And by the way , how the fuck did you forget Alhazen (Ibn al-Haytham) , he wrote the book of optics , mathematical , Theory of Vision , he was Muslim too , believed in god...why you didn't mention him? because he is muslim? retarded...
If you have any knowledge of my video content elsewhere, you would know that I don't hold any prejudical views against Muslims, and have in fact defended Muslims when fair to do so. I didn't exclude Alhazen because he was Muslim. I simply overlooked / forgot about him. If I ever make a second edition to this video, I will be sure to include him for his meritous work on optics, etc.
@omgwtfhelpbbq If he is Muslim he worships Allah..Not God. Big difference. The Christian God is far from being anything like the Muslim Allah. The only similarity is that both are reffered to as 'a god". But God the Father is nothing like Allah the god.
@CartesianTheist It disturbs their Atheistic religious beliefs that this could be true. So they diss it and mock it because that is all they can do. They are not free-thinking enough to actually learn the whole truth.
The middle ages was called the age of faith because the Catholics had too much power. They had so much wealth they can have their own personal army. They enforced anyone who did not believed in God, or anyone who just DISAGREES with them, will be tortured, punished, burned. Any scientist would believe in God during that era because their disagreements would be instantly labeled heresy. Worse, they may get executed.
@HORRORTV1 Scientists are free thinkers. Anyone who discovered some of the principles or laws that they did did not cower in fear. And if you read the quotes, you will see that they were simply speaking their mind just like you, except that their minds were above our minds.
Could one of you Jesus nuts please explain something? Is it your claim that the creator is a sociopath who created billions of people to torture for all eternity for simply not believing something that really makes no sense? Or do you claim that he is INCAPABLE of saving people who don't believe some nonsense because your god is not as powerful as Satan? Which is it? Is your god completely psychotic or just incompetent?
@stallion4life Well since atheists have nothing better to do than try to destroy the religion of others, you find a lot of them in places like this. Probably the better the video, the more atheistic trolls that are going to downrate it. They love changing history and personal beliefs of people from the past just like communist atheistic Russia did. Nothing new, same old "do what you want crowd".
@7777reasons I find the alternate version of history the New Atheists have constructed, and the complete paranoia and hystericism of their anti-theism, really alarming. They've cocooned themselves with their own little intellectually inbred echo-chamber blogs and podcasts, and have implicitly rejected the idea that reasonable people can disagree. How can they consider the hosts of "mind viruses" to be their equal participants in a democracy?
@stallion4life I agree. They call themselves "free thinkers" but the only thinking that is free is what they already believe. "Don't confuse me with the facts...my mind is made up mentality"
@7777reasons I can't decide if New Atheism is a pathetic non-movement that is sputtering out, or if these historical illiterates are really going to end up forcing all of us to relive every nightmare of the last 300 years.
I think this video is a clear statement, that fanatical theists feel stupid because they believe in a god that had a son, that was that god, and he sacrificed himself to himself.
The "textbook" you're referring to, .....I have read two times already, so I'm pretty accurate of what you people believe in, and it's preached that way, too.
Since they were scientists, I doubt very much they believed that humans came from dirt and a ribcage, and other things I will not mention to relieve you of embarassment.
Many a scientist back in the day, when the church held the Bible as complete authority, were in grave danger for dicovering the truth.
The "textbook" you're referring to, ~I have read two times already, so I'm pretty accurate of what you people believe in, and it's preached that way, too.
Since they were scientists, I doubt very much they believed that humans came from dirt and a ribcage, and other things I will not mention to relieve you of embarassment.
Many a scientist back in the day, when the church held the Bible as complete authority, were in grave danger for dicovering the truth.
There is really no importance whether a scientist believes in a god or not, either.
As long as the scientist takes his work, proves it in a lab, takes data down, retests it, and comes out with the same results, and has it tested by other scientists who do the same in their practice.......um, I'd say they are "doing their work right".
I don't care if they say a prayer over it, as long as it's done right.
in the 1500 it was the beginning of the reformation, not as big until martin luther came along but minor lutheran churches began to sprout and at that time the roman catholic church lost most of it's in England because of the Elizabethan era with which means, nobody in england was being told to be Christian which almost everyone here was from England
@CartesianTheist "The point I made all along was that their religion was no contradiction to their doing of science for them."
.
Clearly, but that's because of the liberating nature of science, not the stultifying effects of religion.
.
Sorry but I don't buy UNFF's or your attempt at plausible deniability. Just because UNFF says he's not making the argument from authority doesn't change the fact that this video is making precisely that argument.
"Clearly, but that's because of the liberating nature of science, not the stultifying effects of religion."
And that's called the fallacy of begging the question!! And we're supposed to think that atheists are the brights!!??
Well where in the video does it make that argument from authority then? Gosh, your discrediting tactics are the fallacies here mate not the video itself! Oh sweet irony!
@CartesianTheist "If you're contending it's irrational that's a positive truth claim so back it up if you can."
.
It's a positive proof claim that theists don't have any empirical evidence of a supernatural being, not that such a being doesn't exist. One cannot prove the non existence of a thing for which there is no evidence. Can't prove a negative - but you already know that, you just thought you could sneak that by with a little semantic twist. It's still up to you to prove god exists.
@Noisegator NO it isn't. You have decided he does not exist. Cognitive dissonance means that even if Jesus Christ were to appear in front of you, you would dismiss it as a trick. "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." Your religious belief prevents you from seeing facts that you do not agree with. Probably due to your atheistic programming.
@CartesianTheist What? I need to prove that belief in a magical being, especially the one espoused by christians, is superstitious nonsense? The point you keep missing is that their science was in no way informed by their culturally imposed superstitious presumptions. Keep digging that hole.
@Noisegator At least we have experience and evidence on our side. You have a religion made up of opinions based on the opinions of other atheists. One opinion does not back up another opinion. Only evidence as presented here does.
Also you believe in a magical "force". A force that randomly creates complexity. That IS magic! In nature I see entropy not building complexity. A house left uncared for becomes a ruined house. But your belief probably assumes that out of simple came complex. Sounds magic to me..
@CartesianTheist "Did you even notice when most of these scientists lived? " - I specifically mentioned it, yes. Any more pertinent questions?
.
"Plus it does not seem to me the video is trying to validate theism but simply show that theism and science were not at war with each other for these scientists! " - Of course they were "not at war". Superstition was the universal foundation of their knowledge set.
.
"You seem very defensive... !! " And your pop-psyche criticism is not defensive?
@Noisegator So scientists found truth from studying superstition? You make no sense Noisy. Try studying history. You know nothing about these men and of course like most non-believers simply state opinions which mean nothing because they are backed by no facts, no evidence just MORE opinion. Free up your thinking a bit!
@CartesianTheist "215 people dislike the FACT these scientists were theists? What other FACTS don't they like?"
.
Make that 216 and the FACT many here don't like is UNFF's disingenuous attempt to deny the clear implication of his video, namely that the publicly professed belief in the christian god, during a time when one's livelihood and even life was overshadowed by a capricious and often violent church authority, somehow validates the existence of said christian god, today.
@UNFFwildcard "You're such a tool. I'm not even going to bother with that accusation anymore. "
.
Are you capable of anything more imaginative than calling people "tools"? The only reason you aren't going to address my criticism (it's not an "accusation" BTW) is because it's completely legitimate, unlike your inability to own your words. You won't "bother" because your whole argument is fallacious and defending it will only prove it in spades.
@Noisegator Your opinions stray far from the facts. Your opinions are no better than anyone else's and in this case worse because you do not even know what is true. You have a religious belief you made up called "there is no God" and your dogma will not allow you to even consider that you may be wrong when other smarter people than you or I knew the facts and wrote about them.
Alot of these scientists also do not posses the current knowladge that we do today. Under the light of new evidence about what we have found out about our universe, some of these scientists and great thinkers would change their posistion.
@DjetGlea And so that is your considered opinion based on what DjetGlea? Where is your evidence? Of course there are many atheists who changed their position like Peter Hitchens for one. So maybe you are on to something. Except that we have EVIDENCE that Peter changed HIS position which is lacking in your statement.
@ARKSOLDIER7 i doubt "god" is leaking answers to the universe to the scientists, religion doesnt help science.. but i do agree it doesnt deter it either
@nadernade11 well the Bible does tell us that God told them how to cure some forms of leprousy or skin diseases many more alements in leviticus in leviticus, you probably will have a hard time noting things out considering I use a new living translation but I'll tell you chapter 11 "ceremonially unclean animals" 12 "purification after child birth" 13 "skin diseases" vs 47-59 "treatment of contaminated clothing" 14 "cleansing from skin diseases" 15 "bodily discharges"
99% of these quote mined guys he calls scientists didn't have the ability to be nonreligious since they lived in a time of the inquisition. They lived in a time period where they would have been burned to death for their beliefs notice how today most Scientists are not religious this is because they have an option to not be religious today. This video was obviously meant for people who already blindly believe not Atheists who actually know about truth.
@Liv2xplore I just watched it and it was another fallacious appeal to authority like this one. what he needs to do is find one scientist who can prove the claims of his cult.
@GodKillerAtheist Like atheists using Richard Dawkins? Honestly, I really don't care what you think, if God sat down beside you and handed the scientific proof to you, you'd say it was a hoax. If Moses parted the waters in front of you, you'd claim atmospheric pressure. If you saw Jesus heal a blind man, you'd say his problem was psychological. So any argument brought to you is wasted. I'll spend my time with people interested in hearing about hope, not hate.
@Liv2xplore You just don't understand do you? This video is flawed because it is a fallacy It supposes that X is true because smart person Z is a member of X. Needless to say majority rules doesn't work in mental institutions. Find a person to Prove X and not just claim it...
"I'll spend my time /interested in hearing about hope, not hate."
You're the only one Hating Truth. Your cult is the epitome of hatred and bigotry. You just want someone who mindlessly agrees with your bullshit propaganda.
@GodKillerAtheist My "cult"? I'm okay with that word. No, I don't want someone to mindlessly agree with my bullshit propaganda. I want someone that will look at the teachings of the Bible and the teaching of the secular world (yours) and ask questions about them both. I've seen how religion has been used for oppression and I believe they would have used anything to oppress. Race, religion, family background, anything will work when you want it to.
@Liv2xplore "My "cult"?" You haven't proven any of your claims so yes your cult. Or I should say the cult you are a member of.
" I want someone that will look at the teachings of the Bible and the teaching of the secular world (yours) and ask questions about them both."
I spent the majority of my life in your closed minded cult. I spent too much time reading your pointless poorly written primitive mindless book. Religion is a virus a disease. You can't see it because you are infected with fear
@GodKillerAtheist Your ignorance is swelling with each post. Try reading Peter Hitchens Rage Against God and come back and talk to us okay? Or perhaps Bill Murray's book where he rejected the teachings of his mother realizing they were simply another form of religion.
@Liv2xplore "someone that will look at the teachings of the Bible and the teaching of the secular world (yours) and ask questions about them both"
Would you ask questions of Alice in wonderland and your world view and try to ask questions about them both? BTW the world is secular since there is no God You know how I know because you can't even coherently define this god let alone prove that it exists. You're just preaching the white rabbit to me. One day you may wake up and be a part of reality
@GodKillerAtheist I can see that you've chose your path, and from your page, I'd say it is laced with hatred of anything reverent. Go ahead and check if you haven't, I have very little on my page because I live outside my computer. I didn't start out looking to convert you to theism, and I still don't really care what you think. But I do agree with UNFFwildcard, you ARE a tool. Peace be with you. I pray you learn to deal with your hate and addictions constructively.
@Liv2xplore Yes. And now it has been the totalitarian atheists like Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tse Tung who used anything to oppress people and truth. Atheists cannot look at both sides of an argument because it would disturb their status quo and revisionist history.
@UNFFwildcard "You're a real fucking tool, aren't you?
I'm a tool of truth unlike your poorly produced videos riddled with fallacies
Don't you find it somewhat pathetic that you define yourself by what you're not?"
I find it pathetic that you try to define your God by what its not. Since you have no coherent definition for it at all we can only default to it not existing..
@UNFFwildcard You're right, he is a tool. He's a sad, little tool of the secular world that can be found on campus's everywhere. He's a follower of his own pride and hate. There are many like him, and they say the same crappy arguments, over and over again.
@Liv2xplore "He's a follower of his own pride and hate."
I'm pride is better than being a debased immoral Christian who oppresses the world and hates everyone they can't brainwash into their cult. Sad you are just so sad I was just like you once. I'm just happy I'm free from that never ending nightmare..
@GodKillerAtheist OH yes. Mother Theresa, Mark Buntain, Albert Schweitzer were wicked people weren't they? On the other hand atheistic countries like Kim Jong Il in North Korea, STalin in Russia, Mao Tse Tung in China were saints and did SO MUCH for people didn't they? You are so blind you change history to suit your atheistic religious beliefs.
@GodKillerAtheist You should look up the timeframe of the inquisition. The first was from 1480-1834. The second began about the mid-20th Century with your dogmatic worldview burning at the stake anyone who dare contend with it. Then again, it was the radical atheists who committed the greatest genocides in world history, so I suppose this is not uncharted territory, your intolerance.
@GodKillerAtheist Nope, meant mid-20th Century. Yep, you're a dogmatic Atheist. Welcome to reality, kiddo. Nope, I mean far worse: the genocide of over 100 million by Stalin, Mao (and later dictators), Pol Pot, the Kim family, et al.
@blogbat "Nope, meant mid-20th Century" So I guess that means you admit you're an idiot?
"Yep, you're a dogmatic Atheist" Again I ask what dogma do I have to follow? Atheists don't have dogma. It's probably the soul property of being an Atheist.
"Stalin, Mao /, Pol Pot, the Kim family" None of those are Atheist
Stalin was Orthodox Christian, Mao was Buddhist, Pol Pot was Tao, Kim follow ancestor worship. I've yet to see any one murder for a lack of belief in the claims of cults such as yours
@7777reasons Um made up their own beliefs? NO no sorry sad soul Atheists view the natural world for what it is they don't have to make up anything because it's right there in their face. Theists on the other hand do have to make up everything since they have no evidence to prove their magic indeterministic slaver in the clouds just blind faith.The insane keep doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. That's what reading the bible is all about
@GodKillerAtheist So the "insane" keep doing the same thing? You are calling yourself, INSANE? Wow what an admittance. You all give the same old opinions and revisionist history of the world. You throw away Mother Theresa and Stalin because it suits your dogma to do so. You take your opinion of truth and believe it.... DOGMA! Can you name ONE good thing Christians have done? When in reality most of the western world which did have a Christian perspective is where most advancements were made.
@GodKillerAtheist I listed SOME of your dogma elsewhere. You just don't write it down. You rage against Christians whether they have a point or not. You have no recognition of any truth except your own. Here endeth the second list of Atheistic Dogma. [Ever heard about the dyslexic atheist? He carried a sign that said, " There is no Dog!"]
@blogbat So you think the inquisition was somewhere in the 1950's that would be mid 20th century. You need a history lesson. All the dictators you listed had one thing in mind and that was to gain military power, that surely was not caused by a lack of belief in Jesus. BTW China is a super power because of Mao. Some Still hold Stalin in great esteem. The USSR is still the USA's equal in some respect. Christians killed more than millions they had 2000 years to burn witches and heretics at a whim
@GodKillerAtheist I see why you claim to be an atheist. You not only make up your own atheistic beliefs but you also change history to suit your beliefs. Did you know that was a common trait of the USSR until they fell due to their beliefs and ways they kept people down.
@GodKillerAtheist Your revisionist history would be funny if it were not so childish. Try reading some good books that talk about true Christians who started public education, hospitals, universities, inventions to help the masses.... But then that might be dangerous for you since it may put your atheistic religious beliefs in disarray.
@blogbat Seriously you've got to be a lolz troll because no one is that stupid. Get a book or get a troll face because the only way you're succeeding in this debate is if you're trying to make me laugh.
@GodKillerAtheist Wow you are such an arrogant atheist. Oh I forgot it is one of the tenet's of atheistic religion. "I'm smarter than everyone else living or dead." That is until you find out differently.
@GodKillerAtheist You do not even recognize your own bias or dogma. Your dogma is 1) all Christians are stupid 2) YOu are smarter than ALL Christians 3) You believe you are a freethinker when you can only think negatively about Christianity 4) You have less than 1% of the world's knowledge but claim you have all of it when you say "we will wake up and recognize the truth" 5) You have been sucked in by the most ancient of religions, called "no belief". a start ...
@GodKillerAtheist Lol, wrong. You atheists are so ignorant of science, theology and religions (especially), and general common sense. Almost every single person listed have written extensive Bible commentaries that clearly reveal their deep love for Jesus Christ and the God's Word, so try again. Also there are TONS (thousands) of modern day scientist who believe in a literal 6 day Creation, here is a good link:
h ttp://creation.c om/scientists-of-the-past-who-believed-in-a-creator#modern
@Devin82m " Almost every single person listed have written extensive Bible commentaries"
List some of their commentaries then.
" there are TONS (thousands) of modern day scientist who believe in a literal 6 day Creation"
Okay who? I've only seen 3 and they are the front runners and main propagandists for creationism.
Personally I don't care if you people think your god is incompetent and can't design adaptive features into their creation. Honestly you're nothing but a joke to the majority.
@GodKillerAtheist Atheist are willfully ignorant, just Google each one and the words "bible commentary" you will clearly see. Also you play the typical evolution preaching religious atheist by not going to the link I provided and looking at the list. Here let me provide a separate link as well: h ttp://ww w.answersingenesis.o rg/home/area/bios/ this too: h ttp://ww w.truenews.o rg/Creation_vs_Evolution/scientists.html Also the majority of the world believes a god of some sort created everything
@GodKillerAtheist In almost every country in the world the religion of atheism consist of only 2% or less of the population. Atheism is in the minority. Try doing the research on both sides of the argument instead of parroting professors and the atheist loosers here on YouTube who don't even know basic historical and philosophical facts. You are being intellectually dishonest if you don't review all sides of an argument, that is science after all. But you prefer to be ignorant and in control...
@Devin82m There's no religion of Atheism so that percent would be zero. Just as you are an Atheist regarding all other Gods and fairy tales I am an Atheist or nonbeliever in one more than you. I don't believe in your God because you've failed to produce any evidence to verify YOUR claim. I was a Christian for almost 20 years so yes I've seen both sides and your inability to recognize that fact is intellectually dishonest. The only LOSERS are the illiterate hordes of liars supporting fairy tales
@GodKillerAtheist LOL! You were no Christian, you may have claimed to be affiliated with some church, maybe you even attended one regularly, but you were no Christian. If you were tell me what it means to be a Christian without Googling it. Also what on the Creationist point of view have you looked into? Explain why you don't believe what they have to say. Also the polls don't like, only about 2% of the population in most countries are atheists, more may believe in evolution granted.
@GodKillerAtheist LOL! You were no Christian, you may have claimed to be affiliated with some church, maybe you even attended one regularly, but you were no Christian. If you were tell me what it means to be a Christian without Googling it. Also what on the Creationist point of view have you looked into? Explain why you don't believe what they have to say. Also the polls don't like, only about 2% of the population in most countries are atheists, more may believe in evolution granted.
@Devin82m " You were no Christian" Like I stated your inability to understand that FACT shows your intellectual dishonesty. So I guess this just reaffirms my previous statement. You are intellectually dishonest by your own admittance.
"what on the Creationist point of view have you looked into?"
All of them. Creationism is the belief that God is incompetent and so powerless it cannot create an organism with an ability to adapt to it's environment. Also creationist use evolution but deny it.
@GodKillerAtheist Cute evasion, but you didn't answer either of my questions. Non sequitur. Your just lying to make it sound like you are unbiased and experience in both sides of the argument. Thanks for chatting this out, now every clearly sees you are ignorant, dishonest, deceptive, and a troll. That is exactly what I wanted to everyone to see, good job digging your hole.
@Devin82m Yes you're blaring intellectual dishonesty I stated clearly I was a christian for almost 20 years. You're ashamed that that's over half your life. Yes I am more experienced than you on either side. If experience makes one ignorant, dishonest and a deceptive troll then yes I guess so, but in reality things work much differently. My hole is in your head where your brain should be now go read something other than a religious fools book. Stop supporting the racist ideology of creationism
@GodKillerAtheist Nothing you said changes the fact that you didn't answer my questions. You just keep appealing to your own authority with nothing to back it up except "I'm more experienced" give some substance and answer my questions instead of avoiding them. I'm saying your ignorant because you don't seem to know what a Christian is even though you claim to have been one. Let alone you can't even name a website, book, person related to Creationism that you read or listened to.
@Devin82m No you were the one calling me stupid, ignorant and a troll because you feel you know more. That my young inexperienced friend is called arrogance no matter how you would like to redefine it to suit your religious ideologies. I answered you, but you failed to read. Next time read and stop trying to make me the bad guy when your cult is the one that wages endless wars and mutilates the genitals of newborn babies. You support that NOT ME! Your apocalyptic world view is immoral.
@GodKillerAtheist I didn't use the word "stupid" As for you answering my 2 question, you did not. I asked what does it mean to be a Christian. I asked "If you were tell me what it means to be a Christian without Googling it" and "Also what on the Creationist point of view have you looked into? Explain why you don't believe what they have to say" You are the one poisoning the well and not providing anything to back it up. Also circumcision was for health/sanitary reasons.
@Devin82m I have links that completely disprove your stereotypical "Bible Errors" and other crap you guys like to fling like you just did. You love to throw things out without putting them in Biblical context to make God out to be some horrible monster who wants us to mutilate children. I'll tell you who mutilated children, atheists did, it's called abortion and so did atheist Nazis and Communists (still do). You just sound hateful and don't seem to be thinking straight because of that hate.
@GodKillerAtheist You are such a great salesman for atheism. We can see you love truth and love everybody especially yourself. However your insults and bad manners do not represent truth just your vision of it. So have you read Rage Against God yet, GKA? Don't be a hypocrite now and follow your OWN suggestions ....
@7777reasons I love when cultists can't refute anything stated and instead of acting like an adult and concede to the truth they instead demonize the person they fail to refute. The only rage I have is a lack of understanding of why you need to believe in foolishness and lies. I don't think you can even give anyone a coherent definition of your God so I could hate it. My only suggestion is that you read another book and really get educated stop mutilating kid's genitals end the holy wars ETC
@GodKillerAtheist Perhaps read Peter Hitchens Rage Against God would help you see the other side. Or Bill Murray's or C.S. Lewis. But then again if you did, it would disturb your religious world view. Your religion is simply your set of beliefs. If you have beliefs, you have a religion. Your God is yourself and other atheists. You believe them even when they are not making sense.
@GodKillerAtheist Your revisionist history is based on your biased opinion. To you truth is what YOU think. You have NO evidence for your opinion. We are supposed to just take it on faith.
Amen. I love those who love the Lord, I pray for those who reject him. A life, a moment, an hour with out God is living in eternal hell! Jesus is the TRUTH, WAY AND LIFE! NO MAN COMES TO GOD UNLESS THEY COME THROUGH HIM. JESUS SAYS: ME AND MY FATHER ARE ONE! HE IS I, I AM He. God bless the children of God, and God help those to come to you, that don't know you, before it's too late....
Up until the 18th century, EVERYBODY was a theist, as science implied such. Upon the enlightment, there were a few atheists but theism dominated the scene. In 19th century there were both. But already in the 20th/21st century... almost any respectable scientist is, at the very least, agnostic.
The Reformation showed that you could defy the Church and get away with it. Educated men were defying religion in the late 1600s and getting away with it (ie Lord Herbert of Cherbury, John Toland, etc) Yes, there was persecution, but history shows that dissenters of religion were willing to stand for their beliefs. To imply that the majority of great scientists during this era were closet atheists is absurd, arrogant, and historical revisionism.
@CartesianTheist They could have said nothing? If they had said nothing, then the religious bigots would've won. Why wouldn't they want to correct people when they say the world was flat? Without them speaking out, we'd probably still be in the Christian dark age.
Regarding David Hume, he did not acknowledge his authorship of many of his works in this area until close to his death, and some were not even published until afterwards. Why did you think he needed to do that?
very nice video, I almost didn't want to watch it but i forced myself and was pleasantly surprised. It is my opinion that some of those quotes aren't quite what they could be, like Louis Pasteur's quote. what piece is playing in the back?
Mostly people could get killed or punished by charging blasphemous entries to the Church in the middle ages/medieval age. Most scientific people are not brave enough to claim that god does not exist, fearing punishments and worse, corporal mortification. Hence, atheists in those times are either "not coming out of the closet" or in "hiding'', or following the church. Let alone the church was the most powerful authority in those times, not even the kings or leaders could stop them
@ParacelsusXXXHadas Or you could just accept the fact the most major scientistic people and most logical are christians in that time. . .and stop trying too find loop holes and cracks.
What a great video! I too see science as a method of discovering God. I thought the music to be very classy and fitting as well. Now, where is Einstein in this video? Why was Einstein left out?
@1971SuperLead Actually Albert Einstein did not literally say that he believes in the "literal" definition of god. He believes in the idealism of Benedict (or in some cases he was called "Baruch") Spinoza's concept of God. Meaning, "God" is an incomprehensible and mysterious energy that arouses fear on people, hence creates the concept of religion. Here's an excerpt from his literary piece "This I Believe" stating that he is truly a religious man:
@ParacelsusXXXHadas I agree with you that Einstein did not believe in any kind of conventional God. he did not believe in a "personal God" He did however, believe in an intelligence beyond human intelligence that was responsible for the manifestation of the universe and it's laws. He believed in life after death and he believed in the necessary progress of mankind's spiritual awareness..
manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms---this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness. In this sense, and this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men."
There is a great disbelief amonst christians when it comes to scientific theories (big bang and the evolution probabely being the most denied). When you think that these theories were actually conceived by theists it's kind of strange. Especially since the 2 most denied by christians were thought of by christians :s. The fundy christian made separation between "evolutionists" (those who accept science in general) and christians just doesn't make sense :s.
@TakesTwoToTango Both ways are possible. But I think the evidence is on the side of evolution WITHIN a species but not creating new species which would make other laws like entropy invalid when it is all around us. In life things go from complex to simple, like rotting flesh becomes molecules of matter in the earth. But Some would like us to think that by a series of accidents the simple became more complex. If true, I say bombard Down's Syndrome kids with cosmic rays and see if it works.
@7777reasons Which both ways? I never mentioned 2 "ways". And either you really don't know what you're talking about, or you're a troll. I'll just assume the first. 1) the earth is not a closed system, so the second law doesn't apply. 2) there is no difference between evolution within a secies and speciation. The word "species" is a vague manmade term. And I don't see how "macroevolution" would break any physical law that "microevolution" wouldn't.
(continued) 3) the physical entity "disorder" isn't even defined when it comes to biological systems. "Complex" means something else in biology, it means "higher up the evolutionary ladder" by definition.
4) If you really understood anything about biology, you'd realize how freaking rediculous that idea is. Your cosmic ray joke is just absurde, and is completely irrelevant to down's syndrome.
Quit believing everything you read from socalled christians on the internet. And NEVER give them money
How so?LOL. What kind of laughable arrogance do you have to have, to deny the nature of existance..and to not attribute any credit to substance and design?!!!!LOL. How big of a dipshit do you have to be to try to reason the "unreasonable" infinity?!!!!LOL. Enough with this "atheist" non-sense. No one is an atheist..bu many are pissed of at certain people who associate themselves with an idialogy, as if we can't think for OURSELVES..LOL.
@UNFFwildcard Thank you UNFF for pointing that out, atheist people just want to complain and tell lies all the damn time. Now they are saying all these great and famous scientist were forced to be Christians. LOL. It never fails.
Let's take a look at the term "atheist". Comes from the Greek "atheos", which esentially denies existance. How exactly to you practice science as a disbeliever?LOL. Much is "assumed" about Christianity, but little do people like yourself know, that the advanced Greek world of eastern Rome/Byzantium embraced Christianity for it's sentiment. Sentiment isn't a science..just as the subjective experience isn't a science. For example, the arts have no reason to be valuabl..but ARE.
@Vasilis719 The word atheos actually means "without god" in Greek. And why can't people practice science without god? Where is the connection? I was a Christian for over 30 years until I deconverted last year, so I don't assume anything about Christianity, I have first hand experience. What you just wrote doesn't make any sense at all.
@JohnWoo You can practise science without God. However with him you can practise it better IMHO. Most advancements in the world to help people have come from Christianity. Hospitals, public schools so the masses could get education and improve their lot in life, universities at least in Western countries were all originally setup by Christians. Mother Theresa or Kim Jong Il. Look at South Korea where many are Christian and N. Korea, an atheistic nation .... who made more progress?
@Vasilis719 Your opinion is a sentiment. It is the way you feel. Since you did not live back then you cannot prove what you say. You have to rely on the historical records which would not support your hypothesis. Your sentiments betray you.
My "sentiment"?LOL. The ABSOLUTE FACT that existance has a source, defintion, and recognition is a "sentiment"?!!!!!LOLOLOL. YOUR A COMPLETE BAFOON..:((((((
First of all.. I'm GREEK, and don't need linguistic interpretations about my native language. Secondly, let's define "God". God is the the force of existance in substance, design, and ability of free thought and will. Do you STILL have a hard time understanding that without the just mentioned, science doesn't exist?!!!!. Or ANYTHING for that matter?!!!!. While science is the study of "how", religion asks "why". "atheos" is in fact a denial of the force of existance. Quite ridiculousLOL
@Vasilis719 Wow, you have so many things messed up it's not even funny. First you defined god as the Christian god, and now you defined it as forces of nature? Come on, you can do better than that. Haha.
Wow, you a really slow minded person..LOL. I "denied" God?!!!LOL. I said God IS the force of nature, and everything else in existance..while you claimed "science" to exist independant of "God", which is the designer behind design, and the creator behind substance. Didn't science teach the basic principles of thought?..LOL. You tell me who has things "messed up"..LOL.
"Christian God" and "force of nature" exist seperately?..LOL. Apparently you don't know Christianity(after some 30 years as a so-called "Christian"..LOL), and know "Nature" as existing without a designer, but design..without a creator, but substance?LOL. Your a trully slow brained individual..LOL. God is infinity, yet you try to use finite restrictions to deny him..LOL. Your environment has failed you..LOLOLOLOL.
@Vasilis719 You haven't got a clue what you're talking about. You're just slapping the god label on the widest range as possible. What is it that you can't wrap your head around that things don't always need to have a designer? Can't you tell the difference between naturally occurring patterns and design specific patterns?
Anyway, I'm not gonna be drawn in to an immature name-calling contest with you as I always see it as a sign of victory when they start using ad hominem.
p.s. Adding "LOL" to arguments doesn't make them any truer, it might hide the holes in your argument among kids your age, but any critical thinker can see right through it. Which reminds me that I'm not gonna waste any more time debating on this subject because your arguments are so weak that I don't think I'll get anything out of it.
Adding LOL is an expression of "laughing out loud", and there is nothing more comical than recognizing existance, bit denying the force that makes it possible and sustainable. PERIOD.
Certainly you've been defined as "slow", and you have also been shown what makes that a fact.
"God label"?!!. The finite comes from the infinite, and is nothing but a portion of a no beginning, abd no ending infinitude. For the finite to exist, move, sustain, and form any kind of patterns comes from the very thing that you deny..and the very thing that is ungraspable, unreasonable, and makes existance exist. Victory?!!!!LOL. You certainly are a dreamer..LOL.
Not sure what a "hominem" is..is that "Eminem's" rapper cousin?LOL. A "homonym" is a Greek word meaning "two words that mean the same thing"..LOL. Not only is your spelling particularly funny, since you tried to use a laughably mispelled word to your advanatge..but you tried to compare WHOLE phrases and definitions as "homonym"..or "hominem", as you wrote it..LOL. ENOUGH SAID. THE END..LOLOLOLOLOL.
Hmm..let's see; if your "Latin" is anything like your "Greek"..we can safely assume that it makes no difference..and that I guess my sarcastic belittlement of your trying to use pointless distractions, makes the "victor"(as you said) QUITE CLEAR.
@JohnWoo Perhaps they were just more open-minded than you? Is that possible? Perhaps some of the ancient freethinkers. They did certainly know how to think better than most of us. God loves everybody regardless of our beliefs or our stupidity. Sounds like a good model to follow.
Assume you're a microbiologist in the area of stem cell research does you fundamental Christian beliefs help or hurt your work in the lab?
I submit that to the extent you pay attention to it, it hinders or stops your work.
The magic is the antithesis of science unless it is ignored or is simply outside the area of inquiry. So a scientist studying the chemistry of soda pop may be safe from religious conflict..Oh wait... unless he's a Mormon.
In the history of Western thought there is a progression from believing in many gods such as in classical times, to believing in only a few such as in Christianity, to believing in none. The human race will soon mature to the point that it can leave its supernatural fantasies in the past.
Well, they said that they believed in God and I'm sure that most of them did. But you have to consider that for a long time in Europe, the only way to become man of knowledge, it was to be an active member of the Church.
As for somebody to express disbelief in God in those times, they wouldn't be allowed to keep their heads, let alone to study the mysteries of the Universe.
While apostasy was considered a sub-division of heresy at times, I am not aware that it was punishable by death. In the Byzantine empire there were certain declarations that made it so, but that's not the RCC. You still have a valid point, but that's also why I made 1900-present.
I just did a five minute research, and in one of the articles the author (?) says that the secular penalty for heresy was inescapably death, however if rescued by the holy inquisition the defendant would have a way to escape death by showing repentance.
Either by the church or the state, the threat of death (by no means quick and painless) would be enough to turn any atheist in to an hypocrite.
Take up your argument withH uman error and free will..not God. As we have seen with so-called "atheistic" communism..violence is common practice as well. Where there is light, somewhere there's darkness, where there's good, somewhere there is evil..but only one can be constructive as a result..good. "Principles" are not a science, and not necessarily the easiest thing to practice..or to do righ; but it either is something you believe in or not. PERIOD.
The scientists in the vid are from a bygone era-- Einstein, Hawking, Sagan or Dawkins--all non-believers-- are more representative of today''s scientists. Nothing wrong with Medeivel thinking (except for the Inquisition, Crusades, witch-burning, et al) but we've come a long way since then, or should have. Today's concepts of God are more like Hindu-Buddhist abstractions than the literalism of religious conservatives who are anti-science. There is no 'authority' on the supernatural.
@luvdomus that is pretty stupid thing to say. Today's scientists could not do what they do today without those who worked tirelessly in those yesteryears. Today's scientists are standing on the shoulders of those "giants" = "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants." --Isaac Newton. Don't be a fool and think that today's scientists don't dip into the established science of your so-called "bygone era". You really have no idea what your talking about.
@DJsStratoArt Modern science is free of the superstition of the past, not based on Papal edicts, mysticism, alchemy, astrology or Holy Writ. The anceint Classical Greco-Roman world started Western civilization off in the right direction scientifically, interrupted by a long (1000 year) pause while gods and devils ran rampant through men's minds, and then righting itself once again during the Enlightenment (late 1700's) until today. Religion's role today is as a psychological tranquilizer.
You have it backwards. That 1000 year period you mention was dominated by Platonic/Aristotlian metaphysics that were the antithesis of anything we recognize today as proper science. Greco/Roman natural philosophy was fundamentally flawed, and it was Christian Europe that corrected it.
Your statement is the fruit of a retired conflict thesis combined with a personal ignorance over what science was in the ancient world. There was nothing inherrently wrong in exploring alchemy and astrology.
The Christian Dark Ages were "dominated by Platonic/Aristotilan metaphysics" because they believed in received wisdom and revelation through ancient scripture, not reason. Euclid, Eratosthenes, Archimedes and others discovered workable natural principles through observation. Superstition perpetuated by authoritarians drags any civilization down, clear thinking builds them up. The Christian right attacks science because they claim the right to define the world but have lost credibility.
Any belief in recieved wisdom and revelation has nothing to do with adopting Aristotlian metaphysics - it is about developing theories on the nature of theory; of developing constructs about what the universe is and how one may come to understand it. The Greeks believed that perfect wisdom will come to perfect understanding of the universe. If the early Christians believed that recieved wisdom and revelation will grant them better understanding, that WAS through Greek reason.
Theology in turn was linked with natural philosophy because Christians adopted Aristotle's four causes as the means of understanding. It was not through overcoming superstition but by overcoming Aristotle's fourth cause did science in Europe flourish.
In olden times it was REQUIRED for you to believe in the culturally accepted god-- failure to profess believe could get you killed, so of course it was not something you would be allowed to question, even within your own mind. Today, we are freer to think, and belief in god and the supernatural is plummeting, especially among scientists, only a minority of whom cling to the primitive religion of the past.
interesting video and very informative
osclarkos 1 week ago
very interesting video thanks
msjessypp 1 week ago
some sweet info here
xtremetom180 1 week ago
@7777reasons - don't waste your time on these people :?)
78durban 2 weeks ago
Leibniz was a Lutheran, not a Catholic... :)
YwanBeloch 2 weeks ago
Great video. Thanks for posting.
iftheyonlynew 3 months ago
And by the way , how the fuck did you forget Alhazen (Ibn al-Haytham) , he wrote the book of optics , mathematical , Theory of Vision , he was Muslim too , believed in god...why you didn't mention him? because he is muslim? retarded...
omgwtfhelpbbq 3 months ago
If you have any knowledge of my video content elsewhere, you would know that I don't hold any prejudical views against Muslims, and have in fact defended Muslims when fair to do so. I didn't exclude Alhazen because he was Muslim. I simply overlooked / forgot about him. If I ever make a second edition to this video, I will be sure to include him for his meritous work on optics, etc.
Salaam.
UNFFwildcard 3 months ago
@omgwtfhelpbbq If he is Muslim he worships Allah..Not God. Big difference. The Christian God is far from being anything like the Muslim Allah. The only similarity is that both are reffered to as 'a god". But God the Father is nothing like Allah the god.
Brenda0312F 1 day ago
Charles Darwin ? are you kidding me? he didn't believe if there was a god...fucking pig , evolution theory is wrong also ...
omgwtfhelpbbq 3 months ago
@CartesianTheist It disturbs their Atheistic religious beliefs that this could be true. So they diss it and mock it because that is all they can do. They are not free-thinking enough to actually learn the whole truth.
7777reasons 4 months ago
Amen. Keep on keepin' on.
brinnyboppitybop 6 months ago
The middle ages was called the age of faith because the Catholics had too much power. They had so much wealth they can have their own personal army. They enforced anyone who did not believed in God, or anyone who just DISAGREES with them, will be tortured, punished, burned. Any scientist would believe in God during that era because their disagreements would be instantly labeled heresy. Worse, they may get executed.
HORRORTV1 6 months ago
@HORRORTV1 Scientists are free thinkers. Anyone who discovered some of the principles or laws that they did did not cower in fear. And if you read the quotes, you will see that they were simply speaking their mind just like you, except that their minds were above our minds.
7777reasons 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Could one of you Jesus nuts please explain something? Is it your claim that the creator is a sociopath who created billions of people to torture for all eternity for simply not believing something that really makes no sense? Or do you claim that he is INCAPABLE of saving people who don't believe some nonsense because your god is not as powerful as Satan? Which is it? Is your god completely psychotic or just incompetent?
MasterOfSparks 8 months ago
doesnt matter if stephen hawkin was a muslim, it wont make any religion more of a fact
teedonster 9 months ago
This is one of the best videos on YouTube bar none. The fact that it has 217 dislikes to 88 likes just shows how closed so many minds are.
stallion4life 10 months ago 5
@stallion4life Well since atheists have nothing better to do than try to destroy the religion of others, you find a lot of them in places like this. Probably the better the video, the more atheistic trolls that are going to downrate it. They love changing history and personal beliefs of people from the past just like communist atheistic Russia did. Nothing new, same old "do what you want crowd".
7777reasons 6 months ago
@7777reasons I find the alternate version of history the New Atheists have constructed, and the complete paranoia and hystericism of their anti-theism, really alarming. They've cocooned themselves with their own little intellectually inbred echo-chamber blogs and podcasts, and have implicitly rejected the idea that reasonable people can disagree. How can they consider the hosts of "mind viruses" to be their equal participants in a democracy?
stallion4life 6 months ago 2
@stallion4life I agree. They call themselves "free thinkers" but the only thinking that is free is what they already believe. "Don't confuse me with the facts...my mind is made up mentality"
Do you agree?
7777reasons 4 months ago
@7777reasons Yeah, and their operational philosophy seems to be that people must be bullied and hectored into their "free thought"! lol
stallion4life 4 months ago
@7777reasons I can't decide if New Atheism is a pathetic non-movement that is sputtering out, or if these historical illiterates are really going to end up forcing all of us to relive every nightmare of the last 300 years.
stallion4life 6 months ago 3
I think this video is a clear statement, that fanatical theists feel stupid because they believe in a god that had a son, that was that god, and he sacrificed himself to himself.
I really do.
BrightStaroftheDawn 10 months ago
@BrightStaroftheDawn You should really read the "textbook" before you make comments on it. You are far from the mark. The truth shall set you free.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@7777reasons
The "textbook" you're referring to, .....I have read two times already, so I'm pretty accurate of what you people believe in, and it's preached that way, too.
Since they were scientists, I doubt very much they believed that humans came from dirt and a ribcage, and other things I will not mention to relieve you of embarassment.
Many a scientist back in the day, when the church held the Bible as complete authority, were in grave danger for dicovering the truth.
BrightStaroftheDawn 4 months ago
@7777reasons
The "textbook" you're referring to, ~I have read two times already, so I'm pretty accurate of what you people believe in, and it's preached that way, too.
Since they were scientists, I doubt very much they believed that humans came from dirt and a ribcage, and other things I will not mention to relieve you of embarassment.
Many a scientist back in the day, when the church held the Bible as complete authority, were in grave danger for dicovering the truth.
BrightStaroftheDawn 4 months ago
@7777reasons
The truth HAS set me free. Thank you.
Btw, I am not an atheist, however I do not subscribe to any religions god. How could that be, you ask?
Spinoza.....almost pantheistic, where there is no stories or tribal explanations of anything.
"God" is an IT, to me, that we are constantly discovering in the world of science, that's all.
No heaven, no hell, no son OF god, no quaint stories.
None.
BrightStaroftheDawn 4 months ago
@7777reasons
There is really no importance whether a scientist believes in a god or not, either.
As long as the scientist takes his work, proves it in a lab, takes data down, retests it, and comes out with the same results, and has it tested by other scientists who do the same in their practice.......um, I'd say they are "doing their work right".
I don't care if they say a prayer over it, as long as it's done right.
BrightStaroftheDawn 4 months ago
@CartesianTheist "So are you claiming that for a truth claim to be true it requires empirical evidence?"
.
So you are claiming that for a claim to be true it requires only a claim?
Noisegator 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Noisegator said to @CartesianTheist "So you are claiming that for a claim to be true it requires only a claim?"
That's exactly what he's doing he's not very smart I've had conversations with CT in the past and really he is that simple.
GodKillerAtheist 6 months ago
in the 1500 it was the beginning of the reformation, not as big until martin luther came along but minor lutheran churches began to sprout and at that time the roman catholic church lost most of it's in England because of the Elizabethan era with which means, nobody in england was being told to be Christian which almost everyone here was from England
Vlaxerman343 10 months ago
@CartesianTheist "The point I made all along was that their religion was no contradiction to their doing of science for them."
.
Clearly, but that's because of the liberating nature of science, not the stultifying effects of religion.
.
Sorry but I don't buy UNFF's or your attempt at plausible deniability. Just because UNFF says he's not making the argument from authority doesn't change the fact that this video is making precisely that argument.
Noisegator 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Noisegator
"Clearly, but that's because of the liberating nature of science, not the stultifying effects of religion."
And that's called the fallacy of begging the question!! And we're supposed to think that atheists are the brights!!??
Well where in the video does it make that argument from authority then? Gosh, your discrediting tactics are the fallacies here mate not the video itself! Oh sweet irony!
CartesianTheist 10 months ago
@CartesianTheist "If you're contending it's irrational that's a positive truth claim so back it up if you can."
.
It's a positive proof claim that theists don't have any empirical evidence of a supernatural being, not that such a being doesn't exist. One cannot prove the non existence of a thing for which there is no evidence. Can't prove a negative - but you already know that, you just thought you could sneak that by with a little semantic twist. It's still up to you to prove god exists.
Noisegator 10 months ago
@Noisegator NO it isn't. You have decided he does not exist. Cognitive dissonance means that even if Jesus Christ were to appear in front of you, you would dismiss it as a trick. "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." Your religious belief prevents you from seeing facts that you do not agree with. Probably due to your atheistic programming.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@CartesianTheist What? I need to prove that belief in a magical being, especially the one espoused by christians, is superstitious nonsense? The point you keep missing is that their science was in no way informed by their culturally imposed superstitious presumptions. Keep digging that hole.
Noisegator 10 months ago
@Noisegator At least we have experience and evidence on our side. You have a religion made up of opinions based on the opinions of other atheists. One opinion does not back up another opinion. Only evidence as presented here does.
7777reasons 4 months ago
Also you believe in a magical "force". A force that randomly creates complexity. That IS magic! In nature I see entropy not building complexity. A house left uncared for becomes a ruined house. But your belief probably assumes that out of simple came complex. Sounds magic to me..
7777reasons 4 months ago
@CartesianTheist "Did you even notice when most of these scientists lived? " - I specifically mentioned it, yes. Any more pertinent questions?
.
"Plus it does not seem to me the video is trying to validate theism but simply show that theism and science were not at war with each other for these scientists! " - Of course they were "not at war". Superstition was the universal foundation of their knowledge set.
.
"You seem very defensive... !! " And your pop-psyche criticism is not defensive?
Noisegator 10 months ago
@Noisegator So scientists found truth from studying superstition? You make no sense Noisy. Try studying history. You know nothing about these men and of course like most non-believers simply state opinions which mean nothing because they are backed by no facts, no evidence just MORE opinion. Free up your thinking a bit!
7777reasons 4 months ago
@CartesianTheist "215 people dislike the FACT these scientists were theists? What other FACTS don't they like?"
.
Make that 216 and the FACT many here don't like is UNFF's disingenuous attempt to deny the clear implication of his video, namely that the publicly professed belief in the christian god, during a time when one's livelihood and even life was overshadowed by a capricious and often violent church authority, somehow validates the existence of said christian god, today.
Noisegator 10 months ago 2
@Noisegator
lol. You're such a tool. I'm not even going to bother with that accusation anymore.
UNFFwildcard 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@UNFFwildcard "You're such a tool. I'm not even going to bother with that accusation anymore. "
.
Are you capable of anything more imaginative than calling people "tools"? The only reason you aren't going to address my criticism (it's not an "accusation" BTW) is because it's completely legitimate, unlike your inability to own your words. You won't "bother" because your whole argument is fallacious and defending it will only prove it in spades.
Noisegator 10 months ago
@Noisegator Your opinions stray far from the facts. Your opinions are no better than anyone else's and in this case worse because you do not even know what is true. You have a religious belief you made up called "there is no God" and your dogma will not allow you to even consider that you may be wrong when other smarter people than you or I knew the facts and wrote about them.
7777reasons 4 months ago
Alot of these scientists also do not posses the current knowladge that we do today. Under the light of new evidence about what we have found out about our universe, some of these scientists and great thinkers would change their posistion.
DjetGlea 1 year ago
@DjetGlea And so that is your considered opinion based on what DjetGlea? Where is your evidence? Of course there are many atheists who changed their position like Peter Hitchens for one. So maybe you are on to something. Except that we have EVIDENCE that Peter changed HIS position which is lacking in your statement.
7777reasons 4 months ago
this just goes to show any athiest scientists that religion does not hold back science it only pushes it to even greater momentum
ARKSOLDIER7 1 year ago
@ARKSOLDIER7 i doubt "god" is leaking answers to the universe to the scientists, religion doesnt help science.. but i do agree it doesnt deter it either
nadernade11 1 year ago
@nadernade11 well the Bible does tell us that God told them how to cure some forms of leprousy or skin diseases many more alements in leviticus in leviticus, you probably will have a hard time noting things out considering I use a new living translation but I'll tell you chapter 11 "ceremonially unclean animals" 12 "purification after child birth" 13 "skin diseases" vs 47-59 "treatment of contaminated clothing" 14 "cleansing from skin diseases" 15 "bodily discharges"
ARKSOLDIER7 1 year ago
99% of these quote mined guys he calls scientists didn't have the ability to be nonreligious since they lived in a time of the inquisition. They lived in a time period where they would have been burned to death for their beliefs notice how today most Scientists are not religious this is because they have an option to not be religious today. This video was obviously meant for people who already blindly believe not Atheists who actually know about truth.
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist This is why he did another video on 1900 to present. Many of these men, however, were from the late 1800's.
Liv2xplore 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Liv2xplore " This is why he did another video on 1900 to present."
Was Kent Hovind in it LOL!
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@Liv2xplore I just watched it and it was another fallacious appeal to authority like this one. what he needs to do is find one scientist who can prove the claims of his cult.
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist Like atheists using Richard Dawkins? Honestly, I really don't care what you think, if God sat down beside you and handed the scientific proof to you, you'd say it was a hoax. If Moses parted the waters in front of you, you'd claim atmospheric pressure. If you saw Jesus heal a blind man, you'd say his problem was psychological. So any argument brought to you is wasted. I'll spend my time with people interested in hearing about hope, not hate.
Liv2xplore 1 year ago
@Liv2xplore You just don't understand do you? This video is flawed because it is a fallacy It supposes that X is true because smart person Z is a member of X. Needless to say majority rules doesn't work in mental institutions. Find a person to Prove X and not just claim it...
"I'll spend my time /interested in hearing about hope, not hate."
You're the only one Hating Truth. Your cult is the epitome of hatred and bigotry. You just want someone who mindlessly agrees with your bullshit propaganda.
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist My "cult"? I'm okay with that word. No, I don't want someone to mindlessly agree with my bullshit propaganda. I want someone that will look at the teachings of the Bible and the teaching of the secular world (yours) and ask questions about them both. I've seen how religion has been used for oppression and I believe they would have used anything to oppress. Race, religion, family background, anything will work when you want it to.
Liv2xplore 1 year ago
@Liv2xplore "My "cult"?" You haven't proven any of your claims so yes your cult. Or I should say the cult you are a member of.
" I want someone that will look at the teachings of the Bible and the teaching of the secular world (yours) and ask questions about them both."
I spent the majority of my life in your closed minded cult. I spent too much time reading your pointless poorly written primitive mindless book. Religion is a virus a disease. You can't see it because you are infected with fear
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist Your ignorance is swelling with each post. Try reading Peter Hitchens Rage Against God and come back and talk to us okay? Or perhaps Bill Murray's book where he rejected the teachings of his mother realizing they were simply another form of religion.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@Liv2xplore "someone that will look at the teachings of the Bible and the teaching of the secular world (yours) and ask questions about them both"
Would you ask questions of Alice in wonderland and your world view and try to ask questions about them both? BTW the world is secular since there is no God You know how I know because you can't even coherently define this god let alone prove that it exists. You're just preaching the white rabbit to me. One day you may wake up and be a part of reality
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist I can see that you've chose your path, and from your page, I'd say it is laced with hatred of anything reverent. Go ahead and check if you haven't, I have very little on my page because I live outside my computer. I didn't start out looking to convert you to theism, and I still don't really care what you think. But I do agree with UNFFwildcard, you ARE a tool. Peace be with you. I pray you learn to deal with your hate and addictions constructively.
Liv2xplore 1 year ago
@Liv2xplore Yes. And now it has been the totalitarian atheists like Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tse Tung who used anything to oppress people and truth. Atheists cannot look at both sides of an argument because it would disturb their status quo and revisionist history.
7777reasons 4 months ago
Comment removed
Liv2xplore 1 year ago
Comment removed
Liv2xplore 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist
I've been reading the comments you've posted on this video and elsewhere.
You're a real fucking tool, aren't you?
Don't you find it somewhat pathetic that you define yourself by what you're not?
UNFFwildcard 1 year ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@UNFFwildcard "You're a real fucking tool, aren't you?
I'm a tool of truth unlike your poorly produced videos riddled with fallacies
Don't you find it somewhat pathetic that you define yourself by what you're not?"
I find it pathetic that you try to define your God by what its not. Since you have no coherent definition for it at all we can only default to it not existing..
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@UNFFwildcard You're right, he is a tool. He's a sad, little tool of the secular world that can be found on campus's everywhere. He's a follower of his own pride and hate. There are many like him, and they say the same crappy arguments, over and over again.
Liv2xplore 1 year ago
@Liv2xplore "He's a follower of his own pride and hate."
I'm pride is better than being a debased immoral Christian who oppresses the world and hates everyone they can't brainwash into their cult. Sad you are just so sad I was just like you once. I'm just happy I'm free from that never ending nightmare..
GodKillerAtheist 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist OH yes. Mother Theresa, Mark Buntain, Albert Schweitzer were wicked people weren't they? On the other hand atheistic countries like Kim Jong Il in North Korea, STalin in Russia, Mao Tse Tung in China were saints and did SO MUCH for people didn't they? You are so blind you change history to suit your atheistic religious beliefs.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@UNFFwildcard wow pretty crazy how you seperate christians from like lutherans, catholics and methodists
Vlaxerman343 1 year ago
@GodKillerAtheist You should look up the timeframe of the inquisition. The first was from 1480-1834. The second began about the mid-20th Century with your dogmatic worldview burning at the stake anyone who dare contend with it. Then again, it was the radical atheists who committed the greatest genocides in world history, so I suppose this is not uncharted territory, your intolerance.
blogbat 6 months ago
@blogbat
" The second began about the mid-20th Century"
You mean late 19th century. The 20th century is 1901-2000
"your dogmatic worldview burning at the stake anyone"
Um, I'm an Atheist I have no dogma. Perhaps you confused me for a christian they are known for burning people at the stake.
"atheists who committed the greatest genocides in world history"
You mean like the dark ages, the inquisitions, ww2, Thirty years war, the crusades, Taiping Rebellion...etc Oh no that was you!
GodKillerAtheist 6 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Nope, meant mid-20th Century. Yep, you're a dogmatic Atheist. Welcome to reality, kiddo. Nope, I mean far worse: the genocide of over 100 million by Stalin, Mao (and later dictators), Pol Pot, the Kim family, et al.
blogbat 6 months ago
@blogbat "Nope, meant mid-20th Century" So I guess that means you admit you're an idiot?
"Yep, you're a dogmatic Atheist" Again I ask what dogma do I have to follow? Atheists don't have dogma. It's probably the soul property of being an Atheist.
"Stalin, Mao /, Pol Pot, the Kim family" None of those are Atheist
Stalin was Orthodox Christian, Mao was Buddhist, Pol Pot was Tao, Kim follow ancestor worship. I've yet to see any one murder for a lack of belief in the claims of cults such as yours
GodKillerAtheist 6 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Their all atheist. They made up their own beliefs just like you do on the spur of every moment you live.
7777reasons 6 months ago
@7777reasons Um made up their own beliefs? NO no sorry sad soul Atheists view the natural world for what it is they don't have to make up anything because it's right there in their face. Theists on the other hand do have to make up everything since they have no evidence to prove their magic indeterministic slaver in the clouds just blind faith.The insane keep doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. That's what reading the bible is all about
GodKillerAtheist 6 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist So the "insane" keep doing the same thing? You are calling yourself, INSANE? Wow what an admittance. You all give the same old opinions and revisionist history of the world. You throw away Mother Theresa and Stalin because it suits your dogma to do so. You take your opinion of truth and believe it.... DOGMA! Can you name ONE good thing Christians have done? When in reality most of the western world which did have a Christian perspective is where most advancements were made.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist I listed SOME of your dogma elsewhere. You just don't write it down. You rage against Christians whether they have a point or not. You have no recognition of any truth except your own. Here endeth the second list of Atheistic Dogma. [Ever heard about the dyslexic atheist? He carried a sign that said, " There is no Dog!"]
7777reasons 4 months ago
@blogbat So you think the inquisition was somewhere in the 1950's that would be mid 20th century. You need a history lesson. All the dictators you listed had one thing in mind and that was to gain military power, that surely was not caused by a lack of belief in Jesus. BTW China is a super power because of Mao. Some Still hold Stalin in great esteem. The USSR is still the USA's equal in some respect. Christians killed more than millions they had 2000 years to burn witches and heretics at a whim
GodKillerAtheist 6 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist You read too many atheistic versions of history. Try to get some balance in your life and you will find walking easier.
7777reasons 6 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist I see why you claim to be an atheist. You not only make up your own atheistic beliefs but you also change history to suit your beliefs. Did you know that was a common trait of the USSR until they fell due to their beliefs and ways they kept people down.
7777reasons 6 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Your revisionist history would be funny if it were not so childish. Try reading some good books that talk about true Christians who started public education, hospitals, universities, inventions to help the masses.... But then that might be dangerous for you since it may put your atheistic religious beliefs in disarray.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@blogbat Seriously you've got to be a lolz troll because no one is that stupid. Get a book or get a troll face because the only way you're succeeding in this debate is if you're trying to make me laugh.
GodKillerAtheist 6 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Wow you are such an arrogant atheist. Oh I forgot it is one of the tenet's of atheistic religion. "I'm smarter than everyone else living or dead." That is until you find out differently.
7777reasons 6 months ago
@7777reasons A religion of not believing in gods DAR? a religion of not having any religious dogma HURH? A religion of not having a religion DERP!
GodKillerAtheist 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist You do not even recognize your own bias or dogma. Your dogma is 1) all Christians are stupid 2) YOu are smarter than ALL Christians 3) You believe you are a freethinker when you can only think negatively about Christianity 4) You have less than 1% of the world's knowledge but claim you have all of it when you say "we will wake up and recognize the truth" 5) You have been sucked in by the most ancient of religions, called "no belief". a start ...
7777reasons 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Lol, wrong. You atheists are so ignorant of science, theology and religions (especially), and general common sense. Almost every single person listed have written extensive Bible commentaries that clearly reveal their deep love for Jesus Christ and the God's Word, so try again. Also there are TONS (thousands) of modern day scientist who believe in a literal 6 day Creation, here is a good link:
h ttp://creation.c om/scientists-of-the-past-who-believed-in-a-creator#modern
Devin82m 4 months ago
@Devin82m " Almost every single person listed have written extensive Bible commentaries"
List some of their commentaries then.
" there are TONS (thousands) of modern day scientist who believe in a literal 6 day Creation"
Okay who? I've only seen 3 and they are the front runners and main propagandists for creationism.
Personally I don't care if you people think your god is incompetent and can't design adaptive features into their creation. Honestly you're nothing but a joke to the majority.
GodKillerAtheist 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Atheist are willfully ignorant, just Google each one and the words "bible commentary" you will clearly see. Also you play the typical evolution preaching religious atheist by not going to the link I provided and looking at the list. Here let me provide a separate link as well: h ttp://ww w.answersingenesis.o rg/home/area/bios/ this too: h ttp://ww w.truenews.o rg/Creation_vs_Evolution/scientists.html Also the majority of the world believes a god of some sort created everything
Devin82m 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist In almost every country in the world the religion of atheism consist of only 2% or less of the population. Atheism is in the minority. Try doing the research on both sides of the argument instead of parroting professors and the atheist loosers here on YouTube who don't even know basic historical and philosophical facts. You are being intellectually dishonest if you don't review all sides of an argument, that is science after all. But you prefer to be ignorant and in control...
Devin82m 4 months ago
@Devin82m There's no religion of Atheism so that percent would be zero. Just as you are an Atheist regarding all other Gods and fairy tales I am an Atheist or nonbeliever in one more than you. I don't believe in your God because you've failed to produce any evidence to verify YOUR claim. I was a Christian for almost 20 years so yes I've seen both sides and your inability to recognize that fact is intellectually dishonest. The only LOSERS are the illiterate hordes of liars supporting fairy tales
GodKillerAtheist 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist LOL! You were no Christian, you may have claimed to be affiliated with some church, maybe you even attended one regularly, but you were no Christian. If you were tell me what it means to be a Christian without Googling it. Also what on the Creationist point of view have you looked into? Explain why you don't believe what they have to say. Also the polls don't like, only about 2% of the population in most countries are atheists, more may believe in evolution granted.
Devin82m 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist LOL! You were no Christian, you may have claimed to be affiliated with some church, maybe you even attended one regularly, but you were no Christian. If you were tell me what it means to be a Christian without Googling it. Also what on the Creationist point of view have you looked into? Explain why you don't believe what they have to say. Also the polls don't like, only about 2% of the population in most countries are atheists, more may believe in evolution granted.
Devin82m 4 months ago
@Devin82m " You were no Christian" Like I stated your inability to understand that FACT shows your intellectual dishonesty. So I guess this just reaffirms my previous statement. You are intellectually dishonest by your own admittance.
"what on the Creationist point of view have you looked into?"
All of them. Creationism is the belief that God is incompetent and so powerless it cannot create an organism with an ability to adapt to it's environment. Also creationist use evolution but deny it.
GodKillerAtheist 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Cute evasion, but you didn't answer either of my questions. Non sequitur. Your just lying to make it sound like you are unbiased and experience in both sides of the argument. Thanks for chatting this out, now every clearly sees you are ignorant, dishonest, deceptive, and a troll. That is exactly what I wanted to everyone to see, good job digging your hole.
Devin82m 4 months ago
@Devin82m Yes you're blaring intellectual dishonesty I stated clearly I was a christian for almost 20 years. You're ashamed that that's over half your life. Yes I am more experienced than you on either side. If experience makes one ignorant, dishonest and a deceptive troll then yes I guess so, but in reality things work much differently. My hole is in your head where your brain should be now go read something other than a religious fools book. Stop supporting the racist ideology of creationism
GodKillerAtheist 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Nothing you said changes the fact that you didn't answer my questions. You just keep appealing to your own authority with nothing to back it up except "I'm more experienced" give some substance and answer my questions instead of avoiding them. I'm saying your ignorant because you don't seem to know what a Christian is even though you claim to have been one. Let alone you can't even name a website, book, person related to Creationism that you read or listened to.
Devin82m 4 months ago
@Devin82m No you were the one calling me stupid, ignorant and a troll because you feel you know more. That my young inexperienced friend is called arrogance no matter how you would like to redefine it to suit your religious ideologies. I answered you, but you failed to read. Next time read and stop trying to make me the bad guy when your cult is the one that wages endless wars and mutilates the genitals of newborn babies. You support that NOT ME! Your apocalyptic world view is immoral.
GodKillerAtheist 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist I didn't use the word "stupid" As for you answering my 2 question, you did not. I asked what does it mean to be a Christian. I asked "If you were tell me what it means to be a Christian without Googling it" and "Also what on the Creationist point of view have you looked into? Explain why you don't believe what they have to say" You are the one poisoning the well and not providing anything to back it up. Also circumcision was for health/sanitary reasons.
Devin82m 4 months ago
@Devin82m I have links that completely disprove your stereotypical "Bible Errors" and other crap you guys like to fling like you just did. You love to throw things out without putting them in Biblical context to make God out to be some horrible monster who wants us to mutilate children. I'll tell you who mutilated children, atheists did, it's called abortion and so did atheist Nazis and Communists (still do). You just sound hateful and don't seem to be thinking straight because of that hate.
Devin82m 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist You are such a great salesman for atheism. We can see you love truth and love everybody especially yourself. However your insults and bad manners do not represent truth just your vision of it. So have you read Rage Against God yet, GKA? Don't be a hypocrite now and follow your OWN suggestions ....
7777reasons 4 months ago
@7777reasons I love when cultists can't refute anything stated and instead of acting like an adult and concede to the truth they instead demonize the person they fail to refute. The only rage I have is a lack of understanding of why you need to believe in foolishness and lies. I don't think you can even give anyone a coherent definition of your God so I could hate it. My only suggestion is that you read another book and really get educated stop mutilating kid's genitals end the holy wars ETC
GodKillerAtheist 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist You are one dogmatically religious atheistic bundle of confusion aren't you? That's okay we pray for you anyway.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Perhaps read Peter Hitchens Rage Against God would help you see the other side. Or Bill Murray's or C.S. Lewis. But then again if you did, it would disturb your religious world view. Your religion is simply your set of beliefs. If you have beliefs, you have a religion. Your God is yourself and other atheists. You believe them even when they are not making sense.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@GodKillerAtheist Your revisionist history is based on your biased opinion. To you truth is what YOU think. You have NO evidence for your opinion. We are supposed to just take it on faith.
7777reasons 4 months ago
nice video but what is the name of the song?
SuperGoat777 1 year ago
Ellasings7 1 year ago
@Tancred2008 Yeah, the difference being the protestants believing that they'll die being a martyr and go to heaven afterwards.
JohnWoo 1 year ago
I do not believe that a god who has endowed us with senses has intended us to forego their use - Galileo Galilei
You seemed to miss that..
johnjamo1 1 year ago 2
@johnjamo1 and where did you read that :3?
Scotish223332 1 year ago
Up until the 18th century, EVERYBODY was a theist, as science implied such. Upon the enlightment, there were a few atheists but theism dominated the scene. In 19th century there were both. But already in the 20th/21st century... almost any respectable scientist is, at the very least, agnostic.
bobsanders222 1 year ago
@bobsanders222 Revisionist history.
7777reasons 4 months ago
The Reformation showed that you could defy the Church and get away with it. Educated men were defying religion in the late 1600s and getting away with it (ie Lord Herbert of Cherbury, John Toland, etc) Yes, there was persecution, but history shows that dissenters of religion were willing to stand for their beliefs. To imply that the majority of great scientists during this era were closet atheists is absurd, arrogant, and historical revisionism.
Liezei 1 year ago 2
@CartesianTheist They could have said nothing? If they had said nothing, then the religious bigots would've won. Why wouldn't they want to correct people when they say the world was flat? Without them speaking out, we'd probably still be in the Christian dark age.
Regarding David Hume, he did not acknowledge his authorship of many of his works in this area until close to his death, and some were not even published until afterwards. Why did you think he needed to do that?
JohnWoo 1 year ago
Excellent. thanks for putting this together. One suggestion - I could have used a few more seconds to read each slide. God Bless!
shadow10325 1 year ago
very nice video, I almost didn't want to watch it but i forced myself and was pleasantly surprised. It is my opinion that some of those quotes aren't quite what they could be, like Louis Pasteur's quote. what piece is playing in the back?
cheers
sorrysonofa 1 year ago
I think most of this could be a video of scientists with awesome beards.
edcba321ful 1 year ago
google Doe's Account, its mindblowing.
Wintblash 1 year ago
Mostly people could get killed or punished by charging blasphemous entries to the Church in the middle ages/medieval age. Most scientific people are not brave enough to claim that god does not exist, fearing punishments and worse, corporal mortification. Hence, atheists in those times are either "not coming out of the closet" or in "hiding'', or following the church. Let alone the church was the most powerful authority in those times, not even the kings or leaders could stop them
ParacelsusXXXHadas 1 year ago
@ParacelsusXXXHadas Or you could just accept the fact the most major scientistic people and most logical are christians in that time. . .and stop trying too find loop holes and cracks.
Scotish223332 1 year ago
What a great video! I too see science as a method of discovering God. I thought the music to be very classy and fitting as well. Now, where is Einstein in this video? Why was Einstein left out?
1971SuperLead 1 year ago
@1971SuperLead Actually Albert Einstein did not literally say that he believes in the "literal" definition of god. He believes in the idealism of Benedict (or in some cases he was called "Baruch") Spinoza's concept of God. Meaning, "God" is an incomprehensible and mysterious energy that arouses fear on people, hence creates the concept of religion. Here's an excerpt from his literary piece "This I Believe" stating that he is truly a religious man:
"To know that what is impenetrable to us really
ParacelsusXXXHadas 1 year ago
@ParacelsusXXXHadas I agree with you that Einstein did not believe in any kind of conventional God. he did not believe in a "personal God" He did however, believe in an intelligence beyond human intelligence that was responsible for the manifestation of the universe and it's laws. He believed in life after death and he believed in the necessary progress of mankind's spiritual awareness..
1971SuperLead 1 year ago
@1971SuperLead (continuation)
manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms---this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness. In this sense, and this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men."
-Take heart.
-R.
ParacelsusXXXHadas 1 year ago
Interesting video. It made me wonder...
There is a great disbelief amonst christians when it comes to scientific theories (big bang and the evolution probabely being the most denied). When you think that these theories were actually conceived by theists it's kind of strange. Especially since the 2 most denied by christians were thought of by christians :s. The fundy christian made separation between "evolutionists" (those who accept science in general) and christians just doesn't make sense :s.
TakesTwoToTango 1 year ago
@TakesTwoToTango Both ways are possible. But I think the evidence is on the side of evolution WITHIN a species but not creating new species which would make other laws like entropy invalid when it is all around us. In life things go from complex to simple, like rotting flesh becomes molecules of matter in the earth. But Some would like us to think that by a series of accidents the simple became more complex. If true, I say bombard Down's Syndrome kids with cosmic rays and see if it works.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@7777reasons Which both ways? I never mentioned 2 "ways". And either you really don't know what you're talking about, or you're a troll. I'll just assume the first. 1) the earth is not a closed system, so the second law doesn't apply. 2) there is no difference between evolution within a secies and speciation. The word "species" is a vague manmade term. And I don't see how "macroevolution" would break any physical law that "microevolution" wouldn't.
TakesTwoToTango 4 months ago
(continued) 3) the physical entity "disorder" isn't even defined when it comes to biological systems. "Complex" means something else in biology, it means "higher up the evolutionary ladder" by definition.
4) If you really understood anything about biology, you'd realize how freaking rediculous that idea is. Your cosmic ray joke is just absurde, and is completely irrelevant to down's syndrome.
Quit believing everything you read from socalled christians on the internet. And NEVER give them money
TakesTwoToTango 4 months ago
Yeah, what was the consequences of admitting to be an atheist back in the 1500 again?
Oh yeah, being labeled a heretic could get you KILLED back in those days. No wonder they're "Christians".
JohnWoo 1 year ago
Atheists cannot be heretics.
UNFFwildcard 1 year ago
@UNFFwildcard
How so?LOL. What kind of laughable arrogance do you have to have, to deny the nature of existance..and to not attribute any credit to substance and design?!!!!LOL. How big of a dipshit do you have to be to try to reason the "unreasonable" infinity?!!!!LOL. Enough with this "atheist" non-sense. No one is an atheist..bu many are pissed of at certain people who associate themselves with an idialogy, as if we can't think for OURSELVES..LOL.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@UNFFwildcard Thank you UNFF for pointing that out, atheist people just want to complain and tell lies all the damn time. Now they are saying all these great and famous scientist were forced to be Christians. LOL. It never fails.
jokericon00 1 year ago
@JohnWoo
Let's take a look at the term "atheist". Comes from the Greek "atheos", which esentially denies existance. How exactly to you practice science as a disbeliever?LOL. Much is "assumed" about Christianity, but little do people like yourself know, that the advanced Greek world of eastern Rome/Byzantium embraced Christianity for it's sentiment. Sentiment isn't a science..just as the subjective experience isn't a science. For example, the arts have no reason to be valuabl..but ARE.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@Vasilis719 The word atheos actually means "without god" in Greek. And why can't people practice science without god? Where is the connection? I was a Christian for over 30 years until I deconverted last year, so I don't assume anything about Christianity, I have first hand experience. What you just wrote doesn't make any sense at all.
JohnWoo 1 year ago
@JohnWoo You can practise science without God. However with him you can practise it better IMHO. Most advancements in the world to help people have come from Christianity. Hospitals, public schools so the masses could get education and improve their lot in life, universities at least in Western countries were all originally setup by Christians. Mother Theresa or Kim Jong Il. Look at South Korea where many are Christian and N. Korea, an atheistic nation .... who made more progress?
7777reasons 4 months ago
@Vasilis719 Your opinion is a sentiment. It is the way you feel. Since you did not live back then you cannot prove what you say. You have to rely on the historical records which would not support your hypothesis. Your sentiments betray you.
7777reasons 4 months ago
@7777reasons
My "sentiment"?LOL. The ABSOLUTE FACT that existance has a source, defintion, and recognition is a "sentiment"?!!!!!LOLOLOL. YOUR A COMPLETE BAFOON..:((((((
Vasilis719 4 months ago
@johnwoo
First of all.. I'm GREEK, and don't need linguistic interpretations about my native language. Secondly, let's define "God". God is the the force of existance in substance, design, and ability of free thought and will. Do you STILL have a hard time understanding that without the just mentioned, science doesn't exist?!!!!. Or ANYTHING for that matter?!!!!. While science is the study of "how", religion asks "why". "atheos" is in fact a denial of the force of existance. Quite ridiculousLOL
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@Vasilis719 Wow, you have so many things messed up it's not even funny. First you defined god as the Christian god, and now you defined it as forces of nature? Come on, you can do better than that. Haha.
JohnWoo 1 year ago
@johnwoo
Wow, you a really slow minded person..LOL. I "denied" God?!!!LOL. I said God IS the force of nature, and everything else in existance..while you claimed "science" to exist independant of "God", which is the designer behind design, and the creator behind substance. Didn't science teach the basic principles of thought?..LOL. You tell me who has things "messed up"..LOL.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@johnwoo..PART 2
"Christian God" and "force of nature" exist seperately?..LOL. Apparently you don't know Christianity(after some 30 years as a so-called "Christian"..LOL), and know "Nature" as existing without a designer, but design..without a creator, but substance?LOL. Your a trully slow brained individual..LOL. God is infinity, yet you try to use finite restrictions to deny him..LOL. Your environment has failed you..LOLOLOLOL.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@Vasilis719 You haven't got a clue what you're talking about. You're just slapping the god label on the widest range as possible. What is it that you can't wrap your head around that things don't always need to have a designer? Can't you tell the difference between naturally occurring patterns and design specific patterns?
Anyway, I'm not gonna be drawn in to an immature name-calling contest with you as I always see it as a sign of victory when they start using ad hominem.
JohnWoo 1 year ago
p.s. Adding "LOL" to arguments doesn't make them any truer, it might hide the holes in your argument among kids your age, but any critical thinker can see right through it. Which reminds me that I'm not gonna waste any more time debating on this subject because your arguments are so weak that I don't think I'll get anything out of it.
JohnWoo 1 year ago
@johnwoo..PART 1
Adding LOL is an expression of "laughing out loud", and there is nothing more comical than recognizing existance, bit denying the force that makes it possible and sustainable. PERIOD.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@johnwoo..PART 2
Certainly you've been defined as "slow", and you have also been shown what makes that a fact.
"God label"?!!. The finite comes from the infinite, and is nothing but a portion of a no beginning, abd no ending infinitude. For the finite to exist, move, sustain, and form any kind of patterns comes from the very thing that you deny..and the very thing that is ungraspable, unreasonable, and makes existance exist. Victory?!!!!LOL. You certainly are a dreamer..LOL.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@johnwoo..LASTLY
Not sure what a "hominem" is..is that "Eminem's" rapper cousin?LOL. A "homonym" is a Greek word meaning "two words that mean the same thing"..LOL. Not only is your spelling particularly funny, since you tried to use a laughably mispelled word to your advanatge..but you tried to compare WHOLE phrases and definitions as "homonym"..or "hominem", as you wrote it..LOL. ENOUGH SAID. THE END..LOLOLOLOLOL.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@Vasilis719 "Ad hominem" is Latin, genius. *facepalm
JohnWoo 1 year ago
@JohnWoo
Hmm..let's see; if your "Latin" is anything like your "Greek"..we can safely assume that it makes no difference..and that I guess my sarcastic belittlement of your trying to use pointless distractions, makes the "victor"(as you said) QUITE CLEAR.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
@Vasilis719 Tsk tsk tsk. Well, if you insist, here's your cookie, Buttercup. ;)
JohnWoo 1 year ago
@JohnWoo Also, there was so little to disprove god back then. Whereas now........*flashy motage showing evidence*
And someone tell the guy bellow that atheists were considered heretics, people who "stood against god(s)"! Ohhh! Evil people! raawr!
Uzzie101 1 year ago
@JohnWoo Perhaps they were just more open-minded than you? Is that possible? Perhaps some of the ancient freethinkers. They did certainly know how to think better than most of us. God loves everybody regardless of our beliefs or our stupidity. Sounds like a good model to follow.
7777reasons 6 months ago
Assume you're a microbiologist in the area of stem cell research does you fundamental Christian beliefs help or hurt your work in the lab?
I submit that to the extent you pay attention to it, it hinders or stops your work.
The magic is the antithesis of science unless it is ignored or is simply outside the area of inquiry. So a scientist studying the chemistry of soda pop may be safe from religious conflict..Oh wait... unless he's a Mormon.
dimbulb23 1 year ago
There is GOD ! and SCIENCE is the study that explains the work of the GOD ALMIGHTY.....
neverlosttrak 1 year ago
In the history of Western thought there is a progression from believing in many gods such as in classical times, to believing in only a few such as in Christianity, to believing in none. The human race will soon mature to the point that it can leave its supernatural fantasies in the past.
luvdomus 1 year ago
Well, they said that they believed in God and I'm sure that most of them did. But you have to consider that for a long time in Europe, the only way to become man of knowledge, it was to be an active member of the Church.
As for somebody to express disbelief in God in those times, they wouldn't be allowed to keep their heads, let alone to study the mysteries of the Universe.
Just think about it.
pmnichols10 2 years ago 9
While apostasy was considered a sub-division of heresy at times, I am not aware that it was punishable by death. In the Byzantine empire there were certain declarations that made it so, but that's not the RCC. You still have a valid point, but that's also why I made 1900-present.
UNFFwildcard 2 years ago
I just did a five minute research, and in one of the articles the author (?) says that the secular penalty for heresy was inescapably death, however if rescued by the holy inquisition the defendant would have a way to escape death by showing repentance.
Either by the church or the state, the threat of death (by no means quick and painless) would be enough to turn any atheist in to an hypocrite.
pmnichols10 2 years ago
@pmnichols10
Take up your argument withH uman error and free will..not God. As we have seen with so-called "atheistic" communism..violence is common practice as well. Where there is light, somewhere there's darkness, where there's good, somewhere there is evil..but only one can be constructive as a result..good. "Principles" are not a science, and not necessarily the easiest thing to practice..or to do righ; but it either is something you believe in or not. PERIOD.
Vasilis719 1 year ago
yeah but darwin's theory challenged the religious belief that every creature was created fully formed by god, no? how could he have believed both?
watty024 2 years ago
The scientists in the vid are from a bygone era-- Einstein, Hawking, Sagan or Dawkins--all non-believers-- are more representative of today''s scientists. Nothing wrong with Medeivel thinking (except for the Inquisition, Crusades, witch-burning, et al) but we've come a long way since then, or should have. Today's concepts of God are more like Hindu-Buddhist abstractions than the literalism of religious conservatives who are anti-science. There is no 'authority' on the supernatural.
luvdomus 2 years ago
@luvdomus that is pretty stupid thing to say. Today's scientists could not do what they do today without those who worked tirelessly in those yesteryears. Today's scientists are standing on the shoulders of those "giants" = "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye shoulders of Giants." --Isaac Newton. Don't be a fool and think that today's scientists don't dip into the established science of your so-called "bygone era". You really have no idea what your talking about.
DJsStratoArt 2 years ago
@DJsStratoArt Modern science is free of the superstition of the past, not based on Papal edicts, mysticism, alchemy, astrology or Holy Writ. The anceint Classical Greco-Roman world started Western civilization off in the right direction scientifically, interrupted by a long (1000 year) pause while gods and devils ran rampant through men's minds, and then righting itself once again during the Enlightenment (late 1700's) until today. Religion's role today is as a psychological tranquilizer.
luvdomus 2 years ago
You have it backwards. That 1000 year period you mention was dominated by Platonic/Aristotlian metaphysics that were the antithesis of anything we recognize today as proper science. Greco/Roman natural philosophy was fundamentally flawed, and it was Christian Europe that corrected it.
Your statement is the fruit of a retired conflict thesis combined with a personal ignorance over what science was in the ancient world. There was nothing inherrently wrong in exploring alchemy and astrology.
UNFFwildcard 2 years ago
The Christian Dark Ages were "dominated by Platonic/Aristotilan metaphysics" because they believed in received wisdom and revelation through ancient scripture, not reason. Euclid, Eratosthenes, Archimedes and others discovered workable natural principles through observation. Superstition perpetuated by authoritarians drags any civilization down, clear thinking builds them up. The Christian right attacks science because they claim the right to define the world but have lost credibility.
luvdomus 2 years ago
Any belief in recieved wisdom and revelation has nothing to do with adopting Aristotlian metaphysics - it is about developing theories on the nature of theory; of developing constructs about what the universe is and how one may come to understand it. The Greeks believed that perfect wisdom will come to perfect understanding of the universe. If the early Christians believed that recieved wisdom and revelation will grant them better understanding, that WAS through Greek reason.
UNFFwildcard 2 years ago
Theology in turn was linked with natural philosophy because Christians adopted Aristotle's four causes as the means of understanding. It was not through overcoming superstition but by overcoming Aristotle's fourth cause did science in Europe flourish.
UNFFwildcard 2 years ago
In olden times it was REQUIRED for you to believe in the culturally accepted god-- failure to profess believe could get you killed, so of course it was not something you would be allowed to question, even within your own mind. Today, we are freer to think, and belief in god and the supernatural is plummeting, especially among scientists, only a minority of whom cling to the primitive religion of the past.
luvdomus 2 years ago