"Where do you get your morals and ethics from?" This is SO simple: compassion and empathy. It's as simple as that. I don't know why people have such a hard time answering this question.
because most apologists are looking for the definition and source of "absolute morality". Ie. a quantifiable form of morality and ethics, which of course does not exist.
Aethyrvorous This question is really immaterial. It is an Appeal to Emotion fallacy; it is nonsensical. Whether you like the idea of the existence of absolute morality or not has no impact on the reality of it. The FACT is that morality is _SUBJECTIVE BY DEFINITION_. The second reason your question is a fallacy is because you are trying to create a false dichotomy. Either morality is absolute or it doesn't exist. That is demonstrably untrue. However, to play your game, the best response is because we live in a society. Morality is a set of rules that we use to govern how people within our society deal with each other. We have a set of objective _LAWS_ that the _government_ uses to dictate certain rules, and even though morality and laws can overlap, it doesn't mean that they must be the same. There are laws that don't deal with morality, and there are societal moral conventions that do not have corresponding laws. The fact is, every single person on the planet has a unique set of morals and those morals change throughout a person's lifetime. Whether you like it or not, morals are DEMONSTRABLY subjective and fluid. It is literally _IMPOSSIBLE_ for moral to be objective. We can certainly _quantify_ morals, and we can use philosophy to try to determine what the best set of morals _should be_ based on what we think would constitute the "perfect society", but, again, all of these things are subjective, which, again, makes your question nonsensical.
Morality if, subjective, is man made. Otherwise it is God made and absolute. If it is not absolute then I personally make the decision to be a moral nihilist.
Aethyrvorous _"Morality if, subjective, is man made."_ -- I'm not sure what you mean by "man made". It's "nature made", if anything. It is a result of our compassion, empathy, sympathy and respect for others. We have morals because we have emotions. That is why psychopaths and sociopaths have no morals; because they have no empathy for other people. _"Otherwise it is God made and absolute."_ -- This is a Begging the Question fallacy. You start with the assumption that morals must be objective and, therefore, "made by someone", but, as I have explained, this is a false assumption and is DEMONSTRABLY UNTRUE. Your morals are different than your parents' morals, and your siblings' morals, and your fellow church members' morals. No two people have the exact same set of morals. Morals are SUBJECTIVE by definition. Just because you don't _like_ the idea that morals are subjective, doesn't mean that they aren't. Reality doesn't really give a shit about your opinion. The _reality_ is that morals are subjective, not objective. _"If it is not absolute then I personally make the decision to be a moral nihilist."_ -- Religion will certainly do that to you, but that is YOUR choice. This comment is why atheists are, in general, demonstrably more moral than theists. Atheists are moral because of empathy, sympathy and respect for other people. Theists _think_ they are moral because they advocate belief in a book of archaic, barbaric fairy tales. If you do what you are told regardless of whether it is right or not, you are immoral. If you do what's right despite what you are told, you are honorable and moral. The former is theistic thinking, the latter is atheistic thinking.
Thank you for saying you don't like the term "believe"! I can't stand that either! For example when people say, "I don't believe in evolution". Neither do I. I accept the theory based on the evidence. Darwin isn't my God. I don't pray towards the Galapagos Islands 5 times a day. It's not a religion. Using the word "believe" equates religion to science, and they are totally different things! 5 seconds into your video, you had my respect.
Belief is a very broad and fuzzy word. Still, it's fairly consistent to say that everyone has beliefs, with the caveat that atheists/unbelievers don't have _theistic_ beliefs. I totally understand your gripes with this imprecise word though, as I share those myself. I've even attempted to break it down into five different types of belief: • presumption (belief without checking) • assumption (belief with only cursory examination) • admission (believing something without understanding it) • persuasion (belief in a well learned concept without verifying its logical validity) • conviction (believing something true based on correlated yet tenuous (potentially misleading) evidence)
"I want to live forever". No you don't, because any eternal existence no matter the initial conditions would become a hell sooner or later. I would give myself a thousand years before begging for sweet oblivion. How about after a million years, billion, trillion, or more? I doubt you would even remember you were once a human being let alone anything else about when you were alive. Afraid of death is the same as being afraid of nothing, it's not good, it's not bad, nothing is nothing.. after existing for so long it would be a blessing. ;)
Valthepixie Nope. Not for me. I'd never get tired of existing. Even if I never even got to leave earth. There is plenty to do here, you would never run out of stuff.
Drunkenprophet23 That's because you are young.. Get back to me when you've had another 50 years of drudgery and mundane every day boring stuff and see what you have to say then. ;)
Drunkenprophet23 Ha ha ha ha, you say the sweetest things. but there is absolutely no way I'd go skydiving, I'd be hanging on tooth and claws. or deafening the district for miles. I've done lots, had a good life and it's not over yet, there's miles in these old bone of mine yet. But as you start to ache more and your eye sight starts going fuzzy, your bladder grows a mind of it's own, it's sinks in that we are a brief agreement of different parts that get sick of doing the same thing and finally die of boredom. Weather our minds have other ideas or no. We have no choice but to accept this is it, so do everything and anything you want, The things people regret are not the things they've done, but all the things they didn't. Best advice I can give is don't expect something for nothing, in fact don't expect anything, then when you do get, it's value is beyond worth. x
Wait, let me get this straight... You think the fact that there is no mention of how *often* one should beat their child or slave with a rod makes these verses morally defensible? Wow. The human brain's ability to rationalize is amazing. Just amazing.
I never really understood the logic behind the "you worship Satan" acusation. Let's se: they are obviously trying to say we are bad people. But, what do bad people do when they have to pick a side? Do they choose the side where their true belief falls onto? No, that would be too honest of them, and bad people don't care about honesty, they care about getting the most out of the side they pick! So, regardless of what bad people believe, they are always gonna pick the wining side, and that's the one with the most power. Are they saying Satan is actually more powerful than God? If not, why would we pick Satan's side? Because we are "bad", like him? Since when do bad people share loyalty over the chance of victory? Makes no sense either way you see it.
Jimmy David Trying to apply logic to religious arguments is a forlorn exercise although your reasoning in analysis is very good. When people repeat the 'you worship Satan' it is not as a result of thinking at all. It is merely parroting something they have been told by an authority figure. And it is something church leaders have been repeating forever to prevent them even getting close to a truth. Hence why the religious react with animosity towards 'atheists' as most have never met one.
Bill Green Yeah, i understand you're right. After all, it was no process of reason that got these people into religion, so why should we expect them to reason over any other situation at all? They are driven by ignorance and fear, that's all.
You are brilliant my friend. after 9 years you have never changed who you are being shaped on what you know from our reality. No matter the repercussions of it as in one life then peace and I would think you know the quote by Twain regarding not existing for billions of years. This video is awesome as it displays such genuinus and you remain the same to this day. Conclusion: No God(s) required. I have not watched but nary a few of your vids, that I apologize for but I know real when I see it. All the best to you and yours of course.
You are a great ambassador for reason and atheism...you get your point acroos without being hateful, and your points are very clear to understand. I applaud you my brother.
Why are most of these comments just debating English language and what words mean what?? And nothing to do with the topic being discussed? ..wtf.. Go Liam. ;)
Because that’s the most important topic. For example, knowledge is a subset of “belief.” Justified true belief was the accepted definition of knowledge until the late 60s when Gettier introduced issues with that definition, now known as Gettier problems. Look into Frege’s works on the importance of clarifying language.
Doesnt that then tell you that God is real? How could so many sane Adults believe in something that is not real. Why would be waste our time. We believe because we have had some proof, spiritual proof that God, Jesus, The Holy Spirit has shown us. We have had absolute proof. If you seeked like us, you to would get proof. But you must have never really seeked Jesus if you do not know how real God is.
+Lisa White There are millions and/or billions of adult Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus etc. Does that means that all of those religions are true as well? Of course not. Your reasoning is stupid. Adults are not perfect, they can believe in wrong, stupid shit just as much as a child. Just look at the adults who believe ins insane conspiracy theories like lizard people and faking the moon landing. Also that bullshit of "if you only actually look you will find." Is condescending garbage. Have you truly looked for Allah or Zeus or Vishnu? No, they all gave you the signs you just didn't look hard enough.
"We believe because we have had some proof, spiritual proof that God, Jesus, The Holy Spirit has shown us. We have had absolute proof. If you seeked like us, you to would get proof." Amen. I wish Atheists would come to realize that fact. I keep telling them that God has verified my faith of accepting Jesus, but they just dismiss it.
Daniel Blair Personal revelation is only useful for that one person. If you think your own personal delusions are enough to convince other people than you really are naive. Their are people with personal revelations from EVERY FUCKING RELIGION. You guys think you have some sort of monopoly? This whole "if you only seek" garbage is hell of insulting. You are forcing the burden of proof away from yourself. You set up a win-win situation. Which is easy to do when you are making shit up. If I look and don't find it's not because god doesn't exist it's because I wasn't serious or didn't look hard enough. That's such bullshit and you know it. However as a christian your only recourse is to lie as that's what your life is about. Lying for Jesus. You don't absolutely believe shit or else you wouldn't need faith. You know God doesn't exist, you can keep telling yourself he does and keep falling into your delusion. But if you just honestly thought about it you would see it's all a fairy tale.
" Personal revelation is only useful for that one person." You're right it is. They are the ones that experienced it, but that doesn't automatically mean they are delusional as a result of it just because you choose to not believe what they tell you. "If you think your own personal delusions are enough to convince other people then you really are naive." You choose to consider what that person told you to be a delusion, but that doesn't mean that it is one. "Their are people with personal revelations from EVERY FUCKING RELIGION." And unfortunately they are just as real as the Christian religion because Satan and his demons pretend to be the false gods of those religions. But, there is only one truth and God has made that flat out clear to us and that truth is...Jesus. "You guys think you have some sort of monopoly?" I can't speak for all Christians, but I don't think that at all. "This whole "if you only seek" garbage is hell of insulting. You are forcing the burden of proof away from yourself. You set up a win-win situation. Which is easy to do when you are making shit up." If it is made up (and it isn't) I want to make it clear that Christians didn't establish the Christian religion, it was established by God. "If I look and don't find it's not because god doesn't exist it's because I wasn't serious or didn't look hard enough. That's such bullshit and you know it." The Bible states if you seek you will find. I don't believe it to be bullshit, so I don't know it. In my case I wasn't even seeking...God found me and I just took his hand. "However as a christian your only recourse is to lie as that's what your life is about. Lying for Jesus." In order to lie you must tell someone something that you don't believe to be true. I can honestly say that if a true born again Christian is telling you something about Jesus then they believe what they are telling you is the truth. "You don't absolutely believe shit or else you wouldn't need faith." I don't need faith anymore to believe that God exists...I KNOW that he does. Faith also means trust and now that I KNOW that God exists...I trust him. "You know God doesn't exist," If I knew that God didn't exist then I wouldn't even bother posting this to you. I'm only doing so because I KNOW that God exists. "you can keep telling yourself he does and keep falling into your delusion." How do you know for sure that Christians suffer from a delusion? What evidence do you have to actually prove such a thing? Do you think we Christians blindly believe without it being verified? If that's what you think then you are wrong. God verifies our acceptance of the truth through Jesus. Do you honestly think that so many people would actually believe in something if it wasn't verified in some form that proved that it was true? Why would anyone choose to believe in anything without verification of some kind that what they believed in was true? I know that I wouldn't be a believer today unless it was verified that is for sure. "But if you just honestly thought about it you would see it's all a fairy tale." I have honestly thought about it...and it isn't a fairy tale.
Here you go. "Withhold not correction from the child. For if you beat him with the rod, he shall not die. You shall beat him with with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell." -Proverbs 23:13-14 And for bonus points: "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property." -Exodus 21:20-21
Where do you get your moral codes from? Two things. Empathy (kind of self-explanatory) and evolution. Societies that existed without empathy (if that's possible) didn't last long, so we (all of us) are descendants of empathetic, or moral, societies. That Christians are raised unable to accept that is their problem. Buddhists do, Shintos do, Hindus do, but most people who speak English as a first language are Christian, so they don't. But they're not in the majority, (And that's their problem, not ours.) By the way, from US law, signed into law by John Adams, one of the founders of this nation: "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion”
That is what we are required to have is Faith. Not a belief in God because every man and woman is without excuse. For not believing in the Creator. What the Creator calls on people is to have faith in His Son Jesus Christ. God only wants the Faithful in the Kingdom for Eternity. And Life is a good way of sorting out who will come to Heaven and who will not.
Donald Paige calculated the odds of our life promitting a universe is 1 out of 10,000,000,000 to the 124th power. Robert Gastro has called this the greatest evidence to ever come out of science for the existance of God and if you would like to bring a multi or parrellel universe into the equation i would be happy to answer that to.
"I dont think its unreasonable to see the face of the person who wants to question me. " It's not unreasonable to WANT to see their face, but a requirment is just unreasonable. Does seeing my face make my arguments more or less valid? How would you even tell if it was me?
i REALLY liked the way you rephrased the question of where do atheists get their morals from, showing that since they pick and choose what moral guidelines in the bible to follow and which to ignore, it so clearly shows that they already have a moral code before reaching for the bible
Also keep in mind, when a word is created it is done in order to have a place holder for a meaning. Huxley first coined agnostic to fit his idea of what it means to be unsure whether or not there is a god(s), but through common use it is evolving to be usable for atheist and theist alike, because of its root word gnostic. My point is that even if you don't agree with the way the word is constructed it still doesn't change the ORIGINAL meaning. That is what came first.
Depending on the nature of this deity, it is potentially harmless. However, the majority of poeple in this world that believe in a deity do not believe in deities that fall into the "harmless to believe in" category, so it's mostly an academic issue.
Belief is simply acceptance of a premise or claim or concept, and your standards for belief can be as exacting as the scientific method itself. Faith is the word you seem to be describing.
@spankula123 "Did I say "gently paddle?" Where are you getting that?" Well, you said that the word "beat" in relation to the "beat your child" doesn't mean "beat", so what other conclusion should I have drawn?
The prefix "a" in these cases means without and "anti" isn't actually a word on it's own is it also a prefix meaning "against." Prefixes and suffixes are types of affixes used to alter words. They aren't merely the combination of two words. Whereas homo is a word on it's own, but in combination with other words it becomes a prefix. The words "catfish" or "butterfly" don't have suffixes or prefixes, because they are what is called compound words.
And again like I said. Absence of a similar word does NOT mean it violates the definitions and rules AND you do not get to ignore the rest of the definition for -ist and -ism in order to try and validate your failed position.
Question 3: believers are threatened by the presence of atheism because atheism is the only position that can stand against their particular belief without having an alternate religious belief of their own for the believer to equate to. With atheism, belief is insecure. Other religions, on the other hand, don't cause insecurity by virtue of having their own questionable beliefs. If being wrong was the reason atheists were dreaded, then why aren't all other rival theists persecuted equally?
@shiroironin1 The part that says that you "shall stone him [a rebellious and disobedient child] with stones, that he die" seems pretty clear and not open to much interpretation to me...
@spankula123 "because some translations use the word "beat."" Yeah - just like it says you're allowed to beat your slaves almost to death, as long as they don't die immediately -- but YOU apparently want to redefine "beat" to be a "gentle paddling" instead of what it quite obviously is. Not sure how you could "gently paddle" someone to death. Care to explain?
If you don't know the answer to that question I don't think an explanation will help. But maybe I'll try. The more accurate your understanding of reality, the better you can master phenomena and interact with reality in an effective and efficient way. For example, a person who believes that prayer has power may feel that they have done something useful by praying instead of actually attempting to do something that is demonstrably useful.
Okay please explain Atheism to me and why you are so determined and driven to disprove a God you think doesn't exist. And please don't spout that crap about, "I just think its for the good of the person to have the facts and truth. If we just die, what does it matter?
The -ists in my examples are states of the person. Theist is the person's state of belief and atheist is the person's state of disbelief. They BOTH correspond to their respective -isms that are the actual acts.
FYI TBS: The question was; "How was the EARTH created?" Not; "How was the universe created?" That's what you read anyway. The Earth was created out of the stellar accretion disk during the formation of our solar system. We have observed other star systems with accretion disks and thus have good evidence that this is how our system was created. (I know this is an old video but it was still getting comments, so I jumped at the chance to correct the great TBS.)
@anthonycentoni DNA is a chain of instructions. GC/AT base pairs are in a combination that means something specific. They are blueprints "drawn" because when their specific combination of molecules come together (take a class to learn how), they form a specific shape that happens to also perform a more sophisticated function. The DNA of a specific cell then tells its specific cell what to do. Take a biology class.
Which goes back to the Kalam Cosmoloical argument. A life prohibiting universe is way more probable than our life promitting a universe. Donald Paige calculated the odds of our life promitting a universe is 1 out of 10,000,000,000 to the 124th power. Robert Gastro has called this .
...what the hell? I can't imagine that "You've never seen one, therefore they don't exist" is seriously your reasoning for concluding that we're alone. If it is, then I weep for humanity once again.
// yeah your right, i was wrong to say that. // Thanks. It's rare to hear that on either side, so your humility is appreciated. As to why I have a problem. I have a problem due to a love for truth: For understanding to the best of my ability what truly 'is'. Because I despise disinformation. Fear. Irrationality. Indoctrination of the young. I have a problem with the vast majority of wars stemming from false beliefs of this nature. And, I'm a humanist. Suffering should be ceased. Thanks.
Just because atheists dont believe in God. Does not mean He does not exist. Now you just foolish about your comment re: Jesus and Islam. You show a complete lack of the history of both Jesus and Islam.
I agree on many arguments you have between creationists and yourself. I may be young but I know a lot about this topic, and have had experience with religious ignorance as many of my peers have had. I'm currently going to be a sophomore in highschool. I love your videos. The only flaw I have detected while going through your videos is this one. If in theory, there was a universe with no religion, I assume that it would be very chaotic. Without creationist theories many people would be criminals.
@studyboy2007 The phrase "before the big bang" may not make sense. The word "before" necessarily involves a flow of time, and our current understanding suggests time, at least as we know it, began at the big bang. Asking what came "before" therefore may not really be a meaningful question. A better one might be "why did the big bang happen". We don't know. There's a good deal of informed speculation on the topic but it is exceedingly difficult to study that question empirically right now.
@JeremyOrOmega There is a huge difference between a living tissue and dead tissue, they are not the same you can look that up anywhere. And yes, a rat dissolves in a snakes stomach, but we're talking about MAMMALS, not reptiles who have slightly different bodily functions
IN FACT, if there was a rule about how you break down affixed words, you would more likely break them down by relation and not by order in which they were created, especially since the origin of some words isn't known and merely hypothesized. For example disagreement 14c came BEFORE disagree 15c, so you wouldn't break it down as disagree+ment, if you WERE to break it down it would be dis+agreement, because disagreement is the negation of agreement and is only correlative to disagree.
(cont.) Referring to extraterrestrial life ANYWHERE other than earth - Seeing as how water is the second most common molecule in the entire universe, how life is made up of each element that is progressively less and less the most common, and our understanding of how organic molecules (including complex ones like proteins) can form under natural situations - we are faced with two choices: 1. We are alone 2. Life is nearly everywhere Both are mind blowing.
The reason your stomach does not digest itself is due to the fact that your stomach is lined with tissue that is acid resistant, not because it is alive.
@sooners2812 I think he probably didn't properly explain what he meant with his admonishment of saying "believe in". To say you "believe in" something implies a more intuitive, emotional thought process, that you've evaluated it based on your feelings, rather than examining evidence and being convinced or not. There are things I "believe in", but I wouldn't say I "believe in" evolution, for example. I understand it and accept it as the current best explanation for the variety of life on Earth.
@Poxlajetik I have at least three problems with your statement: 1. There is no such thing as killing. What is killing? 2. When is someone/something innocent? Who determines that? 3. Given that you can answer those two, who said killing the innocent is wrong? I'm not saying that something can't be 'true'. I'm saying there is not a thing called truth. Hand me truth... It's a concept like infinite.
Being an atheist merely entails being open to possibilities, instead of actually fabricating answers to fit one's view of why/how/what/when/where and if.
The more I look around on TH-cam, the more I notice I'm not the only one who realizes these things... Let us go forth and multiply the amount of atheïsts
"That is what we are required to have is Faith." You have just signed away ANY argument you had. As you have now admitted that the reason you have for belief is "I want to"
I foremost apologize for adding to the mounting list of comments; I feel I should lend an essentially useless, if not nice word to you. On the whole I find your opinion of perception to be a very good one as far as I can understand. Your arguments and rebuttals have the quality of what can be assumed as rational thought and study, barring my lack of your knowledge. I find it exceedingly hard to disagree with many of your ideas. Thank you for causing me to cogitate on the matter. Do please go on.
I stand corrected. Noted by my own research BTW. atheist (n.) 1570s, from French athéiste (16c.), from Greek atheos "without god, denying the gods; abandoned of the gods; godless, ungodly," from a- "without" + theos "a god" (see Thea). atheism (n.) 1580s, from French athéisme (16c.), from Greek atheos "without god" (see atheist). A slightly earlier form is represented by atheonism (1530s) which is perhaps from Italian atheo "atheist." Ancient Greek atheotes meant "ungodliness."
I grew up in a Christian home, I went to church constantly and found at a young age all the contradictions. Whenever I point out a contradiction to my mother she says "don't make fun of the bible", I am, of course, not, I am simply showing how flawed the Christian belief is. I am now atheist of course.
Very refreshing. Very intelligent, free thinking guy. Religion appears to me as a saftey bubble for those who can't define right and wrong for themselves. Isn't this what we teach children?
I was responding to the question you asked about why it is better to have an accruate understanding of reality rather than an inaccurate one, not why it is harmful to believe in a god. It may not be that belief in a god causes harm in all cases, but it is not difficult to estimate where having a world view more consistent with reality would be better. A person can be an alcoholic and live a normal, productive life, but most can imagine that it would be improved without the alcohol.
due to my career as an International Photographer, Photography coming about from a prayer said to Jesus in 2002. I have forgotten what the thread was about. I was just thanking you overall for your time spent.
And this comment right here is what evoked my comment about what prefixes are and the compound words have no prefixes. I explained that just because a prefix like "a", if written by itself, is a word, that does not mean that the combination of "a" and "theist" makes it a compound word. The meaning of "a" has changed. Much like gnostic has its own meaning so does theist. That's why agnostic means without knowledge and atheist mean one without a belief in a deity. Same for theism and atheism.
Correction: Belief is not the same as Faith. A belief is a proposition that an individual holds to be true. It provides no information about the justification for holding that proposition to be true. You can have a belief that is justified by strong scientific evidence. For example, I believe that the earth is best described as an oblate spheroid. Conversely, a belief can also lack justification, or have poor justification. For example, the belief that MMR causes autism is poorly justified.
Am! I just about to start on projects. One is from Northern Ireland when I went behind Loyalist lines and for an Irish man with a Southern accent. That was pretty scary,lol. I would have been put to death if I met the wrong sort of people, you know! Am! can you give me a run down what the thread was about please.
@Poxlajetik I didn't bring this up, andya011 specifically asked for these verses. Slavery, beating your child, stoning your wife/child, incest, sleeping with children, etcetera are not acceptable anymore in our western culture. I would agree that stealing is always wrong if you define it as intentional. Killing may be wrong depending on your definition; in my opinion, self-defense is allowed. Also, the fact that there are other opinions on morals means they are subjective anyways.
Do you also notice that atheos doesn't have just one meaning? 'But Thayer! the Greek alpha "a" doesn't mean denying; abandoned; the suffixes -less or -ly or even the prefix un-, and don't get me started on the two versions of theos (god v. gods) being defined.' Passive aggressive I know, but I'm somehow hoping that you can see that there is a difference between a word's literal translation or meaning and its definition. There is no rule that says they have to be, else English would be invalid.
I actually do. I've recently spoken at two freedom rallies and a youth forum. It wasn't 'mouthing off', it was talking about people being people and no sky daddy having anything to do with someone's lifestyle or spirituality.
haha I love how you said you tried not to say " I believe" and then went on to say it a bunch of times to answer the next question. :) just an observation I still love your work
Nope. I didn't JUST offer that. It was an added measure and is ALSO substantiated, by the example of awful I gave. My argument still stands that atheism follows the rule and definition of -isms, I even defined it for you, and that under the definition and rule of -ists, atheist follows perfectly.
lol. Thanks brotha. Spread the word. We need to start spreading some intolerance for bad ideas. It should not be ok in society to profess belief in things that are not proven and cannot be proven. I'm not saying we need violence, that's a bad idea too, but meaningful questioning and peaceful ridicule for those who cannot give answers for their beliefs. This respect for beliefs needs to end. People need to be told they are being stupid when they are being stupid. A war of ideas.
Also, how do you explain the resurrection story? The resurrection of Jesus was not in any way similar to the Jewish concept of resurrection, so where did it originate?
"Just because it is subjective doesn't make it any less "real" for the purposes of human interaction. "Hot" and "cold" and purely subjective terms, yet you are still justified in the course of everyday life in saying that snow is cold and fire is hot." You'd be justified in saying that fire is hotter than snow since hot and cold are relative terms.
You saying that the question "Why was LIFE placed on planet Earth" is irrelevant. Makes you the most unimaginative mind I have ever had the misfortune to encounter.
@amandha2000 Agnosticism can mean two things. More traditionally, it is the belief that the existence and nature of a god or gods is inherently unknowable. More recently, it has come to mean a stance where one claims a lack of knowledge regarding the existence of a god. By the latter definition, such a person is also an atheist, because when asked the question "Do you believe in a god", their answer is not yes.
I think you should've explained why believing something false in exchange for comfort or happiness is not a good thing. For many people it's kind of counter-intuitive. But Matt Dillahunty put it rather elegantly, I'm parafrasing: A guy who falsely believes he won the lottery will undoubtedly feel happiness and comfort - but the consequences are obviously devastating. He will start spending money he doesn't have. So it's rarely a good thing to act on false beliefs - religion is a great example.
By George you can learn. That's why I said that the ETYMOLOGY of atheist comes from the Greek word atheos. That's why I said "the ETYMOLOGY of atheist translates to 'without god(s),'" Paying attention actually helps. Atheist still means without god(s) just in a more drawn out, NON-LITERAL sense, and that's what I've been telling you. I NEVER said that atheist LITERALLY means without god(s). I know it's a noun, that's why it is defined as "one without a belief, or disbelief, in god(s)"
@ZeppelinTrain wow. what a valid valid point. the man outlines what he considers "belief" he doesnt try and hold, then you call him out for valid use of vocabulary in this sentence. is that REALLY the best you can do?
The only problem I have with this is "common sense" . There is nothing common about "common" sense. What anyone's values are are based on where they were born and raised, their parents, teachers, friens, and what they inherently like and dislike. If all of those things are the same, then it could be common, otherwise it is at best some percentage common and all of the rest different, often dramatically.
On top of EVERYTHING, like I noted earlier, -ism can also be for a state or condition. Nothing in ANY of the words states that god(s) EXIST, but rather the they believe they do and atheism does not state that god(s) do not exist, merely that that it is the state of disbelief in them. The ultimate point is that I can disbelieve that god(s) exist without asserting to know they don't exist, and atheist and atheism is the best place holders for this position.
@Nativety Do you only believe in tangible evidence or only scientific evidence for truth? Or do you believe you can obtain truth by other means i.e. philosophy?
Again the lack of a similar example, does NOT automatically mean that the word itself is in violation of the rules. -ist does not fit solely in your narrowed definition of 'person who believes ___.' The word corresponds with atheism and as such follows the definition and rule PERFECTLY. Then move onto the -ism and again you're trying to force a narrow and fallacious definition of -ism in order to validate your argument. See my definition of -ism and notice that atheism fits atheos perfectly.
"Where do you get your morals and ethics from?"
This is SO simple: compassion and empathy. It's as simple as that. I don't know why people have such a hard time answering this question.
because most apologists are looking for the definition and source of "absolute morality". Ie. a quantifiable form of morality and ethics, which of course does not exist.
Kirk Bushell Without absolute morality, why should morality exist at all?
Aethyrvorous This question is really immaterial. It is an Appeal to Emotion fallacy; it is nonsensical. Whether you like the idea of the existence of absolute morality or not has no impact on the reality of it. The FACT is that morality is _SUBJECTIVE BY DEFINITION_. The second reason your question is a fallacy is because you are trying to create a false dichotomy. Either morality is absolute or it doesn't exist. That is demonstrably untrue.
However, to play your game, the best response is because we live in a society. Morality is a set of rules that we use to govern how people within our society deal with each other. We have a set of objective _LAWS_ that the _government_ uses to dictate certain rules, and even though morality and laws can overlap, it doesn't mean that they must be the same. There are laws that don't deal with morality, and there are societal moral conventions that do not have corresponding laws.
The fact is, every single person on the planet has a unique set of morals and those morals change throughout a person's lifetime. Whether you like it or not, morals are DEMONSTRABLY subjective and fluid. It is literally _IMPOSSIBLE_ for moral to be objective. We can certainly _quantify_ morals, and we can use philosophy to try to determine what the best set of morals _should be_ based on what we think would constitute the "perfect society", but, again, all of these things are subjective, which, again, makes your question nonsensical.
Morality if, subjective, is man made. Otherwise it is God made and absolute. If it is not absolute then I personally make the decision to be a moral nihilist.
Aethyrvorous _"Morality if, subjective, is man made."_ -- I'm not sure what you mean by "man made". It's "nature made", if anything. It is a result of our compassion, empathy, sympathy and respect for others. We have morals because we have emotions. That is why psychopaths and sociopaths have no morals; because they have no empathy for other people.
_"Otherwise it is God made and absolute."_ -- This is a Begging the Question fallacy. You start with the assumption that morals must be objective and, therefore, "made by someone", but, as I have explained, this is a false assumption and is DEMONSTRABLY UNTRUE. Your morals are different than your parents' morals, and your siblings' morals, and your fellow church members' morals. No two people have the exact same set of morals. Morals are SUBJECTIVE by definition.
Just because you don't _like_ the idea that morals are subjective, doesn't mean that they aren't. Reality doesn't really give a shit about your opinion. The _reality_ is that morals are subjective, not objective.
_"If it is not absolute then I personally make the decision to be a moral nihilist."_ -- Religion will certainly do that to you, but that is YOUR choice. This comment is why atheists are, in general, demonstrably more moral than theists. Atheists are moral because of empathy, sympathy and respect for other people. Theists _think_ they are moral because they advocate belief in a book of archaic, barbaric fairy tales.
If you do what you are told regardless of whether it is right or not, you are immoral. If you do what's right despite what you are told, you are honorable and moral. The former is theistic thinking, the latter is atheistic thinking.
Thank you for saying you don't like the term "believe"! I can't stand that either! For example when people say, "I don't believe in evolution". Neither do I. I accept the theory based on the evidence. Darwin isn't my God. I don't pray towards the Galapagos Islands 5 times a day. It's not a religion. Using the word "believe" equates religion to science, and they are totally different things! 5 seconds into your video, you had my respect.
Belief is a very broad and fuzzy word. Still, it's fairly consistent to say that everyone has beliefs, with the caveat that atheists/unbelievers don't have _theistic_ beliefs.
I totally understand your gripes with this imprecise word though, as I share those myself. I've even attempted to break it down into five different types of belief:
• presumption (belief without checking)
• assumption (belief with only cursory examination)
• admission (believing something without understanding it)
• persuasion (belief in a well learned concept without verifying its logical validity)
• conviction (believing something true based on correlated yet tenuous (potentially misleading) evidence)
I really hope atheism isn't true... I want to live forever... but I think atheism is true.
"I want to live forever". No you don't, because any eternal existence no matter the initial conditions would become a hell sooner or later. I would give myself a thousand years before begging for sweet oblivion. How about after a million years, billion, trillion, or more? I doubt you would even remember you were once a human being let alone anything else about when you were alive. Afraid of death is the same as being afraid of nothing, it's not good, it's not bad, nothing is nothing.. after existing for so long it would be a blessing. ;)
Valthepixie Nope. Not for me. I'd never get tired of existing. Even if I never even got to leave earth. There is plenty to do here, you would never run out of stuff.
Drunkenprophet23 That's because you are young.. Get back to me when you've had another 50 years of drudgery and mundane every day boring stuff and see what you have to say then. ;)
Valthepixie Sure... or... you could try something new :P It's a big world out there. Go skydiving or something.
Drunkenprophet23 Ha ha ha ha, you say the sweetest things. but there is absolutely no way I'd go skydiving, I'd be hanging on tooth and claws. or deafening the district for miles. I've done lots, had a good life and it's not over yet, there's miles in these old bone of mine yet. But as you start to ache more and your eye sight starts going fuzzy, your bladder grows a mind of it's own, it's sinks in that we are a brief agreement of different parts that get sick of doing the same thing and finally die of boredom. Weather our minds have other ideas or no. We have no choice but to accept this is it, so do everything and anything you want, The things people regret are not the things they've done, but all the things they didn't. Best advice I can give is don't expect something for nothing, in fact don't expect anything, then when you do get, it's value is beyond worth. x
Wait, let me get this straight... You think the fact that there is no mention of how *often* one should beat their child or slave with a rod makes these verses morally defensible?
Wow. The human brain's ability to rationalize is amazing. Just amazing.
its good see you making good use of a sunday
I guess Im kinda randomly asking but does anybody know a good website to stream newly released tv shows online ?
@Alonzo Jonathan i would suggest Flixzone. You can find it by googling :)
@Vivaan Bo yea, have been watching on FlixZone for since march myself :D
@Vivaan Bo thanks, signed up and it seems like a nice service :D I really appreciate it!!
@Alonzo Jonathan you are welcome :)
The thing is.....Christianity is not about religion. Its about a relationship.
I never really understood the logic behind the "you worship Satan" acusation. Let's se: they are obviously trying to say we are bad people. But, what do bad people do when they have to pick a side? Do they choose the side where their true belief falls onto? No, that would be too honest of them, and bad people don't care about honesty, they care about getting the most out of the side they pick! So, regardless of what bad people believe, they are always gonna pick the wining side, and that's the one with the most power. Are they saying Satan is actually more powerful than God? If not, why would we pick Satan's side? Because we are "bad", like him? Since when do bad people share loyalty over the chance of victory? Makes no sense either way you see it.
Jimmy David Trying to apply logic to religious arguments is a forlorn exercise although your reasoning in analysis is very good. When people repeat the 'you worship Satan' it is not as a result of thinking at all. It is merely parroting something they have been told by an authority figure. And it is something church leaders have been repeating forever to prevent them even getting close to a truth. Hence why the religious react with animosity towards 'atheists' as most have never met one.
Bill Green Yeah, i understand you're right. After all, it was no process of reason that got these people into religion, so why should we expect them to reason over any other situation at all? They are driven by ignorance and fear, that's all.
I love people who use their brains, a well thought out argument in response to a poorly thought out insult. This, people, this.
You are brilliant my friend. after 9 years you have never changed who you are being shaped on what you know from our reality. No matter the repercussions of it as in one life then peace and I would think you know the quote by Twain regarding not existing for billions of years. This video is awesome as it displays such genuinus and you remain the same to this day. Conclusion: No God(s) required.
I have not watched but nary a few of your vids, that I apologize for but I know real when I see it. All the best to you and yours of course.
You are a great ambassador for reason and atheism...you get your point acroos without being hateful, and your points are very clear to understand. I applaud you my brother.
Why are most of these comments just debating English language and what words mean what?? And nothing to do with the topic being discussed? ..wtf..
Go Liam.
;)
Because that’s the most important topic. For example, knowledge is a subset of “belief.” Justified true belief was the accepted definition of knowledge until the late 60s when Gettier introduced issues with that definition, now known as Gettier problems. Look into Frege’s works on the importance of clarifying language.
Wow, logic and intelligence on youtube. I thought i'd never live to see the day
Doesnt that then tell you that God is real? How could so many sane Adults believe in something that is not real. Why would be waste our time. We believe because we have had some proof, spiritual proof that God, Jesus, The Holy Spirit has shown us. We have had absolute proof. If you seeked like us, you to would get proof. But you must have never really seeked Jesus if you do not know how real God is.
+Lisa White There are millions and/or billions of adult Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus etc. Does that means that all of those religions are true as well? Of course not. Your reasoning is stupid. Adults are not perfect, they can believe in wrong, stupid shit just as much as a child. Just look at the adults who believe ins insane conspiracy theories like lizard people and faking the moon landing.
Also that bullshit of "if you only actually look you will find." Is condescending garbage. Have you truly looked for Allah or Zeus or Vishnu? No, they all gave you the signs you just didn't look hard enough.
+Lisa White "you to would get proof". Think you mean 'you too'
"We believe because we have had some proof, spiritual proof that God, Jesus, The Holy Spirit has shown us. We have had absolute proof. If you seeked like us, you to would get proof."
Amen.
I wish Atheists would come to realize that fact.
I keep telling them that God has verified my faith of accepting Jesus, but they just dismiss it.
Daniel Blair Personal revelation is only useful for that one person. If you think your own personal delusions are enough to convince other people than you really are naive. Their are people with personal revelations from EVERY FUCKING RELIGION. You guys think you have some sort of monopoly?
This whole "if you only seek" garbage is hell of insulting. You are forcing the burden of proof away from yourself. You set up a win-win situation. Which is easy to do when you are making shit up. If I look and don't find it's not because god doesn't exist it's because I wasn't serious or didn't look hard enough. That's such bullshit and you know it. However as a christian your only recourse is to lie as that's what your life is about. Lying for Jesus. You don't absolutely believe shit or else you wouldn't need faith.
You know God doesn't exist, you can keep telling yourself he does and keep falling into your delusion. But if you just honestly thought about it you would see it's all a fairy tale.
" Personal revelation is only useful for that one person."
You're right it is. They are the ones that experienced it, but that doesn't automatically mean they are delusional as a result of it just because you choose to not believe what they tell you.
"If you think your own personal delusions are enough to convince other people then you really are naive."
You choose to consider what that person told you to be a delusion, but that doesn't mean that it is one.
"Their are people with personal revelations from EVERY FUCKING RELIGION."
And unfortunately they are just as real as the Christian religion because Satan and his demons pretend to be the false gods of those religions.
But, there is only one truth and God has made that flat out clear to us and that truth is...Jesus.
"You guys think you have some sort of monopoly?"
I can't speak for all Christians, but I don't think that at all.
"This whole "if you only seek" garbage is hell of insulting. You are forcing the burden of proof away from yourself. You set up a win-win situation. Which is easy to do when you are making shit up."
If it is made up (and it isn't) I want to make it clear that Christians didn't establish the Christian religion, it was established by God.
"If I look and don't find it's not because god doesn't exist it's because I wasn't serious or didn't look hard enough. That's such bullshit and you know it."
The Bible states if you seek you will find. I don't believe it to be bullshit, so I don't know it.
In my case I wasn't even seeking...God found me and I just took his hand.
"However as a christian your only recourse is to lie as that's what your life is about. Lying for Jesus."
In order to lie you must tell someone something that you don't believe to be true.
I can honestly say that if a true born again Christian is telling you something about Jesus then they believe what they are telling you is the truth.
"You don't absolutely believe shit or else you wouldn't need faith."
I don't need faith anymore to believe that God exists...I KNOW that he does. Faith also means trust and now that I KNOW that God exists...I trust him.
"You know God doesn't exist,"
If I knew that God didn't exist then I wouldn't even bother posting this to you. I'm only doing so because I KNOW that God exists.
"you can keep telling yourself he does and keep falling into your delusion."
How do you know for sure that Christians suffer from a delusion?
What evidence do you have to actually prove such a thing?
Do you think we Christians blindly believe without it being verified?
If that's what you think then you are wrong.
God verifies our acceptance of the truth through Jesus.
Do you honestly think that so many people would actually believe in something if it wasn't verified in some form that proved that it was true?
Why would anyone choose to believe in anything without verification of some kind that what they believed in was true?
I know that I wouldn't be a believer today unless it was verified that is for sure.
"But if you just honestly thought about it you would see it's all a fairy tale."
I have honestly thought about it...and it isn't a fairy tale.
Did everybody catch that? He said, "thank god". So he DOES believe...
1. Created?
3. Why "persecuted"?
4. Parents and peers, same as Christians.
5. Morals from parents and peers, laws from governments
Here you go.
"Withhold not correction from the child. For if you beat him with the rod, he shall not die. You shall beat him with with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell." -Proverbs 23:13-14
And for bonus points:
"If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property." -Exodus 21:20-21
Where do you get your moral codes from? Two things. Empathy (kind of self-explanatory) and evolution. Societies that existed without empathy (if that's possible) didn't last long, so we (all of us) are descendants of empathetic, or moral, societies. That Christians are raised unable to accept that is their problem. Buddhists do, Shintos do, Hindus do, but most people who speak English as a first language are Christian, so they don't. But they're not in the majority, (And that's their problem, not ours.)
By the way, from US law, signed into law by John Adams, one of the founders of this nation: "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion”
That is what we are required to have is Faith.
Not a belief in God because every man and woman is without excuse. For not believing in the Creator.
What the Creator calls on people is to have faith in His Son Jesus Christ.
God only wants the Faithful in the Kingdom for Eternity. And Life is a good way of sorting out who will come to Heaven and who will not.
A Belief is accepting a claim statement or idea as true. It doesn't mean you claim absolute certainty. You changed the definition of true.
Thanks brothaness. I love people who use their brains as well. Spread the word.
Donald Paige calculated the odds of our life promitting a universe is 1 out of 10,000,000,000 to the 124th power. Robert Gastro has called this the greatest evidence to ever come out of science for the existance of God and if you would like to bring a multi or parrellel universe into the equation i would be happy to answer that to.
"I dont think its unreasonable to see the face of the person who wants to question me. "
It's not unreasonable to WANT to see their face, but a requirment is just unreasonable. Does seeing my face make my arguments more or less valid? How would you even tell if it was me?
i REALLY liked the way you rephrased the question of where do atheists get their morals from, showing that since they pick and choose what moral guidelines in the bible to follow and which to ignore, it so clearly shows that they already have a moral code before reaching for the bible
the mysanthropic nature of your statement is a case in point.
Also keep in mind, when a word is created it is done in order to have a place holder for a meaning.
Huxley first coined agnostic to fit his idea of what it means to be unsure whether or not there is a god(s), but through common use it is evolving to be usable for atheist and theist alike, because of its root word gnostic.
My point is that even if you don't agree with the way the word is constructed it still doesn't change the ORIGINAL meaning. That is what came first.
Depending on the nature of this deity, it is potentially harmless.
However, the majority of poeple in this world that believe in a deity do not believe in deities that fall into the "harmless to believe in" category, so it's mostly an academic issue.
A very strong argumment around the basis for morality. I could elaborate on some of the ideas that you present, but nicely done.
Belief is simply acceptance of a premise or claim or concept, and your standards for belief can be as exacting as the scientific method itself. Faith is the word you seem to be describing.
@spankula123 "Did I say "gently paddle?" Where are you getting that?"
Well, you said that the word "beat" in relation to the "beat your child" doesn't mean "beat", so what other conclusion should I have drawn?
dude have we ever been able to create a left hand amino acid using methane ammonia and water vapor but no oxygen ?
I'd like to see the response to this. Is there one? You should string them all together into a playlist.
The prefix "a" in these cases means without and "anti" isn't actually a word on it's own is it also a prefix meaning "against."
Prefixes and suffixes are types of affixes used to alter words. They aren't merely the combination of two words. Whereas homo is a word on it's own, but in combination with other words it becomes a prefix.
The words "catfish" or "butterfly" don't have suffixes or prefixes, because they are what is called compound words.
And again like I said.
Absence of a similar word does NOT mean it violates the definitions and rules AND you do not get to ignore the rest of the definition for -ist and -ism in order to try and validate your failed position.
it doesnt say that people that dont have faith are evil. its says that sin is evil, not the people themselves.
Question 3: believers are threatened by the presence of atheism because atheism is the only position that can stand against their particular belief without having an alternate religious belief of their own for the believer to equate to. With atheism, belief is insecure. Other religions, on the other hand, don't cause insecurity by virtue of having their own questionable beliefs. If being wrong was the reason atheists were dreaded, then why aren't all other rival theists persecuted equally?
@shiroironin1 The part that says that you "shall stone him [a rebellious and disobedient child] with stones, that he die" seems pretty clear and not open to much interpretation to me...
@spankula123 "because some translations use the word "beat.""
Yeah - just like it says you're allowed to beat your slaves almost to death, as long as they don't die immediately -- but YOU apparently want to redefine "beat" to be a "gentle paddling" instead of what it quite obviously is.
Not sure how you could "gently paddle" someone to death. Care to explain?
If you don't know the answer to that question I don't think an explanation will help. But maybe I'll try.
The more accurate your understanding of reality, the better you can master phenomena and interact with reality in an effective and efficient way. For example, a person who believes that prayer has power may feel that they have done something useful by praying instead of actually attempting to do something that is demonstrably useful.
Okay please explain Atheism to me and why you are so determined and driven to disprove a God you think doesn't exist. And please don't spout that crap about, "I just think its for the good of the person to have the facts and truth. If we just die, what does it matter?
So what are the beliefs of Atheists? Where do they come from? How do you make sure to fulfill them?
The -ists in my examples are states of the person. Theist is the person's state of belief and atheist is the person's state of disbelief. They BOTH correspond to their respective -isms that are the actual acts.
FYI TBS: The question was; "How was the EARTH created?" Not; "How was the universe created?" That's what you read anyway. The Earth was created out of the stellar accretion disk during the formation of our solar system. We have observed other star systems with accretion disks and thus have good evidence that this is how our system was created. (I know this is an old video but it was still getting comments, so I jumped at the chance to correct the great TBS.)
Awesome, articulate and well spoken my friend
@anthonycentoni
DNA is a chain of instructions. GC/AT base pairs are in a combination that means something specific. They are blueprints "drawn" because when their specific combination of molecules come together (take a class to learn how), they form a specific shape that happens to also perform a more sophisticated function. The DNA of a specific cell then tells its specific cell what to do. Take a biology class.
Which goes back to the Kalam Cosmoloical argument. A life prohibiting universe is way more probable than our life promitting a universe. Donald Paige calculated the odds of our life promitting a universe is 1 out of 10,000,000,000 to the 124th power. Robert Gastro has called this .
...what the hell?
I can't imagine that "You've never seen one, therefore they don't exist" is seriously your reasoning for concluding that we're alone.
If it is, then I weep for humanity once again.
I dont think its unreasonable to see the face of the person who wants to question me. Especially that this is a video/image site.
// yeah your right, i was wrong to say that. //
Thanks. It's rare to hear that on either side, so your humility is appreciated.
As to why I have a problem. I have a problem due to a love for truth: For understanding to the best of my ability what truly 'is'. Because I despise disinformation. Fear. Irrationality. Indoctrination of the young. I have a problem with the vast majority of wars stemming from false beliefs of this nature.
And, I'm a humanist. Suffering should be ceased. Thanks.
Just because atheists dont believe in God. Does not mean He does not exist.
Now you just foolish about your comment re: Jesus and Islam. You show a complete lack of the history of both Jesus and Islam.
Alright Brian. I take it you believe in Evolution. Tell me your basis for your beliefs and proof that Evolution exists.
I agree on many arguments you have between creationists and yourself. I may be young but I know a lot about this topic, and have had experience with religious ignorance as many of my peers have had. I'm currently going to be a sophomore in highschool. I love your videos. The only flaw I have detected while going through your videos is this one. If in theory, there was a universe with no religion, I assume that it would be very chaotic. Without creationist theories many people would be criminals.
@studyboy2007 The phrase "before the big bang" may not make sense. The word "before" necessarily involves a flow of time, and our current understanding suggests time, at least as we know it, began at the big bang. Asking what came "before" therefore may not really be a meaningful question. A better one might be "why did the big bang happen". We don't know. There's a good deal of informed speculation on the topic but it is exceedingly difficult to study that question empirically right now.
@JeremyOrOmega
There is a huge difference between a living tissue and dead tissue, they are not the same you can look that up anywhere. And yes, a rat dissolves in a snakes stomach, but we're talking about MAMMALS, not reptiles who have slightly different bodily functions
IN FACT, if there was a rule about how you break down affixed words, you would more likely break them down by relation and not by order in which they were created, especially since the origin of some words isn't known and merely hypothesized.
For example disagreement 14c came BEFORE disagree 15c, so you wouldn't break it down as disagree+ment, if you WERE to break it down it would be dis+agreement, because disagreement is the negation of agreement and is only correlative to disagree.
(cont.)
Referring to extraterrestrial life ANYWHERE other than earth -
Seeing as how water is the second most common molecule in the entire universe, how life is made up of each element that is progressively less and less the most common, and our understanding of how organic molecules (including complex ones like proteins) can form under natural situations - we are faced with two choices:
1. We are alone
2. Life is nearly everywhere
Both are mind blowing.
The reason your stomach does not digest itself is due to the fact that your stomach is lined with tissue that is acid resistant, not because it is alive.
that's because it is that guy from the soap opera general hospital, and from the bold and the beautiful. his name is scott clifton.
well spoken and straight to the point...very enlightening
@sooners2812 I think he probably didn't properly explain what he meant with his admonishment of saying "believe in". To say you "believe in" something implies a more intuitive, emotional thought process, that you've evaluated it based on your feelings, rather than examining evidence and being convinced or not. There are things I "believe in", but I wouldn't say I "believe in" evolution, for example. I understand it and accept it as the current best explanation for the variety of life on Earth.
everything has a creator, something cant come from nothing. it has to have a creator ,only a creator can give something life.
@Poxlajetik
I have at least three problems with your statement:
1. There is no such thing as killing. What is killing?
2. When is someone/something innocent? Who determines that?
3. Given that you can answer those two, who said killing the innocent is wrong?
I'm not saying that something can't be 'true'. I'm saying there is not a thing called truth. Hand me truth... It's a concept like infinite.
Being an atheist merely entails being open to possibilities, instead of actually fabricating answers to fit one's view of why/how/what/when/where and if.
The more I look around on TH-cam, the more I notice I'm not the only one who realizes these things... Let us go forth and multiply the amount of atheïsts
I think I'm in love with you. But seriously.... This was an impressive video message. Very intelligent, well-rounded person. Good job.
We shouldn't have a law telling people not to kill people, right?
"That is what we are required to have is Faith."
You have just signed away ANY argument you had. As you have now admitted that the reason you have for belief is "I want to"
props, man, you say it brilliantly!
I foremost apologize for adding to the mounting list of comments; I feel I should lend an essentially useless, if not nice word to you. On the whole I find your opinion of perception to be a very good one as far as I can understand. Your arguments and rebuttals have the quality of what can be assumed as rational thought and study, barring my lack of your knowledge. I find it exceedingly hard to disagree with many of your ideas. Thank you for causing me to cogitate on the matter. Do please go on.
What do you mean by "encountered"? Did you see him? Talk to him?
I stand corrected. Noted by my own research BTW.
atheist (n.)
1570s, from French athéiste (16c.), from Greek atheos "without god, denying the gods; abandoned of the gods; godless, ungodly," from a- "without" + theos "a god" (see Thea).
atheism (n.)
1580s, from French athéisme (16c.), from Greek atheos "without god" (see atheist). A slightly earlier form is represented by atheonism (1530s) which is perhaps from Italian atheo "atheist." Ancient Greek atheotes meant "ungodliness."
I grew up in a Christian home, I went to church constantly and found at a young age all the contradictions. Whenever I point out a contradiction to my mother she says "don't make fun of the bible", I am, of course, not, I am simply showing how flawed the Christian belief is. I am now atheist of course.
Very refreshing. Very intelligent, free thinking guy. Religion appears to me as a saftey bubble for those who can't define right and wrong for themselves. Isn't this what we teach children?
I was responding to the question you asked about why it is better to have an accruate understanding of reality rather than an inaccurate one, not why it is harmful to believe in a god.
It may not be that belief in a god causes harm in all cases, but it is not difficult to estimate where having a world view more consistent with reality would be better. A person can be an alcoholic and live a normal, productive life, but most can imagine that it would be improved without the alcohol.
due to my career as an International Photographer, Photography coming about from a prayer said to Jesus in 2002. I have forgotten what the thread was about. I was just thanking you overall for your time spent.
And this comment right here is what evoked my comment about what prefixes are and the compound words have no prefixes. I explained that just because a prefix like "a", if written by itself, is a word, that does not mean that the combination of "a" and "theist" makes it a compound word. The meaning of "a" has changed.
Much like gnostic has its own meaning so does theist. That's why agnostic means without knowledge and atheist mean one without a belief in a deity. Same for theism and atheism.
Correction: Belief is not the same as Faith. A belief is a proposition that an individual holds to be true. It provides no information about the justification for holding that proposition to be true. You can have a belief that is justified by strong scientific evidence. For example, I believe that the earth is best described as an oblate spheroid. Conversely, a belief can also lack justification, or have poor justification. For example, the belief that MMR causes autism is poorly justified.
Am! I just about to start on projects. One is from Northern Ireland when I went behind Loyalist lines and for an Irish man with a Southern accent. That was pretty scary,lol. I would have been put to death if I met the wrong sort of people, you know! Am! can you give me a run down what the thread was about please.
@Poxlajetik
I didn't bring this up, andya011 specifically asked for these verses.
Slavery, beating your child, stoning your wife/child, incest, sleeping with children, etcetera are not acceptable anymore in our western culture.
I would agree that stealing is always wrong if you define it as intentional.
Killing may be wrong depending on your definition; in my opinion, self-defense is allowed.
Also, the fact that there are other opinions on morals means they are subjective anyways.
Do you also notice that atheos doesn't have just one meaning?
'But Thayer! the Greek alpha "a" doesn't mean denying; abandoned; the suffixes -less or -ly or even the prefix un-, and don't get me started on the two versions of theos (god v. gods) being defined.'
Passive aggressive I know, but I'm somehow hoping that you can see that there is a difference between a word's literal translation or meaning and its definition. There is no rule that says they have to be, else English would be invalid.
I actually do. I've recently spoken at two freedom rallies and a youth forum. It wasn't 'mouthing off', it was talking about people being people and no sky daddy having anything to do with someone's lifestyle or spirituality.
It's weird how TB gets a ton of view at some times then only a few k's in others.
haha I love how you said you tried not to say " I believe" and then went on to say it a bunch of times to answer the next question. :) just an observation I still love your work
Nope. I didn't JUST offer that. It was an added measure and is ALSO substantiated, by the example of awful I gave. My argument still stands that atheism follows the rule and definition of -isms, I even defined it for you, and that under the definition and rule of -ists, atheist follows perfectly.
lol. Thanks brotha. Spread the word. We need to start spreading some intolerance for bad ideas. It should not be ok in society to profess belief in things that are not proven and cannot be proven. I'm not saying we need violence, that's a bad idea too, but meaningful questioning and peaceful ridicule for those who cannot give answers for their beliefs. This respect for beliefs needs to end. People need to be told they are being stupid when they are being stupid. A war of ideas.
Also, how do you explain the resurrection story? The resurrection of Jesus was not in any way similar to the Jewish concept of resurrection, so where did it originate?
"Just because it is subjective doesn't make it any less "real" for the purposes of human interaction.
"Hot" and "cold" and purely subjective terms, yet you are still justified in the course of everyday life in saying that snow is cold and fire is hot."
You'd be justified in saying that fire is hotter than snow since hot and cold are relative terms.
You saying that the question "Why was LIFE placed on planet Earth" is irrelevant.
Makes you the most unimaginative mind I have ever had the misfortune to encounter.
@amandha2000 Agnosticism can mean two things. More traditionally, it is the belief that the existence and nature of a god or gods is inherently unknowable. More recently, it has come to mean a stance where one claims a lack of knowledge regarding the existence of a god. By the latter definition, such a person is also an atheist, because when asked the question "Do you believe in a god", their answer is not yes.
@wuphat what you talking about Willis...
I think you should've explained why believing something false in exchange for comfort or happiness is not a good thing. For many people it's kind of counter-intuitive. But Matt Dillahunty put it rather elegantly, I'm parafrasing: A guy who falsely believes he won the lottery will undoubtedly feel happiness and comfort - but the consequences are obviously devastating. He will start spending money he doesn't have.
So it's rarely a good thing to act on false beliefs - religion is a great example.
How do we determine what is true and what is false?
By George you can learn. That's why I said that the ETYMOLOGY of atheist comes from the Greek word atheos. That's why I said "the ETYMOLOGY of atheist translates to 'without god(s),'" Paying attention actually helps.
Atheist still means without god(s) just in a more drawn out, NON-LITERAL sense, and that's what I've been telling you. I NEVER said that atheist LITERALLY means without god(s). I know it's a noun, that's why it is defined as "one without a belief, or disbelief, in god(s)"
What I like about videos using logic and questioning the bible is, that after 5 - 6 years, they still work just as well ^^
@ZeppelinTrain wow. what a valid valid point. the man outlines what he considers "belief" he doesnt try and hold, then you call him out for valid use of vocabulary in this sentence. is that REALLY the best you can do?
The only problem I have with this is "common sense" . There is nothing common about "common" sense. What anyone's values are are based on where they were born and raised, their parents, teachers, friens, and what they inherently like and dislike. If all of those things are the same, then it could be common, otherwise it is at best some percentage common and all of the rest different, often dramatically.
You have really good logical statements. Thanks for the videos! :)
On top of EVERYTHING, like I noted earlier, -ism can also be for a state or condition. Nothing in ANY of the words states that god(s) EXIST, but rather the they believe they do and atheism does not state that god(s) do not exist, merely that that it is the state of disbelief in them.
The ultimate point is that I can disbelieve that god(s) exist without asserting to know they don't exist, and atheist and atheism is the best place holders for this position.
@Nativety Do you only believe in tangible evidence or only scientific evidence for truth? Or do you believe you can obtain truth by other means i.e. philosophy?
Again the lack of a similar example, does NOT automatically mean that the word itself is in violation of the rules. -ist does not fit solely in your narrowed definition of 'person who believes ___.' The word corresponds with atheism and as such follows the definition and rule PERFECTLY. Then move onto the -ism and again you're trying to force a narrow and fallacious definition of -ism in order to validate your argument. See my definition of -ism and notice that atheism fits atheos perfectly.
"if there is a creator he doesnt o you to show himself to you.. "
Well isnt he just kind and loving?