He just said the first human - sun god thing to make a point. But I see you did not understand that point/didn't want to and just carried on talking about it through most of your video COMPLETELY ignoring all the other stuff that he has said. Blah.
The reason people attributed the sun to a God is obvious and irrational. Throughout history and today, people fill the voids of knowledge with the assumption of God. "I do not understand this, therefore it must be God."
The early humans also believed that evil spirits caused sickness and that the world was flat. Citing the beliefs of early humanity does very little to prove the truth of the God Hypothesis...
It's easy to guess where that concept came from and probably with a great degree of accuracy.
This post may be a little late and someone else may have already said this but...
People invent things in their head all the time. The boogieman is another great example of that. The first god was not a singular. Was gods. Many of them. If you could go back in time and witness the first telling of the story of gods, I bet you'd find the first confidence scam too.
Your view is not universal. When the trio talk about God, they don't talk about god. Believers know nothing about science yet pretend to be experts. Science has nothing to do with whether there is God or not. It is trying continuously to understand . When believers understand that they shall understand science. . Your rhetorics only makes a mockery of knowledge.There was no 1st human. Tio's God came only 5000 years ago. Geology is the history of the planet, Genetics is of life. Enough said.
Humans like to try to rationalize ignorance. Gods are just anthropomorphism's of natural events. They see tribal leaders and imagine the big ball of fire is a bigger tribal leader. Humans are ignorant primates. Much of science is counter-intuitive.
Why are you proud of human ignorance? Its an obscene and dangerous thing.
All people are born as Atheists until they are brainwashed or conditioned by one of the thousands of cults/Gods.
There is only one modern Cult that worships Human Sacrifice: christianity. The foundational basis of this cult is the bloody sacrifice of a human named Jesus. This also involves neo-cannibalism, eating of flesh and drink of blood.
There is only one modern Cult that worships GENETICS/RACE: Judaism. The foundational basis of this cult is the racial genealogy of ones mother
Don't worry about it. Your meaning is as clear as a bell.
It's made me wonder if the same tendencies can be applied to the sensation that the self is other than the mind and it's activity. (re: the feeling of separation between the observer and the observed). I'm kind of hung up on that one.
As soon as you think about your own mind you tend to imagening it as something separated from your self.
I think some of the "Theory of mind" consept could apply as you think about your own mind in the same manner you would use if you where thinking of another person. Kind of "Theory of (your own) mind".
lol - Don´t know if that makes any sense to you but it is my 2c. :)
the reason it's rational for that person to belive the sun us a god is because humans have a tendency to anthrpomorphise everything around them. meaning they atribute the less tangible qualities of themself to other things.
that person would see the sun and realise that when the plants can't "see" the sun they die. they would also realise that if the plants die they, and everything around them, would die too. thus the sun also has the atribute of giving life to everything.
@QCreyton Sometimes I think going back to worshipping the sun makes more sense than a lot of the religious practices/beliefs floating around these days.
/facepalm. Cant you think things by yourself? Honestly give some toughts and read science books if you lack basic knowledge. Before making so stupid questions.
TogetherForPeace - I've jumped in here, but what is the problem? Primitive humans must have looked around them and wondered how everything came to be and why they were there. Primitive BUT intellectual enough to contemplate that a supernatural being might well be responsible, without knowledge, there could be no other explanation. As those primitives became more modern and science evolved (sorry!), some would develop alternative explanations and break from tradition...and here we are today!
Jack. Your reasoning is so circular. It's such a funny image: Jack sitting comfortably in a corner, chillin' while you're running 'round and 'round the coffee table.
In reference to the sun-god analogy, you don't get it because you don't want to. It's about what knowledge is available to a mind at the particular time they are trying to fit their experiences of life into predictable rules, ways to mitigate fear, and ways to control others. FEAR and AW of the unknown lead minds to fashion gods.
seriously no offense but you ask kinda dumb questions... because we got knowledge(assuming you believe it) of how everything around us works and got created,it leaves no place to your almighty, all knowing, creator... who created everything.. and just for us, ALL this might universe, for such a primitive bloodthirsty race.. that's 1 arrogant ideology
Evidence seems to show that the first evolved monkey/humans worshipped 'women' of all things... which is why some years later there would take place a complete polarity effect where women were treated less spiritual than men.
LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE....
thats why it was rational to think the sun is superior than us humans. they didnt know what it was, or how it worked. NOT because it is natural to think there is a god.
he whines, and bickers, and rants when he does not get his way
The atheist does not. He does not care if he is believed, or if others understand him for he is delighted in the knowledge that he knows something that the christians mind is too fragile to comprehend
Heaven's Gate was an American UFO religion.They believed or came up with the concept "It is also possible that part of our test of faith is our hating this world, even our flesh body, to the extent to be willing to leave it without any proof of the Next Level's existence" The group killed themselves in 1997 with this concept that Hale-Bopp comet, which members seemed to regard as a cosmic emissary beckoning them to another world.
Someone once came up with the concept of the loch ness monster and many believed it. Just believing or someone coming up with the concept does not make it so.
Invader- First there has to be an accepted criteria to determine what makes a belief rational. You haven't established any such criteria. Therefore you telling me what is rational or irrational is meaningless to me. Additionally your comment reflects a grand ignorance of history in such a way that I'm compelled to think you're only 16. You've certainly demonstrated how easy it is to spout nonsense and then pretend like you actually said something.
All religions were concocted in antiquity from superstitions and cults that predated them. Early on the ruling class realized the power of myths and stories. It made it sooo much easier to influence, rule, control the masses and specially to get them to do their hard labor for a beer and a loaf of bread! Oh! did I forget how it made it easy to get the poor to do their Dirty Deeds? WAR!!! It is so easy to justify war and get people to martyr themselves for the benefit of the rich! Madness : (
it does matter where you get your infomation from, and it is actually good practice to cite the names of people who's work you mention, so that we have the choice to verify what you say.
You make a good point, for once. Science answering a question may or may not resolve any particular longing for something greater (because, let's face it, not everyone has this desperate need to appeal to something greater - to the point of even making it up).
The question is, given that science doesn't answer the question of this 'longing', where do you get off insisting that your answer is correct - to the point of denouncing others for being wrong?
Early man evolved with large brains, and with the capacity to try to figure out how stuff works. The stuff they couldn't figure out how it worked, they called that "god".
The sun, the moon, the stars, the rain, trees, the life force of animals. All unexplainable with their primitive level of understanding.
Today, we know about the all-natural laws of physics and chemistry. If you want to call that "god", that's your right, but I guarantee that it doesn't talk to you or grant wishes.
@middlekk yes it does you just have to make the proper offerings, OH CHEMISTRY I PRESENT TO YOU ONE VIAL OF VINEGAR AND ONE VIAL OF BAKING SODA I WISH FOR FIZZ
Yes, they were justified in believing that there was a god!!! but now adays your illogical if you believe jesus was the son of god.
using christian logic there is a man with millions of witnesses walking america today who calls himself the reincarnation of jesus as the bible prophesied.
LOL! Why Phil would spend 1 minute on something without "addressing the points" and this, coming from you at 2 minutes into your vid, and you've addressed precisely ZERO points!
Perhaps this is why you are getting 2 star ratings? You don't even seem to see your self-contradictory ideas.
truthsurge- Dialogue for me is more than just addressing points. I get two stars anytime I say anything the larger community here on YouTube doesn't like. Like yourself many just act like annoying spectators thinking I care about what their saying as though they're the ones I'm talking with.
Bottom line: I don't know you from Jack (oops) but if you are unconcerned that your internal worldview is inconsistent, then rock on. I prefer to rest upon the ugly facts rather than the whitewashed bird-in-the-bush. But I give you credit for getting on here and stating your views. Maybe it's just Phil's accent that makes his points sound so convincing. LOL!
The facts are ugly in comparison to the fairytale. Ever watch a movie called "The Matrix"? The lie was the normal world and the truth was that the real world was not nearly so pretty but at least... it was real. Now, if you want to live in or out... that's your choice. I prefer to live outside in the real world and admit that there is no known heaven, hell, afterlife, daddy in the sky watching over us, etc.
"Like yourself many just act like annoying spectators thinking I care about what their saying as though they're the ones I'm talking with."
Actually, posting a vid allowing ALL people to view it allows us annoying spectators to comment. If you don't want comments and don't care about what we're saying, why not disable comments and ratings? that way, you could have discourse with... yourself! ?
truthsurge- true there is this whole pro's and con thing with youtube. either i post a video and disable comments and hear people whine about some notion of censorship they have or post a video and wave at the annoying spectators just to let them know i really don't care. well i care enough from time to time to come over and shake their hand :)
I know. Danged if you do... danged if you don't. Good choice to NOT disable comments/ratings. Better to have a few critics than no one. I don't enjoy shooting the breeze. I like to get down and dirty with the real evidence and draw conclusions from that. More like a mathematician than some philosopher. I don't do philosophy per se. I just lump stuff under two categories: true and false. hehehe
philhellenes' point was that, to people who don't know about nuclear fusion (or any part of physics) it isn't totally stupid to impute its functioning to magic/supernatural agency. It was our species' first mode of explanation, and for precisely that reason, the worst.
Just because an idea seems amazingly intuitive doesn't even begin to establish that it is correct - how counter-intuitive are relativity, quantum mechanics, evolution, etc.?
I have to say, your disdain for science and learning is really becoming VFX-like. No, Jack, explanations of how nature functions are not trivial, and they bear directly upon our place in the world. You can't say that the scientific account of (say) how the sun formed is unsatisfactory or insignificant just because it isn't theism-friendly.
As an aside, your (Freudian slip?) use of the phrase "want to believe" is incredibly revealing - put into other terms, "wish-think"...
The cancer patient analogy is irrelevant in the case of belief in god for the simple reason that, in the case of the patient, his belief can affect the truth of what he believes in (i.e. that he will get better), whereas no system of theology I have ever encountered allows for the existence of god to be affected by the strength of the conviction with which one believes in him.
The cancer patient might be a good analogy to make (it's certainly a very interesting case in point, because of the unusual fact of a belief influencing its own truth) but you have to consider the CONTEXT in which it was originally deployed by the philosopher in question.
9:27 It is my guess that you don't know exactly what phil means by rational. The rationality of something, perhaps, can change depending on how much we know. All of this hinges on what is meant by rationality.
The first humans, if the untouched tribes in various places are any example, didn't believe in "God". They believed in kindly/malevolent spirits and demons. Later, when their powers were exaggerated (Man of Tribe 1: "My spirits are more powerful than your tribes!" Man of Tribe 2: "Mine are more powerful than yours. Mine are.. are... gods !") did they morph into multiple gods. The Abrahamic God didn't arise until about 5000 years ago. And the gap was about 15000 to 185000 years (depends).
The first link between a natural phenomenon and a personification of it is through metaphor. You notice that the sun moving along its daily path is like a "bird of fire" or whatever. Then, when it doesn't show for months and everything gets cold, you begin to think it has lost interest in going over you, so you try to bring it back by offering it food, &c; and the whole thing moves on from there. The human mind works through metaphor. That's what being human is, essentially.
no, they just recognize that without the Sun their existence is absolutely impossible. even today, wouldn't you think that our Sun has more authority over our lives than any god you can believe in? if it suddenly disappeared, we would starve and freeze to death. if didn't know better i would definitely think it was a god
i was thinking about that and i guess its true, when the idea of god comes to help give an explanation on how the world works, but the concept he explains in the video, I think, doesnt follow that line so clearly, more as a notion of their being something grater, not as an explanation but of a sense, a longing as he says
Jack, do me one favour, make a video defining your concept of god, since there are so many different concepts of god. Define your god, really, define what you perceive your god to be...
Good luck refuting Phil's most recent video! This little battle of logic and rationality vs ancient dogma is over, at least between you two. Phil has won, hands down. Add another check mark to the Atheists' win column. Eventually, religion as a whole will follow your example, and lose valiantly, shrinking into the night. It's a wonder religion hasn't disappeared already. The age of reason is coming.
No. You give your source. You do not need to state that they have a PhD or not - THAT is not relevant. But to use someone else's idea without attribution is approaching immoral.
In science it is plagiarism and if someone is found to do it they are booted out. On youtube lots of folks use all kinds of material from others (songs, images) but without claiming the ideas are their own. In any case it is best to state your sources.
Language does not mean whatever you want it to mean. If it did or could then language would break down. No not point out words that have different meanings, or different meanings in context. These are the necessary and accepted vicissitudes of language that are part of what make it work. You simply don't want words to have the meanings that they do because you cannot support your case when nailed down to merely the facts of language, let alone the facts of genetics, paleontology and so forth.
To be honest Alister McGrath is hardly enlightened ... nevertheless even if i believed that alister and collins are briliant individuals it would not refute the undeniable fact that most believers are wildly ignorant
plus this is not my point .. please address the point ... ppl used to love fairy tales they actually believed in them .. they were drawn to them ... so according to TogetherForPeace all of them must be true .. since the simple fact humans could conceive of ... u should get the pic
I am not sure hieroglyphic writing is that old, however proto-writing (and agriculture) certainly is. Look up "History of Writing" on wikipedia and in particular pay attention to the section of "Proto-Writing".
it was not wrong for them to worship the sun in the sense that it DID ultimately give them everything needed for survival. however it was incorrect for them to ascribe any kind of sentience to the sun, as if their worship of it would actually effect anything.
in the same way, go ahead and hold mystical ideas about things we don't understand today. but don't try to construct a serious explanation without evidence.
To answer the sun-god question: No, the Neolithic concept of a god was not anything remotely similar to the modern concept of a god. Modern gods (e.g., Yahweh (God, Dieu, Dios, etc), Allah, Brahman, etc) are very, very abstract. Historical gods had specific magical powers and even the king of gods was only magical because he had one extra special power, not because he had all of the others' powers (like modern Yahweh).
Re: point two:
Ignorance is natural. Doesn't make it a good thing.
Yes, I think it was rational. They had no proof disproving their theory, and I'm sure they were pretty simple-minded.PLUS: the sun can be proven (unlike god))... you can look up and see it. The sun gave those people warmth, light, crops, and other things that rely on the sun. It's certainly more rational than the bible.
When i watch your videos i feel like I'm watching a man slowly descend into madness. Its amazes me how much energy it takes to affirm the supernatural.
humans have many unusual concepts ... ppl had a concept of dwarfs unicorns ... fairies ... none of this concepts is true or rational ... humans like to believe in their fairy tales .. they useful and comforting to the ignorant
It seems perfectly natural for primitive man to create the illusion of god. The world was a big, confusing, and frightening place (still is). A superhero parental figure (god) is an obvious extrapolation.
Your argument that you feel that there is a god, therefore there is a god is brilliant! Your best bet is to abandon reason. Simply appear to be reasonable. Stick with the emotional, its your bread and butter!
Well, you know, the sun is actually THERE and it actually gives you thing, like light, warmth. Plus, they believed there was a god because they didn't know any better, our society should.
Crying is an emotional cue. Its causes others to have sympathy was a good survival property for early hominid communities.
Love is just an expression for intense emotional bonding. This engenders loyalty and cooperation in child rearing.
GPS devices are less complicated than bird brains. Evolution has a way of solving problems to fit the needs of the species in question (light weight, migration).
All living things are evolved to be comfortable in the temperature ranges available for survival.
for all u haters i think that this guy has a point. theres no point in hating on someone cuz it just puts them down, and it is down right inapropriate. keep ur comments to urself. and for all the people who tell haters to f off..ur just another one of those haters to. ur just copying wat that hater is saying. so please keep it clean and if u have a comment think twice b4 u post it.
If a caveman saw a cinema screen sized image he'd probably think it was a god or magical thing. Knowing that it is a projection of light demystifies that preconcpetion, the same could be said of the sun or any other thing that appears supernatural or god like. We don't worship the sun anymore because we know that its simply a natural phenomomnon that has no need or conception of our worship and therefore it would be pointless.
May I ask how we "know" beyond a 1700 year old book?
The sun worshipping probably came about because people wanted to think that they were somehow in control (however indirectly) over the forces of nature that lay beyond their understanding this of course provides a comfort zone. Do you think its not a streatch to think that people 2000+ years ago created Yahweh for the same purposes. Please tell me how the God of the Bible is any different to say Ra.
Ra didn't raise people from the dead where they appeared to real people in a real places (Lazarus). He didn't part the Red Sea, prophesy the future, or destroy empires and armies. Ra's life is not a history book, its a story. It is not historically accurate. He was a powerless, mythical invention.
Again what evidence. You've cited stories from the bible to prove your bible. Biblical hitorians cant find evidence of the exodus, the parting of the red sea was most likley a stroll through a marsh and as for the resurections, agian no support outside of the bible itself. very little of the bible is historicaly acurate and often contradicts itself. The ten commandments managed to get smashed twice somehow. And do you agree with the tales of human sacrifice? Mizpah, Judges 11:29-40 for example.
why are the stories of the bible the only mentioning of these supposedly HUGE events, if there was a parting of a sea, the Egyptians wouldn't keep it to themselves.
Science can only explain a few cause and effects, it does not answer the question of why we are here, why matter is evolving when it could much easier to be chaos, so I really feel where you're coming from, although I think science and spirituality(maybe not young earth creationism) can coexist.
Now this was good Jack. Even though I disagree with your approach on previous videos. The question is a valid one about the first humans concept of a god. Great stuff. You are getting real now. 5*
didnt you miss phils point? he was saying IF YOU WERE going to beleive in god it was rational for the first human to think the sun is a god. He was NOT saying the first human thought that the sun was a god.
and of course knowledge makes you not think the sun is a god! we now know we don't have to worship it to make it stay etc since we know we are orbiting it, back then it would be rational to think its a god as we did not know about it and would think we want the sun to stay so be nice to it.
Superstition does seem to be intrinsic to human beings. It is natural to try & make sense of the what, why, etc, that is how religion began. It is all clearly man made... look at the Aztecs making human sacrifice to appease Gods - their belief must have been even stronger than yours - it doesn't make it true. What is wrong with trying to understand the natural world leaving the supernatural and bronze age myths out of it? I can't believe you could read the OT and think that was truth.
Why is it natural to belive in gods? Perhaps because as children we yearn for the love and protection of our parents and that yearning never leaves us?
Actually direct citation is common courtesy in serious intellectual discourse.
If you want to know where the concept of sun worship comes from you are going to have to keep reading. It comes from authoritarianism & shamanism.
Monotheism is a relatively recent activity. It is simply a powerful mind virus that has spread pervasively. Children left to make up their own minds will not engage in god worship; you need to indoctrinate them.
That's why Jack. Because people like you spread this virus.
You're partly right, Jack. It is natural to take an intentional stance when trying to explain things. You hear an unexplained noise - "What was that!?" and go to check it out. We see agency in many things which we don't directly see. A long time ago, this was the only game in town. Everything from weather to disease was explained this way. But now we have developed a method that gives very useful answers to questions - science. And as we've investigated more and more we find no intention...
...anywhere, but in biological organisms. And neuroscience is already peeling that onion.
It is also natural to see God as a parent. Why do we think God is above us? Why does he punish and reward? You don't see this God-concept as a little infantile? I think Freud said it best "Religion would thus be the universal obsessional neurosis of humanity; like the obsessional neurosis of children, it arose...out of the relation to the father."
You either believe the sun formed due to natural processes several billion years ago, formed from the remnants of previous suns, or you believe God created it as written in Genesis. So yes, understanding how things work CAN lead to a conflict with a belief in God.
I was a christian for years, searching myself to find god. Praying as hard as I could for an inner voice. Then, when I was ten years old, I realized I was praying to myself.
Jack, have you ever taken psychotropic drugs? The human mental state is relatively fragile. Our "innate" sense of God is so easily tweaked into an innate sense of *being* God or an innate sense of nothing existing at all.
I don't normally recommend experimental drug use, but you really need a lesson in how little our intuition and paranoia matter to cold hard reality. You're in school? Great! Two words; evolutionary psychology.
"That than which no greater thing can be thought."
Greater for whom? We have to assume the idea of greatness doesn't merely refer to size, durability, potential energy, or other similar physics measurements. What else could greatness refer to? Its benefit to sentient life? Billions of souls suffering in hell for eternity benefits noone, and I can easily imagine a God greater than that.
So please explain to me what it means to be that than which nothing greater can be thought.
Ernest Sosa Rocks; he wrote an awesome essay on Donald Davidson's epistemology. But Jack, it really is important to acknowledge your sources. People make the assumption that what you are saying is your own ideas, so to use somebody else's ideas without referencing them is disingenuous (at best) and plagerism (at worst).
Awesome I didn't know the Biological Theory of Evolution via Natural Selection can be applied to other disciplines of science.
Outside of that. You're asking what allows for abstract thought. That is a large question. Its an unanswered one right now, but it won't allows be. Neurology and Psychology are growing by leaps and bound.
The sciences often conclude to answer that contradict the natural thought of the natural world.
Yeah, I'm rude, when someone says the very concept of hope was "borrowed from Christianity", like you have.
You will never understand why that remark is SO sickening, or you would NEVER have allowed it out of your mouth. My rudeness in YOUR case has NOTHING to do with uncertainty concerning our relative positions, unless you you have the GALL to think I consider your disgusting assertion as anything more than ridiculous.
See, there you go again. If there was any question about what I said all one would have to do is read my response to CyanideSovereign:
"What's borrowed from Christianity is the concept of the moral standard by which we can say one moral act is better than another."
You could have tried to make a case that objective morality is possible within atheism. But, as you did here, you chose to hurl reckless insults. That reflects on your argument you know.
Thanks for the response. It'll be a pleasure to reply. I'll try to address as many of your points as I can. You ask some excellent questions in this one. I'll listen to some peaceful, classical music before responding in the hope it will make me less "jerky". Thanks again. See you in a bit. Maybe tomorrow, more likely Monday.
You said it . You said you 'want' to believe. That does not make what you believe true. Early man wanted the sun to be a God probably because they wanted an explanation. You want god to exist. For god to continue to be believed it has to be just a little bit further away from being discovered as not god. Like the sun was discovered as not god.
I'm holding the the concept of an elf in my mind.How can i just have this concept?I guess the elves are real.The concept has to come from somewhere!It must be real!!!
"God" did not start out as "that above which none is greater." Look at the Greeks, the Gods were "lesser" than the Titans.
You're an idiot. A "god" is simply a being which is more powerful than a human in some significant way that they control the "uncontrollable" parts of nature. The sea, thunder, etc.
"Beg the question" => To prove an argument by asserting your conclusion. Example, "God is good." proved: "God exists", "God says he's good." "God wouldn't lie." Therefore, "God is good."
Was early man justified in believing that sickness was caused by a person wishing bad things on another person? Sure, they didn't know any better.
Is modern man justified in believing in imaginary beings in the sky? No, we know better.
MrTruthAddict 9 months ago
He just said the first human - sun god thing to make a point. But I see you did not understand that point/didn't want to and just carried on talking about it through most of your video COMPLETELY ignoring all the other stuff that he has said. Blah.
Nemesishk 1 year ago
The reason people attributed the sun to a God is obvious and irrational. Throughout history and today, people fill the voids of knowledge with the assumption of God. "I do not understand this, therefore it must be God."
MADMAXIMUS88 1 year ago
The early humans also believed that evil spirits caused sickness and that the world was flat. Citing the beliefs of early humanity does very little to prove the truth of the God Hypothesis...
jlabrecque1 1 year ago
It makes more sense to believe the sun is god than to believe in what the bible says...
IncredibleDeals 1 year ago
It's easy to guess where that concept came from and probably with a great degree of accuracy.
This post may be a little late and someone else may have already said this but...
People invent things in their head all the time. The boogieman is another great example of that. The first god was not a singular. Was gods. Many of them. If you could go back in time and witness the first telling of the story of gods, I bet you'd find the first confidence scam too.
tommy605 1 year ago
Your view is not universal. When the trio talk about God, they don't talk about god. Believers know nothing about science yet pretend to be experts. Science has nothing to do with whether there is God or not. It is trying continuously to understand . When believers understand that they shall understand science. . Your rhetorics only makes a mockery of knowledge.There was no 1st human. Tio's God came only 5000 years ago. Geology is the history of the planet, Genetics is of life. Enough said.
amoralis123 1 year ago
@1:34 lol
dabuddhaguy 1 year ago
@1:34 lol
dabuddhaguy 1 year ago
Humans like to try to rationalize ignorance. Gods are just anthropomorphism's of natural events. They see tribal leaders and imagine the big ball of fire is a bigger tribal leader. Humans are ignorant primates. Much of science is counter-intuitive.
Why are you proud of human ignorance? Its an obscene and dangerous thing.
PinkProgram 1 year ago
@PinkProgram
It's an evolutionary trait. Religion serves our survival.
Jcolinsol 1 year ago
All people are born as Atheists until they are brainwashed or conditioned by one of the thousands of cults/Gods.
There is only one modern Cult that worships Human Sacrifice: christianity. The foundational basis of this cult is the bloody sacrifice of a human named Jesus. This also involves neo-cannibalism, eating of flesh and drink of blood.
There is only one modern Cult that worships GENETICS/RACE: Judaism. The foundational basis of this cult is the racial genealogy of ones mother
parasitesarefunny 1 year ago
took you 2 minutes to get to your first point.
hmmmm
Mgoodwin14 2 years ago
That the idea behind God of the Gaps. The first man had no/limited scientific knowledge - Therefore they had to use God to explain tyhings
badpanda84 2 years ago
How to explain the consept of god in primitive man.
Tendensy to asume agents behind unexplained phenomena. Evolved to avoid to be eaten.
and
Theory of mind - social skill to imagen what another person is think even when they are not around.
Combine those and you will have the religious consept.
Faidros62 2 years ago
@ Faidros62
Your spelling is terrible but your explanation is great.
Straight to the point and profoundly convincing. Kudos!
1om8cat 2 years ago
@1om8cat
Thanks!
English is not my first language so I know my spelling is bad. But I´m working on it. :)
Faidros62 2 years ago
Don't worry about it. Your meaning is as clear as a bell.
It's made me wonder if the same tendencies can be applied to the sensation that the self is other than the mind and it's activity. (re: the feeling of separation between the observer and the observed). I'm kind of hung up on that one.
1om8cat 2 years ago
@1om8cat
As soon as you think about your own mind you tend to imagening it as something separated from your self.
I think some of the "Theory of mind" consept could apply as you think about your own mind in the same manner you would use if you where thinking of another person. Kind of "Theory of (your own) mind".
lol - Don´t know if that makes any sense to you but it is my 2c. :)
Faidros62 2 years ago
The ten minute rant of an idiot, attesting to the magic man, who lives in the sky.
Phil owned you, because Phil has knowledge and evidence for his point of view.
Oh well Jack, you still have faith.
bigboy45454545 2 years ago 2
odd for humans to see agency in other things? must be god
sfb008008 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this guy is a dick
raptoresque 2 years ago
Jack...do us all a favor. Whatever you do...please...please...DO NOT REPRODUCE. The world is a better place with less people like you than more.
000SMITH000 2 years ago 2
the reason it's rational for that person to belive the sun us a god is because humans have a tendency to anthrpomorphise everything around them. meaning they atribute the less tangible qualities of themself to other things.
that person would see the sun and realise that when the plants can't "see" the sun they die. they would also realise that if the plants die they, and everything around them, would die too. thus the sun also has the atribute of giving life to everything.
QCreyton 2 years ago 7
@QCreyton Sometimes I think going back to worshipping the sun makes more sense than a lot of the religious practices/beliefs floating around these days.
elfbride 1 year ago
/facepalm. Cant you think things by yourself? Honestly give some toughts and read science books if you lack basic knowledge. Before making so stupid questions.
Tespri 2 years ago
The sun offers heat and light. It has obvious effects on plants and vegetation. It's span changing through the seasons has biological effects etc.
megamanium 2 years ago
TogetherForPeace - I've jumped in here, but what is the problem? Primitive humans must have looked around them and wondered how everything came to be and why they were there. Primitive BUT intellectual enough to contemplate that a supernatural being might well be responsible, without knowledge, there could be no other explanation. As those primitives became more modern and science evolved (sorry!), some would develop alternative explanations and break from tradition...and here we are today!
alanstarkie2001 2 years ago
Jack. Your reasoning is so circular. It's such a funny image: Jack sitting comfortably in a corner, chillin' while you're running 'round and 'round the coffee table.
In reference to the sun-god analogy, you don't get it because you don't want to. It's about what knowledge is available to a mind at the particular time they are trying to fit their experiences of life into predictable rules, ways to mitigate fear, and ways to control others. FEAR and AW of the unknown lead minds to fashion gods.
BigMTBrain 2 years ago
Oops! meant "Phil sitting comfortably in a corner..."
BigMTBrain 2 years ago
seriously no offense but you ask kinda dumb questions... because we got knowledge(assuming you believe it) of how everything around us works and got created,it leaves no place to your almighty, all knowing, creator... who created everything.. and just for us, ALL this might universe, for such a primitive bloodthirsty race.. that's 1 arrogant ideology
Gregk82 2 years ago
Evidence seems to show that the first evolved monkey/humans worshipped 'women' of all things... which is why some years later there would take place a complete polarity effect where women were treated less spiritual than men.
OurTVproductions 2 years ago
God is not the greatest things that can be thought!
I can think of an even more powerful god that made yours.
Actually, I don't feel that the concept of god is great at all!
freetaught 2 years ago 2
LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE LACK OF KNOLEDGE....
thats why it was rational to think the sun is superior than us humans. they didnt know what it was, or how it worked. NOT because it is natural to think there is a god.
cooluser432 2 years ago 2
LACK OF CORRECT SPELLING DIMINISHES YOUR PERCEIVED INTELLECT WHEN ASSERTING LACK OF KNOWLEDGE. Otherwise I agree.
alanstarkie2001 2 years ago
i guarantee i would not spell incorrectly if i was speaking my native language
but yea this is the internet people make typos. its not like im attacking anyone by saying they didnt have knoWledge
cooluser432 2 years ago
What you experienced was British sarcasm which is often used as humour. If not your native language I forgive you!
alanstarkie2001 2 years ago
The christian is a foolish thing
he whines, and bickers, and rants when he does not get his way
The atheist does not. He does not care if he is believed, or if others understand him for he is delighted in the knowledge that he knows something that the christians mind is too fragile to comprehend
End Of Line
Starbuck049 2 years ago
Point being people come up with concepts all the time. It is not proof of god or rational.
RealLifeProduct 2 years ago
Heaven's Gate was an American UFO religion.They believed or came up with the concept "It is also possible that part of our test of faith is our hating this world, even our flesh body, to the extent to be willing to leave it without any proof of the Next Level's existence" The group killed themselves in 1997 with this concept that Hale-Bopp comet, which members seemed to regard as a cosmic emissary beckoning them to another world.
RealLifeProduct 2 years ago 2
The Bible is a perfect book and faith - it eats its tail better than any other religion :)
OurTVproductions 2 years ago
Someone once came up with the concept of the loch ness monster and many believed it. Just believing or someone coming up with the concept does not make it so.
RealLifeProduct 2 years ago
Invader- First there has to be an accepted criteria to determine what makes a belief rational. You haven't established any such criteria. Therefore you telling me what is rational or irrational is meaningless to me. Additionally your comment reflects a grand ignorance of history in such a way that I'm compelled to think you're only 16. You've certainly demonstrated how easy it is to spout nonsense and then pretend like you actually said something.
TogetherForPeace 2 years ago
All religions were concocted in antiquity from superstitions and cults that predated them. Early on the ruling class realized the power of myths and stories. It made it sooo much easier to influence, rule, control the masses and specially to get them to do their hard labor for a beer and a loaf of bread! Oh! did I forget how it made it easy to get the poor to do their Dirty Deeds? WAR!!! It is so easy to justify war and get people to martyr themselves for the benefit of the rich! Madness : (
tainoaz 3 years ago
it does matter where you get your infomation from, and it is actually good practice to cite the names of people who's work you mention, so that we have the choice to verify what you say.
begily 3 years ago
Almost every culture in mankind believe in a god or supernatural being in one sense or another. Man created a god to make sense of the world.
thickblkpa 3 years ago 3
So you tortured and killed a poodle by stoning it to death? Fuck your god.
Bloodrazor666 3 years ago 2
You make a good point, for once. Science answering a question may or may not resolve any particular longing for something greater (because, let's face it, not everyone has this desperate need to appeal to something greater - to the point of even making it up).
The question is, given that science doesn't answer the question of this 'longing', where do you get off insisting that your answer is correct - to the point of denouncing others for being wrong?
Upon what real basis do you assert this?
Mathenaut 3 years ago
What's your view on philhellenes's issue about converting people from groups, where rational thinking and knowledge is required?
theM4ce 3 years ago
lol that guy i so frustrated.
y8r6jrrtfg 3 years ago 2
You're obviously frustrated, but why wouldn't you be? It's hard to cut down a tree with a whittling knife.
cosmicjackpot 3 years ago 2
Early man evolved with large brains, and with the capacity to try to figure out how stuff works. The stuff they couldn't figure out how it worked, they called that "god".
The sun, the moon, the stars, the rain, trees, the life force of animals. All unexplainable with their primitive level of understanding.
Today, we know about the all-natural laws of physics and chemistry. If you want to call that "god", that's your right, but I guarantee that it doesn't talk to you or grant wishes.
middlekk 3 years ago 12
@middlekk yes it does you just have to make the proper offerings, OH CHEMISTRY I PRESENT TO YOU ONE VIAL OF VINEGAR AND ONE VIAL OF BAKING SODA I WISH FOR FIZZ
Thank you chemistry!
peoplearemessedup 11 months ago
Yes they were justified, because they could see it and get light from it. we had no candles or fire as the first humans.
ragnar336 3 years ago
Yes, they were justified in believing that there was a god!!! but now adays your illogical if you believe jesus was the son of god.
using christian logic there is a man with millions of witnesses walking america today who calls himself the reincarnation of jesus as the bible prophesied.
ragnar336 3 years ago
you fail
also you pronounce atheist wrong at 02:59
ninst 3 years ago
He said theist, which by definition means someone who believes in God. He did not say atheist.
Samsasrenjet 3 years ago
LOL! Why Phil would spend 1 minute on something without "addressing the points" and this, coming from you at 2 minutes into your vid, and you've addressed precisely ZERO points!
Perhaps this is why you are getting 2 star ratings? You don't even seem to see your self-contradictory ideas.
TruthSurge 3 years ago
truthsurge- Dialogue for me is more than just addressing points. I get two stars anytime I say anything the larger community here on YouTube doesn't like. Like yourself many just act like annoying spectators thinking I care about what their saying as though they're the ones I'm talking with.
TogetherForPeace 3 years ago
Bottom line: I don't know you from Jack (oops) but if you are unconcerned that your internal worldview is inconsistent, then rock on. I prefer to rest upon the ugly facts rather than the whitewashed bird-in-the-bush. But I give you credit for getting on here and stating your views. Maybe it's just Phil's accent that makes his points sound so convincing. LOL!
TruthSurge 3 years ago
truthsurge- my 'internal worldview'? Internally speaking I'm feeling quite consistent. :) I'm wondering why are these facts you rest upon ugly?
TogetherForPeace 3 years ago
The facts are ugly in comparison to the fairytale. Ever watch a movie called "The Matrix"? The lie was the normal world and the truth was that the real world was not nearly so pretty but at least... it was real. Now, if you want to live in or out... that's your choice. I prefer to live outside in the real world and admit that there is no known heaven, hell, afterlife, daddy in the sky watching over us, etc.
Do you believe in the god of the Bible?
TruthSurge 3 years ago
"Like yourself many just act like annoying spectators thinking I care about what their saying as though they're the ones I'm talking with."
Actually, posting a vid allowing ALL people to view it allows us annoying spectators to comment. If you don't want comments and don't care about what we're saying, why not disable comments and ratings? that way, you could have discourse with... yourself! ?
TruthSurge 3 years ago
truthsurge- true there is this whole pro's and con thing with youtube. either i post a video and disable comments and hear people whine about some notion of censorship they have or post a video and wave at the annoying spectators just to let them know i really don't care. well i care enough from time to time to come over and shake their hand :)
TogetherForPeace 3 years ago
I know. Danged if you do... danged if you don't. Good choice to NOT disable comments/ratings. Better to have a few critics than no one. I don't enjoy shooting the breeze. I like to get down and dirty with the real evidence and draw conclusions from that. More like a mathematician than some philosopher. I don't do philosophy per se. I just lump stuff under two categories: true and false. hehehe
TruthSurge 3 years ago
philhellenes' point was that, to people who don't know about nuclear fusion (or any part of physics) it isn't totally stupid to impute its functioning to magic/supernatural agency. It was our species' first mode of explanation, and for precisely that reason, the worst.
Just because an idea seems amazingly intuitive doesn't even begin to establish that it is correct - how counter-intuitive are relativity, quantum mechanics, evolution, etc.?
archon88 3 years ago
I have to say, your disdain for science and learning is really becoming VFX-like. No, Jack, explanations of how nature functions are not trivial, and they bear directly upon our place in the world. You can't say that the scientific account of (say) how the sun formed is unsatisfactory or insignificant just because it isn't theism-friendly.
As an aside, your (Freudian slip?) use of the phrase "want to believe" is incredibly revealing - put into other terms, "wish-think"...
archon88 3 years ago
The cancer patient analogy is irrelevant in the case of belief in god for the simple reason that, in the case of the patient, his belief can affect the truth of what he believes in (i.e. that he will get better), whereas no system of theology I have ever encountered allows for the existence of god to be affected by the strength of the conviction with which one believes in him.
archon88 3 years ago
The cancer patient might be a good analogy to make (it's certainly a very interesting case in point, because of the unusual fact of a belief influencing its own truth) but you have to consider the CONTEXT in which it was originally deployed by the philosopher in question.
archon88 3 years ago
Up to 3:33 - appeal to authority.
4:03 - good question. "Why is it rational for a person to see the sun and conclude that the sun is a God?"
5:49 - "Where does the concept come from?" From not knowing.
6:24 - "When was the last time you touched a concept?" Right now. I'm typing on a keyboard.
6:30 - argument "Our thinking has God inherent in it" skips over thinking about the word "concept"
7:05 "that there is something greater than ourselves" - no, it is not inherent.
SomethingSeaAgain 3 years ago
7:58 If it can be explained, it is no longer mysterious. That's why. The cause is not necessarily God, which in not knowing, it was said to be.
8:24 "a part of who I am" - emotional attachment.
8:41 "just give up on what seems so natural and intrinsic" - How do you know it's natural and intrinsic, and why are these good?
9:08 If God is the truth, then investigation should not contradict, but confirm.
9:22 What is a human? What is humanness?
SomethingSeaAgain 3 years ago
9:27 It is my guess that you don't know exactly what phil means by rational. The rationality of something, perhaps, can change depending on how much we know. All of this hinges on what is meant by rationality.
SomethingSeaAgain 3 years ago
The first humans, if the untouched tribes in various places are any example, didn't believe in "God". They believed in kindly/malevolent spirits and demons. Later, when their powers were exaggerated (Man of Tribe 1: "My spirits are more powerful than your tribes!" Man of Tribe 2: "Mine are more powerful than yours. Mine are.. are... gods !") did they morph into multiple gods. The Abrahamic God didn't arise until about 5000 years ago. And the gap was about 15000 to 185000 years (depends).
RyuDarragh 3 years ago
The first link between a natural phenomenon and a personification of it is through metaphor. You notice that the sun moving along its daily path is like a "bird of fire" or whatever. Then, when it doesn't show for months and everything gets cold, you begin to think it has lost interest in going over you, so you try to bring it back by offering it food, &c; and the whole thing moves on from there. The human mind works through metaphor. That's what being human is, essentially.
DoctorPlausible 3 years ago
You wasted over 2:30 min...
spider606 3 years ago
This video is the strongest case I have ever seen put forward by a modern human to worship the sun.
Frid9998 3 years ago
no, they just recognize that without the Sun their existence is absolutely impossible. even today, wouldn't you think that our Sun has more authority over our lives than any god you can believe in? if it suddenly disappeared, we would starve and freeze to death. if didn't know better i would definitely think it was a god
Deathless2288 3 years ago
our ability to imagine and create illusions in our heads is what made people think there were gods
xynth101088 3 years ago
i was thinking about that and i guess its true, when the idea of god comes to help give an explanation on how the world works, but the concept he explains in the video, I think, doesnt follow that line so clearly, more as a notion of their being something grater, not as an explanation but of a sense, a longing as he says
pipin666 3 years ago
Jack, do me one favour, make a video defining your concept of god, since there are so many different concepts of god. Define your god, really, define what you perceive your god to be...
Atheistblindchick 3 years ago
Fact: all religion is derived from the use of chemicals. That's where the concept comes from. Mushrooms and smoke. Sorry.
sarcasmosis 3 years ago
Interesting idea that may explain part of the delusion.
Who knows maybe they did see something.
tainoaz 3 years ago
Good luck refuting Phil's most recent video! This little battle of logic and rationality vs ancient dogma is over, at least between you two. Phil has won, hands down. Add another check mark to the Atheists' win column. Eventually, religion as a whole will follow your example, and lose valiantly, shrinking into the night. It's a wonder religion hasn't disappeared already. The age of reason is coming.
siciliano29 3 years ago 2
Indeed sir, with 4% in the US alone, religion is definitely on the run!!!
groundhog0339 3 years ago
No. You give your source. You do not need to state that they have a PhD or not - THAT is not relevant. But to use someone else's idea without attribution is approaching immoral.
In science it is plagiarism and if someone is found to do it they are booted out. On youtube lots of folks use all kinds of material from others (songs, images) but without claiming the ideas are their own. In any case it is best to state your sources.
farvision 3 years ago
God is the answer to a question you cannot answer or are afraid to. A crutch to live life with.
dante13xy 3 years ago
Yo - just stop - this is embarrassing to watch
LorenzKamo 3 years ago
most early human beings belived in lots of gods, usually linked to aspects of nature, the sun, wind, rain, fire etc
the 2,000 year old desert dogmas 'single god' idea of today was not evident in early human life, all of the 'evidence' points to that conclusion
watchtheskies 3 years ago
Jesus is natural and intrinsic? really?
T0mNZ 3 years ago
"...the first human..."
Oy, that speaks volumes about misunderstanding evolution.
BoozyBeggar 3 years ago
Language does not mean whatever you want it to mean. If it did or could then language would break down. No not point out words that have different meanings, or different meanings in context. These are the necessary and accepted vicissitudes of language that are part of what make it work. You simply don't want words to have the meanings that they do because you cannot support your case when nailed down to merely the facts of language, let alone the facts of genetics, paleontology and so forth.
LordSlag 3 years ago
Hey, dude, you need to watch Zeitgeist.
It's on my profile!
BecauseTheTruthHurts 3 years ago
Zeitgeist doesn't use real facts. Experts in the religions referenced in the video refute the facts of the video.
groundhog0339 3 years ago
To be honest Alister McGrath is hardly enlightened ... nevertheless even if i believed that alister and collins are briliant individuals it would not refute the undeniable fact that most believers are wildly ignorant
plus this is not my point .. please address the point ... ppl used to love fairy tales they actually believed in them .. they were drawn to them ... so according to TogetherForPeace all of them must be true .. since the simple fact humans could conceive of ... u should get the pic
arconus 3 years ago
I am not sure hieroglyphic writing is that old, however proto-writing (and agriculture) certainly is. Look up "History of Writing" on wikipedia and in particular pay attention to the section of "Proto-Writing".
websnarf 3 years ago
"first humans"? define, please.
it was not wrong for them to worship the sun in the sense that it DID ultimately give them everything needed for survival. however it was incorrect for them to ascribe any kind of sentience to the sun, as if their worship of it would actually effect anything.
in the same way, go ahead and hold mystical ideas about things we don't understand today. but don't try to construct a serious explanation without evidence.
ATL45 3 years ago
To answer the sun-god question: No, the Neolithic concept of a god was not anything remotely similar to the modern concept of a god. Modern gods (e.g., Yahweh (God, Dieu, Dios, etc), Allah, Brahman, etc) are very, very abstract. Historical gods had specific magical powers and even the king of gods was only magical because he had one extra special power, not because he had all of the others' powers (like modern Yahweh).
Re: point two:
Ignorance is natural. Doesn't make it a good thing.
GyrinidaeRex 3 years ago
Yes, I think it was rational. They had no proof disproving their theory, and I'm sure they were pretty simple-minded.PLUS: the sun can be proven (unlike god))... you can look up and see it. The sun gave those people warmth, light, crops, and other things that rely on the sun. It's certainly more rational than the bible.
DanishsUtube 3 years ago
You're saying evidence/knowledge doesn't not affect the validity of concepts? PFffft.
adjohnson916 3 years ago
When i watch your videos i feel like I'm watching a man slowly descend into madness. Its amazes me how much energy it takes to affirm the supernatural.
ANDR3W1848 3 years ago
First Humans Believed in God? I think your idea of who the first human were may be different from reality
rd1999 3 years ago
"Takin' trash"..."that's just retarded"...
I don't think there is anything left he can say to you...
I can see your brain about to implode upon itself as you cling with all your might to your dogma...
BecauseTheTruthHurts 3 years ago
humans have many unusual concepts ... ppl had a concept of dwarfs unicorns ... fairies ... none of this concepts is true or rational ... humans like to believe in their fairy tales .. they useful and comforting to the ignorant
arconus 3 years ago
It seems perfectly natural for primitive man to create the illusion of god. The world was a big, confusing, and frightening place (still is). A superhero parental figure (god) is an obvious extrapolation.
Your argument that you feel that there is a god, therefore there is a god is brilliant! Your best bet is to abandon reason. Simply appear to be reasonable. Stick with the emotional, its your bread and butter!
premed2 3 years ago
I'm just going to stop replying..
the satanist is just really making it hard for me to write anything.
alexross8 3 years ago
Stupid satanist poet.
If a man is terminally ill and the doc says he will die in 1 hour , i will not give up on a man's life.
A Christians will never give up on someone because of a problem.
being a Christian is a feeling that you know you can help someone who's chances of surviving is slim.
If i look at our destroyed world , i will give my life to make it better.
Christianity is about life , not death.
alexross8 3 years ago
Well, you know, the sun is actually THERE and it actually gives you thing, like light, warmth. Plus, they believed there was a god because they didn't know any better, our society should.
Syntheticbrawler 3 years ago
Fuck off! nobody wants to hear your satanic poetry.
alexross8 3 years ago
Want to know the real prophecies?
research Nostradamus.
im too lazy to look up the bible , because i see prophecies that could be post dictions , but nostradamus was the real deal.
He prophesied real dates and everything .
he believed in Christ.
alexross8 3 years ago
You question the origin of first people's concept of god. Why don't you challenge YOUR concept of why you believe in that god. Why do you believe?
oakleywellington 3 years ago
I am glad the conversations around here keep flowing! :-)
michelle2chat 3 years ago
God was the first (poor) attempt at explaining a complex world. Why do things grow? Sungod. Why does it rain? Raingod. Why do people die? Deathgod.
churchofstfu 3 years ago
Never thought of that. Yeah, all those gods just eventually became one god to explain life's events.
qtpie99 3 years ago
The longing for God is intrinsic? Or the knowledge of God?
It makes a lot of difference.
lovasip 3 years ago
crying has nothing to do with lubricating/mosturizing an eyeball.
what about love?
how come birds have sooo tiny brains , yet can go for thousands of miles and find their home?
How is it that we are not burning from the sun , neither are we freezing because of the distance?
alexross8 3 years ago
Crying is an emotional cue. Its causes others to have sympathy was a good survival property for early hominid communities.
Love is just an expression for intense emotional bonding. This engenders loyalty and cooperation in child rearing.
GPS devices are less complicated than bird brains. Evolution has a way of solving problems to fit the needs of the species in question (light weight, migration).
All living things are evolved to be comfortable in the temperature ranges available for survival.
websnarf 3 years ago
for all u haters i think that this guy has a point. theres no point in hating on someone cuz it just puts them down, and it is down right inapropriate. keep ur comments to urself. and for all the people who tell haters to f off..ur just another one of those haters to. ur just copying wat that hater is saying. so please keep it clean and if u have a comment think twice b4 u post it.
elephantluvr224 3 years ago
How do children have the concept of their parents?
There is your fucking insubstantial 'concept' you dishonest prick.
ourben 3 years ago
Oh look at you using the leading minds to prove a point...
Anyone would thinking you were A FUCKING HYPOCRITE.
ourben 3 years ago
I had a class with prof Sosa. Brilliant, but not that effective a teacher, and I believe he's an atheist.
daswann14 3 years ago
If a caveman saw a cinema screen sized image he'd probably think it was a god or magical thing. Knowing that it is a projection of light demystifies that preconcpetion, the same could be said of the sun or any other thing that appears supernatural or god like. We don't worship the sun anymore because we know that its simply a natural phenomomnon that has no need or conception of our worship and therefore it would be pointless.
anothergazman 3 years ago 2
That makes sense....
But the problem is that we don't worship statues or images. we don't worship the suns , the stars , the planets , or any other galaxy.
we worship a being that we know exists beyond our capacity to think.
alexross8 3 years ago
May I ask how we "know" beyond a 1700 year old book?
The sun worshipping probably came about because people wanted to think that they were somehow in control (however indirectly) over the forces of nature that lay beyond their understanding this of course provides a comfort zone. Do you think its not a streatch to think that people 2000+ years ago created Yahweh for the same purposes. Please tell me how the God of the Bible is any different to say Ra.
anothergazman 3 years ago
Because the bible predicts thing that came true.
the bible is 66 books written by about 40 different authors in different time periods.
there are a few prophesies in the bible that predict actual occurances , which is even supported by science.
I would be glad to name a few , but im goin to a chinese buffet in a second.
alexross8 3 years ago
Thats ok, just post them when you get a few minutes. Have a good one matey :)
anothergazman 3 years ago
Ra didn't raise people from the dead where they appeared to real people in a real places (Lazarus). He didn't part the Red Sea, prophesy the future, or destroy empires and armies. Ra's life is not a history book, its a story. It is not historically accurate. He was a powerless, mythical invention.
The difference is the evidence.
groundhog0339 3 years ago
By evidence you mean hearsay which was written down many years after the events took place? The greek Gods had plenty of crazy powers.
churchofstfu 3 years ago 2
many years after the events took place?
how would you know.
No one knows the age of the bible.
alexross8 3 years ago
Again what evidence. You've cited stories from the bible to prove your bible. Biblical hitorians cant find evidence of the exodus, the parting of the red sea was most likley a stroll through a marsh and as for the resurections, agian no support outside of the bible itself. very little of the bible is historicaly acurate and often contradicts itself. The ten commandments managed to get smashed twice somehow. And do you agree with the tales of human sacrifice? Mizpah, Judges 11:29-40 for example.
anothergazman 3 years ago
why are the stories of the bible the only mentioning of these supposedly HUGE events, if there was a parting of a sea, the Egyptians wouldn't keep it to themselves.
Syntheticbrawler 3 years ago
Science can only explain a few cause and effects, it does not answer the question of why we are here, why matter is evolving when it could much easier to be chaos, so I really feel where you're coming from, although I think science and spirituality(maybe not young earth creationism) can coexist.
ozjthomas 3 years ago
Is it possible that the god concepts were created from an inability to explain such a powerful element?
ndclark 3 years ago
Now this was good Jack. Even though I disagree with your approach on previous videos. The question is a valid one about the first humans concept of a god. Great stuff. You are getting real now. 5*
ndclark 3 years ago
didnt you miss phils point? he was saying IF YOU WERE going to beleive in god it was rational for the first human to think the sun is a god. He was NOT saying the first human thought that the sun was a god.
and of course knowledge makes you not think the sun is a god! we now know we don't have to worship it to make it stay etc since we know we are orbiting it, back then it would be rational to think its a god as we did not know about it and would think we want the sun to stay so be nice to it.
aclark970 3 years ago 2
It is cool that you allow comments - I admire the fact that you were honest and didn't cover up for VFX.
midas41 3 years ago
Superstition does seem to be intrinsic to human beings. It is natural to try & make sense of the what, why, etc, that is how religion began. It is all clearly man made... look at the Aztecs making human sacrifice to appease Gods - their belief must have been even stronger than yours - it doesn't make it true. What is wrong with trying to understand the natural world leaving the supernatural and bronze age myths out of it? I can't believe you could read the OT and think that was truth.
midas41 3 years ago 3
Why is it natural to belive in gods? Perhaps because as children we yearn for the love and protection of our parents and that yearning never leaves us?
shoyhoy 3 years ago 3
Actually direct citation is common courtesy in serious intellectual discourse.
If you want to know where the concept of sun worship comes from you are going to have to keep reading. It comes from authoritarianism & shamanism.
Monotheism is a relatively recent activity. It is simply a powerful mind virus that has spread pervasively. Children left to make up their own minds will not engage in god worship; you need to indoctrinate them.
That's why Jack. Because people like you spread this virus.
websnarf 3 years ago 4
You're partly right, Jack. It is natural to take an intentional stance when trying to explain things. You hear an unexplained noise - "What was that!?" and go to check it out. We see agency in many things which we don't directly see. A long time ago, this was the only game in town. Everything from weather to disease was explained this way. But now we have developed a method that gives very useful answers to questions - science. And as we've investigated more and more we find no intention...
riversonthemoon 3 years ago 3
...anywhere, but in biological organisms. And neuroscience is already peeling that onion.
It is also natural to see God as a parent. Why do we think God is above us? Why does he punish and reward? You don't see this God-concept as a little infantile? I think Freud said it best "Religion would thus be the universal obsessional neurosis of humanity; like the obsessional neurosis of children, it arose...out of the relation to the father."
riversonthemoon 3 years ago 4
You either believe the sun formed due to natural processes several billion years ago, formed from the remnants of previous suns, or you believe God created it as written in Genesis. So yes, understanding how things work CAN lead to a conflict with a belief in God.
joyork 3 years ago
I was a christian for years, searching myself to find god. Praying as hard as I could for an inner voice. Then, when I was ten years old, I realized I was praying to myself.
awormyourhonor 3 years ago
huge problem.
The first humans worshiped women, not the sun. We literally worshiped sex and food before we understood enough to worship the sun.
Look at our first drawings and sculptures from 40,000 years ago and see for yourself.
awormyourhonor 3 years ago
Jack, have you ever taken psychotropic drugs? The human mental state is relatively fragile. Our "innate" sense of God is so easily tweaked into an innate sense of *being* God or an innate sense of nothing existing at all.
I don't normally recommend experimental drug use, but you really need a lesson in how little our intuition and paranoia matter to cold hard reality. You're in school? Great! Two words; evolutionary psychology.
echthroi9 3 years ago
"That than which no greater thing can be thought."
Greater for whom? We have to assume the idea of greatness doesn't merely refer to size, durability, potential energy, or other similar physics measurements. What else could greatness refer to? Its benefit to sentient life? Billions of souls suffering in hell for eternity benefits noone, and I can easily imagine a God greater than that.
So please explain to me what it means to be that than which nothing greater can be thought.
echthroi9 3 years ago
Ernest Sosa Rocks; he wrote an awesome essay on Donald Davidson's epistemology. But Jack, it really is important to acknowledge your sources. People make the assumption that what you are saying is your own ideas, so to use somebody else's ideas without referencing them is disingenuous (at best) and plagerism (at worst).
randyhelzerman 3 years ago 6
randy-point taken ill be sure to acknowledge the sources in the info section.
TogetherForPeace 3 years ago
The info section or through annotations.
misterwigggles 3 years ago
Awesome I didn't know the Biological Theory of Evolution via Natural Selection can be applied to other disciplines of science.
Outside of that. You're asking what allows for abstract thought. That is a large question. Its an unanswered one right now, but it won't allows be. Neurology and Psychology are growing by leaps and bound.
The sciences often conclude to answer that contradict the natural thought of the natural world.
misterwigggles 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
philhellenes is a bit fragile. He tends to rudeness. Which is weird because he claims to be so confident in his opinion.
StormTrek 3 years ago
Yeah, I'm rude, when someone says the very concept of hope was "borrowed from Christianity", like you have.
You will never understand why that remark is SO sickening, or you would NEVER have allowed it out of your mouth. My rudeness in YOUR case has NOTHING to do with uncertainty concerning our relative positions, unless you you have the GALL to think I consider your disgusting assertion as anything more than ridiculous.
philhellenes 3 years ago 8
See, there you go again. If there was any question about what I said all one would have to do is read my response to CyanideSovereign:
"What's borrowed from Christianity is the concept of the moral standard by which we can say one moral act is better than another."
You could have tried to make a case that objective morality is possible within atheism. But, as you did here, you chose to hurl reckless insults. That reflects on your argument you know.
StormTrek 3 years ago
Thanks for the response. It'll be a pleasure to reply. I'll try to address as many of your points as I can. You ask some excellent questions in this one. I'll listen to some peaceful, classical music before responding in the hope it will make me less "jerky". Thanks again. See you in a bit. Maybe tomorrow, more likely Monday.
philhellenes 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Heres an evolutionary problem..
why do we cry?
to blind us while we hunt , thus becoming the hunted?
why 2 eyes?
why a gall bladder?
why pinkies?
evolution doesn't explain anything really.
alexross8 3 years ago
"why do we cry?"
To wash the dirt from our eyes.
"why 2 eyes?"
Stereo vision, depth perception.
"why a gall bladder?"
For storing bile.
"why pinkies?"
What?
closedmouth 3 years ago 6
"why do we cry?"
Washes and moisturizes eyes
"why 2 eyes?"
Panorama vision, stereo vision, depth perception, double the vision of one eye
"why a gall bladder?"
Stores bile, which is rather important
"why pinkies?"
It helps us hold things. Cut your pinkies off and try to hold things. It's harder, isn't it?
"evolution doesn't explain anything really."
Read a damn book
BENY0HAMA 3 years ago 6
lol utter pwnage. I bet he doesn't listen tho.
932016 3 years ago
thanks, eh?
BENY0HAMA 3 years ago
Is it possible there is no God? What does God do? What would happen if he stopped doing it? Has he already stopped? Did he ever do anything?
scepticVseptic 3 years ago 2
You said it . You said you 'want' to believe. That does not make what you believe true. Early man wanted the sun to be a God probably because they wanted an explanation. You want god to exist. For god to continue to be believed it has to be just a little bit further away from being discovered as not god. Like the sun was discovered as not god.
samten54 3 years ago 6
I'm holding the the concept of an elf in my mind.How can i just have this concept?I guess the elves are real.The concept has to come from somewhere!It must be real!!!
worldlystone 3 years ago 3
Jack you dont talk over anybodies head. You are not making the points. You do undisciplined logic.
CognosSquare 3 years ago
"God" did not start out as "that above which none is greater." Look at the Greeks, the Gods were "lesser" than the Titans.
You're an idiot. A "god" is simply a being which is more powerful than a human in some significant way that they control the "uncontrollable" parts of nature. The sea, thunder, etc.
puellanivis 3 years ago 2
its not odd, it basic, the god concept comes from having parents.
cozmikzen 3 years ago 2
"Beg the question" => To prove an argument by asserting your conclusion. Example, "God is good." proved: "God exists", "God says he's good." "God wouldn't lie." Therefore, "God is good."
puellanivis 3 years ago