PROOF that God does not exist.

[foxjackalwolf]

All of the 3 secrets happened as foretold. The HELL they saw was unforgiving. This is how one of the child described what she saw "Our Lady showed us a great sea of fire which seemed to be under the earth. Plunged in this fire were demons and souls in human form, like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, floating about in the conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames that issued from within themselves together with great clouds of smoke,

[solopowerfulone]

SUCK EGGS

[muntu1221]

You are such a dumbass. You got all of this wrong. Why would God need to help anybody? If he did, nobody would die. That wouldn't be a pretty world. This has no real proof in it

[mizzmonie100]

LOVE THIS

[NobodyXChallenger]

I'd say god is a wannabe.He sends innocent people to hell for not believing in him.That is just plain child-ish!

[muntu1221]

@NobodyXChallenger Hell is a miss translation, so God isn't a wannabe

[drewnut]

I debated the argument of all knowing in a philosophy class. To solve the riddle of how a god could be all knowing and us still have free will for morality to justify the punishment of hell there would have to be multiverses. one universe would not work with the christian concept of god because he would already know what actions we would take based on the universe he created since he is not affected by time.

[wesleyg20]

dude u have the dumbest arguments . waste of time

[123Montserrat]

One i have a testimony to make my grandma was in the hospital for 3 days. day 1 she was very sick we all prayed and then day 2 she was better than before she could walk day 3 we all sang hallellujah because she was okay and now 1 month after she can do the things she used to do

[NobodyXChallenger]

@123Montserrat That means NOTHING!Your grandma is just ONE human healed out of the many thousands that are praying but no luck or "god" for that matter, that helped them.Your grandma's body found an amazing way to heal, but not by a god.

[logodaedally]

Why does the video try to justify an attack on the Bible with the Koran? I think we can all see the irony in that.

[logodaedally]

I don't get how people can't get their minds around the concept of a miracle being plausible if God exists. This sort of 'miracles can't happen' is CIRCULAR LOGIC. I'm sure many of you know what that phrase means.

[sirocox2x]

Dude the god of the muslims is not the same god as in the Bible lol , u are ignorant i bet u never read any of the books , and u surfed the web to get your So called prof ged a life dude and stop this crap if u do not baleve in god it s your choice but do not blame the others for baleving in god , because than u got a problem , i wonder why have u made this video , what did u had in miind?

[Greyh0und]

Sadly, God (god with a capital G = Yahweh/the biblical god) can't be disproven as there can't be proof of a non-existant being. Because if there would be proof it didn't exist, the proof itself would prove it WOULD exist. (can you still follow it?)

Although the existance of God is VERY inprobable. I'd say 1:1 Googleplex, which is more then 1:"The amount of atoms in the universe".

[plbuster]

@Greyh0und Not at all, troll.

[mayhemmanson]

ok, so how is asking questions about God proof that he doesnt exist? and your logic is off

[MARGARETPF]

Oh he is real, you dont feel him because you are not apart of him. he chose his people before life even exsit. God knowns the heart of every one, so he must have look over you for a reason. many will come few will be chose you may be one of the few.

[Phage0070]

@MARGARETPF

"A part" and apart are not synonymous. In fact they are opposites. While I suspect people can figure out what you are saying, it is only because they already knew what you were talking about.

[100percentrekkie]

Unfortunately, "proof" is a math term. We don't have "proof" in the real world as we mathematicians know it.

That said, this is not proof, but an extreme amount of evidence against God.

1) makes the existence of God unlikely.

2) makes God appear cruel

3) Judaism

4) this disproves the power of prayer.

5) so is the existence of necrotizing fasciitis, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.

6) see #2

7) This disproves an all powerful or all knowing God that exists in this universe. yeah, cop out...

[logodaedally]

@100percentrekkie I disagree but am happy you know what a proof is! Common misconception... *sigh at all those people who demand 'proof' that God exists

[Mancunian786]

god does exist and i can proove it

[Greyh0und]

@Mancunian786 Go ahead. Prove that 'god' (Whichever god you believe in) exists.

[bonniew1155]

@Greyh0und Look around He has left us with all kinds of proof.You either accept or not.I choose to believe inGod and all He stands for.If you reject Him ,I feel sorry for you.Read His word and find out.God hears and sees all,,he knows we had this conversation.Accept Him.

[Greyh0und]

@bonniew1155

"He has left us with all kinds of proof."

What kind of proof? Note: The bible is not proof, as the book changed in the centuries and can not be trusted at all!

And even IF he indeed exists, I would never accept him as a leader, as Yahweh is an incredible immoral character!

[plbuster]

@Greyh0und Nonsense. I could refute that same straw man argument by stating that every book written by man is not to be trusted. This is just another example of trolling.

[Greyh0und]

@plbuster The oldest still intact bible is the Codex Sinaiticus, which is vastly different then the newly (re)written bibles.

Any (non fiction) book can be checked with reality, and when you check reality with the bible, you'll see it's full of bullshit! Walking on water? Rising from the dead after 3 days? Living in a fish for a week (or was that 3 days)? Talking Snakes/Donkeys? Come on! You know that shit is false! The only reason you believe it, is because it's written in the bible! AMIRITE?

[plbuster]

@Greyh0und Wow, let's just throw out all those scrolls found in the scriptorums around the Dead Sea....That ought to support your assertions. You choose not to believe because you don't want to believe. Such hate can only come from a demented mind.

[plbuster]

@Greyh0und it is a wicked and sinful generation that seeks a sign. All the evidence is given, yet you still refuse to believe. Why please such an insignificant egocentric troll like you?

[Greyh0und]

@plbuster

>it is a wicked and sinful generation that seeks a sign.

Every generation of ignorant people will seek a sign. And educated generation would seek EVIDENCE!

> All the evidence is given

Which evidence? Tell me *SPECIFICALLY*!

> egocentric troll like you

Did I touched a nerve, did I? You can call me whatever you like, It won't change reality.

[plbuster]

@Greyh0und Every sign was already predicted, given, documented, and attested to, yet you still refuse to believe. Your "websites" are no more academically honest than the Enquirer Magazine.

[onijester56]

@plbuster That's why I read peer-reviewed papers, pre-review-era scientific texts, and even philosophical and theological treatises. Of course that not a single one of those sources presents any honest evidence for God and many present cases that end up refuting the idea of God.

Also, the "Dead sea scrolls" are a collection of Judaic texts that demonstrate the progression and evolution of Christianity from Judaism. ~40% are copies of Canon, ~30% are non-canonical, and ~30% are commentary.

[plbuster]

@onijester56 Actually, the Bible itself demonstrates the progression and evolution of Christianity from Judaism. No need for the "Dead sea scrolls" which include the writings of the Essenes.

"Peer reviewed papers? Whose peers? A bunch of atheistic socialists? Historical revisionists that go so far as to re-write history to favor their views? Are those the "peers" to which you refer?

[onijester56]

@plbuster [No need for the "Dead sea scrolls" which include the writings of the Essenes.] What part of "~40% are copies of Canon, ~30% are non-canonical, and ~30% are commentary" don't you understand? Hell, a good portion of what I've read takes clear artistic liberties from what has been written before the Israelites.

"A bunch of atheistic socialists?" From atheists to polytheists and everything inbetween. The thing about Science is that judges views on the evidences and arguments made.

[boscoblack]

@LuciferOfficial666 I like your thinking about the infinite past of time, and that if it was infinte, we wouldn't be here. however, this statement is wrong. you are thinking of time as something that actually exists and is able to stretch into the past. it is in fact nothing more than a series of changes at the subatomic and molecular level, and we happen to be here because certain changes occurred at a specific point in "time," that allowed our life to exist.

[Jozyrose]

wow which bible did u read??? so far i didn't see things like "kill the adulter and adultress" to see God to believe in him tells that u have no faith and u rely on facts and logic explanations 

[cbrnate]

no offense but the whole lucifer666 stuff? i'm pretty sure you dont worship satan, but that isn't going to help you at all. i know i know it's like a joke. haha do you know how many people think atheisim is satanism, hence satan worship? haha funny thing is satanists dont even worship satan, then again christins dont worship god either, they worship whatever thier ideal image of god is. but dont hate, it's just the ones that point fingers and claim authority to damn people to hell that are bad

[logodaedally]

1. Worst argument I ever heard. Newton, Kepler, Boyle, Pasteur were all very smart scientists and devout Christians. FAIL

2. Why is there suffering? It can help people draw closer to God. See Job.

3. "When two or three are gathered in my name" e.g. already faithful Christians. If you had faith you wouldn't need Jesus to appear.

4. Let's not forget that God created the world and therefore science is a study of His creation.

[cbrnate]

@logodaedally so innocent children suffer so we can be closer to god? i thought he was omnipresent and he is us. how can you get closer? that makes no sense. at all. god is greedy casue why would he need anything from us anyways. he's probably cheating on us with another solar system haha. maybe he thought it would be funny to actually make klingons and romulans, and we star as the enemies on their version of star trek lol.

[logodaedally]

@cbrnate I didn't say all types of suffering... that is a mistaken distinction you are making

God does not need anything from you either! I have no idea where that comment came from

[onijester56]

@logodaedally 1) They were far from Orthodox, and all used 'God' to predominately fill the gaps in their knowledge, which is fallacious.

2) Omnipresence voids the concept of seperation. Omniscience voids ignorance of that fact. Omnipotence voids any lack of action. Benevolence is not demonstrated by the very presence of suffering.

3) FSM laughs at your ignorance. Have faith in His Noodly Appendages.

4) Then if God is real, science will prove it.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 1) What does Orthodox have to do with it? They were Christians who believed in sound doctrine and in fact Issac Newton said atheism became more pointless as he learned more about the universe. You should really read biographies.

2) Justice is not demonstrated by 'lack of action' to remonstrate sinners.

3) This is basically a character attack. Tip: they don't work very well.

4) Not everything can be proven by science. You can't even scientifically prove that the earth is round...

[onijester56]

@logodaedally

1) Orthodoxy determines how valid their opinions are with respect to Biblical doctrine. Even Socrates can be interpreted as a Christian despite being from ~500 BC; does that make him right on matters of Jesus?

2) When one has the time, ability, and foreknowledge to stop something they say they hate, if they don't stop it then they don't hate it.

3) It's not 'a character attack' if it's your own argument. Or did you not state "If you had faith you wouldn't need Jesus to appear"?

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 1) If he was 500 BC then it logically follows he was not Christian because Christ was not even born yet

2) *sigh you are forcing me to go into the subject of free will, and that takes a very long time to explain. Try watching "Since Evil and Suffering Exist..." etc. by WhatisMedia. I will be happy to answer questions

3) Yes, and it's true. So?

4) Try taking a debate class at Northwestern University... although I think you win on that one. They forgot about satellite imaging! :)

[onijester56]

@logodaedally

1) Then you obviously haven't read his work. In fact many of his ideas are fundamental to Christianity. Including, but not limited to, the concept of a three-part unity.

2) Not a single argument on Free Will validly excludes God from action he is (by definition) capable of while either keeping perfection or allowing moral worship.

3) It's hypocritical to claim a character attack against the same argument you use when it is used against you.

(cont)

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 1) that's 'sound doctrine'... you are not making sense to me

2) then obviously you haven't watched the video

3) My argument was that your argument was invalid; your argument was that I was 'ignorant.' My argument was an argument against your argument; yours was an argument against ME. There's a difference, and therefore it's not hypocrisy.

[logodaedally]

Wait - disregard 1) - I didn't see your other comment. Sorry! :)

[onijester56]

@logodaedally 1) For starters, Plato's "Symposium". Specifically start at line (should be) 201d, Socrate's chapter.

There's also a Greek myth analogous to the sexuality as expressed in Genesis 1 and 2 in Aristophane's chapter [should be line 189c].

2) Quite contrary, I have. And the video still fails. However I'll entertain you.

3) It's not a character attack to state a fact. Any knowledge on the topic would have you realize the fallacious nature of your claim, hence you are ignorant.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 1) That still doesn't mean he was Christian - which obviously he isn't.

By the way, all this has nothing to do with my argument that Christians can be smart people.

2) OK then... in that case you need to explain WHY it fails

3) First "FSM laughs at you" and now "hence you are ignorant"... you still haven't pointed out anything wrong with my argument and you are focusing on ME instead. I hope I don't have to keep repeating myself

[onijester56]

@logodaedally

1) You seem to like ignoring what is put. My words, emphasis added: [Even Socrates can be INTERPRETED AS a Christian]

3) You seem to like ignoring what you don't want to address. I'll spell it out for you. Your argument is circular: You presuppose despite any evidence or lack thereof for or against and then use your own bias/presupposition/assumption to support the presupposed conclusion. That I've had now spelled it out is even more evidence towards the fact of your ignorance.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 1) He wasn't a Christian because Christ had not been born yet. I've told you that already too.

2) So explain or not?

3) Take a look at the video's argument: "In the Bible verse (quote) why won't Jesus appear? This is a contradiction" I gave an answer based on the verse resolving the contradiction. How is that circular? I'm using the verse to support the argument; the video was assuming the verse true in the first place. Calm down a bit - some questions you can answer yourself.

[onijester56]

@logodaedally

1) I'll put the words right here. For you. Alone. INTERPRETED AS.

2) You seem to not know that (cont) stands for "continued". As well as the topic at hand being at least 200 words...Either eagerness or ignorance.

3) "I gave an answer based on the verse resolving the contradiction" It doesn't resolve the contradiction, though. It describes a social phenomenon known since ancient times using a preconceived notion, circular logic, and bias.

And you repeatedly ignore context.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 1)...... Socrates does nothing to Newton or the rest of the gang

2) ok got it

3) circular logic is x then y because y then x... I fail to see how it is circular logic. Please explain

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 Are you going to explain or have you checked your logic and agreed with me?

[onijester56]

(cont)

2) "A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all." Evil, however, is subjectively called, based predominately on harm to others; depending on individual philosophy either intent or end, but that's irrelevant for this.

As such, a world could be at least as valuable as both extremes while maintaining 'limited will'.

(cont)

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 In English, please. Your vocabulary, though not too difficult, is extremely dry and formal and somewhat confusing to read. And please don't include irrelevant information.

If it's about there being an alternate design, try to come up with one that includes free will, and then ask if it works.

[onijester56]

@logodaedally "In English, please." I'll spell it out, then.

The video you present doesn't answer anything because:

*It ASSUMES that free will is more valuable than Moral Perfection.

*It ignores that Morality is subjective.

*It ignores any middle-ground between Total Free Will and Total Moral Perfection.

"If it's about there being an alternate design, try to come up with one that includes free will, and then ask if it works."

Eliminate the impulse to harm others. FYI it generally would.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 a) how would you prove otherwise?

b) Actually in Christianity morality is objective, as given by God's law. YOU are assuming

c) The two are not comparable

d) that wouldn't really give them much of a choice between perfection and perfection, would it?

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 I see you gave up on 4)

[onijester56]

@logodaedally "I see you gave up on 4)" Because there's nothing to discuss about it. In fact if I'm able to look at a cell phone and present two arguments [satellite imagine and satellite rotation around the earth] that an entire debate team can't then that is highly questionable on their actual debate skills.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 no... there's nothing to discuss about it because you can't scientifically prove that Lincoln existed. I'd like to see you try though :)

[onijester56]

@logodaedally Statues. Lists of the Presidents. Birth record. Presidental ballots. Job records. Signature on presidential documents. School records. Records of speeches and debates. His body. Official portraits and camera-shots. Personal journals. Just to begin.

Then there's his wive's and childrens' documentation. And his parents'.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 I said SCIENTIFICALLY

It's (as you relate to God) "unprovable. Untestable." How would you TEST that Lincoln existed? My point is that some things are not scientifically provable and that all you can do is gather evidence. Am I clear enough?

[onijester56]

@logodaedally "How would you TEST that Lincoln existed?" The point of TESTING in science is TO ACQUIRE EVIDENCE. So acquiring a such objects from his birth records (or at least official copies) to his own body (or photographs) is in and of itself testing for Lincoln's existence.

"My point is that some things are not scientifically provable and that all you can do is gather evidence" Anything you CAN gather evidence is scientifically provable (and/or disprovable, but that's another topic).

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 The point of scientific testing is to obtain data that CAN BE VERIFIED OVER AND OVER... for instance is you wanted to prove that salt melts ice at a certain temperature you could melt it over and over again; Lincoln will not exist over and over; it is not REPEATEDLY VERIFIABLE. The proof is not scientific. I could say that there was a conspiracy to 'forge' evidence of his existence. It IS A PROOF, I agree, but it's not scientifically proven. There is a difference. Same for God.

[onijester56]

@logodaedally "The point of scientific testing is to obtain data that CAN BE VERIFIED OVER AND OVER" You fail to understand simple science. Then when it gets to Historical science you completely fail.

Historical science, in understanding that specific events only occur once, relies on COLLECTIONS OF EVIDENCES from MANY INDEPENDENT SOURCES. At ANY TIME the evidences are READILY AVAILABLE if not the original then a contemporary or direct copy. THAT is the repeatability in Historical science.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 I repeat that it is not a SCIENTIFIC PROOF.

If you want to call subjective proof by another name that is fine with me. Just call it "history." Don't get it confused with an actually science proof, because the scientific proof so many people are hoping for to either prove or disprove God simply does not exist. I hope you understand what I mean... It's hard to explain it to someone who is under the impression that everything is scientific.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 PS I believe "Historical science" does not exist but is actually a field called archeology. I'm sure you've heard of it.

[onijester56]

(cont)

For Lincoln we have: birth records kept by the hospital AND in family reserves, school records and portfolios kept by the school AND in family reserves, hand-written letters from others to Lincoln and from Lincoln to others, hand-written journals, and official copies from various libraries of at least the bulk of these. Then there's Political Party, Political Debate, and Political Action records also available.

Just to list a few.

God? A bronze-age book that's been repeatedly edited.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 So you agree that the video argument is outdated then? Thanks. We can continue.

"A book" is a misconception. The Bible is actually a collection of 66 books written by over 40 authors during different time periods. When we compare the modern books of the Bible with the Dead Sea Scrolls, there is actually a 99% accuracy - a few mispellings, but no altered meanings. Your "editing" is not evident in archeological evidence. Sorry.

[logodaedally]

@logodaedally Hello?

[onijester56]

(cont)

And I can't forget that the New Testament then adds 2000-year-old adaptations of bronze-age myths incorporated into the life of a POSSIBLE person.

But that's a topic for another time. Until then: Until you learn, I'm done with your bullshit. Your total and willful ignorance is stunningly annoying.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 Very well... "ignorance" seems to be your favorite word. "Bronze-age myth" also a pet phrase...

Please try to clear your mind of bias! Didn't I just throw you a piece of hard evidence? (And what is with you and character attacks?) I'm beginning to suspect that you doubt Jesus' existence only as a way to feel secure that you are right...

It's in pretty much every world history book, you know. You can go shout at the school boards and editors.

[onijester56]

(cont)

Additionally for God to appear to people would still not contradict with the claim that "He can't cause or determine them to do only what is right."

"The fact that free creatures sometimes go wrong, however, counts neither against God's omnipotence nor against His goodness; for He could have forestalled the occurrence of moral evil only by removing the possibility of moral good." Both moral neutral AND the immoral punishment for breaking absolute/inconstant moral laws are disregarded.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 Punishment is obviously morally just...

Moral neutral?

[onijester56]

(cont)

However even assuming that the first part WAS a character attack, you IGNORE the second part.

In particular, the reply to your Bible verse. It in fact calls for you to assume the conclusion is correct without regards to the evidence or thought that may support or deny the conclusion.

Simply: Your point FAILS because you shape reality to a preconceived assumption while disregarding anything that cannot be fit while accepting it.

And then there's an ignored tangent on socialization.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 It was. Thank you for some signs of change.

If what you mean by all the above is simply that the Bible isn't an accurate source, well then, we can go into that. No need to state everything indirectly... I won't take too much offense you know...

Simply: Please assume that I 'disregard' these things. If there was no reason to believe in the Bible do you honestly think I would believe in it? (Easy enough logic there)

And thanks for somewhat cutting the character attacks.

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 for 1) please include the quotation and source where you got this information

And please listen to the other point of view before assuming things that have already been answered! Watch the video before you say no such argument exists, okay?

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 Oh - I almost forgot - Yes, their beliefs were all very much valid with respect to Biblical doctrine. Didn't I already say they had "sound doctrine?"

And it was a character attack - you were laughing at my "ignorance. Have faith in His Noodly Appendages," not my argument. Besides, laughing is hardly destructive *lol

[onijester56]

@logodaedally Your exact words: "Worst argument I ever heard. Newton, Kepler, Boyle, Pasteur were all very smart scientists and devout Christians. FAIL"

Which shows that you don't understand the views themselves. In fact Newton rejected the notion of the Trinity, and in other aspects he states were considerably heretical even while hidden under Orthodoxy. And I can prove the nullification of all Ten Commandments while still "valid with respect to doctrine".

(cont)

[onijester56]

(cont)

"If you had faith you wouldn't need Jesus to appear." actually does in fact equal "Have faith in His Noodly Appendages" because both are stating the requirement of faith [a lack of evidence] towards something that is unprovable, unfalsifiable, and untestable [hence mere speculation] such that you presuppose that the claim is true [the point of faith] in order to keep the assumption [circular argument].

To not realize the errors in both in fact demonstrates ignorance [no knowledge].

[logodaedally]

@onijester56 "A lack of evidence"

Actually, faith can be based on evidence. We didn't see dinosaurs evolve, but we have evidence that evolution happens.

Another example: You can't 'prove' that Abraham Lincoln existed. However, you believe he exists because of evidence that he exists. It is indeed 'unprovable' and 'untestable,' but you know so anyway.

Since faith is based on evidence, it is not circular logic.

*Nice try, so many atheists I've met have said this... it doesn't work

[onijester56]

(cont)

4) Actually science can and does. Circumnavigation: Circular paths (excluding mountains) provide a route back to the starting point without changing direction. Ergo it's a 3-dimensional shape composed of circles around a central point, by definition round.

Then there's satellite imaging...

And science is remarkable in that its fundamental point is the focus on what is testable and falsifiable. If God fails to be either, then He can only be claimed mere speculation and hence not true.

[SummerSunshine1988]

God does exist.

[logodaedally]

@SummerSunshine1988 Of course He does! Of course this person doesn't want religious people on his site - they would bust everything.

You can even tell by his account name how badly he hates Christians.

However, it might be smart to not waste time arguing with him because these people are so biased that they keep asking the same questions...

[SummerSunshine1988]

@logodaedally : I have no intention of even speaking with this person unless he approaches me first. Not to worry. I just felt that my statement needed to be said.

[cbrnate]

@logodaedally everyone with fith is biased, yeah he's immature, but there is an awful lot of things that dont add up in organized religion

[logodaedally]

@cbrnate wait... who's immature? I'm afraid you weren't clear.

Also, everyone with an opinion is biased, you know. The thing is to not let bias take you into circular arguments based in your bias or only showing one side of an argument (many of these arguments on the web are easily answered).

[soulplatos]

Also people do not recieve fullfilled prayers from god because they are praying without faith, with empty hearts, or in vain. Either that or it is because it is not relevent to anything......stop being stupid people.

[cbrnate]

@soulplatos the prayer experiment is way bogus, but there's no way to prove, even if what you pray for comes true, that doesnt mean it was an answered prayer. ok think about every sports game that has ever taken place, where both teams pray for a win. even if only one person on each team is a believer, they will be the praying the hardest, and same on the other team. so only one team can win, so no matter what, god is only answers half of prayers. if thre is a devout christian on both teams who

[cbrnate]

@soulplatos deserves to win? i am actually not an atheist, i'm agnostic, actually to be more accurate, i'm a former lutheren christian, turned nhilist, reformed secular humansit agnostic solipsist with a faith in god that no one could shake. but i dont believe in the various religions, i mean, which one is my ticket to heaven? how am i supposed to know? oh yeah i make my own rules, and my own rules follow the golden/silver rule. i make mistakes but i'm human, if i make a mistake, i should ask

[cbrnate]

@soulplatos for forgivness, but not of the god that created me with my faults, i ask for forgivness for the people on earth. see the god i have come to know, wouldnt create a hell to send people to. the fact that i know people who have felt so depressed they killed themselves, and yes you have no right to judge someone who was sexually abused to the point of that and neither does god. imagine a parent that spanks his child for no reason, then gorund them for cryying from the pain. that's what

[cbrnate]

@soulplatos the judau/chirstian and islamic god are, abusive fatehr figure. and this would be fine to believe in except ya'll claim he is love only. well there have been parents that kill thier own kids, but we dont call them a loving parent now do we? like i was saying, i can't believe in or love a god that would send a 13 year old boy to hell, becasue he killed himself, becasue he was raped by preist of the church. he suffers forever becasue he lost all hope, you know what his life was hell

[cbrnate]

@soulplatos how dare you, you guys have to watch saying things like people suffer, like kids are raped so we can be closer to god? wow that's not a creator, thats an extorsionist. in fact i might convert to islam, so i can touch a peice of pork, or look at another mans wife, becasue well you know the thought of cheating is cheat and cheating is a sin, so i can go to hell, and rescue all the innocent. think about the benefits of dumping your cult, first off, no one has to be tortured for eternity

[cbrnate]

@soulplatos the world wont end, you mothers and siter wont go to hell for having sex or ahving a baby out of wedlock. people will be nice to each other becasue it's the right thing to do, not because they are told to do so. in fact the bible is proof that we as a society can establish values and morals. becasue we humans wrote it to bring order. but you know power corrupts and so forth. so if your god exists, then that proves god sucks at making things, plain and simple cut and dry

[soulplatos]

@cbrnate While it si true the world will not end, somethingc hrist says his self, I know this. It is your soul and your life...while not live it and leave me be kk?

nightttt~

[cbrnate]

well i appreciate you ignoring my typos, didnt mean to be on a rant, not a good day for me, wont bother you again

[soulplatos]

Not true to yrou first inquirt...im a mecnahical engineer from ga tech...and I believe god exists....These questions are childish that are asked........and why are all the atheists going to great leaps and bounds to prove god exists? Sounds like he does to me...otherwise...why would you all care? As for me...if something is not important or relevent....It does not bother me....lol. you have been pwned.

[spamanon]

Very unsophisticated "proof." What you wrote is not even close to proof that God doesn't exist. I think you might not understand what the word "proof" means.

[GeeCu1]

Adam and eve sinned, and all their sons and daughters have been evil and worse ever since. So whose fault is all the evil in the world... yours and everyone else. Don't blame God.

[GeeCu1]

Why are there amputees? Why do prayers need to be asked? Why is their evil in the world? Why do children in Sudan need help? Why are kids raped? Why are you listening to this music? Why do you live a life worshipping yourself, live immorally, lying, stealing, hating, committing adultery, worshipping idol, coveting others stuff, and refusing to give honor,glory and thanks to the One who gave you life?

[GrandchaseFan101]

Heres some extra info if your wondering.

I'm agnostic.You see,I do have a main religion but always think outside the box like ''Maybe there was a Jesus maybe there wasn't.) so I probably will be an agnostic for the rest of my life.

Also,I think iv given my heart out to god before?it wasn't Jesus but...close enough?:P

[GrandchaseFan101]

Just because God is cruel doesn't mean God doesn't exsist.

I know its hard to imagine someone like that exsisting but its possible.

For all we know maybe God can't do anything about it or is just a sadist.It's really 1 big mystery.Also about Santa,iv herd from my mom he actually did exsist but he wasn't fat or had rein-dear or went into chyminies.He just gave to the poor.Then again--who knows really.

(Maybe you should try giving ur heart out to Jesus.You never know until you try right?)

[repairthemisery]

this isn't "proof", so don't say it is. your lies are repulsive.

if you were a sensible human being, then you would know that we are given problems to overcome them. kids in africa are being given a life lesson. bad karma from past lives needs to be taken off somehow.

i don't pray to god, but if i did, i would never fucking ask him to help me so that i could have the easy way out. that's ridiculous.

[MrClanzO]

1. If God were to say yes to all prayers in the world. People would become to dependant on him. He wants you to work for things, and get over it.

2. Im no Christian, but i know that if he did exist, and if God was Christian, then you'dd have to be christian along with him to get what you want. Christians say there Christians, but they have no idea what christianity is actually about. Or what it actually is.

[GodKnight888]

hey dude, the only thing I know is, when I asked jesus to come to my life, he came, and jesus just changed my life 100%, You should try it too ;D

[Mystical7899]

Great video, If God stopped the 9/11 attack, it would have taken away the free will of 19 people instead of the free will of thousands of people!

GOD DOES NOT EXIST! At least I found someone who knows the Bible is nonsense!

[ashemone]

i seen jesus second coming in my room like 5 years ago there was a cloud spinning around his torso he took my face towards tha cloud he was white see through so was my face

i calculated the beast like 3 days later COUNT thA repeated words

[jaybirdBCR]

ashemone you gotta stop smoking that shit man. its fucking with your head

[Davidovich101]

The biggest problem I can see with what your saying in this video, is your not putting into account that God gave us free will. He gave us will so that we would make the choice to accept him for what he is, God. And if you actual read the bible, you would know it says in Deuteronomy 6:16 "do not put the lord your God to the test" And koran isn't in the christian bible. There is a Corinthians 1&2. but no koran.

[Mystical7899]

Duh! Any mentally retarted idio knows that the Bible isn't the Koran!

[clayton7g]

To:  LuciferOfficial666 Frist you need to ASK JESUS into your LIFE not hard to do. Need PROOF it start by ASKING for PROOF. Watch Azuza Street Revival on You Tube.

[MusicMakesPeace27]

Why Jesus? I think Islam would be more suitable for him. It is more specific than Christianity. Those who are broken Christians can follow Islam easily. It is about love and faith and peace. Islam means peace.

[clayton7g]

Ask Jesus to come into your life. When you mean it he will come to you. What do you have to lose? SO ASK NOT HARD TO DO.

[LuciferOfficial666]

Yeah, right! The Bible is just a fiction by bronze age men. It contradict itself thousands of times (look up contradictions in the Bible!), and there are more variations of it than there are words in the new testament. By the way, maybe stopping a car from hitting somebody takes away free will, but healing an amputee does NOT take away anyone's free will, so God won't do that because he doesn't exist.

[mayhemmanson]

the only reason ppl think there are contradictions is cuz hebrew is the hardest language to translate, its written with NO spaces between that words and backwards

so a simple statement like "Godisnowhere"

does it say "God is here"

or "god is no where"

btw asking why God wont heal an amputee IS NOT proof that he doesnt exist ;)

[soulplatos]

@LuciferOfficial666 really? so where is yrou proof of this? I can easly reply that your statment is that of a immature, uneducated, fool. however I am not saying anything like this. Why not think more about what your typing? God will help you...but one thing you DON'T DO it tempt god...this means dont run infront of a car after asking god to not let one hit you, and then expect it not to kill you. Foolishness does not beget wisdom.

[bonniew1155]

@LuciferOfficial666 Iy's not our place to judge what God should do or not do.We cannot understand his ways, but whatever they are we must trust and believe He is always right.It's hard at times but He gives you peace, if you really KNOW him.That is my prayer for you.If you don't believe in God why are you called Lucifer?Isn't he the same as God in your book?

[plbuster]

@LuciferOfficial666 utter nonsense. Much of the Old and all of the New Testament was written during the Iron Age. Stop spouting lies.

[LuciferOfficial666]

I can prove to you that something with the definition of God cannot exist! If I say I will give you a dollar after an infinite amount of time, will I ever give you the dollar? No. Now, could there have been an infinite amount of time before right now? No. So there couldn't have been an infinite amount of time before right now, b/c if there were, we wouldn't be here. So nothing can be infinite. So God cannot be infinite. If God was finite, he wouldn't be God, b/c he must have been created!

[bonniew1155]

@LuciferOfficial666 Ask God if youdare.

[plbuster]

@LuciferOfficial666 Strawman logic. You are applying 4 dimensional logic upon a being that looks at time like we look at a stretch of road.

[MALCOLMACDOO]

@LuciferOfficial666 in answer to that question time could be circular rather than linear. We think of time as past present future. the past no longer exists the future hasn't happened. it's just the present that is real. But in truth they are connected and the past does influence the present and the future. So within that frame work there is no infinity because time loops back on itself . the beginning and ending are one which is how God describes himself the alpha and omega.

[tweethang1]

@clayton7g Fuck Jesus. Jesus can suck my balls!!

[Cootabux]

clayton7g

Most atheists here on YT were Xians before deconverting to atheism. When I was Born Again, I convinced myself of all the usual stuff we're supposed to believe, but then I started noticing things in scripture weren't right. Orig. Sin, Hell, and prayer. God doesn't answer prayer. I posted a challenge 4 yrs ago to any theist who believes god answers their prayers, I'll give them a chance to prove it. No one has taken the challenge yet.

Then I studied scripture for 3 & a half yrs. It's BS!