You can't disprove God by disproving religion. Religion is man made, that is obvious. So are mathematics and physics. Your arguments are very surface level, you will need to dig deeper for any truth on the matter. This video is nothing but you poking holes in flawed religions, you provide no evidence on why God is impossible, you provide no evidence on why there is no God, you provide no evidence on why God fits these narrow definitions that you have (wrongly) placed upon it. You don't seem to understand that you can believe in God and not religion, and you can believe that God is not good or evil.
@@JoeyWheeler-m3shahaha the funny thing about this is that god is your core, he is literally your soul , he is you 😂😂😂😂😂, right now unaware because you are ‘inside the video game’ or the dream or whatever you wanna call this
@@JoeyWheeler-m3swe can investigate the evidence on both God, and the reliability of Jesus. Who in fact did historically exist, did claim to be God, and did historically resurrect from the dead and ascend into Heaven.
@@JoeyWheeler-m3swhat is considered to be god? And if something transcend reality (God), then how could we comprehend it? Not trying to be persuasive. Just throwing some counter ideas out there.
You should take any Theology 101 course. You have a middle school level understanding of basic theology. Your logos is clearly in tact so I encourage you to put it to better use. No grown adult with any media literacy would interpret "God" as described by ANY RELIGOUS TEXT the way you have summarized.
I think he is talking about the main theistic God, which is the God of the Abrahamic religions. Though I also think he should have been clearer, this is what he should be meaning. After all, anyone can make up an ''unfalsifiable (equally unprovable)'' definition and call it God.
“The first hurdle in affirming gods existence lies in the contradictions inherent to the concept itself, god is often described as omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-benevolent.” All these things actually can be reconciled by reframing “god” from an entity to the universe itself. The universe is everywhere. The universe is all knowing (in that it is an interconnected tapestry of systems that are dependent on one another, NOTHING escapes the grasp of the universe) and it is onni-benevolent in the sense that everything that happens in and of the universe is in the grand scheme of things good for the universe. Even if it isn’t always good for those of us who live inside it. The universes benevolence seems cruel and chaotic sometimes, like the ocean. But it’s a complex system that sustains and grows life with the ultimate “goal” of doing more of that.
If you’re looking for a creator look no further than the universe itself. Perhaps that’s what religion was speaking about all along, but didn’t have the means to describe at the time so they used the mythic storytelling devices they did have. We already accept this as a perfectly logical rationale for the creation of many ancient gods, like the Greek and Norse gods. We don’t seek to explain them away, we instead seek to recontextualise them with our modern understanding of how the universe works and reverse engineer the thinking of Ancient Greeks and Nordics to understand how they arrived at these myths, and why they were necessary for that culture. I find it odd that we don’t do that for Christianity. It seems the obvious way to reconcile religion and science.
2 วันที่ผ่านมา
we already have a word for universe we don't need to call it gawd or whatever
Food for thought: 1. The problem of evil is evidence against theistic models that predicate omni-benevolence to God. But once you let go of this assumption, it seems like your argument disappears. You might object and say that perfection is inherent to the concept of God, and it’s plausible that a perfect being would have a morally virtuous character. But this just seems like an assertion. So the point is the problem of evil, at best, is an argument against certain models of God. 2. Your argument against the moral character of gods totally depends on your theory of morality. Suppose you’re an error theorist about morality and suppose you believe in God. It’s not obvious the two are inconsistent. So once again, your argument only shows that some models of God are problematic. So your claim that theism is impossible, utterly fails. 3. Your argument against certain theological doctrines will not bother theists who reject religion. 4. Did humans create gods? Your reasoning here at best shows why we should be skeptical of religious conceptions of God. But your reasons have no bearing on the truth of natural theology or philosophical attempts to establish a necessary being with properties typically associated with God (or at the very least inconsistent with atheism). So have you shown theism to be improbable or impossible? If anything is impossible, it’s the conclusion you’re attempting to draw from the reasons you have given. I’m happy to discuss this further with you
If you’re a theist who rejects religion it’s because you have found evidence outside of these religions that point to god. God is a being that relies on faith because there is no evidence that points to his existence. Religion is what’s criticized because these are the “sciences” that attempt to explain God. Feeling like God exist is not enough to consider his existence.
I mean yeah but. If I say unicorns don’t exist why is it on me to prove that? No one can know if they exist or not? That argument falls apart quickly under a breeze of contradiction.
@@JoeyWheeler-m3s spiritually speaking. It can only be a personal/ subjective truth , not an objective one. Although there may be people who see unicorns as spiritual but … :/ that’d be kinda empty , eh
You can't know 100% is god exists but you can reason what is more likely. Ironically the monkeys and typewriter idea, where if enough time was available they could write complete works of Shakespear. This idea is more likely to point to a god than an absence. Ok infinity would allow the monkey and typewriter thing, but the universe isn't infinite old, there was a start and random events would take many times the existance of the universe to occur, there isn't enough time for certain random things to happen. So what is more likely William Shakespear writing this books (god) or a load of monkeys (random stuff) if within a time limit?
@@JoeyWheeler-m3sunless you think further. god is outside of physicality and reality. we can nether disprove nor prove of god because of what god is . “the creator of the universe” everything that happens has a cause. a rock is moved by a stick that’s pushed by a hand that’s moved by a mind. but what makes the mind start that chain? is the mind the unmoved mover? well something caused the mind to think those thoughts. you’re a product of your environment and genetics. something caused the environment and ur genetics - history of humans and we can keep going back until the big bang. is the big bang uncaused? when everything else in reality has a cause? no it would have to be something outside of reality that causes that. because everything in reality has a cause.
I’m a muslim. In Islam we believe according to the Quran itself that God gave every soul the choice to live in this world to attain heaven or hell. It was our choice and we accepted the challenge. Our souls knew it would be a difficult test because God told us it would be. God is most loving and the most merciful, not all loving and all merciful. He is the best judge of who deserves love and mercy, otherwise even the devil would’ve been forgiven which he is not, he’s doomed until infinity because of his deeds. God is most forgiving to those who sincerely repent and change their ways. He is all knowing and understands the suffering we endure, but we chose to go through this, this world is just like a dream. When you wake up from a dream, even if it was a nightmare, you are okay and the suffering in that dream wasn’t truly suffering, it was an illusion. Also the bliss of heaven is infinitely worth the suffering we endure. Because of enduring suffering and having patience you attain peace and heaven.
Also for those who are wondering, even the devil can be forgiven if he changes his ways going forward. But he’s simply too arrogant to repent, that’s why he’s doomed.
Dive deeper and you‘ll find god bro. I‘ve been at a similar point, I know what you‘ve been through and understand your points. But there‘s more, trust me and trust god. God bless you and your family ✌️🙏
2 วันที่ผ่านมา
Arguments for the Non-Existence of Gods: 1. If god existed such existence would be obvious, yet there is no evidence of any such existence (“divine hiddenness”). 2. The historical record shows that all gods were invented by men and evolved over time in accordance with the development of human knowledge. 3. Most accounts of god involve its performance of miracles and supernatural events that conflict with what we know about reality. 4. Human cognitive biases include attribution of agency, aversion to uncertainty and death, self-deception, wishful thinking and projection. Gods and religion correspond to these cognitive biases. 5. Most conceptions of god are logically incoherent, e.g. describing god as a "creator" while special pleading its own creation.
Religions don’t have much to say on truth. But the main issue is that they define God in these anthropomorphic ways. I think “God” is what people use to explain things beyond science, like love, consciousness, etc. The “human” things about us. We could just reproduce without love, or be alive without consciousness, but we have those things. Whatever explains that is what people refer to when they say “God”
Ahh my cute dear friend. The pinnacle of this journey is when you realize there are ex-muslims out there who practiced their faith for 30 years and then left it due to the painful guilt of not being able to practice such a barbaric religion. They were indoctrinated from their youth and still fought it without developing a hate of the thing they are escaping, but rather they started thinking about why such a barbaric religion has such strong roots in humanity. Look up Haris Sultan (his english channel)
The part about God testing Abraham is distinct for me since God should be all-knowing, why would he need to test Abraham's faith? It means one of two things: Either he wanted to confirm how Abraham would act and therefore proving he is not all-knowing, or he is sadistic and enjoys watching people suffering in his name (narcissistic behavior). I am not denying the existence of any higher power, simply denying the image of God painted by mainstream ideologies.
Or 3rd. You needed God to test Abraham. The story is a foreshadowing of what was to come. That God himself will provide the sacrifice to atone for sin once and for all. It for shadows how even the most willing servants sacrifices will fall short and only God can pay the penalty as Christ Jesus. (Ram in the bush) The stories are brilliant if you don’t strawman argue the characters. Christian or not.
He wouldn't NEED to test it. God choose to act like this. He could choose not to create you but yet he created. That's not because he NEEDS us. That's about choice. He is all knowing. Does Ishmael get hurt at the end? No. And to that dilemma Soren Kierkeegard brings a new perspective too I recommend it.
@1stSonOfJames yeah I agree. I don't believe the "sin" theory of Christianity but there is a lot of explanation to even simple things when the ultimate being is in the game.
@@Musical_thinker And then there’s the governance of things above us. Opposites depending on each other for definition. In this case the Infinite and Finite. “NEED” becomes the definitional pre-requisite itself to exist. Its Logos.
I think Abraham had to earn it through unquestionable obedience even through great suffering. It was a representation of the Father offering His Son as a sacrifice in years to come.
Christian here! This is mostly just ramblings and frankly I feel like he doesn’t understand some of the things he’s saying especially when he talks about the fine tuning argument. Maybe we can have some argument in the comment section and help me understand better?
The fine tuning argument is the silliest of all apologetics. The universe is not designed at all for us as literally everywhere we look the universe is horrifically inhospitable to life. We have adapted to this very narrow corner of an infinite universe, on a muddy rock. It took billions of years of trial and error in a briny ocean vat for self replicating molecules to rise up with sufficient complexity to wonder - why? Fine tuning puts the human experience at the center of the universe. It’s the new geocentric model.
@@jonq8714That rebuttal works for the people that say that the whole universe is tuned for human life to exist. But what the argument really says is that the universal constants are so finely tuned in a way in which if they were changed in the slightest way is not only that life and chemistry would not have formed but the universe would collapse, for me that is not silly.
I believe most, now days are athiests for 2 reaons. 1. Your born in the 21st-century. 2. You have acces to TH-cam. You being of Asian descent also increases this probabilty.
My Babies First Philosophy 😂😂😂 You're at Level One bro. The discource has evolved. There's rebuttals to the rebuttals of the rebuttals. Read some CS Lewis, for the love of GOD
You have not quite addressed pantheism, though. This is to read between the lines, not limit your consciousness to the calculator mind: True God can be found in the space where theists acknowledge your critique as good points and where you acknowledge that denial of God leaves you in no better position to deal with the incomprehensible infinity staring us in the face so much that we normalized fading it out of awareness. Ponder how and why christians tend to make a strong distinction between the church and Jesus. Now extrapolate further. God is that which naturally blows everybody's mind. At some point, if you become dissatisfied with being trapped in analysis and begin to strive for synthesis in order to grasp the whole picture, you might be daring enough to seek out certain powerful assistance that can give you glimpses into aspects of reality totally out of your comprehension. To quote Yoda: "You WILL be afraid." You can learn and grow from christianity if you truly commit to the learning experience. Of course you will find limitations in the minds of christians, but you have them, too, just maybe in a different 'flavor'. Synthesis leads to the spiritual type of enlightenment. It is a practice of overcoming fear, which erodes walls in our minds. Basically, the concept of God might naturally appear valid to you if you gaze deeply into the fabric of the universe. You will understand how those who prove others wrong might further down the line be wrong themselves, and the fools become right again. It is a very ... enlightening journey, and humbling, which is a necessary part of enlightenment. And humility can become hard when we basically consider ourselves God. Hubris is a fierce beast. "The universe does not require a creator." - So you find it a more reasonable thesis that there can be stuff that no one made? But then where did it all come from and why? This is where spiritually starved science becomes an exercise in distraction and denial: When you look towards the big bang or whatever one wants to imagine there, you HAVE to confront the metaphysical, because otherwise you always encounter a wall, and beyond it, the prospect of unceasing unexplainable infinity. … It only makes sense once you add feeling to your perceptions so that you perceive the nature of the universe in all its aspects instead of only half of it all.
Thank you for taking the time to reply. I will keep in mind the importance of synthesis alongside analysis in my future endeavors. To answer your question regarding the universe's creator, physics has an answer if you read the scientific literature regarding the beginning of the universe. And as to "why" the universe came into being -- there is no "why." I know that isn't a satisfying answer, but there are things in life that have no explanation ... they just are. Even the "meaning" of life is questionable. Rather, I have come to believe that humans make their own meaning, and we go from there. I do see some personal emotional benefit in adding feeling to my perceptions of the universe, however, in terms of scientific inquiry, personal feelings cloud judgement and obfuscate the objective interpretation of data. I must end by expressing my sincere gratitude at your loquacious comment. It is an example of which I hope will continue to happen on my channel.
@@raikageray The limitation, when science says some things just are, against their own core mission to explore all mysteries, that is exactly where spirituality can expand the scientific endeavor by exploring greater perceptions of reality. One cannot really understand a system while being part of that system and subject to its limits, but those limits can be transcended, at least temporarily and to a certain degree. I can say from own experience that I experienced things that could normally not be comprehended. It was scary at times, but impressive at other times. And it is not situated at any pole of a divide of world views. Well, you are young and have much to explore and I can only give you some hints. 🙂 - It is wise to focus on more pressing matters in the world first, so that we can continue to have the luxury of such lofty explorations. The most basic things are connected to the highest things.
@@Dowlphin Science is not a thing. It "says" nothing. Science is simply a process we have developed for studying the world around us. That's it. And if one's brain doesn't already have the information inside of it, one is not going to receive answers to the universe by staring meditatively into it and concluding "Well, it all had to be created, so obviously God did it!" Gods are neither pseudo science nor philosophy. They are merely out story creations we arrogantly use when we refuse to simply say "I don't know."
There is nothing that says the universe requires a beginning or an end. The passage of time could merely be an illusion that is only created in sentient minds. For all we know everything is happening all at once. Science proves that there is nothing limiting the passage of time from moving forwards or backwards.
@@TheForneveralone I agree. The last sentence might be a bit bold, specifically the science-proves part, but I am not versed in the details of that question.
🔥🔥Mathematical truth exists. Timeless, spaceless, and immaterial. Objective. Logical. Infinitely beautiful. Moral truth exists. Timeless, spaceless, and immaterial. Objective. Logical. Infinitely beautiful. Athiesm is immoral. Jesus came to bring light to this dark world. Amen. 🔥🔥✝✝👼🏼👼🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼😇😇🙏🏼🙏🏼✝✝🔥🔥
I hope you are prepared to strengthen your resolve and understand that you're entering a religious world while shouting loudly that you don't believe, Look at your comments most of them believe whereas very little agree and that feeling of being alone and the world being mentally against can be scary and full of pressure. Remain headstrong and do not let group think sway you, the impossibility of god is easy the impossibility of dealing with god believers is not. keep up the clear thinking young man
god is consciousness, god is “everything” , god is you, you are god. it is impossible for a human to describe what is god, it is like describing what is a new colour or what is a new taste
God is the devil then. God is evil if God is everything. If you believe that to be true then the statements above are true then my statements are also true. You also said God was indescribable yet you have described it.
@@JoeyWheeler-m3s god is the devil...or the devil is an agent of the lord....he will tempt you, but he will also punish you...the devil is like god's public relations scapegoat.
God is nothing you are correct. He is everything and nothing. Up and down. Also he isn’t a he or a human He created the darkness and the light. Isiah 45:7. So also correct. This temporary life you live bound by time and space is a speck of the infinite reality beyond. Seek and you will find.
God is ill-defined and can mean the unintelligent entirety of reality or a personal mind that has desires much like us. Saying that one does or doesn't believe in god or that god is or isn't impossible is always up for contention because the definition you're using is always in contradiction with someone else's.
- Everyone is going to heaven, it's Biblical - Sin causes most of the pain and suffering - Slavery is one of many forms of punishment for evil. Biblical slavery is different than Trans-Atlantic slavery, like what used to be in America. That form of slavery is a capital offense in the Bible.
1. "Everyone is going to heaven, it's Biblical." Hate to rain early on your happy parade, but majority of Christian and Catholic denominations would disagree with you. Some even believe God specifically makes certain individuals with the sole purpose of sending them to hell. 2. "Sin causes most of the pain and suffering." If we're talking about suffering that results from human actions and choices, sure. But that doesn't explain natural disasters and diseases. 3. "Biblical slavery is different than Trans-Atlantic slavery, like what used to be in America. That form of slavery is a capital offense in the Bible." You do realize this only applies to Hebrew slaves right? Hebrew men (but not women) are to be set free after six years of servitude. Of course you could always get the Hebrew male to impregnate one of your female slaves and force him to marry her. Then you get to keep both of them as a package deal (including any children they pop out). Also, the part about slavery being a capital offense is referring to one Israelite attempting to kidnap and enslave a fellow Israelite. In fact in Leviticus, it tells you that you can take slaves from the nations around you, and they are to become your property that you may bequeath to your children as inheritance. But you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly (once again special treatment for Israelites). This is very clearly describing "chattel" slavery which was very much practiced in America in the Antebellum South.
@ there is no hell in the Old Testament. All of the hell verses in the 4 gospels are hyperbole. For God has bound everyone into disobedience so that He may mercy on them all. - Romans 11:32
Im here to enlighten you, i was born muslim ( societal brainwashing) then became atheist after digging deep in science , then finally had a direct mystical experience of god, god is a separate thing from religions, think of him like coffee beans that are still in the tree, they are natural and independent from human thought, once humans became aware of coffee beans and their effects as a drug to humans, they marketed it as brands ( analogy for religions)
@ psychological death also known as EGO death, it reveals the hidden reality , it’s the experience of enlightenment when people meditate for enough time, the brain thinks the body is dead , beginning the process of ‘dying’ the process of ‘death’ is what reveals the secrets of the universe, truth can be found in any spiritual tradition, because it comes from people who went through it, like buddha , lao tzu , and all the mystics of all the corner of the world , the truth is you are not a stranger to this world/ universe , you come out of it , wherever you go it’s your home , this quote explains it perfectly, « you are not a drop in the ocean, you are the entire ocean inside a drop »
@ the ego mind is a mechanical illusion created by the mind to generate the « human identity » this human identity is the veil, it’s what hides the true reality of everything , it’s simple , god created everything--> god ALONE exists, this is the secret truth that is hidden by the nature of how our human minds were designed in order to let us and make us play this video game or dream called life as a human
If there is no god then morality is just a subjective opinion based on what helps people survive at the current time. So there is no real absolute basis for right and wrong on anything, as people needs can change over time. So no-one can really have the high ground and judge anyway one else. So people may judge actions in the bible as immoral but it's just oppinion when there is no moral absolute. In a world without god your opinion is just has valid as an insect (not saying this to be rude) and all your left with is an uncaring world. Doesn't really give people much to build on or hope for, so even if you look at it from an evolutionary angle, religion serves a purpose that has allowed the human race to flourish.
Morality IS already subjective. Some believe in God, some don’t, but in effect, each person’s morality is what they think is right/wrong. That doesn’t make it useless. Most people agree on basic morals, and we have laws without needing to refer to any objective moral arbiter.
I disagree, first religion is not used to determine what is right and wrong, your “moral compass” yes can be based on said religious beliefs but to assume everyone shares the same is redundant. I just don’t understand how a God of any religion could be deemed based on morals. Most people morals would have changed over millenniums due to human survival as well as different religious practices. But u said it yourself morality is relative and subjective to the individual; but the whole idea of religion and a church was not only to comfort the dead and dying but survival and union for the living. (Obviously not all religions) you also said that religion served a purpose in humans evolutionary flourishment but it without a doubt has caused more harm than not. The amount of death, destruction and lack of money for all, in order to satisfy gods and religious teachers hopefully hasn’t played a role in shaping many peoples morals.
@@brixan... In your opinion it is subjective. Yes everyone can make up what they believe is right or wrong. It doesn't really matter if you believe in god if a moral compass was put in you from him. It's worth looking into what morals you have and where they came from. Some pass down through the family of previous religious people several generations before. If morality is just based on survival, the world soon turns ugly and empty.
@ right, morality is not based on survival. Again, we have laws without referring to any objective moral arbiter. The morals may have been put into us by God, so we just need some evidence or reason to believe that it’s truly the case
god can't provide objective morality. just because something serves a purpose doesn't make it true, or even a good thing. have you ever seen monsters inc.? scaring children served a purpose for the monsters in that story and allowed them to flourish, but it is literally scaring children, and there are other ways of structuring society without need for that.
To use traditional religion as a means to deny the existence of a larger entity is similar to a straw man. Religion itself and the basis of societal values are built from a collective lack of understanding. Just because a being is beyond our current comprehension doesn’t mean it does not exist. Humans can hardly visualize the actual structure of an atom, what makes you think they can comprehend a being spanning larger than existence. To believe life is meaningless would be correct and incorrect at the same time. Your purpose is already fulfilled as long as you live, you are here to simply exist and whatever passion you find can be your “purpose” but in reality there is no one purpose for something. Life itself is a complicated larger organism that hinges on itself through a variety of factors from large to small and back again. I understand it is difficult to visualize God without religion, but that is precisely why it was created. Religion was made to interpret God for the masses who have a lack of understanding of such an infinitely spanning multilayered system. The concepts of “good” and “evil” are simply too black and white. I would better put them as “clarity” and “confusion”. Those who do not understand act in a way that may be considered evil, they simply just do not understand the bigger picture. I enjoy atheist arguments, they are the other side to the closed mind coin of religion, an antithesis of it. I believe both are correct in their own ways, the limits of the story telling of religion hold it back from understanding the larger point. Same with atheists, the ideas of a lack of anything beyond, limit a more open mindset to think progressively. I’m ranting on and on but in summary the answer to some of that confusion within you is “all of the above”. Limiting yourself to only one set of beliefs will inevitably run you into the same wall of ignorance.
@@raikageray the op is implying to accept "Everything" while at the same time, trying to solve "Confusion" and if you really think about it, is moronic. You can't possibly hold 2 contradicting positions.
@@lcrx.streamclearly misunderstood, both positions of theist and atheist are incorrect if you were to hold an argument in a full position. But they are both partially correct. Both are based in and created from impartial information. It is moronic to hold only one position and be inflexible to changing ideas. I’m certain it is comfortable and why atheists and theists alike do not change their views, much easier to push a straw man than to actually research ALL topics in relation.
@@hazardousgreed1064 Wrong. Atheism is not a "Claim" to be wrong. It simply a disbelief of the god claims mostly due to insufficient evidence. You may need to rethink everything you just wrote cause clearly you don't fully understand the subject.
Your critique at the beginning, until circa 3:45, is correct. You tackle it from the positions of the supernatural. Your critique falls flat once you talk about god(s) at our planetary level vis-a-vis human connection. _Let me explain..._ If you study (even as a curiosity) the historiography of cults, religions, faiths, you'll see that there are three main forces: the universal supernatural, the supernatural, and the preternatural. *The universal supernatural* is, per your initial critique, related to the universe, known & unknown, seen and unseen. Not only do we not know but it is absurd to consider Earth/Terra some epicenter of the whole universe as a whole. *The supernatural close to home.* Disasters, weather effects, diseases, droughts, vulcanic eruptions, planetary motions, and also traits relating to the humane such as joy, fury, love, apathy, hatred, hunger, fullness etc. Once, the supernatural was contained within the environment that people simply didn't knew better, why, what, and how. Later, the human aspect was mixed with these pantheons of gods under human, or animal, or object image. A lot of people are tempted to unite this and the previous point - including myself - into the "supernatural-led faith", however, for the sake of clarity, I wanted to separate them just to prove a point. *The preternatural.* This is where your critique doesn't and can't apply the same way as it was applied to the previous ones. The argument - - - the original abrahamic desert religions, respectively animist/animatist cults in Asia, Africa, or the Americas, all of them require an intermediary - a middle person or middle persons. The preternatural religions & faiths, where the challenge lies, is that you're not criticizing the impossibility of god more, than the legitimacy (projection) of power that these intermediaries claim the direct connection between humanity and the unseen, unheard, the powerful beyond human conception. If you study history, you'll observe that between the supernatural faiths & the preternatural faiths, the preternatural ones always won over the supernatural. Why is that? It's simple: at different points of time, people confined with tackling religion, have come to realize that people _(the masses of people, of various beliefs & customs)_ do not care about god(s) that are inhuman - or ahuman to be precise. People have responded extremely favorably to the concept of god, as a deity connection with humanity, via a proxy, via an intermediary. First, polytheism tried that and eventually it failed, because of too many actors & too many rulesets to follow. A headache. The monotheism. Monotheism solved three problems: the lack of human-godhood direct connection, the god that understand the human even though the latter will never understand the former, and the ergonomic rulesets that cancels a multitude of gods with their rites & rituals to a single entity. This is where, eventually, all critiques fail: the arguments against the supernatural, as mentioned, are correct *_for and only_* the supernatural(s) faiths. The same arguments fail against the preternatural(s) because the preternatural(s), all of them, claim a direct intimate link between the imperfect humanity with the perfect abstract entity. Humans will not abandon this intimacy - even if the institutions they're supported are crooked, the individuals governing them more so - because people will cherish what they perceive as the intimate link between them and this god that "understands them" and requires of them to follow rules that only a human could do & treat it as a special dispensation (wear this, eat that, don't wear that, don't eat this, pray like this, don't pray like that, say these words in this particular order & intonation, god understand your grievance but don't forget your obligations etc.) We already have the criticism for the supernatural. It became the preternatural. We do not have the criticism for the preternatural. This is where we're at, even though we know better than our fellow brethren scared of pain, agony, death, threats, hunger, poverty etc. The majority of humanity values the vague intimate link - of mutual understanding - between them and the concept of god.
Haven’t watched the video more than 20 seconds but before I do.. let me say this: Of course, religions just do their best to describe god, but in doing so, you are limiting ‘god’ to words.. which is impossible. Most religions attempt to instill obedience or orderliness due to man’s greed (need to propagate)…but they still acknowledge a force that started it all. What is this force? The Big Bang? What happened to initiate the reaction in the Big Bang? What broke the symmetry? Was there symmetry to break? (Google electroweak forces and symmetry breaking if you don’t understand). Often I believe that ‘god’ is the force that set everything into motion.. wether that’s as he’s described in the Hebrew religions… it’s Impossible to tell. Why is there something rather than nothing? Good luck out there man, you’re on the first steps ;)
Good video man
Religion has nothing to do with God. Religions are business'.
if i am to believe that the world came without a god is as dumb as to expect a phone to appear out of nothing if I waited long enough
You can't disprove God by disproving religion. Religion is man made, that is obvious. So are mathematics and physics. Your arguments are very surface level, you will need to dig deeper for any truth on the matter. This video is nothing but you poking holes in flawed religions, you provide no evidence on why God is impossible, you provide no evidence on why there is no God, you provide no evidence on why God fits these narrow definitions that you have (wrongly) placed upon it. You don't seem to understand that you can believe in God and not religion, and you can believe that God is not good or evil.
Why is it on him to provide proof that something doesn’t exist? There’s no way to prove gods existence.
@@JoeyWheeler-m3shahaha the funny thing about this is that god is your core, he is literally your soul , he is you 😂😂😂😂😂, right now unaware because you are ‘inside the video game’ or the dream or whatever you wanna call this
@@JoeyWheeler-m3swe can investigate the evidence on both God, and the reliability of Jesus. Who in fact did historically exist, did claim to be God, and did historically resurrect from the dead and ascend into Heaven.
Fool
@@JoeyWheeler-m3swhat is considered to be god? And if something transcend reality (God), then how could we comprehend it? Not trying to be persuasive. Just throwing some counter ideas out there.
You should take any Theology 101 course. You have a middle school level understanding of basic theology. Your logos is clearly in tact so I encourage you to put it to better use. No grown adult with any media literacy would interpret "God" as described by ANY RELIGOUS TEXT the way you have summarized.
I think he is talking about the main theistic God, which is the God of the Abrahamic religions. Though I also think he should have been clearer, this is what he should be meaning. After all, anyone can make up an ''unfalsifiable (equally unprovable)'' definition and call it God.
Just take shrooms
ong bro
@ on god literally
Facts
@@muhammadmahdi8492double facts.
“The first hurdle in affirming gods existence lies in the contradictions inherent to the concept itself, god is often described as omniscient, omnipotent, and omni-benevolent.”
All these things actually can be reconciled by reframing “god” from an entity to the universe itself. The universe is everywhere. The universe is all knowing (in that it is an interconnected tapestry of systems that are dependent on one another, NOTHING escapes the grasp of the universe) and it is onni-benevolent in the sense that everything that happens in and of the universe is in the grand scheme of things good for the universe. Even if it isn’t always good for those of us who live inside it. The universes benevolence seems cruel and chaotic sometimes, like the ocean. But it’s a complex system that sustains and grows life with the ultimate “goal” of doing more of that.
If you’re looking for a creator look no further than the universe itself. Perhaps that’s what religion was speaking about all along, but didn’t have the means to describe at the time so they used the mythic storytelling devices they did have.
We already accept this as a perfectly logical rationale for the creation of many ancient gods, like the Greek and Norse gods. We don’t seek to explain them away, we instead seek to recontextualise them with our modern understanding of how the universe works and reverse engineer the thinking of Ancient Greeks and Nordics to understand how they arrived at these myths, and why they were necessary for that culture.
I find it odd that we don’t do that for Christianity. It seems the obvious way to reconcile religion and science.
we already have a word for universe we don't need to call it gawd or whatever
this is level 1 atheism. you got a long way to go bro. wish you the best on your journey
what do you recommend to further it?
@@raikagerayisolation
Well we can't all be level 100 atheists like you. The guy's gotta start somewhere.
@@Z-one1000 lmao im Muslim bro. Being an atheist is one of the most dangerous lifestyles someone can live.
@@raikageray I wouldn’t further it at all. You should study the Quran. I hope you find the answers you’re searching for
This guy has isolated himself way too long
Food for thought:
1. The problem of evil is evidence against theistic models that predicate omni-benevolence to God. But once you let go of this assumption, it seems like your argument disappears. You might object and say that perfection is inherent to the concept of God, and it’s plausible that a perfect being would have a morally virtuous character. But this just seems like an assertion. So the point is the problem of evil, at best, is an argument against certain models of God.
2. Your argument against the moral character of gods totally depends on your theory of morality. Suppose you’re an error theorist about morality and suppose you believe in God. It’s not obvious the two are inconsistent. So once again, your argument only shows that some models of God are problematic. So your claim that theism is impossible, utterly fails.
3. Your argument against certain theological doctrines will not bother theists who reject religion.
4. Did humans create gods? Your reasoning here at best shows why we should be skeptical of religious conceptions of God. But your reasons have no bearing on the truth of natural theology or philosophical attempts to establish a necessary being with properties typically associated with God (or at the very least inconsistent with atheism).
So have you shown theism to be improbable or impossible?
If anything is impossible, it’s the conclusion you’re attempting to draw from the reasons you have given.
I’m happy to discuss this further with you
If you’re a theist who rejects religion it’s because you have found evidence outside of these religions that point to god. God is a being that relies on faith because there is no evidence that points to his existence. Religion is what’s criticized because these are the “sciences” that attempt to explain God. Feeling like God exist is not enough to consider his existence.
Spiritually speaking , God ultimately is a concept . No one know can possibly know objectively if one exists or not
I mean yeah but. If I say unicorns don’t exist why is it on me to prove that? No one can know if they exist or not? That argument falls apart quickly under a breeze of contradiction.
@@JoeyWheeler-m3s spiritually speaking. It can only be a personal/ subjective truth , not an objective one. Although there may be people who see unicorns as spiritual but … :/ that’d be kinda empty , eh
You can't know 100% is god exists but you can reason what is more likely. Ironically the monkeys and typewriter idea, where if enough time was available they could write complete works of Shakespear. This idea is more likely to point to a god than an absence. Ok infinity would allow the monkey and typewriter thing, but the universe isn't infinite old, there was a start and random events would take many times the existance of the universe to occur, there isn't enough time for certain random things to happen. So what is more likely William Shakespear writing this books (god) or a load of monkeys (random stuff) if within a time limit?
@@JoeyWheeler-m3sunless you think further. god is outside of physicality and reality. we can nether disprove nor prove of god because of what god is . “the creator of the universe”
everything that happens has a cause. a rock is moved by a stick that’s pushed by a hand that’s moved by a mind. but what makes the mind start that chain? is the mind the unmoved mover? well something caused the mind to think those thoughts. you’re a product of your environment and genetics. something caused the environment and ur genetics - history of humans
and we can keep going back until the big bang.
is the big bang uncaused?
when everything else in reality has a cause?
no it would have to be something outside of reality that causes that.
because everything in reality has a cause.
@@bitofwizdomb7266if its subjective its not really truth since truth is objective
I’m a muslim. In Islam we believe according to the Quran itself that God gave every soul the choice to live in this world to attain heaven or hell. It was our choice and we accepted the challenge. Our souls knew it would be a difficult test because God told us it would be. God is most loving and the most merciful, not all loving and all merciful. He is the best judge of who deserves love and mercy, otherwise even the devil would’ve been forgiven which he is not, he’s doomed until infinity because of his deeds. God is most forgiving to those who sincerely repent and change their ways. He is all knowing and understands the suffering we endure, but we chose to go through this, this world is just like a dream. When you wake up from a dream, even if it was a nightmare, you are okay and the suffering in that dream wasn’t truly suffering, it was an illusion. Also the bliss of heaven is infinitely worth the suffering we endure. Because of enduring suffering and having patience you attain peace and heaven.
Also for those who are wondering, even the devil can be forgiven if he changes his ways going forward. But he’s simply too arrogant to repent, that’s why he’s doomed.
Dive deeper and you‘ll find god bro. I‘ve been at a similar point, I know what you‘ve been through and understand your points. But there‘s more, trust me and trust god. God bless you and your family ✌️🙏
Arguments for the Non-Existence of Gods:
1. If god existed such existence would be obvious, yet there is no evidence of any such existence (“divine hiddenness”).
2. The historical record shows that all gods were invented by men and evolved over time in accordance with the development of human knowledge.
3. Most accounts of god involve its performance of miracles and supernatural events that conflict with what we know about reality.
4. Human cognitive biases include attribution of agency, aversion to uncertainty and death, self-deception, wishful thinking and projection. Gods and religion correspond to these cognitive biases.
5. Most conceptions of god are logically incoherent, e.g. describing god as a "creator" while special pleading its own creation.
Religions don’t have much to say on truth. But the main issue is that they define God in these anthropomorphic ways. I think “God” is what people use to explain things beyond science, like love, consciousness, etc. The “human” things about us. We could just reproduce without love, or be alive without consciousness, but we have those things. Whatever explains that is what people refer to when they say “God”
I would say god is equal to existence itself
“Mo bamba or sicko mode”
Ahh my cute dear friend. The pinnacle of this journey is when you realize there are ex-muslims out there who practiced their faith for 30 years and then left it due to the painful guilt of not being able to practice such a barbaric religion. They were indoctrinated from their youth and still fought it without developing a hate of the thing they are escaping, but rather they started thinking about why such a barbaric religion has such strong roots in humanity. Look up Haris Sultan (his english channel)
The part about God testing Abraham is distinct for me since God should be all-knowing, why would he need to test Abraham's faith? It means one of two things: Either he wanted to confirm how Abraham would act and therefore proving he is not all-knowing, or he is sadistic and enjoys watching people suffering in his name (narcissistic behavior). I am not denying the existence of any higher power, simply denying the image of God painted by mainstream ideologies.
Or 3rd. You needed God to test Abraham. The story is a foreshadowing of what was to come. That God himself will provide the sacrifice to atone for sin once and for all.
It for shadows how even the most willing servants sacrifices will fall short and only God can pay the penalty as Christ Jesus. (Ram in the bush)
The stories are brilliant if you don’t strawman argue the characters. Christian or not.
He wouldn't NEED to test it. God choose to act like this. He could choose not to create you but yet he created. That's not because he NEEDS us. That's about choice. He is all knowing. Does Ishmael get hurt at the end? No. And to that dilemma Soren Kierkeegard brings a new perspective too I recommend it.
@1stSonOfJames yeah I agree. I don't believe the "sin" theory of Christianity but there is a lot of explanation to even simple things when the ultimate being is in the game.
@@Musical_thinker And then there’s the governance of things above us. Opposites depending on each other for definition. In this case the Infinite and Finite. “NEED” becomes the definitional pre-requisite itself to exist. Its Logos.
I think Abraham had to earn it through unquestionable obedience even through great suffering. It was a representation of the Father offering His Son as a sacrifice in years to come.
nah bud, sorry, god is real and christ is king.
Great argument, so articulate
U are mental patient
no he's not
AMEN!
Lmaooo
Christian here!
This is mostly just ramblings and frankly I feel like he doesn’t understand some of the things he’s saying especially when he talks about the fine tuning argument.
Maybe we can have some argument in the comment section and help me understand better?
The fine tuning argument is the silliest of all apologetics. The universe is not designed at all for us as literally everywhere we look the universe is horrifically inhospitable to life. We have adapted to this very narrow corner of an infinite universe, on a muddy rock. It took billions of years of trial and error in a briny ocean vat for self replicating molecules to rise up with sufficient complexity to wonder - why? Fine tuning puts the human experience at the center of the universe. It’s the new geocentric model.
@@jonq8714That rebuttal works for the people that say that the whole universe is tuned for human life to exist. But what the argument really says is that the universal constants are so finely tuned in a way in which if they were changed in the slightest way is not only that life and chemistry would not have formed but the universe would collapse, for me that is not silly.
I believe most, now days are athiests for 2 reaons. 1. Your born in the 21st-century. 2. You have acces to TH-cam. You being of Asian descent also increases this probabilty.
My Babies First Philosophy 😂😂😂
You're at Level One bro. The discource has evolved.
There's rebuttals to the rebuttals of the rebuttals.
Read some CS Lewis, for the love of GOD
You have not quite addressed pantheism, though.
This is to read between the lines, not limit your consciousness to the calculator mind: True God can be found in the space where theists acknowledge your critique as good points and where you acknowledge that denial of God leaves you in no better position to deal with the incomprehensible infinity staring us in the face so much that we normalized fading it out of awareness.
Ponder how and why christians tend to make a strong distinction between the church and Jesus. Now extrapolate further. God is that which naturally blows everybody's mind.
At some point, if you become dissatisfied with being trapped in analysis and begin to strive for synthesis in order to grasp the whole picture, you might be daring enough to seek out certain powerful assistance that can give you glimpses into aspects of reality totally out of your comprehension. To quote Yoda: "You WILL be afraid."
You can learn and grow from christianity if you truly commit to the learning experience. Of course you will find limitations in the minds of christians, but you have them, too, just maybe in a different 'flavor'. Synthesis leads to the spiritual type of enlightenment. It is a practice of overcoming fear, which erodes walls in our minds.
Basically, the concept of God might naturally appear valid to you if you gaze deeply into the fabric of the universe. You will understand how those who prove others wrong might further down the line be wrong themselves, and the fools become right again. It is a very ... enlightening journey, and humbling, which is a necessary part of enlightenment. And humility can become hard when we basically consider ourselves God. Hubris is a fierce beast.
"The universe does not require a creator." - So you find it a more reasonable thesis that there can be stuff that no one made? But then where did it all come from and why? This is where spiritually starved science becomes an exercise in distraction and denial: When you look towards the big bang or whatever one wants to imagine there, you HAVE to confront the metaphysical, because otherwise you always encounter a wall, and beyond it, the prospect of unceasing unexplainable infinity.
… It only makes sense once you add feeling to your perceptions so that you perceive the nature of the universe in all its aspects instead of only half of it all.
Thank you for taking the time to reply. I will keep in mind the importance of synthesis alongside analysis in my future endeavors. To answer your question regarding the universe's creator, physics has an answer if you read the scientific literature regarding the beginning of the universe. And as to "why" the universe came into being -- there is no "why." I know that isn't a satisfying answer, but there are things in life that have no explanation ... they just are. Even the "meaning" of life is questionable. Rather, I have come to believe that humans make their own meaning, and we go from there. I do see some personal emotional benefit in adding feeling to my perceptions of the universe, however, in terms of scientific inquiry, personal feelings cloud judgement and obfuscate the objective interpretation of data. I must end by expressing my sincere gratitude at your loquacious comment. It is an example of which I hope will continue to happen on my channel.
@@raikageray The limitation, when science says some things just are, against their own core mission to explore all mysteries, that is exactly where spirituality can expand the scientific endeavor by exploring greater perceptions of reality.
One cannot really understand a system while being part of that system and subject to its limits, but those limits can be transcended, at least temporarily and to a certain degree. I can say from own experience that I experienced things that could normally not be comprehended. It was scary at times, but impressive at other times. And it is not situated at any pole of a divide of world views.
Well, you are young and have much to explore and I can only give you some hints. 🙂 - It is wise to focus on more pressing matters in the world first, so that we can continue to have the luxury of such lofty explorations. The most basic things are connected to the highest things.
@@Dowlphin Science is not a thing. It "says" nothing. Science is simply a process we have developed for studying the world around us. That's it. And if one's brain doesn't already have the information inside of it, one is not going to receive answers to the universe by staring meditatively into it and concluding "Well, it all had to be created, so obviously God did it!" Gods are neither pseudo science nor philosophy. They are merely out story creations we arrogantly use when we refuse to simply say "I don't know."
There is nothing that says the universe requires a beginning or an end. The passage of time could merely be an illusion that is only created in sentient minds. For all we know everything is happening all at once. Science proves that there is nothing limiting the passage of time from moving forwards or backwards.
@@TheForneveralone I agree.
The last sentence might be a bit bold, specifically the science-proves part, but I am not versed in the details of that question.
🔥🔥Mathematical truth exists. Timeless, spaceless, and immaterial. Objective. Logical. Infinitely beautiful. Moral truth exists. Timeless, spaceless, and immaterial. Objective. Logical. Infinitely beautiful. Athiesm is immoral. Jesus came to bring light to this dark world. Amen. 🔥🔥✝✝👼🏼👼🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼😇😇🙏🏼🙏🏼✝✝🔥🔥
Everything comes from a single point that single point is god
xD good one
You can't know that for sure. It's totally okay to say 'I don't know'. 😉
and why does that point to your god specifically?
Do you realize that this is Earth not Heaven..
Absence of evidence is not evidence for absence.
you're making theists whine like little babies... well done sir
I hope you are prepared to strengthen your resolve and understand that you're entering a religious world while shouting loudly that you don't believe, Look at your comments most of them believe whereas very little agree and that feeling of being alone and the world being mentally against can be scary and full of pressure. Remain headstrong and do not let group think sway you, the impossibility of god is easy the impossibility of dealing with god believers is not. keep up the clear thinking young man
Who taught you all of this?
Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins
@@raikageray I wonder who taught them...
Good example of Dunder-Kruger right here.
you're a good example of it, buddy ... spell it right next time ok?
god is consciousness, god is “everything” , god is you, you are god. it is impossible for a human to describe what is god, it is like describing what is a new colour or what is a new taste
this means literally nothing.
God is the devil then. God is evil if God is everything. If you believe that to be true then the statements above are true then my statements are also true. You also said God was indescribable yet you have described it.
@@JoeyWheeler-m3s god is the devil...or the devil is an agent of the lord....he will tempt you, but he will also punish you...the devil is like god's public relations scapegoat.
God is nothing you are correct. He is everything and nothing. Up and down. Also he isn’t a he or a human
He created the darkness and the light. Isiah 45:7. So also correct.
This temporary life you live bound by time and space is a speck of the infinite reality beyond. Seek and you will find.
Something that transcends our comprehension is ineffable.
I can debate you if you want
Yes like ask him where our rights come from
God is ill-defined and can mean the unintelligent entirety of reality or a personal mind that has desires much like us. Saying that one does or doesn't believe in god or that god is or isn't impossible is always up for contention because the definition you're using is always in contradiction with someone else's.
Why is there no god of madness?
Think about it!
Where do our rights come from? Think about it!
@@GREEENMASTER Is a right a permission to interact with the Material World in a particular way?
- Everyone is going to heaven, it's Biblical
- Sin causes most of the pain and suffering
- Slavery is one of many forms of punishment for evil. Biblical slavery is different than Trans-Atlantic slavery, like what used to be in America. That form of slavery is a capital offense in the Bible.
1. "Everyone is going to heaven, it's Biblical." Hate to rain early on your happy parade, but majority of Christian and Catholic denominations would disagree with you. Some even believe God specifically makes certain individuals with the sole purpose of sending them to hell.
2. "Sin causes most of the pain and suffering." If we're talking about suffering that results from human actions and choices, sure. But that doesn't explain natural disasters and diseases.
3. "Biblical slavery is different than Trans-Atlantic slavery, like what used to be in America. That form of slavery is a capital offense in the Bible." You do realize this only applies to Hebrew slaves right? Hebrew men (but not women) are to be set free after six years of servitude. Of course you could always get the Hebrew male to impregnate one of your female slaves and force him to marry her. Then you get to keep both of them as a package deal (including any children they pop out). Also, the part about slavery being a capital offense is referring to one Israelite attempting to kidnap and enslave a fellow Israelite. In fact in Leviticus, it tells you that you can take slaves from the nations around you, and they are to become your property that you may bequeath to your children as inheritance. But you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly (once again special treatment for Israelites). This is very clearly describing "chattel" slavery which was very much practiced in America in the Antebellum South.
Agree except for the first point
cool!
still don't know why create evil in the first place ..;
we'll never know ig
@ there is no hell in the Old Testament.
All of the hell verses in the 4 gospels are hyperbole.
For God has bound everyone into disobedience so that He may mercy on them all. - Romans 11:32
@@drb_kd evil is a tool used by God to help develop our character.
This part of life is like a simulator in The Matrix that teaches you things.
Im here to enlighten you, i was born muslim ( societal brainwashing) then became atheist after digging deep in science , then finally had a direct mystical experience of god, god is a separate thing from religions, think of him like coffee beans that are still in the tree, they are natural and independent from human thought, once humans became aware of coffee beans and their effects as a drug to humans, they marketed it as brands ( analogy for religions)
What was the mystical experience?
@ psychological death also known as EGO death, it reveals the hidden reality , it’s the experience of enlightenment when people meditate for enough time, the brain thinks the body is dead , beginning the process of ‘dying’ the process of ‘death’ is what reveals the secrets of the universe, truth can be found in any spiritual tradition, because it comes from people who went through it, like buddha , lao tzu , and all the mystics of all the corner of the world , the truth is you are not a stranger to this world/ universe , you come out of it , wherever you go it’s your home , this quote explains it perfectly, « you are not a drop in the ocean, you are the entire ocean inside a drop »
@ the ego mind is a mechanical illusion created by the mind to generate the « human identity » this human identity is the veil, it’s what hides the true reality of everything , it’s simple , god created everything--> god ALONE exists, this is the secret truth that is hidden by the nature of how our human minds were designed in order to let us and make us play this video game or dream called life as a human
I dont know why my comments are gone but it’s basically EGO death, a psychological death, dying without dying reveals the secrets of the universe
If there is no god then morality is just a subjective opinion based on what helps people survive at the current time. So there is no real absolute basis for right and wrong on anything, as people needs can change over time. So no-one can really have the high ground and judge anyway one else. So people may judge actions in the bible as immoral but it's just oppinion when there is no moral absolute. In a world without god your opinion is just has valid as an insect (not saying this to be rude) and all your left with is an uncaring world. Doesn't really give people much to build on or hope for, so even if you look at it from an evolutionary angle, religion serves a purpose that has allowed the human race to flourish.
Morality IS already subjective. Some believe in God, some don’t, but in effect, each person’s morality is what they think is right/wrong. That doesn’t make it useless. Most people agree on basic morals, and we have laws without needing to refer to any objective moral arbiter.
I disagree, first religion is not used to determine what is right and wrong, your “moral compass” yes can be based on said religious beliefs but to assume everyone shares the same is redundant. I just don’t understand how a God of any religion could be deemed based on morals. Most people morals would have changed over millenniums due to human survival as well as different religious practices. But u said it yourself morality is relative and subjective to the individual; but the whole idea of religion and a church was not only to comfort the dead and dying but survival and union for the living. (Obviously not all religions) you also said that religion served a purpose in humans evolutionary flourishment but it without a doubt has caused more harm than not. The amount of death, destruction and lack of money for all, in order to satisfy gods and religious teachers hopefully hasn’t played a role in shaping many peoples morals.
@@brixan... In your opinion it is subjective. Yes everyone can make up what they believe is right or wrong. It doesn't really matter if you believe in god if a moral compass was put in you from him. It's worth looking into what morals you have and where they came from. Some pass down through the family of previous religious people several generations before. If morality is just based on survival, the world soon turns ugly and empty.
@ right, morality is not based on survival. Again, we have laws without referring to any objective moral arbiter. The morals may have been put into us by God, so we just need some evidence or reason to believe that it’s truly the case
god can't provide objective morality. just because something serves a purpose doesn't make it true, or even a good thing. have you ever seen monsters inc.? scaring children served a purpose for the monsters in that story and allowed them to flourish, but it is literally scaring children, and there are other ways of structuring society without need for that.
To use traditional religion as a means to deny the existence of a larger entity is similar to a straw man. Religion itself and the basis of societal values are built from a collective lack of understanding. Just because a being is beyond our current comprehension doesn’t mean it does not exist. Humans can hardly visualize the actual structure of an atom, what makes you think they can comprehend a being spanning larger than existence. To believe life is meaningless would be correct and incorrect at the same time. Your purpose is already fulfilled as long as you live, you are here to simply exist and whatever passion you find can be your “purpose” but in reality there is no one purpose for something. Life itself is a complicated larger organism that hinges on itself through a variety of factors from large to small and back again. I understand it is difficult to visualize God without religion, but that is precisely why it was created. Religion was made to interpret God for the masses who have a lack of understanding of such an infinitely spanning multilayered system. The concepts of “good” and “evil” are simply too black and white. I would better put them as “clarity” and “confusion”. Those who do not understand act in a way that may be considered evil, they simply just do not understand the bigger picture. I enjoy atheist arguments, they are the other side to the closed mind coin of religion, an antithesis of it. I believe both are correct in their own ways, the limits of the story telling of religion hold it back from understanding the larger point. Same with atheists, the ideas of a lack of anything beyond, limit a more open mindset to think progressively. I’m ranting on and on but in summary the answer to some of that confusion within you is “all of the above”. Limiting yourself to only one set of beliefs will inevitably run you into the same wall of ignorance.
That's why you hold belief until proven true.
@@lcrx.stream exactly!
@@raikageray the op is implying to accept "Everything" while at the same time, trying to solve "Confusion" and if you really think about it, is moronic. You can't possibly hold 2 contradicting positions.
@@lcrx.streamclearly misunderstood, both positions of theist and atheist are incorrect if you were to hold an argument in a full position. But they are both partially correct. Both are based in and created from impartial information. It is moronic to hold only one position and be inflexible to changing ideas. I’m certain it is comfortable and why atheists and theists alike do not change their views, much easier to push a straw man than to actually research ALL topics in relation.
@@hazardousgreed1064 Wrong. Atheism is not a "Claim" to be wrong. It simply a disbelief of the god claims mostly due to insufficient evidence. You may need to rethink everything you just wrote cause clearly you don't fully understand the subject.
Your critique at the beginning, until circa 3:45, is correct. You tackle it from the positions of the supernatural.
Your critique falls flat once you talk about god(s) at our planetary level vis-a-vis human connection.
_Let me explain..._
If you study (even as a curiosity) the historiography of cults, religions, faiths, you'll see that there are three main forces: the universal supernatural, the supernatural, and the preternatural.
*The universal supernatural* is, per your initial critique, related to the universe, known & unknown, seen and unseen. Not only do we not know but it is absurd to consider Earth/Terra some epicenter of the whole universe as a whole.
*The supernatural close to home.* Disasters, weather effects, diseases, droughts, vulcanic eruptions, planetary motions, and also traits relating to the humane such as joy, fury, love, apathy, hatred, hunger, fullness etc.
Once, the supernatural was contained within the environment that people simply didn't knew better, why, what, and how. Later, the human aspect was mixed with these pantheons of gods under human, or animal, or object image.
A lot of people are tempted to unite this and the previous point - including myself - into the "supernatural-led faith", however, for the sake of clarity, I wanted to separate them just to prove a point.
*The preternatural.* This is where your critique doesn't and can't apply the same way as it was applied to the previous ones.
The argument - - - the original abrahamic desert religions, respectively animist/animatist cults in Asia, Africa, or the Americas, all of them require an intermediary - a middle person or middle persons.
The preternatural religions & faiths, where the challenge lies, is that you're not criticizing the impossibility of god more, than the legitimacy (projection) of power that these intermediaries claim the direct connection between humanity and the unseen, unheard, the powerful beyond human conception.
If you study history, you'll observe that between the supernatural faiths & the preternatural faiths, the preternatural ones always won over the supernatural.
Why is that? It's simple: at different points of time, people confined with tackling religion, have come to realize that people _(the masses of people, of various beliefs & customs)_ do not care about god(s) that are inhuman - or ahuman to be precise.
People have responded extremely favorably to the concept of god, as a deity connection with humanity, via a proxy, via an intermediary. First, polytheism tried that and eventually it failed, because of too many actors & too many rulesets to follow. A headache.
The monotheism. Monotheism solved three problems: the lack of human-godhood direct connection, the god that understand the human even though the latter will never understand the former, and the ergonomic rulesets that cancels a multitude of gods with their rites & rituals to a single entity.
This is where, eventually, all critiques fail: the arguments against the supernatural, as mentioned, are correct *_for and only_* the supernatural(s) faiths. The same arguments fail against the preternatural(s) because the preternatural(s), all of them, claim a direct intimate link between the imperfect humanity with the perfect abstract entity.
Humans will not abandon this intimacy - even if the institutions they're supported are crooked, the individuals governing them more so - because people will cherish what they perceive as the intimate link between them and this god that "understands them" and requires of them to follow rules that only a human could do & treat it as a special dispensation (wear this, eat that, don't wear that, don't eat this, pray like this, don't pray like that, say these words in this particular order & intonation, god understand your grievance but don't forget your obligations etc.)
We already have the criticism for the supernatural. It became the preternatural.
We do not have the criticism for the preternatural. This is where we're at, even though we know better than our fellow brethren scared of pain, agony, death, threats, hunger, poverty etc. The majority of humanity values the vague intimate link - of mutual understanding - between them and the concept of god.
Very well said.
Man, I was so angry when I figured those things out :D
(at age 38! I really envy young men such as yourself who are sharper than me)
I just had the good fortune of growing up in a non-religious household. I wouldn't say that I'm sharper than you.
Cringe
Haven’t watched the video more than 20 seconds but before I do.. let me say this:
Of course, religions just do their best to describe god, but in doing so, you are limiting ‘god’ to words.. which is impossible. Most religions attempt to instill obedience or orderliness due to man’s greed (need to propagate)…but they still acknowledge a force that started it all. What is this force? The Big Bang? What happened to initiate the reaction in the Big Bang? What broke the symmetry? Was there symmetry to break? (Google electroweak forces and symmetry breaking if you don’t understand).
Often I believe that ‘god’ is the force that set everything into motion.. wether that’s as he’s described in the Hebrew religions… it’s Impossible to tell.
Why is there something rather than nothing?
Good luck out there man, you’re on the first steps ;)