmoil brought by battling religions over holy sites and territories.
The US is having financial problems in the economy, Christianity has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Please show me how this occupy wallstreet nonsense has anything to do with Christianity. Please show me how the riots in the UK a few months back had something to do with Christianity.
I need something serious, not petty little nonsense that is virtually meaningless. Show me something, give me an example and show me the solution.
@TimelessApologist Uhm when did I say anything about the economy? I was speaking of specifically religious turmoil and divisive society over religious belief.
I never said anything about wall street, so now you are just making things up.
If you are going to continue with this barrage of wanting answers for things I haven't proposed I have no inclination to answer them. I will however explain why there is turmoil and divisive societies.
@TimelessApologist When did I ever speak of destroying religion? I merely presented 2 problems caused by religion such as divisive society and anti-scientific beliefs.
You again keep going off of the topic I was originally on, and accusing me of wanting to destroy religion none of which I ever said. You should stop accusing me of things when you have no evidence for it.
"? I merely presented 2 problems caused by religion such as divisive society and anti-scientific beliefs."
Who's going off topic here
I just stated which religion? You said creationsits pose problems X, I stated this can be fixed by religion itself. Therefore the problem of religion can be solved by religion, I'm proposing another solution.
@TimelessApologist I wasn't saying it in a specific sense but a broader sense, as many of these problems are a part of multiple religions not just one in particular. You said it could be fixed with religion itself. The only question here should be, how do you expect to change these different beliefs if these people believe some of the same things you do but interpret them differently? Do you intend to merge many sects into one?
@Requiemxtoxinnocence "The only question here should be, how do you expect to change these different beliefs if these people believe some of the same things you do but interpret them differently? Do you intend to merge many sects into one?"
Good theology would solve the problem. In fact it would solve many problems. First off I can see a revival already in Christian intellectualism, this helps, but it needs to be pushed. better Theology and Philosophy = Less Fundie Creationists
@TimelessApologist That might help but there are thousands if not millions of different sects all with different interpretations. You don't realize how great a schism there is just for christian sects, let alone trying to unite them all would take some time. Feel free to try, I won't stop you.
@TimelessApologist Obviously not all religious people are going to follow some sect without disagreement, in fact some may move from religion to religion. I was merely positing that uniting them all would be nearly impossible.
Well quite a few people do follow their religion militantly, take westboro for instance. Trying to change their views when they are so cemented would take a miracle if not the hand of god himself.
"Well quite a few people do follow their religion militantly, take westboro for instance. Trying to change their views when they are so cemented would take a miracle if not the hand of god himself."
Agreed, but I think the "personality" of the specific person is a factor also.
@TimelessApologist Thank you, I believe in a higher power but I have no idea what it might be or what its emotions, thoughts, or anything else may be. But I do find religion to be an interesting topic.
@TimelessApologist Okay i'll be a bit more clear here, some sects in some religions have some people that sometimes don't take medicine because they believe prayer alone will heal them of their sickness and this is attributed partly due to religion. The point is you all have similar beliefs, but some religious people are indeed out of their minds and anti-science and territorial.
"Religion is useful in dealing with death and attempting to explain away the unknown, and build community. But it also can be divisive, lead to anti-science, and may cause people to persecute others over such beliefs. There are always 2 sides to a coin and that goes for everything."
I asked which religion, you said creationists do X, so I stated why don't we focus on the BIGGER problems first then everything AFTER will go smoother.
It is the "us vs them" that you create, because you are ignorant. You seem to have only one solution to the problem which will create more problems.
It is because people like you do not THINK, you have narrow mindset of how things should be done, but you never look at the whole picture and you never look at the whole consequences.
Some creationists refusing medice doesnt = Christianity\
in fact let's look at a secular problem why are Hospital bills so HIGH?
@TimelessApologist You are going way off of the boundary of what I was saying and then accusing me of being narrow minded.
The reason some creationists which could fit many religions may be that they think god will heal them if thy pray, I mean Jehovah's Witnesses are evidence enough for this.
Hospital bills are high because of the expense of getting a doctorate in medicine, plus equipment, along with many other variables.
@TimelessApologist This is an economic/political topic, most have wanted to solve this by giving the u.s. universal healthcare but many have disagreed with it. Political corruption and our desperate state of affairs isn't helping the situation either.
JW's are just one example, plenty of other religions have done similar things in the past. If you think this is a theological matter then deal with it with your higher ups, not me. I am in full support for scientific advancements in medicine.
"If you think this is a theological matter then deal with it with your higher ups, not me. I am in full support for scientific advancements in medicine."
So am I, so IF you are accusing me of being otherwise then you are being dishonest of my position.
Most Doctors are in fact THEISTS anyways, so they support you and me, as I NEVER stated we should go against medicine. This is why I stated before
@TimelessApologist I never accused you, I was saying some people in general do not accept this. You are not everyone, nor does everyone follow your direct view theologically. All I ever stated was that some religions are anti-science and in doing so risk their health. That is it.
"All I ever stated was that some religions are anti-science and in doing so risk their health."
It's noT RELIGONS as the RELIGION as a whole, it's certain PEOPLE that follow the specific religion. if it is show me which RELIGION in which every person from that RELIGION states what you are saying.
@Requiemxtoxinnocence "I am in full support for scientific advancements in medicine."
These are the type of accusations that I see all the time and it makes me laugh. And if you are true to your word, you'd REALIZE that people who are religious and or spiritual LIVE longer. So you should be SUPPORTING religious services and or spirituality as well to keep consistency.
@TimelessApologist Well that isn't entirely true. Plus there are many factors you seem to be forgetting about such as what country you live in, how much money you have, what you eat, if you have any pre-existing medical conditions, if you are vaccinated, if you are married. All of these things may determine how long you live.
"Well that isn't entirely true. Plus there are many factors you seem to be forgetting about such as what country you live in, how much money you have, what you eat, if you have any pre-existing medical conditions, if you are vaccinated, if you are married. All of these things may determine how long you live."
Well according to the NEW atheists the BEST countries are IRRELIGIOUS so this doesn't follow.
@TimelessApologist Whoever said I was one of these "new atheists" or that I supported all of what they said? They may have some ideas I support, but I don't follow them dogmatically nor agree with them on everything. I know not all religious people are stupid,poor, or insecure in fact some are quite brilliant, rich, and charismatic. My view as an individual is encompassed by many other views believe it or not.
"Okay i'll be a bit more clear here, some sects in some religions have some people that sometimes don't take medicine because they believe prayer alone will heal them of their sickness and this is attributed partly due to religion. The point is you all have similar beliefs, but some religious people are indeed out of their minds and anti-science and territorial."
Agreed, we are in an agreement then. I do what I can to fix the "theology" it isn't easy as you stated
The Church is to blame for it's internal problems, the pushing away of Christian Anti-intellectualism was a horrible idea that occured in the early 1900s. It is a problem that I must work on harder, as I have already raised philosophical and theological awareness in chruches nearby. I cannot stand this "feel-good" Christianity as it is incomplete.
The religon of course has influence, but at times the religion COULD be used just as an "excuse" for a personal feeling about something they disagree with.
I'm saying this is possible, not that it happens all the time.
@TimelessApologist Exactly this is what I was talking about, some people are over zealous and use holy texts as excuses to cause violence out of personal feelings others may do it because they were told to by god himself. That is a major problem because no one should try to justify atrocities with god as their excuse, it just doesn't work. Having an unclear holy text with many sects and interpretations of the text doesn't help things though.
@TimelessApologist Take a chill pill man. I never once accused religion as the reason for the US debt. I specifically spoke on 2 things which you chose to completely ignore so you could go off on this rampant speech.
The US debt problem has numerous causes for it such as war, borrowing money from china, over spending, corrupt officials, growing population, fuel costs. Again completely unrelated to what I was speaking of.
I'm not an a rampant speech, I'm searching for clarity in your first statement. You painted the picture of 'religion" as if it is all belongs in one bowl.
First off not all religions even believe in a God (Buddhism) so this is why I asked for which specific religon. You just said some creationists so I assumed Christians. (as that's what skeptics virtually always refer to) Now I didn't ignore them.
I stated these problems can be fixed by another solution.
We have no support of supernatural claims of any sort. Despite the fact that there are many people who believe, is it reasonable to consider it reasonable to believe in supernatural claims when the reason for the claims are understood from our study of psychology, sociology, and biology; which does not support any of the supernatural claims/notions?
@MyContext Hi MyContext. Since the concept of the supernatural is central to your position, could you tell me where is the dividing line between what is natural and what is supernatural? Thanks.
@StupidTheist You are absolutely right... What is a supernatural anything? Since, currently the term seems to only apply to points of ignorance. Most people don't call anything supernatural (god, ghosts, miracle, magic (as opposed to illusion), etc.) unless they don't understand whatever the phenomena or thing may be...
@MyContext So, for you, supernatural just means "I don't understand it". OK. Might I ask whether for you "truth" is natural or is it supernatural? I'm sure we can say a few things about truth, but there are probably also questions one could ask about truth where one can only shrug one's shoulders in response.
@StupidTheist I don't claim supernatural - if "I don't know".
The limits of what we know determines what we as individuals claim to be true. The limits of what we can claim to be true within the public frame is limited to what can be supported or is commonly accepted. I grant that any claim of truth can be wrong, however, claims that have support for it have the advantage of being reviewable such that if there is an error there is hope that the error will be discovered.
@MyContext Commonly accepted notions can be wrong. These notions simply enjoy the benefit of acceptance. All notions should be challenge-able such that improvements can be made, if the notion is found to be wrong in some fashion.
@MyContext I guess I still do not know what the term "supernatural" means to you, nor whether you believe truth is something natural or whether it is something supernatural, or whether it is neither. I would still like to know, but you raise another issue that I would like to address. I will make a claim, that may at first sound rather outrageous, but I believe that the claim is rational and defensible, and I will try to defend it. That claim is that not all truth claims need be challengable.
@StupidTheist I find the idea that there is anything supernatural to be unsupportable. However, given that people do have notions I must adjust and try to determine what it is that they mean. Some use it as a catchall of things that they don't know, however, they aren't really making a claim about something actually being. There are others who insist that there is something. Depending on their knowledge base, I may interact and explore the claim and the basis of the claim.
"I find the idea that there is anything supernatural to be unsupportable"
But doesn't this keep you in tune with your own presupposition in which you will never search to get out of? Perhaps years from now you will search for Deism and come up with a great argument for it. I don't see why you still can't search
Perhaps one can say, everything in the world is what it is, You and I agree on virtually everything, but the Origin of Everything was a concious mind. what then?
@MyContext My claim is that not all truth claims need be challengable. Here is my argument. Sentences do not have meaning in themselves, but only have meaning within a semantic context. For example, in Euclidean geometry parallel lines never meet, but in elliptical geometry parallel lines intersect. The truth of the statement "parallel lines never meet" depends upon the semantic context. Truth claims that establish a semantic context do not require justification.
@StupidTheist I agree...context depends the nature of what is being claimed. The only truth claims that (at least from my perspective) require justification are claims wherein others will be subject to the outcomes/affects of such truth claims.
If a person believes in demons and epileptic seizures are seen as demon possession and the only acceptable remedy to the person is death - I find this to be a major problem. Since, from the stand point of the person - they are correct.
@MyContext You raise an important issue regarding the relationship one's beliefs and one's behaviors, and how false beliefs can be a factor in harmful behavior. I would like to address this question. However, I think the volume of what needs to be said makes it inappropriate for me to answer you here in the comments of this video. I will be making a video soon, that addresses you issue. Thank you for raising it.
@EnlightenedReader
Google it
Norway Church Burning they are all over, not 100% sure if they are atheists. But norway is HIGHLY Atheist.
If anyone truly believes that "atheists can do no wrong" they should seriously consider counseling. (not saying this is you)
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
I read the book on the recommendation of Albert. Its a good book and makes a good point about how moderate atheists have as much disdain for new atheism as most moderate theists do.
bossman103 1 month ago
Many of the atheists I speak to here on YT simply prove their lack of understanding of both the Bible and of theology in general. Many atheists congradulate themselves on their abilities to dispatch any theist arguments and yet all they do is prove they have no idea what they are talking about.
Thanks for making this video. I look forward to the next part. I have one book by McGrath and hope to get a few more soon. This one looks like it would be a good read.
Thanks and be blessed.
jfrontier1 1 month ago
Doubtful, since this would poke holes in their belief system and worldview. Rational thinking people can certaintly disagree on beliefs and yet it is the atheist who continue to show such disrespect towards any belief system. Harris and dawkins are bigots against faith. They lack any real understanding of what they write of (and it shows) and far to many people appear to follow them rather blindly instead of doing the critical scholarly research needed to look into theology.
jfrontier1 1 month ago
@jfrontier1 It's only atheists that do that you are right, can't think of a single time in history where Christians have done that to atheists except for the past 3000 years or so.
larkingclogger 1 month ago
@larkingclogger
Christianity has only been around for 2000 years
Atheists have always been around and there has ALWAYS been religious bashing all the way back to the xenophanes. So please stop playing victim it makes me sick when atheists try and play victim. All I hear in the media is constant Christian bashing, and if you want to be fair I advise you to LOOK around and see what I mean.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@jfrontier1 It's a little difficult to respect a belief system that has completely eradicated the beliefs of atheists for 3000 years through murder and torture, really amazing tolerant belief system you guys have there, don't know why anyone would want to disrespect that.
larkingclogger 1 month ago
The New Atheism = The New Philistinism. I find it interesting that I as a Christian am asked to think for myself, and if I do then I will come to the obvious conclusion that atheism is correct. Dawkins and the new philistines rarely make good use of the arguments they present and when I point out the obvious flaws I am told that I am just irrational. So, will the new atheists actually do the scholarly work presented by McGrath, Feser and other writers of today? cont.
jfrontier1 1 month ago
@EnlightenedReader shitIjustmadeup . org
larkingclogger 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
A group of atheists went on a church burning spree, in Norway. This just shows that extremists are not limited to just religion. As, there can be extreme atheists who are willing to resort to violence inorder to eradicate religion.
UnFFWildcard, made a brilliant video, on the benefits of religion to society and to individuals.
MegaExelo 1 month ago
@MegaExelo Your first paragraph is more of an attack on extremism/fundamentalism than anything. Which I agree with extremism is bad with pretty much any belief, as everything must be in moderation.
Religion is useful in dealing with death and attempting to explain away the unknown, and build community. But it also can be divisive, lead to anti-science, and may cause people to persecute others over such beliefs. There are always 2 sides to a coin and that goes for everything.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
"Religion is useful in dealing with death and attempting to explain away the unknown, and build community."
Which Religion?
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
And please current examples of this specific religion that is CURRENTLY doing this.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist What examples are you asking for? Do you want examples of the anti-scientific nature of some creationists and hardcore believers who will not accept medicine? What examples do you want over divisive societies over religion, because there are many examples? You do not have to search far in the news to see the turmoil brought by battling religions over holy sites and territories.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
This just isn't good enough I want to see deaths because of religion, and I want to know which religion
Creationists who don't accept medicine is not Christianity it isn't the dogma of the religion.
I need to see something, because this can easily be fixed. teach these creationists that medicine doesn't cdonflict with your dogma. There you go
That's how you do it, not kill off Creationists in general because some do things there way.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
The US is having financial problems in the economy, Christianity has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Please show me how this occupy wallstreet nonsense has anything to do with Christianity. Please show me how the riots in the UK a few months back had something to do with Christianity.
I need something serious, not petty little nonsense that is virtually meaningless. Show me something, give me an example and show me the solution.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist Uhm when did I say anything about the economy? I was speaking of specifically religious turmoil and divisive society over religious belief.
I never said anything about wall street, so now you are just making things up.
If you are going to continue with this barrage of wanting answers for things I haven't proposed I have no inclination to answer them. I will however explain why there is turmoil and divisive societies.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
Ok so you agree with me then
I'm just asking for clarity, because there are ways to take care of the problems you pointed out, BY NOT DESTROYING THE RELIGION ITSELF.
Now when you explain this turmoil, point out whether if it is really "religion" or "power and money" that is the motive.
Then I need to know why destroying this religion is THE ONLY SOLUTION.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist When did I ever speak of destroying religion? I merely presented 2 problems caused by religion such as divisive society and anti-scientific beliefs.
You again keep going off of the topic I was originally on, and accusing me of wanting to destroy religion none of which I ever said. You should stop accusing me of things when you have no evidence for it.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
"? I merely presented 2 problems caused by religion such as divisive society and anti-scientific beliefs."
Who's going off topic here
I just stated which religion? You said creationsits pose problems X, I stated this can be fixed by religion itself. Therefore the problem of religion can be solved by religion, I'm proposing another solution.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist I wasn't saying it in a specific sense but a broader sense, as many of these problems are a part of multiple religions not just one in particular. You said it could be fixed with religion itself. The only question here should be, how do you expect to change these different beliefs if these people believe some of the same things you do but interpret them differently? Do you intend to merge many sects into one?
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence "The only question here should be, how do you expect to change these different beliefs if these people believe some of the same things you do but interpret them differently? Do you intend to merge many sects into one?"
Good theology would solve the problem. In fact it would solve many problems. First off I can see a revival already in Christian intellectualism, this helps, but it needs to be pushed. better Theology and Philosophy = Less Fundie Creationists
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist That might help but there are thousands if not millions of different sects all with different interpretations. You don't realize how great a schism there is just for christian sects, let alone trying to unite them all would take some time. Feel free to try, I won't stop you.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
Do you honest think people follow their sect to the fullest? If this was the case we'd hardly see any converts. Cmon man, be real for a second.
Are you aware of how many people in the US actually READ their bible, when their sect states they should (Virtually all Protestants)?
You make it like all Christians do as they are told like they are being ordered by a drill sergeant
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist Obviously not all religious people are going to follow some sect without disagreement, in fact some may move from religion to religion. I was merely positing that uniting them all would be nearly impossible.
Well quite a few people do follow their religion militantly, take westboro for instance. Trying to change their views when they are so cemented would take a miracle if not the hand of god himself.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
"Well quite a few people do follow their religion militantly, take westboro for instance. Trying to change their views when they are so cemented would take a miracle if not the hand of god himself."
Agreed, but I think the "personality" of the specific person is a factor also.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
Anyways I apologize for stating you are narrow minded in the sense of Tunnel Vision.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist Thank you, I believe in a higher power but I have no idea what it might be or what its emotions, thoughts, or anything else may be. But I do find religion to be an interesting topic.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
You oversimply sects
And when I stated Virtually all Protestant I meant virtually all Protestant sects state the bible should be read. But yet people don't follow this.
But yet as you stated we have creationists against medicine. This leads me to the "person" following the religion, not the religion itself.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist Okay i'll be a bit more clear here, some sects in some religions have some people that sometimes don't take medicine because they believe prayer alone will heal them of their sickness and this is attributed partly due to religion. The point is you all have similar beliefs, but some religious people are indeed out of their minds and anti-science and territorial.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
Your first statement was:
"Religion is useful in dealing with death and attempting to explain away the unknown, and build community. But it also can be divisive, lead to anti-science, and may cause people to persecute others over such beliefs. There are always 2 sides to a coin and that goes for everything."
I asked which religion, you said creationists do X, so I stated why don't we focus on the BIGGER problems first then everything AFTER will go smoother.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
It is the "us vs them" that you create, because you are ignorant. You seem to have only one solution to the problem which will create more problems.
It is because people like you do not THINK, you have narrow mindset of how things should be done, but you never look at the whole picture and you never look at the whole consequences.
Some creationists refusing medice doesnt = Christianity\
in fact let's look at a secular problem why are Hospital bills so HIGH?
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist You are going way off of the boundary of what I was saying and then accusing me of being narrow minded.
The reason some creationists which could fit many religions may be that they think god will heal them if thy pray, I mean Jehovah's Witnesses are evidence enough for this.
Hospital bills are high because of the expense of getting a doctorate in medicine, plus equipment, along with many other variables.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
"Hospital bills are high because of the expense of getting a doctorate in medicine, plus equipment, along with many other variables."
Ok then now we are going somewhere, so do you see this as a good tradeoff?
Do you realize how many people do not have healthcare or are in debt because of healthcare?
Jehovah's Witness use poor theology, I am aware of this, but there is no need to blame all of X for something not all of X has commited.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist This is an economic/political topic, most have wanted to solve this by giving the u.s. universal healthcare but many have disagreed with it. Political corruption and our desperate state of affairs isn't helping the situation either.
JW's are just one example, plenty of other religions have done similar things in the past. If you think this is a theological matter then deal with it with your higher ups, not me. I am in full support for scientific advancements in medicine.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
"If you think this is a theological matter then deal with it with your higher ups, not me. I am in full support for scientific advancements in medicine."
So am I, so IF you are accusing me of being otherwise then you are being dishonest of my position.
Most Doctors are in fact THEISTS anyways, so they support you and me, as I NEVER stated we should go against medicine. This is why I stated before
"Anti-medicine creationists CAN be fixed"
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist I never accused you, I was saying some people in general do not accept this. You are not everyone, nor does everyone follow your direct view theologically. All I ever stated was that some religions are anti-science and in doing so risk their health. That is it.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
"All I ever stated was that some religions are anti-science and in doing so risk their health."
It's noT RELIGONS as the RELIGION as a whole, it's certain PEOPLE that follow the specific religion. if it is show me which RELIGION in which every person from that RELIGION states what you are saying.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence "I am in full support for scientific advancements in medicine."
These are the type of accusations that I see all the time and it makes me laugh. And if you are true to your word, you'd REALIZE that people who are religious and or spiritual LIVE longer. So you should be SUPPORTING religious services and or spirituality as well to keep consistency.
Check WEBMD for source
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist Well that isn't entirely true. Plus there are many factors you seem to be forgetting about such as what country you live in, how much money you have, what you eat, if you have any pre-existing medical conditions, if you are vaccinated, if you are married. All of these things may determine how long you live.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
"Well that isn't entirely true. Plus there are many factors you seem to be forgetting about such as what country you live in, how much money you have, what you eat, if you have any pre-existing medical conditions, if you are vaccinated, if you are married. All of these things may determine how long you live."
Well according to the NEW atheists the BEST countries are IRRELIGIOUS so this doesn't follow.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
In fact according to the New atheists, the only people who are religious are stupid, poor and insecure. So your thesis needs more clarity.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist Whoever said I was one of these "new atheists" or that I supported all of what they said? They may have some ideas I support, but I don't follow them dogmatically nor agree with them on everything. I know not all religious people are stupid,poor, or insecure in fact some are quite brilliant, rich, and charismatic. My view as an individual is encompassed by many other views believe it or not.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
I never said you were a new atheist. I actually thought you were an agnostic.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist I have my own philosophy, but agnostic pretty much fits my belief.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
"Okay i'll be a bit more clear here, some sects in some religions have some people that sometimes don't take medicine because they believe prayer alone will heal them of their sickness and this is attributed partly due to religion. The point is you all have similar beliefs, but some religious people are indeed out of their minds and anti-science and territorial."
Agreed, we are in an agreement then. I do what I can to fix the "theology" it isn't easy as you stated
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
The Church is to blame for it's internal problems, the pushing away of Christian Anti-intellectualism was a horrible idea that occured in the early 1900s. It is a problem that I must work on harder, as I have already raised philosophical and theological awareness in chruches nearby. I cannot stand this "feel-good" Christianity as it is incomplete.
Anyways thanks for the talk, take care
TimelessApologist 1 month ago 2
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
The religon of course has influence, but at times the religion COULD be used just as an "excuse" for a personal feeling about something they disagree with.
I'm saying this is possible, not that it happens all the time.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist Exactly this is what I was talking about, some people are over zealous and use holy texts as excuses to cause violence out of personal feelings others may do it because they were told to by god himself. That is a major problem because no one should try to justify atrocities with god as their excuse, it just doesn't work. Having an unclear holy text with many sects and interpretations of the text doesn't help things though.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
You want to see a problem, HOSPITAL BILLS, DEBT all in which have nothing to do with religion.
Why does it cost 50 bucks for a fuckin bandaid when I go to the hosptial?
Where is your solution for that? Why are you so focused on the small things when people can't even AFFORD healthcare.
Where is religion to blame for that? NO WHERE.
The problem is people like you don't THINK, "everything religious is Bad" while the real bad goes under your nose.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@TimelessApologist Take a chill pill man. I never once accused religion as the reason for the US debt. I specifically spoke on 2 things which you chose to completely ignore so you could go off on this rampant speech.
The US debt problem has numerous causes for it such as war, borrowing money from china, over spending, corrupt officials, growing population, fuel costs. Again completely unrelated to what I was speaking of.
Requiemxtoxinnocence 1 month ago
@Requiemxtoxinnocence
I'm not an a rampant speech, I'm searching for clarity in your first statement. You painted the picture of 'religion" as if it is all belongs in one bowl.
First off not all religions even believe in a God (Buddhism) so this is why I asked for which specific religon. You just said some creationists so I assumed Christians. (as that's what skeptics virtually always refer to) Now I didn't ignore them.
I stated these problems can be fixed by another solution.
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
We have no support of supernatural claims of any sort. Despite the fact that there are many people who believe, is it reasonable to consider it reasonable to believe in supernatural claims when the reason for the claims are understood from our study of psychology, sociology, and biology; which does not support any of the supernatural claims/notions?
MyContext 1 month ago in playlist More videos from TheCartesianTheist
@MyContext Hi MyContext. Since the concept of the supernatural is central to your position, could you tell me where is the dividing line between what is natural and what is supernatural? Thanks.
StupidTheist 1 month ago
@StupidTheist You are absolutely right... What is a supernatural anything? Since, currently the term seems to only apply to points of ignorance. Most people don't call anything supernatural (god, ghosts, miracle, magic (as opposed to illusion), etc.) unless they don't understand whatever the phenomena or thing may be...
MyContext 1 month ago
@MyContext So, for you, supernatural just means "I don't understand it". OK. Might I ask whether for you "truth" is natural or is it supernatural? I'm sure we can say a few things about truth, but there are probably also questions one could ask about truth where one can only shrug one's shoulders in response.
StupidTheist 1 month ago
@StupidTheist I don't claim supernatural - if "I don't know".
The limits of what we know determines what we as individuals claim to be true. The limits of what we can claim to be true within the public frame is limited to what can be supported or is commonly accepted. I grant that any claim of truth can be wrong, however, claims that have support for it have the advantage of being reviewable such that if there is an error there is hope that the error will be discovered.
MyContext 1 month ago
@MyContext Commonly accepted notions can be wrong. These notions simply enjoy the benefit of acceptance. All notions should be challenge-able such that improvements can be made, if the notion is found to be wrong in some fashion.
MyContext 1 month ago
@MyContext I guess I still do not know what the term "supernatural" means to you, nor whether you believe truth is something natural or whether it is something supernatural, or whether it is neither. I would still like to know, but you raise another issue that I would like to address. I will make a claim, that may at first sound rather outrageous, but I believe that the claim is rational and defensible, and I will try to defend it. That claim is that not all truth claims need be challengable.
StupidTheist 1 month ago
@StupidTheist I find the idea that there is anything supernatural to be unsupportable. However, given that people do have notions I must adjust and try to determine what it is that they mean. Some use it as a catchall of things that they don't know, however, they aren't really making a claim about something actually being. There are others who insist that there is something. Depending on their knowledge base, I may interact and explore the claim and the basis of the claim.
MyContext 1 month ago
@MyContext
"I find the idea that there is anything supernatural to be unsupportable"
But doesn't this keep you in tune with your own presupposition in which you will never search to get out of? Perhaps years from now you will search for Deism and come up with a great argument for it. I don't see why you still can't search
Perhaps one can say, everything in the world is what it is, You and I agree on virtually everything, but the Origin of Everything was a concious mind. what then?
TimelessApologist 1 month ago
@MyContext My claim is that not all truth claims need be challengable. Here is my argument. Sentences do not have meaning in themselves, but only have meaning within a semantic context. For example, in Euclidean geometry parallel lines never meet, but in elliptical geometry parallel lines intersect. The truth of the statement "parallel lines never meet" depends upon the semantic context. Truth claims that establish a semantic context do not require justification.
StupidTheist 1 month ago
@StupidTheist I agree...context depends the nature of what is being claimed. The only truth claims that (at least from my perspective) require justification are claims wherein others will be subject to the outcomes/affects of such truth claims.
If a person believes in demons and epileptic seizures are seen as demon possession and the only acceptable remedy to the person is death - I find this to be a major problem. Since, from the stand point of the person - they are correct.
MyContext 1 month ago
@MyContext You raise an important issue regarding the relationship one's beliefs and one's behaviors, and how false beliefs can be a factor in harmful behavior. I would like to address this question. However, I think the volume of what needs to be said makes it inappropriate for me to answer you here in the comments of this video. I will be making a video soon, that addresses you issue. Thank you for raising it.
StupidTheist 1 month ago