@collyera01 Yes, but technically they're also the same person. There is one god in Christianity, however that god is also three separate gods /in/ one. In other words, it is still valid, as all parts of this god exist as one being.
@Trevvbox but how does that make any sense.yeah there is one god but he has three separate beings that are also one and the same. what does God have multiple personality disorder. it makes no sense.
Conclusion: An almighty being cannot exist, as it as a paradox. The almighty would be limited & bound by it's own nature. This limitation then provides the proof then that it doesn't exist because being almighty would require that it be without a limitation, be all-powerful; having absolute power over all. It does not have that because it does not have the power to overcome it's nature.
Can I also add my philosophical 'argument' that I call 'The Almighty Paradox.' I don't know if it's already an argument but here it is:
1) Almighty - Having absolute power over all.
2) Almighty / all-powerful.
3) To be all powerful, you must be able to be all things at once, including all-powerful & powerless; if you're powerless, you cannot be all-powerful or almighty.
4) Almighty would make you bound to that form & function; limited to your nature
I am anthiest too. I think if god is all powerful god why does'nt he make me worship him. I dare Him . My second arguement is let s just say there really is a God out there for argument sake. Which one of the god is it--Christians god, muslim god, hindu god, what god do you believe in so that my sould would be saved if I am not born into any religion at all. What kind of fucking god keep himself so ambiguous and yet expect me to believe in him.???
i may be atheist but i think i have an answer even if it's not a good one. lets say god(s) is/are perfect, if gods are different then at least one is not perfect then they are not gods. if they are all perfect then they are the same and just as effective as 1. if god/gods are not perfect then are they really worth going to church once a week to apologies for being an imperfect human.
Listen, NSC, I love spaghetti. Absolutely love it. Why else would I love spaghetti if there weren't a flying spaghetti monster who designed me to love it? Obviously, FSM created everything AND spaghetti because he knew we, his creation, would love him for it. There's my proof an evidence.............All joking aside, excellent video. As usual.
@Digityus Flying Spaghetti Monster is true because it says so in his holy book, and we know it's his holy book because he said so in his holy book. And we know anyone who disagrees is possessed by the devil of Antipasta, because it also says that in his holy book. :D
Bertrand Russell's "Why I am Not A Christian" is one of my favorite tracts. But, can't we update the tea kettle? Perhaps with an espresso machine? Just askin'.
I have this gut feeling the number of Gods is a red herring, I mean they can't even prove any God created the universe. As for there being one God, you already got the idea of how that was supposedly done. The conflicts started after the fall of man, not during the creation.
I'm an atheist, but I think I can answer that question. If the universe is the result of intalligence, then its creator/creators must have the ability to think. Thought always causes opinion. If you have more then one opinion, maybe on one subject you will have agreement, but you will find yourself in a debate sooner or later. If several gods made the universe, if it impossible they agreed with each other on anything, which means some things in our universe must be conflicting.
@147258502 continuation - If several gods made the universe, if it impossible they agreed with each other on every single subject, which means some things in our universe must be conflicting, in the sense of like a sun note producting any heat despite being at its peak, or a whole planet of negative mass, or... a bed made of sleep. You get the point.
@147258502 final - It is impossible to have something like the greek mythology, without zeus deciding to make no rain for 1000 years so that posidon will dry out, and then somehow getting a sea without any rain, making infinite water. (an impossible case) That is why there has to be only one god, if any.
@welcometoskyvalley I think I misexplained myself due to poor english. I didn't mean anything that doesn't fit, I meant having things which are impossible, like infinite water, etc.
Just searched google translate and... nevermind, I lose. Conclusion to myself - Never enter debates when you can't even speak.
Boy am I having a debate on another video. The whole page is about me going back and forth. What do you know, another e-mail. Il be back nonstampcollector
i hate when creationist say "you cant prove that god doesn't exist therefore he must exist" that's like the dumbest thing I've ever heard i mean that's creationists only argument well here we go. you cant test the existence of something you if have no evidence of it even existing so trying that reverse psychology b/s to make your god more relevant towards truth is not going to work my friend. people give god credit for everything good like doctors are the ones saving lives but credit goes to god
As far as fine-tuning goes, check out MWI (the Multiple Worlds Interpretation) which is very popular with theoretical physicists. It also gives us free-will in a way by allowing us to make different choices in the parallel histories of the multiverse. In the future when quantum computers involve many entangled particles, MWI will explain their incredible computational feats.
What was before the big bang? What caused it? There are heaps of theories because no-one can tell. Whatever it was it must have existed before time and therefore it was supernatural, so please don't say i proved there is no supernatural. I don't want to get into a heated argument here, though.
@ThePrepay Oops before the big bang was probably just space and time. but to say nothing. that's absurd. like we weren't here to know but c'mon we couldn't have came from nothing its so obvious. why does religion have such control over you people its ruining you guys' thought process. what, are you creationist under control. its like your being bribed. "Believe or burn" wake up man. you will never see a god. and you christians are selfish. knocking other religions. what makes your god more true
@badbeatbri3 Theists believe that the "fine tuning" of the constants is proof, so I believe this question suits them fine. They believe that "logic", or real logic, is proof as well (it isn't), so they should be fine with the language. If they argue your point, they instantly contradict themselves.
And when we say faith we dont mean just blind faith. I think my faith is justified by experience and by seeing what god is doing in my own and my brothers' and sisters' lives
I know i haven't answered your challenge, but hopefully this helps you understand our position
I understand the challenge but wont attempt to answer right now. One thing is that science cannot prove or disprove anything about the supernatural. It cannot be measured or observed.
Not sure you really thought out this challenge enough. If any religion had incontrovertible PROOF of God, then there would be no need for faith. Every single reasonable person on the planet would accept God's existence. Obviously this hasn't happened. Without even being able to prove that there is even ANY God, how are theists supposed to prove HOW MANY there are? You see? So this challenge was going nowhere from the start. The cartoons are useful. This, not so much.
@badbeatbri3: I couldn't disagree more. IMO the cartoons are more easily dismissed by theists. In this video, NonStampCollector has, for the sake of argument, conceded the basic claim that the universe was created and then asks monotheists to prove just one very elementary property of the god the believe in. I think it is much easier for a theist to realize that he cannot prove that the correct number of gods is 1 than it is to realize that they cannot prove that the universe was created at all.
@dcarrera01 If I interpret you right, his point is to say that even if the universe was supernaturally created, there is no logical reason to conclude that only ONE God created it? If so, then he should have posed THAT question to theists. Then it might be funny to see what "logical" arguments they might use. But asking for PROOF is completely useless since we already know that is impossible.
Of course no one can actually stand up to this challenge, but if you'd do a little research you'd find that a bunch of them (mostly creationists) actually do it anyways.
@C0FFEErush Didn't you even think before posting? There is no proof God doesn't exist because one cannot prove the absence of God. It isn't a hole in atheism.
The contradiction between science and God is not based in a clash between the two so much as God's inability to permeate scientific knowledge. That is to say, God as it is defined by human beings such as Abrahamic believers contradicts scientific knowledge on its own, without resistance or force from scientific observation.
Science has disproved the god who created the universe in six days.
Science has disproved the god who caused a global flood.
Science has disproved the god who started humanity with a population of two.
Science has disproved the god who seeing humanity was building a tower to the heavens and spoke a single language disrupted that effort and caused all languages.
Science has disproved the god who was born of a virgin and raised from the dead.
Only problem with this video: the audience are Christians. Christians don't watch videos like this. So I guess this video is for Atheists... sadly. ps. love your attempt start honest dialog.
Shockofgod is too stupid to understand the concept of burden of proof. That's why he made such an asinine request to prove that atheism is accurate and correct in the first place. Personally I don't think the guy's for real. With this request, he's basically quantifying his IQ at the level of 'too stupid to live'.
@kandtell i like the way you think, but I've got some problems... but you've gotta admit what @iz2sicc assumed was BEYOND stupid. Anyway, moving to the topic, please explain why it's an established fact that the Quran is full of mistakes. Name a few and I'll reply. Plain and simple.
Even the b b b bible doesn't espouse a monotheistic god. It is a tritheistic god. But then they collapse the three together into a multiple personality disorder god that talks to himself to try and create yet another loophole. I think this is similar to the combo weed eater, edger and hedge trimmer at the hardware store. So they need to prove that god is 3 gods but really one god. It is ludicrous to even be debating this ridiculousness.
The Mayor in my town eats weird things. He likes to eat dried grasshoppers for snacks. He does not frown on me for refusing to eat insects. He does not force my child to eat insects in school. My government doesn't make it mandatory to eat insects. I don't want to constantly be bullied because I don't eat bugs. To each his own. Here's some food for thought.
1) If there is no religions then there is no God or gods as well. Because our whatsoever believes about the concept of God came from believing that he had revealed himself to mankind through his messengers.
2) Assuming God exist then at least one of these messengers' messages must be true and therefore can not be reasonably invalidated.
3) otherwise, God does not exist which is of course what atheists are trying to prove and what we the theists are trying to disprove.
1) The presence or absence of religion does not prove or disprove the existence of god.
2) Assuming god does exist, all those claiming to have information about god could easily be incorrect. Nothing is correct by default. In fact, if a god did exist it would be very unlikely that humans could and have interpreted any information about him.
3) Atheists are not trying to prove god does not exist. Atheists want freedom from religion, and freedom from the term atheism itself.
1) That depends on how do you describe God. That god of yours could be an alien riding a spaceship that came from planet X and created the first seed of life on earth.
2) The two major religions assume God is perfect and therefore his revelation must be perfect as well since its source and protector is God.
3) What is the trademark of atheists ? ;) " GOD DOESN'T EXIST " who say such statement, must have disproved any claim of God existence and therefore he must show us his work.
Freedom isn't always good that's why laws exist. Laws keep human beings moving within defined boundaries of " good " where " evil " exist outside them.
How to define these boundaries ?
are these boundaries needed ?
My answer is yes. Another human being answer could be no. But in the end who could convince the masses win.
Just being the devil's advocate here. Religion is supposed to be based on faith, not well founded arguments and proof. Asking for proof to support a religion goes against the very nature of it. That said, I agree that it is nonsensical to impose one's faith on another. That's my 2 cents.
@TheNoahDueck You may have missed one of NSC's main points. It is absolutely reasonable to ask for proof of religion when it is in the public forum and attempting to make its belief law. Your point would only be valid if religion was entirely personal in our society, but this is not and has never been the case. The hypocrisy is not in NSC and atheists for demanding proof, but in the religious for demanding belief of all, and forcing policies on people that are based on nonsense.
@iz2sicc *facepalm* do I even need to explain? I literally haven't heard something more stupid... But I guess I have to explain...Here's two of the MANY reasons wrong with your sub-human assumption that a holy book from god should predict iphones.. ( I feel stupid just saying it )
1. people wouldn't make the iphone if it was predicted in a holy book...
2. Anyone can invent anything and call it an iphone and say that it proves the holy book right...Does it mean it's correct?
@nonstampcollector that's not circular since I use logical evidence to support my belief ULTIMATELY. Here's another argument: If there were 2 Gods, assuming they aren't identical, assuming they are different in power, then I'd say that the stronger God should be called "God." God is the SUPREME being. That can only be one. Also God does not lack anything. If there were 2 Gods, they can't be the same since that means there's 2 perfects. 2 infinities. They are the same things, with the same (cnt)
@nonstampcollector the scientific miracles and early womens' rights displayed in the Quran show me that what the Quran teaches is true, and that is monotheism. Muhammad, 1400 years ago did NOT copy Greek writings as that claim has been debunked and debunked, showing how he couldn't have known the development of an embryo. Galen got many things wrong, yet these mistakes are not present in the Quran. Only accurate things are mentioned. Plus Muhammad gave away everything for his revelation.
I find it difficult to explain to Christians and Muslims who claim scientific facts in their holy books as evidence exactly why it's not evidence (yes Christians do it too, and yes they also claim their book has no mistakes whereas your book is full of mistakes).
This is because you are convinced your book is holy, so when you hear that it is proved true by some scientific fact or other you don't have the sceptical tools you need to see why it's wrong to be convinced.
In order to do this you must put yourself into the mindset of an atheist.
Imagine you are one of us and think "how easy would it be for a god or gods to write something in a holy book that would convince me of his/her/their existance?"
Answer, very easy.
He/She/They *know* all about the universe, they could have given us something truly useful and explicit.
Instead what we read are vague passages that only read as "scientific facts" if they are interpreted in the right way.
And they are somehow never interpreted the right way *before* we understand the science through other means.
Show me a scientific fact which was discovered as a result of reading your book, which benefited mankind as a result, because without the book it might have taken decades or centuries to find it.
Then I might be impressed. Because that's the sort of thing I would put in my holy book if I was god.
Even then I would not be convinced. But it would be a start.
@truthseeker010101 ... French and England Civil Wars, St. Batholemew's Day Massacre, Council of Blood, "Bloody" Mary, Philip II, witch and heretic executions, severly repressed medical science leaving millions without proper care, hundreds of thousands of lynches Jews and Muslims...
@truthseeker010101 And the death toll for religion is a lot higher than 3 million, considering the first crusade alone killed 4.5 million. Adding the other three, all the Inquisitions, The Thirty Years War, the Conquistadors ethnically cleansing much of the Native Americans...
@truthseeker010101 Atheism didn't led those men to kill. First off, Hitler was a VERY open catholic and Stalin was trained as a priest. They were led by Marxism and a patriotic duty to their country mixed with fascism and totalitarian ideals. Although Hitler's hatred of Jews was created and supported by the Catholic Church.
Hitler was a Catholic creationist. He banned Darwin's books, as they suggested God didn't create Aryans as a superior race, but that the differences between Aryans and other races were provably negligible and shared parentage.
@mrquinnie429 "Although Hitler's hatred of Jews was created and supported by the Catholic Church." Also check out Wikipedia's article about Germany's Martin Luther's "On the Jews and Their Lies"....
(1) for Jewish synagogues and schools to be burned to the ground...
(2) for houses owned by Jews to be likewise razed, and the owners made to live in agricultural outbuildings;
....(4) for rabbis to be forbidden to preach...executed if they do;
...(7) ...put to work as agricultural slave labor.
@mrquinnie429 just like christianity and their hatred towards gays. and creationist thinks its ok to bash another human being because of their sexual orientation. I've found numerous contradictions in the bible. i say burn it for a better future. but were still doomed because the govt. is enforcing religion, its like a tradition. they will always have false prophets who lie and people will still believe. Religion = Lies, Control, and Money i am a proud Atheist =D Science and Evolution = TRUTH
So your logic is just silly, I am not impressed in the atheist's argument that religion has done so much evil. Human beings have done evil in names of many labels and the labels you choice have killed 67 times that of religions, and 100 times faster. Not a good logical stance in my book, I don't understand why my "beliefs" would matter anyway?
The Soviet Union was the first state to have as an ideological objective the elimination of religion[1] and its replacement with atheism as a fundamental ideological goal of the state"
source: John Anderson, Religion, State and Politics in the Soviet Union and Successor States, Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp 3
@truthseeker010101 Stalin made himself the new czar, evident in the herecy laws, the biology he claimed would give you 4 harvests a year which was an imitation of a miracle, the grovelling he demanded, the leader worship. It was an alltropic form of the preceeding theocracy that the Russians had for centuries been conditioned to accept. This had nothing in the slightest to do with secularism, its a category error to compare the two
@moroney1 I don't know why you mentioned the God of the Old Testamemt but yeah, it's called the Demiurge in gnosicism. It's an evil God. I am many things, but I am not Jewish, Muslim, or (Paulian) Christian.
“Almost 50 % of all the killings in human history were committed in the past 100 years by regimes that either actively promoted atheism or discouraged religion. 141,160,000 people.”
@truthseeker010101 Googling R J Rummel, I found theist websites citing his books & quoting him, as evidence for claims of the evils of atheism but do not find the words atheist, atheism, religion or theism in the quotes. I did word searches in several essays of his & excerpts from his books for atheist & atheism & did not find any. I word searched over 30 pages of his personal website & could not find atheist or atheism. His Links Page also did not have religion or theism or christianity.
141,160,000 killed in 100 years of atheist humanism ideology.
You have a religion, your religion is a religion of no religion. Your not against God as an athiest, your Anti Theist. thats why when the God of Genesis is disproven in science they think God is disproven
You've not disproven the truth, just one dogmatic belief, I applaud this.
@truthseeker010101 That number of people killed in the name of Atheism you just said was... well.... made up! If you are implying that Hitler was apart of that well you're wrong because he was a Catholic not an Atheist. Also Atheism is not a religion it's just a word for lack of belief. That's like saying not playing sports is a sport itself which is just plain stupid. I and many other open minded atheists refuse to turn to something as hypocritical, sick, twisted, and evil as Christianity.
@truthseeker010101 If Genesis is disproven then so is Christianity, because how could an all seeing powerful God be so wrong Anyway no one has to do the disproving as an extrodinary claim of existence requires an extrodinary amount of evidence. Until then no one is under any obligation to believe. Also atheism cannot be a religon, a movement yes, but to call it a religion is highly credulous
@moroney1 “Almost 50 % of all the killings in human history were committed in the past 100 years by regimes that either actively promoted atheism or discouraged religion. 141,160,000 people.”
@moroney1 "The Soviet Union was the first state to have as an ideological objective the elimination of religion[1] and its replacement with atheism as a fundamental ideological goal of the state"
source: John Anderson, Religion, State and Politics in the Soviet Union and Successor States, Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp 3
@moroney1 I gave you two sources, I am not making it up. Atheism is the rejection of a diety and it's religions. I am also against religion in a way, I don't believe any one person can know truth, and I don't beleiv in one path to finding your own truth.
I quoted two sources and was not saying it was my opinion, my opinion is that people commited those crimes against humanity, and whatever label they choice to do it under means nothing.
@ToddIngram1000 God is what human beings have made God to be, a concept. The reality of religion dos not exist, the concept of God plainly does exist.
@ToddIngram1000 thats true. The concept of God is based outside of reality. An ineffable source of the cosmos, it is a only a concept. Does this concept have conscience as we do? According to some God's ways our not our ways. Another way of saying, Who knows!
@alan133 one god, and the worship of an attribute of the one god is a concept in the hindu religion,most christians are also ignorant that elohim is in fact 3 distinct attributes of god, so they worship three attributes. Todays christinas mostly worship a single attribute of god, "the creator god" . This is only one of the infinite attributes of the concept that is god. god is also considered all energy, so in science god is energy. some even worship material like the sun as the face of god.
i absolutely love the crappy logic people use to argue for religion. "Prove atheism is true?" That's not how it works. Like Nonstampcollector said, atheism is a lack of belief in something and cannot be proved or disproved. Likewise, God cannot be proved or disproved because there is no basis on which to prove whether or not an omnipotent being exists. Atheists simply argue against the supposed truths (ex. Bible verses or Quran verses) of whatever religion (ex. Christianity or Islam) are false.
I just watched the video by theology101. The title should have been: "Whining about not being able to prove the existence of one god." Or, maybe, "Crying that NSC posed a challenge I wanted to win but couldn't." Or, again, "Rigorous rules are hard and make me angry." Or, "I don't know why Occam's Razor can't be a proof." It could be called a lot of things. It can't be called a successful presentation of proof for one creator. It can't be called that at all.
The economical way to address the assertion of "you can't disprove it" is to address it as a logically unverifiable idea.
A logical or scientific idea must have the ability to be disproven. A stationary universe would disprove the bb. An idea that by definition can't be disproven is logically unverifiable; it cannot be disproved, so it can't be tested. Undetectable aliens control human government. It can't be disproven, so it gets dismissed, as do all logically unverifiable ideas.
What is your definition of "one god?" Let's look at the purpose of a god in this aspect we are arguing: this god is the caretaker, designer, and creator of this universe we live in (caretaker would have me thinking otherwise from Abrahamic texts).
So I'll propose the idea that this god was a massive hyper-advanced system of AI composed of various sub-routine AI, in which they would combine together into that of a great singular entity: Legion. There is your one god.
lol the Bible is NOT evidence. It's a bed-time story. It's like what they tell you about wikipedia. Just because it's written, doesn't mean it's right.
When I really thought about this, I came across very good evidence for multiple creators (assuming they exist). The chemical that prevents a fish's blood from freezing differs in fish from the south pole, to fish from the north pole. If there was one creator, wouldn't he/she use the same chemical for both?
lol I love that ppl stlil try to use the bible to prove a God, even though you instruct not to, and even though the only thing the bible is good for is to prove the point that if Yahweh did exist he would not be a good God to believe in
The bible is a good evidence of the existence of God. It is not the only evidence but this internal evidence of the bible includes fulfilled prophecy,strong historical literature,man not being the hero of the bible, miracles done is public that brought public reaction, self authenicating doctrine(the fruit of the Spirit is love , joy..) "to know(experience)God is eternal life and those that dont know Him are lost "depart from me , I never knew you"
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
...ancient people saw the ocean, they just saw a big expanse of wavy water, no paths. So Matthew Maury investigated, and found the ocean currents, which cut off months of sailing time. So I think that shows that the Bible is not just the ramblings of a bunch of Middle Eastern scholars. Since the Bible says there was only one God, I believe the conclusion is obvious.
...that beforehand, and what would be the chance of it coming true? Secondly, there are things that make sense today that didn't back then. One verse in Revelation says that the whole world would see the witnesses come back to life. Back then, there was no way the whole world could have seen one event, but now it makes sense with TV and the internet. Thirdly, there are things written that turned out to be scientifically correct. For instance, there is the verse about paths on the sea. When...
I believe I can prove there was one God. The Bible says there is, so if I can prove the Bible is what God said, then that proves it. I think the Bible is what God said for three reasons. First, there are thousands of fulfilled prophecies. I can't remember the reference, but one verse says that Zedekiah would not see captivity, and another said he would be taken prisoner by the Babylonians. Guess what happened? The blinded him. It made perfect sense afterwards, but who would have thought of...
"Where is the indication that one single thing had to create them?" I don't believe that just because the laws of physics appear to be consistent that one magical being created them. but astronomy does seem to clearly show that wherever we look within the universe, galaxies, nebula, stars, planets, etc. appear to be behaving in a similar way (w/ gravity, light, etc), according to the same laws of physics. If science finds an exception, then our models need to change to account for it.
I'm not a christian, and don't believe in a supernatural god (only a natural objective reality that could be referred to as "god"), but simply the scientific observation that the rules of physics are consistent throughout the whole universe would indicate that there is only one "god" as opposed to many, each with their own distinct formula for how the natural law functions.
@snowleopardNW Science has never proven that the laws of physics are consistent throughout the entire universe (Try looking up "Dark Flow"). Simply saying that "science indicates" without showing the indication is not proof, it just shows one's inability to understand science. Perhaps the four forces that we can observe driving the universe are the creators; Gravity, the Weak force, the Strong Force and Electromagnetism. Where is the indication that one single thing had to create them?
2.side.God claims he is the only one,in the Bible, and challanges everyone to see if he is what he claims.So,its all together. Is God real, is there one, and is the Bible accurate is all answered together.He gives us a map to follow, and when we do he confirms himself, he wants YOU to challange him but he will not sink to anyones logic or debate but it is a personal challange.Follow what the Bible says with an open mind and see for yourself.
@mettlepuck Well the Bible claims that there is one God, and I follow the same God that is written in the Bible, so wouldnt the same God that is written be the same God as I claim? Im not trying to be a smartellic at all Im just not sure that I 100 percent understand what your saying?
1. I want to say, finally a real atheist that is truthfully speaking for both sides and conveying your views logically and respectfully. The answer though is more than a one part answer. You wanted to step back from the prove your God exists, well, that is what proves there is only one. The Bible itself is a challange to every individual. I cant prove God to you, but God can prove himself to you on an individual level, which is exactly how he wants it so the entire debate is absurd on either
I'm agnostic, yeah one of those fence-sitting bastards, but I'd say that one could make the argument that, at least in the case of the Christian God, the Lord is omnipotent and omnicient and is, in effect, infinite gods as one gestalt entity, percieved as a singular being since all the beings that make up God have a shared intent. Might not be semantically accurate, and it's just an extrapolation and doesn't 'prove' a monotheistic dogma.
I like this video and I embrace what you are trying to say, but I would have to ask the question, what would it mean to say there were more than one god? If we are really trying to talk about omniscient omnipotent nonphysical beings, that are outside of time and space, what could it mean to be a single entity or multiple? Those concepts may have no meaning in that context... which really does prove your real point all the more anyway... or something like that... ;}
I have no pause to the complexity to the universe. To me, it would be logical for a God to make only the earth, sun and moon and nothing else. Whats the point of Mars or the billions of stars? All that detail is soooooo complely pointless in comparison.
In honor of the anniversary of your challenge I would like to point out that the 1-god Creator idea was, prior to Christianity and Islam, a postulate forming the basis of intellectual freedom. It was never intended to be the brainless axiom it has become resulting in such atrocities as recorded in human history. But you challenged something older than either Christianity or Islam so I felt obliged to respond in kind.
Proving a God exist is beyond the Human reach. But many things may seem to imply a God or many Gods exist, an example is 'coincidence of undefinable acts'. Acts where it contradicts the 'laws of physics' may imply a supernatural being or God.
Another reason maybe Life; the reason for Life, Did God created us or is God even alive? Us humans answer this with an exterior solution to answer the impossible question, thus the answer I believe is We humans just do not know.
There's a fable about three blind old man looking for a white elephant. Summarizing this... people find the elephant and each of them touches a different part of it and when they go back and try to tell the others they became angry at each other because each thought they knew the truth about the animal yet all were speaking about a different experience.
Nah. Great cheerleading NSC. Bacteria is good but not good everywhere, hence the infinite knowledge and power of God has the immunue system to prevent its harmful effects.
@superhamzah85 Well I think it's proof when people say all of god's creatures are precious yet all of them HAVE TO destroy each other in order to survive.
Bacteria have there place and without them organic matters would not decay properly. They are needed in digestion, just for starters. But bacteria can have harmful affects to and for this God desings the immunue system to ward them off when not serving a proper function. Further, the fall left the creation in a sort of dying state. The wages of sin is death.
That's not intelligent design. That's evolution of bacteria. God doesn't require rules of biology, evolution does.
All medical science is a big fuck you to god/gods. If we leave gods designs alone then billions would have died early, from tuberculosis, small pox, cholera etc. Diseases WE'VE eradicated or almost eradicated.
well you cant put Christians in this group cause they are polytheistic. they have 3 gods. Yahweh, Jesus Christ, and the holy spirit.
collyera01 5 days ago
@collyera01 you forgot about the other invisible diety "satan"
chadmerlin 5 days ago
@chadmerlin true true, i forgot about him
collyera01 5 days ago
@collyera01 Yes, but technically they're also the same person. There is one god in Christianity, however that god is also three separate gods /in/ one. In other words, it is still valid, as all parts of this god exist as one being.
Trevvbox 3 days ago
@Trevvbox but how does that make any sense.yeah there is one god but he has three separate beings that are also one and the same. what does God have multiple personality disorder. it makes no sense.
collyera01 3 days ago
It was an infinite number of gods having an orgy... Cant you see the fucked up shit? And its still going on to this day, its a never ending orgy.
cureforthemind 1 week ago
Conclusion: An almighty being cannot exist, as it as a paradox. The almighty would be limited & bound by it's own nature. This limitation then provides the proof then that it doesn't exist because being almighty would require that it be without a limitation, be all-powerful; having absolute power over all. It does not have that because it does not have the power to overcome it's nature.
allfitch84 1 week ago
@allfitch84 I think Bertrand Russel beat you to it man.
welcometoskyvalley 1 week ago
@welcometoskyvalley interesting... i'll have to loo up his stuff. I've heard of him and but haven't really gotten into any of his work.
allfitch84 1 week ago
Can I also add my philosophical 'argument' that I call 'The Almighty Paradox.' I don't know if it's already an argument but here it is:
1) Almighty - Having absolute power over all.
2) Almighty / all-powerful.
3) To be all powerful, you must be able to be all things at once, including all-powerful & powerless; if you're powerless, you cannot be all-powerful or almighty.
4) Almighty would make you bound to that form & function; limited to your nature
5) Cannot not be almighty. Again limitation...
allfitch84 1 week ago
I am anthiest too. I think if god is all powerful god why does'nt he make me worship him. I dare Him . My second arguement is let s just say there really is a God out there for argument sake. Which one of the god is it--Christians god, muslim god, hindu god, what god do you believe in so that my sould would be saved if I am not born into any religion at all. What kind of fucking god keep himself so ambiguous and yet expect me to believe in him.???
dua333 1 week ago
i may be atheist but i think i have an answer even if it's not a good one. lets say god(s) is/are perfect, if gods are different then at least one is not perfect then they are not gods. if they are all perfect then they are the same and just as effective as 1. if god/gods are not perfect then are they really worth going to church once a week to apologies for being an imperfect human.
taylan637 1 week ago
Listen, NSC, I love spaghetti. Absolutely love it. Why else would I love spaghetti if there weren't a flying spaghetti monster who designed me to love it? Obviously, FSM created everything AND spaghetti because he knew we, his creation, would love him for it. There's my proof an evidence.............All joking aside, excellent video. As usual.
Digityus 1 week ago
@Digityus Flying Spaghetti Monster is true because it says so in his holy book, and we know it's his holy book because he said so in his holy book. And we know anyone who disagrees is possessed by the devil of Antipasta, because it also says that in his holy book. :D
TheSamuraiGoomba 1 week ago
@TheSamuraiGoomba Us pastafarians have to stick together. All hail his noodley appendage!
Digityus 1 week ago
Bertrand Russell's "Why I am Not A Christian" is one of my favorite tracts. But, can't we update the tea kettle? Perhaps with an espresso machine? Just askin'.
vel22vet 1 week ago
I have this gut feeling the number of Gods is a red herring, I mean they can't even prove any God created the universe. As for there being one God, you already got the idea of how that was supposedly done. The conflicts started after the fall of man, not during the creation.
vatiz93 1 week ago
Voltron isn't real?
rustytool100 1 week ago
shock of god also blocks people who try and ague with him, I've been blocked for years
CropDuster33 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CropDuster33 "shock of god also blocks people who try and ague with him, I've been blocked for years"
Me too (well for months)
UrukEngineer 1 week ago
lol shock of god.... what a fucking loser
CropDuster33 1 week ago 4
I'm an atheist, but I think I can answer that question. If the universe is the result of intalligence, then its creator/creators must have the ability to think. Thought always causes opinion. If you have more then one opinion, maybe on one subject you will have agreement, but you will find yourself in a debate sooner or later. If several gods made the universe, if it impossible they agreed with each other on anything, which means some things in our universe must be conflicting.
147258502 1 week ago
@147258502 continuation - If several gods made the universe, if it impossible they agreed with each other on every single subject, which means some things in our universe must be conflicting, in the sense of like a sun note producting any heat despite being at its peak, or a whole planet of negative mass, or... a bed made of sleep. You get the point.
147258502 1 week ago
@147258502 final - It is impossible to have something like the greek mythology, without zeus deciding to make no rain for 1000 years so that posidon will dry out, and then somehow getting a sea without any rain, making infinite water. (an impossible case) That is why there has to be only one god, if any.
147258502 1 week ago
@147258502
You sound confused. Very confused.
narutofan9999 1 week ago
@narutofan9999 No, just repeating the same thing by accident.. Noticed it later but youtube won't let me erase commants.
147258502 1 week ago
@147258502 " If several gods made the universe, ..... some things in our universe must be conflicting."
Viruses /-/ immune system.
Enough said.
NonStampCollector 1 week ago 8
@NonStampCollector Actually, to say that viruses and the immune system conflict its like saying lions and zebra's conflict..
147258502 1 week ago
@147258502 Lions and zebras do conflict. As a matter of fact, all animals and plants do.
welcometoskyvalley 1 week ago
@welcometoskyvalley I think I misexplained myself due to poor english. I didn't mean anything that doesn't fit, I meant having things which are impossible, like infinite water, etc.
Just searched google translate and... nevermind, I lose. Conclusion to myself - Never enter debates when you can't even speak.
147258502 1 week ago
@welcometoskyvalley (Even though I thought I made it clear what I mean in the 2 other commants I did... You know, when I accidently repeated myself.)
147258502 1 week ago
shockofgod... what a faggot, lol
AlhambraCuterebra 2 weeks ago in playlist More videos from NonStampCollector
Boy am I having a debate on another video. The whole page is about me going back and forth. What do you know, another e-mail. Il be back nonstampcollector
AR1STONE 2 weeks ago
i thought christians have to also prove unichorns and giants(as those are mentioned in the bible makeing it even more unbelievable)
doombybbr 2 weeks ago
i hate when creationist say "you cant prove that god doesn't exist therefore he must exist" that's like the dumbest thing I've ever heard i mean that's creationists only argument well here we go. you cant test the existence of something you if have no evidence of it even existing so trying that reverse psychology b/s to make your god more relevant towards truth is not going to work my friend. people give god credit for everything good like doctors are the ones saving lives but credit goes to god
TyeDye07 2 weeks ago
As far as fine-tuning goes, check out MWI (the Multiple Worlds Interpretation) which is very popular with theoretical physicists. It also gives us free-will in a way by allowing us to make different choices in the parallel histories of the multiverse. In the future when quantum computers involve many entangled particles, MWI will explain their incredible computational feats.
legowolf3d 3 weeks ago
@ber2erker
Ps. That is also why i dont think the big bang is justified by science
ThePrepay 3 weeks ago
@Ber2erker
What was before the big bang? What caused it? There are heaps of theories because no-one can tell. Whatever it was it must have existed before time and therefore it was supernatural, so please don't say i proved there is no supernatural. I don't want to get into a heated argument here, though.
ThePrepay 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
TyeDye07 2 weeks ago
@ThePrepay Oops before the big bang was probably just space and time. but to say nothing. that's absurd. like we weren't here to know but c'mon we couldn't have came from nothing its so obvious. why does religion have such control over you people its ruining you guys' thought process. what, are you creationist under control. its like your being bribed. "Believe or burn" wake up man. you will never see a god. and you christians are selfish. knocking other religions. what makes your god more true
TyeDye07 2 weeks ago
@ThePrepay Yeah, so you pretty much just justified atheism.
BER2ERKER 3 weeks ago
@badbeatbri3 Theists believe that the "fine tuning" of the constants is proof, so I believe this question suits them fine. They believe that "logic", or real logic, is proof as well (it isn't), so they should be fine with the language. If they argue your point, they instantly contradict themselves.
BER2ERKER 3 weeks ago
And when we say faith we dont mean just blind faith. I think my faith is justified by experience and by seeing what god is doing in my own and my brothers' and sisters' lives
I know i haven't answered your challenge, but hopefully this helps you understand our position
ThePrepay 3 weeks ago
I understand the challenge but wont attempt to answer right now. One thing is that science cannot prove or disprove anything about the supernatural. It cannot be measured or observed.
ThePrepay 3 weeks ago
@NonStampCollector
Not sure you really thought out this challenge enough. If any religion had incontrovertible PROOF of God, then there would be no need for faith. Every single reasonable person on the planet would accept God's existence. Obviously this hasn't happened. Without even being able to prove that there is even ANY God, how are theists supposed to prove HOW MANY there are? You see? So this challenge was going nowhere from the start. The cartoons are useful. This, not so much.
badbeatbri3 3 weeks ago
@badbeatbri3: I couldn't disagree more. IMO the cartoons are more easily dismissed by theists. In this video, NonStampCollector has, for the sake of argument, conceded the basic claim that the universe was created and then asks monotheists to prove just one very elementary property of the god the believe in. I think it is much easier for a theist to realize that he cannot prove that the correct number of gods is 1 than it is to realize that they cannot prove that the universe was created at all.
dcarrera01 3 weeks ago
@dcarrera01 If I interpret you right, his point is to say that even if the universe was supernaturally created, there is no logical reason to conclude that only ONE God created it? If so, then he should have posed THAT question to theists. Then it might be funny to see what "logical" arguments they might use. But asking for PROOF is completely useless since we already know that is impossible.
badbeatbri3 3 weeks ago
@badbeatbri3
Of course no one can actually stand up to this challenge, but if you'd do a little research you'd find that a bunch of them (mostly creationists) actually do it anyways.
narutofan9999 1 week ago
@rkyeun
Really? When did science disprove god?
He just said in this video that it can't disprove god (nor should it have to)
ThePrepay 4 weeks ago
Orchams razor :) i love it
roverjoel666 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
C0FFEErush 1 month ago
@C0FFEErush Didn't you even think before posting? There is no proof God doesn't exist because one cannot prove the absence of God. It isn't a hole in atheism.
The contradiction between science and God is not based in a clash between the two so much as God's inability to permeate scientific knowledge. That is to say, God as it is defined by human beings such as Abrahamic believers contradicts scientific knowledge on its own, without resistance or force from scientific observation.
SlitBelly 1 month ago 10
@C0FFEErush Think really hard and you will find the problem with what you just said. You will know it when you go "Ahh shit!! Ofcourse!"
Silversong88 1 month ago
@C0FFEErush
Science has disproved the god who created the universe in six days.
Science has disproved the god who caused a global flood.
Science has disproved the god who started humanity with a population of two.
Science has disproved the god who seeing humanity was building a tower to the heavens and spoke a single language disrupted that effort and caused all languages.
Science has disproved the god who was born of a virgin and raised from the dead.
rkyeun 4 weeks ago
Only problem with this video: the audience are Christians. Christians don't watch videos like this. So I guess this video is for Atheists... sadly. ps. love your attempt start honest dialog.
re4s0n4 1 month ago
It saddens me to see how one can believe in a god even though the truth is layed out before them
time2learnnow 1 month ago
Nope no proof :P yet my faith is still unshaken.
Nice video though very well thought out
malaketh 1 month ago in playlist More videos from NonStampCollector
Shockofgod is too stupid to understand the concept of burden of proof. That's why he made such an asinine request to prove that atheism is accurate and correct in the first place. Personally I don't think the guy's for real. With this request, he's basically quantifying his IQ at the level of 'too stupid to live'.
ChipArgyle 1 month ago
@kandtell i like the way you think, but I've got some problems... but you've gotta admit what @iz2sicc assumed was BEYOND stupid. Anyway, moving to the topic, please explain why it's an established fact that the Quran is full of mistakes. Name a few and I'll reply. Plain and simple.
Zeegoner 1 month ago
Even the b b b bible doesn't espouse a monotheistic god. It is a tritheistic god. But then they collapse the three together into a multiple personality disorder god that talks to himself to try and create yet another loophole. I think this is similar to the combo weed eater, edger and hedge trimmer at the hardware store. So they need to prove that god is 3 gods but really one god. It is ludicrous to even be debating this ridiculousness.
ultim4t32 1 month ago
The Mayor in my town eats weird things. He likes to eat dried grasshoppers for snacks. He does not frown on me for refusing to eat insects. He does not force my child to eat insects in school. My government doesn't make it mandatory to eat insects. I don't want to constantly be bullied because I don't eat bugs. To each his own. Here's some food for thought.
paramattic70 1 month ago
Again, you attack us, respectful followers of Voltron.
You fool.
You'll be chewed by a robot tiger forever after you die.
Don't believe it?
PROVE ME I AM WRONG!
yuirrr 1 month ago in playlist Mais vídeos de NonStampCollector
three steps reply :
1) If there is no religions then there is no God or gods as well. Because our whatsoever believes about the concept of God came from believing that he had revealed himself to mankind through his messengers.
2) Assuming God exist then at least one of these messengers' messages must be true and therefore can not be reasonably invalidated.
3) otherwise, God does not exist which is of course what atheists are trying to prove and what we the theists are trying to disprove.
triafffii 1 month ago
@triafffii
1) The presence or absence of religion does not prove or disprove the existence of god.
2) Assuming god does exist, all those claiming to have information about god could easily be incorrect. Nothing is correct by default. In fact, if a god did exist it would be very unlikely that humans could and have interpreted any information about him.
3) Atheists are not trying to prove god does not exist. Atheists want freedom from religion, and freedom from the term atheism itself.
marjorkid 1 month ago
@marjorkid
1) That depends on how do you describe God. That god of yours could be an alien riding a spaceship that came from planet X and created the first seed of life on earth.
2) The two major religions assume God is perfect and therefore his revelation must be perfect as well since its source and protector is God.
3) What is the trademark of atheists ? ;) " GOD DOESN'T EXIST " who say such statement, must have disproved any claim of God existence and therefore he must show us his work.
triafffii 1 month ago
@marjorkid
Freedom isn't always good that's why laws exist. Laws keep human beings moving within defined boundaries of " good " where " evil " exist outside them.
How to define these boundaries ?
are these boundaries needed ?
My answer is yes. Another human being answer could be no. But in the end who could convince the masses win.
triafffii 1 month ago
Just being the devil's advocate here. Religion is supposed to be based on faith, not well founded arguments and proof. Asking for proof to support a religion goes against the very nature of it. That said, I agree that it is nonsensical to impose one's faith on another. That's my 2 cents.
TheNoahDueck 1 month ago in playlist More videos from NonStampCollector
@TheNoahDueck You may have missed one of NSC's main points. It is absolutely reasonable to ask for proof of religion when it is in the public forum and attempting to make its belief law. Your point would only be valid if religion was entirely personal in our society, but this is not and has never been the case. The hypocrisy is not in NSC and atheists for demanding proof, but in the religious for demanding belief of all, and forcing policies on people that are based on nonsense.
marjorkid 1 month ago
this is making insanely good sense to me.
lionhearted76 2 months ago
@iz2sicc *facepalm* do I even need to explain? I literally haven't heard something more stupid... But I guess I have to explain...Here's two of the MANY reasons wrong with your sub-human assumption that a holy book from god should predict iphones.. ( I feel stupid just saying it )
1. people wouldn't make the iphone if it was predicted in a holy book...
2. Anyone can invent anything and call it an iphone and say that it proves the holy book right...Does it mean it's correct?
Zeegoner 2 months ago
Iiiin the RED CORNER Joe non-believer Smiiith. In the BLUE CORNER Jack MyGod'stheonly1 JooohnSooon. Ding ding ding DEBATE!
AR1STONE 2 months ago
@nonstampcollector conscience, so they should be considered ONE thing.
Zeegoner 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nonstampcollector that's not circular since I use logical evidence to support my belief ULTIMATELY. Here's another argument: If there were 2 Gods, assuming they aren't identical, assuming they are different in power, then I'd say that the stronger God should be called "God." God is the SUPREME being. That can only be one. Also God does not lack anything. If there were 2 Gods, they can't be the same since that means there's 2 perfects. 2 infinities. They are the same things, with the same (cnt)
Zeegoner 2 months ago
Comment removed
Zeegoner 2 months ago
@nonstampcollector the scientific miracles and early womens' rights displayed in the Quran show me that what the Quran teaches is true, and that is monotheism. Muhammad, 1400 years ago did NOT copy Greek writings as that claim has been debunked and debunked, showing how he couldn't have known the development of an embryo. Galen got many things wrong, yet these mistakes are not present in the Quran. Only accurate things are mentioned. Plus Muhammad gave away everything for his revelation.
Zeegoner 2 months ago
@Zeegoner Quran has made all these powerful predictions, yet it made no mention of iPhones and computers. Go figure.
iz2sicc 2 months ago in playlist Best Of The Atheist Experience
@Zeegoner
I find it difficult to explain to Christians and Muslims who claim scientific facts in their holy books as evidence exactly why it's not evidence (yes Christians do it too, and yes they also claim their book has no mistakes whereas your book is full of mistakes).
This is because you are convinced your book is holy, so when you hear that it is proved true by some scientific fact or other you don't have the sceptical tools you need to see why it's wrong to be convinced.
cont...
kandtell 1 month ago
In order to do this you must put yourself into the mindset of an atheist.
Imagine you are one of us and think "how easy would it be for a god or gods to write something in a holy book that would convince me of his/her/their existance?"
Answer, very easy.
He/She/They *know* all about the universe, they could have given us something truly useful and explicit.
Instead what we read are vague passages that only read as "scientific facts" if they are interpreted in the right way.
cont...
kandtell 1 month ago
And they are somehow never interpreted the right way *before* we understand the science through other means.
Show me a scientific fact which was discovered as a result of reading your book, which benefited mankind as a result, because without the book it might have taken decades or centuries to find it.
Then I might be impressed. Because that's the sort of thing I would put in my holy book if I was god.
Even then I would not be convinced. But it would be a start.
kandtell 1 month ago
nsc seriously pwns
managarm1349 2 months ago
29 people concider a thumbs down to be a challenge.
LikaLaruku 2 months ago
JESUS IS CHRIST
NotThatDrunken 2 months ago
@truthseeker010101 ... French and England Civil Wars, St. Batholemew's Day Massacre, Council of Blood, "Bloody" Mary, Philip II, witch and heretic executions, severly repressed medical science leaving millions without proper care, hundreds of thousands of lynches Jews and Muslims...
mrquinnie429 3 months ago
@truthseeker010101 And the death toll for religion is a lot higher than 3 million, considering the first crusade alone killed 4.5 million. Adding the other three, all the Inquisitions, The Thirty Years War, the Conquistadors ethnically cleansing much of the Native Americans...
mrquinnie429 3 months ago
@truthseeker010101 Atheism didn't led those men to kill. First off, Hitler was a VERY open catholic and Stalin was trained as a priest. They were led by Marxism and a patriotic duty to their country mixed with fascism and totalitarian ideals. Although Hitler's hatred of Jews was created and supported by the Catholic Church.
mrquinnie429 3 months ago 12
Comment removed
rkyeun 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrquinnie429
Hitler was a Catholic creationist. He banned Darwin's books, as they suggested God didn't create Aryans as a superior race, but that the differences between Aryans and other races were provably negligible and shared parentage.
rkyeun 4 weeks ago
@mrquinnie429 "Although Hitler's hatred of Jews was created and supported by the Catholic Church." Also check out Wikipedia's article about Germany's Martin Luther's "On the Jews and Their Lies"....
(1) for Jewish synagogues and schools to be burned to the ground...
(2) for houses owned by Jews to be likewise razed, and the owners made to live in agricultural outbuildings;
....(4) for rabbis to be forbidden to preach...executed if they do;
...(7) ...put to work as agricultural slave labor.
zephyr103 3 weeks ago
@mrquinnie429 just like christianity and their hatred towards gays. and creationist thinks its ok to bash another human being because of their sexual orientation. I've found numerous contradictions in the bible. i say burn it for a better future. but were still doomed because the govt. is enforcing religion, its like a tradition. they will always have false prophets who lie and people will still believe. Religion = Lies, Control, and Money i am a proud Atheist =D Science and Evolution = TRUTH
TyeDye07 2 weeks ago
@mrquinnie429 Hm I knew hilter was catholic, but had no idea the church liked his actions against the jews.
Also stalin a trained priest, that I never knew either nor would have ever thought.
TheSolitaryTraveller 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrquinnie429 Hm I knew hilter was catholic, but had no idea the church liked his actions against the jews.
Also stalin a trained priest, that I never knew either nor would have ever thought.
TheSolitaryTraveller 2 weeks ago
@Relvolver64
I am not religious, I do know history.
141,160,000 people in 100 years
3,000,000 in 10,000 years
So your logic is just silly, I am not impressed in the atheist's argument that religion has done so much evil. Human beings have done evil in names of many labels and the labels you choice have killed 67 times that of religions, and 100 times faster. Not a good logical stance in my book, I don't understand why my "beliefs" would matter anyway?
truthseeker010101 3 months ago
@TrollinFoTrolls
The Soviet Union was the first state to have as an ideological objective the elimination of religion[1] and its replacement with atheism as a fundamental ideological goal of the state"
source: John Anderson, Religion, State and Politics in the Soviet Union and Successor States, Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp 3
truthseeker010101 3 months ago
@truthseeker010101 Stalin made himself the new czar, evident in the herecy laws, the biology he claimed would give you 4 harvests a year which was an imitation of a miracle, the grovelling he demanded, the leader worship. It was an alltropic form of the preceeding theocracy that the Russians had for centuries been conditioned to accept. This had nothing in the slightest to do with secularism, its a category error to compare the two
moroney1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@moroney1 I don't know why you mentioned the God of the Old Testamemt but yeah, it's called the Demiurge in gnosicism. It's an evil God. I am many things, but I am not Jewish, Muslim, or (Paulian) Christian.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
@TrollinFoTrolls
“Almost 50 % of all the killings in human history were committed in the past 100 years by regimes that either actively promoted atheism or discouraged religion. 141,160,000 people.”
DEATH
BY GOVERNMENT
By R.J. Rummel
New Brunswick, N.J.:
Transaction Publishers, 1994.
truthseeker010101 3 months ago
@truthseeker010101 Googling R J Rummel, I found theist websites citing his books & quoting him, as evidence for claims of the evils of atheism but do not find the words atheist, atheism, religion or theism in the quotes. I did word searches in several essays of his & excerpts from his books for atheist & atheism & did not find any. I word searched over 30 pages of his personal website & could not find atheist or atheism. His Links Page also did not have religion or theism or christianity.
Strangerinasland 2 months ago
3,000,000 killed in 10,000 years due to religion
141,160,000 killed in 100 years of atheist humanism ideology.
You have a religion, your religion is a religion of no religion. Your not against God as an athiest, your Anti Theist. thats why when the God of Genesis is disproven in science they think God is disproven
You've not disproven the truth, just one dogmatic belief, I applaud this.
Please come to know God, just ask
truthseeker010101 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@truthseeker010101 which god do you believe in? I believe in the fire god.
papasitoman 3 months ago
@truthseeker010101 That number of people killed in the name of Atheism you just said was... well.... made up! If you are implying that Hitler was apart of that well you're wrong because he was a Catholic not an Atheist. Also Atheism is not a religion it's just a word for lack of belief. That's like saying not playing sports is a sport itself which is just plain stupid. I and many other open minded atheists refuse to turn to something as hypocritical, sick, twisted, and evil as Christianity.
Relvolver64 3 months ago in playlist More videos from NonStampCollector
@truthseeker010101 If Genesis is disproven then so is Christianity, because how could an all seeing powerful God be so wrong Anyway no one has to do the disproving as an extrodinary claim of existence requires an extrodinary amount of evidence. Until then no one is under any obligation to believe. Also atheism cannot be a religon, a movement yes, but to call it a religion is highly credulous
moroney1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@moroney1 “Almost 50 % of all the killings in human history were committed in the past 100 years by regimes that either actively promoted atheism or discouraged religion. 141,160,000 people.”
DEATH
BY GOVERNMENT
By R.J. Rummel
New Brunswick, N.J.:
Transaction Publishers, 1994.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@moroney1 "The Soviet Union was the first state to have as an ideological objective the elimination of religion[1] and its replacement with atheism as a fundamental ideological goal of the state"
source: John Anderson, Religion, State and Politics in the Soviet Union and Successor States, Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp 3
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@moroney1 I gave you two sources, I am not making it up. Atheism is the rejection of a diety and it's religions. I am also against religion in a way, I don't believe any one person can know truth, and I don't beleiv in one path to finding your own truth.
I quoted two sources and was not saying it was my opinion, my opinion is that people commited those crimes against humanity, and whatever label they choice to do it under means nothing.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
@truthseeker010101 NONstampcollector asked proof of a GOD, not all kind of other bull
vusgy 2 months ago
@vusgy God is force and energy in science. There's all the proof you need.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
@truthseeker010101 that's not proof at all. I can say "Rabbits are motion, that's my proof." You can't prove it than there is no proof, or evidence
ToddIngram1000 2 months ago in playlist More videos from NonStampCollector
@ToddIngram1000 God is what human beings have made God to be, a concept. The reality of religion dos not exist, the concept of God plainly does exist.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
@truthseeker010101 the concept, or the idea, not the reality
ToddIngram1000 2 months ago
@ToddIngram1000 thats true. The concept of God is based outside of reality. An ineffable source of the cosmos, it is a only a concept. Does this concept have conscience as we do? According to some God's ways our not our ways. Another way of saying, Who knows!
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
I find the question weird. They can't even prove if God exist, let alone if there's only one.
alan133 4 months ago
@alan133 I can prove God exists.
truthseeker010101 3 months ago
@alan133 one god, and the worship of an attribute of the one god is a concept in the hindu religion,most christians are also ignorant that elohim is in fact 3 distinct attributes of god, so they worship three attributes. Todays christinas mostly worship a single attribute of god, "the creator god" . This is only one of the infinite attributes of the concept that is god. god is also considered all energy, so in science god is energy. some even worship material like the sun as the face of god.
truthseeker010101 3 months ago
i absolutely love the crappy logic people use to argue for religion. "Prove atheism is true?" That's not how it works. Like Nonstampcollector said, atheism is a lack of belief in something and cannot be proved or disproved. Likewise, God cannot be proved or disproved because there is no basis on which to prove whether or not an omnipotent being exists. Atheists simply argue against the supposed truths (ex. Bible verses or Quran verses) of whatever religion (ex. Christianity or Islam) are false.
lordtidus12 4 months ago
I just watched the video by theology101. The title should have been: "Whining about not being able to prove the existence of one god." Or, maybe, "Crying that NSC posed a challenge I wanted to win but couldn't." Or, again, "Rigorous rules are hard and make me angry." Or, "I don't know why Occam's Razor can't be a proof." It could be called a lot of things. It can't be called a successful presentation of proof for one creator. It can't be called that at all.
Anyway, just sayin.
joethemoproductions 4 months ago
The economical way to address the assertion of "you can't disprove it" is to address it as a logically unverifiable idea.
A logical or scientific idea must have the ability to be disproven. A stationary universe would disprove the bb. An idea that by definition can't be disproven is logically unverifiable; it cannot be disproved, so it can't be tested. Undetectable aliens control human government. It can't be disproven, so it gets dismissed, as do all logically unverifiable ideas.
joethemoproductions 4 months ago
LAFF NOW [CARTOONS HILARIOUS] CRY LATER [READ SCRIPTURES]...
TheboiwhocouldfLY 4 months ago
You are a hero!
MyOnlyFarph 4 months ago
This is the best debunking of ShockOfGod as it suggests that any question regarding the specifics of a God is impossible to logically answer.
RexKinsey 4 months ago
One god, eh?
What is your definition of "one god?" Let's look at the purpose of a god in this aspect we are arguing: this god is the caretaker, designer, and creator of this universe we live in (caretaker would have me thinking otherwise from Abrahamic texts).
So I'll propose the idea that this god was a massive hyper-advanced system of AI composed of various sub-routine AI, in which they would combine together into that of a great singular entity: Legion. There is your one god.
Lievearn 5 months ago
@Lievearn That is a unique definition of "one".
havvyweponsman 5 months ago
I wonder if the tea from Russel's teapot tastes better or if it is just a tea pot.
I wonder if the teapot is the cause of the apollo13 disaster.
I wonder who is going to read this and think i am serious.
As for my claims on god/gods or anything like that i need to figure out what i believe and why before i make any claims.
FattyMcFox 5 months ago
lol the Bible is NOT evidence. It's a bed-time story. It's like what they tell you about wikipedia. Just because it's written, doesn't mean it's right.
sxcpr0nz 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When I really thought about this, I came across very good evidence for multiple creators (assuming they exist). The chemical that prevents a fish's blood from freezing differs in fish from the south pole, to fish from the north pole. If there was one creator, wouldn't he/she use the same chemical for both?
scottl4321 5 months ago
lol I love that ppl stlil try to use the bible to prove a God, even though you instruct not to, and even though the only thing the bible is good for is to prove the point that if Yahweh did exist he would not be a good God to believe in
sexyvalentines 6 months ago
@sexyvalentines ""the bible to prove a God""
The bible is a good evidence of the existence of God. It is not the only evidence but this internal evidence of the bible includes fulfilled prophecy,strong historical literature,man not being the hero of the bible, miracles done is public that brought public reaction, self authenicating doctrine(the fruit of the Spirit is love , joy..) "to know(experience)God is eternal life and those that dont know Him are lost "depart from me , I never knew you"
j919or 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (Donated) For Debates And Governance
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS FOR CREATIONISM-EVOLUTIONISM DEBATE (See Subchapter 10.2.2, Chapter 10, of Part Two.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
balancedway1.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 6 months ago
...ancient people saw the ocean, they just saw a big expanse of wavy water, no paths. So Matthew Maury investigated, and found the ocean currents, which cut off months of sailing time. So I think that shows that the Bible is not just the ramblings of a bunch of Middle Eastern scholars. Since the Bible says there was only one God, I believe the conclusion is obvious.
Dinoenthusiastguy 6 months ago
...that beforehand, and what would be the chance of it coming true? Secondly, there are things that make sense today that didn't back then. One verse in Revelation says that the whole world would see the witnesses come back to life. Back then, there was no way the whole world could have seen one event, but now it makes sense with TV and the internet. Thirdly, there are things written that turned out to be scientifically correct. For instance, there is the verse about paths on the sea. When...
Dinoenthusiastguy 6 months ago
I believe I can prove there was one God. The Bible says there is, so if I can prove the Bible is what God said, then that proves it. I think the Bible is what God said for three reasons. First, there are thousands of fulfilled prophecies. I can't remember the reference, but one verse says that Zedekiah would not see captivity, and another said he would be taken prisoner by the Babylonians. Guess what happened? The blinded him. It made perfect sense afterwards, but who would have thought of...
Dinoenthusiastguy 6 months ago
"Where is the indication that one single thing had to create them?" I don't believe that just because the laws of physics appear to be consistent that one magical being created them. but astronomy does seem to clearly show that wherever we look within the universe, galaxies, nebula, stars, planets, etc. appear to be behaving in a similar way (w/ gravity, light, etc), according to the same laws of physics. If science finds an exception, then our models need to change to account for it.
snowleopardNW 6 months ago
I'm not a christian, and don't believe in a supernatural god (only a natural objective reality that could be referred to as "god"), but simply the scientific observation that the rules of physics are consistent throughout the whole universe would indicate that there is only one "god" as opposed to many, each with their own distinct formula for how the natural law functions.
snowleopardNW 6 months ago
@snowleopardNW Science has never proven that the laws of physics are consistent throughout the entire universe (Try looking up "Dark Flow"). Simply saying that "science indicates" without showing the indication is not proof, it just shows one's inability to understand science. Perhaps the four forces that we can observe driving the universe are the creators; Gravity, the Weak force, the Strong Force and Electromagnetism. Where is the indication that one single thing had to create them?
mettlepuck 6 months ago
2.side.God claims he is the only one,in the Bible, and challanges everyone to see if he is what he claims.So,its all together. Is God real, is there one, and is the Bible accurate is all answered together.He gives us a map to follow, and when we do he confirms himself, he wants YOU to challange him but he will not sink to anyones logic or debate but it is a personal challange.Follow what the Bible says with an open mind and see for yourself.
KesslersCross 6 months ago
@KesslersCross You broke rule 2, just because it's written does not prove it was written by your god.
mettlepuck 6 months ago
@mettlepuck Well the Bible claims that there is one God, and I follow the same God that is written in the Bible, so wouldnt the same God that is written be the same God as I claim? Im not trying to be a smartellic at all Im just not sure that I 100 percent understand what your saying?
KesslersCross 6 months ago
1. I want to say, finally a real atheist that is truthfully speaking for both sides and conveying your views logically and respectfully. The answer though is more than a one part answer. You wanted to step back from the prove your God exists, well, that is what proves there is only one. The Bible itself is a challange to every individual. I cant prove God to you, but God can prove himself to you on an individual level, which is exactly how he wants it so the entire debate is absurd on either
KesslersCross 6 months ago
I'm agnostic, yeah one of those fence-sitting bastards, but I'd say that one could make the argument that, at least in the case of the Christian God, the Lord is omnipotent and omnicient and is, in effect, infinite gods as one gestalt entity, percieved as a singular being since all the beings that make up God have a shared intent. Might not be semantically accurate, and it's just an extrapolation and doesn't 'prove' a monotheistic dogma.
ojrmk1 6 months ago
Christianity can eat my dong
scottclements78 6 months ago
I like this video and I embrace what you are trying to say, but I would have to ask the question, what would it mean to say there were more than one god? If we are really trying to talk about omniscient omnipotent nonphysical beings, that are outside of time and space, what could it mean to be a single entity or multiple? Those concepts may have no meaning in that context... which really does prove your real point all the more anyway... or something like that... ;}
mathkills 6 months ago
Comment removed
mathkills 6 months ago
I have no pause to the complexity to the universe. To me, it would be logical for a God to make only the earth, sun and moon and nothing else. Whats the point of Mars or the billions of stars? All that detail is soooooo complely pointless in comparison.
ZetaSimsoy 6 months ago
In honor of the anniversary of your challenge I would like to point out that the 1-god Creator idea was, prior to Christianity and Islam, a postulate forming the basis of intellectual freedom. It was never intended to be the brainless axiom it has become resulting in such atrocities as recorded in human history. But you challenged something older than either Christianity or Islam so I felt obliged to respond in kind.
bunsinspace 6 months ago
Interesting Challenge.
Proving a God exist is beyond the Human reach. But many things may seem to imply a God or many Gods exist, an example is 'coincidence of undefinable acts'. Acts where it contradicts the 'laws of physics' may imply a supernatural being or God.
Another reason maybe Life; the reason for Life, Did God created us or is God even alive? Us humans answer this with an exterior solution to answer the impossible question, thus the answer I believe is We humans just do not know.
Dragneonix 6 months ago
@Dragneonix watch?v=IVbnciQYMiM
the point of this challenge is to explain how anyone can reasonably jump from deism to any particular theism.
EpicPhalure 6 months ago
@Dragneonix wooow now I believe
vusgy 2 months ago
@vusgy You don't want to "beleive" in God, you want to know God.
truthseeker010101 2 months ago
@shockofgod What debate room?
Lanthiriel 7 months ago
@shockofgod Hey Rich, are you still afraid?
Lanthiriel 7 months ago
@Lanthiriel I am in the debate room now..
shockofgod 7 months ago
@shockofgod Ah, an unexpected quick reply. Sorry I missed you; I was taking care of my children.
Lanthiriel 7 months ago
Of course one corollary to Occam's Razor is that any sufficiently simple explanation is therefor the answer to everything...thus we have religion.
zippydebrain 7 months ago
There's a fable about three blind old man looking for a white elephant. Summarizing this... people find the elephant and each of them touches a different part of it and when they go back and try to tell the others they became angry at each other because each thought they knew the truth about the animal yet all were speaking about a different experience.
I got it from an occultist book.
I guess we just need to find the right angle.
BTW I think I might have a crush on you :S
NathanSpellman 7 months ago
@NathanSpellman Or all the angles...
NathanSpellman 7 months ago
Not really proof for anything I mean, just a contradicton of one designer.
superhamzah85 7 months ago
Proof of more than one designer.
Bacteria
Immune system
If it's one god, then that's WORSE.
superhamzah85 7 months ago 23
@superhamzah85 That's a fuckin great point.
NonStampCollector 7 months ago 16
This has been flagged as spam show
@NonStampCollector ""fuckin great point""
Nah. Great cheerleading NSC. Bacteria is good but not good everywhere, hence the infinite knowledge and power of God has the immunue system to prevent its harmful effects.
j919or 5 months ago
@superhamzah85 Well I think it's proof when people say all of god's creatures are precious yet all of them HAVE TO destroy each other in order to survive.
kristofor12345 7 months ago
@superhamzah85 ""Bacteria....Immune system""
Bacteria have there place and without them organic matters would not decay properly. They are needed in digestion, just for starters. But bacteria can have harmful affects to and for this God desings the immunue system to ward them off when not serving a proper function. Further, the fall left the creation in a sort of dying state. The wages of sin is death.
j919or 5 months ago
@j919or
Jesus is not real.
superhamzah85 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@j919or
That's not intelligent design. That's evolution of bacteria. God doesn't require rules of biology, evolution does.
All medical science is a big fuck you to god/gods. If we leave gods designs alone then billions would have died early, from tuberculosis, small pox, cholera etc. Diseases WE'VE eradicated or almost eradicated.
superhamzah85 5 months ago
@j919or
You telling me that god is incapable of creating a digestion system that does not rely on things that may kill us if they appear in the wrong place?
narutofan9999 5 months ago