Eevryone who is interested in the topic of belief might be interested to check out Morty Lefkoe's blog. The guy has a super simple explanation for why we believe the things we do, and he actually has a technique to eliminate beliefs. I learned his technique and it's INCREDIBLE. With it, I can literally make somebody stop believing in their God in about 30 minutes or so.
Let’s work to eradicate all religion. Conversely, begin a relationship with Jesus Christ today. You need to repent of your immoral ways of living. Yes, you. Moreover, you should ask God for eternal forgiveness through applying the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to your life of sin within the quietness of your bedroom tonight. As an unrepentant sinner myself, I made this decision around 15 years ago. This is the most important decision that you could ever make. - Romans 10:9-10
@paularenas26, you are leaving this same comment on multiple videos. I've never erased a comment or blocked anyone, but I must admit you are tempting me. If you wish someone to do do all of these things, you should provide either evidence or logical argument to support such notions. In short, say something of worth or post your spam elsewhere.
I agree with you completely, but I do understand why someone would dare believe such a claim. Fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of what comes after death, fear of the possibility that if you don't believe, you will burn for eternity in Hell. Sure, there might not be any evidence. But why take the chance?
But again, I cannot just sit there and accept such insane ideas without evidence. I've tried, and I can't. I take the evidence and personal experience I have and draw a conclusion from that.
@delusionaldragon42, true. Beyond this though, such reasons are also fallacious (appeals to fear and consequence). Even the statement "But why take the chance?" alludes to a false dichotomy.
@naejimba precisely. delusionaldragon42 is effectively citing Pascal's wager, which is an argument built upon a false dichotomy. One response to Pascal's wager, perhaps the most asinine philosophical argument I've ever heard, is to simply add an additional column. Which is to say, conceive of a god who does the inverse of the "classic" god. There is no basis to say one is more valid than the other, hence the end result is neutral.
I do agree, but many are trained to think how they want to think. In one of my books, I added a bannen book from the bible in it. Why they keep that stuff from us in behond me. When a christan agrues with me, I come up with the arguent if God created all things why are there such things as cancer? Then they shut up.
@UnexpectedWonder Except science has evidence. What you call macroevolution (which is just microevolution over hundreds of thousands of generations) actually has evidence.
convince others of God's existence because I want them to know the love I feel and the worth I have for myself, I want them to meet the most amazing person in the universe who interacted in a very real way about 2000 years ago and lived a life of humbleness, nails put in his hands and feet, attached to cross to die, for no reason, other than his love for each and every person on this planet, then raised again! surely that's evidence? who could deny that, why would people believe it if not true?
pray for the sick, bind up the broken hearted, set the captives free, look after this planet and all peoples, giving them worth and meaning, using my life to give rest to the weary, welcome the stranger, even love those who would hate me for what I do and/or believe. Care for those who have no-one to care for them, teach those who wish to learn, all for the cause of love, sharing my food, my heart, my mind and my body, always serving people, and loving them as Christ loves me. I only try to...
And what I find most funny is that people say 'oh, well science hasn't discovered the answers to some of those questions yet' but tbh I know it won't ever 'find' the answers because it's impossible, science's final answer "it's random, everything's random" (and therefore meaningless, some people might add - sounds like book of ecclesiastes to me), and tbh randomness doesn't make sense to human beings, without God life is meaningless. As for me, I'll love everyone I come accross, feed hungry,..
Do you expect to bottle God up in a test tube, add a little acid and "yes, positive result! God's in the test tube"? Naturally you wouldn't. Science is all about discovery and keeping an open mind. I'm not going to try to convince anyone but as for me I can't help but wonder, what sustains the physical forces (strong, weak, electro-magnetic, gravity)? and what made the universe, what continues to sustain it? Why do so many people testify to a God and some claim healings? Why would they bother?
Lol, funny video. I found it amusing. It seemed to suggest there was no 'empirical' evidence for God. Why would people claim to have met God, and seen amazing things he's done? (both bible and modern day answers to prayer act as evidence towards this being true) Why would anyone believe them? Is that not a little evidence? people can be convincted of crimes from only a few testimonies, testimonies about the presence of God are far more, people who 'claim' to have been healed by God too.
@jabbaquar, "It seemed to suggest there was no 'empirical' evidence for God." If you found that "amusing" then let me plainly state that there is no such evidence. Also, your notion of the bible and supposed answers to prayer serving as evidence, according to that logic I could simply use the quaran and muslim's supposed answered prayers as "evidence" of allah. Not only is such a thing circular reasoning, but both of them can't be true. Also, a testamony is not evidence.. (cont)
(cont) it is a testamony. "I can't help but wonder, what sustains the physical forces (strong, weak, electro-magnetic, gravity)? and what made the universe, what continues to sustain it?" There is nothing wrong at all with such questions, but I think to assume that it is something of which there is no proof is a leap in logic. "Why do so many people testify to a God and some claim healings?" I think it says something more about humanity than anything else. You could ask, (cont 2)
(cont 2) 'why do so many people testify to see bigfoot/aliens/ghosts/etc?' but to use this as an argument for belief is an appeal to popularity. "science's final answer "it's random, everything's random" (and therefore meaningless.." I'm sorry, but apparently you have some misunderstanding concerning science. Also, simply because there is not a "god" does not magically mean everything we give meaning to no longer has any meaning. Interestingly, (cont 3)
(cont 3) later on you are implying that you only value existence and feel "worth" for yourself because you believe in god. "surely that's evidence? who could deny that, why would people believe it if not true?" Evidence is something that is demonstrable, that serves as proof. No such evidence has been provided, and merely because one makes a claim, the claim itself does not serve as evidence. Also, to the part about (cont 4)
(cont 4) "..why would people believe it if not true?" then explain why people believe in other deities you do not think exist (Zeus, Krishna, Anubis, etc), explain lockness monster/aliens/etc.
@naejimba I'll be honest with you, I don't really care what you think, obviously I'd prefer you to believe and meet God, but as I said you don't have to, it's your loss. I'd personally view bible as evidence, mainly because there are hundreds of prophecies that Jesus fulfills, including ones he had no control over such as being born in bethlehem. Likewise if people claim to be healed from cancer and can prove it, which most can then, if you can be bothered go and meet them, then...
@jabbaquar (cont) I'd see that as proof, don't see why you wouldn't. And how many muslims can prove to be healed from cancer, or can suddenly walk again, or something similar? At least muslims have what I'd call the old testament so they have something in common. Plus I disagree with you, testimonies count as evidence, and they become stronger evidence when linked with thousands of people who also saw miracles/God or if a hundred people saw someone murdered then you'd believe them...
(cont 2) There is absolutely nothing that explains the fundemental forces of the universe, that's why they are fundemental, they simply 'exist', why? how? well there's no reason. Creation of universe, scientists believe came from nothing, even looking for higgs boson doesn't fill the gap whether existing or not. The universe just started, why? how? no reason, we can explain all the how the few milliseconds after start but not the start. The reason I don't believe we ever will prove..
@jabbaquar (cont 3) it, is because science keeps coming to conclusion that forces just exist, (and if they were much different universe wouldn't exist), and universe itself just came into being, no cause. So what's my mis-understanding concerning science? Do you have any evidence to back up this opinion? Are you at the very least a student of science, or maybe better still a professor and re-searcher? The conclusion of quantum physics, that I have studied is that everything is random,
(cont4) it just happens, doesn't make any sense neither (which is pretty much definition of randomness, unpredictable, no order, chaos), and frankly it's not random because we haven't found all the answers yet, it's actually proven to be random, and only by linking the random events in certain ways can we create predictable results. If the universe is random, the logical step it that everything in universe is random, and therefore you are random, you were born and you'll die, so what
(cont 5) is the meaning for your life then? pleasure perhaps? the savings of riches? why bother having children, they're certainly a hassle, I doubt they'll contribute to your sense of meaning. As for aliens/ghosts/other gods/big foot/ lockness monster etc, the last two have been proven to not exist, and no-one believes in them, all the others show that people know there's something more to life than this one world. Aliens and ghosts, whether existing or not, don't explain anything...
(cont 6) they don't explain creation of universe, reason for life etc, and only a few individuals say they've met them, not whole massive groups of people, all at once, who even go to extent of 'claiming' to be healed, which has stunned many doctors, go and find these people if you're interested. As for other gods, the only real contenders (so to speak) to christianity are jews and muslims, and they all share old-testament, which has many prophecies that only Jesus fulfills. other...
gods as far as I remember tend to either no/few people claiming to ever met them, nor can any of their claims be proven (no golden fleece, minatours, and other such things). However Jesus is known to have existed, known to have been crucified, and his body is known to have gone missing (otherwise authorities would have shown it to crush believers), people have claimed to be healed, many can prove it with medical reports, and why would anyone go all over the earth being persecuted...
(cont 8) killed, beaten, giving away all possessions, in the name of love, loving everyone, being kind to everyone they meet, in the name of Jesus, unless they themselves saw Jesus after he came back from dead, if they just thought 'maybe he's been brought back to life' then they wouldn't have gone to places put in jails, crucified etc, only if they were totally sure would they have. Why would you do a youtube video to argue against God anyway? if it's all fairytales why bother?
(cont 9) and the only position you can really be sure of is "maybe God exists, maybe he doesn't, maybe these people are right, maybe they're not" and "I do not believe God exists, nor do I believe God doesn't, because I can't be sure, it hasn't been proven to me yet, and I either have no interest in finding out if God exists or not or I will search out and thourougly study all Gods just in case one proves to be real" because that's you're only viable position.
@jabbaquar, true, but we could discuss what one thinks the probability of a claim is. Technically, you can not be sure that faeries or the easter bunny does not exist, but this does not mean one is required to give such claims any special attention, nor does it mean you have to spend years of research on the matter. However, you must realize I have been exploring the matter in depth for the majority of my life (whether christian or non-theist).
@jabbaquar, I could make a counter argument using the 9/11 hijackers; they literally blew themselves to bits, and they never "met" mohammed or allah. They were as sure of what they believed as one can be, but that says nothing of the truth of the claims being made. "if it's all fairytales why bother?" Well, no one tries to get 'jack and the beanstalk' taught in a science classroom, it doesn't say 'one nation under jack and the beanstalk' on our money, no president claims to be making (cont)
(cont) decisions based upon 'jack and the beanstalk,' no one comes knocking on my door to ask me about my belief in 'jack and the beanstalk,' nor do they leave pamphlets on my windshield, no one claims I am immoral for not believing in 'jack and the beanstalk,' etc. etc.
@jabbaquar, first, how many people have "met" god? Second, this would be an appeal to popularity. Next, none of the grand claims of christianity can be proven either (noah's flood, jonah and the 'big fish,' virgin birth, resurrection from the dead, talking donkeys, etc.) From a historical perspective, we don't "know" jesus existed (although it is not improbable); many people claim many things (which proves nothing and is an appeal to popularity again).
@jabbaquar, aliens and ghosts don't have to explain things like the creation of the universe, neither do trees or cars, for example. What is your point? Also, claims of things like ghosts and aliens are quite a bit more common than you are portraying. Beyond this, your idea that all other religions besides three can be dismissed is unfounded and intellectually dishonest.
@jabbaquar, just because one does not believe in god does not make one a nihilist, just because there is not some "grand purpose" to life does not mean one's life cannot have meaning. How have big foot and the lockness monster been disproven?
@jabbaquar, "and frankly it's not random because we haven't found all the answers yet" (argument from ignorance). "If the universe is random, the logical step it that everything in universe is random, and therefore you are random, you were born and you'll die, so what" I have already given two examples of things which are not merely "random."
@jabbaquar, "So what's my mis-understanding concerning science?" The ideas that "it's all just random," or "there is no cause"... I have never heard any scientist word things that way; it is a straw man. I am no expert, but simple things like diamonds and snowflakes are not "random," they are ordered. These two examples disprove your blanket statement.
@jabbaquar, well, simply because we do not currently know something, it gives no validity to your claim. If one were to state that it did, this would be an "argument from ignorance."
@jabbaquar, testimony does count as evidence, but only in legal matters (which is quite different). Also, the number of people might be worth noting, but if this is presented as an argument as to why one should believe, it would be an appeal to popularity.
@jabbaquar, well, first, using the bible as evidence would be circular logic. Also, no one is doubting that sometimes people overcome conditions such as cancer.. it is merely what one attributes this to that is a matter of debate. Also worth noting, is that every major religion has these claims, if we are to accept yours as true, you must explain this.
@naejimba You do not have to give the claim that God exists any thought at all, it's just your loss if you don't. Many people have died and been killed in an act of anger and revenge, many others are forced to and/or manipulitated to harm others this could easily include some people who call themselves 'christians', but how many people died in an act of love? The early christians cetainly did, did they want to die? no, but they allowed others to harm them because they wanted to share..
@jabbaquar love. Did they try to harm others out of 'religios belief'? no, they didn't. They were persecuted for loving others and God, more recently Martin Luther King diid a similar thing, he stood up for what God believes in, loving everyone as yourself, no divisions. If testimony is evidence in legal matters surely it as evidence as to whether God exists of not, if even a small group of 20 people claimed that one of them had been instantaneously healed, surely that's worth...
@jabbaquar thinking about? If even 1 person who prayed and was actually healed by God, whatever religion, then surely there is reason to believe in a God. If even one person has actually 'met' God, then you'd have a reason to believe, if you thought even one of the people who have 'met' God is trustworthy. And you keep talking about 'appeal to popularity' as if it's a terrible thing, well firstly there are more athiests than christians, secondly what's popular is generally because...
@jabbaquar most people have found reason for thinking it's right, or would like to believe in something, or haven't thought about it and therefore fallen under the same category, so 'appeal to popularity' would work in your favour not mine, however as you said it's no reason for you to agree with them, it's your life and your choice, I just know that God exists, I'm one of these 'crazy' people who say they've met him, I'd say I'm even in love with him, and him me.
@jabbaquar Yes, diamonds and snow-flakes have structures in them, even if every single snow flake is unique (which is random), have you ever heard of Chaos theory? It's all about order and choas (randomness), better still there is such a simple experiment in quantum physics where you shine a single photon of light through a beam splitter so if you sent alot of them if would be a 50/50 split, but just sending one, leaving all variables the same, sometimes photon would go one way,...
@jabbaquar and sometimes photon would go other, this is an identical situation but photon goes different way, and all quantum physicists know the answer, it's random, increasing the size of experiment you can force photon to go to a certain place, which is how we creaate order out of chaos. Fundementally the universe is random, that's not just 'lack of knowledge' it's proven. The fact we even have a universe is pretty random too, especially believing there must be no God. But you...
@jabbaquar didn't answer my question, what is/are the specific meaning(s) to your life? I'd like to know (it's got nothing to do with whether God exists or not particularly I'm just interested in who you are). Going back to what we're talking about, you didn't even read my argument last time, when I said "and frankly it's not random because we haven't found all the answers yet, it's proven to be random" you only quoted the first part which says "it's not random...answers yet" and...
@jabbaquar called it an argument out of ignorance?!? you didn't even read that I'd put it was proven, and the fact what you'd quoted meant the universe is not random because we haven't proven it yet, which is actually what you're arguing from, you haven't proved that whole universe is ordered, yet you seem to except it as so. So lets now go back to aliens and ghosts and such like, what I meant was God existing explains why universe exists because he wanted us to, because he loves us..
@jabbaquar I'm presuming you don't believe in either aliens or ghosts, am I right? either way, however common or uncommon, it doesn't matter whether they exist of not, for that matter it doesn't matter whether lockness monster, big foot, fairies, unicorns, or any other creature exists or not, when we're talking about existance of God, so there really is no need to bring them up. Personally I believe in spirits also, I don't believe in people who have died being ghosts but I believe in
@jabbaquar both angels and demons because God made them and if you believe in God then it's a natural step to believe in the others as the bible talks about them also.
@jabbaquar So lets look back at your video because I did and still do find it amusing. Your last comments for instance where on how you needed evidence to believe in such a claim, as you are open minded, but then said any such evidence provided will do little to convince you. - this last comment goes against the whole 'open minded' idea. What do you believe in then (meaning what is your explanation for healings, jewish culture, creatioin of universe, origins of life, existance of God?
@jabbaquar I ask this because why do you start off believing for instance there is no God, or is that just the 'norm', but you personally have no proof either way? For me simply concept of God explains alot of things) I'm generally curious about your answers, and what is your evidence for such believes? Finally in your video you mentioned something like 'flawed arguments that generally appeal to consequence', so I presume creation of the universe is one such argument, science...
@jabbaquar has consistently pointed to the fact that every observed thing has a cause, what is flawed in my thinking that as everything consequence has a cause then the universe must have had a cause but the thing that caused it must have been outside the universe and outside of time in order to create both time and space?? My answer to that would be God, is the only explainable thing that is both eternal and powerful to create time, space and matter. what is the flaw in that?
@jabbaquar I would agree with your argument that the universe requires a cause, but not that cause is god. first of all this is at best an argument not empirical evidence. existence is spatial-temporal, so when u claim god exists outside space and time u have to explain how this is possible. assuming god is the first cause doesnt answer which god, therefore it could be anything from Allah, Yahweh, Odin or the flying spaghetti monster.
@SShamit1 u considered that the cause has to be powerful and eternal, but everything we observe in the universe is large complex system made out of small simpler processes, so the first cause doesnt have to be a complex powerful deity it could have been a simpler quantum fluctuation. also most people who make this argument assume infinite regression is not possible and time is linear, this is false as regression is possible for cyclic time. thus ur argument is flawed
@jabbaquar atheism is a response to theistic claim, as such it requires no proof as it makes on claim, atheistic arguments are refutation of theistic claim.
@SShamit1 Well that's wrong for a start, atheism is the BELIEF there is no God, if people who believe in God have to prove why, then athiests have to prove why not, if you want a position in life where you don't have to prove anything be an agnostic, not an atheist. I'm glad that you at least agree that the universe has a cause, the problem with the creation of the universe is that it implies something OUTSIDE the universe to create it, as nothing we've ever known has ever created...
itself, now that doesn't mean it can't happen but it is both unlikely (otherwise we'd have seen it) and doesn't make sense or correspond to any of the laws of the universe we know, in fact it breaks many of them, so that only leaves 'something' outside the universe surely? I fancy being fun and using the quote "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable must be the truth" and the notion is true, but unfortunately anyone can think they've eliminated..
the impossible, including me, and like everyone else I think I'm right. Still, a quantum fluctuation would only have created the universe if it as well holds 'existance' so to speak outside the universe, which I would say is impossible, purely because quantum phenomena are only found inside enclosed areas, and quantum fluctuation would also imply it's in some-sort of medium, which is unlikely if nothing exists. You cannot transverse an infinite progression, it's illogical, everything
we know has a beginning, can you prove an infinite progression to be possible? I'm sure it's possible for cyclic time, but likewise if you are to disprove my claims of God then you have to prove yours to be true, prove that we live in cyclic time, time is simply there to order events, if nothing existed/didn't move, then there would be no time because nothing would change. cyclic time is a fun mind game, but the only things that replay are tv's, our memories etc.
Finally, which god to choose if God really exists? Well go and explore, use your brain to search for the one true God, why only one? well if a god happens to be the only solution left after you've thought about all the others then why make the solution to beginning of the universe more complex by saying many gods exist eternally? Then look for the suppossed gods who have people claiming they interact with the world and check out their claims. Visit a few more churches, I dare you.
Though the only God I know who loves you personally, who accepts you the way you are, who is the only one who (people claim) came to earth and lived among us, who died so we may know him and see his love for us, so we might enjoy him for free, is Jesus - but when you love God in return you'll want to do for him as much as you can offer out of thankfulness and love of what he did for you, so it'll cost you everything, you'll live to care for everyone, no acceptions, as you do yourself.
Finally your last small statement, firstly Allah is just another word for God, in a different language, Christians, Jews and Muslims - along with anyone else who believes in one God (though I can't think of any atm) - all believe in Allah/God, they all share their sacred manuscripts, what christians call the old testament, why do all three faiths believe God loves them personally, because that same text says God does. However both Jew and Muslim believe they gain God's acceptance...
Through either/and ritual sacrifice to forgive sins, and/or good works by obeying God's commands, only through doing all this will God accept them. Christians know, just like both others, that God is perfect, however we also know that we could never (on our own) live up to his perfection, one mistake is too much, and we can't make up for any of them, BUT God loved us enough to pay for our sins by his own sacrifice, who loved us enough to walk among us, so anyone, no matter their...
...past could get to know him and have a relationship with him. That's why those who have seen this now love him in return, who live for him, who bug you all the time with what we consider the best news of everyone's lives. I wouldn't have hassel of talking, arguing, debating, and being riduculed by you and others if there wasn't the slightest chance that any of it would help you find a live with God, which is so good!...so what is the meaning(s) of your life? =)
@jabbaquar Infinite regression is completely logical if time is circular. and of course making claims such as god existing outside space-time frame requires explanation on to how this is possible. and singularities can be considered mediums and can exist indefinitely.
@SShamit1 You've missed the point of what I was saying, do YOU, believe time is circular? it's a simple question, yes, or no, and explain your answer. If you decide answer is no then you have to realise infinite regression isn't logical, and therefore both time and space had to be created, if that was the case then only something outside of 'space-time frame' could have created it, unless you would somehow believe that it just created itself, popped into existance?
Option 2 is that you believe time is circular, apart from still wanting why your logic makes this a more likely option, I need to know what you think are the affects of time being circular, firstly it has no beginning nor end, the whole of history will continue to repeat itself on a few billion years cycle or something? somehow even though time never started we're traversing this circle/cycle and it'll never end? I don't understand how can we be traversing time yet time never started?
@SShamit1 If you believe universe just made itself then you have more 'faith' than I do, and singularities are not their own mediums (even if they do exist, the observations of phenomena that gave rise to concept of singularities can be explained in other ways), they are simply places in the universe where everything gets distorted and things go to infinity, 'corners' or the universe, if you like where it all gets stretched, it is NOT it's own medium. Even if it was, then you'd have...
explain how the singularitiy got there in the first place, was that the thing that just made itself or has existed forever (what I'd call eternal - outside of time)? what suddenly sparked it off into making the whole universe and other singularities? For one who adheres to logic surely these things don't make sense? Whatever thing you say could have created the universe my response is 'what created that? why did that exist? Surely that only exists in the universe? etc'
@jabbaquar atheism doesnt assert anything, we dont say that there is no god, atheism is the default position of disbelief, disbelief being the keyword. its like if some claims that big foot exists, a logical person would not believe it unless enough evidence is provided to support such claim. that person is an atheist in respect to big foot just like u are an atheist in respect to Thor or Zeus
@SShamit1 You can define athiesm as whatever you want it to be, there's no point arguing over what a word means, just a waste of time. Anyway, what do you believe? What are the meaning(s) for your life? what created the universe? why is the universe here? why are both you and I here for that matter? - Just curious as to what you think, since you have a 'disbelief' in God, what, if anything, do you believe (about previous questions)
@SShamit1 An if you can be bothered with what 'atheism' means then it's roots come from latin 'a' meaning without, and 'theo' meaning God/deity, so it's true I don't believe in big foot, thor or Zeus, my beliefs are totally God centered, because I've had enough proof to find concept plausible, and then sought him out.
Naw, bottom line in a non-belief of God is this; 1) the non-believer wants to not be held accountable, 2) has a preconcieved notion of what empirical evidence to expect and tries to box up God, and 3), the non-believer only believe what he/she sees with their eyeballs.
@CJCode21 1) Not true at all. You're saying that we wish that there wasn't a god but that's not the case. I and most non-believers very much want there to be a god.
2) What's your point? Yes of course we have preconceptions of what evidence would be like. It would actually exist and not be flawed logic, is that too much to ask?
3) Nope, I believe in what there is evidence for.
@UnexpectedWonder, if I can jump in, I think I can be of help. This is a good place to start, at least: talkorigins (.) org/faqs/faq-speciation (.) html
@UnexpectedWonder The other guy gave you the same site i would have. However, that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand so there's very little point in bringing it up
@cm3007235 Y do u see no point in talking of evolution of species in the arena of the existence? It means everything. Either man & the rest of Life got here on its onw by Random Chance or it was created by a Higher Power. I can't make it any simpler than that.
@UnexpectedWonder Off the top of my head i can see four mistakes with that. First, chance and a deity are not the only possibilities. There are many more. Second, evolution is not random chance. It's evolution by natural selection, not chance. Third, evolution has nothing to do with how life began. Evolution describes how life changes over time, not how it came into being. Fourth, proving evolution wrong does not bring you closer to proving god exists, so like i said, it is not relevant.
@cm3007235 Lol, you're funny. I haven't read rest of conversation but the whole 'off the top of my head' comment didn't ring true. Firstly, what are some of the other possibilities other than chance or deity (for beginning of creation)? and explain why they're possible if there are so many. The theory of evolution tbh has many flaws (which I'll try to explain in more detail if you need it), one flaw is that it doesn't explain how life began, if we all come from the same ancestor..
then it is natural to assume that we all started from the simplest cell, because that would be the simplest jump from no life to life, and yet that is an incredible jump, one celled organisms are incredibly complicated and to date no theory I have heard can explain the leap, nevermind the fact that the cell would then start reproducing. Therefore if the existance of initial life can't be explained by what really is random chance then the existance of God would provide a more likely...
answer. What else? Going by theory, up until creatures were evolved enough to hunt each other, compete each other for food, sunlight, mates, then it was all due to chance, yes, some creatures may have had greater abilities, but were they evolved enough to use them?- that's last sentence has little to do with existance of God, I just thought you should know that the beginnings of evolution are random. However proving evolution wrong would bring you closer to proving God exists...
because if suddenly creatures appeared on a planet, where before they didn't, then Id want an explainable answer, randomness doesn't do for me, and things like mothers protecting their young goes against 'survival of fittest' anyway, what creature would care about the next generation? It would just be their own survival that counted. Still, if life suddenly appeared (however 'evolved'), I'd want a good reason. God makes sense to me, nothing else I've looked at does, because its random
@jabbaquar Ok you have some serious misconceptions about what evolution says and it would take me far more than the character limit to address them. Do you want to start a conversation in messages? I'm not an expert on evolution by any standard but I think I should be able to give you a hand. Either way, PLEASE go read a book about evolution, trust me, there's a moment where "the penny drops" and it just all falls into place if you do enough reading about it
@cm3007235 I would love to start a conversation in messages, and by the way I have read books on evolution before, but I'm still interested to hear what you have to say.
@cm3007235 You've gotta be kiddin' Me! This is absolutely horrendous. First, name ANY other of the "many" possibilities for the origin of the Universe. 2nd, Humans defy natural selection too often for it to have got Homo sapiens to this age of the world. 3rd, give Me a cause of the origin of the Universe. This is My reason for believing in a God: the complexity & order exhibited throughout Nature and in individual Humans. 4th, Science can NEVER prove or disprove the existence of God.
@UnexpectedWonder We weren't talking about the origin of the universe. Although in theory there are a few for it. String theory has one, quantum fluctuations....
Give me one example of how humans defy natural selection
Just because we don't have an explanation for the origin of the universe doesn't mean you can believe whatever fairytale most appeals to you. It's ok to say "i don't know". Why does complexity and order indicate a creator? Who cares?
@UnexpectedWonder Now we defy natural selection,that's true. Almost everybody can survive and reproduce now, but in the stone age it was very different, to put it mildly. They couldn't defy natural selection in the stone age, and it was in the stone age our species evolved:)
@davidkinane, nope. It's the name of the first horde character I rolled on wow. Random question, would anyone out there be interested in seeing a pvp video if I attempted to make one?
What I actually find interesting is that there is an issue, there are two sides to all arguments. I have actually been provided with 'proof' of both evolution and creation, in the form of sourced books and articles. They are all an interesting read. I am quite surprised though at the amount of people who are unaware of scientific research done, looking into creationism. I think people like things to be proven instead of observing a equal argument, and having to decide a choice alone.
@Soulwrite7, well, I don't quite think it is an "equal argument" as you put it. If nothing else, one side has mountains of empirical evidence (imo the most reliable form of evidence) and the other side does not.
I dont believe in vampires so I dont go around bargging about not believing in them.. . (atheists)... Why dont you just ignore the topic and find your own interests? Why do you feel the need to get involved in others lifes and beliefs... Get your own life!
@sfyr, although not even atheists can agree over the definition of atheism (let alone between atheists and theists), atheism does not necessarily mean one is even making a claim regarding the existence of god. Even more confusing, technically under some definitions not only am I an atheist, but some definitions of agnostic apply to me as well. Using your example, for myself at least, it would be more like this: Atheism (weak/agnostic)= The evidence for god doesn't convince me = (cont)
(cont) The way I see it, if I make a claim regarding the existence or non-existence of something, I then have the burden of proof, and you can't really disprove a negative unless you can show it is logically contradicting, etc. Even this does not concern probability though. For instance, I lack a belief in extraterrestrial intelligent life simply because there is not sufficient evidence in order for me to justify belief. If evidence is presented, my beliefs will change in light of it. (cont 2)
(cont 2) However, this says nothing about what I think the probability of said extraterrestrial life is. I honestly think intelligent life on other planets is far more probable than the existence of Zeus or the judeo-christian god.
@sfyr, "Im just using the definition the dictionary gives" different dictionaries have different definitions which have different implications, for ex. here are two from the merriam webster "a disbelief in the existence of deity," as well as "the doctrine that there is no deity." The former would be weak/negative atheism, while the latter strong/positive atheism. They are two seperate positions. Either way, various atheists have and do disagree on the definition. (cont)
(cont) "lol.. Of course you can..." Read the rest of my sentence. This is quote mining, I clearly stated that a negative can be disproven if it is logically contradicting. "What you can't disprove is God... probably because he exists." I cannot disprove Santa or the tooth fairy. Does this mean they exist? "Zeus is part of the universe so he can't be the Creator." Never said either one was, what I did say was that I found both of these claims less probable than two others I mentioned. (cont 2)
(cont 2) "PS: You're an agnostic." Did you read anything I wrote? Under certain definitions of atheism I am considered an atheist, and under certain definitions of agnostic I am considered agnostic. These days I define myself as a "non-theist" simply because there is so much disagreement currently with the definitions and so much confusion, and I basically have the same conversation over and over and argue semantics until I feel like shooting myself in the face.
@sfyr, "It's really simple.." Sure it is, if you completely ignore any debate on the matter and decide that you alone get to determine the definitions of words. " is there anyone living in the northpole? NO" What if he's out to lunch or on vacation? In reality to determine that santa doesn't exist (besides showing him to be logically contradictory) you would have to simultaneously search every square inch of the universe to be able to determine he's not somewhere else currently. (cont)
(cont) Even more fun, if, for instance, you claimed that we would be able to at least see his house or the workshop where the elves work, I could just pull out the old theist classic where you place the unproven claim slightly out of reach of any criticism. Instead of the usual "he's god.. he can do ANYTHING," I could say, "he's magic, he can do ANYTHING," (in this case I could say since he is magic he could use said magic to hide the workshop). (cont 2)
(cont 2) "Can deers fly? NO." Can donkeys talk? Could all of the world's species fit on one boat? Could a man live in the belly of a fish for several days? Can people walk on water? Can you bring someone else back from the dead? Can a virgin give birth to a baby? All of these claims are just as improbable (if not more so), but 1) theists readily believe without evidence in the claims of their particular religions, but would require evidence in order to believe in a flying deer, (cont 3)
(cont 3) (which in my opinion is hypocritcal and logically inconsistent) and 2) According to your logic, you can disprove something just because you've never seen it before. For all we know, there could be some planet on the other side of the universe that has flying deer on it. Improbable? Perhaps. However, again, you either have to show it is logically contradicting, be able to simultaneously serach every part of the universe, or have all knowledge. (cont 4)
(cont 4) You said yourself that "absence of evidence is not evidence for absence." However, what I will say is that you currently have no good reason TO believe in santa or flying reindeer.
@sfyr, "No you don't... He's supposed to live at the northpole.. that's the only place we need to check." You live in your house, does that mean this is the only place we would ever need to go to find you? Or do you sometimes leave your house? What if you were on vacation? What if you moved?
@sfyr, "we have positive evidence AGAINST them." Then provide said evidence. "The only God outside the universe is the Abrahamic God." What about the flying spaghetti monster? or, I could just make up a god which exists outside the universe, and it would have just as much evidence to support it as any of the abrahamic gods.. none at all. "The question is.. which one is true." No, the question should be "are any of them true?" Your question implies one MUST be true, which is a gross assumption.
Totally true, but stupid christians do not and are not capable of logic. they are DUMB, DUMB and generally VERY DUMB when it comes to logic. If they understood how logic works then they would not believe in anything mythical, Nor do they believe in logical science. Their IQ floats around 70...
Wow. another Video 2 show y Atheist can be Hated by Many, Loved by Few. it's Bigotry. we're right. ur Definately Wrong. i can give Emprical evidence 4 the Existence of God. now, whether it's Accepted or not is on the Reader. but, have Atheist given Believers, especially Christians, empirical evidence that Cancels out the Existence of God. i Think NOT. also, i can use History, Philosophy, and Current Events on My Side of the Argument. Atheists i NEED Proof, not Ideology.
@UnexpectedWonder You need help with grammar, spelling and punctuation. Usually before you start proving a point you want to convince your audience you're capable of a complete thought.
You also didn't read my entire post you replied to. The second half I'm sure you'll disapprove of.
@lost524 Again, I am dealing with a grammatical taskmaster. This is Youtube people, not an academic exercise or report. I use shorthand to save time and space. On here you must be uber economically sound. I can portry my points eloquently, but I don't believe it's needed to get my point across, sir. Is this better for you?
@UnexpectedWonder, well, not only is this the burden of proof fallacy, but if nothing else the same claim can be leveled against theists. Now, if you could provide empirical evidence of god you would be the first person in history to really do so, it is kind of a big deal.
@naejimba hmm...is it Now? y is evidence of a world that is decaying necessary for a Being and other beings that transcend the Physical Realm? Look @ Earth. can u explain the Mathematics that it would take for 1. it to have lightning strike the right amount of times 2. it to have just the right axis. 3. it to be the right distance from the sun 4. the sun to be the right kind of star for Life as we know it to exist 5. it to be the ONLY known habitable planet 6. it to have such vast liquid water?
@UnexpectedWonder, well.. a couple of things. If I can't explain something, it says nothing about proving whatever particular god you believe in. Theists have the burden of proof, thus the burden of proof fallacy. Also, there are lots of things we don't know. Next, you can either view it as "what are the odds that everything is made 'perfect' for us?" or you could view it as life began and evolved here the way it did simply because the conditions happened to permit it.
@naejimba as I continually say, "Numbers don't lie." What evidence can be presented that verifies such evolutionary processes took place? Not only am I viewing the complexity of Homo sapiens but also the biodiversity present on Earth and the fact that Earth is as far as we know one of a kind. You say I need evidence? Tell Me. what r the odds of Earth being the ONLY planet that is able to support Life?
@UnexpectedWonder, " What evidence can be presented that verifies such evolutionary processes took place?" Fossil evidence, molecular evidence, genetic evidence, vestigial organs, altavistic organs, evidence from proteins, embryology, homology, biogeography, bacteriology, virology, immunology, evolution produced in a lab as well as evolution documented that has naturally occured (including observed instances of speciation), even (cont)
This has been flagged as spam show
Eevryone who is interested in the topic of belief might be interested to check out Morty Lefkoe's blog. The guy has a super simple explanation for why we believe the things we do, and he actually has a technique to eliminate beliefs. I learned his technique and it's INCREDIBLE. With it, I can literally make somebody stop believing in their God in about 30 minutes or so.
dispacct1 1 day ago
Let’s work to eradicate all religion. Conversely, begin a relationship with Jesus Christ today. You need to repent of your immoral ways of living. Yes, you. Moreover, you should ask God for eternal forgiveness through applying the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to your life of sin within the quietness of your bedroom tonight. As an unrepentant sinner myself, I made this decision around 15 years ago. This is the most important decision that you could ever make. - Romans 10:9-10
paularenas26 2 weeks ago
@paularenas26, you are leaving this same comment on multiple videos. I've never erased a comment or blocked anyone, but I must admit you are tempting me. If you wish someone to do do all of these things, you should provide either evidence or logical argument to support such notions. In short, say something of worth or post your spam elsewhere.
naejimba 2 weeks ago
I wanna tap that
masterArielC 1 month ago
What gods?
matthewtaylorbrown 1 month ago
DO IT NAKED!
treeshateyou99 2 months ago
I agree with you completely, but I do understand why someone would dare believe such a claim. Fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of what comes after death, fear of the possibility that if you don't believe, you will burn for eternity in Hell. Sure, there might not be any evidence. But why take the chance?
But again, I cannot just sit there and accept such insane ideas without evidence. I've tried, and I can't. I take the evidence and personal experience I have and draw a conclusion from that.
delusionaldragon42 2 months ago
@delusionaldragon42, true. Beyond this though, such reasons are also fallacious (appeals to fear and consequence). Even the statement "But why take the chance?" alludes to a false dichotomy.
naejimba 1 month ago 2
@naejimba I see what you mean. I figure, humans do as humans will, and leave it at that. :)
delusionaldragon42 1 month ago
@naejimba precisely. delusionaldragon42 is effectively citing Pascal's wager, which is an argument built upon a false dichotomy. One response to Pascal's wager, perhaps the most asinine philosophical argument I've ever heard, is to simply add an additional column. Which is to say, conceive of a god who does the inverse of the "classic" god. There is no basis to say one is more valid than the other, hence the end result is neutral.
InverseAgonist 1 month ago
I do agree, but many are trained to think how they want to think. In one of my books, I added a bannen book from the bible in it. Why they keep that stuff from us in behond me. When a christan agrues with me, I come up with the arguent if God created all things why are there such things as cancer? Then they shut up.
krazykelly25 2 months ago
God only exist through brain washing... or "Faith" whichever term you prefer to use :)
chinwart 2 months ago
@chinwart I could say the same for the Macro-evolution or "Science".
UnexpectedWonder 2 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder Really? You don't believe that science is based on facts?
chinwart 2 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder Except science has evidence. What you call macroevolution (which is just microevolution over hundreds of thousands of generations) actually has evidence.
dangerouslytalented 2 months ago
O K your presentation is computer animated and annoying especially the voice and the camera views switching back and forth. uggggh!
Crazy80563 2 months ago
At least unicorns are in the fossil record (elasmotherium siberis) ;D
PinkProgram 2 months ago
convince others of God's existence because I want them to know the love I feel and the worth I have for myself, I want them to meet the most amazing person in the universe who interacted in a very real way about 2000 years ago and lived a life of humbleness, nails put in his hands and feet, attached to cross to die, for no reason, other than his love for each and every person on this planet, then raised again! surely that's evidence? who could deny that, why would people believe it if not true?
jabbaquar 2 months ago
pray for the sick, bind up the broken hearted, set the captives free, look after this planet and all peoples, giving them worth and meaning, using my life to give rest to the weary, welcome the stranger, even love those who would hate me for what I do and/or believe. Care for those who have no-one to care for them, teach those who wish to learn, all for the cause of love, sharing my food, my heart, my mind and my body, always serving people, and loving them as Christ loves me. I only try to...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
And what I find most funny is that people say 'oh, well science hasn't discovered the answers to some of those questions yet' but tbh I know it won't ever 'find' the answers because it's impossible, science's final answer "it's random, everything's random" (and therefore meaningless, some people might add - sounds like book of ecclesiastes to me), and tbh randomness doesn't make sense to human beings, without God life is meaningless. As for me, I'll love everyone I come accross, feed hungry,..
jabbaquar 2 months ago
Do you expect to bottle God up in a test tube, add a little acid and "yes, positive result! God's in the test tube"? Naturally you wouldn't. Science is all about discovery and keeping an open mind. I'm not going to try to convince anyone but as for me I can't help but wonder, what sustains the physical forces (strong, weak, electro-magnetic, gravity)? and what made the universe, what continues to sustain it? Why do so many people testify to a God and some claim healings? Why would they bother?
jabbaquar 2 months ago
Lol, funny video. I found it amusing. It seemed to suggest there was no 'empirical' evidence for God. Why would people claim to have met God, and seen amazing things he's done? (both bible and modern day answers to prayer act as evidence towards this being true) Why would anyone believe them? Is that not a little evidence? people can be convincted of crimes from only a few testimonies, testimonies about the presence of God are far more, people who 'claim' to have been healed by God too.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, "It seemed to suggest there was no 'empirical' evidence for God." If you found that "amusing" then let me plainly state that there is no such evidence. Also, your notion of the bible and supposed answers to prayer serving as evidence, according to that logic I could simply use the quaran and muslim's supposed answered prayers as "evidence" of allah. Not only is such a thing circular reasoning, but both of them can't be true. Also, a testamony is not evidence.. (cont)
naejimba 2 months ago
(cont) it is a testamony. "I can't help but wonder, what sustains the physical forces (strong, weak, electro-magnetic, gravity)? and what made the universe, what continues to sustain it?" There is nothing wrong at all with such questions, but I think to assume that it is something of which there is no proof is a leap in logic. "Why do so many people testify to a God and some claim healings?" I think it says something more about humanity than anything else. You could ask, (cont 2)
naejimba 2 months ago
(cont 2) 'why do so many people testify to see bigfoot/aliens/ghosts/etc?' but to use this as an argument for belief is an appeal to popularity. "science's final answer "it's random, everything's random" (and therefore meaningless.." I'm sorry, but apparently you have some misunderstanding concerning science. Also, simply because there is not a "god" does not magically mean everything we give meaning to no longer has any meaning. Interestingly, (cont 3)
naejimba 2 months ago
(cont 3) later on you are implying that you only value existence and feel "worth" for yourself because you believe in god. "surely that's evidence? who could deny that, why would people believe it if not true?" Evidence is something that is demonstrable, that serves as proof. No such evidence has been provided, and merely because one makes a claim, the claim itself does not serve as evidence. Also, to the part about (cont 4)
naejimba 2 months ago
(cont 4) "..why would people believe it if not true?" then explain why people believe in other deities you do not think exist (Zeus, Krishna, Anubis, etc), explain lockness monster/aliens/etc.
naejimba 2 months ago
@naejimba I'll be honest with you, I don't really care what you think, obviously I'd prefer you to believe and meet God, but as I said you don't have to, it's your loss. I'd personally view bible as evidence, mainly because there are hundreds of prophecies that Jesus fulfills, including ones he had no control over such as being born in bethlehem. Likewise if people claim to be healed from cancer and can prove it, which most can then, if you can be bothered go and meet them, then...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar (cont) I'd see that as proof, don't see why you wouldn't. And how many muslims can prove to be healed from cancer, or can suddenly walk again, or something similar? At least muslims have what I'd call the old testament so they have something in common. Plus I disagree with you, testimonies count as evidence, and they become stronger evidence when linked with thousands of people who also saw miracles/God or if a hundred people saw someone murdered then you'd believe them...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
(cont 2) There is absolutely nothing that explains the fundemental forces of the universe, that's why they are fundemental, they simply 'exist', why? how? well there's no reason. Creation of universe, scientists believe came from nothing, even looking for higgs boson doesn't fill the gap whether existing or not. The universe just started, why? how? no reason, we can explain all the how the few milliseconds after start but not the start. The reason I don't believe we ever will prove..
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar (cont 3) it, is because science keeps coming to conclusion that forces just exist, (and if they were much different universe wouldn't exist), and universe itself just came into being, no cause. So what's my mis-understanding concerning science? Do you have any evidence to back up this opinion? Are you at the very least a student of science, or maybe better still a professor and re-searcher? The conclusion of quantum physics, that I have studied is that everything is random,
jabbaquar 2 months ago
(cont4) it just happens, doesn't make any sense neither (which is pretty much definition of randomness, unpredictable, no order, chaos), and frankly it's not random because we haven't found all the answers yet, it's actually proven to be random, and only by linking the random events in certain ways can we create predictable results. If the universe is random, the logical step it that everything in universe is random, and therefore you are random, you were born and you'll die, so what
jabbaquar 2 months ago
(cont 5) is the meaning for your life then? pleasure perhaps? the savings of riches? why bother having children, they're certainly a hassle, I doubt they'll contribute to your sense of meaning. As for aliens/ghosts/other gods/big foot/ lockness monster etc, the last two have been proven to not exist, and no-one believes in them, all the others show that people know there's something more to life than this one world. Aliens and ghosts, whether existing or not, don't explain anything...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
(cont 6) they don't explain creation of universe, reason for life etc, and only a few individuals say they've met them, not whole massive groups of people, all at once, who even go to extent of 'claiming' to be healed, which has stunned many doctors, go and find these people if you're interested. As for other gods, the only real contenders (so to speak) to christianity are jews and muslims, and they all share old-testament, which has many prophecies that only Jesus fulfills. other...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
gods as far as I remember tend to either no/few people claiming to ever met them, nor can any of their claims be proven (no golden fleece, minatours, and other such things). However Jesus is known to have existed, known to have been crucified, and his body is known to have gone missing (otherwise authorities would have shown it to crush believers), people have claimed to be healed, many can prove it with medical reports, and why would anyone go all over the earth being persecuted...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
(cont 8) killed, beaten, giving away all possessions, in the name of love, loving everyone, being kind to everyone they meet, in the name of Jesus, unless they themselves saw Jesus after he came back from dead, if they just thought 'maybe he's been brought back to life' then they wouldn't have gone to places put in jails, crucified etc, only if they were totally sure would they have. Why would you do a youtube video to argue against God anyway? if it's all fairytales why bother?
jabbaquar 2 months ago
(cont 9) and the only position you can really be sure of is "maybe God exists, maybe he doesn't, maybe these people are right, maybe they're not" and "I do not believe God exists, nor do I believe God doesn't, because I can't be sure, it hasn't been proven to me yet, and I either have no interest in finding out if God exists or not or I will search out and thourougly study all Gods just in case one proves to be real" because that's you're only viable position.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, true, but we could discuss what one thinks the probability of a claim is. Technically, you can not be sure that faeries or the easter bunny does not exist, but this does not mean one is required to give such claims any special attention, nor does it mean you have to spend years of research on the matter. However, you must realize I have been exploring the matter in depth for the majority of my life (whether christian or non-theist).
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, I could make a counter argument using the 9/11 hijackers; they literally blew themselves to bits, and they never "met" mohammed or allah. They were as sure of what they believed as one can be, but that says nothing of the truth of the claims being made. "if it's all fairytales why bother?" Well, no one tries to get 'jack and the beanstalk' taught in a science classroom, it doesn't say 'one nation under jack and the beanstalk' on our money, no president claims to be making (cont)
naejimba 2 months ago
(cont) decisions based upon 'jack and the beanstalk,' no one comes knocking on my door to ask me about my belief in 'jack and the beanstalk,' nor do they leave pamphlets on my windshield, no one claims I am immoral for not believing in 'jack and the beanstalk,' etc. etc.
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, first, how many people have "met" god? Second, this would be an appeal to popularity. Next, none of the grand claims of christianity can be proven either (noah's flood, jonah and the 'big fish,' virgin birth, resurrection from the dead, talking donkeys, etc.) From a historical perspective, we don't "know" jesus existed (although it is not improbable); many people claim many things (which proves nothing and is an appeal to popularity again).
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, aliens and ghosts don't have to explain things like the creation of the universe, neither do trees or cars, for example. What is your point? Also, claims of things like ghosts and aliens are quite a bit more common than you are portraying. Beyond this, your idea that all other religions besides three can be dismissed is unfounded and intellectually dishonest.
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, just because one does not believe in god does not make one a nihilist, just because there is not some "grand purpose" to life does not mean one's life cannot have meaning. How have big foot and the lockness monster been disproven?
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, "and frankly it's not random because we haven't found all the answers yet" (argument from ignorance). "If the universe is random, the logical step it that everything in universe is random, and therefore you are random, you were born and you'll die, so what" I have already given two examples of things which are not merely "random."
naejimba 2 months ago
@naejimba, oh, and this is also the slippery slope fallacy.
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, "So what's my mis-understanding concerning science?" The ideas that "it's all just random," or "there is no cause"... I have never heard any scientist word things that way; it is a straw man. I am no expert, but simple things like diamonds and snowflakes are not "random," they are ordered. These two examples disprove your blanket statement.
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, well, simply because we do not currently know something, it gives no validity to your claim. If one were to state that it did, this would be an "argument from ignorance."
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, testimony does count as evidence, but only in legal matters (which is quite different). Also, the number of people might be worth noting, but if this is presented as an argument as to why one should believe, it would be an appeal to popularity.
naejimba 2 months ago
@jabbaquar, well, first, using the bible as evidence would be circular logic. Also, no one is doubting that sometimes people overcome conditions such as cancer.. it is merely what one attributes this to that is a matter of debate. Also worth noting, is that every major religion has these claims, if we are to accept yours as true, you must explain this.
naejimba 2 months ago
@naejimba You do not have to give the claim that God exists any thought at all, it's just your loss if you don't. Many people have died and been killed in an act of anger and revenge, many others are forced to and/or manipulitated to harm others this could easily include some people who call themselves 'christians', but how many people died in an act of love? The early christians cetainly did, did they want to die? no, but they allowed others to harm them because they wanted to share..
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar love. Did they try to harm others out of 'religios belief'? no, they didn't. They were persecuted for loving others and God, more recently Martin Luther King diid a similar thing, he stood up for what God believes in, loving everyone as yourself, no divisions. If testimony is evidence in legal matters surely it as evidence as to whether God exists of not, if even a small group of 20 people claimed that one of them had been instantaneously healed, surely that's worth...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar thinking about? If even 1 person who prayed and was actually healed by God, whatever religion, then surely there is reason to believe in a God. If even one person has actually 'met' God, then you'd have a reason to believe, if you thought even one of the people who have 'met' God is trustworthy. And you keep talking about 'appeal to popularity' as if it's a terrible thing, well firstly there are more athiests than christians, secondly what's popular is generally because...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar most people have found reason for thinking it's right, or would like to believe in something, or haven't thought about it and therefore fallen under the same category, so 'appeal to popularity' would work in your favour not mine, however as you said it's no reason for you to agree with them, it's your life and your choice, I just know that God exists, I'm one of these 'crazy' people who say they've met him, I'd say I'm even in love with him, and him me.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar Yes, diamonds and snow-flakes have structures in them, even if every single snow flake is unique (which is random), have you ever heard of Chaos theory? It's all about order and choas (randomness), better still there is such a simple experiment in quantum physics where you shine a single photon of light through a beam splitter so if you sent alot of them if would be a 50/50 split, but just sending one, leaving all variables the same, sometimes photon would go one way,...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar and sometimes photon would go other, this is an identical situation but photon goes different way, and all quantum physicists know the answer, it's random, increasing the size of experiment you can force photon to go to a certain place, which is how we creaate order out of chaos. Fundementally the universe is random, that's not just 'lack of knowledge' it's proven. The fact we even have a universe is pretty random too, especially believing there must be no God. But you...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar didn't answer my question, what is/are the specific meaning(s) to your life? I'd like to know (it's got nothing to do with whether God exists or not particularly I'm just interested in who you are). Going back to what we're talking about, you didn't even read my argument last time, when I said "and frankly it's not random because we haven't found all the answers yet, it's proven to be random" you only quoted the first part which says "it's not random...answers yet" and...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar called it an argument out of ignorance?!? you didn't even read that I'd put it was proven, and the fact what you'd quoted meant the universe is not random because we haven't proven it yet, which is actually what you're arguing from, you haven't proved that whole universe is ordered, yet you seem to except it as so. So lets now go back to aliens and ghosts and such like, what I meant was God existing explains why universe exists because he wanted us to, because he loves us..
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar I'm presuming you don't believe in either aliens or ghosts, am I right? either way, however common or uncommon, it doesn't matter whether they exist of not, for that matter it doesn't matter whether lockness monster, big foot, fairies, unicorns, or any other creature exists or not, when we're talking about existance of God, so there really is no need to bring them up. Personally I believe in spirits also, I don't believe in people who have died being ghosts but I believe in
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar both angels and demons because God made them and if you believe in God then it's a natural step to believe in the others as the bible talks about them also.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar So lets look back at your video because I did and still do find it amusing. Your last comments for instance where on how you needed evidence to believe in such a claim, as you are open minded, but then said any such evidence provided will do little to convince you. - this last comment goes against the whole 'open minded' idea. What do you believe in then (meaning what is your explanation for healings, jewish culture, creatioin of universe, origins of life, existance of God?
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar I ask this because why do you start off believing for instance there is no God, or is that just the 'norm', but you personally have no proof either way? For me simply concept of God explains alot of things) I'm generally curious about your answers, and what is your evidence for such believes? Finally in your video you mentioned something like 'flawed arguments that generally appeal to consequence', so I presume creation of the universe is one such argument, science...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar has consistently pointed to the fact that every observed thing has a cause, what is flawed in my thinking that as everything consequence has a cause then the universe must have had a cause but the thing that caused it must have been outside the universe and outside of time in order to create both time and space?? My answer to that would be God, is the only explainable thing that is both eternal and powerful to create time, space and matter. what is the flaw in that?
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar I would agree with your argument that the universe requires a cause, but not that cause is god. first of all this is at best an argument not empirical evidence. existence is spatial-temporal, so when u claim god exists outside space and time u have to explain how this is possible. assuming god is the first cause doesnt answer which god, therefore it could be anything from Allah, Yahweh, Odin or the flying spaghetti monster.
SShamit1 2 months ago
@SShamit1 u considered that the cause has to be powerful and eternal, but everything we observe in the universe is large complex system made out of small simpler processes, so the first cause doesnt have to be a complex powerful deity it could have been a simpler quantum fluctuation. also most people who make this argument assume infinite regression is not possible and time is linear, this is false as regression is possible for cyclic time. thus ur argument is flawed
SShamit1 2 months ago
@jabbaquar atheism is a response to theistic claim, as such it requires no proof as it makes on claim, atheistic arguments are refutation of theistic claim.
SShamit1 2 months ago
@SShamit1 Well that's wrong for a start, atheism is the BELIEF there is no God, if people who believe in God have to prove why, then athiests have to prove why not, if you want a position in life where you don't have to prove anything be an agnostic, not an atheist. I'm glad that you at least agree that the universe has a cause, the problem with the creation of the universe is that it implies something OUTSIDE the universe to create it, as nothing we've ever known has ever created...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
itself, now that doesn't mean it can't happen but it is both unlikely (otherwise we'd have seen it) and doesn't make sense or correspond to any of the laws of the universe we know, in fact it breaks many of them, so that only leaves 'something' outside the universe surely? I fancy being fun and using the quote "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable must be the truth" and the notion is true, but unfortunately anyone can think they've eliminated..
jabbaquar 2 months ago
the impossible, including me, and like everyone else I think I'm right. Still, a quantum fluctuation would only have created the universe if it as well holds 'existance' so to speak outside the universe, which I would say is impossible, purely because quantum phenomena are only found inside enclosed areas, and quantum fluctuation would also imply it's in some-sort of medium, which is unlikely if nothing exists. You cannot transverse an infinite progression, it's illogical, everything
jabbaquar 2 months ago
we know has a beginning, can you prove an infinite progression to be possible? I'm sure it's possible for cyclic time, but likewise if you are to disprove my claims of God then you have to prove yours to be true, prove that we live in cyclic time, time is simply there to order events, if nothing existed/didn't move, then there would be no time because nothing would change. cyclic time is a fun mind game, but the only things that replay are tv's, our memories etc.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
Finally, which god to choose if God really exists? Well go and explore, use your brain to search for the one true God, why only one? well if a god happens to be the only solution left after you've thought about all the others then why make the solution to beginning of the universe more complex by saying many gods exist eternally? Then look for the suppossed gods who have people claiming they interact with the world and check out their claims. Visit a few more churches, I dare you.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
Though the only God I know who loves you personally, who accepts you the way you are, who is the only one who (people claim) came to earth and lived among us, who died so we may know him and see his love for us, so we might enjoy him for free, is Jesus - but when you love God in return you'll want to do for him as much as you can offer out of thankfulness and love of what he did for you, so it'll cost you everything, you'll live to care for everyone, no acceptions, as you do yourself.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar well Allah loves his followers personally.
SShamit1 2 months ago
Finally your last small statement, firstly Allah is just another word for God, in a different language, Christians, Jews and Muslims - along with anyone else who believes in one God (though I can't think of any atm) - all believe in Allah/God, they all share their sacred manuscripts, what christians call the old testament, why do all three faiths believe God loves them personally, because that same text says God does. However both Jew and Muslim believe they gain God's acceptance...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
Through either/and ritual sacrifice to forgive sins, and/or good works by obeying God's commands, only through doing all this will God accept them. Christians know, just like both others, that God is perfect, however we also know that we could never (on our own) live up to his perfection, one mistake is too much, and we can't make up for any of them, BUT God loved us enough to pay for our sins by his own sacrifice, who loved us enough to walk among us, so anyone, no matter their...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
...past could get to know him and have a relationship with him. That's why those who have seen this now love him in return, who live for him, who bug you all the time with what we consider the best news of everyone's lives. I wouldn't have hassel of talking, arguing, debating, and being riduculed by you and others if there wasn't the slightest chance that any of it would help you find a live with God, which is so good!...so what is the meaning(s) of your life? =)
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar Infinite regression is completely logical if time is circular. and of course making claims such as god existing outside space-time frame requires explanation on to how this is possible. and singularities can be considered mediums and can exist indefinitely.
SShamit1 2 months ago
@SShamit1 You've missed the point of what I was saying, do YOU, believe time is circular? it's a simple question, yes, or no, and explain your answer. If you decide answer is no then you have to realise infinite regression isn't logical, and therefore both time and space had to be created, if that was the case then only something outside of 'space-time frame' could have created it, unless you would somehow believe that it just created itself, popped into existance?
jabbaquar 2 months ago
Option 2 is that you believe time is circular, apart from still wanting why your logic makes this a more likely option, I need to know what you think are the affects of time being circular, firstly it has no beginning nor end, the whole of history will continue to repeat itself on a few billion years cycle or something? somehow even though time never started we're traversing this circle/cycle and it'll never end? I don't understand how can we be traversing time yet time never started?
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@SShamit1 If you believe universe just made itself then you have more 'faith' than I do, and singularities are not their own mediums (even if they do exist, the observations of phenomena that gave rise to concept of singularities can be explained in other ways), they are simply places in the universe where everything gets distorted and things go to infinity, 'corners' or the universe, if you like where it all gets stretched, it is NOT it's own medium. Even if it was, then you'd have...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
explain how the singularitiy got there in the first place, was that the thing that just made itself or has existed forever (what I'd call eternal - outside of time)? what suddenly sparked it off into making the whole universe and other singularities? For one who adheres to logic surely these things don't make sense? Whatever thing you say could have created the universe my response is 'what created that? why did that exist? Surely that only exists in the universe? etc'
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar atheism doesnt assert anything, we dont say that there is no god, atheism is the default position of disbelief, disbelief being the keyword. its like if some claims that big foot exists, a logical person would not believe it unless enough evidence is provided to support such claim. that person is an atheist in respect to big foot just like u are an atheist in respect to Thor or Zeus
SShamit1 2 months ago
@SShamit1 You can define athiesm as whatever you want it to be, there's no point arguing over what a word means, just a waste of time. Anyway, what do you believe? What are the meaning(s) for your life? what created the universe? why is the universe here? why are both you and I here for that matter? - Just curious as to what you think, since you have a 'disbelief' in God, what, if anything, do you believe (about previous questions)
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@SShamit1 An if you can be bothered with what 'atheism' means then it's roots come from latin 'a' meaning without, and 'theo' meaning God/deity, so it's true I don't believe in big foot, thor or Zeus, my beliefs are totally God centered, because I've had enough proof to find concept plausible, and then sought him out.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
Naw, bottom line in a non-belief of God is this; 1) the non-believer wants to not be held accountable, 2) has a preconcieved notion of what empirical evidence to expect and tries to box up God, and 3), the non-believer only believe what he/she sees with their eyeballs.
CJCode21 2 months ago
@CJCode21 1) Not true at all. You're saying that we wish that there wasn't a god but that's not the case. I and most non-believers very much want there to be a god.
2) What's your point? Yes of course we have preconceptions of what evidence would be like. It would actually exist and not be flawed logic, is that too much to ask?
3) Nope, I believe in what there is evidence for.
cm3007235 2 months ago
@cm3007235 ok. So explain to Me how Macro-evolution has evidence?
UnexpectedWonder 2 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder, if I can jump in, I think I can be of help. This is a good place to start, at least: talkorigins (.) org/faqs/faq-speciation (.) html
naejimba 2 months ago
@naejimba ok. Explain in laymen's terms how this proves Macro-evolution.
UnexpectedWonder 2 months ago
@naejimba I see you avoided My Last question. I wanna know y? For what reason should one remain alive?
UnexpectedWonder 2 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder The other guy gave you the same site i would have. However, that really has nothing to do with the topic at hand so there's very little point in bringing it up
cm3007235 2 months ago
@cm3007235 Y do u see no point in talking of evolution of species in the arena of the existence? It means everything. Either man & the rest of Life got here on its onw by Random Chance or it was created by a Higher Power. I can't make it any simpler than that.
UnexpectedWonder 2 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder Off the top of my head i can see four mistakes with that. First, chance and a deity are not the only possibilities. There are many more. Second, evolution is not random chance. It's evolution by natural selection, not chance. Third, evolution has nothing to do with how life began. Evolution describes how life changes over time, not how it came into being. Fourth, proving evolution wrong does not bring you closer to proving god exists, so like i said, it is not relevant.
cm3007235 2 months ago
@cm3007235 Lol, you're funny. I haven't read rest of conversation but the whole 'off the top of my head' comment didn't ring true. Firstly, what are some of the other possibilities other than chance or deity (for beginning of creation)? and explain why they're possible if there are so many. The theory of evolution tbh has many flaws (which I'll try to explain in more detail if you need it), one flaw is that it doesn't explain how life began, if we all come from the same ancestor..
jabbaquar 2 months ago
then it is natural to assume that we all started from the simplest cell, because that would be the simplest jump from no life to life, and yet that is an incredible jump, one celled organisms are incredibly complicated and to date no theory I have heard can explain the leap, nevermind the fact that the cell would then start reproducing. Therefore if the existance of initial life can't be explained by what really is random chance then the existance of God would provide a more likely...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
answer. What else? Going by theory, up until creatures were evolved enough to hunt each other, compete each other for food, sunlight, mates, then it was all due to chance, yes, some creatures may have had greater abilities, but were they evolved enough to use them?- that's last sentence has little to do with existance of God, I just thought you should know that the beginnings of evolution are random. However proving evolution wrong would bring you closer to proving God exists...
jabbaquar 2 months ago
because if suddenly creatures appeared on a planet, where before they didn't, then Id want an explainable answer, randomness doesn't do for me, and things like mothers protecting their young goes against 'survival of fittest' anyway, what creature would care about the next generation? It would just be their own survival that counted. Still, if life suddenly appeared (however 'evolved'), I'd want a good reason. God makes sense to me, nothing else I've looked at does, because its random
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@jabbaquar Ok you have some serious misconceptions about what evolution says and it would take me far more than the character limit to address them. Do you want to start a conversation in messages? I'm not an expert on evolution by any standard but I think I should be able to give you a hand. Either way, PLEASE go read a book about evolution, trust me, there's a moment where "the penny drops" and it just all falls into place if you do enough reading about it
cm3007235 2 months ago
@cm3007235 I would love to start a conversation in messages, and by the way I have read books on evolution before, but I'm still interested to hear what you have to say.
jabbaquar 2 months ago
@cm3007235 You've gotta be kiddin' Me! This is absolutely horrendous. First, name ANY other of the "many" possibilities for the origin of the Universe. 2nd, Humans defy natural selection too often for it to have got Homo sapiens to this age of the world. 3rd, give Me a cause of the origin of the Universe. This is My reason for believing in a God: the complexity & order exhibited throughout Nature and in individual Humans. 4th, Science can NEVER prove or disprove the existence of God.
UnexpectedWonder 2 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder Give Me Proof that God doesn't exist?
UnexpectedWonder 2 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder We weren't talking about the origin of the universe. Although in theory there are a few for it. String theory has one, quantum fluctuations....
Give me one example of how humans defy natural selection
Just because we don't have an explanation for the origin of the universe doesn't mean you can believe whatever fairytale most appeals to you. It's ok to say "i don't know". Why does complexity and order indicate a creator? Who cares?
Science also can't disprove bigfoot
cm3007235 2 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder Now we defy natural selection,that's true. Almost everybody can survive and reproduce now, but in the stone age it was very different, to put it mildly. They couldn't defy natural selection in the stone age, and it was in the stone age our species evolved:)
winterstellar 2 months ago
@CJCode21, 1) straw man/ad hominem attack, 2) straw man, and 3) straw man.
naejimba 2 months ago
please watch Vlog 27: S. 1867 National Defense Authorization Act
bigoxtailbone2 2 months ago
how does a computer interact with the video game it is hosting. derp. can't measure a separate dimension.
WalkinonWalls 2 months ago
dawww so cute
mysteryowl1 2 months ago
................
greatgallade 2 months ago
@davidkinane, nope. It's the name of the first horde character I rolled on wow. Random question, would anyone out there be interested in seeing a pvp video if I attempted to make one?
naejimba 4 months ago
Cool video.
What I actually find interesting is that there is an issue, there are two sides to all arguments. I have actually been provided with 'proof' of both evolution and creation, in the form of sourced books and articles. They are all an interesting read. I am quite surprised though at the amount of people who are unaware of scientific research done, looking into creationism. I think people like things to be proven instead of observing a equal argument, and having to decide a choice alone.
Soulwrite7 4 months ago
@Soulwrite7, well, I don't quite think it is an "equal argument" as you put it. If nothing else, one side has mountains of empirical evidence (imo the most reliable form of evidence) and the other side does not.
naejimba 3 months ago
I dont believe in vampires so I dont go around bargging about not believing in them.. . (atheists)... Why dont you just ignore the topic and find your own interests? Why do you feel the need to get involved in others lifes and beliefs... Get your own life!
OooHesGood 4 months ago
@OooHesGood Please watch:watch?v=1pwwvBygoFA&feature=related
Amni0ni 3 months ago
@OooHesGood, I'd bother to comment, but the video Amni0ni linked pretty much gives you an idea as to why.
naejimba 3 months ago
Agnosticism is understandable..
but Atheism is just stupid...
sfyr 4 months ago
@sfyr, please elaborate.
naejimba 4 months ago
@naejimba
Agnosticism = The evidence for God don't totally convince me = Undecided...
Atheism = The evidence for God don't totally convince me = There's NO God...
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.. ie Atheism = Illogical...
sfyr 4 months ago
@sfyr, although not even atheists can agree over the definition of atheism (let alone between atheists and theists), atheism does not necessarily mean one is even making a claim regarding the existence of god. Even more confusing, technically under some definitions not only am I an atheist, but some definitions of agnostic apply to me as well. Using your example, for myself at least, it would be more like this: Atheism (weak/agnostic)= The evidence for god doesn't convince me = (cont)
naejimba 4 months ago
(cont) The way I see it, if I make a claim regarding the existence or non-existence of something, I then have the burden of proof, and you can't really disprove a negative unless you can show it is logically contradicting, etc. Even this does not concern probability though. For instance, I lack a belief in extraterrestrial intelligent life simply because there is not sufficient evidence in order for me to justify belief. If evidence is presented, my beliefs will change in light of it. (cont 2)
naejimba 4 months ago
(cont 2) However, this says nothing about what I think the probability of said extraterrestrial life is. I honestly think intelligent life on other planets is far more probable than the existence of Zeus or the judeo-christian god.
naejimba 4 months ago
@naejimba
"..not even atheists can agree over the definition of atheism.."!!!
Im just using the definition the dictionary gives..
"..The way I see it, if I make a claim regarding the existence or
non-existence of something, I then have the burden of proof.."!!!
EXACTLY... Atheists don't get this point...
"..you can't really disprove a negative.."!.. lol.. Of course you can...
What you can't disprove is God... probably because he exists..
Zeus is part of the universe so he can't be the Creator..
sfyr 4 months ago
@sfyr, "Im just using the definition the dictionary gives" different dictionaries have different definitions which have different implications, for ex. here are two from the merriam webster "a disbelief in the existence of deity," as well as "the doctrine that there is no deity." The former would be weak/negative atheism, while the latter strong/positive atheism. They are two seperate positions. Either way, various atheists have and do disagree on the definition. (cont)
naejimba 4 months ago
(cont) "lol.. Of course you can..." Read the rest of my sentence. This is quote mining, I clearly stated that a negative can be disproven if it is logically contradicting. "What you can't disprove is God... probably because he exists." I cannot disprove Santa or the tooth fairy. Does this mean they exist? "Zeus is part of the universe so he can't be the Creator." Never said either one was, what I did say was that I found both of these claims less probable than two others I mentioned. (cont 2)
naejimba 4 months ago
(cont 2) "PS: You're an agnostic." Did you read anything I wrote? Under certain definitions of atheism I am considered an atheist, and under certain definitions of agnostic I am considered agnostic. These days I define myself as a "non-theist" simply because there is so much disagreement currently with the definitions and so much confusion, and I basically have the same conversation over and over and argue semantics until I feel like shooting myself in the face.
naejimba 4 months ago
@naejimba
"..same conversation over and over and argue semantics until.."!
It's really simple.. If you're undecided you're an agnostic..
If you believe there's NO god you're an atheist..
"I cannot disprove Santa or.."!!. lol. yes you can.. and here's how you do it..
what do we know about santa.. he lives in the northpole and his deers can fly..
1 - is there anyone living in the northpole? NO
2 - can deers fly? NO
Santa disproved..
The "you can't disprove a negative" argument is silly.. (cont)
sfyr 4 months ago
@sfyr, "It's really simple.." Sure it is, if you completely ignore any debate on the matter and decide that you alone get to determine the definitions of words. " is there anyone living in the northpole? NO" What if he's out to lunch or on vacation? In reality to determine that santa doesn't exist (besides showing him to be logically contradictory) you would have to simultaneously search every square inch of the universe to be able to determine he's not somewhere else currently. (cont)
naejimba 4 months ago
(cont) Even more fun, if, for instance, you claimed that we would be able to at least see his house or the workshop where the elves work, I could just pull out the old theist classic where you place the unproven claim slightly out of reach of any criticism. Instead of the usual "he's god.. he can do ANYTHING," I could say, "he's magic, he can do ANYTHING," (in this case I could say since he is magic he could use said magic to hide the workshop). (cont 2)
naejimba 4 months ago
(cont 2) "Can deers fly? NO." Can donkeys talk? Could all of the world's species fit on one boat? Could a man live in the belly of a fish for several days? Can people walk on water? Can you bring someone else back from the dead? Can a virgin give birth to a baby? All of these claims are just as improbable (if not more so), but 1) theists readily believe without evidence in the claims of their particular religions, but would require evidence in order to believe in a flying deer, (cont 3)
naejimba 4 months ago
(cont 3) (which in my opinion is hypocritcal and logically inconsistent) and 2) According to your logic, you can disprove something just because you've never seen it before. For all we know, there could be some planet on the other side of the universe that has flying deer on it. Improbable? Perhaps. However, again, you either have to show it is logically contradicting, be able to simultaneously serach every part of the universe, or have all knowledge. (cont 4)
naejimba 4 months ago
(cont 4) You said yourself that "absence of evidence is not evidence for absence." However, what I will say is that you currently have no good reason TO believe in santa or flying reindeer.
naejimba 4 months ago
@naejimba
"According to your logic, you can disprove something just
because you've never seen it before."!!!. Did I say that???
"..you would have to simultaneously search every square inch of the universe.."!!
No you don't... He's supposed to live at the northpole..
that's the only place we need to check..
Logical contradiction is not the only way to disprove something...
"Then provide said evidence.".. I gave you 2..
You're right about the second one.. but the first one still stands..
(cont)
sfyr 4 months ago
@sfyr, "No you don't... He's supposed to live at the northpole.. that's the only place we need to check." You live in your house, does that mean this is the only place we would ever need to go to find you? Or do you sometimes leave your house? What if you were on vacation? What if you moved?
naejimba 4 months ago
Comment removed
sfyr 4 months ago
@naejimba
"What if you were on vacation? What if you moved?"!!!
What if Im microscopic.. What if Im invisible..
what if.. what if.. what if.. We can do this all day...
Let's talk about God... Do you want the evidence???
sfyr 4 months ago
@sfyr, well, it was your example, and I contend that those were valid points that I made. Yes, I would very much like to see evidence.
naejimba 3 months ago
@naejimba
"..decide that you alone get to determine the definitions of words.."!!..
I'll tell you what you are.. just answer this..: Are you sure of God's non-existence?
"..What about the flying spaghetti monster?.."!!. lol..
How can it be outside the universe.. if it's made of matter???
Universe = Matter + Energy + Time + Space
Outside the Universe = Immaterial + Timeless + Spaceless = Abrahamic God
NO other 'god' has these features...
One of the Abrahamic religions IS TRUE.. want evidence???
sfyr 4 months ago
@naejimba (cont)
The reason why we disbelief in santa/toothfairy/etc is because we have good
reasons to think they do NOT exist.. we have positive evidence AGAINST them...
"Never said either one was..."!!!
All Im saying is.. the Creator must be outside the universe...
Zeus/Odin/etc are part of the universe.. so they can't be Creator...
The only God outside the universe is the Abrahamic God...
Abrahamic religions = Judaism, Christianity, Islam...
The question is.. which one is true...
sfyr 4 months ago
@sfyr, "we have positive evidence AGAINST them." Then provide said evidence. "The only God outside the universe is the Abrahamic God." What about the flying spaghetti monster? or, I could just make up a god which exists outside the universe, and it would have just as much evidence to support it as any of the abrahamic gods.. none at all. "The question is.. which one is true." No, the question should be "are any of them true?" Your question implies one MUST be true, which is a gross assumption.
naejimba 4 months ago
@naejimba
PS: You're an agnostic...
sfyr 4 months ago
I dont believe in god just like i dont believe there is an invisible unicorn following me.
a10fjet 4 months ago
so if the evidence of God is the universe itself then all you look at is evidence of God
MrKillermeatball 4 months ago
wtf did i just watch
macasmunchys 5 months ago
im sorry but i agree and all but why does his head keep moving?
MrIdunnointernet 5 months ago
awesome video.
fausto412 5 months ago
@23darrenjames kill yourself
delacruz28 5 months ago
God IS an extra terrestal. (he lives in space!)
MegaRockcool 5 months ago
@gowthampro bigfoot is certainly more plausible, but santa is sort of impossible.
superfreegoat 5 months ago
sigh soo much arguing...
loonfeet 5 months ago
Totally true, but stupid christians do not and are not capable of logic. they are DUMB, DUMB and generally VERY DUMB when it comes to logic. If they understood how logic works then they would not believe in anything mythical, Nor do they believe in logical science. Their IQ floats around 70...
timdnwd 5 months ago
Wow. another Video 2 show y Atheist can be Hated by Many, Loved by Few. it's Bigotry. we're right. ur Definately Wrong. i can give Emprical evidence 4 the Existence of God. now, whether it's Accepted or not is on the Reader. but, have Atheist given Believers, especially Christians, empirical evidence that Cancels out the Existence of God. i Think NOT. also, i can use History, Philosophy, and Current Events on My Side of the Argument. Atheists i NEED Proof, not Ideology.
UnexpectedWonder 5 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder You need help with grammar, spelling and punctuation. Usually before you start proving a point you want to convince your audience you're capable of a complete thought.
You also didn't read my entire post you replied to. The second half I'm sure you'll disapprove of.
lost524 5 months ago
@lost524 Again, I am dealing with a grammatical taskmaster. This is Youtube people, not an academic exercise or report. I use shorthand to save time and space. On here you must be uber economically sound. I can portry my points eloquently, but I don't believe it's needed to get my point across, sir. Is this better for you?
UnexpectedWonder 5 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder Yes, it is better. You actually seem like you can hold your own in a conversation. Congratulations.
lost524 5 months ago
@lost524 WOW. y would i have 2 Impress u, SIR? i don't KNOW u.
UnexpectedWonder 5 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder I don't know but you tried.
lost524 5 months ago
@lost524 HAHA. Wow...Bro, u've got Me Twisted. u sound a bit Conceited. that Turns people off. u Know?
UnexpectedWonder 5 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder Obvious troll is obvious.
lost524 5 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder, well, not only is this the burden of proof fallacy, but if nothing else the same claim can be leveled against theists. Now, if you could provide empirical evidence of god you would be the first person in history to really do so, it is kind of a big deal.
naejimba 4 months ago
@naejimba hmm...is it Now? y is evidence of a world that is decaying necessary for a Being and other beings that transcend the Physical Realm? Look @ Earth. can u explain the Mathematics that it would take for 1. it to have lightning strike the right amount of times 2. it to have just the right axis. 3. it to be the right distance from the sun 4. the sun to be the right kind of star for Life as we know it to exist 5. it to be the ONLY known habitable planet 6. it to have such vast liquid water?
UnexpectedWonder 4 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder, well.. a couple of things. If I can't explain something, it says nothing about proving whatever particular god you believe in. Theists have the burden of proof, thus the burden of proof fallacy. Also, there are lots of things we don't know. Next, you can either view it as "what are the odds that everything is made 'perfect' for us?" or you could view it as life began and evolved here the way it did simply because the conditions happened to permit it.
naejimba 3 months ago
@naejimba as I continually say, "Numbers don't lie." What evidence can be presented that verifies such evolutionary processes took place? Not only am I viewing the complexity of Homo sapiens but also the biodiversity present on Earth and the fact that Earth is as far as we know one of a kind. You say I need evidence? Tell Me. what r the odds of Earth being the ONLY planet that is able to support Life?
UnexpectedWonder 3 months ago
@UnexpectedWonder, " What evidence can be presented that verifies such evolutionary processes took place?" Fossil evidence, molecular evidence, genetic evidence, vestigial organs, altavistic organs, evidence from proteins, embryology, homology, biogeography, bacteriology, virology, immunology, evolution produced in a lab as well as evolution documented that has naturally occured (including observed instances of speciation), even (cont)
naejimba 3 months ago