When I read the Bible, I don't get bored. Each time I read it I see something new. God is not boring. Jesus is not boring. Good video, makes me glad I'm born again and saved by the blood of Jesus, and don't have to look to this lousy world for happiness. This world doesn't satisfy.
@Valoree1104 How can I sum up in one comment you may never read how wrong you are? This world is not lousy. I learned long ago that when you stop trying to escape it you find meaning in every act, in every moment. Yu say you are a christian, well, I have stood on the summit of a mountain with a dear friend looking out over the land below us. It was inspiring in ways my words can't describe. My friend turned to me and said "This is God."
If there is a God, I don't think he lives in your book.
@IntrepidStranger /I don't mean everything in this world is lousy. Many things God created are beautiful, But the sin in us ruins alot in this world. Yes nature is beautiful, but I don't understand how you think nature came to be w/o a Creator. We need God, w/o Him, there would be no beauty in this world which He created. Alot of people (including people I love) criticize the Bible, but they never even read it.
@Valoree1104 Don't mistake me. I'm not saying that there isn't meaning in the bible, only that it should be viewed as a starting point, not the ending and the whole. of all the things you believe he created, why should this book be anything more than a guide to the rest of creation? Let your faith be a river that flows through you, not an ocean that drowns out all other music. As for how I can find beauty without God... I can't say for sure how, only that I do.
death is an absurd, just another one of the many perverse mechanisms of nature to which we are bound; it should not be what gives meaning to individual existence; besides, if i might say so, nothing lasts forever, not stars, not even the universe itself in all likelihood
I would like to live for couple of millennia, or maybe a little more. To learn a bit more. But I am certain, I want to live, live long, but not for ever.
And for those who say atheists are selfish -> Some are, some are not, it's just the same with religious people. Religious labels have nothing to do with individual's character.
wow, your the first athiest that really made atheism sound appealing. I am almost convince it is the way. It is nice to hear someone to sound so at peace. just want to say nice vid.
Great Video BitRobot, this is the kind of thing I'd like played at my funeral, so people can see how much joy and wonder i've had in my life. Great choice of music, and you have a very calming voice.
I found the whole thing very relaxing ,and quite moving.
When you realize that death is really the end, you won't lose the meaning of life? Nothing will mean anything to you when you're in the ground. You won't remember life, and people won't remember you. Even if they do, you wouldn't know about it. It might give you pleasure to think about that while you're alive, but that isn't any kind of meaning. You might as well have never existed, because nothing you can do has any consequence.
I mean realizing that in life of course. I can't explain the pleasure of this. This is meaning to me.
I have self critique of this vid.. I actuallt don't think philosophy on this level has any significant part to play in your happiness. Nor has god. I am fortunate not to have been traumatized in life. And it is a bit arrogant of me to assume this would matter to anyone that are less fortunate.
A really comforting video that makes sense. Im an agnostic so I believe the afterlife can go either way... Maybe there is one, maybe there is not. Will we ever prove it? Who Knows?
I'm 50. Closer to the end than the beginning. This view as articulated in this video helps me enjoy and get the most meaning I can from each life experience. The meaning seems to amplify as time goes on. My father who's an 81 yr old Atheist feels the same way. It makes each time we get together even more special.
"I absolutely recognize that my belief is based on FAITH"
i'm really happy that you realized that.. that was what i wanted to hear. once again i have no problem where you put your faith in.
as long as you know the difference between faith and evidence then i'm fine with your beliefs
whishfull thinking is picking one version over the other.. faith is believe one thing not becuz of evidence but becuz you want to.. therefor faith can easily cause wishfull thinking.
I know the difference between faith and evidence. Most of the evidence I have encountered about Christ leads me to believe He is real. SOME of the aspects of His life I must accept on faith. NONE of the evidence about the tooth fairy or Santa Claus proved their existence to me. I terminated my faith in the tooth fairy and my belief in receiving money for lost teeth and placed my faith in friends and family to know what I wanted for Christmas rather than Santa...
you can believe whatever you want even if you dont have any evidence. telling you that you cant believe something is not my place even if i disagree with you. just as long as you realize that whatever reason you have in believing jesus god afterlife etc. that reason is personal and based on faith (once again there is nothing wrong with that but when a theist says that they do have evidence then dont mind me if i call them on there bull shit)
Our mind or what is you/me don't work with eternity. It would be hell. To get your skin burnt off for eternity or chillin in a pool with jesus forever doesn't matter if it's forever. Eternity is still hell. And if we are transformed to coupe with eternity we are no longer us. We are what we remember. So our memory needs to be altered for us to "transform",,, so we die either way. With this heaven or hell loses it's point and is therefore not relevant.
I could do this forever...maybe to you eternity is hell, but speak for yourself. You say we are what we remember. Why? You are obsessed with this plane of existence. How do you know what we are or what is relevant after we are transformed into spirit? You have no idea what awaits us after we leave this plane of existence. Quit speaking as if you know...
I know it in the sense that I know that there is not 20 statues of david beckham orbiting jupiter. I'm building my worldview from what I believe most likely to be true. And I am here because It benefits me more to get my views challenged and learn new things(the only way to reach the absolute truth as you speak of in your videos) Not nessesarily on youtube but to basicly be open to new inputs. This however christianity is an obsticle for because of its many claimed certenties.
"You say we are what we remember. Why?" I should have elaborated that. We are all made of the same things if you dig deep enough(now you probably think that I dont dig deep enough but to fill gaps with unlikely stuff is for me not yet better than fill gaps with likely stuff). In my view I am as much part of the chainreaction as a rock. Different but the same. We are everything.
I will not quit speaking as if I know. This is what I know so far. And I exspect the same from you.
Interesting that you decry Christianity for its "certainties" and yet you make unrealistic claims based on nothing more than personal conjecture - then declare them to be true because they are "what you know."
the point is is that we dont know what happens after we die. if you see the possibility that this life is the only one we get. are you prepared to risk this life based on some belief you might have?
Of course many paranormal scientists disagree with you, but now the question is to you - you asked me if I would risk this life - I ask you are you willing to risk the possibility of spiritual existence because you choose to deny it?
if you open your mind to everything without having any proof then you need to accept every singe fairytale that people throw at you which will make you gullible and you wont last very long..
i'm not saying there is no such thing i'm just saying that there is no reason to believe it and so by default i do not believe.
this is not closed mindedness. its simply dealing with reality.
Your argument presupposes that the human mind has not the capability to discriminate between that which is unsubstantiated by fact, but plausible, and that which is not only unsubstantiated by fact but also highly IMPLAUSIBLE
Because I accept the possibility that an afterlife might be possible, does not mean I MUST believe every fairy tale. Where do you get that logic? You assertion is proven false simply by the fact that I can attest to you that I think there is an afterlife, but no tooth fairy
i'm not saying that you MUST believe everything but why would you believe in one but not the other? its certainly not by measuring the evidence and it's not very logical either. maybe its simply becuz you want an afterlife to exist but you dont want the existance of the tooth fairy? if you do believe one but not the other then your simply using wishfull thinking.
what i'm saying is. if you believe in something supernatural then you have no real reason to dismiss the other supernatural things.
Are you saying the tooth fairy is supernatural? See? That's where your argument falls apart. Can you not distinguish absolute fiction from unexplained phenomena? Can you not distinguish between a belief held by many peoples of many cultures throughout all of human history and a fictional story?
i didnt use the toothfairy as comparison becuz its fiction but becuz somebody just made it up.
an afterlife is not an unexplained phenomena. somebody somewhere just made it up! just like the toothfairy! that is the commen thread that those 2 have. that many people believe in god and an afterlife doesnt make it more acceptible to believe.
Wrong - You don't know for a fact that accounts of the afterlife are just made up. Over the entirety of human history, you claim that all accounts of afterlife phenomena are "made up?" Prove it. It is not like the tooth fairy. The toothy fairy and the like are known to be untrue. Adults finally tell their children the truth. How many people who teach their offspring about spirituality later recant the entire notion liker Santa Claus? Give it up. Your comparison is invalid...
what accounts of the afterlife? there are none! and if you think there are then you are claiming a positive which means that you have the burden of proof. the difference between something that was made up and something that is fiction is only that fiction has been known to be false AND made up. and i said the commen thread i was aiming for was that there both made up. that people dont know that the afterlife is made up doesnt make the concept true or any more reasonable.
"what accounts of the afterlife?" The resurrection of Jesus Chtrist...oh but YOU deny the truth of that event. Your circular reasoning is perfect. Deny the poof of the afterlife. Claim the after life is made up. Then claim that the resurrection is made up because the after life is made up...
the event of the ressurection of jesus is only in the bible the existence of Alexander the Great is supported by many seperate source. if you want to believe jesus ressurected then fine but it is wishfull thinking even if you dont want it to be
Big deal - Different sources? Maybe they are all the same fairy tale. btw - to consider the Bible as a SINGLE source is a misnomer it is a COLLECTION of different accounts of the same story. I am not offended by your ignorant arrogance. Its ok - call my belief what you will. To think that your opinion of my belief will influence my conviction in anyway - NOW THAT'S WISHFUL THINKING!!
maybe they are but the fact that there are so many sources makes that unlikely unless there is a major conspiracy going on.
the bible is a single source simply becuz the authers where working together. there is no account of the ress of jesus outside the bible to support it and therefor you have to believe 1 source.
i dont care what you believe and i'm not trying to change your mind. your beliefs are based on nothing but wishfull thinking and FAITH. an honest theist would admit this fact.
if they did work in different times then each auther could alter the work of the auther befor him which also makes it 1 source(it also means that the latest auther was the last to edit the book and he was also the least reliable becuz of the time difference)
Wrong - you are confusing the canonization of the books into the Bible with WRITING it. Authors did not alter the works of others. It was considered divinely delivered. They did not change it. Yes books were accepted or rejected. The canonization, but he sources were original. Other historic accounts have been subject to revision. Do you disqualify those as well?
as long as it is 1 book 1 article 1 text or wahtever it is. it must be treated as 1 source.
"Other historic accounts have been subject to revision. Do you disqualify those as well? "
this makes them more unreliable but not 1 source we can still cross examine them with other sources and see if something doesnt add up and them try to figure out why and if we cant we dismiss that inconsistanty. but history in general is very unreliable since we usually cant confirm anything in it.
"as long as it is 1 book 1 article 1 text or wahtever it is. it must be treated as 1 source."
I disagree. That would disqualify more than half of the college texts I used in school. Most were either written by a team of authors or COMPILATIONS of works by various authors. Because a publisher saw fit to put those different sources into one convenient package reduces the value of the information within???
"but history in general is very unreliable since we usually cant confirm anything in it."
Right - This is why the written history of the Jewish people and Christ as recorded in the Bible is no less a reliable source of ancient history than any other ancient writings...
you mean like the stories of Ra Zeus Thor or any of the other gods of religions that for some reason arent around anymore? then yes. most other historicle documents can be atleast partly varified and of some (the existence of Hitler) we can still see consequensice today.
and even if we can prove that there were those elegedge 500 people who saw the ress of jesus and all of them wrote it in a document and we can prove that those documents werent poluded by eachother or over the course of 2000 years (which many theologians and historians say happened to the bible which explains the contraditions in some of the books) then it still wont be enough. eye witness accounts are the weakest of all evidence and your claim really cant be any higher then sawing somebody ress
"you mean like the stories of Ra Zeus Thor or any of the other gods of religions that for some reason arent around anymore? then yes"
Exactly - those stories were categorically DISPROVED. So, they aren't around anymore. The story of Christ has a truth that millions of people, thousands of years later still believe...
how where they disproven? disproven means that scientific proof shows that its not true but science has never ever had any opinion on any god that ever "existed" simply becuz they cant test anything supernatural. you cant disprove a god!
jesus christ may have been an actual person but his story has never been verified and so you cant know if anything about it is truth. the fact that a lot of people believe it doesnt mean that its true. truth is not a democracy.
You can believe that the sun is drawn across the sky by some mythic god if you wish - but science has categorically disproved the xistence of that god... Independent verification of Biblical accounts exist. See the Dead Sea SAcrolls...
all the things in schoolbooks are compiled to be convenient but all the original articles and texts are still around so if something changes in a schoolbook then we can still see if the change is qualified to be in the school book. but there are no individual record of the stories in the bible apart from the bible itself.
do you want evidence before beleiving something? Yes: you have no reason to believe in an aftelife. No: you have no reason to dismiss anything even if there is no evidence or if the claim is absurd
That's YOUR logic. But your logic is false. I have the evidence I need to satisfy my brain's capability to distinguish between the possible unsubstantiated, and the ridiculously implausible unsubstantiated. I heard the story of Santa Claus. I believed it. I became aware of the implausibility of the story. I judged it to be fiction. I heard the story of Christ. I found some of the story implausible. I have not judged the entire story to be fiction. Your "all or nothing" fallacy is invalid...
the burden of proof is commonly used by logical people including ALL scientists and very valid. if you say that the burden of proof or evidence is not important then i can say that i am the ressurected version of jesus and you have no reason to doubt me becuz i dont have to prove it
why would i need to believe in a spiritual existence in order to be able to go there? its either there or not...what makes you think you can only go there as long as you believe you will? if there evn is such a thing.
The burden is upon you to show how our concept of benefits and diminishing benefits would be different if our conscious was stretched over infinity. Otherwise, we must assume it will act the same.
The burden is on you to show how the purely human realm construct of "diminishing benefits" could even be perceived and would apply in a plane of existence unlike anything we can possibly understand...how can you assume your petty human concepts you now know even translate?
The burden is on you to prove that we could even exist in that realm. Or that our perception of anything could exist in that realm. Or that you could think in that realm, and so on and so forth. You are assuming many many things about something that you assume to exist in the first place. Jesus being resurrected was only recorded by very few, even in the highly bureaucratic state of Rome . Alexander was recorded by almost everyone he even came near. You think jesus is more important.
There are only ten documented sources of Alexander. Some based upon know manuscripts that are described as "lost." I think a better measure of he historic impact of a personality might be a measure of his lasting legacy. Just how many people still worship Alexander as a God figure? How many profess to be Christian?
Yes, lets look at the legacy contemporary to them. Alexander had how many cities named after himself? How many of them retain that name from then? Please, not even close. Also, even if you have substantial evidence for the existence of jesus you don't have it for the resurrection.
"The burden is on you to prove that we could even exist in that realm. Or that you could think in that realm, and so on and so forth." - My point exactly - ASSUMING we exist - we certainly are not going to perceive he existence in human terms - thereby eliminating 'diminishing benefits." Of course I can't prove the existence of the afterlife. If I cold - you'd be worshipping me...
You are assuming many, many unstated things. I can begin listing them if you want.
On your actual point, existing how? You seem to want to make a clear distinction that we wouldn't be existing in a place with diminishing marginal returns, which would drastically alter all of our personal values so much so that we would end up spending eternity doing literally one thing over and over. Also, the assumption further from the status quo needs to be more substantiated to be considered equal.
A beautiful sunset might become less important, but in exchange immortality would allow you to see far beyond our solar system, to see wonders unimaginable to the 21st century human mind.
Without time being a issue the universe will be our playground and we will be as children again.
What reason is there to explore when you have nothing to gain. All we do is fighting to survive. "Unimportant" pleasures is a part of that. Your life is 100 % saved. You know you are going to live forever. At first I agree it would be fascinating. But in time you'll be more and more aware. Eternal life is hell. No matter if you're bathing in a pool with angels or getting your skin burnt off over and over again. In time you will reach the same meaningless state.
Nothing to gain? Life is not just about ensuring procreation. Not for me atleast, I want to see all, feel all, be all.
You are seeing this from a far to down to earth perspective. With unending time also comes unending possibilities, unlimited arrangements of physical law. Although there are a finite amount of things a mortal could do. A immortal "God-like" human being would not suffer from those constrictions. It would be so far away from being human who knows what it would care about.
Great video!
glitchuser4 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BiTROBOTS NEW MUSICAL RELEASE!
18th May 2011
Search on Bandcamp (another site) for your very own BiTROBOT!
NEWS FROM THE STOCKHOLM!
The bitpop-master BitRobot has worked dirty nightshifts with his Asian friends at the UFO-callcenter to master his second album - Nebula.
On the box: Use these 13 tracks to spacetravel. Haters stay on the ground but You, it's time for departure!
Search on Bandcamp (another site) for your very own BiTROBOT!
jonathanperson 9 months ago
I believe with all that I am that given all eternity I would be able to give every moment meaning.
IntrepidStranger 1 year ago
When I read the Bible, I don't get bored. Each time I read it I see something new. God is not boring. Jesus is not boring. Good video, makes me glad I'm born again and saved by the blood of Jesus, and don't have to look to this lousy world for happiness. This world doesn't satisfy.
Valoree1104 1 year ago
@Valoree1104 How can I sum up in one comment you may never read how wrong you are? This world is not lousy. I learned long ago that when you stop trying to escape it you find meaning in every act, in every moment. Yu say you are a christian, well, I have stood on the summit of a mountain with a dear friend looking out over the land below us. It was inspiring in ways my words can't describe. My friend turned to me and said "This is God."
If there is a God, I don't think he lives in your book.
IntrepidStranger 1 year ago
@IntrepidStranger /I don't mean everything in this world is lousy. Many things God created are beautiful, But the sin in us ruins alot in this world. Yes nature is beautiful, but I don't understand how you think nature came to be w/o a Creator. We need God, w/o Him, there would be no beauty in this world which He created. Alot of people (including people I love) criticize the Bible, but they never even read it.
Valoree1104 1 year ago
@Valoree1104 Don't mistake me. I'm not saying that there isn't meaning in the bible, only that it should be viewed as a starting point, not the ending and the whole. of all the things you believe he created, why should this book be anything more than a guide to the rest of creation? Let your faith be a river that flows through you, not an ocean that drowns out all other music. As for how I can find beauty without God... I can't say for sure how, only that I do.
IntrepidStranger 1 year ago
great vid, very artistic and well made :-)
hewey999 1 year ago
Very powerful. I've been struggling inside over the last few months with death even though I have been an atheist for a long time.
More recently I feel more 'spiritual' than I ever have if that makes any sense. This video reflects exactly how I feel.
orangesfromlondon 2 years ago
death is an absurd, just another one of the many perverse mechanisms of nature to which we are bound; it should not be what gives meaning to individual existence; besides, if i might say so, nothing lasts forever, not stars, not even the universe itself in all likelihood
Nouseeker 2 years ago
Really liked this. It's the fact that life will end that gives it its meaning. Nice
dominictemple 2 years ago
Well spoken.
BigDickandLittleJon 2 years ago
thanks man this vid is truly amazing!
Vilagen 2 years ago
Life is beautiful,personal and meaningful when lived without superstition. Great vid!
thegalwegian 2 years ago 4
I would like to live for couple of millennia, or maybe a little more. To learn a bit more. But I am certain, I want to live, live long, but not for ever.
And for those who say atheists are selfish -> Some are, some are not, it's just the same with religious people. Religious labels have nothing to do with individual's character.
skavotajs5 2 years ago 7
wow, your the first athiest that really made atheism sound appealing. I am almost convince it is the way. It is nice to hear someone to sound so at peace. just want to say nice vid.
Elestareus 2 years ago
Great Video BitRobot, this is the kind of thing I'd like played at my funeral, so people can see how much joy and wonder i've had in my life. Great choice of music, and you have a very calming voice.
I found the whole thing very relaxing ,and quite moving.
Excellent vid 5 stars.
bonnie43uk 2 years ago
When you realize that death is really the end, you won't lose the meaning of life? Nothing will mean anything to you when you're in the ground. You won't remember life, and people won't remember you. Even if they do, you wouldn't know about it. It might give you pleasure to think about that while you're alive, but that isn't any kind of meaning. You might as well have never existed, because nothing you can do has any consequence.
dbrass16 2 years ago
I mean realizing that in life of course. I can't explain the pleasure of this. This is meaning to me.
I have self critique of this vid.. I actuallt don't think philosophy on this level has any significant part to play in your happiness. Nor has god. I am fortunate not to have been traumatized in life. And it is a bit arrogant of me to assume this would matter to anyone that are less fortunate.
BitRobot 2 years ago
@dbrass16 But you can improve the lives of others and yourself...
Its the humanistic greek view.
susideguy 1 year ago
Question for christians: If you didn't have the immediate threat of heaven or reward of hell, would you do any good for mankind?
CerrunosisGod 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
why use this as a video response?! It just proves the atheist selfishness and ignorance of existence.....
sorry, dreamy music and half assed poetic statements won't cut it...
This video demonstrates the self serving attitude of the atheist.....sorry ...this fails...
LordWhorfinX 2 years ago
haha.. It should benefit for you then, havin proof of atheistic selfishness as video response. Maby I am a double agent. ;)
BitRobot 2 years ago
How does it prove atheist ignorance and selfishness?
CerrunosisGod 2 years ago
Can you please explain atheist selfishness and ignorance of existence? Is it that atheists don't worship a god they have no proof of?
Boxcutter7 2 years ago
@LordWhorfinX dreamy music and half assed poetic statements...reminds me of church
heestdabeast 1 year ago
A really comforting video that makes sense. Im an agnostic so I believe the afterlife can go either way... Maybe there is one, maybe there is not. Will we ever prove it? Who Knows?
LeafsFan120 2 years ago
This video is fucking awesome
ARoc4578 2 years ago
Excellent. Should be shown in schools.
PeopleAintNoGood 2 years ago
Damn right.
KriimIanga 2 years ago
Amazing, well done - really AWESOME response
todore00 2 years ago
Very well said.
I'm 50. Closer to the end than the beginning. This view as articulated in this video helps me enjoy and get the most meaning I can from each life experience. The meaning seems to amplify as time goes on. My father who's an 81 yr old Atheist feels the same way. It makes each time we get together even more special.
csadler 2 years ago
I absolutely recognize that my belief is based on FAITH. I simply laugh off your characterization of my faith as "wishful thinking."
marklross2 2 years ago
"I absolutely recognize that my belief is based on FAITH"
i'm really happy that you realized that.. that was what i wanted to hear. once again i have no problem where you put your faith in.
as long as you know the difference between faith and evidence then i'm fine with your beliefs
whishfull thinking is picking one version over the other.. faith is believe one thing not becuz of evidence but becuz you want to.. therefor faith can easily cause wishfull thinking.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
I know the difference between faith and evidence. Most of the evidence I have encountered about Christ leads me to believe He is real. SOME of the aspects of His life I must accept on faith. NONE of the evidence about the tooth fairy or Santa Claus proved their existence to me. I terminated my faith in the tooth fairy and my belief in receiving money for lost teeth and placed my faith in friends and family to know what I wanted for Christmas rather than Santa...
marklross2 2 years ago
marklross2
you can believe whatever you want even if you dont have any evidence. telling you that you cant believe something is not my place even if i disagree with you. just as long as you realize that whatever reason you have in believing jesus god afterlife etc. that reason is personal and based on faith (once again there is nothing wrong with that but when a theist says that they do have evidence then dont mind me if i call them on there bull shit)
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
Everything you said about life because death is truly "the end" would also be true if death were an irreversible transition.
marklross2 2 years ago
Our mind or what is you/me don't work with eternity. It would be hell. To get your skin burnt off for eternity or chillin in a pool with jesus forever doesn't matter if it's forever. Eternity is still hell. And if we are transformed to coupe with eternity we are no longer us. We are what we remember. So our memory needs to be altered for us to "transform",,, so we die either way. With this heaven or hell loses it's point and is therefore not relevant.
BitRobot 2 years ago
I could do this forever...maybe to you eternity is hell, but speak for yourself. You say we are what we remember. Why? You are obsessed with this plane of existence. How do you know what we are or what is relevant after we are transformed into spirit? You have no idea what awaits us after we leave this plane of existence. Quit speaking as if you know...
marklross2 2 years ago
I know it in the sense that I know that there is not 20 statues of david beckham orbiting jupiter. I'm building my worldview from what I believe most likely to be true. And I am here because It benefits me more to get my views challenged and learn new things(the only way to reach the absolute truth as you speak of in your videos) Not nessesarily on youtube but to basicly be open to new inputs. This however christianity is an obsticle for because of its many claimed certenties.
BitRobot 2 years ago
"You say we are what we remember. Why?" I should have elaborated that. We are all made of the same things if you dig deep enough(now you probably think that I dont dig deep enough but to fill gaps with unlikely stuff is for me not yet better than fill gaps with likely stuff). In my view I am as much part of the chainreaction as a rock. Different but the same. We are everything.
I will not quit speaking as if I know. This is what I know so far. And I exspect the same from you.
BitRobot 2 years ago
Interesting that you decry Christianity for its "certainties" and yet you make unrealistic claims based on nothing more than personal conjecture - then declare them to be true because they are "what you know."
marklross2 2 years ago
the point is is that we dont know what happens after we die. if you see the possibility that this life is the only one we get. are you prepared to risk this life based on some belief you might have?
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
This is certainly the only life we get - at least in this plane of existence...
marklross2 2 years ago
there is no evidence of any other plane of existence let alone if we go there after our life in this one is done
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
Of course many paranormal scientists disagree with you, but now the question is to you - you asked me if I would risk this life - I ask you are you willing to risk the possibility of spiritual existence because you choose to deny it?
marklross2 2 years ago
This is where it gets absurd. WHY would there be a spiritual existance?
BitRobot 2 years ago
Is it not equally absurd to decide without proof there is not?
Beyond the concept of closing your mind to POSSIBILITY - I don't know what else to say....
marklross2 2 years ago
if you open your mind to everything without having any proof then you need to accept every singe fairytale that people throw at you which will make you gullible and you wont last very long..
i'm not saying there is no such thing i'm just saying that there is no reason to believe it and so by default i do not believe.
this is not closed mindedness. its simply dealing with reality.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
Your argument presupposes that the human mind has not the capability to discriminate between that which is unsubstantiated by fact, but plausible, and that which is not only unsubstantiated by fact but also highly IMPLAUSIBLE
Because I accept the possibility that an afterlife might be possible, does not mean I MUST believe every fairy tale. Where do you get that logic? You assertion is proven false simply by the fact that I can attest to you that I think there is an afterlife, but no tooth fairy
marklross2 2 years ago
i'm not saying that you MUST believe everything but why would you believe in one but not the other? its certainly not by measuring the evidence and it's not very logical either. maybe its simply becuz you want an afterlife to exist but you dont want the existance of the tooth fairy? if you do believe one but not the other then your simply using wishfull thinking.
what i'm saying is. if you believe in something supernatural then you have no real reason to dismiss the other supernatural things.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
Are you saying the tooth fairy is supernatural? See? That's where your argument falls apart. Can you not distinguish absolute fiction from unexplained phenomena? Can you not distinguish between a belief held by many peoples of many cultures throughout all of human history and a fictional story?
marklross2 2 years ago
i didnt use the toothfairy as comparison becuz its fiction but becuz somebody just made it up.
an afterlife is not an unexplained phenomena. somebody somewhere just made it up! just like the toothfairy! that is the commen thread that those 2 have. that many people believe in god and an afterlife doesnt make it more acceptible to believe.
its still fantasy!
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
Wrong - You don't know for a fact that accounts of the afterlife are just made up. Over the entirety of human history, you claim that all accounts of afterlife phenomena are "made up?" Prove it. It is not like the tooth fairy. The toothy fairy and the like are known to be untrue. Adults finally tell their children the truth. How many people who teach their offspring about spirituality later recant the entire notion liker Santa Claus? Give it up. Your comparison is invalid...
marklross2 2 years ago
what accounts of the afterlife? there are none! and if you think there are then you are claiming a positive which means that you have the burden of proof. the difference between something that was made up and something that is fiction is only that fiction has been known to be false AND made up. and i said the commen thread i was aiming for was that there both made up. that people dont know that the afterlife is made up doesnt make the concept true or any more reasonable.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
"what accounts of the afterlife?" The resurrection of Jesus Chtrist...oh but YOU deny the truth of that event. Your circular reasoning is perfect. Deny the poof of the afterlife. Claim the after life is made up. Then claim that the resurrection is made up because the after life is made up...
marklross2 2 years ago
your saying jesus christ resurrected... your claiming a positive.. the burden of proof is on you again.. so prove it.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
ok - I accept the historic account of the event in the same way that I accept the historic account of Alexander the Great....
marklross2 2 years ago
the event of the ressurection of jesus is only in the bible the existence of Alexander the Great is supported by many seperate source. if you want to believe jesus ressurected then fine but it is wishfull thinking even if you dont want it to be
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
Big deal - Different sources? Maybe they are all the same fairy tale. btw - to consider the Bible as a SINGLE source is a misnomer it is a COLLECTION of different accounts of the same story. I am not offended by your ignorant arrogance. Its ok - call my belief what you will. To think that your opinion of my belief will influence my conviction in anyway - NOW THAT'S WISHFUL THINKING!!
marklross2 2 years ago
maybe they are but the fact that there are so many sources makes that unlikely unless there is a major conspiracy going on.
the bible is a single source simply becuz the authers where working together. there is no account of the ress of jesus outside the bible to support it and therefor you have to believe 1 source.
i dont care what you believe and i'm not trying to change your mind. your beliefs are based on nothing but wishfull thinking and FAITH. an honest theist would admit this fact.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
"he bible is a single source simply becuz the authers where working together"
incorrect. Not only did the authors of the books work independently, most even lived in different times...
marklross2 2 years ago
if they did work in different times then each auther could alter the work of the auther befor him which also makes it 1 source(it also means that the latest auther was the last to edit the book and he was also the least reliable becuz of the time difference)
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
Wrong - you are confusing the canonization of the books into the Bible with WRITING it. Authors did not alter the works of others. It was considered divinely delivered. They did not change it. Yes books were accepted or rejected. The canonization, but he sources were original. Other historic accounts have been subject to revision. Do you disqualify those as well?
marklross2 2 years ago
marklross2
as long as it is 1 book 1 article 1 text or wahtever it is. it must be treated as 1 source.
"Other historic accounts have been subject to revision. Do you disqualify those as well? "
this makes them more unreliable but not 1 source we can still cross examine them with other sources and see if something doesnt add up and them try to figure out why and if we cant we dismiss that inconsistanty. but history in general is very unreliable since we usually cant confirm anything in it.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
"as long as it is 1 book 1 article 1 text or wahtever it is. it must be treated as 1 source."
I disagree. That would disqualify more than half of the college texts I used in school. Most were either written by a team of authors or COMPILATIONS of works by various authors. Because a publisher saw fit to put those different sources into one convenient package reduces the value of the information within???
marklross2 2 years ago
"but history in general is very unreliable since we usually cant confirm anything in it."
Right - This is why the written history of the Jewish people and Christ as recorded in the Bible is no less a reliable source of ancient history than any other ancient writings...
marklross2 2 years ago
you mean like the stories of Ra Zeus Thor or any of the other gods of religions that for some reason arent around anymore? then yes. most other historicle documents can be atleast partly varified and of some (the existence of Hitler) we can still see consequensice today.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
and even if we can prove that there were those elegedge 500 people who saw the ress of jesus and all of them wrote it in a document and we can prove that those documents werent poluded by eachother or over the course of 2000 years (which many theologians and historians say happened to the bible which explains the contraditions in some of the books) then it still wont be enough. eye witness accounts are the weakest of all evidence and your claim really cant be any higher then sawing somebody ress
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
"you mean like the stories of Ra Zeus Thor or any of the other gods of religions that for some reason arent around anymore? then yes"
Exactly - those stories were categorically DISPROVED. So, they aren't around anymore. The story of Christ has a truth that millions of people, thousands of years later still believe...
marklross2 2 years ago
marklross2
how where they disproven? disproven means that scientific proof shows that its not true but science has never ever had any opinion on any god that ever "existed" simply becuz they cant test anything supernatural. you cant disprove a god!
jesus christ may have been an actual person but his story has never been verified and so you cant know if anything about it is truth. the fact that a lot of people believe it doesnt mean that its true. truth is not a democracy.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
You can believe that the sun is drawn across the sky by some mythic god if you wish - but science has categorically disproved the xistence of that god... Independent verification of Biblical accounts exist. See the Dead Sea SAcrolls...
marklross2 2 years ago
they only found an explanation that can replace apollo's job in that respect but that doesnt mean that he doesnt exist.
people believed that god made the earth 6000 years ago. its been disproven. is that proof that god doesnt exist?
the ancient greek norse and egyption religions arent around anymore becuz they dont do the same thing as modern religions, moving the goalposts
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
if you give me the traits and definition of your god i'll be glad to try and "disprove" him like the other gods where "disproven"
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
there are plenty of other religions that claim truth that are still around and have been around longer than christianity. So what is your point
ultradevon04 2 years ago
Please be specific. Which religions that predate Christianity are you referring to?
marklross2 2 years ago
all the things in schoolbooks are compiled to be convenient but all the original articles and texts are still around so if something changes in a schoolbook then we can still see if the change is qualified to be in the school book. but there are no individual record of the stories in the bible apart from the bible itself.
therefor we have to view it as 1 text
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
but enough about this tooth fairy bs.
do you want evidence before beleiving something? Yes: you have no reason to believe in an aftelife. No: you have no reason to dismiss anything even if there is no evidence or if the claim is absurd
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
That's YOUR logic. But your logic is false. I have the evidence I need to satisfy my brain's capability to distinguish between the possible unsubstantiated, and the ridiculously implausible unsubstantiated. I heard the story of Santa Claus. I believed it. I became aware of the implausibility of the story. I judged it to be fiction. I heard the story of Christ. I found some of the story implausible. I have not judged the entire story to be fiction. Your "all or nothing" fallacy is invalid...
marklross2 2 years ago
the burden of proof is commonly used by logical people including ALL scientists and very valid. if you say that the burden of proof or evidence is not important then i can say that i am the ressurected version of jesus and you have no reason to doubt me becuz i dont have to prove it
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
paranormal scientists? wth is that?
why would i need to believe in a spiritual existence in order to be able to go there? its either there or not...what makes you think you can only go there as long as you believe you will? if there evn is such a thing.
AllenQuatermain2de 2 years ago
Eternity is ugly. I could explain this same concept with economics ideas of marginal benefits, but you did it much better.
wightboy12345 2 years ago
That a man made science like economics would accurately address the very concept of eternal life is utterly laughable....
marklross2 2 years ago
The burden is upon you to show how our concept of benefits and diminishing benefits would be different if our conscious was stretched over infinity. Otherwise, we must assume it will act the same.
wightboy12345 2 years ago
The burden is on you to show how the purely human realm construct of "diminishing benefits" could even be perceived and would apply in a plane of existence unlike anything we can possibly understand...how can you assume your petty human concepts you now know even translate?
marklross2 2 years ago
The burden is on you to prove that we could even exist in that realm. Or that our perception of anything could exist in that realm. Or that you could think in that realm, and so on and so forth. You are assuming many many things about something that you assume to exist in the first place. Jesus being resurrected was only recorded by very few, even in the highly bureaucratic state of Rome . Alexander was recorded by almost everyone he even came near. You think jesus is more important.
wightboy12345 2 years ago
If jesus is more important, if he did these miraculous things, why wouldn't more people record it?
wightboy12345 2 years ago
There are only ten documented sources of Alexander. Some based upon know manuscripts that are described as "lost." I think a better measure of he historic impact of a personality might be a measure of his lasting legacy. Just how many people still worship Alexander as a God figure? How many profess to be Christian?
marklross2 2 years ago
Yes, lets look at the legacy contemporary to them. Alexander had how many cities named after himself? How many of them retain that name from then? Please, not even close. Also, even if you have substantial evidence for the existence of jesus you don't have it for the resurrection.
wightboy12345 2 years ago
"The burden is on you to prove that we could even exist in that realm. Or that you could think in that realm, and so on and so forth." - My point exactly - ASSUMING we exist - we certainly are not going to perceive he existence in human terms - thereby eliminating 'diminishing benefits." Of course I can't prove the existence of the afterlife. If I cold - you'd be worshipping me...
marklross2 2 years ago
You are assuming many, many unstated things. I can begin listing them if you want.
On your actual point, existing how? You seem to want to make a clear distinction that we wouldn't be existing in a place with diminishing marginal returns, which would drastically alter all of our personal values so much so that we would end up spending eternity doing literally one thing over and over. Also, the assumption further from the status quo needs to be more substantiated to be considered equal.
wightboy12345 2 years ago
Also, you say you can't prove the afterlife. Why believe it and more importantly, why were you trying in your argument with
AllenQuatermain2de?
wightboy12345 2 years ago
hey is that sigur ros in the background?
that's a rhetorical question, i know it is.
littleflags 2 years ago
feels like cheating... I could have talked about kittens.. Their music do the biggest work. ;)
BitRobot 2 years ago
I think i cried at the end.
Sciferas77 2 years ago
(Two part comment)
After all that was said in this video, I would still take the possibly dehumanization effects that eternal life would bring over dieing.
Because immortality achieved through some kind of transhuman technology would also bring with it a new mening to what it is to be human.
SelfQ 2 years ago
A beautiful sunset might become less important, but in exchange immortality would allow you to see far beyond our solar system, to see wonders unimaginable to the 21st century human mind.
Without time being a issue the universe will be our playground and we will be as children again.
SelfQ 2 years ago
What reason is there to explore when you have nothing to gain. All we do is fighting to survive. "Unimportant" pleasures is a part of that. Your life is 100 % saved. You know you are going to live forever. At first I agree it would be fascinating. But in time you'll be more and more aware. Eternal life is hell. No matter if you're bathing in a pool with angels or getting your skin burnt off over and over again. In time you will reach the same meaningless state.
BitRobot 2 years ago
Nothing to gain? Life is not just about ensuring procreation. Not for me atleast, I want to see all, feel all, be all.
You are seeing this from a far to down to earth perspective. With unending time also comes unending possibilities, unlimited arrangements of physical law. Although there are a finite amount of things a mortal could do. A immortal "God-like" human being would not suffer from those constrictions. It would be so far away from being human who knows what it would care about.
SelfQ 2 years ago
Nice video.
zarkoff45 2 years ago
I really enjoy your vids, keep it up!
VietN123 2 years ago
Thank you.. :)
BitRobot 2 years ago