ITS FACT THE WORLD EVOLVED! Just look all around you and then look at thousands of years ago then look at millions of years ago would you not say we have evolved?? would you not say other animals and mammals etc have evolved?? just look how much we have evolved over a 100years! EVOLUTION CREATED LIFE NOT A GOD! Yes we were created by chance and luck not due to a magical god who can create things when HE wants
@martynrobin121 I have a few questions for you. I hope you don't mind the amount of them.
do you believe that we (man) are at the end of the evolutionary scale? Yes or no? If yes, do you see the evolutionary process making our world better for us to live in? Yes or no? If no, why not? Is man getting better in the very general sense? Are you encouraged about what the world will look like in lets say 10 years from now in 2020? If yes great, if no, why not?
@DeaconCliff YES i beleive that over millions of years and life times man eventually evolved from an ape/homo creature you have to remmeber the earths weather and paterns natural disasters happen all the time and the species that survive would have to evolve over time to adapt to that enviroment over life times! and man is evolving as we speak look at how much we have evolved in the last few 100s years and we are adapting to the enivroments.
@DeaconCliff You will find that the world before home-sapians was rules by other species of humans who were very much different from us to adapt to the enviroment over life times! Humans adapt over life times men/women in africa and other hot parts are black because of too much sun and people in northern part became white and you will notice people over the east are different we have all evolved different to cope with our weather and climate
If I were to take up bodybuilding and build muscle, would you say that is evidence of me evolving? My cousin who lives in Belle Glade Florida walks around bare foot, and as such has thicker soles, would you put that in the same categoray as evidence of us evolving? I dont necessarily believe that black people are black because of the sun alone, but then again that is just logical thinking. Anyway, just another perspective to evidence.
@DeaconCliff Yes because your body is adapting to its enviroment and no its not a big step in evolution its isnt even on the scale but it shows your body can adapt to "HEAVY WORK" You will find that other species of human that have been found were smaller and much bigger build than us homo-sapians they had bigger noses and thicker skin to deal with ICE AGE weather theer bodys adapting now remember evolution takes life times and wouldnt you say we are slowly adapting to the enviroment?
adapting to the environment is the extent you can say is evidence for. You can not extrapolate further and say because we CAN adapt, that is evidence that we DID adapt to the extent of becoming another species. It is kind of like me saying as an argument 30 years ago I was 2 foot 6 inches, and now I am 5 foot 9 inches, and so that proves I have the ability to evolve. You would tell me for sure I was crazy if I tried to use that as an argument for evolution. A
@DeaconCliff Its proves that over time your body and bodys of animals and mammals change they adapt and through the condition they live in change and millions of years change alot the planet changes all the time so we have to change to adapt to it! Look at all the bones and fossiles that been found dating back 100 millions of years rocks and salt from mars we have a picture of universe past and the earth SCIENCE! whitch has changed the face of this planet!
@martynrobin121 1-We evolved over trillions of years and life times and theres proof 2- We were all created by a super being with magical powers GOD who has a form and mind and brain and create billions of planets and suns out of nothing and that nothing created this GOD NO-proof. Know i know whitch 1 i beleive not the 2nd when people used to beleive the world was flat and the stars/sky were heavens etc
@martynrobin121 I commented this to a person who didn't claim to be an atheist, but he believed in evolution:
//I think it is important to note, many who examine the evidence of evolution and believe in it, have come to the strong conclusion that there absolutely must be a God. The miraculousness of the evolutionary process, and the (what they consider) billions of years of random and chance happenings, is far too great for them to consider it mere strokes of luck. Evolutionary theory...
...contrary to popular belief does not mean there is no God; it simply is another explanation instead of Genesis 1:1 - Genesis 2:26. So it is very possible to believe that there is a creator God who we are all accountable to, and the belief that Science shows we evolved is it fair for me to assume that you have nothing against there being a God, but don't believe in Genesis 1 and 2? i.e Creationism? Is it fair for me to assume also that you understand you can agree with the science that points
towards evolution being true, but that does not mean anything in respect to whether or not there actually is a God? I ask these questions not because I believe that (God forbid), but I know many atheists have been mis represented by us Christians in the past. I for one repent of that. It is almost like we are quick to throw stones at you, because we have judged you. We have very judgmentally said, they believe evolution, only because they don't want there to be a God. I think that is evil on us.
@DeaconCliff There cant be a god you speak of a god who has a mind and form with a brain and that god has always existed nothing created this super being with magic al powers. And some day he deiced to create billions of planets and sun gases etc then over life times etc decided to create life(Sounds like amyth from thousands of years ago WHITCH IT IS The bibble and other relgious books are fake scientist have proven it)in the next BIGnatural disaster god will not help man kind we will all DIE!
simply because one cannot bare life without fooling himself into thinking there is an eternal paradise does not prove that atheism is wrong or evil. fools. Open your minds simple ones.
"All thinking men are atheists"... Ernest Hemingway. Then boom, he shot himself in the mouth with a double barrel shotgun. Guess he wasn't atheist anymore after that.
@tpstrat14 He shot himself nearly 4 years after that quote, you're an idiot. Also, he wouldn't be anything except dead after he died because he is fucking dead. Have some respect.
@twitchthenrot A magnetic field moves in a certain direction, normally indicated by arrows on a diagram. The north end and the south end move in the same direction.
When two magnets are placed together with the opposite poles, the arrows line up and the magnets stick together.
When same poles placed together, the arrows do not line up, and they repel
@TheCommonCritic I think he was being a smart ass dude...its a line from this really, really idiotic ICP song about miracles. I'm pretty sure they call a tree a miracle too. But seeing as how stupidity and religion go hand in hand, i can see how you thought it may have been a legitimate question.
all you religion hating people...leave my imaginary god ALONE!!!!Okay he isnt real but yall dont have to b so meeeeean with your proof n all... Wahhhhhh. LMFAO
And I never said that this video did not quote mine, but If you want a quote used correctly than try this.
"Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith.... We need believing people."
The proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right.
I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end ... where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice.
@CommanderC4 I was quoting people who had been posted in the video... The quotes from Einstein and Lincoln have been misused, making people think that both of them support atheist beliefs, while in actuality, a deeper study of their life yields quotes supporting an anti-atheistic approach; indeed, a distaste to being misquoted for the sake of supporting atheism! The video is full of quote-mining!
@CommanderC4 And you're welcome to believe what you want!
I'm not going to stay quiet if
1) People are misquoted to support something they don't believe in.
2) Someone calls me an idiot for what I believe.
I've never once said you're stupid for believing in evolution. It's quite a seductive mistress. I'm just saying, don't trust everything out of her mouth! And it saddens me to see someone who has bitten the hook and swallowed it so deep that removing it would tear out your guts.
@xox1234xox Absolutely astounding. You AGAIN bring a new level of hypocrisy to my knowledge. You assert that my thoughts of the universe are flawed because I have bothered to ask questions and continuously think about them, yet you accuse me of being arrogant because I have a rational mind? You claim that I judge you and yet you assume that I have given in to the blissful ignorance that is faith? You say that I believe everything that a scientist says when I have already shown that I don't?
@CommanderC4 "You say that I believe everything that a scientist says when I have already shown that I don't?"
I'm sorry, I really thought that was your stance. I do hope you weigh everything carefully. I just got the impression that you just accept what you read.
"yet you accuse me of being arrogant because I have a rational mind?"
No, your arrogance comes from assuming that yours IS rational. Who are you to decide? THERE lies arrogance.
@xox1234xox Yet in the assertion of arrogance in and of itself you make a claim. Who are you to claim anything if you can never really know anything? You again criticize me for making assertions, but would not the only other option be to assert nothing, a stance that you yourself do not practice? I am all for a healthy dose of skepticism, as it is in no small part the primary function that makes science work, however when that skepticism tells us that because we have never seen the center of-->
@xox1234xox --> the Earth that therefore the idea of it being filled with swirling magma is as valid as the theory of it being the home of angry fire gods who require virgin sacrifices to quell their wrath, I find that it it time to reel in the agnosticism and use logically extrapolated evidence to assert what is most likely the truth. It is called pragmatism and it is the only thing that keeps us functioning properly in the absence of certainty.
@xox1234xox And anyone who believes whatever they are told simply because they respect the person telling it to them is an idiot, hence the allure of science. If properly preformed then it shall claim only what it can explain with logic and evidence and assert the existence of laws only when a theory has withstood every conceivable test that can be preformed; such as the laws of conservation and the law of gravity. Your statement that science is fallible is a mute point given that anyone with-->
@CommanderC4 "And anyone who believes whatever they are told simply because they respect the person telling it to them is an idiot..."
My point exactly. I think we may have been thinking along the same lines all along. If you have analyzed all points of view and feel evolution is correct, then I'm glad. What I don't like is when people [maybe not yourself] suggest that I'm an idiot simply because my conclusions don't match theirs.
@xox1234xox --> half a clue does not claim as such. However the question must be raised; if one is to arrive at conclusions via means other than logic, which is the fundamental basis of science, then what processes would such a method to test the validity of its assertions in coherence with rational skepticism? The very problem I have with "faith" is that it does not allow for intellectual debate, as it asserts it's claims in the absence of evidence and therefore has removed any and all -->
@CommanderC4 "The very problem I have with "faith" is that it does not allow for intellectual debate"
I think that's a false statement. It depends on the person and the situation. Granted, there are many close-minded religious "fanatics" out there... You can't throw out all apples for a few bad ones. I know I don't hold all of science as flawed just because I see weaknesses in some "accepted" theories.
@xox1234xox --> possible avenues of intellectual dissent. And while I inherently have no problem with any belief in and of itself, regardless of its validity, I take great issue with the concept of someone basing their actions on such notoriously unreliable ideas, hence the Hitler quote. If someone had stood up and made him PROVE his assertions of the validity of white supremacy then perhaps we may have avoided an untold number of tragedies. But that did not happen. Instead people allowed-->
@xox1234xox --> themselves to "believe" him because they simply wanted him to be right, and the result need not be mentioned. As such I find no small manor of disgust in those who would set the stage for such a tragedy and others of the like to occur again by allowing themselves and others to accept any manor of faith as reason to believe in anything. It is harmlessly unreliable at best and apolitically dangerous at worst, and I take great pride in the fact that I have cast it aside and -->
@xox1234xox --> replaced it with logic, skepticism, and reason; however flawed my personal ability to preform such concepts may be.
"There are many hypotheses in science which are wrong. That's perfectly all right; they're the aperture to finding out what's right. Science is a self-correcting process. To be accepted, new ideas must survive the most rigorous standards of evidence and scrutiny."
@CommanderC4 Love this Sagan quote. I've been finding a great distaste for Hawking and Sagan as of late, but this reminds me that there are some good thinkers out there still.
@xox1234xox Science is not the arrogant school of thought that most portray it to be, rather to the contrary, its basic fundamentals require it to be open to any and all possibilities. However, that does not mean that all possibilities are equal, as if there is in fact a considerable greater amount of evidence in support of one theory then it is that theory which should receive a respectively greater amount of credibility. Such is the same logic as in saying that if there are two suspects -->
@CommanderC4 "Science is not the arrogant school of thought that most portray it to be, rather to the contrary, its basic fundamentals require it to be open to any and all possibilities. "
Try global warming and the misuse of science.
As long as scientists grab for the funding instead of using their common sense it will be rejected.
@jonesgerard Wow, never thought of that. Guess you must be right about science being evil because they want to learn things, after all, nothing good comes from knowing the truth right? Dumbass.
@xox1234xox --> for the same crime, one having merely lacking an alibi and the other lacking an alibi as well as having been caught with the murder weapon and having a clear and distinctive motive, then the latter will be the one most likely looked into by the investigators. It is simply the logical thing to do. As is the case of evolution. There may be a few remaining holes in the theory as of now, however given how many holes that have been filled in since Darwin first published his-->
@xox1234xox --> there is no reason to assume that these particular holes are anything special and could not be answered in time, as is the case with all scientific research. On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being a scientific law "macro evolution from bacteria" would receive about an 7, in contrast to other propositions which would receive about a 2. Micro evolution on the other hand is a 10, as seen in the simple process of animal breeding. The facts merely point to it more than anything else,-->
@CommanderC4 I disagree with 7 for macro, but I think that 10 for micro is close to accurate, depending on the definition of micro. I think it's safe to say that small changes are certainly possible and occur frequently.
@xox1234xox --> nothing more and nothing less. And during my own personal experiance with faith (I even prayed to the christian god every night until I was twelve) I had arrived at the conclusion that God knows more about God than any people or books written by people who claim to know about God, and if I wanted to learn more about Him myself then I was better off objectively studying the world that He had made, rather than simply believing random beliefs of a random religion. -->
@xox1234xox -->I thought that God may love gays or He may hate them, and He may want this and He may want that, ect ect ect... but He DEFINITELY says that 2+2=4 and that the Earth is round, because those are the facts that He created. The church on the other hand and the Bible as well have had very different opinions on whether or not science was to be trusted. "Stupid humans are assuming that they can comprehend an all knowing, all powerful being and are screwing up it's truth in the process-->
@xox1234xox -->" I would always say. From there I realized my own mistake in assuming that MY own personal feelings and interpretations made any difference in the matter of what exactly "God" is, which made me accept any and all possible deities; even and especially the ones I might not be able to comprehend. Eventually not thinking anything about anything proved to be a useless ideology and from there the rest is history. Now I am a skeptical, scientific, atheist who hates arrogant presumptions
@xox1234xox "I admit that reason is a small and feeble flame, a flickering torch by stumblers carried in the star-less night, -- blown and flared by passion's storm, -- and yet, it is the only light. Extinguish that, and nought remains."
-- Robert Green Ingersoll
Quotes do mean something if you either agree or disagree with the words spoken in and of themselves.
@CommanderC4 Very true about quotes, but that doesn't mean the speaker does not have only one point of view. That's an interesting point though. Our interpretation of information is to a certain extent on our own experiences. "We've made You [God] in our image, so our faith's idolatry." Michael Card. This is a warning from a Christian message to seek God without personal bias. Hard, maybe not possible, but seeking knowledge without bias should be everyone's aim.
@xox1234xox Truth and reality are essentially synonymous terms. To say that "I seek to know the truth regardless of whatever it may be" is to say "I seek to understand reality regardless of whatever it may be". As the objective means of studying reality science is the best chance we have of knowing the truth, and it's structural requirement of review and repetition make it by far the most reliable form of investigation that we have today. I have no problem with skepticism of a scientific -->
@xox1234xox --> theory, as if it is in fact true then it shall have absolutely no problem explaining its logical base. However, when somebody claims to doubt it because they have already concluded something else then they are guilty of arrogance of the highest order.
Evolution: Scientific law, observable, logical, and explains many otherwise complete mysteries in biology.
Evolution by Natural Selection: Scientific theory which explains the mechanics of how evolution works on a macro scale.-->
@xox1234xox -->As of yet logically unchallenged in the field of biology, yet as a result of difficulty in observing it directly still technically remains a scientific theory.
Evolution from organic materials to simple life forms: A scientific hypothesis that explains how life most likely began given the existence of the scientific laws of conservation. Supported by data collected lab experimentation but entirely impossible to observe in the natural world as of yet.
@xox1234xox Evolution may still be somewhat of a mystery, but it fits the mold of what life is. It may not be absolute as of the 21st century but the question must be asked, in comparison to what exactly? There may be some unexplained bits, as in most scientific theories, but nothing yet has been found to explain why it couldn't be true.
It is likely. It is scientifically possible. It remains as of yet unchallenged by another scientific theory. I don't KNOW it for certain but the odds are high.
@CommanderC4 Wow, this is exactly where I wanted to be days ago.I've definitely had you all wrong. You are more enlightened than I thought.
I personally feel that while parts of evolution are compelling and provable, I still think that life happening by chance is improbable, given our attempts to recreate life in a lab. I know that evolution gives billions of years for this. I just don't see it as likely. I think that life had a beginning push, but I also think some development must be going on
@CommanderC4 For instance, I think that God has programmed life with a certain amount of adaptability, perhaps what we observe as microevolution. After all, without some changes, all dogs would be the same. I think that it's entirely possible that all elephants came from a pair of generic elephants, all dogs from a generic canine, etc. I certainly agree with many of the observations made, maybe not all of the conclusions. And it's still possible that God used evolution to make the world...
@xox1234xox Incorrect, your mistake was to assume that I have not already read that book a dozen times. I was an agnostic myself before I realized how anti-pragmatic it is, and while I always maintain an open mind about things it is not so open that my brains would fall out. Your "religion" is the boy that cried wolf, I have heard countless numbers of religious apologists claim that the study of the natural world is arrogant, while the assertions into the void of the supernatural are absolute.
@CommanderC4 Sorry that I made assumptions about you.
As far as I'm concerned, there's nothing that I can say 100% sure about anything. But I do believe in God, even if evolution did occur. It still might have occurred, I can't discount the possibility. I just don't think that it's likely and I think that the support that the theory has gotten is unwarranted.
Christian: A good-natured, simple fellow; a true lamb of the fold, who, in the innocence of his heart, persuades himself that he firmly believes unbelievable things that his priests have told him to believe, especially those he cannot even imagine. Consequently, he is convinced that three x's make fifteen, that God was made man, that he was hanged and rose to life again, that priests cannot lie, and that all who do not believe in priests will be damned without remission.
To you I say, who needs a pope! You have science to be your infallible religion, and scientists as your holy priesthood! You cannot deny the words of your infallible pope, not one word! And heresy if you do!
"That I am not a member of any Christian church is true; but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion in general, or of any denomination of Christians in particular....I do not think I could myself be brought to support a man for office whom I knew to be an open enemy of, or scoffer at, religion." [July 31, 1846] Abraham Lincoln
@xox1234xox -->it to your own system of beliefs is a rather pathetic thing indeed. I do hope that you you decide to begin using the logic you have been bequeathed by countless generations of your ancestors, who managed to obtain it for you in the hard fought struggle to survive that is evolution. Your ability to reject logic and reason is an absolute embarrassment to the human race in general.
HAHA Karl Marx... he's a great role model... the only people to emulate his system didn't even emulate his system at all... He had some good ideas, but unfortunately no real functionality there. If his beliefs were the "cure" for religion's "opium", huh, some cure...
Here we go again with another evolution and Christianity arguement. This is why I choose to believe in neither rather than the fact that we are here today and we do not know where we came from and we should focus on the NOW. Not the AFTER. Humans can barely predict if we are gonna get rain tonight. Good luck predicting the meaning of life fellas. I however will not waste my time haha.
You say God not Allah. Why? (blablablablabla) bible. You did not question everything otherwise you would have come to the conclusion that a pink unicorn is as rational as a blue one. Without hard evidence to support it, one superstition is as ridiculous. Do not make the mistake of thinking that you were ever an agnostic. You were a wavering christian, that's all. And what exactly is lucky about evolution? Its survival of the fittest, not survival of the random.
"Do not make the mistake of thinking that you were ever an agnostic."
I never claimed to try to be agnostic. I admit to investigating a God-based evolution (an evolutionary process initiated by God) but EVOLUTION MAKES NO SENSE, with or without God.
@xox1234xox If you don't believe in science then evolution doesn't make any sense. Yes you are right about that. Its funny though, I could have sworn that there was a time when science was deemed crazy because it said the earth was not flat. Weird huh?
You make it sound like belief in the predictability of provable science requires belief in all unproven theories too. Parapsychology is seen as a science to some... Scientologists believe that psychology is false, does that mean they can't believe in gravity???
@xox1234xox You seem to have this great delusion that science is a democracy.
It Isn't.
Whether or not you believe in evolution or gravity is up to you but that doesn't stop scientists from observing them.
You make ridiculous claims like us comparing Darwin to a god or us using faith to "believe" in evolution. Straw men. Sorry to disappoint but we don't "believe" anything. We think things, we observe things, we aren't scared of ANY conclusion as long as there is proof. Your guess=uneducated.
@CommanderC4 And you believe anything that comes out of a scientist's mouth. It's not a matter of vote, it's a matter of sense. More fools agreeing doesn't make foolishness wisdom, it just changes the number of voices.
My guess = uneducated?
How about basing "science" on unprovable conclusions and limited information? Evolution is the 150 year old straw man... adding more "smart" people does not make wrong into right.
You must believe something. You believe yourself to be right at least...
@xox1234xox I have considered that "religion" may be a straw man...
Have you considered that what you believe is a straw man?
Incidentally, I can see why you believe what you believe. I'm trying to help you see why I don't believe, and it's not because I found this put at Sunday school, bc I gave evolution a try. My studies of science say it's too slim to be believable.
@xox1234xox Nope. I think I am right. Why? Because as a child when I asked a scientist why the earth was round they explained it to me. When I asked a christian why they thought their god wanted us to stop gays from marrying they just said to believe it and didn't show me why I should. I concluded pretty early on that "believing" things was unreliable, and that was before I had heard about slavery. Scientific theories are the most important thing in the entire process, they aren't just guesses.
@CommanderC4 Well, gays can't reproduce, scientific fact. So I guess there's your reason right there, and that's NOT from the Bible.
There's more to it for me than that. You have to believe in something like I said, but only a fool would go on just what they believe.
Believing is the same as thinking... you know certain things so you draw conclusions about what you haven't seen. You've never smashed atoms before, but you believe what you read about it from scientific journals.
@xox1234xox lmfao! Gays can't reproduce? Since when? Last time I checked being gay was about a relationship, not making babies. And do I believe in the scientific Journals? Nope. I trust them. Why? Because they have never been wrong before. I've never even been to space and yet I would trust them when they say the earth is flat. Because they back it up with logic and reason. I like logic and reason. Smashing atoms? I dare say the people of Hiroshima think atoms can be smashed.
@CommanderC4 If being in a relationship is all that matters, then how come bestiality is against the law?
And I'm silly? My point is you haven't directly observed the smashing of atoms, only the reports of results. You believe these reports to be true. You say that you use logic. Logic based on what? Other people's observations? Where's the evidence you have collected?
@xox1234xox Wow. You are special. You are willing to believe something you read in a 2000 year old book but I am wrong for trusting PROVABLE science? Could there be an ironic hypocrisy in there somewhere? lol And gays will eventually be allowed to marry. Jim Crow couldn't stop progress and neither can you. We are headed for a new Enlightenment my friend. I do hope you wake up in time to join the rest of the human race.
@CommanderC4 Hahaha. Arrogance assumes that everyone is right and the "dissenting view" is wrong. And I'm special? I remind you once again that what you call "provable" is trumped up, flawed, and exaggerated. So my beliefs in 2000 years of beliefs are weaker than 100 years of speculation? I'm special? My faith is 2000 years old, your flawed version of science is barely 100... My "kind" has been around a lot longer than you.
@CommanderC4 Okay, so let gays marry. That doesn't stop God from existing. I don't hate gays, but letting them marry only creates an acceptance of a lifestyle, it does nothing to "change" anything. I just think the term should stay as a "partnership" or "union"... those terms work just fine and we all know what we are talking about when we use them. Why make the English language more confusing? It's not like they won't be together anyway.
@xox1234xox So because your belief is older it is therefore better? Well there's some sound reasoning. lol You know what else is old? Slavery. This whole equal rights thing has only been accepted for a few decades. IT MUST BE WRONG! lol And FYI, the natural philosophers understood that the earth was flat LONG before religion accepted it, sound familiar?
Science is not assumption, it is logical reasoning and peer review, you're confusing it with faith.
@CommanderC4 I'm not implying that older is better, but you seemed to be saying older means outdated. That's an unnecessary assumption as well.
Science is not an assumption? Read real books about science. ALL science is an assumption based on observations. These assumptions are then tested for validity.
And to assume that science's observations must be right because we can observe it is flawed, too, because scientists "observed" that we were the center of the universe, too..
All of science is subject to the quality of the observations made. To blithely assume that all observations are 100% accurate and authoritative is arrogance... Remember the Ice Man? All "observations" of "early" man led scientists to assume that man 6000 years ago was rather uncultured. However, the discovery of a 6000 year old man frozen in the Alps turned that theory on its head. Now we realize that mankind was a lot more sophisticated than we thought... we are always relearning what we assume
@CommanderC4 I am not confusing it with faith. It IS faith. You have to believe that what someone else says is accurate. People that believe in psychics aren't necessarily psychic themselves, they accept that what other people say about psychic abilities are true. Same with science. Many assume that science must be right and therefore assume that everything they say is 100% right without weighting the validity of the claims. Not all scientists are right, not even majority rule applies.
@xox1234xox Again, I am utterly dumbfounded by your hypocrisy. Science in and of itself is the method by which those very scientific errs have been corrected. You assert that science is arrogant for noticing and verifying things when you yourself make claims of supernatural entities? If you cannot interpret that things exist from rational observations of existence then you are in a sad state my friend.
To call science faith is to call a PHD a witch doctor, a rather erroneous statement indeed.
@CommanderC4 I am dumbfounded by your failure to read plain English.
Unless you complete experiments by yourself, you have to believe that what someone else says about the experiment is true. You can call it what you want to make yourself feel superior, but you are still taking the scientist for his/her word. Knowing or believing something to be true without observing it personally is called faith, even if the something can be proven. Hypocrisy? Glad you used a word Jesus coined.
@CommanderC4 Science as a whole is not arrogant for making assumptions (it's part of the scientific model that I reminded you of), but in the case of evolution/dating it is arrogant. We have only observed 100 years of particle behavior, but science assumes accuracy for billions of years. If this timeline is the same as the distance from earth to the moon, the observed time is not even an inch off the ground! To assume miles of accuracy for an inch of observation IS arrogance.
@CommanderC4 I'll boil this down to the simplest terms about what I claim is "arrogant" about science.
Evolution claims that species derived from each other through slow changes. The large changes are too slow to observe, but we assume they happen because we see small changes. There's no proof that small changes lead to large changes, just a guess. The fossil record to back this should be a rainbow of these changes; instead, it's a shotgun record, scattered and incomplete.
@xox1234xox This has truly been an experience. I have encountered many ridiculous religious claims in my life but I have never encountered someone as ignorant of the basic nature of science as you. You are welcome to think that logic, reason, and critical thinking are all equal to faith if you want, but know that there is nobody within the field of science that shares in your fantastical notions. And aside from all that, the fact that your best attacks on science are an attempt to compare-->
@CommanderC4 Once again, sounding off your arrogance. You don't know me, so don't pretend to know me. And I hope that not everyone in the scientific community is blind to truth, or else Stephen Hawking will say he eats pie and everyone will throw their cakes away. But once again, you state your "belief is not belief is someone else can prove it" while ignoring the entire core of my philosophical argument.
@CommanderC4 "Gays can't reproduce? Since when? Last time I checked being gay was about a relationship, not making babies."
That's why many people don't want there to be gay "marriage". Keep in mind that the ban isn't against gay "relationships", just against the word "marriage"
@CommanderC4 "Scientific theories are the most important thing in the entire process, they aren't just guesses."
Hate to break it to you, but ALL of science is guesswork, with a better theory or law coming along to replace the inferior or insufficient ones... the quality of the "guesswork" varies of course, but most of it is pretty reliable. But it's the guessing that keeps science marching forward.
"You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth... In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views." Einstein
The N.W.O.'s lackey/wacky-Leninist Chrissy Hitchens' red-herring, non-issues cater to America's analphabetic, pants-dragging, tattooed legions of 20-something nincompoops. He's NEVER endorsed the Constitution in any substantive way. He's NEVER said an ill word in regards to the Fed's shenanigans & the trillions of dollars that they've absconded with. The U.S. is plunging headlong into receivership as Hitchens bleats about Mother Teresa, Jerusalem Slim's divinity & Jerry Falwell.
So a bunch of rich famous people, politicians, and rock singers, don't believe in God. That's not new news, money is the root of all evil, & power corrupts. So who cares what they believe? It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for any of these to enter into the kingdom of God! So let them have their fantasy!
Historical scholarship trusts the accounts closest in date to the actual person portrayed. The surviving fragments of the Bible are closer to Jesus' life than Caesar's bios are to him. Christians have done the research to back their faith, they have to to defend themselves against non believers. The real problem is that most non believers don't have any real evidence; they're just too scared to admit God is real, bc then they would be held accountable for their actions.
@avaxtakaka Right, so I guess all the secular scholars who say Jesus was a real person are wrong... or are you only defaming His divinity, not His existence?
A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word 'darkness' on the walls of his cell.
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son. Whoever believes in Him (Christ) will not perish but have everlasting life--- John 3:16 You either believe or you don't believe, but Christ is real and our God is real, and in the end you will have no excuse for not accepting Him as your Saviour. He loves you all dearly and wants so badly for you to experience that love in a life in Christ Jesus, both NOW while you're alive and when we leave this earth. The CHOICE is yours.
Yeah, small mistake there : Your deity put on a human form, then sacrificed itself, to itself, in order to atone for a sin it set in motion. Sorry, but that's the plot of a rather badly written book more than anything. Your deity, like any others, is fictional, deal with it.
@Atharkas Unfortunately, you're wrong. Faith's are proved by FAITH, nothing tangible, nothing physical because that's how God designed it. On the other hand, YOU cannot prove that He does not exist. Looks like the burden is on you to disprove God, which you will NEVER be able to do... count yourself lucky on that end. At the end of the day us Christians are still one up on the unbeliever. Christ is wonderful and so is the gift of salvation. One day you'll accept Him or end up wishing u did
Actually, faith proves nothing since it is to believe in something without any proof.
And disproving the abrahamic deity is actually easy, just learn history, biology or art and you can easily disprove him.
History : the oldest stories of the Torah was written around -1500 CE and most of it was borrowed from other myths, mostly sumerian, hindus and egyptians.
Biology : Evolution and common descent disprove Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, Noah, Jonah, etc.
Art : 40000 years old painting showing hunting scenes, fertility idol cult spanning from -40000 to -11000 from western europe to eastern siberia, anthropomorphical statuette representing early deities, but nothing, not a single thing, related to Yahweh or any of the myths of the abrahamic faith.
Sorry, but when faced with facts, the abrahamic faith deities becomes merely a myth.
Actually, if you consider this deity to know everything (this means of the past, present, future and alternate timeline), then it would already know what would have happened before it even created humans. Sorry, but in the eyes of your deity, whatever you choose is already known even before your birth. As such, your "free will" is an illusion in the face of such a deity. It constantly surprise me when people cannot grasp the concept of "knows everything",
@Atharkas I do understand. This is the distinction. We can freely choose, but God already knows what we are going to choose. God's knowledge of the outcome doesn't change the fact that we still chose the outcome.
@xox1234xox You got us, DAMN! We're just scared of whatever god you believe in, that's why we use logic and reasoning to determine or facts, because if we didn't then we will believe in whatever superstition is around at the time. Now that you mention it, the only reason I stopped being afraid of the dark is because I realized that monsters are not scientifically possible, but there are monsters in your book; guess I better start walking around with a flashlight, just in case.
@CommanderC4 If you are implying that I haven't thought it through logically, then that's a real arrogant assumption. I went through a time in my life when I did doubt the existence of God. I questioned everything and read everything, and after much thinking and reading I still came to the conclusion that evolution would require a lot of lucky breaks, more than I was willing to accept. What I find ridiculous is, and this may not be you, that many atheists assume that I blindly chose my beliefs.
@xox1234xox I was also afraid of the dark until I found the light switch!! And stop lying, no one can claim to be thinking logically and still believe in "god". If you believe in an imaginary sky person then you have disregarded all evidence and gone for "sure, why not?"
@eddiewinehosen once again, another enlightened opinion brought to us from the "miracle" of evolution...
Whenever I meet you on your level, you insult my intelligence. You have to puff yourself up to bolster your weak theories.
If this is your science, I want nothing of it. It's a bunch of stuck-up, "believe me or else" people. I thought science was about questioning everything to prove what you can. Isn't that how your god Darwin did things?
@Atharkas And God doesn't set "sin into motion". If you mean He allowed man to make the choice whether or not TO sin, that's different, but it seems to me that you're saying that God helped man to sin... In fact, He gave man the choice and warned him not to do it. It's Satan who set sin into motion for real.
A lot of these comments are directed at God and ignore the devil... I guess that's because the devil's work is to defame God, not himself.
@psalm139stem It's funny that you christians can only threaten people for after they die. You cannot make any other appeal in this world. These threats may work on people that have low intellect or superstitious people of the ancient world, but they do nothing but make you look like a fool when intelligent men view them today. Your unquestionable ignorance is certainly useful to those who wish to keep you that way. Remember, all you have to do is "believe" in their god and send them money.
@switchinfeet The Einstein quote is especially telling, since Einstein wasn't an atheist and spoke out about his quotes being used by atheists to support atheism.
This only proves what Jesus said, the devil has his kids here on earth and God has his. and u can tell the difference by how they act, what they say, and what they do. It isn't too late to be saved as long as your still breathing the air he gave us. love ya wake up
The inquisitors who subjected their brethren to the rack and the iron maiden were emulating the game a house cat plays with a rodent: slow torture till death.
I hate that atheists believe freedom of religion protects their beliefs. The Founding Fathers didn't know about atheism, Islam, or various eastern religions and would have excluded them from the First Amendment. The First Amendment only refers to Judeo-Christian religions.
Actually, Islam is the reason for the creation of the US' navy and, eventually, army. Read about the Barbary Corsairs and you'll see that your "founding fathers" knew about it.
We, atheists, are like you, with the only different that we disbelieve in one more deity than you.
If there is a "God" then we shouldn't worship him but rebel against him because if he existed then why would he let a child starve to death in Africa but reward a fat rich American who only has petty worries like if he/she is going to get that promotion or if they think someone likes them or not if God was real then why would he do that? isn't he supposed to be an all loving and caring God?
@gramosjr7 if god is like tht then wud anybody want to knw him , people like you are destroying the christian faith and destroying the world. God is not a being, and if he is hes not reli a good guy, he represents all tht is good about our being creativity, love etc etc the reason people have done shite things in gods name is cus they think him as a supreme being
Where will you go to when you die? Have you ever told lies, stolen, used God's name in vain, or looked at someone with lust? If yes, then you are a lying, theiving, blasphemous, adulterer at heart. When you die & stand before God you'll be guilty of breaking His law. The bible says you'll end up in Hell! So God sent God His Son Jesus to die for your sins, & He rose from the dead on the third day. If you'll believe the Gospel(Jesus died for your sins & was resurrected) you'll be saved!
ITS FACT THE WORLD EVOLVED! Just look all around you and then look at thousands of years ago then look at millions of years ago would you not say we have evolved?? would you not say other animals and mammals etc have evolved?? just look how much we have evolved over a 100years! EVOLUTION CREATED LIFE NOT A GOD! Yes we were created by chance and luck not due to a magical god who can create things when HE wants
martynrobin121 1 year ago
@martynrobin121 I have a few questions for you. I hope you don't mind the amount of them.
do you believe that we (man) are at the end of the evolutionary scale? Yes or no? If yes, do you see the evolutionary process making our world better for us to live in? Yes or no? If no, why not? Is man getting better in the very general sense? Are you encouraged about what the world will look like in lets say 10 years from now in 2020? If yes great, if no, why not?
DeaconCliff 1 year ago
@DeaconCliff YES i beleive that over millions of years and life times man eventually evolved from an ape/homo creature you have to remmeber the earths weather and paterns natural disasters happen all the time and the species that survive would have to evolve over time to adapt to that enviroment over life times! and man is evolving as we speak look at how much we have evolved in the last few 100s years and we are adapting to the enivroments.
martynrobin121 1 year ago
@DeaconCliff You will find that the world before home-sapians was rules by other species of humans who were very much different from us to adapt to the enviroment over life times! Humans adapt over life times men/women in africa and other hot parts are black because of too much sun and people in northern part became white and you will notice people over the east are different we have all evolved different to cope with our weather and climate
martynrobin121 1 year ago
@martynrobin121 ok let me play the skeptic here with you.
If I were to take up bodybuilding and build muscle, would you say that is evidence of me evolving? My cousin who lives in Belle Glade Florida walks around bare foot, and as such has thicker soles, would you put that in the same categoray as evidence of us evolving? I dont necessarily believe that black people are black because of the sun alone, but then again that is just logical thinking. Anyway, just another perspective to evidence.
DeaconCliff 1 year ago
@DeaconCliff Yes because your body is adapting to its enviroment and no its not a big step in evolution its isnt even on the scale but it shows your body can adapt to "HEAVY WORK" You will find that other species of human that have been found were smaller and much bigger build than us homo-sapians they had bigger noses and thicker skin to deal with ICE AGE weather theer bodys adapting now remember evolution takes life times and wouldnt you say we are slowly adapting to the enviroment?
martynrobin121 1 year ago
@martynrobin121
adapting to the environment is the extent you can say is evidence for. You can not extrapolate further and say because we CAN adapt, that is evidence that we DID adapt to the extent of becoming another species. It is kind of like me saying as an argument 30 years ago I was 2 foot 6 inches, and now I am 5 foot 9 inches, and so that proves I have the ability to evolve. You would tell me for sure I was crazy if I tried to use that as an argument for evolution. A
DeaconCliff 1 year ago
@DeaconCliff Its proves that over time your body and bodys of animals and mammals change they adapt and through the condition they live in change and millions of years change alot the planet changes all the time so we have to change to adapt to it! Look at all the bones and fossiles that been found dating back 100 millions of years rocks and salt from mars we have a picture of universe past and the earth SCIENCE! whitch has changed the face of this planet!
martynrobin121 1 year ago
@martynrobin121 1-We evolved over trillions of years and life times and theres proof 2- We were all created by a super being with magical powers GOD who has a form and mind and brain and create billions of planets and suns out of nothing and that nothing created this GOD NO-proof. Know i know whitch 1 i beleive not the 2nd when people used to beleive the world was flat and the stars/sky were heavens etc
martynrobin121 1 year ago
@martynrobin121 I commented this to a person who didn't claim to be an atheist, but he believed in evolution:
//I think it is important to note, many who examine the evidence of evolution and believe in it, have come to the strong conclusion that there absolutely must be a God. The miraculousness of the evolutionary process, and the (what they consider) billions of years of random and chance happenings, is far too great for them to consider it mere strokes of luck. Evolutionary theory...
DeaconCliff 1 year ago
...contrary to popular belief does not mean there is no God; it simply is another explanation instead of Genesis 1:1 - Genesis 2:26. So it is very possible to believe that there is a creator God who we are all accountable to, and the belief that Science shows we evolved is it fair for me to assume that you have nothing against there being a God, but don't believe in Genesis 1 and 2? i.e Creationism? Is it fair for me to assume also that you understand you can agree with the science that points
DeaconCliff 1 year ago
towards evolution being true, but that does not mean anything in respect to whether or not there actually is a God? I ask these questions not because I believe that (God forbid), but I know many atheists have been mis represented by us Christians in the past. I for one repent of that. It is almost like we are quick to throw stones at you, because we have judged you. We have very judgmentally said, they believe evolution, only because they don't want there to be a God. I think that is evil on us.
DeaconCliff 1 year ago
@DeaconCliff There cant be a god you speak of a god who has a mind and form with a brain and that god has always existed nothing created this super being with magic al powers. And some day he deiced to create billions of planets and sun gases etc then over life times etc decided to create life(Sounds like amyth from thousands of years ago WHITCH IT IS The bibble and other relgious books are fake scientist have proven it)in the next BIGnatural disaster god will not help man kind we will all DIE!
martynrobin121 1 year ago
3:25 is my favorite
jenko4292 1 year ago
Atheist story of creation:
"There was nothing and then it exploded."
SymbioteD25 1 year ago
theres not proof god is real or not......lets just leave it at that
ironspiderWD 1 year ago
@ironspiderWD
If it was just that easy...
Elementboy6522 1 year ago
simply because one cannot bare life without fooling himself into thinking there is an eternal paradise does not prove that atheism is wrong or evil. fools. Open your minds simple ones.
Redmilitiageneral 1 year ago
"All thinking men are atheists"... Ernest Hemingway. Then boom, he shot himself in the mouth with a double barrel shotgun. Guess he wasn't atheist anymore after that.
tpstrat14 1 year ago
@tpstrat14 He shot himself nearly 4 years after that quote, you're an idiot. Also, he wouldn't be anything except dead after he died because he is fucking dead. Have some respect.
Ye4hBuddy 1 year ago
IF god doesnt exist, How the fuck do magnets work?!
twitchthenrot 1 year ago
@twitchthenrot A magnetic field moves in a certain direction, normally indicated by arrows on a diagram. The north end and the south end move in the same direction.
When two magnets are placed together with the opposite poles, the arrows line up and the magnets stick together.
When same poles placed together, the arrows do not line up, and they repel
TheCommonCritic 1 year ago
@TheCommonCritic I think he was being a smart ass dude...its a line from this really, really idiotic ICP song about miracles. I'm pretty sure they call a tree a miracle too. But seeing as how stupidity and religion go hand in hand, i can see how you thought it may have been a legitimate question.
abrahambivins 1 year ago
@abrahambivins I see how it may have been a sarcastic comment. It's just that I've seen people actually use that as an argument.
TheCommonCritic 1 year ago
all you religion hating people...leave my imaginary god ALONE!!!!Okay he isnt real but yall dont have to b so meeeeean with your proof n all... Wahhhhhh. LMFAO
gheadntryme 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And I never said that this video did not quote mine, but If you want a quote used correctly than try this.
"Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith.... We need believing people."
-- Adolf Hitler
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 But that's quotemining too, lol
xox1234xox 1 year ago
The proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right.
-- Thomas Jefferson
CommanderC4 1 year ago
I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end ... where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice.
-- John F Kennedy
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 I was quoting people who had been posted in the video... The quotes from Einstein and Lincoln have been misused, making people think that both of them support atheist beliefs, while in actuality, a deeper study of their life yields quotes supporting an anti-atheistic approach; indeed, a distaste to being misquoted for the sake of supporting atheism! The video is full of quote-mining!
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 And you're welcome to believe what you want!
I'm not going to stay quiet if
1) People are misquoted to support something they don't believe in.
2) Someone calls me an idiot for what I believe.
I've never once said you're stupid for believing in evolution. It's quite a seductive mistress. I'm just saying, don't trust everything out of her mouth! And it saddens me to see someone who has bitten the hook and swallowed it so deep that removing it would tear out your guts.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Absolutely astounding. You AGAIN bring a new level of hypocrisy to my knowledge. You assert that my thoughts of the universe are flawed because I have bothered to ask questions and continuously think about them, yet you accuse me of being arrogant because I have a rational mind? You claim that I judge you and yet you assume that I have given in to the blissful ignorance that is faith? You say that I believe everything that a scientist says when I have already shown that I don't?
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 "You say that I believe everything that a scientist says when I have already shown that I don't?"
I'm sorry, I really thought that was your stance. I do hope you weigh everything carefully. I just got the impression that you just accept what you read.
"yet you accuse me of being arrogant because I have a rational mind?"
No, your arrogance comes from assuming that yours IS rational. Who are you to decide? THERE lies arrogance.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Yet in the assertion of arrogance in and of itself you make a claim. Who are you to claim anything if you can never really know anything? You again criticize me for making assertions, but would not the only other option be to assert nothing, a stance that you yourself do not practice? I am all for a healthy dose of skepticism, as it is in no small part the primary function that makes science work, however when that skepticism tells us that because we have never seen the center of-->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> the Earth that therefore the idea of it being filled with swirling magma is as valid as the theory of it being the home of angry fire gods who require virgin sacrifices to quell their wrath, I find that it it time to reel in the agnosticism and use logically extrapolated evidence to assert what is most likely the truth. It is called pragmatism and it is the only thing that keeps us functioning properly in the absence of certainty.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox And anyone who believes whatever they are told simply because they respect the person telling it to them is an idiot, hence the allure of science. If properly preformed then it shall claim only what it can explain with logic and evidence and assert the existence of laws only when a theory has withstood every conceivable test that can be preformed; such as the laws of conservation and the law of gravity. Your statement that science is fallible is a mute point given that anyone with-->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 "And anyone who believes whatever they are told simply because they respect the person telling it to them is an idiot..."
My point exactly. I think we may have been thinking along the same lines all along. If you have analyzed all points of view and feel evolution is correct, then I'm glad. What I don't like is when people [maybe not yourself] suggest that I'm an idiot simply because my conclusions don't match theirs.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> half a clue does not claim as such. However the question must be raised; if one is to arrive at conclusions via means other than logic, which is the fundamental basis of science, then what processes would such a method to test the validity of its assertions in coherence with rational skepticism? The very problem I have with "faith" is that it does not allow for intellectual debate, as it asserts it's claims in the absence of evidence and therefore has removed any and all -->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 "The very problem I have with "faith" is that it does not allow for intellectual debate"
I think that's a false statement. It depends on the person and the situation. Granted, there are many close-minded religious "fanatics" out there... You can't throw out all apples for a few bad ones. I know I don't hold all of science as flawed just because I see weaknesses in some "accepted" theories.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> possible avenues of intellectual dissent. And while I inherently have no problem with any belief in and of itself, regardless of its validity, I take great issue with the concept of someone basing their actions on such notoriously unreliable ideas, hence the Hitler quote. If someone had stood up and made him PROVE his assertions of the validity of white supremacy then perhaps we may have avoided an untold number of tragedies. But that did not happen. Instead people allowed-->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> themselves to "believe" him because they simply wanted him to be right, and the result need not be mentioned. As such I find no small manor of disgust in those who would set the stage for such a tragedy and others of the like to occur again by allowing themselves and others to accept any manor of faith as reason to believe in anything. It is harmlessly unreliable at best and apolitically dangerous at worst, and I take great pride in the fact that I have cast it aside and -->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 "...to "believe" him because they simply wanted him to be right..."
Wow, eloquent and astute observation about Hitler's regime.
P.S. this is not sarcasm.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> replaced it with logic, skepticism, and reason; however flawed my personal ability to preform such concepts may be.
"There are many hypotheses in science which are wrong. That's perfectly all right; they're the aperture to finding out what's right. Science is a self-correcting process. To be accepted, new ideas must survive the most rigorous standards of evidence and scrutiny."
-- Carl Sagan
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Love this Sagan quote. I've been finding a great distaste for Hawking and Sagan as of late, but this reminds me that there are some good thinkers out there still.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Science is not the arrogant school of thought that most portray it to be, rather to the contrary, its basic fundamentals require it to be open to any and all possibilities. However, that does not mean that all possibilities are equal, as if there is in fact a considerable greater amount of evidence in support of one theory then it is that theory which should receive a respectively greater amount of credibility. Such is the same logic as in saying that if there are two suspects -->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 "Science is not the arrogant school of thought that most portray it to be, rather to the contrary, its basic fundamentals require it to be open to any and all possibilities. "
Try global warming and the misuse of science.
As long as scientists grab for the funding instead of using their common sense it will be rejected.
jonesgerard 1 year ago
@jonesgerard Wow, never thought of that. Guess you must be right about science being evil because they want to learn things, after all, nothing good comes from knowing the truth right? Dumbass.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Global warming isn't about truth.
The truth is its about imposing global socialism by whacked out green enviromentalists who hate God because they want to play God and run the world.
You are atheist correct?
jonesgerard 1 year ago
@jonesgerard Wow. That was even dumber than the last statement. Not even worthy of a rebuttal.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CommanderC4
So you are an atheist.
jonesgerard 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 haha, that was hilarious...So you're an atheist??
abrahambivins 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> for the same crime, one having merely lacking an alibi and the other lacking an alibi as well as having been caught with the murder weapon and having a clear and distinctive motive, then the latter will be the one most likely looked into by the investigators. It is simply the logical thing to do. As is the case of evolution. There may be a few remaining holes in the theory as of now, however given how many holes that have been filled in since Darwin first published his-->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> there is no reason to assume that these particular holes are anything special and could not be answered in time, as is the case with all scientific research. On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being a scientific law "macro evolution from bacteria" would receive about an 7, in contrast to other propositions which would receive about a 2. Micro evolution on the other hand is a 10, as seen in the simple process of animal breeding. The facts merely point to it more than anything else,-->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 I disagree with 7 for macro, but I think that 10 for micro is close to accurate, depending on the definition of micro. I think it's safe to say that small changes are certainly possible and occur frequently.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> nothing more and nothing less. And during my own personal experiance with faith (I even prayed to the christian god every night until I was twelve) I had arrived at the conclusion that God knows more about God than any people or books written by people who claim to know about God, and if I wanted to learn more about Him myself then I was better off objectively studying the world that He had made, rather than simply believing random beliefs of a random religion. -->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox -->I thought that God may love gays or He may hate them, and He may want this and He may want that, ect ect ect... but He DEFINITELY says that 2+2=4 and that the Earth is round, because those are the facts that He created. The church on the other hand and the Bible as well have had very different opinions on whether or not science was to be trusted. "Stupid humans are assuming that they can comprehend an all knowing, all powerful being and are screwing up it's truth in the process-->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox -->" I would always say. From there I realized my own mistake in assuming that MY own personal feelings and interpretations made any difference in the matter of what exactly "God" is, which made me accept any and all possible deities; even and especially the ones I might not be able to comprehend. Eventually not thinking anything about anything proved to be a useless ideology and from there the rest is history. Now I am a skeptical, scientific, atheist who hates arrogant presumptions
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox "I admit that reason is a small and feeble flame, a flickering torch by stumblers carried in the star-less night, -- blown and flared by passion's storm, -- and yet, it is the only light. Extinguish that, and nought remains."
-- Robert Green Ingersoll
Quotes do mean something if you either agree or disagree with the words spoken in and of themselves.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Very true about quotes, but that doesn't mean the speaker does not have only one point of view. That's an interesting point though. Our interpretation of information is to a certain extent on our own experiences. "We've made You [God] in our image, so our faith's idolatry." Michael Card. This is a warning from a Christian message to seek God without personal bias. Hard, maybe not possible, but seeking knowledge without bias should be everyone's aim.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Truth and reality are essentially synonymous terms. To say that "I seek to know the truth regardless of whatever it may be" is to say "I seek to understand reality regardless of whatever it may be". As the objective means of studying reality science is the best chance we have of knowing the truth, and it's structural requirement of review and repetition make it by far the most reliable form of investigation that we have today. I have no problem with skepticism of a scientific -->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox --> theory, as if it is in fact true then it shall have absolutely no problem explaining its logical base. However, when somebody claims to doubt it because they have already concluded something else then they are guilty of arrogance of the highest order.
Evolution: Scientific law, observable, logical, and explains many otherwise complete mysteries in biology.
Evolution by Natural Selection: Scientific theory which explains the mechanics of how evolution works on a macro scale.-->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox -->As of yet logically unchallenged in the field of biology, yet as a result of difficulty in observing it directly still technically remains a scientific theory.
Evolution from organic materials to simple life forms: A scientific hypothesis that explains how life most likely began given the existence of the scientific laws of conservation. Supported by data collected lab experimentation but entirely impossible to observe in the natural world as of yet.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Evolution may still be somewhat of a mystery, but it fits the mold of what life is. It may not be absolute as of the 21st century but the question must be asked, in comparison to what exactly? There may be some unexplained bits, as in most scientific theories, but nothing yet has been found to explain why it couldn't be true.
It is likely. It is scientifically possible. It remains as of yet unchallenged by another scientific theory. I don't KNOW it for certain but the odds are high.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Wow, this is exactly where I wanted to be days ago.I've definitely had you all wrong. You are more enlightened than I thought.
I personally feel that while parts of evolution are compelling and provable, I still think that life happening by chance is improbable, given our attempts to recreate life in a lab. I know that evolution gives billions of years for this. I just don't see it as likely. I think that life had a beginning push, but I also think some development must be going on
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 For instance, I think that God has programmed life with a certain amount of adaptability, perhaps what we observe as microevolution. After all, without some changes, all dogs would be the same. I think that it's entirely possible that all elephants came from a pair of generic elephants, all dogs from a generic canine, etc. I certainly agree with many of the observations made, maybe not all of the conclusions. And it's still possible that God used evolution to make the world...
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 I was just trying to open your mind to see another viewpoint OUTSIDE of established norms. My mistake was trying to open a closed book.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Incorrect, your mistake was to assume that I have not already read that book a dozen times. I was an agnostic myself before I realized how anti-pragmatic it is, and while I always maintain an open mind about things it is not so open that my brains would fall out. Your "religion" is the boy that cried wolf, I have heard countless numbers of religious apologists claim that the study of the natural world is arrogant, while the assertions into the void of the supernatural are absolute.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Sorry that I made assumptions about you.
As far as I'm concerned, there's nothing that I can say 100% sure about anything. But I do believe in God, even if evolution did occur. It still might have occurred, I can't discount the possibility. I just don't think that it's likely and I think that the support that the theory has gotten is unwarranted.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
Christian: A good-natured, simple fellow; a true lamb of the fold, who, in the innocence of his heart, persuades himself that he firmly believes unbelievable things that his priests have told him to believe, especially those he cannot even imagine. Consequently, he is convinced that three x's make fifteen, that God was made man, that he was hanged and rose to life again, that priests cannot lie, and that all who do not believe in priests will be damned without remission.
-- Voltaire
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 To Voltaire I say, I have no pope.
To you I say, who needs a pope! You have science to be your infallible religion, and scientists as your holy priesthood! You cannot deny the words of your infallible pope, not one word! And heresy if you do!
Your a science Catholic!
xox1234xox 1 year ago
Here's a great "atheist" quote:
"That I am not a member of any Christian church is true; but I have never denied the truth of the Scriptures; and I have never spoken with intentional disrespect of religion in general, or of any denomination of Christians in particular....I do not think I could myself be brought to support a man for office whom I knew to be an open enemy of, or scoffer at, religion." [July 31, 1846] Abraham Lincoln
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox -->it to your own system of beliefs is a rather pathetic thing indeed. I do hope that you you decide to begin using the logic you have been bequeathed by countless generations of your ancestors, who managed to obtain it for you in the hard fought struggle to survive that is evolution. Your ability to reject logic and reason is an absolute embarrassment to the human race in general.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@Dogsneedpleasuretoo How many is "almost 17"? lol
xox1234xox 1 year ago
HAHA Karl Marx... he's a great role model... the only people to emulate his system didn't even emulate his system at all... He had some good ideas, but unfortunately no real functionality there. If his beliefs were the "cure" for religion's "opium", huh, some cure...
xox1234xox 1 year ago
These famously well known people had it ALL SO WRONG!
Taytay1o1 1 year ago
Here we go again with another evolution and Christianity arguement. This is why I choose to believe in neither rather than the fact that we are here today and we do not know where we came from and we should focus on the NOW. Not the AFTER. Humans can barely predict if we are gonna get rain tonight. Good luck predicting the meaning of life fellas. I however will not waste my time haha.
BrownEyeBlue 1 year ago
The lack of faith is what created America.
Londron 1 year ago
"Faith is the great cop out..." Richard Dawkins.
Such as faith in slim evidence, unproven theories, and wild speculation.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
You say God not Allah. Why? (blablablablabla) bible. You did not question everything otherwise you would have come to the conclusion that a pink unicorn is as rational as a blue one. Without hard evidence to support it, one superstition is as ridiculous. Do not make the mistake of thinking that you were ever an agnostic. You were a wavering christian, that's all. And what exactly is lucky about evolution? Its survival of the fittest, not survival of the random.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
Comment removed
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 "You did not question everything"
Why assumptions? You don't know me
"Do not make the mistake of thinking that you were ever an agnostic."
I never claimed to try to be agnostic. I admit to investigating a God-based evolution (an evolutionary process initiated by God) but EVOLUTION MAKES NO SENSE, with or without God.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox If you don't believe in science then evolution doesn't make any sense. Yes you are right about that. Its funny though, I could have sworn that there was a time when science was deemed crazy because it said the earth was not flat. Weird huh?
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Define "science".
You make it sound like belief in the predictability of provable science requires belief in all unproven theories too. Parapsychology is seen as a science to some... Scientologists believe that psychology is false, does that mean they can't believe in gravity???
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox You seem to have this great delusion that science is a democracy.
It Isn't.
Whether or not you believe in evolution or gravity is up to you but that doesn't stop scientists from observing them.
You make ridiculous claims like us comparing Darwin to a god or us using faith to "believe" in evolution. Straw men. Sorry to disappoint but we don't "believe" anything. We think things, we observe things, we aren't scared of ANY conclusion as long as there is proof. Your guess=uneducated.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 And you believe anything that comes out of a scientist's mouth. It's not a matter of vote, it's a matter of sense. More fools agreeing doesn't make foolishness wisdom, it just changes the number of voices.
My guess = uneducated?
How about basing "science" on unprovable conclusions and limited information? Evolution is the 150 year old straw man... adding more "smart" people does not make wrong into right.
You must believe something. You believe yourself to be right at least...
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox I have considered that "religion" may be a straw man...
Have you considered that what you believe is a straw man?
Incidentally, I can see why you believe what you believe. I'm trying to help you see why I don't believe, and it's not because I found this put at Sunday school, bc I gave evolution a try. My studies of science say it's too slim to be believable.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Nope. I think I am right. Why? Because as a child when I asked a scientist why the earth was round they explained it to me. When I asked a christian why they thought their god wanted us to stop gays from marrying they just said to believe it and didn't show me why I should. I concluded pretty early on that "believing" things was unreliable, and that was before I had heard about slavery. Scientific theories are the most important thing in the entire process, they aren't just guesses.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Well, gays can't reproduce, scientific fact. So I guess there's your reason right there, and that's NOT from the Bible.
There's more to it for me than that. You have to believe in something like I said, but only a fool would go on just what they believe.
Believing is the same as thinking... you know certain things so you draw conclusions about what you haven't seen. You've never smashed atoms before, but you believe what you read about it from scientific journals.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox lmfao! Gays can't reproduce? Since when? Last time I checked being gay was about a relationship, not making babies. And do I believe in the scientific Journals? Nope. I trust them. Why? Because they have never been wrong before. I've never even been to space and yet I would trust them when they say the earth is flat. Because they back it up with logic and reason. I like logic and reason. Smashing atoms? I dare say the people of Hiroshima think atoms can be smashed.
You're just silly.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 If being in a relationship is all that matters, then how come bestiality is against the law?
And I'm silly? My point is you haven't directly observed the smashing of atoms, only the reports of results. You believe these reports to be true. You say that you use logic. Logic based on what? Other people's observations? Where's the evidence you have collected?
[I'm making a point, stay with me...]
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Wow. You are special. You are willing to believe something you read in a 2000 year old book but I am wrong for trusting PROVABLE science? Could there be an ironic hypocrisy in there somewhere? lol And gays will eventually be allowed to marry. Jim Crow couldn't stop progress and neither can you. We are headed for a new Enlightenment my friend. I do hope you wake up in time to join the rest of the human race.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Hahaha. Arrogance assumes that everyone is right and the "dissenting view" is wrong. And I'm special? I remind you once again that what you call "provable" is trumped up, flawed, and exaggerated. So my beliefs in 2000 years of beliefs are weaker than 100 years of speculation? I'm special? My faith is 2000 years old, your flawed version of science is barely 100... My "kind" has been around a lot longer than you.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Okay, so let gays marry. That doesn't stop God from existing. I don't hate gays, but letting them marry only creates an acceptance of a lifestyle, it does nothing to "change" anything. I just think the term should stay as a "partnership" or "union"... those terms work just fine and we all know what we are talking about when we use them. Why make the English language more confusing? It's not like they won't be together anyway.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox So because your belief is older it is therefore better? Well there's some sound reasoning. lol You know what else is old? Slavery. This whole equal rights thing has only been accepted for a few decades. IT MUST BE WRONG! lol And FYI, the natural philosophers understood that the earth was flat LONG before religion accepted it, sound familiar?
Science is not assumption, it is logical reasoning and peer review, you're confusing it with faith.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 I'm not implying that older is better, but you seemed to be saying older means outdated. That's an unnecessary assumption as well.
Science is not an assumption? Read real books about science. ALL science is an assumption based on observations. These assumptions are then tested for validity.
And to assume that science's observations must be right because we can observe it is flawed, too, because scientists "observed" that we were the center of the universe, too..
xox1234xox 1 year ago
All of science is subject to the quality of the observations made. To blithely assume that all observations are 100% accurate and authoritative is arrogance... Remember the Ice Man? All "observations" of "early" man led scientists to assume that man 6000 years ago was rather uncultured. However, the discovery of a 6000 year old man frozen in the Alps turned that theory on its head. Now we realize that mankind was a lot more sophisticated than we thought... we are always relearning what we assume
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 I am not confusing it with faith. It IS faith. You have to believe that what someone else says is accurate. People that believe in psychics aren't necessarily psychic themselves, they accept that what other people say about psychic abilities are true. Same with science. Many assume that science must be right and therefore assume that everything they say is 100% right without weighting the validity of the claims. Not all scientists are right, not even majority rule applies.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Again, I am utterly dumbfounded by your hypocrisy. Science in and of itself is the method by which those very scientific errs have been corrected. You assert that science is arrogant for noticing and verifying things when you yourself make claims of supernatural entities? If you cannot interpret that things exist from rational observations of existence then you are in a sad state my friend.
To call science faith is to call a PHD a witch doctor, a rather erroneous statement indeed.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 I am dumbfounded by your failure to read plain English.
Unless you complete experiments by yourself, you have to believe that what someone else says about the experiment is true. You can call it what you want to make yourself feel superior, but you are still taking the scientist for his/her word. Knowing or believing something to be true without observing it personally is called faith, even if the something can be proven. Hypocrisy? Glad you used a word Jesus coined.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Science as a whole is not arrogant for making assumptions (it's part of the scientific model that I reminded you of), but in the case of evolution/dating it is arrogant. We have only observed 100 years of particle behavior, but science assumes accuracy for billions of years. If this timeline is the same as the distance from earth to the moon, the observed time is not even an inch off the ground! To assume miles of accuracy for an inch of observation IS arrogance.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 I'll boil this down to the simplest terms about what I claim is "arrogant" about science.
Evolution claims that species derived from each other through slow changes. The large changes are too slow to observe, but we assume they happen because we see small changes. There's no proof that small changes lead to large changes, just a guess. The fossil record to back this should be a rainbow of these changes; instead, it's a shotgun record, scattered and incomplete.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox This has truly been an experience. I have encountered many ridiculous religious claims in my life but I have never encountered someone as ignorant of the basic nature of science as you. You are welcome to think that logic, reason, and critical thinking are all equal to faith if you want, but know that there is nobody within the field of science that shares in your fantastical notions. And aside from all that, the fact that your best attacks on science are an attempt to compare-->
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 Once again, sounding off your arrogance. You don't know me, so don't pretend to know me. And I hope that not everyone in the scientific community is blind to truth, or else Stephen Hawking will say he eats pie and everyone will throw their cakes away. But once again, you state your "belief is not belief is someone else can prove it" while ignoring the entire core of my philosophical argument.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 "Gays can't reproduce? Since when? Last time I checked being gay was about a relationship, not making babies."
That's why many people don't want there to be gay "marriage". Keep in mind that the ban isn't against gay "relationships", just against the word "marriage"
xox1234xox 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CommanderC4 "Scientific theories are the most important thing in the entire process, they aren't just guesses."
Hate to break it to you, but ALL of science is guesswork, with a better theory or law coming along to replace the inferior or insufficient ones... the quality of the "guesswork" varies of course, but most of it is pretty reliable. But it's the guessing that keeps science marching forward.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
Talk about quote-mining by the video...
"You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth... In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views." Einstein
xox1234xox 1 year ago
Sorry to call out the Einstein quote, but Mr. Einstein himself has called it out before he died.
In other words, a posthumous thumbs down.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
The N.W.O.'s lackey/wacky-Leninist Chrissy Hitchens' red-herring, non-issues cater to America's analphabetic, pants-dragging, tattooed legions of 20-something nincompoops. He's NEVER endorsed the Constitution in any substantive way. He's NEVER said an ill word in regards to the Fed's shenanigans & the trillions of dollars that they've absconded with. The U.S. is plunging headlong into receivership as Hitchens bleats about Mother Teresa, Jerusalem Slim's divinity & Jerry Falwell.
procommenter 1 year ago
So a bunch of rich famous people, politicians, and rock singers, don't believe in God. That's not new news, money is the root of all evil, & power corrupts. So who cares what they believe? It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for any of these to enter into the kingdom of God! So let them have their fantasy!
RudeAwakning 1 year ago
@RudeAwakning
Yes, it is easier. Because heaven doesn't actually exist.
Jammed9000 1 year ago
@FreeThinking76-Whose the 2 songs by? Common?
olmec19 1 year ago
type in in utube search "Who Created God? Where Did God Come From? Proof of God" and watch the one by LetsTalkChrist
aell0111 1 year ago
Back in 1994, the "Great Leader" of North Korea, Kim
il-Sung, died of a heart attack. In spite of that, he is
still the "President", with his son, Kim Jong-Il, running
the show. "Kim Il-Sung will come back to life!", North
Koreans say (and believe!). Crazy? Nuts? Of course!
But it's no more insane than for Americans to believe
in the fictional Jesus, and to actually believe that this
guy will "return from the dead". There is no "Jesus",
there is no "God". It's BALONEY!!!!
avaxtakaka 1 year ago
@avaxtakaka Lenin said that Christianity would die with the grandmothers. Lenin is dead, faith in Jesus is not.
Glad to see you chose a side, though...
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox Not that I am a Communist, but I will
take Mr, Lenin over the fictional Jesus, thank you.
avaxtakaka 1 year ago
Comment removed
xox1234xox 1 year ago
Historical scholarship trusts the accounts closest in date to the actual person portrayed. The surviving fragments of the Bible are closer to Jesus' life than Caesar's bios are to him. Christians have done the research to back their faith, they have to to defend themselves against non believers. The real problem is that most non believers don't have any real evidence; they're just too scared to admit God is real, bc then they would be held accountable for their actions.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@avaxtakaka Right, so I guess all the secular scholars who say Jesus was a real person are wrong... or are you only defaming His divinity, not His existence?
I guess you should doubt Julius Caesar, too...
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@avaxtakaka And what's even more amazing is that you assume all Christians are Americans... what a racist remark.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word 'darkness' on the walls of his cell.
loqutor 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PEOPLE LISTEN TO THIS GUY. JESUS IS REAL DO YOUR RESEARCH.
Hey atheist: you don't know! Copy and paste
Hell is Real - 1 of 29 - Shocking Proof - Watch the Series Copy and paste
JESUS IS REAL AND HE LOVES YOU. WATCH THESE VIDEOS!
Kr0n1k4Lyfe 1 year ago
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son. Whoever believes in Him (Christ) will not perish but have everlasting life--- John 3:16 You either believe or you don't believe, but Christ is real and our God is real, and in the end you will have no excuse for not accepting Him as your Saviour. He loves you all dearly and wants so badly for you to experience that love in a life in Christ Jesus, both NOW while you're alive and when we leave this earth. The CHOICE is yours.
psalm139stem 1 year ago
@psalm139stem
Yeah, small mistake there : Your deity put on a human form, then sacrificed itself, to itself, in order to atone for a sin it set in motion. Sorry, but that's the plot of a rather badly written book more than anything. Your deity, like any others, is fictional, deal with it.
Atharkas 1 year ago
@Atharkas Unfortunately, you're wrong. Faith's are proved by FAITH, nothing tangible, nothing physical because that's how God designed it. On the other hand, YOU cannot prove that He does not exist. Looks like the burden is on you to disprove God, which you will NEVER be able to do... count yourself lucky on that end. At the end of the day us Christians are still one up on the unbeliever. Christ is wonderful and so is the gift of salvation. One day you'll accept Him or end up wishing u did
psalm139stem 1 year ago
@psalm139stem
Actually, faith proves nothing since it is to believe in something without any proof.
And disproving the abrahamic deity is actually easy, just learn history, biology or art and you can easily disprove him.
History : the oldest stories of the Torah was written around -1500 CE and most of it was borrowed from other myths, mostly sumerian, hindus and egyptians.
Biology : Evolution and common descent disprove Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, Noah, Jonah, etc.
Atharkas 1 year ago
Art : 40000 years old painting showing hunting scenes, fertility idol cult spanning from -40000 to -11000 from western europe to eastern siberia, anthropomorphical statuette representing early deities, but nothing, not a single thing, related to Yahweh or any of the myths of the abrahamic faith.
Sorry, but when faced with facts, the abrahamic faith deities becomes merely a myth.
Atharkas 1 year ago
@psalm139stem When you speak about "Faith", are
you referring to Faith Hill, the blonde Country-and-
Western singer? I have faith in Faith. I agree, Jesus
is wonderful. Of course, I'm talking about my buddy
from Mexico, Jesus Valdez.. We go to a lot of football
games together.
avaxtakaka 1 year ago
@Atharkas Well said my friend, bravo.
georgetcr 1 year ago
@Atharkas It constantly surprises me how people cannot grasp free will. For someone who uses it daily, it should have been easy...
I guess you can't appreciate movies where the hero sacrifices himself for everyone else, even though they don't deserve it.
Incidentally, there's a lot of Jesus in Neo from the Matrix... But I guess that movie just sucks.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox
Actually, if you consider this deity to know everything (this means of the past, present, future and alternate timeline), then it would already know what would have happened before it even created humans. Sorry, but in the eyes of your deity, whatever you choose is already known even before your birth. As such, your "free will" is an illusion in the face of such a deity. It constantly surprise me when people cannot grasp the concept of "knows everything",
Atharkas 1 year ago
@Atharkas I do understand. This is the distinction. We can freely choose, but God already knows what we are going to choose. God's knowledge of the outcome doesn't change the fact that we still chose the outcome.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox You got us, DAMN! We're just scared of whatever god you believe in, that's why we use logic and reasoning to determine or facts, because if we didn't then we will believe in whatever superstition is around at the time. Now that you mention it, the only reason I stopped being afraid of the dark is because I realized that monsters are not scientifically possible, but there are monsters in your book; guess I better start walking around with a flashlight, just in case.
CommanderC4 1 year ago
@CommanderC4 If you are implying that I haven't thought it through logically, then that's a real arrogant assumption. I went through a time in my life when I did doubt the existence of God. I questioned everything and read everything, and after much thinking and reading I still came to the conclusion that evolution would require a lot of lucky breaks, more than I was willing to accept. What I find ridiculous is, and this may not be you, that many atheists assume that I blindly chose my beliefs.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@xox1234xox I was also afraid of the dark until I found the light switch!! And stop lying, no one can claim to be thinking logically and still believe in "god". If you believe in an imaginary sky person then you have disregarded all evidence and gone for "sure, why not?"
eddiewinehosen 1 year ago
@eddiewinehosen once again, another enlightened opinion brought to us from the "miracle" of evolution...
Whenever I meet you on your level, you insult my intelligence. You have to puff yourself up to bolster your weak theories.
If this is your science, I want nothing of it. It's a bunch of stuck-up, "believe me or else" people. I thought science was about questioning everything to prove what you can. Isn't that how your god Darwin did things?
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@Atharkas And God doesn't set "sin into motion". If you mean He allowed man to make the choice whether or not TO sin, that's different, but it seems to me that you're saying that God helped man to sin... In fact, He gave man the choice and warned him not to do it. It's Satan who set sin into motion for real.
A lot of these comments are directed at God and ignore the devil... I guess that's because the devil's work is to defame God, not himself.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
@psalm139stem It's funny that you christians can only threaten people for after they die. You cannot make any other appeal in this world. These threats may work on people that have low intellect or superstitious people of the ancient world, but they do nothing but make you look like a fool when intelligent men view them today. Your unquestionable ignorance is certainly useful to those who wish to keep you that way. Remember, all you have to do is "believe" in their god and send them money.
pillowbugg 1 year ago
@pillowbugg RIGHT ON!!!! Christians spend their
sorry lives condemning others, calling them "sinn-
ers", and saying "You're going to Hell!". Wow, what
a "contribution" to mankind! Christians are the LOS-
ERS of society. There is no "God", no "Jesus": it's
all BULLSHIT!
avaxtakaka 1 year ago
@avaxtakaka Name the charitable organization founded in the name of atheism.
And for someone who claims Christians spend their lives condemning others, you do a pretty fair job condemning them all as "losers"...
Glad to see you changing things...
xox1234xox 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pillowbugg RIGHT ON!!!! Christians spend their
sorry lives condemning others, calling them "sinn-
ers", and saying "You're going to Hell!". Wow, what
a "contribution" to mankind! Christians are the LOS-
ERS of society. There is no "God", no "Jesus": it's
all bullshit!
avaxtakaka 1 year ago
most of these are either misquotes or taken out of context.
switchinfeet 1 year ago
@switchinfeet The Einstein quote is especially telling, since Einstein wasn't an atheist and spoke out about his quotes being used by atheists to support atheism.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
you forgot quotes from Stalin and chariman Mao. I wonder why?
pfnr37 1 year ago
This only proves what Jesus said, the devil has his kids here on earth and God has his. and u can tell the difference by how they act, what they say, and what they do. It isn't too late to be saved as long as your still breathing the air he gave us. love ya wake up
macman3430 1 year ago
The inquisitors who subjected their brethren to the rack and the iron maiden were emulating the game a house cat plays with a rodent: slow torture till death.
TheManWithTVEyes 1 year ago
I hate that atheists believe freedom of religion protects their beliefs. The Founding Fathers didn't know about atheism, Islam, or various eastern religions and would have excluded them from the First Amendment. The First Amendment only refers to Judeo-Christian religions.
Cenamark2 1 year ago
@Cenamark2 They didn't know about atheism? For fucks sake.
Oxygaunt 1 year ago
@Cenamark2
Actually, Islam is the reason for the creation of the US' navy and, eventually, army. Read about the Barbary Corsairs and you'll see that your "founding fathers" knew about it.
We, atheists, are like you, with the only different that we disbelieve in one more deity than you.
Atharkas 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Cenamark2 You are one dumb person
pillowbugg 1 year ago
If there is a "God" then we shouldn't worship him but rebel against him because if he existed then why would he let a child starve to death in Africa but reward a fat rich American who only has petty worries like if he/she is going to get that promotion or if they think someone likes them or not if God was real then why would he do that? isn't he supposed to be an all loving and caring God?
MultiRaistlin 1 year ago
@MultiRaistlin Sounds like you're doing a good enough job rebelling already.
xox1234xox 1 year ago
time to find out the truth
MrTrilidge 1 year ago
@HustlinInDa313 so you're saying you're saying you are playing safe?
and you believe in your god because there is a chance you'll have a reward?
please read again Einsteins quote.
btw, Einstein was not catholic or religious, he received letters because of his views
notdsender 1 year ago
@gramosjr7 if god is like tht then wud anybody want to knw him , people like you are destroying the christian faith and destroying the world. God is not a being, and if he is hes not reli a good guy, he represents all tht is good about our being creativity, love etc etc the reason people have done shite things in gods name is cus they think him as a supreme being
DomhnallX50 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Where will you go to when you die? Have you ever told lies, stolen, used God's name in vain, or looked at someone with lust? If yes, then you are a lying, theiving, blasphemous, adulterer at heart. When you die & stand before God you'll be guilty of breaking His law. The bible says you'll end up in Hell! So God sent God His Son Jesus to die for your sins, & He rose from the dead on the third day. If you'll believe the Gospel(Jesus died for your sins & was resurrected) you'll be saved!
gramosjr7 1 year ago
A pity there isnt a God otherwise we could sue him for bad management.
RMPify 1 year ago
Dear Mr FreeThinking76, would you kindly tell us the names of the ill hip-hop accompanying this great compilation...peace!
teyhar 1 year ago
Hmm... A lot of those men and women originate from the United States. Pity that most of our founding fathers believed in a God.
The U.S must fail then.
Either that or, these quotes do. Weird how "All thinking men are atheists" when they came to the conclusion of our government.
That's not thinking at all, har har.
Morons.
TyDa2 1 year ago
@TyDa2 actually most founders were not theists
patrickledford420 1 year ago
@TyDa2 Our founding fathers were all secularists meaning they believed that church and state should be separate, to each his own.