I watched a debate between Hitchens and Craig, and just as I predicted, all of Craigs arguments basically revolved around the arument from ignorance - "You can't disprove it, thus it is true". Either that or "we see what we perceive to be design everywhere, thus everything was designed", which is terrible inductive reasoning. I'm completely bored with even the "best" of theist debaters.
@farrell2k everything is designed. and If u can't prove something wrong, then it is right, isn't that how scientific theories work wich all science revolves around?
Ignorance seems to be something u are well accustemed to
@AlexiusMoore - HAHA, No! That is called argumentum ad ignorantiam, the argument from ignorance which is a logical fallacy that proposes that if you cannot disprove something, then it must be true. A great example of this fallacy is bigfoot. You cannot disprove it exists, therefore it must. The same goes for aliens, the loch ness monster, etc. See the pattern?
@farrell2k I have to agree. I saw a clip of a Hitchens/Craig debate where Craig asked Hitch to disprove that god existed. I was VERY disappointed that such a great thinker as Hitch failed to use the proper logical reply which should have been that the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the side claiming existence of a thing, not the side claiming non-existence of that thing.
@crucisnh Craig made a legit point. Hitchens must 1 refute craigs arguments, which he also failed to do and 2 provide a more plausible answer to the question, with evidence. Notice Craig in all of his opening statements gives proof of God's existence and then says that the opposition must build a better case. If he had just said, "I bet you can't prove God doesn't exist" and sat down, that would be different.
@thetheistexperience1 Myea.. the sad thing is that some of those arguments are unfalsifiable, (if i recall correctly his opening speech) more or less those are arguments for god, not a specific god.. The same arguments where used in other debates and sadly not only by Craig, but by a muslim too... Further more the arguments posed are silly, and i can say all the things you did about Craig, when he totally ignored TBS's arguments, which where backed up..
@16thunder he is not making arguments based on the scientific method, he is making PHILOSOPHICAL arguments and using what scientists have discoverd to back up his claims about the design argument. Further, recall if you will that, although scanty, he does mention some historical evidence for Jesus and the Apostles.
@thetheistexperience1 - Even if Jesus and his apostles were real, which is not a very fantastic claim and is quite probable, how does that in any way demonstrate the divinity of Jesus?
@thetheistexperience1 Yes i recall that argument quite good. The argument he makes does demonstrate that Jesus and his friends existed, although the historians that wrote about him wrote it ages after the crucifixion. He does make arguments for Jesus being divine, but they are just playing with words. How do I know? I mentioned a muslim using the same arguments but instead of Jesus he used Mohamed And he does use "PHILOSOPHICAL" arguments which fail.
@thetheistexperience1 Craig uses science but, he doesn't mention many things which if he did would automatically explain why something is like it is. "The universe didn't came out of nothing" he states many times while talking about the big bang "from nothing, nothing comes" but the theory of big bang doesn't say that at all. Mather & energy can not be destroyed, E2=m2c4+p2c2, => the universe always existed just in another form before the big bang. It's long to explain
@TemplarThe2nd The big bang is the theory that most scientists find way plausible than the string theory or god creating it out of nothing. Yes it is a theory but the one with the most data backing it up...
@thetheistexperience1 I don't believe that there's any possible proof that god exists. And no words that Craig could utter can change that for me. It's an improvable proposition to me. Thus, I do not believe that Hitchens or anyone else in his position needs to come up with a "better" answer beyond saying that it's simply impossible to prove the unprovable.
@farrell2k you weren't really listening then. He gives ampal SCIENTIFIC evidence to show that it is more resonable and takes less faith to believe that the universe was created by an intellegent designer than by chance.
@thetheistexperience1 - In order for evidence to be scientific, which is really just a meaningless adjective added to the word "evidence" (there is no other type of evidence), it MUST be not only demonstrable, but also falsifiable. Philosophical arguments are neither testable not falsifiable, thus they are not evidence; they're just arguments.
If you will say in public (as Craig has) that you believe in dead people strolling about and that demons were once possessed by pigs as found in Matthew, people may not bother constructing arguments against you. Sometimes the appropriate response is to point and laugh.
The Talking Snake is clearly a study on behavioral observations. The method of the Snake as a predator is to move quietly and undisturbingly to create a false sense of security in the presence of the snake, until the snake has it's prey surrounded in a choke hold, and then for the prey to sound any alarm is fruitless. In comparison the Lion roars to cause the stronger to run fast and so the Lion announces it's purpose boldly and catches the weakest. But the Snake can catch the strongest.
/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kWedeRJQ-J8#! This is hilarious especially if you don't care for WLC... God Trek; Starring William Lane Craig as Captain Jerk!
Richard Dawkins ist Francesco Schettino des Wissenschaftsbetriebs, der das Schiff der exakten Naturwissenschaften in die Havarie der atheistischen Halbwissenschaften zusteuert. Mit seinem waghalsigen Manöver eines Hasardeurs wird er die unzähligen Passanten der "Costa Scienza" in die unmoralische Vernunftlosigkeit kentern.
i think athiests and christians can say what they want about william lane craig and richard dawkins......but come on!!!!! you know you both want to see the debate, and if they both had one, both would watch it!!!!!!
@MrMatthewwayne88 It would only be entertaining if you actually take Craig seriously. Nothing that has come out of that man's mouth has been coherent. He uses straw man arguments, and plays on emotion rather than presenting evidence for his claims that God exists.
All you have to do is pay attention and you will see he never actually says anything coherent, it is just circular logic and poetic nonsense. He relies on rhetoric rather than substance. You get nowhere debating people like that.
Dawkins has claimed, “As for religion … nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.” Harris debated Craig on 7th April. In his opening statement in that debate, Harris declared that Dr Craig is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” After that debate, the atheist website Debunking Christianity reported: “Bill (Craig) has once again showed himself as the best debater of this generation.” ROFL
You are never to say "it's too complex for nature to have made this, god must have designed it" in science. You dig deeper and find out how this could have come about with out the supernatural playing a part, because lets say god created all, I doubt he just magiced us here. Observing nature we have no evidence, that if god does exist and made life, he works that in way. The evidence we have, if it's true, is he uses natural means to do everything. So search for the means god used, dont give up.
Creationist aren't into logic. Their basic theory is: Since science doesn't know how life came to be, because it can't fill every missing link, and can't answer every question, they say the basic beginning of evolution is false and the answer to everything is GOD?!? Fallacy Much? Instead of investigating the answers to those questions, lets just say god did it? What kind of retard logic is that? my little brother could do better scientific reasoning he's1 3. Science=discovering+questioning
BTW, EVIL by definition does not exist, only Gd does. EVIL is to live backwards. Anything that is, is also good. Nothing is evil, literally, for evil is the lack of something, which cannot also exist, again, by definition. FREEWILL is Gd. . You are talking about animals. WE-R humans... Elevate friend: goo.gl / GN4D
Craig is an ass. He'll make one weak point0 like "everything has a cause, hur-dur...therefore the Christian god exists hur-dur-dur." Then he spends the next 15 minutes dramatically talking about how shocked he is about how anybody on the planet can possibly disagree with him, and how ignorant and irrational opposing arguments are without ever addressing them. Then he goes and cons poor morons out of their money...Craig's online store has more than 150 items. Taking God all the way to the bank.
i liked seeing hitchens crush bill mahers' world regarding the g. w. bush jokes. as a theist, i've always admired hitchens' honesty if not his beliefs. i miss him.
@RosesTimes paraphrasing what Dawkins said, If you were a "XXXX" would you give a platform for someone who professed to know otherwise to the absurd" . All you do is just give them publicity where they can use their sly word play to convince the less intelligent of us that their view is correct when it is absurd. Geologist vs Flat-Earther for example, we know the world is round, proven fact, yet people still believe the earth is flat, go figure.
@ZOGcorp He is a professor in philosophy; indeed he is an actual philosopher. Religion and the existence of God is a philosophical question. This makes Craig one of the best candidates for Dawkins to debate.
Dawkins calling Collins "not a bright guy" shows his true intellect and sophistication. Jealous of Collins. Dawkins looks like he might be scared of his own shadow.
"Because People are so unsophisticated in their thinking. . . how inept and sophomoric people are.. . " Well maybe if "god" would have made people smarter we wouldn't have to have these silly debates. Maybe if "god" would have given us more efficient brains we would be living in a much better world.
to be good without a higher power. Some have hurt others or hurt themselves to the point of no forgiveness. U know the type fatherless moms on drugs never stood a chance to know right from wrong and jail doesn't seem to scare them anymore cause they been there so many times. If the idea of god could change them from robbing and killing and being a better person I'm with that. Thats evidence enough
@humdrumfeast I here u with the curiosity thing. But its just like u said in your life you haven't seen one shread of evidence, but in some peoples life every waking day and struggle over came is a sign of evidence. It depends on your viewpoint of things. see what i'm saying is what I have been saying from the first comment if it helps people better them selves why knock it. And i feel u when u say u don't have to believe in god to be a good person, but its people out here that know how
Dawkins is an antisemetic Nazi collaborator, his response to a teenage girl who "fucked him up" is proof of this, calling Jews monsters that live at the bottom of the sea!
We are going to end this heathen Nazi piece of shit! We are Anonymous and he's Finished!
I find that Dawkins is not an authority to speak on anything, if you listen closely to him all he ever talks about is himself, praising himself and putting down anyone who doesn't agree with his over inflated opinion of himself. That's all he is a big fucking windbag, it's about time the ignorant cunt popped!
@kryckeestrooff He's an renowned biological scientist, who's made scientific works dating back to the 60's. He's the definition of an authority on evolutionary biology and one of the key people who have made it so commonly accepted. You should go read some of his early books instead of posting drivel on the internet I feel.
@thetankgarage LOL Maybe in your dreams he is sunshine, but in mine he's just a ignorant rude wind bag. Writing a book or two says nothing of his worth, There are millions of books been written about any topic you care to choose, and just because he's written a couple means nothing to me. Some would call Marvel comics books too, so do you believe in Superman or Spiderman? Probably!! Maybe you also believe in the JewJew monster at the bottom of the sea too, so long as he told you!
@kryckeestrooff He's been published multiple times in magazines like Nature and written many ... many academic papers. These aren't books, they're peered-reviewed papers of science, the foundation of our entire scientific community, the reason your computer is working as well as it is, along with why planes fly, A-bombs explode and medicine cures disease.
after all that he replied her past has nothing to do with what me and her have going on now. Then i realised he he had learned to drive wit this girl, got his first place with her and she was making him a better man and i was just jealous of losing my friend. He had faith in her so I tried to use my insecurities to crush his faith so he would be as lonely as i was. so the point is whats the point of bringing negative to someones positive situation if its making them a better person
@MegaSleep1 I can't speak for anyone else, but I can say that for me, my questioning of other people's faith is more out of curiosity than any desire to tear apart their spiritual nature and leave them broken and weeping in the dust. I have seen no evidence, not a shred, for any deity that has ever been come up with throughout our entire history, and I am genuinely curious about what persuaded them.
I also think that you shouldn't need some god looking over your shoulder for you to be good
Heres a good example on what I am talking about. My close friend fell in love with this girl who lived across town. I knew a few people across town who told me she had a past of dealing with a few guys over there.My pride and evilness made me obsessed with finding out more and more dirt on her until i went back in told him everything i heard to ruin his relationship. when i told him he replied he already knew everything because she was honest with him. I asked him how could he stay with her
@Gretgor Just because someone may beleive in a higher power does not make them religious so the sarcasm isn't necessecary. What I am saying is if someone becomes a better person, a better husband, a better father, better neighbor etc... because of the theory of god which I have witnessed over and over again with my own eyes, Why argue against it. Why fight a good thing
I think the whole theory of god is cool even if most people dont think he exists. I mean think about it, dont kill, dont steal, dont sleep wit my dam wife it all sounds pretty fair to me. I seen drug attics stop using thru prayer, I seen people dyeing from cancer no longer fear death because of christian beliefs, i seen murderers gain a conscience because of scriptures. If it helps people live a better life whats the point of fighting against it.
Many fight against religion not because they want mankind to be free, but because they want to take God's position by means of ideologies like communism, socialism, political correctness etc. Being the lawmaker in a godless world gives you absolute power. It's not that I'm delighted with the activity of institutionalized religions. However, the important thing is their treasure of values which have kept the western civilization running for two thousand of years
@GEDANUS6 I'm sorry, but I do believe that what you refere to as western civilization came into existence only after the heavy "treasure" of religious values had been removed, melted down and steeped into something entirely different.
@MegaSleep1 The point is to remove (the idea of) God from people's consciousness, and thus create vacuum to be filled with new "scientifically-based" morality, which could be modelled as some "people of reason" like. The trick has been known since the French Revolution (whose only contribution to the development of civilization is the guillotine) and has been used by such famous architects of new wonderful worlds as Hitler, Stalin, Mao et consortes.
@supermariofj "creationism, (which I still don't completely disregard) is viable so long as evolution is not proven.make sense?"
No that does not make sense.
1) The failure of Theory A does not mean that Theory B, C, D etc. are by default correct!
2) Evolution by Natural Selection as close to being "proven" as any principle in science ever has been. Biblical Creationism denies every observable law of nature and has ZERO evidence - no data - just a few verses in a book.
@supermariofj "naturalism, which holds that only what the 5 senses perceive is real"
No. It holds that the best hope we have for finding universal principles to agree upon is by a method which carefully seeks agreement between data and its interpretation.
Religious faith is not the equal of knowledge because faith is arbitrary. Each religion claims that their belief without evidence is superior to every other. With only shifting sands of opinion to stand on, no religion will EVER know truth.
@cigartragic "It's pretty telling that WLC says "he tries to anticipate objections to my arguments in order to answer them in advance."
It's hard not to "anticipate" Billy Boy Craig, since he uses the same, lame arguments over and over and over and over...
And it's pretty hypocritical of him to level such a criticism at Dawkins since Craig comes preloaded with a host of semantic tricks and logical fallacies for the sole purpose of sidestepping any real issues.
It's pretty telling that WLC says "he tries to anticipate objections to my arguments in order to answer them in advance." He's not considering the other viewpoint to be valid, he's working from an assumption that we're (atheists) are wrong and working backwards from that. The whole point of science and philosophy is to present evidence and/or sound logical arguments to get to the truth; it is not so you close your mind and pointlessly argue one side because you refuse to admit you're wrong.
i am atheist but but but but but,,,,,,,,,, i think if a religion can give someone hope ,faith ,love thats good for the people to follow if they want to ,,,,,, just imagine can u or anyone in this world can give hope to someone who has suffered emotionally and mentally,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,what will give them hope that everything will be all right ???????? ........if it has to come from any religion i think everyone will not mind and we all will agree
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." - Thomas Jefferson
@supermariofj Hahahahaha......and that just makes you feel much better about the cosmos doesn't it. So tell me superm, what religion do you subscribe to? Please entertain me, I'm too eager to hear this.
@commoncents78 no, i just lament tj was a deist and not a christian. he was a brilliant man, but he couldn't wrap his mind around Jesus, a human being, also being the Son of God. I dont subscribe to a religion. I hate religion. I'm just a plain jane Christian. I came to know Jesus personally as a young teen, and through my studies (ironically in science and not religious studies) and life experiences, i've come to believe in God, and Jesus more and more. it's really life changing.
@supermariofj Well you sound like you mean well. And professing to know Jesus is very serious. You know that means you base your belief on faith, or you have some substantial proof that Jesus and God for that matter does exist. If you have the latter please elaborate. No need for small talk right.
@commoncents78 believe me, i hate religion. i used to be catholic, how i truly believed in Jesus was a spiritual experience. and so i say, that it is physically impossible to prove Jesus and God exist aside from the often used argument of the complexity of life. however, there are many logical arguments for the existence of God laid forth by Dr. William lane craig which i highly recommend to u. I am a scientist, and while i cant substantially eliminate evolution entirely, i have my reservations.
additionally, even if evolution did happen, it still would be very possible, in fact no less probable that God does exist, because it would still be necessary for the atheist to prove or have evidence at least, that abiogenesis has occurred, including evidence for the possibility of the string theory being the cause of the creation of the universe as opposed to an intelligent creator. u see, evolution is the make or break argument for atheism. Christians still have some wiggle room.
@supermariofj Wiggle room? You mean adhering to a 2000+ year old book and declaring it the infallible word of God so that editing it in Gods name is considered a sin is having wiggle room? Science by definition is examining evidence and drawing new conclusions based on a constant stream of new data. A majority of Christians, however, believe editing the Bible or omitting any part of it is considered a damnable offense; this by definition makes Christianity rigid i.e no wiggle room.
@cigartragic well let's take a couple steps back now. there are several issues at hand with what u wrote. okay, 1st, faith is faith, scientific principles can't be applied to it, (i.e. the scientific method, which is what ur using), because many things in the bible can only be taken by believing (that's why they call it faith) in the absence of evidence. 2nd, this is why many Christians, including I, take it by offense to just change the bible to fit others' standards. (there's a verse warning..
@cigartragic verse warning about that). so, many peeps take offense at that. 3rd, when i mean wiggle room, i solely regard it in the context of philosophical discussion regarding science as a whole, and particularly, philosophical stances such as naturalism, which holds that only what the 5 senses perceive is real, that there is no God, and abiogenesis and evolution MUST have occured. creationism, (which I still don't completely disregard) is viable so long as evolution is not proven.make sense?
@supermariofj "even if evolution did happen, it still would be very possible, in fact no less probable that God does exist,"
That would depend on which God you are talking about - that depends what charactisics you belive the "God" has.
IF you belive he is all power and might and can do anything -- then why would God bother taking billions of years for life to evolve when he could just create everything in a snap of his fingers.
@supermariofj You can say what you want about logical arguments by Craig, he is just a debater. The fact is you, and Craig for that matter, get the basis of your beliefs from the bible. This book is absurdly flawed, immoral, and many parts of it completely ignored by even the believers. But you 'feel' like it's the spiritual nature that calls you. I hope you don't use that hypothesis in your line of work(science), you certainly will get repudiated. Good luck, u gonna need it.
Anybody who uses arguments like "Well, things exist!" as evidence for a strictly man-made concept is in no position to chastise anyone else for mediocre thinking.
@MrJimmyNapoleon oh cmon, im not saying that the cosmological argument is convincing evidence for the existence of a necessary being(god), but are you really going to argue that the question of why something exists rather than nothing is not a question worth taking seriously? especially if you believe that existence had a definite beginning??
I love the Idea of natural selection, right now science teaches us that cells are consist of proteins and protein is consist of amino acids. Theory of Evolution teaches us that through the natural selection, amino acids 'evolve' to protein later cells. Right now what human manage to do is to create artificial DNA (which not random, but designed by human). With outstanding technologies that we have now, why no scientists able to create same result as explained by the theory of evolution?
@kirablacknote Science can't explain what life is. Even if you throw a few amino acids together in a test tube and say a cell came to be, there's still that question; what is life?
Years ago someone asked how a tape recorder worked. After dishing out all I knew right down to electromagnetism, the question remained; but how does it work?
William Lane Craig doesn´t even knows what the meaning of atheism is, atheism means the rejection of belief in the existence of deities, period, no more, this person "William Lane Craig" as he said, do believe that people that do not believe in the three in one, or in virgins giving birth to these three persons in one being, in talking snakes or in ghosts from heaven and hell, are inferior to him and stupid, he believes everyone should be as sophisticated as him to the point of hallucination.
William Lane Craig doesn´t even knows what the meaning of atheism is, atheism means the rejection of belief in the existence of deities, period, no more, this person "William Lane Craig" as he said, do believe that people that do not believe in the three in one, or in virgins giving birth to these three persons in one being, in talking snakes or in ghosts from heaven and hell, are inferior to him and stupid, he believes everyone should be as sophisticated as him to the point of hallucination.
i never hear christopher hitchens and richard mention the more tangible evidence of the unexplained which is voo doo witch craft spells black candles weegie board altars hex suth sayers etc.. people are hooked on that shit in secrecy since the beginning. if they really wanted to get through to people they would make mention of that type of practice 1st until they do that i will think they are a joke
@Paletero336 You have to be 'IN' society to do something that even would require a "cover up". It's easy to be a holy man on top of a mountain.-The Razor's Edge
You're flexing ideological muscle in the only place you can. No atheist or anyone else for that matter ever said to my face what they say here on YouTube. Why is that? In society you can't just say whatever you want or do whatever you want. Your ideas and power have no existence in reality, sorry.
I dont really care if any atheist has argued with you in real life,
You make it seem like a black and white issue atheist may not be able to have community like theist but so many times communities of theist with different ideas may conflict with another.
@HundKaiser Can you have what you say? I mean by saying something about Dr. Craig like this does it happen the way you say? Is he now duplicitous because you're saying it? Couldn't someone say the exact same about you? You're not even pointing out how he's duplicitous. Isn't that a type of duplicity? Why not just say you have a million dollars in the bank, or that you're right about everything especially since you're saying it?
irreligion: adhering to no particular religious belief
atheism: the belief that there are no god(s)
It's not that there is a subtle difference in these words it's that they're diametrically opposed to one another. As the best friend you'll never have in your life let me just suggest that simplicity in complex matters is what the law of Parsimony means to me.
Atheism is not having a belief in gods. It is also possible to have a belief against gods, and that is a second definition of atheism in most dictionaries.
Irreligious excludes those people with religions but not a god belief, such as say Buddhists.
A lack of belief does not imply the presence of a belief to the contrary.
@domnal I want to be known in a Biblical sense by Jennifer Capriati. How can I effect how people know me?
Atheism is the rejection of God and religion. That's the very definition of God and religion. Irreligion is the lack or absence of religion. In pure violation of the law of parsimony I'll explain further. My mom tries to put spinach on my plate. "But MOM I lack spinach!" or "But MOM I reject spinach". Your problem with words isn't religion non-religion it's with "lack" & "reject".
@domnal I used to work as a loan collector like Rocky Balboa from the 1st Rocky movie. Nobody argues with me about anything, not in real life anyway.
I set those pin headed, self-righteous, puritanical hypocrites on the right path. People are disarmed by affection. Osama Bin Laden thought he was going to get a fair trial, due process of law, instead he sleeps with the fishes. Never been hit with a wet fish but all my lady friends have been dominatrixes, does that count? Only Love. Right?
Nothing ever changes or adapts, no new genes? Just rearranging? You can rearrange the chairs on the decks of the Titanic, but that's not going to change the fact that she sank.
Professor Dawkins refuses to debate with creationists on one hand, but on the other hand he seems to be on good terms with global warming peddlers. He won't admit that so called abortion is just slaughtering the unborn (biologist!), and that the idea of godless state was realised in the form of the Soviet Union. His rationality stops and his courage leaves him when he approaches the realm of political correctness.
@GEDANUS6 The Soviet Union wasn't secular though. They merely replaced god with communism and leader worship, particularly the worship of Lenin and Stalin. While Dawkins can sometimes be a little more reserved about insulting people face to face (especially compared to Hitchens) he has on several occasions called people on their religious BS.
@leejs YEAH? What do you call people on? If you're calling them on their religious BS, then you're in league with them. Atheism is a protected religion in the USA.
@shizzleman8 Atheism isn't a religion. And he has called muslims on their ridiculous belief that apostates should be murdered. He has called christians on their belief that homosexuality is wrong and that gays should be barred from adoption. And most often called people on their ridiculous insistence on biblical creationism and the idea that it should be taught as science.
@leejs There are a number of legal precedents which ushered in atheism's non profit tax status as protected under the 1st amendment to the constitution's free exercise of religion clause. You saying it's not a religion doesn't come with any authoritative reference the same as everything else you write. Do you need me to direct you to the case law? God is judicially noticed. You want it to be atheism that's judicially noticed and all the religions that you fight against not be protected. Ha!
@leejs There are atheist churches in America. Pot smokers don't have churches.
First Atheist Church of True Science (facts). There are atheist churches in LA and in Houston or somewhere in Texas. Godlessness is protected under the 1st amendement. Torcaso v. Watkins 1961 was upheld in kaufman v. McCaughtry 2005
@shizzleman8 The 1st amend. is irrelevant to me as I do not live in the US. But that does not mean it's a religion. The First Church of Atheism exists solely to ordain clergy so that non-religious people can have weddings/funerals officiated by non-religious individuals. There is no doctrine, no belief structure, simply rejection of god. But I'm certain that even though it lacks any and all traits of religion, you will continue to assert it is religion.
@leejs What's not relevant is where you live. You could move here.
I don't assert. I'm merely sharing the law with you in an as emotionaless way as I can. I'm not fighting against atheism. I'm glad it's a religion, it's a boon for you atheists. You're winning. You gained tax advantages. You're growing. You just can't put other religions down now because you're in one. Atheists live to serve themselves. Just an observation. 1961 until like 2007 atheists couldn't prove they do good.
@shizzleman8 Atheists do not gain tax advantages for being a religion, some atheist organizations gain tax advantages because they are non profit organizations. That's equivalent to claiming the American Cancer Society is a religion because it gets tax advantages. Atheism is solely the rejection of god, there are no tenets, no organized hierarchy, there's not even the basics of a scripture. You can assert it's a religion but it lacks every aspect that defines religion.
@shizzleman8 No, I don't see what you're saying. I just said the reason that some atheist groups are tax-exempt is because they are registered non-profits, not because they are churches. That's not 'defining' anything that's merely stating a fact. If you have a problem with my so-called defining of things then tell me what you consider a religion to be.
@leejs I don't know what you're talking about I'm a Budhist, i'm not religious! < See how ridiculous that sounds? Atheists will write me, "WE DON"T HAVE ANY DOGMAS" < well, that sounds pretty dogmatic there little fella.
Religion is the opposite of irreligion not atheism. Have you ever been referred to as an infidel, or perhaps unfaithful? Those terms of endearment fit atheists but not the irreligious.
Sometimes I'm irreligious, but I'm also in love with stained glass windows. (?)
@shizzleman8 That would be ridiculous if a practicing buddhist said they weren't religious. Same as if a christian, jew or muslim said they weren't religious. But I am still surprised at your inclusion of atheism in the religion category, especially since you have given no points as to how it can be classified as such. So if I say "I DON'T HAVE A UNICORN" then does that mean I have a unicorn? Cause if so, awesome, I can make some money off that shit.
@leejs OJ Simpson when asked how he pleaded in his murder charge of his wife and her friend Ron Goldman said, "100% NOT GUILTY".
It was that 100% part that cinched the deal.
Most Christians will tell you that they're not religious, that they in fact are in a RELATIONSHIP (they'll emphasize the word & say it a little louder). It's like when a luscious blonde tells me she's not religious but she is spiritual. I'll say, "I'm not honest, but I find you extremely interesting". You too friend.
What if people purposely troll on videos that they agree with so people who disagree will keep commenting? That would bring more traffic to videos that those people agree with, and away from smarter ones.
Atheism is the POSITION that there is no God. It's not knowledge of any kind it's just prejudice. It's a godless religion. It's the same as saying you're a Jehovah's Witness. No matter what evidence is submitted to you, you automatically reject it. You guys can't even speak English logically and coherently and see ONE SINGLE POINT THROUGH. How is the universe being convserved. WHAT CONSERVES IT? HUH? NO ANSWER. RIGHT because you've already made up your minds. YOU'RE PREJUDICED!!!!
For anyone who is unfamiliar with Craig's argument it goes a little like this, "Dunno, God musta' done it."
titans091052 4 days ago
CONTRAST: Illuminati brainwash VS Jesus Christ truth. There's nowhere else to go.
blattt188 4 days ago
I watched a debate between Hitchens and Craig, and just as I predicted, all of Craigs arguments basically revolved around the arument from ignorance - "You can't disprove it, thus it is true". Either that or "we see what we perceive to be design everywhere, thus everything was designed", which is terrible inductive reasoning. I'm completely bored with even the "best" of theist debaters.
farrell2k 1 week ago
@farrell2k everything is designed. and If u can't prove something wrong, then it is right, isn't that how scientific theories work wich all science revolves around?
Ignorance seems to be something u are well accustemed to
AlexiusMoore 6 days ago
@AlexiusMoore - HAHA, No! That is called argumentum ad ignorantiam, the argument from ignorance which is a logical fallacy that proposes that if you cannot disprove something, then it must be true. A great example of this fallacy is bigfoot. You cannot disprove it exists, therefore it must. The same goes for aliens, the loch ness monster, etc. See the pattern?
farrell2k 2 days ago
@farrell2k I have to agree. I saw a clip of a Hitchens/Craig debate where Craig asked Hitch to disprove that god existed. I was VERY disappointed that such a great thinker as Hitch failed to use the proper logical reply which should have been that the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the side claiming existence of a thing, not the side claiming non-existence of that thing.
crucisnh 4 days ago
@crucisnh Craig made a legit point. Hitchens must 1 refute craigs arguments, which he also failed to do and 2 provide a more plausible answer to the question, with evidence. Notice Craig in all of his opening statements gives proof of God's existence and then says that the opposition must build a better case. If he had just said, "I bet you can't prove God doesn't exist" and sat down, that would be different.
thetheistexperience1 2 days ago
@thetheistexperience1 Myea.. the sad thing is that some of those arguments are unfalsifiable, (if i recall correctly his opening speech) more or less those are arguments for god, not a specific god.. The same arguments where used in other debates and sadly not only by Craig, but by a muslim too... Further more the arguments posed are silly, and i can say all the things you did about Craig, when he totally ignored TBS's arguments, which where backed up..
16thunder 2 days ago
@16thunder he is not making arguments based on the scientific method, he is making PHILOSOPHICAL arguments and using what scientists have discoverd to back up his claims about the design argument. Further, recall if you will that, although scanty, he does mention some historical evidence for Jesus and the Apostles.
thetheistexperience1 2 days ago
@thetheistexperience1 - Even if Jesus and his apostles were real, which is not a very fantastic claim and is quite probable, how does that in any way demonstrate the divinity of Jesus?
farrell2k 2 days ago
@thetheistexperience1 Yes i recall that argument quite good. The argument he makes does demonstrate that Jesus and his friends existed, although the historians that wrote about him wrote it ages after the crucifixion. He does make arguments for Jesus being divine, but they are just playing with words. How do I know? I mentioned a muslim using the same arguments but instead of Jesus he used Mohamed And he does use "PHILOSOPHICAL" arguments which fail.
16thunder 1 day ago
@thetheistexperience1 Craig uses science but, he doesn't mention many things which if he did would automatically explain why something is like it is. "The universe didn't came out of nothing" he states many times while talking about the big bang "from nothing, nothing comes" but the theory of big bang doesn't say that at all. Mather & energy can not be destroyed, E2=m2c4+p2c2, => the universe always existed just in another form before the big bang. It's long to explain
16thunder 1 day ago
@16thunder the universe, at least as we know it, had a beginning, as BVG theorem tells us
TemplarThe2nd 21 hours ago
@TemplarThe2nd Which we call the big bang, the creation of time and space and the creation of the universe as we know it ...
16thunder 18 hours ago
@16thunder the big bang is one model among many of how our universe came into existence...
TemplarThe2nd 15 hours ago
@TemplarThe2nd The big bang is the theory that most scientists find way plausible than the string theory or god creating it out of nothing. Yes it is a theory but the one with the most data backing it up...
16thunder 14 hours ago
@thetheistexperience1 I don't believe that there's any possible proof that god exists. And no words that Craig could utter can change that for me. It's an improvable proposition to me. Thus, I do not believe that Hitchens or anyone else in his position needs to come up with a "better" answer beyond saying that it's simply impossible to prove the unprovable.
crucisnh 2 days ago
@farrell2k you weren't really listening then. He gives ampal SCIENTIFIC evidence to show that it is more resonable and takes less faith to believe that the universe was created by an intellegent designer than by chance.
thetheistexperience1 2 days ago
@thetheistexperience1 - In order for evidence to be scientific, which is really just a meaningless adjective added to the word "evidence" (there is no other type of evidence), it MUST be not only demonstrable, but also falsifiable. Philosophical arguments are neither testable not falsifiable, thus they are not evidence; they're just arguments.
farrell2k 2 days ago
APPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLED
HundKaiser 1 week ago
If you will say in public (as Craig has) that you believe in dead people strolling about and that demons were once possessed by pigs as found in Matthew, people may not bother constructing arguments against you. Sometimes the appropriate response is to point and laugh.
Like Bill Maher said, "it's ridiculous."
Poor Craig. No one to play with.
HellRehab 2 weeks ago
William Lane Craig is a spin doctor. he has all the talk and no evidence
twilight8181 2 weeks ago
The Talking Snake is clearly a study on behavioral observations. The method of the Snake as a predator is to move quietly and undisturbingly to create a false sense of security in the presence of the snake, until the snake has it's prey surrounded in a choke hold, and then for the prey to sound any alarm is fruitless. In comparison the Lion roars to cause the stronger to run fast and so the Lion announces it's purpose boldly and catches the weakest. But the Snake can catch the strongest.
CarmineFragione 2 weeks ago
Your busy? You mean scared!!!!!
yoursola 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
niggerking420 2 weeks ago
@yoursola he has debated with craig and won
twilight8181 2 weeks ago
@twilight8181 You mean lost!!!!
yoursola 2 weeks ago
@yoursola no if i'd have ment lost i would have said lost. craig has got all the talk but no evidence to back it up with
twilight8181 2 weeks ago
@yoursola Why are these debates about fear and violence for the theists.... oh wait, never mind.
DocWyoming 1 week ago
/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kWedeRJQ-J8#! This is hilarious especially if you don't care for WLC... God Trek; Starring William Lane Craig as Captain Jerk!
ByronBTB 2 weeks ago
Why atheists dont believe in the talking snake? Bill Maher is a snake and he is talking.
trifulquita15 3 weeks ago
@trifulquita15 Oh brilliant! How long did it take you to think that up?
steveinchelsea 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Richard Dawkins ist Francesco Schettino des Wissenschaftsbetriebs, der das Schiff der exakten Naturwissenschaften in die Havarie der atheistischen Halbwissenschaften zusteuert. Mit seinem waghalsigen Manöver eines Hasardeurs wird er die unzähligen Passanten der "Costa Scienza" in die unmoralische Vernunftlosigkeit kentern.
JesusChristusSoter 3 weeks ago
Clear manipulation. Sound bits won't help you "reason-party?!!
saadessex 3 weeks ago
@saadessex OH REALLY -have you ever watched Dr Craig's videos?
steveinchelsea 2 weeks ago
@steveinchelsea Yes, some of them.
saadessex 2 weeks ago
@saadessex No sound bites or manipulation on them?
steveinchelsea 2 weeks ago
i think athiests and christians can say what they want about william lane craig and richard dawkins......but come on!!!!! you know you both want to see the debate, and if they both had one, both would watch it!!!!!!
MrMatthewwayne88 3 weeks ago
@MrMatthewwayne88 It would only be entertaining if you actually take Craig seriously. Nothing that has come out of that man's mouth has been coherent. He uses straw man arguments, and plays on emotion rather than presenting evidence for his claims that God exists.
All you have to do is pay attention and you will see he never actually says anything coherent, it is just circular logic and poetic nonsense. He relies on rhetoric rather than substance. You get nowhere debating people like that.
RoCk4LiFe90 3 weeks ago
Dawkins has claimed, “As for religion … nobody wields a sharper bayonet than Sam Harris.” Harris debated Craig on 7th April. In his opening statement in that debate, Harris declared that Dr Craig is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheists.” After that debate, the atheist website Debunking Christianity reported: “Bill (Craig) has once again showed himself as the best debater of this generation.” ROFL
madamsarah368 3 weeks ago
Just wasted 5 minutes of my life watching this ...
Barry120792 4 weeks ago
You are never to say "it's too complex for nature to have made this, god must have designed it" in science. You dig deeper and find out how this could have come about with out the supernatural playing a part, because lets say god created all, I doubt he just magiced us here. Observing nature we have no evidence, that if god does exist and made life, he works that in way. The evidence we have, if it's true, is he uses natural means to do everything. So search for the means god used, dont give up.
TKE627 4 weeks ago
Creationist aren't into logic. Their basic theory is: Since science doesn't know how life came to be, because it can't fill every missing link, and can't answer every question, they say the basic beginning of evolution is false and the answer to everything is GOD?!? Fallacy Much? Instead of investigating the answers to those questions, lets just say god did it? What kind of retard logic is that? my little brother could do better scientific reasoning he's1 3. Science=discovering+questioning
TKE627 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BTW, EVIL by definition does not exist, only Gd does. EVIL is to live backwards. Anything that is, is also good. Nothing is evil, literally, for evil is the lack of something, which cannot also exist, again, by definition. FREEWILL is Gd. . You are talking about animals. WE-R humans... Elevate friend: goo.gl / GN4D
roboeco 4 weeks ago
This snake-oil salesman has based his entire career on exploiting the stupidity of people and now he's telling us he's appalled by it?
He's not appalled by it - in fact it's like money in the bank to someone like Craig
shumble32 4 weeks ago
Craig is an ass. He'll make one weak point0 like "everything has a cause, hur-dur...therefore the Christian god exists hur-dur-dur." Then he spends the next 15 minutes dramatically talking about how shocked he is about how anybody on the planet can possibly disagree with him, and how ignorant and irrational opposing arguments are without ever addressing them. Then he goes and cons poor morons out of their money...Craig's online store has more than 150 items. Taking God all the way to the bank.
titans091052 1 month ago
The very idea that a professional philosopher exist is in itself proof of that mircales are possible :)
MisterTutor2010 1 month ago
i liked seeing hitchens crush bill mahers' world regarding the g. w. bush jokes. as a theist, i've always admired hitchens' honesty if not his beliefs. i miss him.
MrSomethingscary 1 month ago
Dawkins isnt popular- HE'S RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!
dancingnancy09 1 month ago
@RosesTimes, no Sir it appears you are the one who has departed and gone to eat faecal matter ROFLCOPTER
turb0m0nk3y 1 month ago
@RosesTimes paraphrasing what Dawkins said, If you were a "XXXX" would you give a platform for someone who professed to know otherwise to the absurd" . All you do is just give them publicity where they can use their sly word play to convince the less intelligent of us that their view is correct when it is absurd. Geologist vs Flat-Earther for example, we know the world is round, proven fact, yet people still believe the earth is flat, go figure.
turb0m0nk3y 1 month ago
William Lane Craig is a professional debater.
Maybe he should get a real job.
ZOGcorp 1 month ago
@ZOGcorp He is a professor in philosophy; indeed he is an actual philosopher. Religion and the existence of God is a philosophical question. This makes Craig one of the best candidates for Dawkins to debate.
ggsimmonds1 1 month ago
Craig is living a lie
lauce3 1 month ago
Comment removed
TheDrewManXD 1 month ago
Dawkins calling Collins "not a bright guy" shows his true intellect and sophistication. Jealous of Collins. Dawkins looks like he might be scared of his own shadow.
Rpagsis1 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
"Because People are so unsophisticated in their thinking. . . how inept and sophomoric people are.. . " Well maybe if "god" would have made people smarter we wouldn't have to have these silly debates. Maybe if "god" would have given us more efficient brains we would be living in a much better world.
MrBeautifulba1 1 month ago
I meant to put dont know how to be good pardon me
MegaSleep1 1 month ago
to be good without a higher power. Some have hurt others or hurt themselves to the point of no forgiveness. U know the type fatherless moms on drugs never stood a chance to know right from wrong and jail doesn't seem to scare them anymore cause they been there so many times. If the idea of god could change them from robbing and killing and being a better person I'm with that. Thats evidence enough
MegaSleep1 1 month ago
@humdrumfeast I here u with the curiosity thing. But its just like u said in your life you haven't seen one shread of evidence, but in some peoples life every waking day and struggle over came is a sign of evidence. It depends on your viewpoint of things. see what i'm saying is what I have been saying from the first comment if it helps people better them selves why knock it. And i feel u when u say u don't have to believe in god to be a good person, but its people out here that know how
MegaSleep1 1 month ago
Dawkins is an antisemetic Nazi collaborator, his response to a teenage girl who "fucked him up" is proof of this, calling Jews monsters that live at the bottom of the sea!
We are going to end this heathen Nazi piece of shit! We are Anonymous and he's Finished!
kryckeestrooff 1 month ago
@kryckeestrooff Kid get lost, your iq is level of cow or donkey.
Mindaugas7100 1 month ago
@kryckeestrooff What do you prefer, believe in good when there is no evidence?
Mindaugas7100 1 month ago
I find that Dawkins is not an authority to speak on anything, if you listen closely to him all he ever talks about is himself, praising himself and putting down anyone who doesn't agree with his over inflated opinion of himself. That's all he is a big fucking windbag, it's about time the ignorant cunt popped!
kryckeestrooff 1 month ago
@kryckeestrooff He's an renowned biological scientist, who's made scientific works dating back to the 60's. He's the definition of an authority on evolutionary biology and one of the key people who have made it so commonly accepted. You should go read some of his early books instead of posting drivel on the internet I feel.
thetankgarage 1 month ago
@thetankgarage LOL Maybe in your dreams he is sunshine, but in mine he's just a ignorant rude wind bag. Writing a book or two says nothing of his worth, There are millions of books been written about any topic you care to choose, and just because he's written a couple means nothing to me. Some would call Marvel comics books too, so do you believe in Superman or Spiderman? Probably!! Maybe you also believe in the JewJew monster at the bottom of the sea too, so long as he told you!
kryckeestrooff 1 month ago
@kryckeestrooff He's been published multiple times in magazines like Nature and written many ... many academic papers. These aren't books, they're peered-reviewed papers of science, the foundation of our entire scientific community, the reason your computer is working as well as it is, along with why planes fly, A-bombs explode and medicine cures disease.
thetankgarage 1 month ago
@kryckeestrooff superman is not a marvel comic, it is DC. if your sarcasm is not even accurate, the rest of what you say is garbage too. HA HA HA.
iculus1972 1 month ago
william lane craig needs to just get over himself.
osiris7nz 1 month ago
after all that he replied her past has nothing to do with what me and her have going on now. Then i realised he he had learned to drive wit this girl, got his first place with her and she was making him a better man and i was just jealous of losing my friend. He had faith in her so I tried to use my insecurities to crush his faith so he would be as lonely as i was. so the point is whats the point of bringing negative to someones positive situation if its making them a better person
MegaSleep1 1 month ago
@MegaSleep1 I can't speak for anyone else, but I can say that for me, my questioning of other people's faith is more out of curiosity than any desire to tear apart their spiritual nature and leave them broken and weeping in the dust. I have seen no evidence, not a shred, for any deity that has ever been come up with throughout our entire history, and I am genuinely curious about what persuaded them.
I also think that you shouldn't need some god looking over your shoulder for you to be good
humdrumfeast 1 month ago
Heres a good example on what I am talking about. My close friend fell in love with this girl who lived across town. I knew a few people across town who told me she had a past of dealing with a few guys over there.My pride and evilness made me obsessed with finding out more and more dirt on her until i went back in told him everything i heard to ruin his relationship. when i told him he replied he already knew everything because she was honest with him. I asked him how could he stay with her
MegaSleep1 1 month ago
@Gretgor Just because someone may beleive in a higher power does not make them religious so the sarcasm isn't necessecary. What I am saying is if someone becomes a better person, a better husband, a better father, better neighbor etc... because of the theory of god which I have witnessed over and over again with my own eyes, Why argue against it. Why fight a good thing
MegaSleep1 1 month ago
So because the thought of the end of everything is unpleasant, therefore it's false? Typical religious.
Gretgor666 1 month ago
Only one question for Craig: why YOUR god?
MrBuffaloGrill 1 month ago
@GEDANUS6 Sad reality, but what u are saying makes a lot of since
MegaSleep1 1 month ago
I think the whole theory of god is cool even if most people dont think he exists. I mean think about it, dont kill, dont steal, dont sleep wit my dam wife it all sounds pretty fair to me. I seen drug attics stop using thru prayer, I seen people dyeing from cancer no longer fear death because of christian beliefs, i seen murderers gain a conscience because of scriptures. If it helps people live a better life whats the point of fighting against it.
MegaSleep1 1 month ago
Many fight against religion not because they want mankind to be free, but because they want to take God's position by means of ideologies like communism, socialism, political correctness etc. Being the lawmaker in a godless world gives you absolute power. It's not that I'm delighted with the activity of institutionalized religions. However, the important thing is their treasure of values which have kept the western civilization running for two thousand of years
GEDANUS6 1 month ago
@GEDANUS6 I'm sorry, but I do believe that what you refere to as western civilization came into existence only after the heavy "treasure" of religious values had been removed, melted down and steeped into something entirely different.
ibra54 1 month ago
@MegaSleep1 The point is to remove (the idea of) God from people's consciousness, and thus create vacuum to be filled with new "scientifically-based" morality, which could be modelled as some "people of reason" like. The trick has been known since the French Revolution (whose only contribution to the development of civilization is the guillotine) and has been used by such famous architects of new wonderful worlds as Hitler, Stalin, Mao et consortes.
GEDANUS6 1 month ago
@supermariofj "creationism, (which I still don't completely disregard) is viable so long as evolution is not proven.make sense?"
No that does not make sense.
1) The failure of Theory A does not mean that Theory B, C, D etc. are by default correct!
2) Evolution by Natural Selection as close to being "proven" as any principle in science ever has been. Biblical Creationism denies every observable law of nature and has ZERO evidence - no data - just a few verses in a book.
Terncote 1 month ago
@supermariofj "naturalism, which holds that only what the 5 senses perceive is real"
No. It holds that the best hope we have for finding universal principles to agree upon is by a method which carefully seeks agreement between data and its interpretation.
Religious faith is not the equal of knowledge because faith is arbitrary. Each religion claims that their belief without evidence is superior to every other. With only shifting sands of opinion to stand on, no religion will EVER know truth.
Terncote 1 month ago
@cigartragic "It's pretty telling that WLC says "he tries to anticipate objections to my arguments in order to answer them in advance."
It's hard not to "anticipate" Billy Boy Craig, since he uses the same, lame arguments over and over and over and over...
And it's pretty hypocritical of him to level such a criticism at Dawkins since Craig comes preloaded with a host of semantic tricks and logical fallacies for the sole purpose of sidestepping any real issues.
Liars for Jesus.
Terncote 1 month ago
William is a tool. like most apologist that make a claim and then they can't prove it. surprise surprise.
Marzattacz 1 month ago
So Craig comes clean and admits that he thinks people are stupid (after taking advantage of their stupidity for years)
shumble32 1 month ago
Craig is the guy that says it is ok if God does it. Genocide? Fine, God even did them a service?
The problem with pain going together with a good god, animals aren't really aware of pain.
The amount of mind juggling that this man has to do is quite a lot.
Hirnlego999 1 month ago
william lane craig is a SUPER GENIUS!! on the planet Moronia
Samura1gamer 1 month ago
It's pretty telling that WLC says "he tries to anticipate objections to my arguments in order to answer them in advance." He's not considering the other viewpoint to be valid, he's working from an assumption that we're (atheists) are wrong and working backwards from that. The whole point of science and philosophy is to present evidence and/or sound logical arguments to get to the truth; it is not so you close your mind and pointlessly argue one side because you refuse to admit you're wrong.
cigartragic 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Create a video response or Post
i am atheist but but but but but,,,,,,,,,, i think if a religion can give someone hope ,faith ,love thats good for the people to follow if they want to ,,,,,, just imagine can u or anyone in this world can give hope to someone who has suffered emotionally and mentally,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,what will give them hope that everything will be all right ???????? ........if it has to come from any religion i think everyone will not mind and we all will agree
skygurung13 1 month ago
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." - Thomas Jefferson
commoncents78 1 month ago
@commoncents78 nice try. but jefferson still believed in a Creator. he just didn't believe Jesus was, or is God.
supermariofj 1 month ago
@supermariofj Hahahahaha......and that just makes you feel much better about the cosmos doesn't it. So tell me superm, what religion do you subscribe to? Please entertain me, I'm too eager to hear this.
commoncents78 1 month ago
@commoncents78 no, i just lament tj was a deist and not a christian. he was a brilliant man, but he couldn't wrap his mind around Jesus, a human being, also being the Son of God. I dont subscribe to a religion. I hate religion. I'm just a plain jane Christian. I came to know Jesus personally as a young teen, and through my studies (ironically in science and not religious studies) and life experiences, i've come to believe in God, and Jesus more and more. it's really life changing.
supermariofj 1 month ago
@supermariofj Well you sound like you mean well. And professing to know Jesus is very serious. You know that means you base your belief on faith, or you have some substantial proof that Jesus and God for that matter does exist. If you have the latter please elaborate. No need for small talk right.
commoncents78 1 month ago
@commoncents78 believe me, i hate religion. i used to be catholic, how i truly believed in Jesus was a spiritual experience. and so i say, that it is physically impossible to prove Jesus and God exist aside from the often used argument of the complexity of life. however, there are many logical arguments for the existence of God laid forth by Dr. William lane craig which i highly recommend to u. I am a scientist, and while i cant substantially eliminate evolution entirely, i have my reservations.
supermariofj 1 month ago
additionally, even if evolution did happen, it still would be very possible, in fact no less probable that God does exist, because it would still be necessary for the atheist to prove or have evidence at least, that abiogenesis has occurred, including evidence for the possibility of the string theory being the cause of the creation of the universe as opposed to an intelligent creator. u see, evolution is the make or break argument for atheism. Christians still have some wiggle room.
supermariofj 1 month ago
@supermariofj Wiggle room? You mean adhering to a 2000+ year old book and declaring it the infallible word of God so that editing it in Gods name is considered a sin is having wiggle room? Science by definition is examining evidence and drawing new conclusions based on a constant stream of new data. A majority of Christians, however, believe editing the Bible or omitting any part of it is considered a damnable offense; this by definition makes Christianity rigid i.e no wiggle room.
cigartragic 1 month ago
@cigartragic well let's take a couple steps back now. there are several issues at hand with what u wrote. okay, 1st, faith is faith, scientific principles can't be applied to it, (i.e. the scientific method, which is what ur using), because many things in the bible can only be taken by believing (that's why they call it faith) in the absence of evidence. 2nd, this is why many Christians, including I, take it by offense to just change the bible to fit others' standards. (there's a verse warning..
supermariofj 1 month ago
@cigartragic verse warning about that). so, many peeps take offense at that. 3rd, when i mean wiggle room, i solely regard it in the context of philosophical discussion regarding science as a whole, and particularly, philosophical stances such as naturalism, which holds that only what the 5 senses perceive is real, that there is no God, and abiogenesis and evolution MUST have occured. creationism, (which I still don't completely disregard) is viable so long as evolution is not proven.make sense?
supermariofj 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@supermariofj "even if evolution did happen, it still would be very possible, in fact no less probable that God does exist,"
That would depend on which God you are talking about - that depends what charactisics you belive the "God" has.
IF you belive he is all power and might and can do anything -- then why would God bother taking billions of years for life to evolve when he could just create everything in a snap of his fingers.
Evoultions just dosent seem very "God like"
badpanda84 1 month ago
@supermariofj You can say what you want about logical arguments by Craig, he is just a debater. The fact is you, and Craig for that matter, get the basis of your beliefs from the bible. This book is absurdly flawed, immoral, and many parts of it completely ignored by even the believers. But you 'feel' like it's the spiritual nature that calls you. I hope you don't use that hypothesis in your line of work(science), you certainly will get repudiated. Good luck, u gonna need it.
commoncents78 1 month ago
So much ad hominem towards both men lol
EyeJayAre 1 month ago
"...many young people just have never been exposed to good, rigorous argumentation."
Oh, the irony.
Oilisdeathtomany 1 month ago
Anybody who uses arguments like "Well, things exist!" as evidence for a strictly man-made concept is in no position to chastise anyone else for mediocre thinking.
MrJimmyNapoleon 1 month ago 11
@MrJimmyNapoleon oh cmon, im not saying that the cosmological argument is convincing evidence for the existence of a necessary being(god), but are you really going to argue that the question of why something exists rather than nothing is not a question worth taking seriously? especially if you believe that existence had a definite beginning??
MickeyMacaroney 1 month ago
he said we will see some day,, not him he is dead now
albusai 1 month ago
richard is a moron , and he will die soon
albusai 1 month ago
and richard is a kitty afraid by this ass
erwtwfwfdsf 1 month ago
Comment removed
tensorbundle 1 month ago
William Craig is just an ass.
mike112769 1 month ago 25
@mike112769 u butthurt because the highest education you've been fed is high school :(
AeonFlexMusic 1 month ago
@mike112769 What about dawkin's? He's the most hateful athiest out there.
riverstory87 1 month ago
@mike112769 If that's so, then even an ass is brighter on theological issues than Richard Dawkins.
tamething1 1 month ago
@mike112769 Well yea.. but i mean.. to be fair... so is Dawkins..
Chadgod 1 month ago
I love the Idea of natural selection, right now science teaches us that cells are consist of proteins and protein is consist of amino acids. Theory of Evolution teaches us that through the natural selection, amino acids 'evolve' to protein later cells. Right now what human manage to do is to create artificial DNA (which not random, but designed by human). With outstanding technologies that we have now, why no scientists able to create same result as explained by the theory of evolution?
kirablacknote 1 month ago
@kirablacknote Science can't explain what life is. Even if you throw a few amino acids together in a test tube and say a cell came to be, there's still that question; what is life?
Years ago someone asked how a tape recorder worked. After dishing out all I knew right down to electromagnetism, the question remained; but how does it work?
loremdolorfu 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
William Lane Craig doesn´t even knows what the meaning of atheism is, atheism means the rejection of belief in the existence of deities, period, no more, this person "William Lane Craig" as he said, do believe that people that do not believe in the three in one, or in virgins giving birth to these three persons in one being, in talking snakes or in ghosts from heaven and hell, are inferior to him and stupid, he believes everyone should be as sophisticated as him to the point of hallucination.
1984serpiente 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
William Lane Craig doesn´t even knows what the meaning of atheism is, atheism means the rejection of belief in the existence of deities, period, no more, this person "William Lane Craig" as he said, do believe that people that do not believe in the three in one, or in virgins giving birth to these three persons in one being, in talking snakes or in ghosts from heaven and hell, are inferior to him and stupid, he believes everyone should be as sophisticated as him to the point of hallucination.
1984serpiente 1 month ago
Comment removed
1984serpiente 1 month ago
i never hear christopher hitchens and richard mention the more tangible evidence of the unexplained which is voo doo witch craft spells black candles weegie board altars hex suth sayers etc.. people are hooked on that shit in secrecy since the beginning. if they really wanted to get through to people they would make mention of that type of practice 1st until they do that i will think they are a joke
hapz3000 1 month ago
Comment removed
domnal 1 month ago
@domnal
sadly yes, since said priest hide behind relegion
Paletero336 1 month ago
@Paletero336 Priests don't live cloistered lives, that's what you're doing.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8
nope, Many times People like these with ideological power try their best to cover it up.
Paletero336 1 month ago
@Paletero336 You have to be 'IN' society to do something that even would require a "cover up". It's easy to be a holy man on top of a mountain.-The Razor's Edge
You're flexing ideological muscle in the only place you can. No atheist or anyone else for that matter ever said to my face what they say here on YouTube. Why is that? In society you can't just say whatever you want or do whatever you want. Your ideas and power have no existence in reality, sorry.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8
I dont really care if any atheist has argued with you in real life,
You make it seem like a black and white issue atheist may not be able to have community like theist but so many times communities of theist with different ideas may conflict with another.
Oh and don't be sorry,
Paletero336 1 month ago
@Paletero336 Got you mixed up with comment to me by domnal. I thought I was answering your comment. See below. 8)
shizzleman8 1 month ago
Craig is a snide, arrogant, and thoroughly duplicitous individual.
HundKaiser 1 month ago
@HundKaiser Can you have what you say? I mean by saying something about Dr. Craig like this does it happen the way you say? Is he now duplicitous because you're saying it? Couldn't someone say the exact same about you? You're not even pointing out how he's duplicitous. Isn't that a type of duplicity? Why not just say you have a million dollars in the bank, or that you're right about everything especially since you're saying it?
shizzleman8 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Subscribe to atheistmusicchannel if you like good atheist music
AtheistMusicChannel 1 month ago
irreligion: adhering to no particular religious belief
atheism: the belief that there are no god(s)
It's not that there is a subtle difference in these words it's that they're diametrically opposed to one another. As the best friend you'll never have in your life let me just suggest that simplicity in complex matters is what the law of Parsimony means to me.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8
Um no.
Atheism is not having a belief in gods. It is also possible to have a belief against gods, and that is a second definition of atheism in most dictionaries.
Irreligious excludes those people with religions but not a god belief, such as say Buddhists.
A lack of belief does not imply the presence of a belief to the contrary.
rkyeun 1 month ago
Comment removed
domnal 1 month ago
@domnal I want to be known in a Biblical sense by Jennifer Capriati. How can I effect how people know me?
Atheism is the rejection of God and religion. That's the very definition of God and religion. Irreligion is the lack or absence of religion. In pure violation of the law of parsimony I'll explain further. My mom tries to put spinach on my plate. "But MOM I lack spinach!" or "But MOM I reject spinach". Your problem with words isn't religion non-religion it's with "lack" & "reject".
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8 Have you ever had a slap in the belly with a wet fish ??
domnal 1 month ago
@domnal I used to work as a loan collector like Rocky Balboa from the 1st Rocky movie. Nobody argues with me about anything, not in real life anyway.
I set those pin headed, self-righteous, puritanical hypocrites on the right path. People are disarmed by affection. Osama Bin Laden thought he was going to get a fair trial, due process of law, instead he sleeps with the fishes. Never been hit with a wet fish but all my lady friends have been dominatrixes, does that count? Only Love. Right?
shizzleman8 1 month ago
Nothing ever changes or adapts, no new genes? Just rearranging? You can rearrange the chairs on the decks of the Titanic, but that's not going to change the fact that she sank.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
Dr. Craig's arguments take the form of logic syllogism. What forms do your arguments take?
shizzleman8 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Professor Dawkins refuses to debate with creationists on one hand, but on the other hand he seems to be on good terms with global warming peddlers. He won't admit that so called abortion is just slaughtering the unborn (biologist!), and that the idea of godless state was realised in the form of the Soviet Union. His rationality stops and his courage leaves him when he approaches the realm of political correctness.
GEDANUS6 1 month ago
@GEDANUS6 The Soviet Union wasn't secular though. They merely replaced god with communism and leader worship, particularly the worship of Lenin and Stalin. While Dawkins can sometimes be a little more reserved about insulting people face to face (especially compared to Hitchens) he has on several occasions called people on their religious BS.
leejs 1 month ago
@leejs YEAH? What do you call people on? If you're calling them on their religious BS, then you're in league with them. Atheism is a protected religion in the USA.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8 Atheism isn't a religion. And he has called muslims on their ridiculous belief that apostates should be murdered. He has called christians on their belief that homosexuality is wrong and that gays should be barred from adoption. And most often called people on their ridiculous insistence on biblical creationism and the idea that it should be taught as science.
leejs 1 month ago
@leejs There are a number of legal precedents which ushered in atheism's non profit tax status as protected under the 1st amendment to the constitution's free exercise of religion clause. You saying it's not a religion doesn't come with any authoritative reference the same as everything else you write. Do you need me to direct you to the case law? God is judicially noticed. You want it to be atheism that's judicially noticed and all the religions that you fight against not be protected. Ha!
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8 You saying atheism is a religion doesn't come with any authoritative reference the same as everything else you write.
leejs 1 month ago
@leejs There are atheist churches in America. Pot smokers don't have churches.
First Atheist Church of True Science (facts). There are atheist churches in LA and in Houston or somewhere in Texas. Godlessness is protected under the 1st amendement. Torcaso v. Watkins 1961 was upheld in kaufman v. McCaughtry 2005
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8 The 1st amend. is irrelevant to me as I do not live in the US. But that does not mean it's a religion. The First Church of Atheism exists solely to ordain clergy so that non-religious people can have weddings/funerals officiated by non-religious individuals. There is no doctrine, no belief structure, simply rejection of god. But I'm certain that even though it lacks any and all traits of religion, you will continue to assert it is religion.
leejs 1 month ago
@leejs What's not relevant is where you live. You could move here.
I don't assert. I'm merely sharing the law with you in an as emotionaless way as I can. I'm not fighting against atheism. I'm glad it's a religion, it's a boon for you atheists. You're winning. You gained tax advantages. You're growing. You just can't put other religions down now because you're in one. Atheists live to serve themselves. Just an observation. 1961 until like 2007 atheists couldn't prove they do good.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8 Atheists do not gain tax advantages for being a religion, some atheist organizations gain tax advantages because they are non profit organizations. That's equivalent to claiming the American Cancer Society is a religion because it gets tax advantages. Atheism is solely the rejection of god, there are no tenets, no organized hierarchy, there's not even the basics of a scripture. You can assert it's a religion but it lacks every aspect that defines religion.
leejs 1 month ago
@leejs NPO non profit organization.
As long as you're the one defining reality why don't you define everything for everyone? Make us ALL rich for example. see what I'm saying?
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8 No, I don't see what you're saying. I just said the reason that some atheist groups are tax-exempt is because they are registered non-profits, not because they are churches. That's not 'defining' anything that's merely stating a fact. If you have a problem with my so-called defining of things then tell me what you consider a religion to be.
leejs 1 month ago
@leejs I don't know what you're talking about I'm a Budhist, i'm not religious! < See how ridiculous that sounds? Atheists will write me, "WE DON"T HAVE ANY DOGMAS" < well, that sounds pretty dogmatic there little fella.
Religion is the opposite of irreligion not atheism. Have you ever been referred to as an infidel, or perhaps unfaithful? Those terms of endearment fit atheists but not the irreligious.
Sometimes I'm irreligious, but I'm also in love with stained glass windows. (?)
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8
If "We don't have a dogma." sounds like a dogma to you, is vanilla pudding also the strongest and sharpest material in the universe?
rkyeun 1 month ago
@rkyeun No, it sounds like another dogma to me.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8
Cool, good to know.
So what color IS the sky in your world?
rkyeun 1 month ago
@rkyeun It depends on what time it is.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
@shizzleman8 That would be ridiculous if a practicing buddhist said they weren't religious. Same as if a christian, jew or muslim said they weren't religious. But I am still surprised at your inclusion of atheism in the religion category, especially since you have given no points as to how it can be classified as such. So if I say "I DON'T HAVE A UNICORN" then does that mean I have a unicorn? Cause if so, awesome, I can make some money off that shit.
leejs 1 month ago
@leejs OJ Simpson when asked how he pleaded in his murder charge of his wife and her friend Ron Goldman said, "100% NOT GUILTY".
It was that 100% part that cinched the deal.
Most Christians will tell you that they're not religious, that they in fact are in a RELATIONSHIP (they'll emphasize the word & say it a little louder). It's like when a luscious blonde tells me she's not religious but she is spiritual. I'll say, "I'm not honest, but I find you extremely interesting". You too friend.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
Comment removed
GEDANUS6 1 month ago
What if people purposely troll on videos that they agree with so people who disagree will keep commenting? That would bring more traffic to videos that those people agree with, and away from smarter ones.
Sounds like a fun social experiment.
DoctorTopper 1 month ago
Atheism is the POSITION that there is no God. It's not knowledge of any kind it's just prejudice. It's a godless religion. It's the same as saying you're a Jehovah's Witness. No matter what evidence is submitted to you, you automatically reject it. You guys can't even speak English logically and coherently and see ONE SINGLE POINT THROUGH. How is the universe being convserved. WHAT CONSERVES IT? HUH? NO ANSWER. RIGHT because you've already made up your minds. YOU'RE PREJUDICED!!!!
shizzleman8 1 month ago
Take an IQ test, and you'll see what I'm saying about atheists is founded on fact.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
Look at my Cross. My Dad played a joke on humanity. It's my Cross to bear.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
It was really painful, but I can play the piano again. People get tortured. We all take a beating from time to time.
Don't let it get you down.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
That'll be 25 cents.
shizzleman8 1 month ago
Putting someone or something down to make yourself feel better for real and imagined failures is known as compensation.