Upload

The Credibility of Faith

by bdwilson1000 • 2,881 views

A quick look at religious history shows that faith is not a reliable path to truth. This video was created and reuploaded with permission of Darkmatter2525. Check out his channel for more great...

@Matur1n And what I'm saying is that you have accepted that it's a plane before it had been proven. Look at my example again. The only thing that is constant is the hole. The hole being life and the universe. The possible explanations for the hole are god. We started with one god, debunked it, man created another (harder to debunk) god, we debunked it, man created another (even harder to debunk), we debunked it, and eventually man moved god outside the realm of possibility of being debunked.
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK "Every time we proved god false throughout history" You never once proved God false. You proved individuals wrong about what they assumed had happened. If I blame the meter reader for leaving the gate open, but you prove it couldn't have been him as they only read meters on Fridays, that in no way casts the existence of meter readers into question. If anything it supports the existence of meter readers as we both acknowledge meter readers exist.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Yet we never see 100s of people streaming out of anywhere claiming to have seen a god. One person makes a claim about god and the rest repeat what they've heard. After they have been convinced, they look for any coincidence or unexplained occurrence to credit their belief.... there is nothing anywhere or at any time that supports one god story over another.... or over simple coincidence and wishful thinking.
Report spam or abuse
This is a clear pattern which has led us to where we are now. It's MOVING THE GOALPOST! If you lived 3000 years ago you would absolutely believe in one of those older (but actually more plausible) gods. And you would have been wrong then too. The way God is defined (and in some cases NOT DEFINED AT ALL) is in such a way today that it can't be disproven. But, I can ask you for your reasons for believing and laugh when you make a fool of yourself. No reasons its true and many reasons its not.
Report spam or abuse
@StrikaAmaru But they clearly SAW plane hit a building. This is more like 100s of people see a hole in a building and say a really big bird caused it. Then, many years later, when it's PROVEN that a bird couldn't have caused it, they say a big rock from a catapult MUST have caused it. And then, many years later, when it's PROVEN that a catapult didn't cause it, they say a rock from the sky MUST have caused it. But then, when they PROVE that it couldn't have happened that way either....?
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
"evidence for unintelligent design than intelligent design" I disagree. The planet wasn't designed for the 90% that die off, that isn't its purpose. If the weak nuclear force was only a tiny bit weaker, in the early universe, all of the hydrogen would have become helium, thus no stars would form. If it was only a tiny bit stronger, exploding supernovas would not eject their outer envelopes, and thus not seeding the universe with the heavy elements necessary for life. That looks designed.
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK "How accurate do you supposed they were after, say, 30-40 years? " Paul said he personally was around 100s of eye witnesses as he wrote his books. I imagine a book written today about Jimmy Carter's Presidency or Gerald Ford's would be quite accurate. Lots of people would know immediately if you strayed far from the truth. Same for then. People were still around from Jesus day.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Check out my last few comments. I sent them to the wrong person. They were for you. I must have been distracted by the fact that you really couldn't understand the point of this video. It shouldn't surprise me that a theist wouldn't understand logic and reason but it still occasionally catches me offguard. Open your eyes. Trust what you can prove to be reasonably accurate. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence my friend. Think about it.
Report spam or abuse
Mother fucking best youtube vid I have seen in a while. Good work.
Report spam or abuse
@sfg911 Your logic refutes the whole argument of the video. That there being so many different accounts of what God is like by different religions is evidence against his existence. If they are not "witnesses" then what they say can't be used against the existence of God anymore than in favor of it.
Report spam or abuse
Science for the win. No need to hold onto the ancient bullshit. If anything, it holds us back from progress.
Report spam or abuse
Christians keep moving the goal post.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n I doubt these people were "dedicated atheists" in the first place. But it's not really important... people change. You can have a perfectly rational become a WTC "truther".... it's quite common for people to go a bit crazy and still lead normal lives. A "dedicated" atheist could have a schizophrenic episode and (your words "witness") a god (always the one they grew up hearing about by the way)
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n The answer that christians give for creating life and the universe is an assumption. I wouldn't even consider it an answer. It's a complete guess. It's best to say "I don't know" until there's good reason to believe something is true. The answer to this question could be infinitely complex. It's possible we may never fully grasp it. But going on faith and assumptions is detrimental and a hindrance to a true search for the facts on this matter. An unproven answer is no answer at all.
Report spam or abuse
@lancethrustworthy The music might have been a little downbeat, but the message did end on a positive note. Science will inevitably erode away religious superstition..the same way water slowly grinds solid rock into sand. It might take a while, but we'll get there. ;)
Report spam or abuse
Zeus was there, he was behind the rock on the left. Take that, atheists.
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK "get your common sense from a book that THEY WROTE!" You keep mentioning the Bible, not me. I am giving you scientific reasons that I believe our universe was either created for some an intelligent purpose, or at least was altered or modified for such.
Report spam or abuse
"how does one go about finding the religion that most accurately describes god?" Like anything else. Study them. Read their religious books like Bibles, Korans & Avestas. See what traits (like belief/disbelief in reincarnation) make them seem more/less likely to you.Now that you believe a god/creator to be likely, think what such an entity would want from us & what it is up to in creating us. Given about 3.8 billion of the 7 billion on earth believe in Abraham's God, look at that one closely.
Report spam or abuse
@bdwilson1000 "so if you believe in god Z on the basis of faith, you are quite likely to be wrong as well." No. It tells you nothing about Z at all. Anymore than Michael Jordan jerseys on the backs of bad basketball players tells you that the real Michael Jordan is a bad basketball player.
Report spam or abuse
With your weak nuclear force example, you are relying on faith again. This is the problem with faith. You can't see the world as anything but designed because you have been indoctrinated that way. There are many other explanations (some with actual evidence backing them up) which you disregard. Why? Why BELIEVE any are true until you're certain. Is a complete assumption enough to make you BELIEVE? This is one of those science arguments I spoke about earlier. And Science IS winning this one.
Report spam or abuse
....They failed because man defined them in a way that could be disproven. Time and time again we created new definitions for our gods (believing they would never be disproven), but they were. Wether it was intentional or not, christianity has defined god in a way that it may be impossible to disprove. But they submit no reason to believe it's true either. No verifiable one...just like all the others. Leaving us to rely on FAITH! No thanks. You rely on faith. I'm tired of being misled.
Report spam or abuse
I loved this video. Thanks for sharing.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Let me get this straight. You WOULDN'T believe 800 scientific-minded people (who are far more educated than people were 2000 years ago) when they claim to see a creature which is physically possible, but, you're CONVINCED that something which we clearly can't explain and has no basis in reality is real because (mostly ignorant) desert-dwellers wrote a book! You've got issues that I'm probably not qualified to deal with. Think about what you're saying. It's completely illogical.
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK "because (mostly ignorant) desert-dwellers wrote a book!" The Bible is not the primary reason I believe in God. I love reading it, but would still believe in a God even if the Bible had not been written. I would note that the primary author of the New Testament (Paul) was born in Tarsus, a large coastal city on the Mediterranean. Paul was a Roman citizen who had their equivalent of PHD studies, having studied at the feet of Gamaliel, a famous teacher then.
Report spam or abuse
Christianity did claim that our universe had a beginning ("In the beginning ...). That is a scientific one. For decades science held to the "steady state" theory that our universe had always been here. Then Monsignor Georges Lemaitre, a catholic priest, publicly proposed the idea now known as the Big Bang. Einstein admitted he was skeptical at first because it fit so closely to Christian dogma. It was proven true by Hubble's work & background radiation. So "every" religious claim hasn't failed.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n "Never proved god false". Well, do you believe in Zeus? Would you consider Zeus to be disproven? Take your pick of pre-christian gods. Are any of them true? They're either true or false. There's not a third option. If they're not true, then they're false. If they're false, how did we decide this? Throughout history we've moved beyond our belief in imaginary gods. Humans finally conjured up this idea of the Christian god only after seeing all the reasons the previous gods failed. They..
Report spam or abuse
@StrikaAmaru ....they decide to put their faith in a massive lightning strike causing the big hole. And yet again, they PROVE this not to be the case, so, they shift propositions to a man-made explosion (which is quickly disproven). Then, many years later, when everyone else can be convinced its not true (because irrefutable evidence isn't enough for some people to disbelieve), they say a plane flew into the building. Forget the fact that they have no reason to believe that anyone knows how....
Report spam or abuse
Faith is the only path to a lie. The only reason faith is given so much credit by the religious is because there is no other way to get to their belief.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n I would be surprised if there were many people still alive during the writing of the gospels. Check out what the average age was back then. It'll put it into perspective. And it's still 2nd hand information passed by word of mouth for many years! Truth can get exaggerated. And noone claimed Jimmy Carter could heal people with a touch, walk on water, or turn water into wine either. That makes it a little bit easier to swallow don't you think!
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK "When science gets is wrong ... When the bible gets it wrong, " You keep running back to the Bible and specific religions. All I am showing you is that our universe is suspiciously tailored for the existence of life. You don't seem to want to address that topic, probably because you know deep down it is true.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n So, if the weak nuclear force were different, we wouldn't be here to be talking about it. We wouldn't be able to say "Didn't that work out pretty good for us? Must have been made just for us huh!". And if the earth were twice as big, we would be probably crawling on the ground discussing how it all worked out just perfectly for us due to the perfect gravitational force. We would adapt to IT, so it would SEEM as though it was adapted for us! Let's stop guessing. Let's prove things.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n "Love your neighbor as yourself" is not a religious claim. What I mean is when a religion makes a claim that there is a creator of the universe. Or that the universe was created in 6 days. Or that there was a massive worldwide flood. Or that there is an afterlife. Or that their god can cure cancer. Or any number of other claims that religions make. These claims are ALL testable by science.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Wrong again.... there are countless people that believe they know what god is yet virtually none of them can agree. The believers have not seen anything but they make CLAIMS. Not only are the claims based on zero evidence but they all argue and contradict each other. That fact is very good evidence that no god exists at all.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n I'm not continuing this debate because I like arguing with you. I'm trying to explain a truth about humanity which (after alot of observation and careful consideration) seems to be irrefutable. We can be easily misled when rely on faith for our beliefs instead of the facts. Intelligent men throughout history have been duped is the his manner and it's unnecessary. I want to help people to understand that there are better ways to realize TRUTH. Faith is unreliable. Do you disagree?
Report spam or abuse
yea, but did you visit Zeus' summer home?
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK So how do you explain Antony Flew, Gerald Schroeder, C.S. Lewis all adult intelligent men who were dedicated atheists far into their adult lives who changed their minds and became convinced of the existence of a God or deity? They aren't ten year olds sent into a creepy house. Nor did their belief come first.
Report spam or abuse
"bigfoot" Say tomorrow we have a new claim of a bigfoot sighting. But this time it is 800 reliable witnesses. A bunch of biology classes & college professors on a field trip saw it up close. That probably still isn't going to prove its existence to me. It could be an elaborate prank being played on them (movie makeup is scary good these days). Or a Zoo's escaped gorilla misidentified. But with your logic having even more witnesses has to make it LESS likely to be true. That's just illogical.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n God isn't the hole, he supposedly CAUSED it! The hole exists. Just as life, the universe, and lots of unexplained things throughout history exist. But the point of the video is proof of god and how when one lie about god is debunked, THEISTS just make god harder to disprove. MOVING THE GOALPOST so to speak. It is truly impossible to disprove ALL notions of god because if I could disprove one, you would redefine god. I debunk, you redefine, I debunk, you redefine. It's unending.
Report spam or abuse
"ARE YOU GETTING ANY OF THIS! DO YOU SEE THE PATTERN? ONE ASSUMPTION AFTER ANOTHER. NONE TRUE" So they are wrong over and over about what caused the hole. Is any of that evidence at all that no hole exists? No. It exists. Follow your own logic stream. You can exhaustively prove that no Leer jets were in the area, that there are no giant birds, or big rocks, but none of that is any evidence against those who say it was a commercial jetliner (so far not disproven), and there is obviously a hole.
Report spam or abuse
@sfg911 "nowhere in "my logic" do I suggest ..." Then you are disagreeing with the video? Because it clearly suggests that so many different religions, agreeing that there is some form of god, but disagreeing on his characteristics and when he might end the world is some kind of evidence against God existing. If you don't consider them "witnesses" at all and totally discount their testimony, then it can't be used as evidence against God's existence either (as the video wants to do).
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n When science gets is wrong, the way we prove that is with MORE science. When the bible gets it wrong, we say we misinterpreted it! It's all up to interpretation. We interpret it in the direction which WE believe to be moral and just. We disregard the parts about slavery, genocide, rape, and child abuse, and so on because we know better NOW. It was acceptable then. Slavery is immoral just like murder. Why didn't god simply say that? Why instruct us to stone people? Should we do that?
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n It does show that those who believed in gods A through Y on the basis of faith reached the wrong conclusion (at least according to your religion), so if you believe in god Z on the basis of faith, you are quite likely to be wrong as well. The point of the video was not that gods don't exist..but that given the huge number of mutually incompatible gods believed in over the centuries, faith is a miserable failure when it comes to discovering truth.
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK The christian God was old centuries before Zeus was ever thought of. The people dreaming up stories of Zeus were just telling garbled versions of the real god. At least they had the common sense to know there had to be such an entity.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n And in your example things like leer jets are known to exist. If people were running out of town claiming a dragon attacked the WTC and another claiming it was the stay-puff marshmallow man, godzilla... etc... I'd assume there was some mind altering drugs involved not that a giant monster of some kind must exist.
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK "Science is winning the arguments on 100 different fronts" Science is answering questions in a 100 different areas that are totally irrelevant to the existence or nonexistence of a God. That is not winning an argument. Religion and science go hand in hand in helping us to understand the universe.
Report spam or abuse
You're thinking like a 2000 year old goat-herder. Probably because you live your life and get your common sense from a book that THEY WROTE! We can see that the river doesn't move for us. We go around or build a bridge. The world isn't adapting to us. We have always adapted to it. We are fortunate to have been on of the few species to have made it this long. It's arrogant to believe that our life is any more significant to the universe than any other animal's. I believe we are very fortunate.
Report spam or abuse
Like the vid, a few flaws, as already pointed out by others, but my main concern is related to the final quotes about the rock and water. Unfortunately, religious folk are likely not educated enough to understand the metaphor, and certainly not open-minded enough to give it any thought.
Report spam or abuse
@sfg911 You hit MY earlier example to him on the head. There's a hole in a building. NOBODY WITNESSED THE CAUSE! Just like nobody "witnessed" god do the things he's credited with! In my metaphorical example, God was the assumed cause which continued to shift every time it was proven to be false. Every time we proved god false throughout history, MAN redefined god (because admitting that there's no God is not an option!) so god would be harder to disprove. We debunk, they redefine, and so on
Report spam or abuse
@bdwilson1000 That may all be well and so when we eventually get there. But aren't we forgetting about something? The very cause of a problem. I do not believe mankind is in a state where it would find correctly identifying the cause to a problem, an easy thing to do. If you would like to talk about stuff like this, let me know. But try and look around, you can see evidence of this, inability to prioritize everywhere. ~Jkun~
Report spam or abuse
@USHOULDTHINK "God isn't the hole, he supposedly CAUSED it! " That doesn't fit with our example. Our example has all the witnesses agreeing there is a hole or damage to the building, but disagreeing what type of plane caused it. Likewise, the religions agree there is a God, they disagree on descriptions or traits. So in our example, the existence of some form of God is what is agreed upon. Thus he represents the hole or damage to the building, the part all witnesses/religions agree upon.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Uh... no. Nowhere in "my logic" do I suggest more witnesses make something less reliable. Do you realize there really are no "witnesses" to any god? What you are talking about is belief (after indoctrination). Nothing more miraculous then telling a bunch of 10 year olds ghost stories then sending them into a creepy old house on a stormy night. Guaranteed they will "witness" a ghost.
Report spam or abuse
"So, if the weak nuclear force were different, we wouldn't be here to be talking about it." Exactly. A universe that isn't seeded with heavy elements, or one composed primarily of helium, simply isn't conducive to any kind of life. There isn't some other life form that can substitute. Life isn't inevitable. It is extraordinary. There wouldn't be any life to adapt to anything. This universe is too suspiciously tailored to be conducive to life. Not just the weak force, many other things too.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
@jjukil Since you know that, you should realize the failure of the logic used in this video. Whether A through Y exist or not has no bearing on whether Z does or not.
Report spam or abuse
religion is the stone the builder refused.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Alright, I'll avoid the bible. You seem to want to. I don't blame you. Life (as we know it) wouldn't exist if the weak nuclear force were different. Emphasis on "as we know it". We have barely scratched the surface of what exists in our single galaxy, LET ALONE THE BILLIONS OF OTHER GALAXIES! How can we even attempt to claim that ALL life that exists would cease when confronted with our clear ignorance toward the universe. We know SOME of the rules, not all of them.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Except Michael Jordan actually exists.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n So you are saying that religion is a matter of preference? It doesn't matter whether or not I think a particular religion is more/less likely, all that matters is the evidence. My opinion on whether or not a certain god exists is irrelevant to whether or not it actually does. Either there is a god, or there isn't. Those are the only 2 options. Believing in god is not a matter of faith, it is a matter of fact.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Jesus's sacrifice moves me too. But it's not a reason to believe he's the son of god, or god himself, or however you christians would like to twist the story. And I believe MOST of his teachings were correct and we should all live by them. That doesn't make him a son of god either. He defended the laws of the old testament and there are lots of things in there that surely you don't think are moral in this day and age. He wasn't always right. Mostly right, but not always right.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n "Admitting the likelihood of a god is just the first step." It's the first MISTAKE! It's the foundation for all the unproven nonsense that follows. Without that "first step" we wouldn't have any reason to attach supernatural claims to unexplained scenarios. We might even try a little harder at seeking realistic explanations for those things. For every supernatural claim, there is a natural explanation. Sometimes very unlikely but entirely possible. Very unlikely things DO happen!
Report spam or abuse
"But it's not really important... people change." That's all I am saying. Not everyone is who they are because of childhood indoctrination. That is an atheist fantasy. There are plenty of adult, intelligent atheists that change their mind to become Christians. Just like some Christians become atheists. In my experience, the Christians I see become atheists do so for emotional reasons, e.g. the loss of a child. The atheists that I have seen converted to Christianity were convinced by reasons.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n I also believe it to be foolish and arrogant to think we know enough to make any claim of what life could or could not exist if the universe were different. All we can speak of is ourselves. Clearly WE wouldn't exist. But your faith-based assumption that we are the only life in the universe, or, that any life out there will exist in a way we can even recognize as life, is the problem. We are ignorant. That much can't be denied. It's arrogant to believe WE are the reason for everything.
Report spam or abuse
...outcome could just as easily be chance as designed, what pushes you in the direction of designed? There is not now and never has been any scientific reason to believe in any intelligent design. Intelligent design is purely faith-based. It stems from religious text. It all begins with religious faith and is trying to find a home in science. But,it's like oil and water. They can't mix. Faith has no business in science. We rejected faith as a path to truth long ago. Hence the scientific method.
Report spam or abuse
Looks like the mountian Top was empty,not even Sasquatch was seen..
Report spam or abuse
Prince Philip aint dead yet, mate. :)
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n They were ignorant people. Ignorant doesn't mean stupid, it simply means NOT KNOWING. There are things that we are ALL ignorant about. But 2000 years ago, they were VERY ignorant. We have learned alot in 2000 years. They MAY have been the most educated back then. But, that wouldn't have been saying much. That was my point. AND THE FACT THAT IT'S ALL IRRELEVANT UNLESS HE WAS ACTUALLY ABLE TO PROVE ANY OF IT! How do you know it wasn't just a fictional story made up by him?
Report spam or abuse
"every religious claim made by every religion hasn't stood up to intellectual or scientific scrutiny" That is a bizarre statement? Since when did science bother itself with examining religious doctrines? Do you mean scientific claims? Because most religions don't really bother with scientific claims very much.I don't even know how science would go about examining a religious claim. How would science address "Love your neighbor as yourself"?You really think that will fall to scientific scrutiny?
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n And by the way, MOST of the people were illiterate and passed these stories on by word of mouth. You DO realize that right? Do you know how the bible came to be? These stories of Jesus were spread by word of mouth by illiterate desert dwellers for many, many years until someone finally documented them. How accurate do you supposed they were after, say, 30-40 years? If you told a story NOW and it spread by word of mouth only for 30 years, would it still be an accurate representation?
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Seems to me the logic is more: a quick look at people wearing Michael Jordan jerseys is not a reliable path to finding Michael Jordan.
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n WOW! You still don't get it! The reasons that people believe in God are the actions they claim he performs. Examples: miracles, creating life, creating the universe, answering prayers, giving us morality, and so on. When you ask someone for their PROOF of god, these are the answers given. Did anyone SEE god do these things? NO! How do we know he did? The book says so. How do we know the book is correct? It's the word of God. But how do we know that there is a God? Because how else....
Report spam or abuse
"there is nothing anywhere or at any time that supports one god story over another" That is changing the question into which story most accurately describes the god that exists. It isn't refuting the point that there most likely is some God of some kind. It is like focusing on whether it was a Leer Jet or a commercial jet hitting the WTC, you may not be able to establish that from the first witnesses, but you can establish from them that some event involving a plane hitting the WTC happened.
Report spam or abuse
i know i'm being picky and you've probably heard it already but prince phillip is definately not dead (as of 8:32 gmt 24/02/2012). great vid still. shame the faith-heads will still be adament that their god is the real deal.
Report spam or abuse
Zeus was a sky god, though he lived on Olympus. Prince Philip isn't dead. blah blah blah, the main point still stands, and I agree. Go science and exploration.
Report spam or abuse
Who Wants to be credible ? Just say "pass" when someone offers " religion" . " Unsalted Atheism " rules supreme. Silence religion into the "shamefully ignorant" , historically framed in all its splendour and extravagance....how deep the shame..,right?
Report spam or abuse
....else do you explain miracles, life, the universe, prayers being answered, morality, and so on! But how do you know god did those things? Because the book says so. How do we know the book is correct? Because it's the word of God. But how do we know there's a god? DO I REALLY NEED TO GO ON? It's called circular reasoning. You get trapped in this circle and everything SEEMS to be verified, but, in reality NOTHING IS EVER REALLY VERIFIED. Nothing about god can be verified. It never has been.
Report spam or abuse
Well done, point well made. If you look at the timeline and history of the human race, we are still crawling out of the dark ages really....Religion will continue to dissolve and facts and logic will slowly take over as explanations of our existence. Sound good? This won't happen in our lifetime. Would love to see it!!!
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Also, if I were writing a story about someone I clearly didn't meet and truly wanted people to believe it, I would surely say that the story came directly from the horse's mouth (so to speak). How could we know it's not false? Maybe it's not false but not an accurate representation of true events either.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n A PhD 2000 years ago was less significant than high school education today (in alot of ways). Just think about how much they DID NOT KNOW! Did they know some things...sure. Science of the natural world...practically nothing. They were good at metaphorical stories and philosophy. Not surprising that the bible is full of both of those things. All of that is irrelevant because it doesn't prove any of what he wrote was true. If Einstein were a Wiccan, would it be the one true religion?
Report spam or abuse
"HOW MANY TIMES WITH YOU THEISTS MOVE THE GOALPOST" Because witnesses are uncertain or wrong about the details of what hit the WTC doesn't mean it wasn't hit. Because some theists are uncertain or wrong about some descriptions of God doesn't mean a God doesn't exist. In fact, some witnesses were accurate when they said that commercial jets hit the WTC. You just have to find the corresponding religion that most accurately describes God. Because all of them agree the WTC was hit (that God exists)
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n The reason I mentioned your faith is that you seem to believe there are no accidents. Everything seems to be designed to you. My earlier point was that if the weak nuclear force were different, we wouldn't be discussing this right now. Meaning that the only way you CAN claim that it worked out perfectly is if it actually DOES work out perfectly. How convenient! In this particular instance, claiming it DIDN'T simply happen by chance I would call a faith-based belief. When the outcome...
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n There are ALWAYS exceptions.... but it's very telling how in virtually every single atheist to religious conversion they always just happen to be lucky enough to have been brought up in (or within) the right one... no matter where they live! And I have to disagree. Most atheist to theist conversions or for emotional reasons and most theist to atheist are because they can no longer believe to transparent arguments... often entangled with bigotry and hate.
Report spam or abuse
@pickles4all "I am still not in a position to believe any of them without evidence" That's fine, but that wasn't what was being claimed. The claim was that so many people believing similar things made those things less likely to be true. Something that flies in the face of logic.
Report spam or abuse
I hope you're right, but for some reason, the human mind has a flaw evolved into it. That flaw makes us ask who made us and why. The question itself is flawed, but it is why every culture of man has created gods against all reason. My fear is that as we try to knock out the old religions, new ones will continue to spring up. The only way anyone can believe in something as ridiculous as Mormonism or Scientology is if there's a basic wiring problem in our brains.
Report spam or abuse
Are we really certain that nobody climbed that rock before 1913? Given that Hannibal crossed the alps, and mankind's curious attitude in general, I'm almost certain that people have tried things like that all the time.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n True, there are common elements, but just because there are common elements to their stories I am still not in a position to believe any of them without evidence. I would be gullible if I believed any of them without evidence. In the case of god, sure there may be common elements, but you can't get from common elements to a specific god with specific characteristics without faith. And faith is nothing more than gullibility.
Report spam or abuse
Brilliant vid although I'll politely point out that Prince Phillip (included in the montage of people thought to be gods) isn't dead yet...
Report spam or abuse
@StrikaAmaru Sorry about the mistake. Didn't mean those comments for you. I got in a hurry. Take care.
Report spam or abuse
@StrikaAmaru .....how a plane could have even existed so many years before they were even invented. ARE YOU GETTING ANY OF THIS! DO YOU SEE THE PATTERN? ONE ASSUMPTION AFTER ANOTHER. NONE TRUE. AND WHEN ONE IS DISPROVEN, ANOTHER EXPLANATION IS GIVEN TO DISPROVE ALL OVER AGAIN, AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN! HOW MANY TIMES WITH YOU THEISTS MOVE THE GOALPOST? HOW MANY TIMES MUST WE DISPROVE YOUR IMAGINARY GOD? Just curious.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Here's your problem, you get confused when a thing happens which is so rare and incomprehensible that it is your first instinct to NOT believe it's true. That's a natural reaction and a logical FIRST reaction. But, you just can't understand that (from time to time) things happen which defy expected odds. It's VERY rare. But, so are the C. S. Lewis's of the world. Would you like a list of theists who became atheists? We can compare lists if you'd like.
Report spam or abuse
....evidence for unintelligent design than intelligent design. More than 90% of all creatures that walked, crawled, or flew on this planet have died off. Would you say THAT was an intelligent plan? Why create a life knowing it wouldn't be able to survive? Intelligent design is an attempt to create a SEEMINGLY scientific explanation for god when there's no evidence for it whatsoever. Religions are throwing things at the wall and hoping something sticks. No self-respecting scientist would accept..
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n I'll grant you that just because people have different descriptions of a thing doesn't mean that the thing doesn't exist. But how does one go about finding the religion that most accurately describes god? Nearly every religion claims to be the one true religion. They all claim that they have the evidence, scripture and logic to back up their beliefs. Yet every religious claim made by every religion hasn't stood up to intellectual or scientific scrutiny. Why is that?
Report spam or abuse
"huge number of mutually incompatible gods believed in' Again you go in the face of logic. Say you are watching 100s of people stream out of New York. Each one goes by with a different story. One says a jetliner hit the WTC. Another a cargo plane. Another person says it was 2 jets. Another crop dusters. As people stream by, all with a different story do you conclude "well nothing must have happened to the WTC, these stories are incompatible." Or do you take the common elements? There is a god.
Report spam or abuse
@Matur1n Sorry... you are ignoring things I am clearly explaining to you. Religions do not have "witnesses" in your examples of the WTC, if someone had a camera could they have taken a picture?? Yes... they actually SAW something. An important step to be considered a "witness". People believe in religion, they do not "witness" it.
Report spam or abuse
Show more Loading...
Sign in to add this to Watch Later

Add to