Fails videos

Funny videos

Atheism 2.0 | Alain de Botton

Publicado el 17 ene. 2012 833.665 visualizaciones

Descargar video: Descargar MP3:

¿Qué aspectos de la religión deberían adoptar (con respeto) los ateos? Alain de Botton sugiere una "religión de los ateos" llamándola Ateísmo 2.0 y que incorpora formas religiosas y tradiciones para satisfacer nuestra necesidad humana de conexión, ritual y trascendencia.

Comments
  • kipupking
    kipupking 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas is this the school of life guy?
  • one iota
    one iota 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Yep!
  • James TunbridgeWells
    James TunbridgeWells 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Yes, but his voice sounds different on "School of life"
  • Devon King
    Devon King 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas A different setting, different pacing, and even a different microphone can do a lot to change the sound of a person's voice
  • James TunbridgeWells
    James TunbridgeWells 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Devon King I think I also had an image of the School of Life narrator in my mind which was very different.
  • Tom Cunnington
    Tom Cunnington 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas I totally thought the same thing
  • MAC KASH
    MAC KASH 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas hey thanx.
  • boycot gugle
    boycot gugle 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas I KNEW it! xD The voice, rhetorics, themes, everything! Thanks^^
  • jh72826 Harris
    jh72826 Harris 1 taon ang nakalipas kipupking HOLY S***
  • Divya Bhusal
    Divya Bhusal 1 taon ang nakalipas kipupking Yesssss he is amazing 😁
  • Pretty Prudent
    Pretty Prudent 1 taon ang nakalipas Thank you, I thought he sounded familiar but I've never seen his face (: (:
  • LuiKang043
    LuiKang043 1 taon ang nakalipas kipupking Yeah. And he speaks loud enough in this video, for a change.
  • Taylor Isaac
    Taylor Isaac 1 taon ang nakalipas it is isn't it!?
  • German Palacio
    German Palacio 5 (na) taon ang nakalipas Morality is what we atheist do best, atheists' morality is the best one
  • Robert LC - Digital Artist
    Robert LC - Digital Artist 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas Of course he's right, except it should be Secularism 2.0 (as atheism is not and should not become an ideology, Atheism+ is proof of that)
  • NihilNoviSubSole
    NihilNoviSubSole 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) @Robert LC - Digital Artist It is an ideology to think that you need not become entwined in an ideology. Just saying, seems legit, 420.
  • Robert LC - Digital Artist
    Robert LC - Digital Artist 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Ulysses P I said the label Atheism should not be transformed into an ideology (not that "you need not become entwined in an ideology") and that it would make more sense to label it Secularism 2.0 Don't try to be clever when you even fail to grasp something as simple as that or actually read another one's comment.
  • NihilNoviSubSole
    NihilNoviSubSole 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Robert LC - Digital Artist I sense a large shaker of salt in your vicinity. And I am glad you think I am trying to be intelligent even when this is YouTube and I mentioned 420.. you must feel threatened in some degree to respond in the fashion you did. I say ideology, because generally speaking, Atheists consider themselves non-religious or secular towards theism (etc). Identifying yourself as, with or separate from something is an example of holding ideals, which is an ideology. I am not going to say something like, "don't try to be clever", because this is YouTube.. But, I do know that Atheists also have a 'label' of being dicks, and that is confirmed once again with you. - Go easy on the salt Mr. Digital Artist.
  • altarush
    altarush 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas +Robert LC - Digital Artist I thought Dawson's Brights were their religion.
  • Akindele Bankole
    Akindele Bankole 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas +Ulysses P Can you please rewrite your commend in a straight forward way. It is not clear to me what side you're on, or what exactly you are trying to convey. Thank you.
  • Gerard Mulder
    Gerard Mulder 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas +Robert LC - Digital Artist Good point, and it changes the whole talk for me into something better. As an atheist, I would be interested in Secilarism 2.0, not in Atheism 2.0
  • NotTrollin
    NotTrollin 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas true
  • Devin Beverage
    Devin Beverage 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas +Robert LC - Digital Artist I think that using the word ‘Atheist’ detaches some of the general closed-mindedness that is often associated with the term. Therefore, one of the functions of ‘Atheism 2.0’ is to destigmatize the term. In addition, ‘Atheism 2.0’ is more relatable/recognizable. The first thing the average person thinks of when they hear ‘Secular’ is “Wait, which one is that again...the god one or the non-church one..?"
  • Hayley bourgault
    Hayley bourgault 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas I think Secularism 2.0 is a contradiction since it involves not being religious. And I get your point on Atheism 2.0. We could just call it Humanism 2.0. It is a shame that there isn't as much American Ethical Union gatherings as there are churches. It is my dream that one day more of those will be around. Thoughts?
  • Tobias Bauer
    Tobias Bauer 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas It's called humanism. The problem is that some Atheists don't get what's the difference. Atheism is just the believe that there is no god, or at least that no human god imagination is right. Humanism is one of MANY different ethic models of it. Therefore asking for a special atheistic model of ethics is in it's own very dumb, but what's in fact very intelligent is the idea to promote humanistic ideas in our own society and creating an humanistic society.
  • Alice DB
    Alice DB 1 taon ang nakalipas if you can not prove with Sciece that something exists or does not exists, then you need FAITH to believe either way, so this concept of atheism you share, is just so misleading, atheism should logically be a : no-part with believes on something and faith. But many many of them actually a believers, because they cannot prove either way, they are therefore just on more religion. Can you prove there is life outside earth? no, can you prove there is no life outside earth? no. So, that should be an atheist, logical and not FAITH based, affirming there is or there is not life with out massive prove of either, is an ACT OF FAITH.
  • zoom
    zoom 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) god have mercy on your soul, for you are wandering the world with silly ideas like that...
  • Khaled Ratul
    Khaled Ratul 1 taon ang nakalipas +Alice DB Absent of faith is not faith. Its not +1 and -1. It's 1 and 0. The burden of proof solely lies on a believer to prove God's existance. It's not possible to disprove something that isn't proven. Even disregarding that, it's not possible to prove God doesn't exist unless you clearly define what God is and what kind of proof would be satisfactory because atheism's always been there but a believer always changes the goalpost. Without pointing at something quantifiable and telling the scientists 'here's my proof', a God isn't needed to fill in any gaps to stop the progress.
  • silence
    silence 1 taon ang nakalipas Atheists are not subjected to the burden of proof, as you can never prove a negative unless clear evidence is given for the positive (wich it hasnt ever). The definition of atheism is the abscence of faith in a supernatural deity. Atheism can still take things on faith, but they arent arrogant or dumb enough to claim those things as facts (like religion does). Atheism is not a religion, and it will never be, its very definition is abscence of religion. You can never prove a negative, therefore atheism is not an act of faith. So next time, try to get things right before you start to argue.
  • Sevil Natas
    Sevil Natas 1 taon ang nakalipas +Tobias Bauer "Atheism is just the believe that there is no god", this is not quite correct. Atheism is just the lack of belief in a god. The difference is between making a claim that there is no god, which of course can't be done, and just not believing in a god. For many Atheists, this belief is based upon the lack of evidence presented by the people making the claim that there is a god.
  • bazil bourgeois
    bazil bourgeois 1 taon ang nakalipas Do you believe your body , life, family and the ground you get to walk on are all a gift or something else? If you believe it is something else then what do you think it is then?
  • Sevil Natas
    Sevil Natas 1 taon ang nakalipas +bazil bourgeois - A gift in what sense? What does that even mean. The religious talk in these nonsensical platitudes that sound deep or meaningful but when you look at them, they mean nothing. A gift? Do you think your life is a spatula, if not what is it?
  • VeroMithril
    VeroMithril 1 taon ang nakalipas Atheism is not an ideology and all Atheists are agnostic. Wanna know why?
  • HP160498
    HP160498 7 (na) buwan ang nakalipas VeroMithril shut up please
  • Skeptics we love you anyway
    Skeptics we love you anyway 1 buwan ang nakalipas @VeroMithril Yes
  • Skeptics we love you anyway
    Skeptics we love you anyway 1 buwan ang nakalipas ​@Sevil Natas But then a great deal of often loud, fumbling and insistant people will claim that it's a certainty there is no God. The truth is, there is a real lack of vocabulary, because those people do exist, and simply call themselves 'atheists', or sometimes 'militant atheists', which isn't adequate enough, and there is still that category that doesn't want to insist that there is no God but despise the concept of agnosticism (I know, cause I was one of them -_- ). I think that A-theism could mean no belief, and Athe-ism, could mean belief that there is no God. If that makes sense. But of course the word being written in one block means we just have to go find the intended meaning in books and early usage of the term. NB : I don't think that what he is talking about is secularism. That's the separation between the Church and the state. He is talking about being an atheist without being a manichean close-minded tyranical and blind a.hole who can see the best of both sides and let live ever side as long as respect of human life is placed as the highest value (as of 7:07, I haven't finished watching). Also, humanism is not an ideology that involves atheism. It is a sentiment in the heart of some people, a value, an ideal, a philosophy, but make being an atheist a requirement is already telling of how much you believe in equality between people and humility, wisdom, spiritual height and friendship.
  • Bishshoy Das
    Bishshoy Das 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Agree.
  • Gerry De naro
    Gerry De naro 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Atheism 2.0^2 Darwin was spot on when he expressed the "horrid doubt" that minds evolved from lower animals are at all capable of knowing and uttering truth. And so we hear many self-defined, semi-evolved, career atheists like Nathan proclaim "atheism is like non stamp collecting is a hobby." Such is the delusional aspirations of deniers who have no idea what scientific naturalism implies. And so they add "atheism makes no claims and "has nothing to prove" These get-out-of-jail claims imply deniers dont have to think about, let alone explain the consequences of *why there is something and not nothing, * how anything let alone the universe could exist at all, if the past is finite, * infinite regress fallacy (the impossibility of matter/energy being infinite or eternal) *design and fine tuning, (the rational comprehensibility of the universe) * origin and existence the immaterial laws of science (metaphysical truths dont even exist if mindless matter is the only game in town aka naturalism) * the language of abstract mathematics that define those laws, * the 30+ unique physical parameters that make this "rock" life-supporting * the biodiversity and abundance of animal and plant life on earth, * the emergence of a sentient intelligent moral human being who could wonder in awe at the beauty, design, and intelligibility of nature. (when a lawless, lifeless chaos would be expected on atheism) * the endless hours wasted by bored, career atheists trying to glorify apparently, an otherwise meaningless life by mocking God and religion *attacking one Scripture they neither understand nor believe a word of, in support of atheism (a complete non sequitur) *the fact that committed Christian lead happier, healthier, longer and more fulfilling lives * the search for a personal loving God has been the most dominant issue in all human history *the love of a mother for her newborn is what defines human nature (proving atheism is not the default worldview) * the very need to have numerous websites, an abundance of literature, hold conventions, fund raising events, merchandise, prove man cannot live without God who constantly seeks us out to come to him.
  • Gabriel Rozin
    Gabriel Rozin 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas A well deserved standing applause. Thank you!
  • alex dornelli
    alex dornelli 5 (na) taon ang nakalipas I'm an atheist who loves to admire churches and the rituals. Its not a contradiction, because many believers also see the logic in my points. Its all about tolearance and learning to live together.
  • lilrog0909
    lilrog0909 4 (na) taon ang nakalipas I couldn't agree even more. I really hate being around militant athiest but I love science and history
  • yiban di
    yiban di 4 (na) taon ang nakalipas haha exactly... thats why even if I'm an atheist I don't mind going to christian churches when my friends/family invite me even if they know I'm an atheist... its fun, especially the rising popularity of having christian bands in it... even plain old catholic homilies... the preachers always tell nice stories that almost always have a good moral and not just because it was what god willed... its also probably the reason why there is no militant atheist, well if there is then there would be barely any militant atheist...
  • Übermensch
    Übermensch 1 taon ang nakalipas Yeah.. so should be flat-earthers, other woofuckery traditional n cultural practices like - tonsuring, god's fetish with circumcision, piercing, angels, spirit, astrology..
  • Lei Robbie Zhang
    Lei Robbie Zhang 8 (na) buwan ang nakalipas How I wish people with religious could think the same way.
  • Kosta Ilijev
    Kosta Ilijev 6 (na) buwan ang nakalipas Religious atheism is the new "in thing!"
  • socksumi
    socksumi 3 (na) buwan ang nakalipas (na-edit) I don't admire religious rituals... at all. Some churches look impressive but it only serves to remind how rich and powerful they are. I recently visited the basilica in Vatican City. The lavishness, the gold, the endless ornamentation is so decadent and over-the-top that it's quite unsettling.
  • Mohammed El Massri
    Mohammed El Massri 3 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @lilrog0909 Belief in a Creator does not necessitate accepting unacceptable dogma . To be a believer you need to believe only three things ... We have been created by God .... There is a Resurrection ..... and there is Accountability . You can imagine God the way you choose as he is unimginable ... But if you are a believer , you know you are not your own boss and that you are under the authority of your Creator .
  • Skeptics we love you anyway
    Skeptics we love you anyway 1 buwan ang nakalipas @Lei Robbie Zhang Atheism can be a faith in the exact same way that some religions are. I personally am a believer without a specific religion. And I believe mostly in things I have experienced and didn't leave much doubt as to the conclusions to be made about them. Reading religious literature and following certain practices helps in getting said experiences, and it is those that guide me in my beliefs. Most atheists have no idea what it is they deny, and what would be required to acquire the necessary experience. You can't look for a new planet with a map from Pirates of the Caribbean.
  • Skeptics we love you anyway
    Skeptics we love you anyway 1 buwan ang nakalipas @Mohammed El Massri I am a believer. In God. In Karma. In magic, sorcery, divination, energy, feng shui, intentions, animism, numerology, souls of people emprisonned in statues and most probably poltergeist and angels. I used to be an atheist who was just draw towards the power of shapes and symbols. Gradually, I have experienced more and more things that have made me believe that nothing really is impossible, and that most people claiming strange things are not only honest but sane. As for Jesus, I am not sure, if that is what you mean by resurrection. We all believe, only the consequences that believing would have makes most of us hide in denial. But deep down we know all, and there is nothing in this world that is actually not possible. Just keep in mind that 'belief' doesn't just mean Abrahamic monotheism or readily and literally accepted written revealed truths.
  • linda linacre
    linda linacre 1 buwan ang nakalipas (na-edit) We don't need it.I suppose some atheists want to bond with others to have some political clout when religious laws get put on legislative agendas in secular societies. I get that. A religious structure isn't necessary to be with others who think as you do. But why do we need to pull people into our thinking. That's a personal thing. Let each figure it out for themselves. We don't need to teach people and direct people towards atheism . That was always my objection to the religions I've encountered. If they are so sure their belief is right then why do they need to push at everyone or revile them for not believing as they "say" they do. If I don't feel it, then I'm not going to lie and pretend I do for the people around me to feel comfortable.(There was a time I did but I have rejected this way of thinking ,but do know many who don't believe but pretend too so they can be around their families without harassment.) does this mean I wouldn't go to a church or temple that family or friend I care about is singing or performing at . Sure , I 'd do that but I wouldn't do the rituals of that church while I was there . The rituals are tedious behaviors of conformity and I don't engage in mindless trained actions.
  • Gerry De naro
    Gerry De naro 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Letting go of reality. Darwin was spot on when he expressed the "horrid doubt" that minds evolved from lower animals are at all capable of knowing and uttering truth. And so we hear many self-defined, semi-evolved, career atheists like Nathan proclaim "atheism is like non stamp collecting is a hobby." Such is the delusional aspirations of deniers who have no idea what scientific naturalism implies. And so they add "atheism makes no claims and "has nothing to prove" These get-out-of-jail claims imply deniers dont have to think about, let alone explain the consequences of *why there is something and not nothing, * how anything let alone the universe could exist at all, if the past is finite, * infinite regress fallacy (the impossibility of matter/energy being infinite or eternal) *design and fine tuning, (the rational comprehensibility of the universe) * origin and existence the immaterial laws of science (metaphysical truths dont even exist if mindless matter is the only game in town aka naturalism) * the language of abstract mathematics that define those laws, * the 30+ unique physical parameters that make this "rock" life-supporting * the biodiversity and abundance of animal and plant life on earth, * the emergence of a sentient intelligent moral human being who could wonder in awe at the beauty, design, and intelligibility of nature. (when a lawless, lifeless chaos would be expected on atheism) * the endless hours wasted by bored, career atheists trying to glorify apparently, an otherwise meaningless life by mocking God and religion *attacking one Scripture they neither understand nor believe a word of, in support of atheism (a complete non sequitur) *the fact that committed Christian lead happier, healthier, longer and more fulfilling lives * the search for a personal loving God has been the most dominant issue in all human history *the love of a mother for her newborn is what defines human nature (proving atheism is not the default worldview) * the very need to have numerous websites, an abundance of literature, hold conventions, fund raising events, merchandise, prove man cannot live without God who constantly seeks us out to come to him.
  • majordendrocopos
    majordendrocopos 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Gerry De naro I am intrigued. You talk of “Many self-defined, semi-evolved, career atheists like Nathan”? How do their numbers compare with the number of career religious people in the world? A drop in the bucket I reckon.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas If you need god to tell you you should not murder other humans, you're a frickin' psychopath.
  • Tizzeres
    Tizzeres 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Chimps murder one another and cannibalise even though it's not necessary. We share a very similar genome to chimps. Hence, why would we be any different. I detest cannibalism and murder but, if my whole life I was taught it was fine and a normal part of life and death, would I be a psychopath?
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Tizzeres Animals are amoral so IMHO statements about moral behaviour can not be generalized to them. On your second point, I would say that such a hypothetical situation, you would not be a psychopath. But we have collectively decided that cannibalism is never allowed and murder is only allowed in some cases and this decision was made before modern monotheistic religions existed (though it might have had more exceptions). So in existing societies you would probably be seen as a psychopath if you thought murder and cannibalism was completely okay. Interesting point, I will think about it some more. #moralrelativism  
  • Tizzeres
    Tizzeres 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Fluxquark That was a very enlightening response. However, where is the evidence that cannibalism was decided as "not allowed"? I myself are not of faith but it's interesting to think how these morals have formed, as we have these set morals that are widely accepted but we could easily have ones that differ- depending on our upbringing. Furthermore, from my knowledge our morals view equality as a good thing and physical violence as bad and emotional violence to some degree but why? I agree with these morals but I was wondering how they could have come to form originally?
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Tizzeres Your guess is as good as mine but I would say that morals started forming when humans lived together in small bands/tribes/villages. Such a tribe would probably be a lot more successful if members of the same tribe did not murder each other because they could spend their energy gathering food and warring against other tribes. Over time, this would lead to tribes with 'moral' behaviour becoming dominant. It's interesting to note that cannibalism was and still is practiced in some parts of the world but usually in wars or rituals (kinda like murder).
  • TheMadMedek
    TheMadMedek 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Religion does offer something that us atheist should take note of. Self reflection on a weekly basis. We should take time to meditate on our daily choices. Atheist "prayer"
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @TheMadMedek Yes! Self-reflection seems to be in short supply nowadays.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Dark Knight Goes into Hiding Just because something is natural does not mean it is morally just or good.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Dark Knight Goes into Hiding No it doesn't. Nature is amoral so you can't argue something is moral because it is natural.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Dark Knight Goes into Hiding In that, you are correct.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Wrong most people kill people they "love". What God shows you is what love really is. This is especially true of the incarnation.
  • ZERO PELAGIO
    ZERO PELAGIO 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Then why is the majority of people in prison religious and not atheist?
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Aaron Siering God does not show you anything because God does not interact with humans (if God exists at all, that is).
  • Randall Donadio
    Randall Donadio 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas By your logic, there is no need for laws. There needs to be a benchmark. Otherwise, what one considers "right" remains highly subjective. This is not a statement for or against theism. Just facts.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Randall Donadio ???
  • Randall Donadio
    Randall Donadio 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Fluxquark Wasn't a reply to you.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark, If God does exist then it is a matter of historical fact that he does interact with humans--in fact incarnated into human nature, himself. That you don't already realize this goes to argue that you are nowhere nearly educated enough on the subject to engage in this discussion intelligently.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Aaron Siering There are no historical facts that point to any god in any shape or form interacting with humans. You seem to be presupposing the existence of god and the truth of the bible so please don't talk to others about how their education is insufficient.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) Fluxquark, I believe that I am in a good position to be able to judge the state of your education based on the naive way you speak about facts and evidence.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Aaron Siering Just so you know my academic training is of sufficient quality to recognize the fact that you are committing an appeal to authority fallacy and referring to nonexistent historical evidence of god interacting with humans (just to be clear, religious texts are not historical evidence). You might have some academic training (BA? MA?), but not enough to mask the fact that you're a religious person with a somewhat loose interpretation of the words "facts" and "evidence". If you really believe you are in a good position to judge the state of my education I suggest you try to guess what degrees I hold. Good luck!
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas InfiniteSkeptic 60, "God is a planed idea" and the evidence for this is? Why would I feel the need to rationalize and ignore your poor arguments--really just a series of naked assertions--by suggesting such you're committing the fallacy of many questions by implying that I could not be interested in truth and dedicated to reason. That you may, yourself, sincerely believe this only reflects your own bigotry or bias.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark, there is nothing to be recognized as intelligent in your comment. There are no actual arguments, only biased bare assertions based on your emotions.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Aaron Siering, are you serious? I actually thought you were slightly more intelligent than most religious people up until your last comment but you seem to be so delusional that actual rational people seem crazy in your eyes. I hope you will find your way in the future.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas InfiniteSkeptic 60 first, you're deflecting and second, everybody's a "religious person", because the most basic question: is the world dysteleological or teleological is an extra-scientific one. In other words, the later is not a question we can answer through science but rather a belief that we bring to any interpretation of the raw data produced by scientific investigation. In relationship to this, whether or not one is a member of a formal religion is relatively trivial. In short everyone has a mythological commitment that precedes their scientific beliefs. "Mythological" because it is predicated upon extra-scientific beliefs and functions epistemologically as a type of origin narrative, giving context to the world. And again this is true of everyone irrespective of if they have commitments to a formal religious belief system. Fundamentally, atheism is just an informal religious belief. Nice ad hominem, btw. Really, when arguing with someone like you I needn't bothered to have done any work at all, because you are more than happy to prove my case for me. I mean your comment demonstrates just how irrational, emotionally driven, and bigoted you really are.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Aaron Siering Extra-scientific beliefs are not necessarily of a religious nature. I can believe that the sky is orange. No need for any religious interpretation. You are mistaken once again.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark, well I have a moment of free time so let's look at what made it such a stupid comment in my opinion: Just so you know my academic training is of sufficient quality to recognize the fact that you are committing an appeal to authority fallacy and referring to nonexistent historical evidence of god interacting with humans (just to be clear, religious texts are not historical evidence). You aren't actually responding to my argument at all. You're simply reasserting you own previous naked assertion. Now granted my own admission that I had academic training in the philosophy of science was a little silly, but really I just meant it to serve as short hand way of demonstrating that I do, in fact, have a rather sophisticated understanding of what counts for evidence and what constitutes knowledge. In light of this, your parenthetical is just an immature insult meant to deflect from the real issue we are discussing. Where in your argument that is not actually an argument but rather just an ignorant opinionated assertion and your further attempts to deflect should I find the evidence of your "rationality"?
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) InfinteSkeptic 60, even after I call you out on it you can't really help yourself can you? Thanks for the laugh, and again doing all my work for me. Allow me to quote you in full in case you come to your senses and delete your comment: You're old "you are but what am I?" pathetic response is horrible. Please grow up and start using logic, skepticism and intellectual honesty and quit being an intellectually brainwashed infant. And if course you misunderstand what "ad hominem" entails. I didn't say your argument was pathetic because you're a brainwashed dolt; just that using such lame arguments make you a brainwashed dolt. Nice word salads thrown in there. deepak chopra would be proud. P.S. also perhaps you should learn what an ad hominem fallacy actually is. It is not a mere insult, but rather it is the attempt to discredit an argument by insulting the person instead of actually addressing their arguments. I wouldn't accuse you of making an ad hominem just because you said something disparaging about me. I realize you are a low class individual and so can't really help yourself in this regard. No rather it is your attempt to substitute these insults for actual rebuttals that I was addressing. That is what made it a fallacious form of argumentation. A case in point was your attempt to dismiss my argument that we all necessarily have (what I've termed) a mythological commitment that precedes any scientific theory building by calling my comment a "word salad". Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean that it isn't perfectly cogent and well articulated--or maybe it does in your world, lol. In any event, an intelligent person would ask clarifying questions when they don't understand something as opposed to simply dismissing it out of hand.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Aaron Siering You asserted that there is historical evidence that god has interacted with humans so the burden of proof is on you. It is impossible to prove that something does not exist so it is up to you to prove that the evidence you are referring to does exist. You should know this if you want to make claim to having a sophisticated understanding of evidence and knowledge.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark, the reality is that you simply ignored that my original statement was a conditional. Perhaps you should go back and read it again--this time with the kind of care that bespeaks actually having some intelligence.... The point being that if it were the case then the conclusion would follow logically. The take away then is that I was demonstrating that you can't say that it is, in fact, not the case. Rather, it is merely your belief that it is not the case. What I was really attacking was the unwarranted and ridiculous certainty you are placing in your own beliefs.
  • Randall Donadio
    Randall Donadio 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) Lol, this is why I think I am going to remove all Atheist videos and channel recommendations from my feed. Not because of atheism but simply because the comment section and videos are full of the same cycle of logical fallacy. Atheist argues "argument from ignorance" fallacy. Theist argues "proving non existence" fallacy. If you want to have an intellectual debate -- YouTube is a terrible place to start. These channels and people have already established their position. They have no desire (not that there is anything wrong with that) to even discuss the possibility of the adverse. As a result, these arguments are futile and redundant.
  • Randall Donadio
    Randall Donadio 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) @InfiniteSkeptic 60 "We aren't saying with an absolute certainty that there isn't a god just how unlikely and why; especially the god of the bible which can be shown to be nonsense in oh so many ways." Yes, I know. My point was that atheists are calling out theists for "argument from ignorance" fallacy and theists are calling out atheists for "proving non existence" fallacy (whether incorrect or not, it's what they keep accusing atheists of doing). It's the same argument everywhere. It's redundant, adds nothing to the discussion and is frustrating for people like myself who look to discuss these things and exercise the mind. But thank you for proving my point that these comments exhibit pointless banter. You're trying to argue with someone not even arguing with you (me).
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Aaron Siering Yeah your statement was a conditional but still wrong. Because even if god is real, it is not a historical fact that god interacts with humans. Because there is no historical proof of this. Why am I so sure of this? If there was historical proof then the percentage of atheists/agnostics wouldn''t be growing as people got more educated, it would, in fact diminish. It might still be true that he did interact with humans and we don't know but as we have zero historical proof it's categorically false to claim that it is a historical fact. You seriously are pretty dumb for someone so articulate.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @InfiniteSkeptic 60 I agree that morality keeps evolving as our civilization grows older and hopefully we will actually learn what is right in time. However I do also think that we sometimes take steps backwards on certain issues. For example: In the Western world, the idea that being poor is caused by your own bad decisions is pretty pervasive and this is causing a lot of harm because it influences policy and prevents us from actually solving poverty-related problems. In the past, while it had other problems, you were born into a poor class and thus determined to be poor so you were unlucky, but not necessarily of poor character. A similar problem is our current approach to debt. Greece is being held accountable for lending too much and has to pay back pretty much all of it while in past times it would have been recognized that the unrepayable debt is both the debtor's and the lender's fault and would have been erased. On social issues, things are definitely progressing though (except in the US) and we have made great progress in the past couple of decades.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas There is historical evidence that there was a person that we would say is Jesus, yes. But there is no evidence that he had supernatural qualities. And you are so extremely wrong about Alexander. We have found coins with his name and face, from when he lived, in locations that belonged to his empire. It's independent confirmations like these that provide strong historical proof and this is why we can assert with confidence that Alexander existed. There is no independent confirmation of the supernatural events from religious texts and considering people can write down whatever they want, texts in themselves prove very little.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Randall Donadio, the point isn't really to convince the other person, but rather to present a counterpoint for any interested third party who may be reading these comments. I have no illusions about Fluxquark's intellectual abilities, but it does give me a chance to refine my own arguments and allows other person's a chance to see a cogent response to fallacious argument.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) Fluxquark, "... there is no historical proof of this. Why am I so sure of this? If there was historical proof then the percentage of atheists/agnostics wouldn''t be growing as people got more educated, it would, in fact diminish." Is this really an assumption that bears itself out? If there were a God and Christianity were true might there not be other reasons that people would reject it? I know for a long time I was an atheist, although really in hindsight more of an agnostic in that I found many of the metaphysical arguments compelling but the created zero ability for me to actually believe it nonetheless. My conversion was actually more complex than I will share here (mainly to keep my comment short and more focused), but at some point I started looking at the historical evidence. Just look at the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. This was a concerted effort to produce a biography/history by the standards of the day. It is by Greco-Roman standards a rigorous work of Greco-Roman biography/history, although not by those of modern scientific history. The historical evidence for Jesus is the same if not better for the historical evidence for Alexander the Great--but the sources are actually much better. Our best sources for Alexander was written 400 years after his death. By the standards of ancient history our the historical evidence for the Christ is tremendous. So your argument is paramount to dismissing all ancient history as being beyond any historical proof, which is not a mainstream view at all. I have no explanation for the spread of Christianity in first century Palestine if those people didn't believe these accounts, and no explanation for why they would have believed it if were not true--and believe me I've thought hard and deep about this, so any objection you're likely to bring up I've already thought through with far more rigor and erudition than you are likely capable and found it unconvincing. Now don't take this as challenge or a threat to your own beliefs. You are free to reject the evidence for whatever reason, but you can't say that there is no evidence at all. That's just stupid or so blindingly biased that is it amounts to the same thing. The fact is that the evidence by the standards of ancient history are really fantastic, so it is just manifestly a false statement to say that there is no evidence at all. Even just looking at the pre-Christian scriptures. Basically the Hebrews took the literary forms and stories of the greater Mesopotamian area and shifted there emphasis to communicate a new understanding of a transcendent source of Being, itself, which was unique to the Biblical stories and that was also later arrived at through Aristotle and Greek reason. That to say a Being that was the simple (non-compound), transcendent source for the contingent world. So if God--and by God we always mean something transcendent to contingent reality, that is pure act absolutely simple, as opposed to say gods which are themselves a product of contingency--exists your saying this is just a coincidence? That is too far fetched for me to accept myself, and ironically if the Judeo-Christians were uninspired then they are paradoxically even more worthy of respect and veneration as a document of human genius. So the first tip off to me that someone is irrationally biased regarding content of the Judeo-Christine scriptures is their irreverence for them. No either there is no God in which case we have an incoherent metaphysics that ultimately undermines science as being something other than just a driver of technology because a consistent understanding of the reality is beyond us, or there is a God and his appearance in both the Hebrew scriptures and later Greek thought was no accident. The bottom line, however, is that a modern education only prejudices one against looking at what evidence there is as one become more likely to simply dismiss it out of hand as you've shown. What you are actually arguing for here and attempting to defend is a philosophical Positivism. I see this all the time at the institution that I am at. How we teach philosophy and train scientists, and I see how increasingly an academic education is merely an indoctrination into a worldview that if anything trains one in what evidence to accept and what evidence to ignore. I started to comment with you because I saw that you in a very naive and unsophisticated way were arguing for this ideological perspective--one that yourself have been indoctrinated into. What we are really arguing about here are two respective worldviews and not evidence. Your attempt to make it about evidence is just to beg the question of your own worldview and that ultimately is my only point.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Aaron Siering There is historical evidence that there was a person that we would say is Jesus, yes. But there is no evidence that he had supernatural qualities. And you are so extremely wrong about Alexander. We have found coins with his name and face, from when he lived, in locations that belonged to his empire. It's independent confirmations like these that provide strong historical proof and this is why we can assert with confidence that Alexander existed. There is no independent confirmation of the supernatural events from religious texts and considering people can write down whatever they want, texts in themselves prove very little.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @InfiniteSkeptic 60 I like to think that most people are sane and rational but I suspect I am deluding myself :'( Have a good day!
  • Parched Pinemarten
    Parched Pinemarten 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas The reason many of us don't do 'bad things' is because of conscience, and conscience ultimately derives from God. Without conscience, there is no sense of somebody watching us. No sense of justice or virtue. No sense of our actions having any immediate significance other than their immediate effect.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Parched Pinemarten Conscience does not necessitate the existence of a god, nor does it derive from one. And I sincerely hope there is more that prevents you from immoral behaviour than the sense of somebody (god) watching you. Maybe a consideration for the well-being of your fellow humans?
  • Parched Pinemarten
    Parched Pinemarten 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Fluxquark I never stated that God exists. I believe it's fundamentally crucial that we continue to believe in his existence as a combatant against immoral behaviour. The belief in God doesn't inform my morality, it gives it meaning.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Parched Pinemarten You did not state that god exists but think it's of prime importance to believe he does? It sounds an awful lot like you believe he exists. And why do you need a supernatural being judging you to behave morally? Why not just do it for the sake of others?
  • Randall Donadio
    Randall Donadio 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark Believing he exists and claiming he exists are two different things. Despite the regurgitated morality discussions from celebrity atheists -- I'm inclined to agree. There's something humbling about a powerful person such as a president or celebrity that gets on his knees at night and believes there's someone who judges even him. I think morality is still a valid discussion. Especially since there are plenty of immoral corporate and bank executives that I'm forced to think would be less inclined to make the decisions they do if they believed their actions were actually being judged. But that's as much a systematic issue as it is a religious one.
  • Parched Pinemarten
    Parched Pinemarten 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Fluxquark Randall said it very clearly. Whether God actually exists or not is irrelevant; the belief is what's relevant. Of course it's possible to be moral without Christianity, but only for individuals. It is my view that it does not work as a concept in societies, and will inevitably result in secularism. I'm from the UK and the growing rise in loud-mouth atheism is now a problem. The Soviet Union was atheist and look what happened. For a brief while, abortions outweighed the number of live births, churches were destroyed, morality went black and white. Atheist societies and regimes end with violence.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Parched Pinemarten @Randall Donadio The examples you two are providing have nothing to do with atheism. I will address the most egregious one first because it's infuriatingly inaccurate. Implying that the Soviet Union had those problems because of atheism is insultingly stupid. Dictatorial, oppressive regimes end with violence and even if atheism played a role here, it would still be a horrendously stupid argument considering the horrible violence committed by religious leaders (Aztec sacrifices, kings doing whatever they want, the crusades, the holocaust etc. etc.). Arguing that religion helps keep leaders humble and "in line" is more reasonable but not a good argument for your positions because: 1) Religion does not have that high of a success rate at keeping leaders in check (see the previous argument). 2) Religious morality has all kinds of horrible outdated elements which have no place in modern society (discrimination against LGBT people, not allowing the consumption of certain foods or drinks, not allowing certain medical procedures etc.) 3) There are different, more effective ways of keeping a leader in check without having to rely on a supernatural entity that might not exist. Having a strong democracy with checks and balances and separation of powers have proven extremely effective at protecting citizens and are secular values. If you feel inclined to disagree, remember that kings and nobles could basically do what they wanted. I will admit that few countries have a strong democracy nowadays and the US is certainly not one of them, neither is the UK. But blaming atheism instead of the incessant and corrupting influence of large corporations and private wealthy individuals is intellectually lazy and factually incorrect. There are some laws that keep corporate and financial executives in check but considering nobody went to jail for causing the 2008 crisis they evidently aren't enforced properly. Since most individuals and companies that caused the crisis are from the US, whose leaders have overwhelmingly been christian, it seems the christian wholesomeness you suppose hasn't motivated these christian leaders to hold those responsible accountable. Perhaps they think god will judge the culprits so there is no need for them to act? In any case, your argument does not seem to hold up to scrutiny at all.
  • Parched Pinemarten
    Parched Pinemarten 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Impossible strawman arguments.
  • Randall Donadio
    Randall Donadio 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) @Fluxquark There are different, more effective ways of keeping a leader in check without having to rely on a supernatural entity that might not exist. Which is why I said it's as much of a systematic issue as it is a religious one. If you missed this then you're selectively reading. If not, you're being intellectually dishonest. horrible violence committed by religious leaders (Aztec sacrifices, kings doing whatever they want, the crusades, the holocaust etc. etc.). I hate when people use these examples. The holocaust had nothing to do with religion (it was about ethnicity, German as the "master race") and religion is responsible for less than 2% of all people killed in warfare. Again, intellectually dishonest and a statistical fallacy. The examples you two are providing have nothing to do with atheism. I never said it did, yet you use examples of religious leaders who killed in the name of other reasons yet cling to the fact that they are (may have been) religious. Just because Jews were killed in the Holocaust does not mean it was a war based on religion. Don't be hypocritical in your examples and don't resort to ad-hominem. The notion that anyone who shares an opposing view to atheistic human secularism is an 'idiot' for having an intellectual discussion makes you sound like a bigot. Atheism is not a benchmark for intelligence so stop acting like it is.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Randall Donadio Apologies, I didn't formulate what I meant clearly enough. Giving a bad example of an atheist government that does horrible things does not prove that atheism necessarily leads to violence. If we were going by that logic, religion would also necessarily lead to violence because there are examples of religious leaders committing violence. Examples are just that, examples. I did read your point about it being a systemic issue but I think it's mostly a systematic issue and not a religious one because even leaders that claim to be christians, like all US presidents, seldomly make decisions based on their religion. Strategic considerations dominate, and pleasing your donors and companies is of high strategic value :( I agree about Alan Greenspan and Obama, they just continued the deregulation policies that started with Clinton and it's clear that this approach is unsustainable and highly undesirable. Currently the financial philosophy seems to be: Risks should be public, profits should be private. I will check out that documentary, thank you for the recommendation!
  • Damasn
    Damasn 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas think back to the ancient medieval times where killings are common, wether it is to protect your loved ones, or to achieve your goals. They have been desensitized to how horrible it is, unlike today.
  • SelfReferencingName
    SelfReferencingName 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas You've totally missed the point. You'd be shocked by how easily it is to justify the killing of another person when it's not explicitly and strictly forbidden by a religious law that transcends any earthy circumstance. People almost always think the killing they're doing is justified in some way. The Ten Commandments are like moral building blocks upon which to build an ethical system: they establish the absolutes. Think of Descartes' "I think therefore I am" method of finding the building blocks for knowledge. There's nothing in our DNA that tells us not to kill, as other animals do. Your point on sociopathy concerns social behavior, which is not hard-wired in to humans but is formed through culture and behavior, which is able to degenerate into savagery (or progress into political violence perhaps). They're commandments, not advice, and ritualised into people's lives. The smug joke that they're stupid and that one is above the teaching is foolish, whether atheist or not. Don't pass off the power of ritual, however tempting it is to resist it and think you don't need to be told the same thing twice, or that you will always grasp the importance of fundamental morals.
  • Hope Hill Farm
    Hope Hill Farm 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas +SRName I have no problem with rituals, but I think it is you who have missed the point, deontologies are the enemy of reason, and are more like the immoral building blocks that found obedience and duty, which never question authority or necessitate self correction. Smug or not, if you need to be told not to kill, not only are you stupid, but you are extremely dangerous and quite possibly a psychopath.
  • David Frisken
    David Frisken 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas +SelfReferencingName Look up humanist. Most people live in a society which has laws and courts etc, so you really are making no sense. Society has developed to restrict harm. This we have done despite the church's ancient values, on the worth of human life.
  • Fluxquark
    Fluxquark 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas +SelfReferencingName Were it not for the fact that most religious texts contain explicit passages on how unbelievers, heretics and people of different religious must be killed, shunned or otherwise harmed, I might agree with you somewhat. But as has correctly been pointed out by other people and history itself, religion is and always has been an extremely ineffective tool to prevent murder. Secularism, rationalism and humanism have yielded far better results in preventing people from murdering others despite the corrupting influence religion has on the mind.
  • SelfReferencingName
    SelfReferencingName 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark The New Testament supersedes the Old Testament. The old passages like you cannot have tattoos/sparing the child the rod/stoning etc. are not law. In Christianity you follow the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus which preach love for all, unconditionally, and for forgiveness. I can't honestly say the same about Islam.
  • NihilisticAngst
    NihilisticAngst 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas TheMadMedek meditation is not prayer, really. You're just calling it "prayer" to make it seem religious, when it's really not.
  • David Vázquez
    David Vázquez 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas You have no idea what a psychopath is, do you?
  • Hope Hill Farm
    Hope Hill Farm 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas +DavidVazquez I think he does. As defined by the D.S.M., the god of the old testament would certainly qualify.
  • Niryaad Oblum
    Niryaad Oblum 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark that's a very void full statement
  • Dominik MJ
    Dominik MJ 1 taon ang nakalipas @Fluxquark The issue here is that all modern societies are heavily influenced by religions. In fact, there are tribes, which were discovered to have cannibalistic rituals. Are these cultures psychopaths? Nope - they just didn’t had the influence of religions (and let’s face it - religions are around since a very very long time - even before Christ or Mohammed were born!
  • Hope Hill Farm
    Hope Hill Farm 1 taon ang nakalipas +Dominik MJ The guy in the pot says yes.
  • **
    ** 1 taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark trump
  • David Song
    David Song 1 taon ang nakalipas The urge/willingness to kill is in all of us, but it comes out in different circumstances and depending on that circumstance society deems it ok or not ok. Aka self defense war vs serial killings.
  • Zee Ferg
    Zee Ferg 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) so just logically speaking, by default we all have certain immoral desires that lay wait until certain seducing moments (temptation; the tempting moment or urge to bring harm to someone who treats you poorly or threatens you, for example). It is very natural. Having something in place, a law, a guide or so, that pin points these corrupt yet natural desires and their negative side effects allows us to keep a vision on the importance of staying away from 'em. Like the saying, 'keeping your eyes on the prize', or 'Keep focus', or 'tunnel visual'; these are all appropriate phrases to what God's law is, essentially. So, it's not so much mindlessly following something with void, but, more so, like yielding to a profound manuscript to aid in the journey of life. Like a manual for building something; you do not have to read it to build the thing, you have free will, you can certainly do away with that manual and just go for, but the manual sure would help and make life much easier
  • Dominik MJ
    Dominik MJ 1 taon ang nakalipas I think, that the premises "immoral desires" and "seducing moments” are not very scientific. Evolutionary hurting someone would be pretty neutral: it would be disadvantageous to hurt someone in the only clan - but probably advantageous if hurting someone outside (a rivaling clan).
  • BlacksmithTWD
    BlacksmithTWD 1 taon ang nakalipas +Fluxquark "If there was historical proof then the percentage of atheists/agnostics wouldn''t be growing as people got more educated, it would, in fact diminish." Nonsense, if this kind of reasoning were valid, were you born in a time where the number of religious people committed to a certain specific religion were growing, you would see this as evidence that particular religion was true. Hereby making your definition of whats true or not totally dependant of what time/culture you were living in, so totally subjective rather than objective, wich you claim to be.
  • BlacksmithTWD
    BlacksmithTWD 1 taon ang nakalipas +Fluxquark "Conscience does not necessitate the existence of a god, nor does it derive from one" Here you clearly demonstrate the troublesome position most atheist i spoke are in. You have a clear conception of what god is, and what god is not, but you don't believe it. So the moment anyone uses the word god, your pavlov reaction is to not believe it, irrelevant of what the context the word god was used in is. The sad thing is that most atheists are not even aware of they are doing so, depriving them of valuable insights and ideas. Perhaps you can get out of this conditioned behaviour by practicing substitiution. So when someone utters the word god, try replace it with another word so the uttered sententence starts making sense. Words you can try to substitute the word god are for example "universe', "culture" , "humanity". So for instance when someone says "we get our morals from god" wich i assume sounds rather silly to you. Try think of the sentence as "we get our morals from the culture we were born and raised in" and it will probably make abit more sense to you. This way, though you still may be getting slightly besides the point of what the one you spoke to intended, at least you get alot closer to what the one you spoke to meant than the way you currently seem to do.
  • BlacksmithTWD
    BlacksmithTWD 1 taon ang nakalipas +Zuriel Ferguson Only if one is able to understand what the munual is referring too. A written description in a foreign language can be a very usefull and accurate manual, but only to the ones who speak that language. So to use any manual requires certain basic skills. For people deprived of one of the nessesary skills the manual is pretty useless, the problem is that most atheist, rather than attempting to learn the additional skills required, they tend to try to convince the ones who already have the skills required that the manual is useless, wich for the ones who got the right skillset obviously isnt. At least to me most usually sound alot like a person not able to do simple calculations correctly claiming that differential equasions are bullshit, and even worse, they claim that one doesnt need to learn 1+1=2 as that is just bullshit as well. Now I don't mind that much they are depriving theirselves of the gain, but they are corrupting others into believing that this is a righteous attitude.
  • Zee Ferg
    Zee Ferg 1 taon ang nakalipas In laymen's terms, you are saying Holy Texts as a life manual or guide is only capable of being directed and effective for a few selected amount of individuals, and these individuals then try forcing others who are incapable of understanding this ultimate life guide into doing and believing them against their will? and corrupting those who can not take on this collection of scripts?
  • Dominik MJ
    Dominik MJ 1 taon ang nakalipas It is actually very interesting... throughout the millennia, there were people, who wanted that "the people" can read and understand the bible (not sure about the other holy texts). But even though they translated the texts (and published them), there was still a lack of understanding. And the institutions (church) still could tell people basically anything they could benefit from. It seems almost like a "Trump'ish" manipulation - people can see it directly in front of their eyes (and check it) and yet a big part of the population listens what "the wrong leaders" are saying...
  • BlacksmithTWD
    BlacksmithTWD 1 taon ang nakalipas +Zuriel Ferguson I'm saying that, if one vieuws a holy text as a life manual, the same goes for it as for other manuals. So when you compare it for intance to a manual on how to assemble an ikea cabinet, there are wise and less wise ways to approach it. Now assuming one who wants to assemble the cabinet neatly, and not chop it up for firewood directly, there is a choise. Does one even start looking for the manual, or does one just pack out the stuff of the box, lay it on the floor, watch it, think on how to assembe it, and assemble it without ever bothering to look at the manual that came with it. Some people are capable of doing just that with a very neat cabinet as a result. So it would be silly in such case to force that person to use the manual. Some people try use the manual but don't know how to interpret it as it was intended (we are assuming a correct guide here of cause, wich by no means will always be the case) and even though they use the manual and try hard, they still end up with a crooked cabinet, if at all. Now i think can think up several different scenarios of wich some will end up in a beautiful cabinet, others in abit crooked but still usefull cabinet, some with a useless pile of partly assemble construction parts and some with just a heap not even suitable for firewood. And think of all the different ways , both with using the manual and with not using the manual wich could lead to all these different outcomes. Then I would for say the ones able to understand the manual, and not belong to the group of natural talents that would not need the manual to assemble a beautifull cabinet, they be better off using the manual.
  • Zee Ferg
    Zee Ferg 1 taon ang nakalipas @blacksmithTWD Ah, I see. well yes, I actually agree with you on that when you say 'there are wise and less wise' approaches to going about following such instructions. I mean, look at those who go astray from what God, our creator, has inscribed in the Holy texts; those who reject Biblical teaching entirely are some of the most lost, deprived, depressed, and impatient people. While those who are closer to following this ultimate manuscript of life, have more of an idea of how to go about daily functions to sustain and survive. So yes, I'd say, there are an infinite amount of routes one can take, in life, thanks to freewill, though, once a person dig deeper into the Holy Scriptures, use it as a manual of life, and such, this person gets closer to truth, purpose, and overall understanding on how to approach life itself and all of its daily nuances. I am not saying that anyone who reads this Bible will have it all figured out, in fact, many people read bits and pieces of the Bible, know a little bit of it, but end up misunderstanding or taking it out of context in many regards and are some of the most secular minded individuals there are. ----- The man in this video says himself he is secular minded (really into secularism), did he possibly take the Bible out of its original context or misinterpret? Did he even read it? Can one judge the viability and truthiness of something without even ever knowing what it is all about? Many make this mistake. Anyways, so reading this ultimate text doesn't improve your life right away, but with diligence and an open mind, one can see a bit clearer and clearer each day, and if someone makes it a lifestyle choice to, not mindlessly follow random words, but with purpose use this book as a way to simply understand how to go about daily life, they can benefit greatly. If I am a novice, and I want to build a PC (which I will be doing soon), this PC build will be far better and easier if I use a guide, this guide can be written online in a blog post, on here on youtube. Having the bible is quite like that, only more powerful; something inspired by the creator of humanity and the universe, written to guide us, inspire us, and give us better insight on various aspects of life.
  • BlacksmithTWD
    BlacksmithTWD 1 taon ang nakalipas +Zuriel Ferguson I'm glad we can agree about that. I think these days many misconceptions about what the bible is about is caused by reading it as a science book, wich of course it is not as it has been assembled over 1500 years ago and science as we know it today only started about 500 years ago.
  • A m
    A m 1 taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark it's more personal. Napoleon was atheist so is every man behind every genocide.
  • Martin Liza
    Martin Liza 1 taon ang nakalipas One can be a criminal and be happy because the ability to be is more important than empty commitment to moral principles
  • Space Orbis Gaming
    Space Orbis Gaming 1 taon ang nakalipas As an atheist I do I guess meditate on things I have said or did I ask myself would I be X if I was born at this time or place. It's why I'm an atheist that and the bible and talking about god helped make me one. It's sad in a way so many don't ask themselves why they do the things they do.
  • Pete Miller
    Pete Miller 1 taon ang nakalipas I believe Stalin would disagree with you.
  • E Mans
    E Mans 1 taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark what you fail to see is that everything you know now when you were a baby you didn't babies don't know right and wrong does that mean they are psychopaths?
  • E Mans
    E Mans 1 taon ang nakalipas Fluxquark don't you atheist say that we are animals then why don't we act viciously and as immorally as animals it is a basic human instinct to protect than to think selfishly like protecting young yet animals survive selfishly
  • Damon Sade
    Damon Sade 10 (na) buwan ang nakalipas Exactly what I was saying, no one listens, no one understand and they think it's you who is stupid ._.
  • Shueps x
    Shueps x 9 (na) buwan ang nakalipas (na-edit) Dominik MJ Those tribes had their own religions or believe systems that may have allowed or encouraged cannibalism. Religion promotes unethical things as well. Murder and other crimes are condemned by many different cultures with very different religions, why would be religion the key to achieve a moral society? I think conscience is not religion derived. Someone set as an example of lack of morals the chimpanzees. True, they murder and comit cannibalism. But they have also shown altruistic behaviour, in a study with two chimps, they gave food to one of them, every time he picked up food they gave an electric shock to the other chimp, they stopped eating when they make the connection between their reward and the suffer of one of their kind. Not for a little while, but to the point of starvation. That's a pretty moral choice, and considering how many terrible things we have done and keep doing to eachother as humans, it doesn't seem like religion has helped us that much.
  • Shueps x
    Shueps x 9 (na) buwan ang nakalipas A Mianaby that's just not true
  • Shueps x
    Shueps x 9 (na) buwan ang nakalipas E Mans We behave in bad and good ways, just like animals. Animals do make selfless acts for their offspring, their groups etc... And we spoiled our kids with things they can live without instead of sending that money to save kids that we don't know from deseases or starvation
  • Jo Brill
    Jo Brill 7 (na) buwan ang nakalipas What an idiotic statement. No Christian needs God to tell them that. Grow up and get a more cogent argument.
  • Kosta Ilijev
    Kosta Ilijev 6 (na) buwan ang nakalipas Psychopaths think they are their own God!
  • biju joze
    biju joze 1 buwan ang nakalipas And that's why without these basic guidelines you many psychopath with complete liberty thinking they can do any damn thing go around murdering people, go check the history of lunatics
  • biju joze
    biju joze 1 buwan ang nakalipas Oh yeah and simple act of abusing animals by some.kids have led these kids some of the horrible murderers in our beautiful far left society
  • JOHN L OPPERMAN
    JOHN L OPPERMAN 1 buwan ang nakalipas Bilble ORDERS murder, assassination, local/regional genociderape, RAPE, RACISM, SLAVERY, ETC, IN ADDITION TO DIRECT GOB SLAUGHTERS, WORLD-WIDE GENOCIDE. ETC, ETC...
  • JOHN L OPPERMAN
    JOHN L OPPERMAN 1 buwan ang nakalipas Sorry for shouting. Accidentally premature rough post w/o editing/finalization. The message however is clear.
  • Beatrix Sullivan
    Beatrix Sullivan 1 buwan ang nakalipas tru dat
  • 吴裕泉
    吴裕泉 1 buwan ang nakalipas @Tizzeres psychopath is genetic, so it does matter what you are taught, it matters what you feel like to do instinctually.
  • J M
    J M 1 buwan ang nakalipas Fluxquark what about the people that need god to tell them who is an infadel that should be killed? What about the people that need to hear either point from Satan or even the invisible man at the center of the sun? Yes of course some people have critical thinking shortcomings. The big bang and evolution are the effect of the work of god and gods will. Humans debate everything because I he you them They she said so. But being an atheist is really just a refusal to consider facts and their associated relativity.
  • Impact Aisha
    Impact Aisha 4 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Fluxquark That’s extreme I guess.
  • Impact Aisha
    Impact Aisha 4 (na) linggo ang nakalipas ZERO PELAGIO Not just religious but increasingly Muslim. The structure of Islam, surrender for peace appeals to those who have to be spiritually dormant in society i.e. their feelings don’t matter. Black men.
  • James Emerson
    James Emerson 1 linggo ang nakalipas He didn't tell you, everyone knows it. Christianity does not tell you that you need to read a book to know not to kill someone. IF there is a God, it is very obvious that all of us know the basics of morality for it is written. Far out... the ignorance in the world astounds me. It's like... have you actually thought deeply about anything at all?
  • pernus
    pernus 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas This approach is fine in the UK, where the church has in large part faded into obscurity. The problem is that American Evangelical Christendom will not go so quietly. They are positively rabid.
  • Colin Cleveland
    Colin Cleveland 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Amen! Jk
  • Frenchie 11
    Frenchie 11 1 linggo ang nakalipas @Colin Cleveland big business in US - all travelling in their private jets!
  • Jasim Ahamed
    Jasim Ahamed 2 (na) araw ang nakalipas I would add most of the world is probably worse than America.. in these places we still need the militant atheism " Religion is bullshit" argument
  • Hamish Woodland
    Hamish Woodland 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Atheists aren't an active group in ourselves. We don't all want to fight religions. We don't all need a connection between us. We don't feel guilty for looking at old churches. We simply don't believe there is a God. That's it.
  • Raf B
    Raf B 1 taon ang nakalipas if atheists are not an active group than why are you speaking on behave of all of them?
  • Golol cohan
    Golol cohan 1 taon ang nakalipas He is not speaking in behalf of all of them, he just said "don't all". You also don't need to be part of an "active group" to speak about a concept lol
  • Wrds Mth
    Wrds Mth 1 taon ang nakalipas It's a compulsive need to feel more correct than others.
  • Sanjana Karkera
    Sanjana Karkera 1 taon ang nakalipas Agreed
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 taon ang nakalipas It's all good, Christopher and Peter Hitchens are BOTH Theists now; Atheism; The Irrational Belief that in the Beginning there was Nothing and Nothing happened to Nothing and then Nothing, because it got bored, decided to detonate some Non-existent TNT just to see what happens; and here we are....... Atheism; the philosophy that teaches we are just bags of meat waiting to die on a rock floating aimlessly through space; pointless.....
  • Omega
    Omega 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) traditional500 Nice strawman
  • Josh Van Natta
    Josh Van Natta 1 taon ang nakalipas I think his point isn't that athiest's are or aren't an active group (social or otherwise), but that they deserve to be. Speaking as an athiest myself, I can say it's easy to become isolated and feel that there's not a great place to discuss and be reminded of the basic human truths that bind us together. Where I live in there really is a barren set of options for coming together: bars, work, gym. Most conversations are transactional and if you want something more substantial the best places you can find are buddhist temples or maybe support groups, where the focus is on whats wrong, rather than whats natural. If there was a religious athiest organization like church is for Christians I'd go. Life is fucking terrifying when you're lonely. (Especially if you believe we're all just ambulating body's, and our consciousness can just evaporate if damaged)
  • Gleb Strelets
    Gleb Strelets 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) Traditional500 atheism: lack of belief in God. But theists thinks that it is believing in absurd thing, or caricature of science. PS low birth rates isn't bad thing. At such "low birth rates" we will have 10 billions people on Earth at lest.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 taon ang nakalipas Atheism believes PLENTY of things; Net search this sometime; Suicidal atheist converts to Christ, a very moving article that illustrates how Atheism leads to depression and despair, with its belief there is no God and we're just bags of chemicals on a rock floating aimlessly in space, and it leads to other bad ideas as in the case of suicide-murderer Pekka-Eric Auvinen from Finland; he said ; ‘I am a cynical existentialist, antihuman humanist, antisocial social darwinist, realistic idealist and godlike atheist.’ ‘Life is just a coincidence … result of long process of evolution and many several factors, causes and effects.’ ‘There are no other universal laws than the laws of nature and the laws of physics.’ ‘Evolution is both a theory and a fact, creationism is neither one.’ ‘Religious people, your gods are nothing and exists only in your heads. Your slave morals means nothing to me. I’m the god & devil of my own life.’ ‘What is the best thing in life? It ends. Well I guess there are some other great things, worth living for, but sometimes you lose them or don’t get them.’ ‘Trust no one … and rely on your instincts.’ ‘I’m the dictator of my own life.’ ‘HUMANITY IS OVERRATED!’ ‘Human life is not sacred. Humans are just a species among other animals and world does not exist only for humans. Death is not a tragedy, it happens in nature all the time between all species. Not all human lives are important or worth saving. Sometimes I feel like no one is really worth [sic] of life at all.’ ‘Today the process of natural selection is totally misguided. Modern human race has not only betrayed its ancestors, but the future generations too.’ ‘It’s time to put NATURAL SELECTION & SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST back on track!’ ‘I cannot say that I am of the same race as this miserable, arrogant and selfish human race. No! I have evolved a step higher.’ ‘I am prepared to fight and die for my cause. I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit, disgraces of the human race and failures of natural selection.’ ‘The faster the human race is wiped out from this planet, the better … no one should be left alive. No mercy for the scum of earth.’ ‘I am the law, judge and executioner. There is no higher authority than me.’
  • Gleb Strelets
    Gleb Strelets 1 taon ang nakalipas Traditional500 one atheist person gone crazy... so atheism is belief? He said, that he was more then just atheist. How about other approach to our finite existence: I have one life, so I must live as much satisfying life as possible. I like to create, help other people, etc.. So, I found meaning to my life myself: caring for others and creating things, and having fun on my own. Also, if we all return to nonexistent, all our pain and suffer will be erased. Also, all my past action will affect future, even if I will be forgotten. I am sure, that I helped some people, and I will continue helping. And major cause of suicide is depression, not atheism itself, but, of course, some people can have situation, where some religion could possibly help them, for example, some per cent of sociopaths. But, religions isn't exclusive way for helping with any issue.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 taon ang nakalipas Every Atheist has to face their Despair sooner or later; Helping people? Making a difference to the world? How will that help your corpse??? Its all Pointless in a Godless Universe, and you "Imagining" in your mind "Meaning" when you KNOW the Universe is Meaningless; Isn't that trying to Trick your Brain?? Isn't that living a Fantasy, a Delusion?? Obviously it is, so Atheism is a Religion as any other, but Atheism is a Religion of Despair.
  • Gleb Strelets
    Gleb Strelets 1 taon ang nakalipas Traditional500 atheism is lack of belief in God. Different people from different cultures respond to that differently. I just described, how I think about meaning of life. Atheism and meaning are different things. Different atheists have different politic views, different meanings of life, etc. Nihilism or existentialism aren't parts of atheism.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 taon ang nakalipas Of course Nihilism is the CENTRAL part of Atheism, but Atheist's try to Trick their brains and minds and live a Fantasy/Delusional life; I'll quote to you an HONEST Atheist ; Atheism in a nutshell; "We come from an inconceivable nothingness. We stay a while in something which seems equally inconceivable, only to vanish again into the inconceivable nothingness." - Atheist Peter Wessel Zapffe, Philosopher.
  • Gleb Strelets
    Gleb Strelets 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) Traditional500 atheists sometimes try to make you stop believe in God. A lot of them think, that they try to bring truth. Atheists (mostly) see religions as delusions or fantasies. Why you assume so many things about large group of people? Ps most people, actually, don't think about death very often. But depression can cause feeling of meaningless of life etc.
  • bazil bourgeois
    bazil bourgeois 1 taon ang nakalipas @Hamish You are active enough to post a comment and let everyone know how you feel though....... Do you believe your body, life, family and the ground you get to walk on are all a gift or something else? If you believe it is something else then what do you think it is then?
  • Gleb Strelets
    Gleb Strelets 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) Traditional500 first of all, atheist doesn't find any proofs of God, so atheist can't believe in God. Some atheists believe in afterlife, but for those who don't, we just accept that we are mortal and continue to live on. Second, if you feel that universe without God or afterlife is bad, terrifying etc, that doesn't mean that it's not. Third, God (of Bible) is weird, and he almost feels like mere human with bloodlust. Fourth, for a sake of argument, there is Supreme Consciousness. Why is it specifically your idea of God exist? Fifth, on a grand scheme we are inconsolable and unimportant, but for ourself our world, friends, family etc are significant. Atheists don't lack emotions and have significant people and things. Sixth, atheism isn't materialism. Atheist is someone that don't believe in any kind of God. That's all!
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 taon ang nakalipas Gleb There's PLENTY of Evidence for God; See "Darwin's Doubt" by Dr Stephen C Meyer for many more examples of Mainstream Science's strange unwillingness to see the obvious Intelligent Design in Living Organisms. Youtube Search "Information Enigma" . DNA stores information is the form of a 4 character Digital code. Nucleatide bases supply the Precise assembly instructions, that is, the INFORMATION, the PRECISE BLUE PRINTS, for Building our crucial protein molecules in PRECISE 3D shapes. Proteins that are off by even ONE Amino Acid, will be disfunctional/meaningless. The DNA Digital code functions exactly like Digital Symbols in a section of Computer Code. All this information just Appeared out of "Nowhere" during the Cambrian Explosion? To build ANY animal or plant, you HAVE to have the PRECISE Biological Code. Just like Digital Blueprints for building a car. Mutations are random changes in DNA; try putting in RANDOM digital code in your computer software; and WATCH IT BE DESTROYED. Mutations never make new information in the DNA Digital Code. The Combinatorial Problem of Information Theory makes clear that Randomness Only produces Gibberish. Search "Scientific Dissent from Darwinism" : "Signatories of the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism hold doctorates in biological sciences, physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, computer science, and related disciplines from such institutions as Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Dartmouth, Rutgers, University of Chicago, Stanford and University of California at Berkeley. Many are also professors or researchers at major universities and research institutions such as Cambridge, Princeton, MIT, UCLA, University of Pennsylvania, University of Georgia, Tulane, Moscow State University, Chitose Institute of Science & Technology in Japan, and Ben-Gurion University in Israel."
  • Gleb Strelets
    Gleb Strelets 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) Traditional500 if we are designed, then God is poor designer. Or he himself have inefficient body structure. Also, mutations can duplicate gene, so there is new place for information, because we have necessary gene that work totally fine and gene that can be changed without destroying function. Also, evolutions isn't just random process. In the start of life (at least, we can assume using today's data that all life we know evolved from common ancestor) there were something self-replicating. It mutated, changed, and most fit for survival became more prevalent. Also, we have evolution-like simulations. Nero-networks work based on way life evolved. So, there is random Nero network at start, and test that we need it to go through. We create new networks with small random changes, and then use most fit for task to create copy's with random changes. We don't need belief in God for anything. Isn't more complex universe that we can understand more beautiful that universe where anything we don't understand answer is "God did it"? Also, why specifically your God is a designer? Even if we are designed, that doesn't mean we are designed by all powerful being. We could evolved from some form of life send alliance to space to save life itself from dying off. Or created as some science project by some student.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) This Universe was not meant to be perfect, that's for Heaven, This Universe is a test, WHat do we love more, God and other people or Ourselves.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 taon ang nakalipas The physicist Paul Davies points out: “We now know that the secret of life lies not with the chemical ingredients as such, but with the logical structure and organisational arrangement of the molecules…. Like a supercomputer, life is an information processing system…. It is the software of the living cell that is the real mystery, not the hardware.” He says: “How did atoms spontaneously write their own software? … Nobody knows … ” [Life force, New Scientist 163(2204):27–30, 18 September 1999. See also Huff and Bluff: Can quantum magic save chemical evolution?] Leading atheist Richard Dawkins himself admits: “[T]here is enough information capacity in a single human cell to store the Encyclopaedia Britannica, all 30 volumes of it, three or four times over.” [The Blind Watchmaker] “There is a general belief that DNA is ‘rock solid’—extremely stable,” says Brandt Eichman, associate professor of biological sciences at Vanderbilt,....“Actually DNA is highly reactive. On a good day about one million bases in the DNA in a human cell are damaged.” (Salisbury, D.F., Newly discovered DNA repair mechanism, Science News, sciencedailydotcom, 5 October 2010) (But of course the DNA has Encoded on it Repair Enzymes to Protect Itself, Incredible!) Regarding the Translation of the Code into Products Needed by the Cell; ‘Thus the code can not be translated except by using certain products of its translation. This constitutes a baffling circle; a really vicious circle, it seems, for any attempt to form a model or theory of the genesis of the genetic code. (Popper, K.R., Scientific Reduction and the Essential Incompleteness of All Science) In 2012 S. Kosuri and G. Church had succssfully stored 5.5 petabits of data in just ONE GRAM of DNA (That's around 14,000 Blue Ray movies' worth). DNA is the most perfect information storage mechanism in the Universe. Once you study Genetics IN DEPTH, you will see that Atheism is simply a fairy tale.
  • anas jerusalem
    anas jerusalem 1 taon ang nakalipas Good explained 👍👍👍
  • VeroMithril
    VeroMithril 1 taon ang nakalipas Some like me are activists as they recognize the horror and the damage that religion does.
  • Teragnau
    Teragnau 1 taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) Traditional500> Atheism is "I don't believe in God." nothing else. Associating Atheism and depression like you does is stupid. I could mentionne depressed religious people and say every religious people are depressed and believing is God means you want to suicide deep inside. But it would be stupid, as stupid as what you do. Funny thing, a study, trying to link religion/atheism and depression got more religious depressed people than non-religious ones. There ISN'T plenty of Evidence for God. There is no Evidence for God. First idiocy from you : information isn't intrinsic to an object. Something is information because we perceive it as information. And we can perceive anything as information. And we do. The floor of a forest can be seen as information if you hunt. A planet moving can be seen as information if you study its movements. Even the laws of physics are information, if you study physics. Second idiocy from you : Mutation are random, but evolution isn't. And anyway you can't compare random change and putting a random digital code in you computer software. And it won't destroy the computer. You should have learn how mutations works in biology at school so you have no excuse for such a retarded claim. You should have also learn how evolution works in biology at school so you have no excuse for such a retarded claim. "Once you study Genetics IN DEPTH" You have not studied genetics in depth, don't try to act like you know anything. And I love how you go for "DNA is the most perfect information storage mechanism in the Universe" (which is wrong, since it's based on molecules) while saying "This Universe was not meant to be perfect" when someone shows you humans are not perfect. So when something looks perfect to you (and you are not an expert about anything, so quite anything could look perfect I imagine) it's a proof God exist (and he is from your religion, obviously), and when something is not perfect, it's ok, because the univers is not meant to be perfect (and DNA might be just an error then). You try to prove a God exist, and it's vain, because it would never prove YOUR God exist. Darwin's Evolution is about evolution, and not about how did life appear. You don't understand quantic physics and having it explained by someone who doesn't understand it either doesn't help you. Stop trying to use maths, physics, or biology you don't understand to prove or disprove anything. It doesn't work. (excuse me if my english is bad)
  • Nicoo Boling
    Nicoo Boling 1 taon ang nakalipas The higher power simply doesn't believe in you 🤷‍♂️
  • joseph sullivan
    joseph sullivan 9 (na) buwan ang nakalipas Traditional500 niggered um Mean triggered
  • Jose Cortez
    Jose Cortez 9 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @Raf B he speaks for himself. Where do you see that?!
  • Jose Cortez
    Jose Cortez 9 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @Gleb Strelets , is because many people believe is truth? People think spirits bring diseases, the earth is flat etc etc...
  • P Last Name
    P Last Name 8 (na) buwan ang nakalipas Would Jesus have said something like that?
  • HP160498
    HP160498 7 (na) buwan ang nakalipas 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
  • Jimmy Demello
    Jimmy Demello 6 (na) buwan ang nakalipas You could visit a Unitarian church - they don't believe in anything either. (I mean that in a nice way.)
  • TFfan75
    TFfan75 5 (na) buwan ang nakalipas Traditional500 : but a magic man forced him self on a woman to be born, just so he could die for our sins that he created...are you a child?? Or did you lack the ability to grow up?
  • Stanzi Curtis
    Stanzi Curtis 5 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @Traditional500 You're ignorant and spewing a bunch of lies
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 5 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @Stanzi Curtis You're obviously too lazy to provide reasoned evidence to assert your claim and just accuse people at whim
  • Stanzi Curtis
    Stanzi Curtis 5 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @Traditional500 My time is more valuable than to argue with a person that states Christopher Hitchens was ever a theist.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 5 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @Stanzi Curtis See that's where your level of simple comprehension is lacking, I never said he WAS ever a theist, I said he is a Theist Now, big difference
  • Stanzi Curtis
    Stanzi Curtis 5 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @Traditional500 You've just proven that you are mentally diluted... but don't worry, that's pretty typical of most christians
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 5 (na) buwan ang nakalipas @Stanzi Curtis I'll pray for you friend, as you need a conversion to stop you from believing in the Almighty Nothing that made Everything for no Reason and now here we are walking around on a rock aimlessly floating in the void, just waiting to die . Atheism in a nutshell; "We come from an inconceivable nothingness. We stay a while in something which seems equally inconceivable, only to vanish again into the inconceivable nothingness." - Atheist Peter Wessel Zapffe, Philosopher.
  • Soytu19
    Soytu19 4 (na) buwan ang nakalipas You totally misunderstood the message. It's obvious that God does not exist, but that's totally irrelevant. What is important is to understand that religions have been very important for providing people a feeling of belonging to a community, sources of knowledge, consolation, guidance, etc... all these important things that we once got with religion are lost in the secular world. Forget the God part please. What we have to do is to take the "tools" of religions and apply them to the modern way of understanding the world and ourselves. Something like a synthesys between religion + philosohy + psycholohy.
  • jhonas ferreira
    jhonas ferreira 3 (na) buwan ang nakalipas That's a generalisation.
  • Max Gron
    Max Gron 3 (na) buwan ang nakalipas I think atheists see the beauty on the surface, on the physicality of things and not in the deeper meanings, not on more complicated, complex issues like ritual bathing, travel, and art like Alain recommends. But I think between atheism and atheism 2.0 there's a balance known as religious atheism in which you follow a religion or set of religions, especially the nontheistic religions, and believe in no gods, my atheism is more complicated than your simplistic philosophy of religion, that is as an example an omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipotent God isn't compatible with a world of evil and suffering, and where divine love is lost in the many, this is a more beautiful atheism than "there is no God", don't you think? Though religious people with all my frustration cause me to be aggressive when as an atheist I wasn't originally aggressive, and also I bought a floral atheist tie I made myself on the internet (custom made) and I'll show this to my little brother to rub his nose in my atheism. :)
  • Chris Wright
    Chris Wright 2 (na) buwan ang nakalipas Sound more agnostic than atheist. Atheism says there is no god, a claim that can never be proven, and no one can, or has to date. To say god does not exist, and then have no idea why everything came into existence , to rule out a possibility before knowing is unscientific, illogical, unreasomable , and irrational, yet atheists claim to be the beacons of reason and logic. More respect to agnostics i say.
  • Stevie B
    Stevie B 1 buwan ang nakalipas Random person: "There is a God." Me: " I dont believe you." That's it.
  • leonard2000s
    leonard2000s 1 buwan ang nakalipas @Traditional500 Adding God does not solve the problem of the origin of everything, it only shifts it, as this question has to follow: What is God's origin? And if God does not need to have an origin, why should this be the case with the universe. Your argumention follows Thomas Aquin's one, which has been disproven for quite a while now;)
  • leonard2000s
    leonard2000s 1 buwan ang nakalipas @Chris Wright If something can neither be proven nor disproven, shouldn't we out of practicality dismiss it? I can state the following: If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes or any other method. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.
  • daniel etim
    daniel etim 1 buwan ang nakalipas @leonard2000s this must be either Demon Haunted World or god is not Great
  • Chris Wright
    Chris Wright 1 buwan ang nakalipas @leonard2000s sure, you can believe or disbelieve as you wish. Not quite the same analogy as the God hypothesis. This teapot could exist but i find it more plausible that it does not exist , either way it is not going to affect the way i live my life. The God hypothesis is a little different, the fingerprint of God has been left by behind in creation, moral objectivity, revelation through Jesus Christ, transformed lives through belief etc.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 4 (na) linggo ang nakalipas (na-edit) @leonard2000s God is Infinite, an Infinite Being cannot have a beginning, otherwise He'd be Finite and therefore not God; And Hence not Able to Create, Hence Nothing would Exist. The Universe had a Beginning, Hence it's Finite, hence Not Divine; Very simple Logic.
  • TJ J
    TJ J 4 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Traditional500 dude, atheism means not believing in God - there is no statistical evidence that atheism leads to depression - it's actually a key driving force for many scientists, because you can refuse to believe until it's proven. I won't sit and argue with you though because seemingly many people have been incredibly clear and you keep repeating the same rhetoric. Have a good day dude.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 4 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @TJ J Again WIthout Christ you won't be able to Reject the following Absurdity but simply have Great Religious Faith in it; In the Beginning There was Nothing and Nothing Happened to Nothing and then Something Happened to Nothing for No reason, and Nothing BECAME ALMIGHTY NOTHING and made EVERYTHING FOR NO REASON! And now here we are, sacks of chemicals (we are 99% oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium and phosphorus, 6 elements out of 118 on the Periodic Table) waiting to die, aimlessly floating about on a rock in the void of space.
  • Natchan CAT
    Natchan CAT 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Traditional500 - well, you are doing what the man in the video said religion had been doing: saying thing in absolute way, telling people you know more about what they are thingking and feeling, and keep repeating the same thing over and over and over. Congrats, you have mastering the religions propaganda strategies
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Natchan CAT Atheism is simply Despair, you can say it once or a million times, it'll ALWAYS be true, there's no sugarcoating it, no embellishing it, it's just fact; In the Beginning There was Nothing and Nothing Happened to Nothing and then Something Happened to Nothing for No reason, and Nothing BECAME ALMIGHTY NOTHING and made EVERYTHING FOR NO REASON! And now here we are, sacks of chemicals (we are 99% oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium and phosphorus, 6 elements out of 118 on the Periodic Table) waiting to die, aimlessly floating about on a rock in the void of space.
  • Natchan CAT
    Natchan CAT 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Traditional500 - and existing monotheis religion brings oppresion, war, etc = DESPAIR, there’s no sugarcoating it, no embellishing it, it’s just fact, TRUE FACT that can be tested just by looking into history. If your assumption that you (as an individual) need religion for your emotional health is true (since each individual have different needs and different level of mental health), than my suggestion is have a polytheis religion, research your religion don’t pick the one that is nasty/violence
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Natchan CAT It is estimated that in the past 100 years, governments under the banner of atheistic communism have caused the death of somewhere between 40,472,000 and 259,432,000 human lives (White, Matthew (February 2011). "Source list and detailed death tolls for the primary megadeaths of the twentieth century". Necrometrics.) And you're keeping nice and quiet about the Communist soldiers who invaded Gemrany in WWII and the things they did to so many of the German women; "Estimates of the numbers of German women raped by Soviet soldiers have ranged up to 2 million"(Wikipedia search; Rape during the occupation of Germany)
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas (na-edit) @J.P Y. Jesus a Communist? Isn't Communism all about propagating Atheism? Read "The Communist Manifesto" since you may be slightly confused ;)
  • Natchan CAT
    Natchan CAT 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Traditional500 - why are you brings up communism? Do you want to count the death toll, tragedies, rapes, despair caused by religions? And compare it to the deaths caused by comminism? Or you turns a blind eyes for that too? That was why, I admit that some peoples needs religion for their emotional & phychological well being, and thats okay. Just don't pick a religion that commands you to do nasty stuff.
  • watch in
    watch in 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Traditional500 lol @you still ranting a year later with your "atheism is"
  • Natchan CAT
    Natchan CAT 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Traditional500 - by the way, I go to the list you cited, aanndd...its completly bias and fabricated. The only one that differentiate between death by comunism (87M) and non-communism (116M) was mathew white (for 20th century), and he lump the death toll of vietnam war, korea war, man-made famine (did he counted famine caused by govt mismanagement also? Or just every famines. He already count the intentional famine, whatever that was.), etc as death caused by communism... I'm curious, where did you get the number 259,432,000? If you think about it, death toll caused by religions was not only happens because of pollitical strugle (like with communism rusia&others) for example of death caused by religious political strugle: genocide of Indonesian communism party by religious parties, religious terrorism, spanish inquisiton, holy war, etc. But you must also count everyday murders caused by religions such as witch hunt, lgbtq murders, etc.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Natchan CAT So you don't accept Scientific studies on the Deaths caused by Atheist Ideologies, don't Accept the Data, and just come up with your Little Theory from your brain that "Religion is Bad and Atheistic Communism is Good"??? Pointless Discussion *Rolls eyes *
  • Natchan CAT
    Natchan CAT 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Traditional500 - what scientific studies, I already explain to you why I don’t except the data. I’m from science, you must know that not every scientific journals that comes out can be excepted, thats why there is peer review process, a good study can passed others scrutiny, that is science. Not all religions is bad, that is why in my previous comments, I said some people do need religion for their emotional & psycological well being and thats okay, just don’t pick the one who commands you to do violence & oppression unto others. I also already know this discussion have a big chance to be pointless base on your pattern up there, I just curious where would you bring it to
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Natchan CAT Atheism is completely Intellectually Schizophrenic; First it says The Universe has ‘no design, no purpose, NO EVIL AND NO GOOD, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference’. Dawkins, R., River out of Eden, Weidenfeld and Nicolswi, Chapter 4, 1995 (Emphasis mine), THEN IT SAYS Religion is Evil!! What utter hypocrisy! For Atheists, we are just bags of chemicals waiting to die and walking around on a rock aimlessly floating in the void, morality doesn't exist for them, THEN THEY SAY RELIGION IS IMMORAL, What Lunacy. Dawkins has spoken; there is no evil; Doesn't he speak for you? If not, Define Evil, can you make it in a lab? We are just bags of chemicals, so why is it "evil" for one bag of chemicals to be mean to another? If we annihilate ourselves in a Nuclear Holocaust, is that "evil"? No one will be around to make that judgement; you think the Universe will "care"? Listen to Dawkins; if you are an Atheist; there is no "evil". Also Atheism will die out soon, since Atheists tend to have fewer children because they tend to be selfish. Atheism is whacky too in its explanation of the Universe.
  • Natchan CAT
    Natchan CAT 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Traditional500 - aannd we have come to a full circle, I thought the discusion have finished with the eye roll. I'm sorry, I cant comment on Dawkins, never read any of his books. But base on experience, I suspect you only take a quote that fit with your mind set and not read the whole book to try to understand what he meant. Morality exist because human exist and concious, it also evolve as human culture evolving, as human gain more knowledge about themself and universe. That is why in the holy book, it is okay to have slave, to married children, etc because at that time the culture collective agreement of this group of people said it was not immoral or evil. Evil is just something that we perceived as bad for us/our group. That is why the terrorist bomber dont think what they are doing is evil, because their religious group consensus said it is not. Thats the problem with religion, because it teach morality said to have come from devine power, it stuck, the morality cant evolve to be better because the devine power cannot be wrong. I just have hope that human can do better, and not stuck or worse devolving. This will be my last reply to you, since you are right, this is a pointless discussion
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 3 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @Natchan CAT If you look at the fine tuning of Quantum Physics, DNA evidence (how did DNA code itself so as to code itself to replicate itself to produce Human CONSCIOUSNESS???? ) and the Fine Tuning of the entire Universe as well as the 5 Proofs of St Thomas Aquinas its Easy to see there is and Must be a Designer. Ex Atheist Michael Knight's Book God's Blueprint is very interesting (he is a deist), I recommend it, maybe a Convert from your camp will help you to See reason Better. Also The 20th century’s most influential atheist thinker, Prof Antony Flew, announced in 2004 that he accepted the existence of a God, based on the DNA Information Code needing an Encoder, and wrote a book "There is a God: How The World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind" with Roy Varghese. Dr Francis Collins, the head of the Human Genome Project rejected Atheism and became a Christians in adulthood. Or maybe Ex Atheist Dr. M. Rawling's book Beyond Death's Door, who said if an Atheist has a Disturbing Near Death Experience, there is a 100% conversion rate to Religion, most interesting. See also Dr Jeffrey Long's "Evidence for the Afterlife"; he is the Founder of the NDE Research Foundation. "Non coding" DNA is a Myth perpetuated by scientists in the 90s, and you still believe it, really tells how uninformed you are friend. Read THE MYTH OF JUNK DNA by J. Wells. "Non coding" DNA is imperative for DNA to coordinate its Genetic Expression and has Many Useful functions; You really are unbelievably mistaken here.; Prof. John Mattick said ...'the failure to recognize the implications of the non-coding DNA will go down as the biggest mistake in the history of molecular biology'. Search "Scientific Dissent from Darwinism" : "Signatories of the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism hold doctorates in biological sciences, physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, computer science, and related disciplines from such institutions as Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Dartmouth, Rutgers, University of Chicago, Stanford and University of California at Berkeley. Many are also professors or researchers at major universities and research institutions such as Cambridge, Princeton, MIT, UCLA, University of Pennsylvania, University of Georgia, Tulane, Moscow State University, Chitose Institute of Science & Technology in Japan, and Ben-Gurion University in Israel."
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @majordendrocopos Yeah, and I use logic, cos, you know, what's your "Glorious Destiny? A 6 ft hole or a furnace? How is that in any way meaningful haha. If you look at the fine tuning of Quantum Physics, DNA evidence (how did DNA code itself so as to code itself to replicate itself to produce Human CONSCIOUSNESS???? ) and the Fine Tuning of the entire Universe as well as the 5 Proofs of St Thomas Aquinas its Easy to see there is and Must be a Designer. Ex Atheist Michael Knight's Book God's Blueprint is very interesting (he is a deist), I recommend it, maybe a Convert from your camp will help you to See reason Better. Also The 20th century’s most influential atheist thinker, Prof Antony Flew, announced in 2004 that he accepted the existence of a God, based on the DNA Information Code needing an Encoder, and wrote a book "There is a God: How The World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind" with Roy Varghese. Dr Francis Collins, the head of the Human Genome Project rejected Atheism and became a Christians in adulthood. Or maybe Ex Atheist Dr. M. Rawling's book Beyond Death's Door, who said if an Atheist has a Disturbing Near Death Experience, there is a 100% conversion rate to Religion, most interesting. See also Dr Jeffrey Long's "Evidence for the Afterlife"; he is the Founder of the NDE Research Foundation. "Non coding" DNA is a Myth perpetuated by scientists in the 90s, and you still believe it, really tells how uninformed you are friend. Read THE MYTH OF JUNK DNA by J. Wells. "Non coding" DNA is imperative for DNA to coordinate its Genetic Expression and has Many Useful functions; You really are unbelievably mistaken here.; Prof. John Mattick said ...'the failure to recognize the implications of the non-coding DNA will go down as the biggest mistake in the history of molecular biology'. Search "Scientific Dissent from Darwinism" : "Signatories of the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism hold doctorates in biological sciences, physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, computer science, and related disciplines from such institutions as Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Dartmouth, Rutgers, University of Chicago, Stanford and University of California at Berkeley. Many are also professors or researchers at major universities and research institutions such as Cambridge, Princeton, MIT, UCLA, University of Pennsylvania, University of Georgia, Tulane, Moscow State University, Chitose Institute of Science & Technology in Japan, and Ben-Gurion University in Israel."
  • majordendrocopos
    majordendrocopos 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Traditional500 I don’t claim to have a glorious destiny, whatever that is. I don’t claim to know things that I don't know. Why do you keep quoting isolated bits of science which you clearly do not understand? The rigorous logic of science has not turned up a single piece of evidence to support the existence of any supernatural deity. Science does not back up what you say.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @majordendrocopos Again I have an Applied Science Degree in Medical Laboratory Science, and was force fed Materialism/Atheism for three years, I have been debating atheists for decades and I dare say I know more about Atheism than you do friend. Firstly friend it seems you don't actually Understand how the Scientific community works; it seems you have blind faith in Scientism, let me tell you a DIRTY little secret of Science that'll shatter your Naivete; its NOT a search for Truth, its a search for MONEY; you follow the accepted Atheistic Paradigm and you'll get Funding! It is NOT about following the Evidence WHEREVER it may lead; A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, was conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; These scientists have to be Very careful they don't rock the "Atheistic Paradigm Boat" , if they do they will be persecuted, as proved by the excellent article by Jerry Bergman ; Contemporary Suppression of the Theistic Worldview. Atheist Professor of Genetics, Richard Lewontin Admitted; “We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.” Billions and Billions of Demons, The New York Review, 9 January, 1997, p. 31. Dutch scientist Chris Hartgerink, based at Tilburg University’s Meta-Research Center wrote; “The scientific system as we know it is pretty screwed up,” .(The hi-tech war on science fraud. The Guardian, Wednesday 1 February 2017 ) Up to 33.7% of scientists have admitted ... questionable research practices, (Fanelli D (2009) How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLoS ONE 4(5): e5738. ) and this is only those who have volunteered to tell the truth of their shady practices, so the numbers are conservative. Putting your faith in Scientism is disastrous for your search for Truth.
  • majordendrocopos
    majordendrocopos 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Traditional500 Sorry, I didn’t realise how mad you are.
  • aikiiai
    aikiiai 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Traditional500, you say, "Atheism is simply Despair...." It seems you believe you would despair without your religion. That is so sad. There is so much of life, yet without your religion, you would despair. That is so sad.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas @aikiiai So your life is all about a Meaningless ending in a 5 ft hole or a Furnace and you're not Sad about that?? Every Single Experience of your life is approaching Deletion and you're not worried>? That's even more sad, my Faith makes me very happy, I know Death is only the Beginning, for you, Death is Catastrophe, and it could happen at any moment, turn to Jesus for Peace ;)
  • James Emerson
    James Emerson 1 linggo ang nakalipas Then you have nothing to say at all. Shut up and live your life.
  • Peter Matthiesen
    Peter Matthiesen 1 linggo ang nakalipas @Traditional500 You are dead right - pointless. Why dont you face it. So they are Theists are they? Oh yes, your book promises proof AFTER death. Very clever.
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 linggo ang nakalipas @Peter Matthiesen Ok so you agree everything is pointless as an Atheist. So why do you even respond if you see everything as pointless, which would include your response as being pointless! ;)
  • ricardo moyano
    ricardo moyano 4 (na) taon ang nakalipas "the possibility of an harmonious disagreement" 
  • muamurko
    muamurko 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas If you saw this video through and found any semblance of thought with Mr. Botton, I highly recommend checking out The School of Life channel on YouTube with which Mr. Botton is widely associated. It is undoubtedly one of my favorite destinations on the internet for short philosophical discussions.
  • Le Mannequin 熳熳来
    Le Mannequin 熳熳来 1 taon ang nakalipas MINE TOO!
  • Gamina Wulfsdottir
    Gamina Wulfsdottir 9 (na) buwan ang nakalipas "Semblance"; I'm not sure it means what you think it means.
  • Shunarjuna
    Shunarjuna 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas Alain de Botton looks like he has a giant brain… sounds like it too.
  • Devin Beverage
    Devin Beverage 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas +TheLyingTruthTeller That sounds related, thanks for your contribution. While we’re at it, I have heard he has a certain affinity for canning strawberries.
  • Ali Rafatjah
    Ali Rafatjah 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) +thelyingtruthteller Why do you say that he has a giant temper?
  • Yusuf Seedat
    Yusuf Seedat 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Think he meant giant "temple"
  • Ian Vincent
    Ian Vincent 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas I see what you did there.
  • toni g
    toni g 1 taon ang nakalipas Shunarjuna he sounds like he gotta big booty too
  • Nóra Bánfi
    Nóra Bánfi 1 taon ang nakalipas Well, he read History at Cambridge.
  • Veritas et Aequitas
    Veritas et Aequitas 1 taon ang nakalipas He looks like a talking penis
  • JOHN L OPPERMAN
    JOHN L OPPERMAN 1 buwan ang nakalipas Shun Looks are often deceiving, noise damaging to the ears.
  • Gaurav Mishra
    Gaurav Mishra 1 taon ang nakalipas Anybody else got the Richard Dawkins reference?
  • SuperEdge67
    SuperEdge67 1 taon ang nakalipas Gaurav Mishra Everybody did.
  • karenKristal
    karenKristal 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas this is excellent
  • tigerwa
    tigerwa 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) I am an atheist though I very occasionally go to church (CofE) because I like singing loudly out of tune and free wine, I often feel I am not the only one there for those reasons too.
  • Varoon
    Varoon 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas I go to Hindu temples for the food too :)
  • Sergio Herrero
    Sergio Herrero 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas hahahahahhahahahaha best comment
  • Augusto Griffi
    Augusto Griffi 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas ++++++++++
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas I believe you are right in that most professing Christians are actually atheists--or at least that they are really committed to the presuppositions of materialism/atheism. It makes you kind of wonder then, why is it so hard to really be a Christian and considering the fact that it is why do so many people make a pretense of being one anyway?
  • Adas Lesniak
    Adas Lesniak 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas Because Christian narrative (fairy tale part in mind of many) doesn't resonate with lot of people while their miss practice and talks about values (exactly what this talk was about), so they do believe in what Christianity is about in terms of moral and social things, but they do not agree on many "you need to believe in all of those dogmas".
  • Sergio Herrero
    Sergio Herrero 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas @Adas Lesniak So right.
  • Baji Scipio Dārayav Aurelius Julian Venizelos Nalwa
    Baji Scipio Dārayav Aurelius Julian Venizelos Nalwa 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas then you are living in  falsehood
  • Baji Scipio Dārayav Aurelius Julian Venizelos Nalwa
    Baji Scipio Dārayav Aurelius Julian Venizelos Nalwa 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas atheists no they are not but yes there are few people who don't believe in god just like there are religious people who don't go to their worship places but still claim to adhere to a religion
  • Embittered Drunk
    Embittered Drunk 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas A dome that shiny can't be explained by random mutations, there has to be a creator behind it.
  • indi123
    indi123 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas i am atheists too but i like churches and temples and festivels bla bla bla
  • Carol Norton
    Carol Norton 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas or polish.
  • Carol Norton
    Carol Norton 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas I think he is a very evolved man.
  • Mercy Mburu
    Mercy Mburu 1 taon ang nakalipas tigerwa man you are actually just amazing! I think i I should feel vaguely offended but I'm amused.
  • Lodrö Pharchin Siering
    Lodrö Pharchin Siering 1 taon ang nakalipas Oh, you're not as nobody in the CoE actually believes in God. People belong to the CoE because they believe in the British state, or maybe that they also vaguely believe that somehow the morality of Christianity makes sense without the ultimate belief in God and the promise of a future resurrection.
  • Ed Service
    Ed Service 1 taon ang nakalipas go see your favorite band
  • BlacksmithTWD
    BlacksmithTWD 1 taon ang nakalipas +tigerwa You like singing loudly out of tune because you ar unable to sing loudly in tune and just like singing loudly (with others), or do you like it as you see it as a way to rebel in church without anyone able to say anything about it? Or possibly abit of both?
  • Traditional500
    Traditional500 1 taon ang nakalipas It's all good, Christopher and Peter Hitchens are BOTH Theists now; Atheism; The Irrational Belief that in the Beginning there was Nothing and Nothing happened to Nothing and then Nothing, because it got bored, decided to detonate some Non-existent TNT just to see what happens; and here we are....... Atheism; the philosophy that teaches we are just bags of meat waiting to die on a rock floating aimlessly through space; pointless.....
  • muse
    muse 1 taon ang nakalipas many churches don't give wines..but music definitely
  • Stevie B
    Stevie B 1 buwan ang nakalipas If you are not there trying to expose bad ideas, dont go. You are not helping those whom have not escaped.
  • mary O'Neill
    mary O'Neill 2 (na) linggo ang nakalipas Don't forget sawdust flatbread rounds that stick to the roof of your mouth....
  • edward byrne
    edward byrne 20 (na) oras ang nakalipas If its catholic, you could also include the priest, I bet most of them don't believe in all that bullshit, they took on that job because it pays well, they have a large house, a car......and other PERKS. I have never seen a man of the cloth in the unemployed group.
  • LionHeart1511
    LionHeart1511 4 (na) taon ang nakalipas Watching this video I couldn't help but think about me and one of my best friends. She comes from a Christian household and holds strong beliefs in her faith but you would never be able to tell that unless you asked her. I on the other hand am an Atheist but I don't dismiss religion as being nothing but fairy tales because I can see value in it. However, their are parts in religion I disagree with. But me and her everyday at least once a day, talk about religion and are views on it but It isn't a conversation that I dread on having each day. Believe it or not, we agree on things and it's one of the favorite parts of my day. I may not have the same view point as her but I start to get a better understanding of why people believe in God. I'm not saying I ever will but rather than hating on someone because your religious values are different. I feel that the best way people can come to an understanding about things is by meeting in the middle and talking about things. I find religion to be a fascinating topic. Something I could talk about all the time because our modern day world would never have come to be with out it. 
  • bazil bourgeois
    bazil bourgeois 1 taon ang nakalipas @LionHeart1511 Your friend is correct though, God is real and he is your great great grandfather to the 200-300th generation back! You should pray to him and get to know him.... Do you believe your body, life, family and the ground you get to walk on are all a gift or something else? If you believe it is something else then what do you think it is then?
  • David Veal
    David Veal 4 (na) taon ang nakalipas I have never heard this kind of atheism before, but I have preached it for 20 years. Respect is a key ingredient to atheism. It is a shame that some people who do not believe in the myths of gods feel the need to tear another down. And it ultimately becomes a cat chasing it's tail sort of argument. No on really changes anyone's mind. And good people, regardless of their faith, are still good people. I love it when my family and friends ask me about my ideas of creation and all of that, I love it when they share theirs. Respect. It's so needed in this life. You and I do not own the sensibility of another. Why try to pull happiness and direction from someone who has finally found it?
  • David Veal
    David Veal 4 (na) taon ang nakalipas (na-edit) @ZyTelevan I think any person takes a lot into consideration, and no single person or single debate really changes anyone who doesn't want change. That is more along the lines of what I should have said. People do change, all the time. To me, a true believer in God will always have that on them. To me that is why people take the time and effort to debate, they just have not fully let go. However, we are diverse, dynamic critters, so any general statements from me are of course not worth the pixels they're formed by. I get that.
  • Ambrus Kocsis
    Ambrus Kocsis 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas @David Veal I agree. I'm a Christian. I can accept if someone's beliefs is not the same as mine (there are many form of Christianity itself). I have no problem atheists either. What is hurts me is the "religion is the root of al evil and if you're religious than you are automatically stupid and ignorant" arguament, wich is quite simplifies the whole question. It's mostly a negative stereotype, based upon acts and statements of radical and fundamentalist people. Very much like the "atheists are immoral" nonsense. No one can truly understand the other side if we constantly puts labels on each other. Sorry if my english is not perfect, I'm from Hungary and I studied english a long time ago. :-)
  • Juan Zulu
    Juan Zulu 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas +David Veal well, I basically agree with you. Of course we dont need to be on the offense all the time. But how can you ever "respect" ridiculous beliefs, religious or not? I cannot. I would need to lie. And I have the strong feeling that it is similar to you. You just PRETEND to respect those beliefs. This is something we can do with children. But adults deserve more than that, namely the gift of critique.
  • David Veal
    David Veal 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas I can set aside one's beliefs while respecting the many different values of a person. I do not put that much emphasis or I should say concern on anyone's religious belief. Faith has little to do with the aggressiveness or peacefulness of an individual, or of an organization.
  • Juan Zulu
    Juan Zulu 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas @David Veal faith means believing something without good reason which in itself is nothing to be proud of or nothing which in the long run has ever caused something good. 
  • Don Endsley
    Don Endsley 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas +David Veal I am not a militant atheist and I do show respect for the religious people.  But when someone makes a religious pronouncement, that opens the door for me to let them know that I don't share their view anymore, as a former born again Christian I am now an atheist.  That opens the door to a wonderful discussion.  There is no arguing.  This is why I don't believe anymore.  And I do believe minds can be changed.
  • Jared Prince
    Jared Prince 9 (na) buwan ang nakalipas NO, respect is not an ingredient of atheism. Atheism is a lack of belief in god. Respect is as independent of atheism as it is of religion. One can have respect for others or not whether atheist or believer.
  • Betty White
    Betty White 5 (na) buwan ang nakalipas My mind was changed. I didn't want it to be but I'm so thankful now that it was. I respect others beliefs but religion can be very harmful so there's a fine line, for me.
  • Brandon  Booth
    Brandon Booth 2 (na) taon ang nakalipas I'm in a situation where I never liked any of those things that he says secular life is missing. I am incredibly happy to be without. I understand that for some people, they really enjoy it and find value in it. But there must be plenty others like me that want nothing to do with it and can easily find more valuable things to do with my time.
  • DDball
    DDball 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas Sounds kind of like Unitarian Universalism to me
  • Odette Viljoen
    Odette Viljoen 3 (na) taon ang nakalipas +DDball Not quite. He's not advocating any appeals to the supernatural. He's recommending that the secular, rational worldview adopts a greater appreciation for beauty / qualia -- areas of life that have been sorely neglected in the secular world. Atheists and the like are deathly afraid of appeals to emotion, all the while forgetting that starkness and satire are very strong appeals to emotion. Just a different kind. What matters is that you advocate for evidence-based ideas. There will always be appeals to emotion. Might as well develop a wider repertoire of those.
  • Sir_Lucian
    Sir_Lucian 1 oras ang nakalipas Would love to see Jordan Peterson respond to this one or maybe have a talk with this speaker.
  • Art Tyree
    Art Tyree 18 (na) oras ang nakalipas Just wondering. . . wold the TEDsters consider inviting Timothy Keller or Ravi Zacharias to speak on Theism 1.0?