Is Atheism a Delusion?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2024
- Join us at: www.inspiringph...
To help support this ministry click here: www.patreon.co...
So I hear from atheists all the time that religion is a delusion, but they never show evidence it is true. They just assume it is true without evidence. So I did a video to address this and show religion is perfectly consistent with normal brain functions and not a delusion. However, in my research I found that atheism appears to be abnormal for normal brain development. This video explains why.
TJ's Video: • Religion: Does Anyone ...
Sources:
Why God Won't Go Away - Andrew Newberg and Eugene D'Aquili
www.sciencedire...
www.cell.com/tr...
Born Believers - Justin L. Barrett
www.qub.ac.uk/...
journals.cambri...
www.nature.com/...
www.tandfonline...
citeseerx.ist.p...
www.cell.com/tr...
www.sciencedire...
www.anthro.ox.a...
www.yale.edu/co...
*If you are caught excessively commenting, being disrespectful, insulting, or derailing then your comments will be removed. If you do not like it you can watch this video:
www.youtube.com....
"Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."
As a former atheist, I can confirm this to be true. I was often mad at Christians for believing in god. There was something I was lacking that they had. When I accepted god, my life was transformed. I am now walking with the lord and abiding by his word.
welcome brother.
Lol why would you be mad at christians for believing in god? I have a feeling you didn't have your life in order.
@@Mutantcy1992 Well, isn't that what his testimony says directly?
@@blusheep2 Atheism has two versions. One is never having believed in anything and so being a de facto atheist. The other is having believed, then stopped believing.
most of the stereotypical immature atheists are the first type, feeling some unearned superiority over people who believe in something they can't comprehend believing in.
and that type can be drawn in to religion because they've never actually thought about how it doesn't make sense, and how it's not the answer.
I'm the second type. I could never believe again because I know what it is to believe and I know what it is that Christians have that I don't, and I'm glad I don't have it anymore.
@@Mutantcy1992 I think your analysis misses quite a few groups. Some of these other groups may be subsets of the two you mentioned.
1. Those who have never believed or those that never cared less one way or another
2. Those that stopped believing
3. Those that claim God doesn't exist.
4. Those that don't know if God exists but believe that is more likely that he doesn't. (Agnostic/atheists)
I don't accept:
1. "Atheism is just a lack of a belief." - Some very few may fall into this but it is a crap definition because it leaves no room for agnosticism and applies equally to rocks as it does thinking people.
2. Those that leave are not the type to be drawn into it again. - I don't believe this because people rarely leave because of a deep review of the data. There are those that are mad at God for not giving something they want, usually the health of a loved one. There are those that leave because they shallowly think they have all the information they need to reject it(This I'd say is the most common). There are those that followed the rules and even pretended to be something that deep inside they knew they never were. There are those that set such high expectations that they concluded that God must not be real because these expectations weren't met.
3. The immature type are those that never believed. - I have been engaging atheists for about three years. I dedicated my time online to it. I wanted to see what made atheists tick, if we could find common ground on anything, and to test the reasons that I had held unchallenged for so long and by doing so either eliminate, moderate, or strengthen them. I did all three. When I run into that insulting, immature, uncharitable, bigots, it is VERY common for them to claim they used to be in the church.
30% of the comments are people expecting trolls that never show up
Nova-C Productions
..."trolls that never show up" are called atheists.
Lol
Trolls u call hmm u mean non deluded ppl
@@wmthewyld no, because they always show up, although this very well could be a video they run from.
I’m here. Well....
I was raised catholic. During and after college, my religious beliefs were challenged by all the factual science I was being exposed to, which I could "understand" and "verify". In the end I professed atheism. But I was really refusing to believe in the kind of deity I was told about during all my life. So I prayed: If you are really there, whatever it is you are, I want to get to know you, so please reveal yourself to me in a way i can understand. And it happened. For me, the ultimate evidence of GOD is himself.
it was probably indigestion, and you're a weird kind of atheist who is catholic. lets see what you have on your channel...
What happened?
what was it?
Niga what? You saw god?
What does he look like?
TJ: "Does anybody REALLY believe this sh*t?"
Me: "Yes."
Oh no
So you believe that the Bible is the word of god?
@@gabebrocklebank7411 The Word of God is Christ, and the Bible the message for humanity from him.
The Bible was divinely inspired, but there’s nothing stopping a person from interpreting something in it incorrectly, either by accident or on purpose.
After all, the Bible certainly was not originally written in English, and there is always a little bit on context or meaning lost even in the most faithful translations.
@@NineHundredDollarydoos Awesome, so do you think it’s okay to beat a slave as long as you don’t kill them?
@@gabebrocklebank7411 Nice anti-intellectual ‘gotcha’ question. Try spending less time attempting to trick poorly thought out and emotional responses from people and instead try making an actual argument.
To answer your question, Christ himself is quoted in the New Testament as saying that, apart from loving God, the most important commandment is “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”
You can develop your own interpretation of that, but my view is that it means that you shouldn’t subject others to experiences that you are not willing to go through yourself. Treat others as you wish to be treated and all that.
Under that interpretation, I don’t think I should own slaves at all, let alone beat them.
But let me guess your next move, you’re going to bring up an out of context passage from the Old Testament, probably from quite early on as well, all the while completely ignoring the fact that the commandments and promises Christ made in the New Testament overrode and fulfilled the ones made previously between God and the Israelites?
New laws that override old ones are created all the time in human societies, God simply delivered the new promises through Christ once it was necessary to do so.
I was bullied in school and I hated God because I thought no God would allow such things to happen to me. But I changed and now I’m in service every sunday.
lol loser
Well yea, because when you were a kid, you didn't understood the free will of humans and that is not God's fault, but rather is because he loved us and didn't wanted us to be robots
Former atheist here: it's true that trying to be blasphemous is painful and I did want to undo it.
just want to say, i am proud of anyonewho leaves the cult that is atheism and becomes a batter person,
Takes this verse to a whole new meaning
Mark 10:15
Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God *like a child* shall not enter it.”
we all know something good in the world exists
that was the default state
when humans chose evil, evil stayed that way: an open door just needs a small crack to open up
now that we tolerate evil, some of us think that there is no good, there is no God. where did their longing for God go? is it because they want justification too? therefore, it stands to reason there must be a God to determine who is justified otherwise humans are terrible deciders of good and evil.
Infantilisation is a tool used by manipulative groups to ...well...manipulate people into joining and staying.Watch some theramintrees vids on the topic if you want a more in-depth explanation.
@@db1416 It's an analogy. Children always ask questions.
@@charlesrankin1190 Questions and doubt is often punished in religious organisations.
@@db1416 Define 'punished'? If someone is actively prostelytizing anti-theism, why the fuck should a church let them be a member? That would be like if a Communist party let an anti-communist be a member.
Non-christian here.
Very good arguments. Especially for militant atheists who discharge their whole frustration and resentment against religious authorities who may have done some abuse directly or indirectly to them. They are quite annoying, but once you listen to them and understand their backgrounds, then you may comprehend why they are like they are..
Gr8 videos, IP, I'm going to be a History teacher and I watch your videos to educate myself. I have discovered that many things i used to belive as true, were false. i want to teach the truth ti my students.
So thank you a lot
This news is amazing! I pray God opens your heart to the truth and blesses you! Thanks for being so open minded.
No one believes you aren't already a devout believer.
@@highroller-jq3ix haha nice one 😅 but no, it's just... Not for me. But thanks, I guess 😅
@@Luxzifer Either you're a fraud or a complete dunce. No sincere aspiring skeptical history teacher would turn to a Christian apologist as a resource or pretend that the "truth" is to be found in religious propaganda. Great emojis. Is that the level of expressive gravitas you learned from the fundie propagandist's guide to historiography?
@@highroller-jq3ix lol what a weird thing to say to someone
Well that explains way it was so easy for me walk away from Atheism plus the community was getting Toxic.
@Thelma Lynne, stop making the exception an example you idiot, if we had to talk about every atheist pedo there is we would never finish.
Groups of self-proclaimed intellectuals tend to get toxic.
@Thelma Lynne, your intellect is astonishing, I'm amazed how smart you are! Could you enlighten me with your supreme intelligence and show me your arguments against God's existence?
@Thelma Lynne, ok you have no arguments whatsoever and your questions are absurd.
@Thelma Lynne, I sent you the arguments 2 days ago, besides you also have the burden of proof since you're an atheist.
As a former atheist, it is total self delusion.
@@getkraken8064 as a current atheist, I think that non of them are delusions
@@Zembie1I thought atheists followed evidence? I was wrong lol
Former atheist here...
Once you have mystical experience, you see that atheism have a cartoonish view of religion. It is more realistic than it looks like.
However, without experience, that would be like trying to explain color to a blind person.
@@sophiacristina makes sense
Whenever I hear Dawkins or Harris speak, I always get the feeling that they're desperately trying to convince THEMSELVES that their assertions are true, and they're just looking for validation. The need to write books and give lectures beating people over the head with what you DON'T believe reeks of insecurity and narcissism to me.
Its worst than that, it is a lie.
www.researchgate.net/post/To_say_that_something_does_not_exist_is_a_contradiction_in_terms_But_there_is_a_sense_in_which_the_question_admits_different_answers_What_exists
Now, that someone ignorant would do it here and there, might just be a mistake, but if you make a career out of it, there is no excuse. Its certainly irrational either way.
Same as those people that say "in the past, people thought the Earth was flat, but Christopher Columbus, blah blah." Its a lie too. Historically false, but also, how would they know? they are just making things up and attributing their own delusions to others in order to deny them. Same with God, what they deny is their own delusions, usually badly informed, which they project on others. Its a psychological projection, which accord to the data in the video, that they get aroused by the idea of God, and don't want to deal with those feelings. Now, a normal person would simply avoid things they dislike, but in this case, they seek it out, and try to gaslight everybody, so it is a mental illness. Militant atheists at any rate, are clearly sick people.
@@OneLine122 ..Oneline.. clearly the deluded ones, the one with the mental problem, are the believers.. surely it is they who are sick? what about those who believe in Blessed Virgin Mary? that She had actually appeared to various people in the world and said to them, 'Build a church on this spot and pray for world peace.'.. She seems to have appeared to and said this to a number of different people world wide, judging by the number of shrines dedicated to Her.. and claims of visions of BVM are as valid as Paul of Tarsus claim to have seen the Risen Christ.. or maybe not?
the bottom line is that there really is no good reason to believe in Moses Jealous God, or angels and demons, neither should we believe in Divine Revelation.. this is complete and utter delusion.. touch wood, touch the Black Stone...
all people of faith are, at the very least, Deluded, and that is a FACT!!...
To be fair, Harris hasn't devoted much attention to the God question in years: all the videos you see of him debating Christians on TH-cam are at least a decade old. He has made himself unpopular in the atheist community by maintaining that atheism is a useless banner to rally around, and there are far more interesting and important issues in life to spend one's energies on.
I can say this with confidence because I've read almost everything the man has ever published. Many of his key points (such as the irreducibility of consciousness, and the validity of spiritual experience) run counter to the standard naturalist worldview, and have lead me away from atheism in some ways.
@@ThePlatypus94 The one thing Atheist have problems with is trying to convince someone who has met God, though the Holy Ghost and have had their lives changed not in years but in days, or minutes, this I know by experience, and can with stand any argument by the grace of God.
I would like to believe there is a god but there is zero evidence of one, furthermore there is bounds more evidence that there is no God and the universe was created 13.8 billion years ago not 6 according to Christianity also the bible is a horrible book about terrible human beings and if God is real and everything that happens is caused by him then why does he do such atrocious acts of cruelty?
I really should share this with my relatives who all think I am nuts since I started going to church again.
I am glad you did
@@InspiringPhilosophy Thanks, sadly, due to the flu I had to miss this Sunday service for the first time in a year, but your vids and my fav sermon channels kept me going this weekend.
@@InspiringPhilosophy I would also like to ask if you intend to critique any examples of bad apologetics? From personal experience they do seem to keep people from taking Christianity seriously on an intellectual level.
you likely are nuts
@@InspiringPhilosophy I'm surprised nobody mentions the fact that Japan is a country where athiesm abounds. Apparently, about 86% of Japanese people are athiests. I checked. How is it that despite their education system being of superior quality than ours, many of them think there is no god, nor miracles, nor the supernatural?
I think the part about "atheists" being emotionally aroused was very interesting... They make radical statements with undertones of anger. We can definitely look at the comment sections on any videos that discuss the existence of God, as see how emotional they get when God is brought up. That's another interesting point too. Why do they spend so much time talking about God, even though they don't believe in a God?
Also, non-religious people tend to use the name of God and Christ a lot more than religious people do, since a lot if swearing is done using God's name. Personally speaking, it makes me uncomfortable whenever people swear using God's name, since the commandments tell us not to use the Lord's name in vain.
@@AericLee23 how many commandments?
I bet you get this wrong?
colin dickson, I was talking about the Ten Commandments- one of which says, “you shall not use the Lord’s name in vain”.
@@aericabison23 oh i know the comandments.
Not just ten of them.
colin dickson, yeah, yeah, whatever.
I keep reading comments from people who say "former atheist" here, or
"ex-atheist"
Atheists say there is no such thing as a former atheist, but I keep reading comments from people who say they are former atheists, or ex-atheist.
Thought provoking
So, an “ex-atheist/former atheist” is what? A theist who used to be really trying hard to reject theism, but just couldn’t quite let go of a tiny kernel of faith? Like Christians sometimes say that a professing Christian who turns against the faith and becomes an atheist was never really a believer in the first place? You do realise where this line of reasoning leads to, don’t you?
@@MrAgonizomai
Ask former atheist @AaronBNation
I'm sure he can tell you.
An ex-atheist is someone who decides to stop being miserable with their life.
Atheist here. The literal first time that I have read/heard anything along the lines of "there is no such thing as a former atheist" was just moments ago when I read your comment. way to shut down an argument not being made by anyone.
@@MrAgonizomai According to Christianity, if God has entered someone's life and has a solid relationship with that person, then they would not leave the faith. Therefore, if someone leaves the faith, then that means they never had a good relationship with God, hence, never Christian. It is not in same line of reasoning as becoming an ex-atheist/former atheist.
I used to be an atheist. I believe it. I really do. Praise god!
I hope and pray that God uses you to bless your friends and family in particular those who new you before you got saved
@@davidmccarroll8274 your god is fake
Now that you've decided to stop thinking rationally, which particular god fantasy do you slavishly praise?
@@highroller-jq3ix Which fedora and cheeto stained white shirt did you wear today?
@@joe5959 How many vacuous, tired, infantile memes did you substitute for actual neural cognition in the last hour?
'You can wake up a person who's asleep, but you cannot wake up a person who pretends to sleep.'
That's a really good quote, wow. I'll remember that one.
Wow I'm saving this
@@midnightthenightfury3333
Also remember this one: I'm right, because I'm right.
I'd be happy to watch an hour long video on this topic.
probably better to watch one of derren browns, or at least one done by actual scientists, rather than - what's IP's qualification in psychology? oh, none. he's lying in this video about what the studies (they are real at least) actually show.
@@HarryNicNicholas Based on what, exactly?
Took 12 mins to say what Jaramiah said ... "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
I think Jeremiah wrote about the new covenant, not about universal innate knowledge about God.
Hello. So, what I want to do with this message is to simply show what the Gospel is. I am not trying to force my belief down people's throats. It's your choice whether you want to accept it.
So, a question: Do you think you are a good person? If so, have you ever stolen anything, lied, looked lustfully, watched adult material? All of those are sins and anyone who sinned is not good(on God's standard). You, I and most( most because babies don't sin, and maybe specifically mentally Ill people) purely human beings have violated God's moral law. Since God is just, He can't let sin go just like that.
So is there any hope? Yes, there is! Out of love and mercy, God became a human being, Jesus Christ. Jesus lived a sinless life and finally died on the cross to bear the punishment we deserve, we deserve to be punished because we have sinned.
The reason why blood must be spilled for forgiveness of sins is because the life of the flesh is in the blood, in the Old Testament Jews sacrificed animals for sins but the sacrifice of animals were enough to temporarily cover some sins. (it did not allow forgiveness of sins, Unlike Jesus's, it only temporarily covered them). Jesus is the Lamb of God, the ultimate sacrifice for sins which is enough for all sins that have been done, are done and will be done. Jesus was buried and rose again. His resurrection proved that His death was enough to pay our penalty, the penalty for our sins. Jesus paid our penalty and in order to accept the free gift of salvation from God, we must trust in Jesus's spilled Blood, His finished work on the Cross for our Salvation. And then your sins will be forgiven because of what Christ did, you will be saved. See: Romans 3:10 KJV, Romans 3:23 KJV, Romans 5:12 KJV, Romans 6:23 KJV, Romans 5:8-9 KJV Romans 10:9-10 KJV, Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV, John 3:16 KJV, Leviticus 17:11 KJV, Ephesians 1:7 KJV, Colossians 1:20 KJV, 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV.
th-cam.com/video/lbb4xwYj19g/w-d-xo.html
Evidence for God's existence: Kalam Cosmological argument, Contigency argument, Modal ontological argument.
Regarding Christianity watch InspiringPhilosophy's videos about the Ressurection of Jesus reliability of NT. Together, they show good evidence that Christianity is true.
G
I was a staunch Atheist myself until God revealed himself to me. And I've noticed other atheists follow the same path, and very consistently with one another. There seems to be a step-by-step guide.
So if you're agnostic and are genuinely searching for answers, here's the step-by-step guide to the best of my limited understanding.
1) Understand the moral decay in society.
2) Hold up a mirror and see that same moral decay in you.
3) Seek to systemize it, look up views on morality from longstanding sources, you'll end up looking at religion, which will end up with you looking at the 10 commandments of Moses.
4) Now you've been exposed to the Moral Law, and understand how you and the others around you broke it (at least to a minor extent).
5) Your natural desire for justice and goodness will be at work here, and you'll seek ways to rectify the situation. But you won't. No amount of self-righteousness wil fix anything.
6) Having no other option, you'll turn to God, which you do not yet believe in, and ask sincerely, though you do not have faith, you want to be mistaken.
7) In your heart, you would have chosen to be a Son of God, and forsaken sin, and so God *will* reveal Himself to you.
And once he does (or even beforeso), you'll know the solution to the moral problem is the Gospel, so read it.
A few things are important to note during a revelation. God is not coercive. He will never force you to believe in him. He wants you to come to Him willingly. Some of us are very stubborn, so if we choose God, He'll reveal himself to us in more direct ways (such as myself), if you do not suffer from my curse, He'll reveal himself in more subtle ways. You will always be able to choose to write off your revelation as nothing more than a delusion, or misinterpreted signs. And you will always be able to choose to believe. God will even the scales, so that His own goodness tempts you as much as sin does, and you will have to continually choose to be a Son of God rather than a slave to sin.
Directness does not always mean persuasiveness. Adam and Eve had no doubt of God's existence, and yet they chose sin. Same with Cain. David, Saul, Solomon and so on. Pharoah of Moses' time had no shortage of chances and revelations to choose God, but he chose sin. The scale is always balanced perfectly, so that you may choose completely unimpeded.
Lol God isn’t real, it’s literally a character from 1st century European mythology about an evil sorcerer, who talks to snakes and turtles, summons giant cricket armies to attack the townspeople’s crops, casts spells of evil spirits who feast on the souls of the 1st born, and has a zombie apprentice who rose from the grave & rides a donkey into town 😂🤣🤣🤣
@@macysondheim Hello younger me. You're in for the quite the journey as you grow in wisdom and age.
I do agree with your argument that the studies do in fact show, that belief in supernatural is a result of normal brain function and that atheism does indeed require extra cognitive effort to achieve. What I have a problem with is whether it justifies taking the "path of least resistance". There are several examples I can think of, where human brains are strongly primed towards inaccurate representation of reality and it takes great effort to overcome such "delusion" (in the broader sense). The few examples I can think of right now include:
Relativity - it is very unintuitive for human mind to grasp the concept of curved space-time and the non-existence of universal frame of reference. Questions like "what was before the big bang?" or "what's inside the black hole?" seem natural tu our brains despite being mathematical equivalents of asking "what's closer to the center of the circle than the center itself?"
Underestimating danger in some situations, like not wearing seatbelts. While it doesn't take much to convince a person that it is dangerous, it takes quite a lot of effort to make him act reasonably on that belief.
oh the beautiful comment section, where are the trolls, sceptics and haters give there opinion. I love it.
atheism is the religion of hate.
TheMarsCydonia Looks like you are off your meds, so bye.
Just so ya'll know I am not an atheist.
I am an atheist and I do not hate any of you
***** lol no how can you hate what you don't believe exists? do you hate the boogie man? Hate is a yucky feeling I don't hate anyone or anything.
good arguments op, im still not a believer but you made me slightly question my opinion which is anways welcome
i love the way you present your points
great video
We need more people like u, have a nice day😎👌🏽👍🏽
@@kingwarrior5028 mhm we do, people would hate but i respect her for not doing so :D
Minie Waxeller believer or not we should stay optimistic
It's ok that you still don't believe. God won't give up on you and will continually try to draw you to Him.
He does, in fact, promise that He will reveal Himself to anyone who diligently seeks Him with their whole heart, and I can assure you He doesn't break His promises. When He makes a promise, He'll make good on it.
Paul Rice yes! If this person makes the decision to seek him, they will find him 200%!
Even the demons know that God exist.. Almighty God bless you IP for the good job.. Always a blessing
And the Smurfs and the three little pigs....
Okay. Prove the existence of demons then... Or provide some credible evidence at least
@Joseph Rogers you sound like a religious individual.
@Joseph Rogers how christian of you.....lol. Do you believe in demons and gods mate?...after all this is 2021.
@Joseph Rogers are you angry because you don't have any evidence to back up your belief?
Maybe that is why scripture says the fool is someone wise in his own eyes, and why Scripture always calls Atheist (Unbelievers ) fools.
Delgen and Einstein will be smarter than you will ever be. Who's the fucking fool now.
@@ibah9718 Newton, Lennox, Maxwell, Galileo, were all religious (Lennox is still alive), who is a fucking fool now??
SenCorbrn33 u
🐟 07. GOD (OR NOT):
There has never been, nor will there ever be, even the slightest shred of evidence for the existence of the Godhead, that is, a Supreme Person, for the notion of an omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent Deity is both profoundly illogical and extremely incongruous, to put it mildly.
The English word “PERSON” literally means “for sound”, originating from the Latin/Greek “persona/prósōpa”, referring to the masks worn by actors in ancient European theatrical plays, which featured a mouth hole to enable the actors to speak through. Theists, by definition, believe that there is a Supreme Deity which incorporates anthropomorphic characteristics such as corporeal form (even if that form is a “spiritual” body, whatever that may connote), with a face (hence the term “person”), and certain personality traits such as unique preferences and aversions. Simple logic dictates that the Ultimate Reality transcends all concepts, including personality and even impersonality. However, only an excruciatingly minute number of humans have ever grasped this complete understanding and realization.
There are at least FOUR possible reasons why many persons are convinced of the existence of a Supreme Personal God:
1. Because it is natural for any sensible person to believe that humans may not be the pinnacle of existence, and that there must be a higher power or ultimate creative force (an intelligent designer). However, because they cannot conceive of this designer being non-personal, they automatically suspect it must be a man (God) or a woman (The Goddess) with personal attributes. One who is truly awakened and/or enlightened understands that the Universal Self is the creator of all experiences and that he IS that (“tat tvam asi”, in Sanskrit).
2. Because they may have experienced some kind of mystical phenomenon or miracle, which they mistakenly attribute to “God's grace”, but which can be more logically explicated by another means. As explained, all such phenomena are produced by the TRUE Self of all selves (“Paramātman”, in Sanskrit). I, the author of this Holy Scripture, have personally experienced very powerful, miraculous, mystical phenomena, which I formerly ascribed to the personal conception of God (since I was a Theist), but now know to be caused, ultimately, by the Real Self.
3. Because they may have witnessed the deeds or read the words of an individual who seems to be a perfect person - in other words an incarnation of the Divine Principle (“Avatāra”, in Sanskrit). To be sure, such persons do exist, but that does not necessarily prove that the Supreme Truth is PERSONAL. An Avatar is a man who was born fully enlightened, with all noble qualities, but not necessarily perfect in every possible way. For example, very few (if any) of the recognized Avatars in human history taught or practiced veganism.
4. Because they may have been CONDITIONED by their family, society and/or religious organization over many years or decades. Unfortunately, we humans are very gullible. Due to low intelligence and lack of critical analytical skills, the typical person believes almost anything they read or hear from virtually any source. During a visit to one's local place of worship on any given weekend, one will notice a congregation of sheepish individuals nodding in agreement with practically every nonsensical, inane word spouted by their deluded so-called “priest”, imam, mullah, rabbi, guru, monk, or preacher. Even the current World Teacher, despite his genius intellect, was once a thoroughly-indoctrinated religious fundamentalist, before he awoke to a definitive understanding of life.
Having stated the above, the worship of the Personal Deity (“bhakti yoga”, in Sanskrit), is a legitimate spiritual path for the masses. However, the most ACCURATE understanding is monistic or non-dual (“advaita”, in Sanskrit). If one wishes to be even more pedantic, the ultimate understanding is beyond even the concept of nonduality, as the famous South Indian sage, Śri Ramana Maharishi, once so rightly proclaimed.
As an aside or adjunct, it seems that virtually every religious organization, particularly those originating in Bhārata (India), claims to have been founded by an Avatar, but that’s simply wishful thinking on the part of their congregations. Only a great sage or World Teacher can POSSIBLY recognize an enlightened being, what to speak of an Incarnation of the Divine. The typical spiritual aspirant, even one who may seem to be a highly-exalted practitioner, has very little idea of what constitutes actual holiness. Frankly speaking, many famous (infamous?) religious leaders were some of the most vile and contemptible characters in human history, particularly in this Epoch of Darkness (“Kali Yuga”, in Sanskrit).
“God is greater than God.”
*************
“Where there is Isness, there God is. Creation is the giving of isness from God. That is why God becomes where any creature expresses God.”
*************
“Theologians may quarrel, but the mystics of the world speak the same language.”
*************
“There is something in the soul that is so akin to God that it is one with Him... It has nothing in common with anything created.”
*************
“The knower and the known are one. Simple people imagine that they should see God as if he stood there and they here. This is not so. God and I, we are one in knowledge.”
*************
“The eye through which I see God is the same eye through which God sees me; my eye and God's eye are one eye, one seeing, one knowing, one love.”
Eckhart von Hochheim O.P. (AKA Meister Eckhart) ,
German Roman Catholic Priest.
“God is merely one of man's concepts, a symbol used for pointing the way, to the Ultimate Reality, which has been mistaken for the Reality itself.
The map has been mistaken for the actual territory.”
*************
“Worshippers may derive some sort of satisfaction or peace of mind, through worship of a concept such as God (created by themselves), but it is a futile process, from the viewpoint of experiencing one's true nature.”
Ramesh Balsekar,
Indian Spiritual Teacher.
@Ward Ulens actually no he's an agnostic not an atheist
@@TheWorldTeacher why do you care?
I think a large part of the problem when it comes to the atheist vs theist debate is that many western atheists can’t take criticism when it comes to religious people criticizing atheist beliefs. It’s considered acceptable when atheists criticize theists but when it is the other way around, atheists would start labeling theists as invalid, irrational and delusional solely the fact because the person that is criticizing the atheist is religious
atheism is the religion of hate.
@@wmthewyld not even close to accurate or true
@@therick363 Thank you for your reply. Please show how I am wrong.
No it's because being arrogant and wrong is a worse look than just arrogant.
@@wmthewyld your post isn’t there so I can’t answer your question
To IP:
I wanted to direct your attention to Chapter 3 in the book "Why I am a Christian: Leading Thinkers Explain Why They Believe" if you haven't already known of this book.
Chapter 3, by J. Budziszewski, "Why I am not an Atheist", details his time as an atheist, and why he returned to faith. It dovetails perfectly with the theme of atheism as self-delusion that you mention here.
Dude it's not even that it's delusional. The basal problem is that god is an unfalsifiable claim and unless your claim has a false condition, it can't be disproved. If a claim cannot be disproved it can't compete with hypothetical future claims that may be more accurate. In other words, the unfalsifiability of a claim undermines its reliability.
That's again for proving atheists are delusional. GOD is not the focus of the video, atheism being delusional is the focus.
Atheist here. I truly believe people believe in god, to suggest otherwise is dumb. That belief being natural, is relevant. It is natural to want to believe in a higher power - to look for meaning, and explanations. I just don't believe a higher power exists, nor is it a good explanation for what happens, how the world was created, etc.
Ill say this: why is YOUR god real, but the other ones are not? Why is the god of Israel (Elohim, Adonai... god of jews) real but not Zeus, or the cannanite god Baal, or any random Chinese god, or even Allah of the Islam (the same god as god of israel? maybe, but jews don't believe in the Quran)? I really want you theists to think about this for a moment - what makes your god real, but another one not? I'd also like to add "yeah I believe in the big bang" "but what created the big bang" is a valid argument, which to be honest I can't answer, but no one can answer "who created god?" - and if you say he was always there, I can say the same about the big bang.
EDIT: I'll add that the fact that you have evidence to show your belief is real, as in, you're not faking it, doesn't mean it's true.
When I took Psychology as a required course for my Criminal Justice studies I was actually fascinated when I reached the chapter about Consciousness and Unconsciousness. What fascinated me about it is the fact that you literally can have arguments with yourself and one of the two sides of your mind, keep in mind we are talking about consciousness, can in fact refuse to agree with your conscious mind and it shows up in different ways usually in behaviors you simply do without thinking about them. It's just like when you try to lie and for whatever reason your body does these things, and it's different for different people, for example some will scratch themselves for no reason, or make unnecessary movements and so on, well that's what I am referring to when I mention behaviors your unconcsious mind does when it refuses to agree with your conscious mind. So I honestly think that's a daily struggle atheists constantly have and it shows whenever their idea of religion clearly conflicts with what actually tends to be the reality. For example some atheists I argue with insist Christianity is violent at it's core except this argument immediately comes to an end when I ask them why is it in countries where Christians are a clear minority and no one would blame them for fighting back because that country's government is already guilty of a number of different human rights violations but these very Christians simply don't really do anything really considered violent. China would be a good example of this. Sometimes I throw this in, "For your statement to be true shouldn't these same minorities be doing something that would be violent even if it was just a barfight?" I even reference research groups that study terrorism like the START institute which maintains lists on current terrorist groups and point out that there are barely a handful of Christian groups at any given time meanwhile left wing and jihadist groups dominate these lists in the 100s sometimes 1000s. They literally have no answer for this as if even they don't truly believe their own claim. This is just one example but there are a ton of others with similar results showing that same mental struggle between their conscious minds and their unconscious minds. They just blurt them out as though they do believe them but retreat the second it get's challenged using actual facts they can't refute. I even argued with one who kept repeating the same argument over and over and each time I would bring up that contradictory fact and they just kept retreating and it wouldn't be until the 3rd or 4th time I used the same contradictory fact that they either gave some half @$$ed rant posing as a credible response in which case I just threw another irrufutable fact at them and then they finally went away realizing they weren't getting away from this, whatever it was, or they just refused to answer and simply changed to a different argument.
The Bible has a lot of violence but I don't think atheist's main argument is that Christianity is violent though. If you watch the Atheist connection, the Line, etc. they are call in atheist shows. They just ask what do you believe and why. When they ask for evidence of God no one can give it. That seems go be by far their main reason. Simply no convincing evidence. They don't like the religions because the main ones oppose LGBT, and "us against them" mentality, spreading guilt and fear in people, believing in unscientific things, etc. They don't like the results of religion, but that is not why they don't believe (generally).
Islam is also a religion, and they seem to be more violent these days, I think. But then again imperialist nations were Christian and they did a lot of damage around the world.
But if you compare to a low religion country like Noway or Sweden, these countries are the happiest and healthiest. So this seems like a straw man. Compare theism to a country like Norway, not an Islamic country,
Other reasons for non belief, the problem of evil, the hiddeness of God. Lesser ones may be the contradictions in the Bible (maybe the Quran too), the very strange things in these texts (eg miracles).
Atheism is just non belief in God. Just not being convinced. It is not "proven" by pointing to a religion and saying the members are violent, or uneducated, or bad, etc. That is just the results of the religion anyway, not whether it is true or not.
I like to say skeptic for me, but really I believed and now not so sure. I am very ill but have no evidence of a deity helping unfortunately. Peace
@@joecheffo5942 According to you, what I actually see and good luck convincing me otherwise because I follow a legal standard of evidence which basically means I could care less what you think is and isn't evidence. If it meets a legal standard then you don't get a say in the matter, but anyway, what I actually see is your demand for evidence being met and you keep coming up with any excuse to reject it even though on the flip side, say a scientist studying the dark matter or a Psychologist studying consciousness, they will use the exact same forms of evidence but the second any of these professionals in their field tries to make a god argument you immediately reject anything they say regardless of their credentials, their accomplishments and so on as though they committed some sort of heresy. You didn't really think no one would notice that did you? See that's whats called a double standard and it is fallacy because you have no problem with the use of an academic standard of evidence so long as it's not being used in any kind of religious argument. You even rejected historical evidence for the historicity of Jesus even though it is the exact same kind of evidence used to prove Julius Ceasar, Hannibal or pick your historical figure from Antiquity that no historian in their right mind would dare say didn't exist. Yet because Jesus is a Historical figure you automatically reject the methodology and standard of evidence used. Jordan Peterson on the Bible same thing the second he started Psychoanalysing the Bible expossing what atheists refused to take seriously you completely rejected psychology and tried just about anything to discredit Peterson even though he is a noted Psychologist in his field. I can go on. See that goes back to my initial argument because double standards are another your subconscious shows it refuses to agree with you because that's usually why most use a rules for thee not for me standard of any kind. It also shows you are scared to death of the truth which your subconscious mind already accepted.
@@joecheffo5942 Oh btw on the violence part and that changes the fact Christian violent groups are extremely rare how exactly? See in my field when we have a conclusion that doesn't quite measure up to what we should be seeing this is where we review the evidence again because it's pretty obvious something got overlooked and when it comes to atheists this doesn't at all surprise me because the very questions you should be asking about the bible, like this particular question in this case, they are the very questions you refuse to ask because the truth of your stereotypes and false claims about Christians terrifies you. In case you want to challenge me on that ok I will give you a fair chance. Review your claim of violence in the bible but maybe focus on, why it happened according to scripture. Bet you anything the very people you are trying to defend were guilty by anyone's standards if you dig deep enough. And the claims that atheists like to spout about violence in the bible are indeed very much exaggerated and there is a lot more to the stories of violence then most of you are willing to admit. I will put it to you this way, if a rapist, child murderer or just murderer in general was put on trial and they were definitely guilty wouldn't even you want the judge to throw the book at them? I would have to challenge your sanity if you said no. Just in case you want to turn that around on me. I know which scriptures you might try to use but take my advice and dig deep into those very scriptures first before you use them. Like I said there is more to the story. How do I know? Because I didn't just read the bible, I studied it and arguing with you nitwits turned out to be a big help in studying the bible especially when I read the whole chapter and not just the parts you want me to read. And yes, that also means I read related stories to the ones you may in fact mention so you might want to think carefully, and read carefully, before going there. Oh and in case you want to mention historical events thinking that will somehow make a difference you might want to look more into who benefitted from those incidents. Why? Criminal Justice study remember? That means to me someone saying religion says this that and some other thing anyone can do that but that's not what an investigator looks at when looking for the motive. In other words once again there is more to the story so you might want to look more into that before using any such incident. Now I can cite Atheist leaders like Mao Tse Tung who made Hitler look like a boy scout in terms of deaths and they were very much atheist. Mao was even famed for saying, "Religion is Poison." So there again if you want to go there be sure to carefully think about it and read it before you decide to use it.
@@asgaiyawaya3973 I would like to notice that as a supposed Christian you seen full of ego, not humble at all. Also, when a person says they are very ill. Normally, a compassionate person will comment something like “ Sorry to hear that” or “ I hope you feel better.” It’s just interesting that you’re trying to tell people how great it is to be a Christian but then don’t seem to have what I consider common decency.
I’ll try to get some of your arguments. As for Julius Caesar, there are coins, statues, many many other things, that prove his existence. He conquered other countries, and they have evidence of that. Still, if someone wrote that Julius Caesar one day called down lightening ftom the sky, I would be skeptical. Most people agree Jesus existed, or a person of that name who was crucified. Not everyone but most. History is about levels of certainty. That a man names Jesus existed and a man named Jesus walked on water, two very different claims. I would be skeptical if it was written that Caesar walked on water too. Woulnd you be?
Its possible Plato or Hannibal did not exist. Obviously someone wrote The Republic, maybe it was Platos brother or sister. If it was who cares? You make it soumd like I am so convinced of all these other figures but not Jesus. Still, there some historical figures have more evidence, it seems, than others. I certainly dont easily believe miraculous claims about anyone however. I dont believe Paul Bunyan stories.
As for Mao being an atheist, what does that prove? You think it proves God? How so? And which god does it prove?
(See next post)
@@asgaiyawaya3973 part 2
You seem to be jumbling together legal standards, scientific standards and historical standards. Its confusing.
But to Mao for a second. Karl Marx said religion is the “opiate for the masses”. Mao got this idea from him. Im not defending them but Mao took took hundreds of millions out of poverty, made China a world power. Japan had invaded them and butchered millions of Chinese, so Mao took measures to consolidate the country. There is a history behind all this. Japan skinned people alive, tortured Filipinos (I wont say how). Anyway, history is not as black and white as you think. Japan was not always making anime and digital devices. They were very brutal at one point even in the 20th century.
If you have something to say about the Bible, how someone is getting it right or wrong, just say it. Skip all the hot air about the law and investigations. I was a licensed attorney and I participated in trials. There are rules of evidence, but there is also a judge that presides and decides what evudence is allowed or not. So someone does in fact decide. God doesn’t come into the courtroom and decide. Its a judge.
John Lennox got it right: *_"...afraid of the light."_* And, in this context, "light" is not electromagnetic radiation, but spiritual awareness.
😎♥✝🇺🇸💯
I may be an atheist, but I really love your videos, they are very well made and interesting
@spooderderg4077 I understand the feeling. Why is it that you don't feel that you qualify?
@spooderderg4077everyone qualifies and is welcome to relationship with God. He loves everyone no matter what they’ve done
@spooderderg4077 Or at least superficially researched in the service of confirmation bias.
Im agnostic. Everything in this is actually true we humans are naturally wired to be religious since our brain has evolved to follow patterns. So when patterns don’t align with logic we try to justify by creating religions and Gods.
Atheism isn’t a delusion is just against our natural wiring. Religions are manmade creations the assumption in this video is we only reject God but religious people who believe in God reject all the other Gods that have existed in other cultures around the world. There many logical fallacies in this video because it ignores every other religion except the Abrahamic religions. The Egyptians for example did not believed in God they believed in many different Gods and prayed to their polytheistic gods for help even were willing to die for them. Religions is about Groupthink. This is why in India most people believe in Hinduism and indigenous cultures believe in their own gods.
We need MORE of this. Honestly I don't know HOW you find much of this research. I mean it must take you HOURS. I am a doctoral student and I am amazed how good you are at researching articles on these topics and the research that has been done in these areas.
And yet-atheism isn’t a delusion
@@therick363 And neither is religion. Hopefully, constructive dialogue will continue.
@@MrPeaceGuy54 I keep hoping for constructive dialogue from believers.
@@therick363 There is certainly a degree of dogma there. Personally, I wish that people would be more willing to consider a pluralistic perspective. Even though I am a Hindu, my panentheistic view is not necessarily confined to one God who was divinely revealed to my people. Such a view seems to be somewhat parochial.
Jesus Is King.!!! Jesus Loves You❤.!!! John 14:6
King James Bible
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me..!!! Follow Jesus Take The Narrow Path.!!!😊
It amazes me how many atheists go look for videos looking to refute the existence of God. I don't believe in Santa Claus, yet I have never, not even once went to look for or had the desire to look for videos about Santa Claus in order to refute his existence! It would make so much more sense to me if there were no atheists making comments on these types of videos. The fact that they do comment on these types of videos just serves as evidence of what this video is talking about.
No followers of Santa are trying to force their beliefs on others. Santa followers aren’t grooming our kids to disbelieve established scientific facts.
@rickdelatour5355 ok, in that case...I demand that you to believe in my God...I won't hold my breath. You can't force belief on anyone. You may be able to force compliance, but that's a completely different thing.
@@whodatdere trying to do so in the courts and schools. Grooming our kids. Trying to dismiss science. Adding phrases like “under god” to the traditional pledge . . .
Isn’t “forcing compliance” enough to speak out on?
Me, I typically focus on creationists and those who try to straw man atheists.
@rickdelatour5355 fair enough. When it comes to legislation, it all has to do with what we think is right or wrong. Whether it be abortion issues or lgbtq rights. Their views versus our views, right? In a way, we're all forcing compliance. That's just the way our system is set up. I hope my side wins and you hope yours wins.
@@rickdelatour5355 in that case, atheism is dangerous, since atheism is mandatory in North Korea!
I think it would have been interesting to see the reaction in the brain of someone who would say blasphemous curses to Santa Claus or the Easter bunny because these were other personages that children believed in when they were young.
One might argue that , at such a young age, our Neuro- pathways were developed in such a way that a belief in God would be something that would be with us our whole life. Would we feel just as bad telling Santa we wish he were dead because we loved him so much when we were little.
Don't get me wrong I'm a theist, but i think it would have given more credibility to the study.
IP is distorting the facts, the studies don't show a predisposition to XIANTY, but to SUPERSTITION in general. never trust a christian. especially a christian apologist, his job is lying for the sake of god.
Man idk abt you but I loved goku from dragon ball z as a kid and I can blaspheme goku 1000x and not feel anything but bored. (Not sure if blaspheming goku is possible cause that isn’t even the fitting word). Same with Santa. And I’m not sure how you equate Santa with God
Do you know why we have stories about Santa Clause and the like for children? This is something I learned when I was teaching Literature and a lot of it I learned from JRR Tolkien whose bread and butter was Norse and Old English Storytelling a very good thing to note because his education is in stories that started off as word of mouth before they became written word and a lot being family histories. Anyway, we tell stories to children to create a foundation for understanding truths. What do I mean by this? Well let's look at modern Story Telling, let's say Star Trek, great story lines from Gene Roddenbury and he actually is fairly referred to as a legend when it comes to science fiction but what most don't realize was that what made his stories stand out was the fact they were all based on actual sciences some of it merely theoretical and physicists themselves weren't entirely convinced they were proven but regardless it fascinated Gene Roddenbury and it lead to one of the most successful science fiction sagas in TV and Movies, even literature. This is what I mean by that. Stories serve as a vehicle for telling highly complex truths. So if a child says something like, "What's wrong with being a bad little kid every year why do I have to be good?" You can try to explain the highly complex idea of consequences to a child or you can use story telling which already provides a medium for understanding that very idea. And before someone says, "Oh so children are too simple minded?" Well what does psychology tell us about kids? If you actually took it then you don't have an excuse the answer is usually yes with few exceptions because such wisdom usually hasn't developed in children yet and their intelligence and brain's haven't developed to the point where they can simply learn such things from any other way. This is why in physics a highly complicated theory is usually demonstrated through a narrative of some kind because it makes the theory easier to understand. Same with philosophy, law or pick your academic discipline.
Let me start by saying, that I'm a great fan of your channel, although I'm not a theist. You seem to be the only guy in the whole of YT, that doesn't seem to be fanatical about faith and some of your videos (like on the problem of evil) are really, REALLY thought provoking. That being said, I simply have to point out several fallacies that keep popping up in many of your videos.
1. You very often say (including this video) "Some scientists/scholars suggest..." or "Recent research implies...". I'm sorry, but you cannot do that if you invoke a science argument. That's a confirmation bias. You cannot select the few scientists/scholars or researches that confirm your views and base the whole science argument on that. You have to look at everything that science has to say about a certain topic and then draw conclusions. And fact of the matter is, vast majority of science doesn't prove nor disprove god (or gods). If it did, it wouldn't be called "faith". I don't believe that water is two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom, I know it. I don't have to believe it, I don't need to have the faith that's the case, because it's been proven many times over. But it hasn't been proven that any god exists, so yes, you have to have faith that's the case.
2. The evidence there is that confirm certain religious aspects, is used by you to draw very, VERY far-reaching conclusions. For example, the evidence that there indeed was the great flood doesn't prove that god exists. Nor it proves that Noah existed (and his ark). All it proves, is that there is some merit to the story of the great flood. That's it. That's all it proves. It doesn't prove that the story of Noah's ark is true, nor does it prove that the epic of Gilgamesh is true. I'm sorry, but this line of thinking is on the same level as what the Ancient Aliens freaks do. They see something resembling a space saucer on some ancient painting or mural and they claim that's the evidence that extraterrestrials visited the earth. Come on...
3. As many other Christians, you tend to choose which parts of the Bible interpret metaphorically and which literally. And you do it so it smoothly aligns with you views and theories. For example: The part about Adam and Eve becoming one you interpret metaphorically as procreation, but the part about the last supper and bread being Jesus' body and wine his blood you interpret literally. For me, that's a big problem, because it leaves a huge field to various, far-reaching and sometimes weird interpretations. If something in the Bible sounds silly, you can say: "Oh, but that's not meant to be taken literally" and if something sounds quite the opposite then it's suddenly literal meaning. Such approach begs abuse.
The answer is yes
Atheism is just an excuse:
Luke 14:18 (parable of the banquet)
But they all alike began to make excuses. The first said to him, ‘I have bought a field, and I must go out and see it. Please have me excused.’
When God calls to fellowship with you, you do not turn it down, so when he disqualifies you, you complain. Atheism leads to no win situations.
Religious people are a joke
not just an excuse, it's a mental retardation
There is an Almighty God and he is my Savior please pray for me.
Okay there is a deity but which one how many
@@shreyanodoyto5975Only 1❤
Atheists come with all kinds of thoughts. I am an atheist and I believe that theists truly believe in God. I was once a theist and I truly believed in God. As for the analogy with the guy at the computer... the brain is giving the person the belief in a God. I'm not sure if that qualifies as a delusion or not. I think it probably does. It is possible that are senses are all wrong, which means that the reality that we think we know doesn't really exist. As an ex-theist, I am always willing to become an theist once again. Most atheist would become a theist if the evidence was there. Atheists are not in denial. There was much about religion that I liked, including the idea that there was a supreme being watching over me. Unfortunately I gave the whole thing some thought some time ago and I would now need actual evidence for the god to believe once again. I now treat religious belief using the same standards of rationality that I apply to everything else.
I wonder what the percentage is of atheist who were once theists. Probably 80% or so.
***** I'm not sure by what is meant by "no evidence for atheism". Unless there is valid evidence for a god, atheism should exist as the default position. That's the rational standard. As for the rest of your sentence, it is a mystery to me what any of it means.
Pretty much agree completely. I also used to be a theist. There's a point where you just outgrow it, starting with the knowledge that popular religions make false claims and can't all be true. There was a comfort for me in theism, but it's been replaced with the satisfaction of knowing I'm being more honest in my search for the truth now.
The honest truth is there is no evidence for god. If there were, I'd want to be the first to know about it. I am totally open to the idea if it is the truth, there is just nothing supporting it.
+atfuhshgh "Still no evidence for atheism"
Because atheism isn't an affirmation of belief, it is a lack of belief. You don't need evidence to not believe something. Not believing is the default until evidence is presented.
Well actually guys, someone could be theist and not have a reason to believe a God exists. The only way you'd know if you were an atheist, would be to be presented with theism and not believe it. I'm not trying to argue with anyone, I'm just saying.
+Shannon85 If by "valid evidence for a god", you mean scientifically testable, wouldn't God not allow that?
I mean, God could be testing our faith without what you call "valid evidence". He absolutely would have the power to take that out. Why? Well, if you take a test with the answer sheet right next to you, it will not be terribly valuable for determining your knowledge, would it? Our life on Earth could be nothing more than a test, given an imperfect world and inabsolute evidence for God. Yes, an omniscient God would know our test results, but I personally find it interesting that it's entirely possible that he's giving us the illusion of a chance.
Just something to think about...
I'll never understand why Christian history has been withheld for several generations.. I am appalled that we were never taught about anything from Ante Nicene to Patristic Literature.. it's like my grandparents would tell my dad as a kid not to question God and would just leave him with this concept that we are just all sinners worthy of hell and yet God was merciful.. and just leave it at that, question no further otherwise might agitate and be called rebellious.. and told to shut up because "I said so".. my dad is in his mid 60s.. I'm 30.. I grew up with the "non theist" concept, rather than "anti-theist" strictly materialist concept worldview.. the idea of thousands of denominations, one being more right than the other.. of course no one wants to take their shame and guilt and sin and the recognition of it.. into buildings divided like that.. bickering among themselves.. nobody imitating Jesus and the early Church..
But God bless em anyway for praying for us..
Irrespective of the prophets ever-failing conditions, God still used them. . .
I am still appalled that many generations have been revoked from knowing the Word of our Testimony.. Christian history.
To this very day, go ask a local church leader if they have ever heard of people such as Polycarp of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch through to Athanasius of Alexandria.. chances are, they haven't..
Yet these names are the connection to the Apostles and the New Testament preservation..
If you go to a Catholic or Orthodox Church and ask anyone about the things you mentioned, they’ll tell you they’ve heard of at least two of them
@@ninjaked1265 modernity kills…
I love your straight forward evidence based videos. God bless you brother!
he distorts the evidence though, studies don't show people and children believe in "god" it shows that humans are superstitious, they believe in ANY kind of supernatural, even unicorns.
Yah, if only the evidence were actually evidence.
Thank you for your videos!! You help me articulate my faith in a educated manner. You are truly an inspiration to all Christians who need help soul winning with science and facts
you believe the planet is 5000 years old?
^
You are a moron, the christians believe the earth is 6,000 years old. Go back to the hole you crawled out of. ;)
Herobrian ye even if we are salty, what does that has any link to religion?
@@memphisbrocc7308 I know this is not old comment, but I think he's an old world creationist (aka he believes in evolution and doesn't take genisis literally)
Absolutely brilliant. Another concise tour de force of the relative strength of the theistic position. God bless you Inspiring Philosophy.
except it wasnt. just strawman arguments as always.
+themplar I would enlist your assistance then. Would you help me in identifying the particular strawman arguments you have cited in general.
*****
I disagree. Delusion is a privation of normality or otherwise proper function. By contrast a false belief could simply be the result of being mistaken. Conversely a delusional state is the result of an absence of proper function. Nevertheless the data suggests that theistic belief is the cognitive default resulting from proper function.
***** It does if you are in point of fact acquainted with the data. I think you may be harboring multiple points of confusion relative to the subject matter. 1) "that position makes no sense, specialy if you are religous because the of the existence of diffent religions." This has no bearing on the discussion insofar as ontology is distinct from mental content relative to the cognitive default position. Beliefs, which are among the five mental states: Beliefs, Desires, Sensations, Thoughts and Volitions, and their corresponding content is being considered from the point of view of causation, i.e. proper functions causes Theistic Belief. The particulars of Theistic Belief as well as the truth value of such beliefs are irrelevant in the immediate context.
2) "Both religiuos feelings....." Theistic Belief are not feelings but are characterized as a doxastic or otherwise a certain mental content.
3) Delusion is the absence of normal or otherwise proper function. False beliefs are not in and of themselves delusional. For example, the post-Newtonian belief in the Aether was not a delusion held by Physicists prior to the advent of general relativity. It was simply a mistaken belief. Conversely, delusions may manifest themselves in terms of unwarranted persecution or paranoia consistent with certain mental disorders like schizophrenia or psychosis.
I think you confusion lies stems from a preoccupation with the truth value of the propositions expressing the content of the belief and not with the causal relations producing the belief in question.
*****
Not at all sir that would result in a patent absurdity. Thus you would equate being mistaken with being delusional whereas delusion is coextensive with proper function more specifically the lack thereof.
Accordingly then, Physicists prior to the advent of general relativity who appealed to the Aether so as to explain the propagation of light within the context of Newtonian Mechanics were delusional? Thats absurd. In the absence of contravening evidence and or reasons for abandoning a belief irrespective of whether the belief is false is not constitutive of experiencing a delusion or otherwise being deluded. The degree of generality you are applying the relative import of the term strains the imagination.
Thus if it turns out that quantum decoherence as presently understood may in point of fact be revised in light of new information would lead successive generations of physicists to heap scorn upon their predecessors such that they were delusional. Thats preposterous!
Operating within the context of my example once more, If your view were in point of fact correct then the discoveries made by previous generations of physicists were then admittedly made under the auspices of harboring a delusion. You would then have to admit that discoveries the substance of which correspond to reality were achieved while harboring a dissociative or otherwise false view of reality.
Essentially by adopting your view and the corresponding degree of generality with which you apply it inevitably results in a reductio ad absurdum argument relative to the distinction between what is real and what is not real.
I have noticed that it seems most former theists became atheist after a traumatic or uncomfortable experience with the Church. In other words, many deconstructionists were in some way hurt by the church, either personally or on behalf of someone else. Either they were in a cult environment, and actual cult (JW, Mormon), or they knew nominal Christians who were hypocritical in some close, real way.
So their conversion to Atheism isn’t based on reason, but rather as a reaction to a negative experience, emotion, or trauma. It is then fostered through reason.
Just my observations.
This is why people need to focus on Christ and not religion.
Except no.
My experience. I was an atheist originally because as a kid I firstly denied god til my parents made me believe in him. But few years ago became agnostic cause of facts that I knew about my religion. Agnostic because It's hard to become atheist after years as a religious person
@@mc-x4l If you do not hold a conviction that any gods exist, then you are an atheist.
@@highroller-jq3ix according to you there is no difference between atheist and agnostic, why these terms exist
I’m not religious but I consider myself an agnostic. I appreciate your video and keep up the great work
Why agnostic?
@@Dr.NaturalInstinct Why asking him that?As far as am aware,they are just people that dont know if God exist or not.
there are believers and none believers. No in between. agnosticism is just confused atheism .
@@JAYSPLASHMUSIC Actualy no.There are agnostic that choose to believe but arent certain if there is a god and there are other that choose not to believe but arent sure if there isnt a god.In general,they just accept the fact that there is no way they could possibly know the answer to such question...so no,its not just "confused atheism".
@@George_Gogo01 If you choose to believe that makes you a believer brother lol agnostism by definition is one who is a skeptic or a doubter. Being an agnostic believer is a contradiction. Like i said you are confused..
Great job! Fantastic sources.
Yeah, the first source I looked up is against the idea that atheism is a delusion.
Wait...he used sources?
@@brainwashedbyevidence948 Are you kidding?
@@Joleyn-Joy no I'm not...he used CREDIBLE sources?
@@brainwashedbyevidence948 lol , so, sources are only valid if they say what you want right?
Uh oh IP! You're doing the commentary on videos thing that people like Sargon of Akkad does. This means TJ will soon see this video and send his goons after you to troll and dislike.
I would like to see TJ respond to this.
TJ doesn't have the IQ to respond to this video.
No Tj doesn't ''send'' anyone to do anything of that sort, nor does he encourage anything similar. This is just meaningless slander from one of IP's fanboys.
+catholicontrast
I'm going to send this to TJ to try to get him to respond to this
+catholicontrast
oh, you're alive?
Our heart is made for you O Lord
and is restless until it rests in You.
- St Augustine of Hippo
In fairness, we atheists have to deal with condescending attitudes of christians who dismiss us by saying 'we're just angry at god'. Then I have to explain that they are the ones pissing us off not their imaginary friend. This is a delusion I just encountered again in an online debate with a christian for the millionth time. So, yeah we don't understand how you can believe these stories and you think we're angry at your god. We each have our annoyances to deal with.
"imaginary friend."? You have evidence that proves this claim?
Alright, I'm not a Christian, I'm not religious, but I will always be siding with christians majority of the time, mostly because I see the hostility come from you atheists, which is why I don't call myself an atheist. Sorry not sorry, but the matter of fact is that the hostility majority of the time, more often than not from what I've seen, y'all tend to provoke hostilities more so than christians. Hell you just did it in your op comment with the condescending "imaginary friend" bit, which to respond to your first bit about who's condescending, come on man, don't even try to cope here, because more often than not I see atheists start rambling off condescendingly. Last that I have to say is that last bit is just slightly proving my point about who tends to start sh°° more so than the other.
Hell majority of y'all's arguments tend to boil down to what is now a common stereotype of a fedora wearing nerd asking something like "well why can't I poke my head into the clouds and see heaven" or "if I can't personally see it then it's not true/real". Yeah I've seen poor arguments from christians before, many times, but y'all don't do any better. Hell even Richard Dawkins' books that argue against religion aren't exactly all that they're praised to be. There are christians who I actually respect who do far better in arguing for their side, their religion, than the average online atheist and Christian
I actually prefer to be around christians more so than any who espouse their disbelief in religion and debate christians or any religious person, over their religion, because y'all, the specific type of atheist who feel the need to fight what y'all deem "delusions" tend to reveal just what types of people you really are, and more often than not are inconsistent in matters that relate to morality. Majority of the loudest speaking atheists, well you can argue against god all you like, but when comparing "it's bad that the Christian God prohibits h°m° life styles, cause reasons" to matters relating to say a boy being forced to normalize on a inner level, themselves wearing a dress or s--°°lly dance in front of grown men, many tend to support this, yet the ones who try to object have so much trouble just trying to argue against it when the promoters and supporters say "well it's not like it's directly affecting you", when all of this is taken into consideration, the christians have the moral high ground, which their arguments are consistent with their religious teachings.
@@jacobj3933 my condescending comment. Please, Michael Jones and all the other apologists start off with the dismissal of us and a condescending attitude of superiority. Save it. Sorry not sorry. This video was a dig at us. Why shouldn't he expect condescending attitudes when he came with one out the gate. And what was so condescending about my comment...besides the imaginary friend remark 😆. That wasn't that bad. And until they provide evidence for it's existence, I'm technically right. I get into debates with Christians all the time. When they come respectful so do I. We can all act like adults or resort to childish name-calling. All cool with me. You don't like it, cool. I guess we won't be on each other's Christmas card lists. I'm over it.
Muslim here. I enjoyed your video, thanks for sharing it. God bless
@Niko Bellic Why should I? After I found the path that works for me and makes sense to me, only a solid proof that I'm wrong could make me change my mind.
Peace.
@Niko Bellic Your opinion is not a proof.
@@sal_strazzullo peace be with you.
Not what "works" with you should be your choice. What is true should.
God bless
Islam is false momo is a false prophet
Apparently the term "atheist" applies to pretty much anyone who does not believe in the Christian version of God 🤦♂️
@John S. Butler I know right. What's worse is that Inspiring Philosophy is always dishonest about Atheists. This dude is an absolute grifter.
No,the ones who don't believe in the Christian God are called Pagans not Atheists. Get your facts straight.
@@jimmypedoille8482 I'm saying that most Christians often assume that I'm an atheist simply because I'm not a Christian. I'm Jewish, but every time I join religion conversations and debates, the Christian opponent usually tells me something like "But I thought you atheists believed..." or "Man, being an atheist like you must be dull..." It's annoying how most people think this world is just "Christians and Atheists."
@@jimmypedoille8482 There's an “f” missing in your last name bro
@@logans.butler285 Why don't you accept Yeshua?
Jesus Is King.!!! Jesus Loves You❤.!!! John 14:6
King James Bible
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me..!!! Follow Jesus Take The Narrow Path.!!!😊
Everyone drop a like and a nice comment to support this video before the atheists hear something they disagree with
Yeah I know some of IPs videos have a close tie between likes and dislikes even if the video has a lot of sources and is well presented
I would LOVE to see you debate Richard Dawkins.
I like how you brought up the benefits of religion in a secular perspective. Great insight. There is another video by a TH-camr named the school of life that talks about the benefits of religion
No civilization has ever existed with out religion. This a self-evident truth.
Jesus Is King.!!! Jesus Loves You❤.!!! John 14:6
King James Bible
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me..!!! Follow Jesus Take The Narrow Path.!!!😊
My main reason for believing in a God is: order cannot spontaneously arise from disorder.
When you say that I feel differently. Like I understand how the fundamental forces of the universe can take “disorder” of a gas and “order” it into a star or planet.
Oh you only have a "belief" and no actual "knowledge“ that your god exists.
Great logic
@@therick363 even having those forces and that material in the first place and that they can do that would make me believe differently than you. Or about life on this planet since it is the only one we know so far that is capable of hosting life. Is it probable that randomness spontaneously can organize such that we can have this conversation?
"our cognitive biases make us prone and receptive to religious ideas"lmao you dont say
No this says that we are made to believe it is hardwired in us, so an unbeliever has a brain malfunction so he can't believe, other word he is broken more so than most and does need God, yet flees form God.
@Delgen1951 No we don’t. Stop making up lies. Our brains are not malfunctioning. Theists are actually brains are malfunctioning www.rawstory.com/2019/01/link... .
Black Atheist I would say his point in this video is proven by your angry strange response. People who are indoctrinated get angry when they are challenged
@@blackatheist7369 Not a lie dude, Studies have show this to be a fact, when under a brain scan the area of the brain that is responsible for "belief lights up in believers while in praying or viewing religious images and does not light up in atheist at all. So this says that the Atheist is broken.
@Kimberly Means Of the Royal Priesthood I like how you thought I was angry nice try. Btw I wasn’t indoctrinated.
O boy flames incoming
Yep, check back next week and you will see plently
Keep preaching it though brother, you're doing great stuff for the Lord :-)
You went after the Amazing Atheist. Egad. You are very bold and brave in Christ, and faithful to spread the Word of God to do so. (:
VideoAudioDisco09 1:00-1:37...
@VideoAudioDisco09 truth? What is it?
I don't hate God at all, but many Atheists do. I don't believe in god or the devil so I can't hate someone I don't believe in.
We don't assume that we know better. Most of us do hear your arguments and conclude that they're bad arguments. So far no god has been proven which is odd considering this god is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent and should have no problem appearing and proving himself or herself.
Really so we are supposed to completely ignore the fact you do this even if the argument is from someone who is regarded as being knowledgeable in their area such as Gary Habermas, Fred Hole, or Antony Flew? Yeah that's not going to happen. Sorry but actions speak louder than words.
@@asgaiyawaya3973so because they were more well known what they said carries more?
@@therick363 let me put it to you this way. Suppose you had a life threatening illness that required surgery yesterday do you think it really matters if the surgeon believes in God or not or that he can do the operation? I would like to think you have enough brains to realize belief is irrelevant if he can fix whatever your condition is. Assuming your brain actually works then you should figure out that it's not about being well-known but how well versed, competent, proficient or whatever word you want to use. If they know their stuff then who are you to judge?
@@asgaiyawaya3973Most atheists support freedom of religion, including myself as I think humans have the right to believe whatever they want. That being said when it harms others it is not okay. Also, he argued that there is no sound argument for god, so can you present one or not
@@ballshd68419 harmful based on what though? All i see are examples of why emotional outbursts of " that is harmful." Cannot be trusted as logical conclusions. When you say harmful about Christianity how so? You have also demonstrated you refuse to acknowledge any standard of evidence beyond your own. So logical argument ok based on what standard of evidence? Because if you say a court standard ok that means you must abide to the brady material rule and the Jenk rule. Look those up if you don't know what they are. If you say academic standard well that's not much different from a court standard same with a scientific standard and if it's a scientific you have no choice but to work from the premise that science is interpreted by scientists who are not infallible and the very fact that everytime a new telescope or microscope is invented a previously accepted theory gets destroyed. The results of the James Webb telescope is a good example of this. You also have the problem of Scientism to deal with which completely disregards this fact about the fallibility of scientists.
I like how he went from this, to losing his head reacting to tiktoks
"Does anybody REALLY believe this sh*t?" says a guy who cant even cut his hair........
This channel has been very helpful for me. Greetings from Perú. Keep up with the good work. God bless you brother.
Christian here. To say atheists are angry at God is ignoring the traumatic notion of...projecting emotions onto ideas. If someone has been traumatized in religion, anger can be triggered when any ideas related to the trauma network are denoted. This does not prove an anger towards God, but the ability to project anger onto ideas. As a Christian, even I admit that all we have in the mind is a conception of God. An idea of God we communicate THROUGH. And If that idea happens to conform to Christianity, the Christian God, than the Holy Spirit has influenced us. But it’s still an idea nonetheless, empirically speaking.
No, we aren't just angry at god or reject him. We think that there's no god. You're just repeating religious prejudices that are thousands of years old and support them by some selected studies.
This is all just psychologising. That religious people engage in wishful thinking or atheists want to be their own god. We can accuse each other endlessly of being really irrational or immoral. Or we could just look at arguments and evidence.
Looking at arguments and evidence is what turned me into a believer.
@@khanusmagnus577May I ask what the were? I'm trying to debate with atheists that want more evidence and I am a faith-based kinda girl.
If so many atheists think there is no God, why are they trying so hard to disprove Him? Why are they trying so hard to say "God is evil" on no basis other than their own emotions? Why are atheists so dogmatic about rejecting God, and borderline bullying or harassing people of the Christian faith? Why are many atheists so fixated on Christianity, calling it a "delusion", while simultaneously being alright with Islam or Paganism? If God really does not exist, why do you even bother to try to disprove Him? If Christianity really is this delusional fantasy atheists claim it to be, why is it still going and going strong? Most other religions usually die well over 2000 years after being created, usually becoming books of mythological stories and the like. But Christianity is still a religion, even after all this time, after all this persecution and ridicule, Christianity is still a thing. If there is no God, then why are you even bothering to prove He doesn't exist? If there is no God, then there is no God, plain and simple. And yet, without fail, we have people who believe in God, and delusional people making illogical claims based on their irrational emotions, parroting "There's no God, so that makes me smarter than you." Atheists fall flat on their own stupidity. They claim they're logical and reasonable, but we actually look at them, they're militaristic cultists propping up narcissism. They say that they're smarter cause they don't believe in a religion, yet when I look at them, all I see are delusional people trying to be smarter, but end up in the same boat as flat earthers: you can show them any and all evidence, and they will not believe still.
I love how TJ is just ranting in the background while IP is talking.
Science: "Hey guys, this are a bunch of mechanisms that explain why people can believe in god regardless of whether there is one or not, and the evidence to substantiate it."
IP: "This is proof that god exists!"
Science: "No, wait, we're explaining that the brain naturally believes that there is purpose due to an evolutionary advantage that this particular mechanism has in-"
IP: "This is proof that god exists! Science says god exists! Atheism is a delusion!"
Inspiring indeed.
Where did i say this is proof God exists?
Delusion: an idiosyncratic belief firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument.
If atheism, being not an argument but just a statement, is a delusion, god must exist.
But do keep inspiring.
Yeah, now your are committing an equivocation fallacy, since I did not refer to delusions in that matter. Funny how you ignored how it can be defined differently: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/delusion
Again, where did i say this is proof God exists?
Already said so. The other definition doesn't apply to atheism since it is not a belief, it's just a statement.
But after watching this video, I can tell you're great at mental gymnastics, so I know you can spin it.
Don't misunderstand me, i'm not looking to start an argument. You just quoted research that states there's a good reason why people believe in god even though there may not be any and spinned it to make it sounds like it supported the existence of god. Arguing with you is as effective as arguing with my cat.
I'm just having fun.
Sinclairelim You do realize I am talking about theism in regards to the accusation it is caused by abnormal brain functioning, right? i am not talking about proof for God. I have say so at the end.
I heard an atheist once say that its hard to be an atheist on their death bed.
as an atheist
not great points but nice editting brother, keep up the work im sure youll be able to understand the point atheists try to make. Just try to not keep yourself in the theist bubble
I feel like most of these butthurt atheists didn’t even watch the video, but clicked on it just so they can give it a dislike. You guys are proving him right by just how irrational you guys can be, and it’s hilarious.
Can you verify that every like was by a person who watched the whole thing?
ThyBountyHunter read my comment again lol. “ I feel like”.
@@munizsims6636 'I feel like' doesn't diminish nor change your point at all nor does it change my response.
After all I felt like having bacon cheeseburgers made at home so I did. The whole 'feel like' doesn't detract from the point at all.
ThyBountyHunter Dude... are you really making this into a debate lol. It’s an just overexgerration, it’s a pretty common thing in every day language.
@@munizsims6636 " are you really making this into a debate lol."
When you opened your trap you created the debate when you made a position about a group of people. I was pointing out that the same thing could be said about the likes.
You then whined at me and felt that because you said "I feel' changed anything.
Now you are whining about me addressing your point.
"It’s an just overexgerration, it’s a pretty common thing in every day language."
Not really, given that I just pointed out the exact same thing you did but you had an issue with it. So obviously it is more than what you claim it was, after all the only thing here being butt hurt is you and how I addressed your point.
Wow this was jaw dropping. Comparing this to any atheistic arguments I've heard... It's like I'm watching you dunk on a child playing basketball.
Question please-are you agreeing with the title of the video? That atheism is a delusion?
Can I copy the sources with the arguments made in those sources? I want to use it for debate
The video should be re named to. How you raise and burn an strawman.
+athfuhshgh "atheists don't think theists really believe, but the truth is that atheists are secretly theists!" This is the stupidest straw man against atheists
lol right. He's basically trying to say we're theists and just don't know it. It's actually absurd.
+athfushgh do you know what a strawman is?
***** really? i think it should be called "man admits to cherry-picking studies, uses them to create and agree with strawman, people believe him regardless".
I don`t beöive in Santa claus either, but i don`t hate him, nor do i hate bigfoot or all the gods not even invented yett. But if you take any of these concepts and tell me i have to live by them, i still don`t hate the concept,
If i would hate anything i would hate the fact. that someone is taking a concept and tryes to Control me, and when they try to do that, using an unproven concept, the easiest way to attack that, is by showing how flawed the concept is, Its either that or just hating the person trying to Control me.
so you say when i strongly believe in unicorns until it forms the illusion in my brain than it becomes real because it's in there? perfect i can make everithing be real from now on :D
Salt inbound.
Great video :D
+Denchanter357 there it is
Yea, of course. I'm sure you and flat earth believers can form your own club.
Abort mission! Abort mission! Too much Salt!!
such tasty salty tears
Haha :D
A few comments:
1) The definition of atheism is unreasonably stretched. Being an atheist does not mean denying all “meaning” to one's actions, for that, as noted, cannot be done. Making sense is a basic function of the mind, and to equate it with belief in a deity is dishonest, even though deities are usually receptacles of meaning.
2) Feeling emotionally attached to a word or a formula doesn't mean believing in its veracity; it simply means recognizing that it is charged with power. If you repeat your experience with a first-century individual who has, for example, renounced the Greek religion to embrace Christianity, you'll see that cursing Zeus will cost him mentally, as the term remains for him still charged. This doesn't mean he doesn't really believe in Jesus.
3) It's strange that a naturalistic/evolutionary explanation of religion should be presented here as an argument against atheism, given how different religions' accounts of their own origins are: it's a miracle, a revelation, a prodigy that is evoked (when evoked) as the basis of religion. This argument is also often used by atheists, albeit with different connotations.
4) It's doubtful that your antipathy for Zeus or Allah differs from the atheists' antipathy for God. It's a double standard. In the same way, one can feel aversion to the most abstract things: one can hate the state (a social construct), the other communism (an ideology). Ideas are commonly reified.
5) The idea that atheists don't believe because they hate God is unfounded. You live in your bubble of debates, but the vast majority of atheists don't give a damn and think little, if ever, about God. The determining factor is sociological, not psychological.
6) The idea of punishments and rewards after death as a response to morality on Earth is relatively recent in the history of religions, and has long remained in the minority. It is by no means a fundamental principle of religion and therefore cannot be a reason for this supposed psychological denial.
Ive never asked anyone if they really believe in their religion, but I have had people question whether I was a genuine atheist.
Benjamin Schooley
...You believe in your religion of hate, atheism and I believe you.
Trigger Warning. Tread softly.
Hey, IP, thanks for the upload. Always love your stuff. This is much more powerful than people will realize and appreciate, I think. Good stuff.
I have a few questions and requested points of clarification.
1.) From the research, you cite that "reading the provocations addressed to God increased atheists' emotional arousal more than reading neutral statements about such things as sleep and weather."
First, it seems perfectly natural that certain words would elicit emotional arousal, regardless of their inherent truth. Further, a visceral reaction, or any departure from a neutral state, doesn't seem to point to a belief in that stimulus. Just because "the same pattern of results were obtained for religious individuals" it doesn't seem to necessarily follow that the causes (belief) of that effect are the same. For instance, I may be emotionally aroused by the mention of Mohammad because I think his teachings heretical; this surely doesn't evidence my "repressed belief" in him or his teachings. This strikes me as being of the genus of post hoc fallacies.
Based on the evidence provided (and perhaps there was more that was simply withheld in order to achieve a video of reasonable length), it would seem that the link between belief and emotional arousal can only be stated as correlative, not causal. To then claim that this correlation suggests a latent belief on the part of the atheists seems very tenuous indeed.
2.) This is similar to the first point. You cite that "atheists demonstrate anger towards God," and then suggest that this is a self-defeating position, since one can't be angry at something in which one doesn't believe. Did the research show that these individuals were angry towards a specifically personal being or merely an impersonal and abstract concept of a being? The former would betray their atheism, but with the latter their atheism would remain in tact-"God" to them would simply be a man-made abstraction that has caused needless suffering and has inhibited progress.
3.) Even if they did have this "repressed belief," I don't see how that goes any length in proving the objective truthfulness of the belief. This, I think, is outside the scope of the video; but still, it would seem that one would need to demonstrate the infallibility of these "intuitions that nourish religious beliefs" in order for this argument to hold any water, if it is ultimately the Truth at which we're aiming. Is it not possible that we have beliefs that have developed naturally which are wrong? As a less than perfect example, our faith informs our belief toward the equality of all persons, yet apart from God this seems to me wholly unnatural to a creature existing in a Fallen State, wanting to serve only his purposes. Therefore, a "natural development" of a brain uninhabited by God would lead one to a perverse and patently false worldview.
You equate delusions with anything that does not stem from the natural development of our brains. On theism this is perfectly tenable, since our brains were designed to perceive and interpret the Truth around us, but on atheism it strikes me as untenable, since there would be no reason to believe that our brains yield truth and reflect reality (much as Lewis metaphorized with the upset milk jug; a paradox for them to untangle in its own right). Your argument seems to rely on the premise that God exists, something which the atheist rejects from the first. I believe what you're saying, but were I to approach this as an atheist I would find this unconvincing.
~~~
All this said, I understand that the point of this video is much more conjecture than definitive assertion. I agree with the conclusion; I'd just appreciate some clarification on its validity of its premises. Loving the work. Keep it up, brother.
As an atheist, this is much needed content. Psychologists have long been aware of the necessity for religion in the human psyche. EVERY human society has developed some manifestation of the spiritual world, even if it doesn't involve an external creator deity. Cultural theorists/anthropologists have long been studying various religions and how their ability to convey certain thoughts and ideas have correlated with civilizations. Stronger religious ideas correlate with stronger, more comprehensive civilizations.
In response to Boyer, disbelief in general theism certainly takes effort. But, disbelief in specific religions does not take effort (unless you've been indoctrinated. For me it was a struggle to break free from Pascal's wager) and that's where I'm at. No active belief. A=not. Theist=active belief in a deity.
This being said, I think it is entirely possible to reconcile a nihilistic perspective of the state of reality with individual purpose. I see no data to indicate that purpose could not be an emergent emotional response from natural selection. I can accept this from a deterministic perspective, in which I believe that all of our emotions and motivations and thoughts are products of our brain chemistry which has developed through evolution by natural selection. So despite the fact that I don't believe in an external purpose projected onto us by a deity, I do believe that purpose exists internally as an amalgamation of emotional reactions resulted from satisfying various instinctual desires. Being convinced of various religious propositions is merely one path to satisfying these desires which is evident in the fact that everyone who actively believes in ANY religion is capable of satisfying them in such a manner. Atheism in of itself offers no such satisfaction and I would likewise call it unnatural, but unnatural does not mean not true, which should be easy for anyone holding supernatural beliefs to understand.
Amazing video. I really appreciate the effort you put into your videos.
First I'd like to say it's really messed up to relate false beliefs with delusions. As delusions are not necessarily false. And they're also a particular symptom of mental illness (psychotic disorders). It belittles people suffering from mental illness, while also disrespecting those with different beliefs.
That said, it's also a bit dishonest to paint atheists as "not truly lacking belief" or 'hating god". Back when I was an atheist (I was born and grew up as one) I genuinely had no interest or belief in god. He was as "real" as santa claus to me. As "real" as zeus or poseidon, or some cartoon character. I wasn't "angry" at god. Nor was I opposed to religion and theism (although I was anti-theist for some time, I was always open to the idea of being convinced if the evidence were presented). Looking back I would say the main thing that made me atheist was *misunderstanding* god. Once I understood god's nature, and figured out the basics of spirituality, I pretty much instantly became theist. I have a bias towards skepticism. By default I don't believe claims made unless they have proof. That leads me towards a position of naturalism, and indeed the secular science did a pretty good job of explaining almost everything I saw or interacted with. There was no need for god or a religion. The only "gaps" were the start of it all, why physical laws existed as they do, why anything exists at all, and why I'm "me" and have this unique perspective, what happens when we die, how did "I" come into existence, etc. I sort of ignored these questions as an atheist, having faith there was some naturalistic explanation that science would eventually arrive at. Eventually I realized and learned there's spiritual answers to all of this. Being an atheist didn't take effort; becoming theist did. Atheism was the default given the things I knew about the world. I imagine this might differ for atheists who were previously religious, but I never had that experience.
I’m still an atheist but your story was very good. Polite, respectful and honest. You brought up good points, like how so many theists feel they know more about us than we do even after we try to explain our views and positions.
@@therick363 yeah it's always a little frustrating seeing debates about God now. Because I understand where both sides are coming from, and how/why they're failing to understand the opposite side. But alas the same tired talking points and arguments are brought up again and again, as if those ever convinced anyone. Theist apologetics never convinced me. I basically had to find my own path to God. Looking at the apologetics now and... Yeah I can see where theists are coming from. Such as the fine tuning argument. Utterly unconvincing for an atheist, but for a theist not only is it obvious, but it just further proves a divine creator. As an atheist I always thought of God as some superpowered man in the sky (literally) because that's how I always heard it phrased. Atheists said it all the time and theists seemed to reinforce that. That's probably the biggest thing I had to unlearn. But yeah. Itd be nice if everyone could just understand each other but a lot of the time it just feels like they're talking past each other.
@@Otome_chan311 well said. It seems like all too often, not just this topic, but so many, that no one wants to listen but only be heard. That they accuse others of things like being disrespectful or dishonest yet act like they never do that. Too many have to be right and it can only be their right and no one else’s.
This video just truly explained a lot of the internet athiests, thanks IP.
Faith makes the visible evidence of invisible, visible.
Unbelief makes the visible evidence of the invisible, invisible.
This sort of flies in the face of the whole "Atheism is the default position" hypothesis.
Aethists can't be convinced of the existence of God for the same reason someone pretending to be asleep can't be woken up.
The reason Atheists don't believe the gospel is not a cognitive problem, it is a spiritual one - “They are spiritually blind” (John 3:3). In other words, it isn't a rational decision they make, it is an emotional choice: they don't want God to exist. But they know he exists and hold the truth in unrighteousness - “They live in denial of reality” (Romans 1:18-22).
The reason Atheists don't believe the gospel is not a cognitive problem, it is a spiritual one - “They are spiritually blind” (John 3:3). In other words, it isn't a rational decision they make, it is an emotional choice: they don't want God to exist. But they know he exists and hold the truth in unrighteousness - “They live in denial of reality” (Romans 1:18-22).
@@macysondheim so true!!! God bless you!!!
@@macysondheim quotes from your Bible don’t make it a reality about others.
@@clark987878 no it’s not true .
Awesome video my friend!! Keep it up, God bless
“Properly watched, the Amazing Atheist is the most potent force for theism ever conceived” -RabidLeech, 2024
One of the fascinating thing about atheism and agnosticism in America is how truly mystified they often are by religious people. I've realized my secular friends are genuinely convinced that Christianity is a life optimization thing for me, like taking a pottery class or choosing the right job. The funny thing is, the historical norm is religion, what's unusual is atheism. Nevertheless aa a Christian it's fairly straightforward to understand why and that atheists exist. It doesn't speak very highly of their philosophy that its hard for them to do the reverse.
Or they say you're only religious because you grew up in a culture where religion was on offer. Like atheism isn't the cheapest item on the North American/European cultural menu.
I love how so many atheists are saying this posting is wrong by posting nonsense that proves they are delusional. Keep it up atheists. You are doing a bang-up job!
Mantafirefly You have something to say, say it.
Mantafirefly George Carlin said to avoid idiots and you fit the bill. Bye
Bullshit. I used to be a Christian because I wanted to believe for it's utility. I used to listen to IP, answers in genesis, William lane Craig and others in order to try and strengthen my faith. I realized that all arguments for theism and Christianity have been refuted thoroughly so I deconverted. I still want to believe in God, but I can't because there's no valid or sound arguments that god exists
why do (most) religious people always thing that atheistic people (like me) are angry at God? I was a Christian once, but I'm not angry at God and I have never been angry at him
just like I am not angry at Zeus ore Allah ore Buddha
because they want to believe you just lost your way because some tragedy befell upon your life.
This video is really frustrating to watch. The logical fallacies keep piling up, it is hard to keep track of.
Where are the logical fallacies?
@@juance2262 The video purports that because religious belief is natural atheism is a delusion. That is a tremendously obvious non-sequitur - a logical fallacy. The video states that religious belief, being natural, indicates it is not delusion, which is a humongous logical fallacy. The video argues that because children have a tendency to believe in supernatural beings, supernatural beings are not delusional. That is a non-sequitur - a logical fallacy. Were you really unable to spot any of these on your own?
Banana Boy: 0 IP: 1
Good video. I never considered that there might be biological brain studies for mystical experiences. And I’m a Christian.
I'm an atheist, I don't give a dawn about what anyone believes in as long it don't harm anyone else. My arms are not limited to one but all
Really? Nothing much has changed I see.
There's nothing in this video that points to religious belief not being a delusion... but a lot that points to desperation and borderline dishonesty being used to defend it.
Some pointless studies, some ridiculous assumptions, and then finally the same old failed scientific arguments, and bible quotes at the end.
Boring.
"There's nothing in this video that points to religious belief not being a delusion" Great observation, that's because it is about atheism being delusional.
"Some pointless studies" Really? Then it should be no trouble for you to refute them.
"same old failed scientific arguments," Really? Then it will not be a problem for you to reveal these arguments.
Thank you for proving once again that atheists are delusional.
Idiot atheist
_Great observation, that's because it is about atheism being delusional_
- Yeah.. that’s why it tried to cite research about religious experiences… whatever they are * yawn
_Really? Then it should be no trouble for you to refute them_
- Happy to if you want. But to be fair, there’s nothing in the studies to refute, as usual it’s the ridiculous conclusions extrapolated from them. These videos have a history of that sort of thing.
_Really? Then it will not be a problem for you to reveal these arguments_
- Reveal what? The failed argument s at the end of the video? They’re so outdated it’s sad at this point.
_Thank you for proving once again that atheists are delusional_
- Well the video didn’t prove anything, so I suppose you may as well try to comment and help it out… maybe that will help.
Roper122 I see from you reply you cannot prove anything you claimed.
You could not refute any of the many studies shown.
You said "old failed scientific arguments" yet revealed nothing, no proof, zip.
The video and you proved atheists are delusional.
Your "Well the video didn’t prove anything," is the argumentum ad lapidem fallacy. You have proven yourself to be intellectually dishonest.
Deny all you want. You are nothing more that a paper tiger.
Atheists don't have to prove anything, the burden of proof comes from the one making an extraordinary claim . Atheism is a rejection of that claim. You can try to bring forth evidence, but we easily dispute it with better tangible evidence.
Arc Ravens "Atheists don't have to prove anything, the burden of proof comes from the one making an extraordinary claim" Prove this.
"Is atheism a delusion?"
No, it is the response to a question.
"Do you believe in a god?"
"No."
That is all there is to it...
atheism has become a "billion" dollar business. All the books, websites, anti-atheism bashing organizations, conferences, debates and so on. Is "That is all there is to it.." no, you are delusional if you believe this "fairy tale" of"That is all there is to it..".
Idiot atheist Atheism is the response to a question. All the stuff you mentioned isn't Atheism, it is the offshoot of more and more people becoming atheists.
DrewPeacock69 Well you just keep believing your deluded fantasy fairy tale brainwashing propaganda atheist sheeple nonsense.
In the end you will bow your knee and confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
You need to get your soul right with GOD before you die. After you die, it will be too late.
Idiot atheist And you keep trying to get people to convert to your religion by threatening them instead of offering up good evidence...
DrewPeacock69 A few things wrong with your nonsense claim.
First- I have no religion
Second- I am not trying to convert or change the minds of anyone.
Third-How am I threatening anyone. What have I said to you that is a threat?
Alright, I'll bite, I guess because I don't have much else to do today.
The analogy at 2:35 doesn't actually prove there's a computer in front of you; it proves your brain is *perceiving* a computer in front of you. At this moment, it is true that there's a computer in front of me. But that doesn't mean this logic always applies. Someone who is legitimately delusional will believe in their delusions just as genuinely as I believe there's a computer in front of me.
I suppose your analogy does answer TJ/TheAmazingAtheist's question; people *do* genuinely believe in their religious experiences. But just because they do believe it doesn't make them true, and it doesn't make atheism itself a delusion.
Next, the argument that humans are naturally prone to buy into religious ideas: Just because religion is something most humans are naturally wired to buy into doesn't mean their beliefs are fact. I also believe human beings are naturally drawn to dogma and theism. But just because a lot of people naturally want to believe something doesn't make it true. Human beings are *also* naturally drawn to being territorial, having violent, selfish tendencies, and ignoring nuance in favor of black-and-white views of the world. These are all tendencies which are based in survivalism -- Being selfish, protecting what's yours through force, and making snap-judgements are all great ways to survive. In the same vein, theism, in my view, is a nice, easy way to feel secure in your place in the Universe. Theism says "Don't worry about feeling small and unimportant in this infinite Universe; God loves *you* in particular. And don't worry about death, God will make sure you live on in eternal paradise." Fears of death and insignificance are both natural, because humans, like all creatures, are instilled with a feverous sense to survive. In conclusion, this doesn't prove atheism is a delusion either -- It just provides the commentary that humans are naturally drawn to theism.
Also, the comment about children naturally believing in God doesn't help your case either. "Young children naturally believe things were created as they are." Yeah, and children also have an uncanny problem with grasping object permanence. All this example says to me is that theists also can't grasp object permanence.
6:21 -- OK, that's actually just fucking unfair to her. She was saying that she was glad she failed the course, because it taught her that failure isn't the end of the world. She's saying she fell down and got back up again, and was stronger as a result. NOT theistic. NOT religious. NOT spiritual. Shame on this quote-mining argument.
The argument that follows, that says atheists get "emotionally aroused" when daring God to smite them, is also flawed. Here's an (actually functioning) analogy about this: No matter how old a human may get, there's still some weird, dormant fear of the dark (More specifically, what might *hide* in the dark) in everyone's mind. When falling asleep at night, everyone will have those occasional moments where their mind wanders, and they think, "What if there's some sort of monster lurking in the dark?" which pumps adrenaline through their brain and puts them on edge. Does their fear mean the monster exists? No! Monsters aren't real, but even knowing that, people still are afraid of the dark. So when an atheist says, "God, if you exist, smite me down right now and send me to Hell!" whether or not they believe God exists, they still get that adrenaline rush that comes with a fear of the unknown. That does NOT justify God's existence, unless if we're also going to start justifying the monsters that live under children's beds.
"You can't really be angry at things you don't think exist." I fucking hate this argument. IF God exists, then I am unbelievably angry with him. THAT'S what is meant by "anger towards God." IF God exists, then he is beyond malevolent. He's all-powerful, but he's allowed tragedy after tragedy to happen. He's created diseases, wars, and poverty. He's created children cursed with diseases which were not obtained by any choice of their own, and now that child is doomed to die slowly and painfully as their mother and father watch on helplessly. Why is he allowing all this to happen? So he can TEST us and see if we're WORTHY of his presence in Heaven? That is not love. That is sociopathy. IF God exists, I am irate with him, and he will have to beg ME, along with the rest of humanity, for MY forgiveness.
Of course, this is all hinged upon the notion that God DOES exist. If he doesn't, then I'm not angry with him -- Instead, I'm saddened by this imperfect world and all of its tragedies, and I will try my best to both come to terms with its faults, and make it better. THIS is what is meant when an atheist might say they are "angry with God."
Thank you for providing a slightly more well-constructed argument than the standard "God real because I think he real" argument. It was fun to deconstruct. But even assuming the "science" presented in this video is sound (I'm not very convinced it is), the arguments and philosophy itself is flawed. The conclusion of this video, based on the arguments presented, should not be, "Yes, we believe in our religion and have the science to back it. In fact appears *atheism* is the unnatural belief that people have to force themselves to accept." The conclusion should be, "Yes, we believe in our religion and have the science to prove that we *believe* in it, regardless of its truth. In this sense, we *do* believe in our delusion, because despite having no actual evidence to support the existence of a god, we feel so inclined to impulsively believe our delusions that we say to non-believers 'No, we aren't crazy, *YOU'RE CRAZY!*'"
"Next, the argument that humans are naturally prone to buy into religious ideas:" No where in the video is the idea "prone to buy" ever stated. This is clearly the strawman fallacy and you have proven yourself to be intellectually dishonest. You have been proven foolish.
Oof, ya got me, I made that part up! No part in this video says anything along those lines. That whole section from 3:21 - 5:30, ESPECIALLY 4:05, just doesn't exist. And even if that part of the video DID exist, NONE of my other points are valid. I'm glad there are TH-cam scholars out there who will peer-review my comments. Thx a grip fam.
In case you couldn't pick up on it (not trying to be condescending, it's hard to convey over text), I'm being sarcastic. The phrases "Humans are naturally prone to buy into religious ideas" and "Our cognitive biases make us prone and receptive to religious ideas" are essentially synonymous. This is clearly the "I don't know how to synonym" fallacy and you have proven yourself to be intellectually dishonest. You have been proven foolish.
Nice critique, Laser. Well argued.
IP stated that he is not "angry at Zeus or Allah". But to stay consistent with the video, he must also mean it would be less "delusional" to believe in Zeus than it would be to be an atheist because from an atheistic standpoint, all the higher entities are equally valid. And a Christian would be an atheist for all but their own higher entity. So does IP really believe that full atheists are more delusional than Greek God worshipers when they share the same atheistic mindset for that specific religion? By IP's definition of delusion, I suppose athiests are more delusional than someone that earnestly believes in Xenu. Or an adult that still earnestly believes that there exists an Easter Bunny.
IP does a great disservice to what it truly means to be "delusional" in any practical sense. Since an innate inclination towards a belief to a vague higher power (that could be dictated by the very culture you were born in) doesn't add a whole lot of logical validity (maybe only a little statistical bump in likelihood) towards whether there is any truth to that belief, we can't practically use this definition of "delusion" to do anything. There are too many conflicting beliefs (theist: Christian, Hindu, Norse myth, etc) that are categorized as "non-delusional", while the opposite side sees that there is a single (mostly) consistent belief (atheism) which is categorized as "delusional". Atheists see delusion differently. It is mostly a reference towards the need to cling to a belief that no longer meets your standards for belief long after you've acquired enhanced mental faculties to enact to standards. As LaserFace23 has said, young children don't understand object permanence. Imagine if a person long after developing object permanence refused to believe an object existed unless they could physically see it, even if they just saw it moments before. It was natural for the children, but doesn't an adult seem delusional? What the study that showed an increase emotional response demonstrated in regards to this definition of delusion is that we are all a bit innately delusional, long after we develop the capacity for standards of reality.
aaronlwu257 "he must also mean it would be less "delusional" to believe in Zeus than it would be to be an atheist because from an atheistic standpoint" You cannot know IP's mind, so your point is invalid. Want to try again without pretending to be Carnac the Magnificent. Thanks.
For they reasoned unsoundly, saying to themselves,
“Short and sorrowful is our life,
and there is no remedy when a life comes to its end,
and no one has been known to return from Hades.
2 For we were born by mere chance,
and hereafter we shall be as though we had never been,
for the breath in our nostrils is smoke,
and reason is a spark kindled by the beating of our hearts;
3 when it is extinguished, the body will turn to ashes,
and the spirit will dissolve like empty air.
4 Our name will be forgotten in time,
and no one will remember our works;
our life will pass away like the traces of a cloud,
and be scattered like mist
that is chased by the rays of the sun
and overcome by its heat.
5 For our allotted time is the passing of a shadow,
and there is no return from our death,
because it is sealed up and no one turns back.
6 “Come, therefore, let us enjoy the good things that exist,
and make use of the creation to the full as in youth.
7 Let us take our fill of costly wine and perfumes,
and let no flower of spring pass us by.
8 Let us crown ourselves with rosebuds before they wither.
9 Let none of us fail to share in our revelry;
everywhere let us leave signs of enjoyment,
because this is our portion, and this our lot.
10 Let us oppress the righteous poor man;
let us not spare the widow
or regard the gray hairs of the aged.
11 But let our might be our law of right,
for what is weak proves itself to be useless.
12 “Let us lie in wait for the righteous man,
because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions;
he reproaches us for sins against the law,
and accuses us of sins against our training.
13 He professes to have knowledge of God,
and calls himself a child[a] of the Lord.
14 He became to us a reproof of our thoughts;
15 the very sight of him is a burden to us,
because his manner of life is unlike that of others,
and his ways are strange.
16 We are considered by him as something base,
and he avoids our ways as unclean;
he calls the last end of the righteous happy,
and boasts that God is his father.
17 Let us see if his words are true,
and let us test what will happen at the end of his life;
18 for if the righteous man is God’s child, he will help him,
and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries.
19 Let us test him with insult and torture,
so that we may find out how gentle he is,
and make trial of his forbearance.
20 Let us condemn him to a shameful death,
for, according to what he says, he will be protected.”
21 Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray,
for their wickedness blinded them,
22 and they did not know the secret purposes of God,
nor hoped for the wages of holiness,
nor discerned the prize for blameless souls;
23 for God created us for incorruption,
and made us in the image of his own eternity,[b]
24 but through the devil’s envy death entered the world,
and those who belong to his company experience it.
- Wisdom 2