It depends on the god. Certainly we can imagine a universe forming due to Bob from Accounting playing Universe Simulator 5000 on his home PC, and Bob might just not care what the sentient inhabitants of his universe believe because they're meaningless to him. Alternatively maybe Bob _does_ care, but because the game is so big he never finds the corner of the universe with life and those various religions. But certainly reality is inconsistent when it comes to a god who's omniscient, omnipresent, and cares about our belief/worship. Such a god could and would provide evidence they exist.

Wikipedia -> Cargo cults 😁

@@majmage you know here in the arab world, people like you are very few and not completely come out as non believers / infidels in terms of belief

​@@abdulrahmann.9024 I've heard that. That seems to be a strategy some religions use to avoid criticism. Yet if a religion was truth, why would it need to avoid reasonable skepticism? It wouldn't. A true religion would simply lay down the evidence, and let it speak for itself. Skeptics' questions could be answered honestly.

Not really if one was real that doesn't mean that there are not gonna be fake ones

Great channel 😀

Off is a TV channel !!!! I love you . You are the best .

Obviously, atheism is wrong The Norse Titan Ymir created the universe

And Not Stamp Collecting is a hobby!

Baldness is a hair style.

+Justin Porteus Dr. Stamp is very well distributed.

Justin Porteus didnt even know what it was called but same

And the theists are to the left of it There's plenty of smart theists out there, I'm well aware

It's a normal thing to see. Sorry, I gauss I will be going.

Lol it also disturbs me XD

And he wouldn't be wrong

@@nathanmckenzie904 Nope.

@@concept5631 History shows they would.

@ Yep.

😂

AsDeadAsDillinger i love you

+Jaroslav At Amsterdam The difference being we believe in one less god than Christians do.

I prefer Thor. He goes around helping people in his chariot pulled by goats. can their god top that? Nah, all he does is kill people for fun.

Well i mean,yeahweh promised to kill all wicked people or some shit with a flood.But i still see wicked people in this world. But Zeus won a war againts the titans...And we don't see any titans now do we? ZEUS IS REAL MOTHEFUCKERS THERES THE EVIDENCE!

AsDeadAsDillinger my answer is, if I'm wrong all I have to do is repent on my deathbed. not visit the church every week, not be a good person, not live a fruitful life, not make anything of myself... if you are wrong, you just wasted your one and only life kissing the ass of your imaginary friend tho. that's a much bigger waste because either way I live forever. the only difference is heaven or hell. it's tantamount to losing a few cents from your bank account. but if you are wrong, you just threw away your entire life savings on snake oil.

SGerard you look like a great guy ! (=

@@steveonrock if you think about he is kinda right, even if I know the Definition of atheism. The Athiest just rejects one God more than any religious Person

@@steveonrock Athesit is when you don't believe in a god. Anyone who only believes in 1 God, is there by an atheist by default, as they are then rejecting a whole bunch of God's. Of course, I know that's not really what the definition means, but you get my point, Right?

Not necessarily true. Being polytheist means I don’t have to hold to that kind of inconsistency.

@@the_polish_prince8966 Do you believe in ALL gods? Cuz if you don't you aren't your point is null.

Yes!

I'll pay for it.

Dito I’ll do it in school if you want.

@@WiisonicHedgehogGamer And I'd pray for it.

Id pay for my first and only theatre act in my entire life lmaoo

Damn bro that's still thousands of Christians you're talking to xD

lennox is an idiot. he's one of the best teachers that - deism is pointless and theism is ridiculous

Well I figure it can be argued that the mathematical improbability is irrelevant, infinite monkeys eventually write Shakespeare. We have no idea how many failed big bangs there might have been the fact of the matter is that the only way we could ever end up perceiving things the way they are is if everything happened the way it did. Mathematical probability is meaningless in a space where time isnt a factor, how many universes formed that didn't have the necessary foundations to create life? How many died off before we came along? Whos to say ours is even as good as it could have turned out? We may never know. Theism and worship is nice in the vaccum assuming that we were special or different in some way but the instant you think you might not be all that unique in the grand infiniteness of it all, the concept kinda falls apart. So what if there is a god? Who gives a shit? Is a being that has immense power somehow worth more than your average rock or tree? Jeffery Bezos has immense power over my life and existence, does that deem him worthy of my worship? Does the scale of the power even matter in the end? Weather I get shot by a hitman or "divinely" smitten im dead either way so whats the difference? But nihilism is just toxic atheist propaganda so i guess thats a moot point. P.s. "it exists so it must have been created by god" is such a silly argument. god can always have been without a need for a creator but the universe cant have just been without the help of God, hypocrisy at its finest.

Because 99% of all theists know deep down that their gods are fictional, and would therefore fail such a test. If they would really believe it, they would happily agree to such a test.

Omega0850 not likely. I cant speak for other religions but Christians teach that it is a sin to tempt/test the lord. So they dont test him because they believe thats a sin. Its not because they know they're wrong, not by a long shot.

carultch dark matter 2525 did a video on that

Because Con Artists cover their tracks. On one hand a Con Artist will Promise you ANYTHING you ask for in prayer, and he will do that many times to sell his Con. But then what? How does he cover his tracks after having made such Huge claims? Easy. After you make those claims, you make it Clear that "Thou shall not put your lord your god to the Test". That way, no matter how many times your prayers do not come true, the Con can say it was because you TESTED him. .......................Truly Pathetic that here we are only 3 months away from 2019 in the U.S. and the vast majority still believe in those Fairy Tales............. “The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits.” - Albert Einstein

@@Lord_Skeptic I was just thinking about that one earlier today myself; because for some reason, the quote, "Come on Baal. Light my fire." was stuck in my head.

Even if you apply human logic some questions are still unanswerable. God is such a being that God is being comprehension and human imagination. We can't even answer questions about all that exists in the universe, how can we then answer questions about the one who created it. You can actually use human logic to prove God's existence I pray Allah guide us

*monotheists. Your point is moot when it comes to theists who don’t hold a position like that.

@@the_polish_prince8966 Yes it is but its is more logical for there to be a God and believe in a God than not. Atheist view is always subjective. Peace ✌

Syed Hussain Uh, I’m a theist...

@@the_polish_prince8966 Fixed it. Even in polytheism, it's still special pleading.

Preach!!

It's just wonderful how this comment can be applied to both the origins of life *and* the -dumpster fire of an- argument of the theists

@@ernesik4636 how could a theist use this as an argument?

No, I meant that it's what the theists were saying, meaning: nobody primed their "forest fire" (infighting), it happened by itself.

It happens so nature can fix itself

@Hehe Hehe Stop humping the keyboard you dumbass, words not clear.

@Hehe Hehe Why do you believe that Jesus really got resurrected? It's because it's "written in the bible"? You probably know that the bible is a really old book, which means that in order for it to be preserved, it had to be copied many times by multiple people. You probably also know that humans are flawed, so mistakes can happen and information can be written down incorrectly. Therefore, it's not farfetched to assume that the bible, due to it's age and the fact that it was preserved by humans, not by a powerful and perfect being, has mistakes in it.

@Hehe Hehe dude have you not heard of a resuscitation, or it could be faked, or a million other things, this does not get you past deism, A million other people claim to have been resurrected /healed etc. I’m not even an atheist and I know this. (I’m Sikh for those wondering)

Hehe Hehe I thought you were seriously joking. “You just don’t want to believe” what does that even mean? And no claiming something is not proof that something exist you’re just saying it does and take it as fact.How can one choose to believe Anyways? If I choose to believe I am immortal and not die or that I can start flying or my car won’t run out of gas will it still happen? Yes it will because the truth doesn’t care about what you believe in, I don’t think you even choose to believe in anything you don’t have much control over it, if you have a basic knowledge of how something works you can’t choose to believe against it.Kind’ve like knowledge you wish you could unknow. I bet you wish you could unknow things like this because you know these arguments are silly and flawed.

Because if Theist actually understood general basic rules of coherent arguments, they likely wouldnt be Theist anymore.

True, for a monotheist.

As someone who is an Omnist (me) I can definitely agree. Why should one religion be more correct then the other. It’s clear that not all religions are perfect and that’s okay. Sometimes I just beleive that religions themselves are puzzle pieces into not only god but also to ourselves. (Sorry for the religious talk I’m just saying that I agree.)

Nope, your argument is the weak one atheist. All these proofs support the one and only truth : The Almighty Great Flying Spaghetti Monster created life with Holy Noodly Appendages. 🙏🙏🙏

Hopefully The Running Ramen Beast and The Swimming Pasta Ghost aren't angry at me. I'm so sorry Sprinting Potato Zombie. 🙏🙏

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Beerus (from DBS) stand more chance than Yahweh and Allah? I mean, he has at least a 21 century show depicting him. Not some 2000 years old books.

Virginia Davis XDDD

In all this no one actually bothered to search for truth. I pray Allah guide us

I think that’s because this animation was made by an atheist as propaganda for his position, and only portrays an extreme and not universal form of theism.

@@the_polish_prince8966 not only that this person thinks religions fight with each other, that's not what Islam teaches. Islam says to come in common terms as one another. Surah Aal-e-Imran, Verse 64: قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ تَعَالَوْا إِلَىٰ كَلِمَةٍ سَوَاءٍ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمْ أَلَّا نَعْبُدَ إِلَّا اللَّهَ وَلَا نُشْرِكَ بِهِ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُنَا بَعْضًا أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا فَقُولُوا اشْهَدُوا بِأَنَّا مُسْلِمُونَ Say (O Muhammad SAW): "O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians): Come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but Allah, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: "Bear witness that we are Muslims." (English - Mohsin Khan) via iQuran The verse ends with that "you go your way and I will go mine" Like following verse mentions. Surah Al-Kafiroon, Verse 6: لَكُمْ دِينُكُمْ وَلِيَ دِينِ "To you be your religion, and to me my religion (Islamic Monotheism)." (English - Mohsin Khan) via iQuran

Syed Hussain Cool, but you’re forgetting the part where Islam says you have to kill me. Or are you simply forgetting the fifth verse of the ninth Surah? I’m polytheist, by the way.

Exactly. We only know of this one because it happened and caused us to exist. If this one didn't work, we wouldn't know about it as we wouldn't exist

Agreed

The British army had a great marching song that proved this, sung to the same tune as 'Auld Lang Syne', the words are' We're here because we're here because we're here because we're here...... and so on' ad nauseum.

@@solentbum LOL that's a great example, my family always says that when we arrive somewhere but I never knew it came from a song!

Exactly. The universe could have collapsed and expanded multiple times with slightly different universal constants every time, until the constants were just right enough for the universe to not collapse again. That way the universal constants could have reached optimal values that balance the universe. In the end, it's just one of the infinite possible reasons for our universe's existence. To find out what really happened, we will have to keep aside all supernatural, illogical possibilities and think with reasoning and logic. That's how we discovered so much about our universe and will continue to do so.

god i'll be laughing the entire day now.

That's not the moderator, that's a member of the theistic team

Thankyou Eric Kartman, very cool!

Everyone is born a Muslim: Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: The mother of every person gives him birth according to his true nature. It is subsequently his parents who make him a Jew or a Christian or a Magian. Had his parents been Muslim he would have also remained a Muslim. Every person to whom his mother gives birth (has two aspects of his life) ; when his mother gives birth Satan strikes him but it was not the case with Mary and her son (Jesus Christ). حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْعَزِيزِ، - يَعْنِي الدَّرَاوَرْدِيَّ - عَنِ الْعَلاَءِ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ كُلُّ إِنْسَانٍ تَلِدُهُ أُمُّهُ عَلَى الْفِطْرَةِ وَأَبَوَاهُ بَعْدُ يُهَوِّدَانِهِ وَيُنَصِّرَانِهِ وَيُمَجِّسَانِهِ فَإِنْ كَانَا مُسْلِمَيْنِ فَمُسْلِمٌ كُلُّ إِنْسَانٍ تَلِدُهُ أُمُّهُ يَلْكُزُهُ الشَّيْطَانُ فِي حِضْنَيْهِ إِلاَّ مَرْيَمَ وَابْنَهَا ‏"‏ ‏.‏ Reference : Sahih Muslim 2659 aIn-book reference : Book 46, Hadith 40USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 33, Hadith 6429

@@Soyodi why? Because the islamic Holy book say so? Under that logic any other religion book should apply the same logic...

@@freddycuevas5743 no but how do we know what our fitra (natural disposition) at birth was. No one can know this but the one who created us. And other religions Don't teach this. You will only find this in Islam. So the same thing can't be said about them also. Peace brother

@@Soyodi lol you are working from the assumption of a creator, thing that you need to prove first in order to even make it relevant in the conversation. by your own standards any so-called good could fill that gap. If you were born in Italy you should be a Catholic since birth mate. that is how absurd your position is.

@@freddycuevas5743 Yes I agree with you if I was born in to a Catholic family I mostly would have grown up to be a Catherine Christian. The hadith I provided shows this. But the Prophet ﷺ also said that fitra of a child born is a Muslim. As the child grows up it gets influenced by it's parents and follows them. What Islam teaches is that we shouldn't follow our forefathers and to seek knowledge and truth for ourselves.

Platymus and no when their are no atheists region will always argue amongst themselves

Nothing is more ridiculous than a religious person trying to use science for proving his/her believe.

@@lastfirst2021 The flaw in the idea of religion is that it can only function with an absent of facts. Hence faith. Science functions entirely with factual evidence so it is capable of error. Religion cannot be wrong or else all evidence written in the book becomes uncreditable as the writer is imperfect and does not know all...

Aquila Athena Doesn't mean they weren't wrong

@@averroes6279 Einstein was not a theist. He explicitly stated that he was an agnostic. Darwin was only a theist for the first part of his life. He, too, explicitly described himself as an agnostic. There are similar issues with others on your list as well. People who argue using falsehoods deservingly invite scorn.

Cthulhu is a weird way to say Yog-Sogoth.

@@somethingsomewhat8860 Yog-Sogoth is a weird way to say Azathoth.

Guys chill out we found who the true god is. Based on the bing bang theory and that the earth is round we can be sure that ancoent greece was correct all this time since it had a creator and the greeks said the earth was round first(pls ignore that the earth being round had nothing to do with the religon)

Back off everyone. THE REAL GOD IS KUKULKAN now lemme say a prayer Rogjrokfhekfiowrjifhonfoeirotbjtojeofnwoitgnekotjdbrofbworitpfnosnfkdjfjdjowtkjdkegodnriginjrofnejrfjjdwifjjdiwfnjfkwirjfh

Excuse you my Helix fossil begs to differ

@Hehe Hehe did you just reply to a 10 year old comment bruh

@@frostfire4513 he is also rejecting evolution in other comments 😂😂

I am also getting fed up of stupid people. Today someone told me that joe Biden was Satans pet and that leftists want to rule the world and fulfill the prophecy of the bible by having it under one leader. I was on a right wing site and felt frustrated that no one was agreeing with me and I should have ignored him but it was so outrageously stupid.

@Hehe Hehe he is just fed up with these that's why he is not providing any proofs

Someone has actually said this to me when I asked where their god came from

Sounds like futurama. At least, it has the same vibe.

Certainly good point, though to me the bigger problem with Pascal's Wager is the implication that there's no cost to a belief. (There's always an _opportunity cost_ to whatever we choose to do/believe.)

@@majmage - That's a very good point as well, although I wonder what, to Pascal, constituted "belief" in terms of how much it could/should affect his behavior or inconvenience him on a day-by-day basis. Even today, many believe that a death-bed confession and absolution is enough to put you in heaven. Another problem with the wager is that it seems to be the same as essentially taking out "heaven insurance" ("can't hurt, right?... just in case") with no real belief or faith behind it; it's a calculation, not a revelation.

@@Malt454 Well in Pascal's defense the foundation of Pascal's Wager was published in 1670, well before the concept of opportunity costs was formalized in 1894. So I'm not sure if we can fault him _too_ much for being a product of his times. (It's just now we know better, so we can certainly fault theists who rely on the argument. ;) ) And yeah, I agree with the other problems you've mentioned.

@@majmage - Yes, and, as a product of his times, Pascal's problem was greatly simplified by society itself; his question was simply whether to believe, not one of who/which/what to believe in. Indra, Thor and Zeus weren't on the table.

@@majmage Even worse, there is also another counter argument. Since pascels wager is a thought experiment assuming there is absolutely 0 evidence for god, then we can "make up" any hypothetical god we want because there is just as much evidence for that god as there is any other. So assume >for every god that exists that says if you dont do what they say and believe in them and worship them yada yada, you go to hell and if you do you go to heven >that you have an ANTI-God that does the exact opposite. If you DO believe in the other god and worship them you go to hell and if you dont you go to heaven. Then you run the cost/benefit analysis again, and there you go. Even assuming that beliefs have no cost, the balance is perfectly equal. There is no reason to believe in any specific god over another or even in any god in general. And then when you do factor in a cost to believe, no matter how small, it always becomes the logical choice then to never believe in a god(s) without evidence.

I believe it was Hawking who said that if our universe was fine tuned for anything, it would be for black holes

@@chrisphinney8475 🤣

Yeah, arguments like that always feel like: *tips over crate full of dice* "Woah, I rolled exactly a 13,127. Do you have any idea how rare and unlikely that is? That crate surely was fine-tuned to roll this exact number!"

@@TheHeavyshadow 🤣 That's hilariously accurate.

Cuthbert Nibbles 1/10 to much stupidity-IGN

ya the BuyBull is filled with too much stupidity.... The talking snake was just too much.

10/10. Whoops, forgot the negative sign

Try this: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult. 😁

That would be taking a stance on religion in a school setting, no better than teaching a particular faith in class.

hate to say it. but no. That’s just as bad as teachers teaching religion in a direct way, instead of a historical way. Teaching them atheism and teaching them theism will hold the same problem

Absolutely not

well, you just wait for the circular reasoning to tire them out, and then you go in for the kill.

Yet he won

I am a christian and i think this video is dumb

the fallen emperor why explain

@@TheGamer14300 i have no idea why, i don't even remember commenting that

Because christianity claim to be the true religion only because of competition, not because it is the only one.

I don't remember where I've heard it that "Christians won because we count years based on Christianity"

Supposing there is some supernatural entity, and further suppose that at least one human group has actually, genuinely described the nature of that entity correctly. On odds, it’s just as likely to be some golden buffalo in a cave painting as any religion we’ve heard of today. No supernatural being seems much more probable.

religions aren’t the same their concept and teachings are different. most of the religions were corrupted and followers just blindly believe it to be true. christian preachers start with good points, yet, after giving you some doubts they start forcing paganic beliefs on you(man god, sacrifice, etc)

I’m tempted to correct your wrong statement, but not for the reason you think. I’m a Heathen, I worship the gods described in that story. Ymir was Jotun, Titans are Greek. Ymir was killed and the universe made from his corpse, he wasn’t the creator.

You heathen! The flying spaghetti monster is the only god with the precision to create a universe like this!

Totally unrealistic though. In reality each of them force others to kill each other on their behalf.

well since pares are only a-t g-c, you just need to code one side of double helix.

Danilo Popović Does it make no difference which side the A or T is on?

+antiHUMANDesigns well it does. you must know the position of each primary element of helix. but knowing one side also means you know the other. so if the word is ACCTAG, you already know the other side is TGGATC. This makes coding faster, becaouse you only need to encode one side of healix.

Danilo Popović You'd still need one bit of information to store which side the they are on, which meanas it's the same. I didn't propose to encode both sides, but our DNA is still 2bit/base4.

antiHUMANDesigns​ but why? You can just zse MSB to say what side you are coding and then just make a line of 2-bits characters. If you need other side, you would use program thet calculates what is on the oposit side. So its 1 one bit for side (0-left, 1-right) and array of n 2-bits characters. If you are encoding just a part of genom, you need tqo more memory informations, for start and end. So, you need two lets sya 16-bite for location, one 1-bite tipe for side and n 2-bite characters for genom.

Did you just rename the strawman fallacy to try to be politically correct?

​@@shatterhacked on second thought, I should rename it to Straw-Human or Straw-{They/Them} to be more politically correct. Ok, jokes aside, it wasn't necessarily because of that. I just found it weird that it was called "straw-man". In my main language, it would be called "dummy" or "straw doll", which is inherently genderless and non-human

@@Rudxain I was just saying… it has a name. The name is the strawman fallacy. That’s like referring to a person with a nickname that no one knew about. Idk, it just makes me feel weird when you rename things that have official names. Especially when you write it like this is how it’s always been.

@@shatterhackedI kinda agree 👍

fair? I don't know about that. The most rational position to take into account anything metaphysical - absolutely.

***** That our universe's inception was purely natural?

+B0badenvero8 Well first, that's contingent on your definition of "nothing", and second, just because we don't have examples of other universe's being created - using these examples for documentation and study - doesn't mean that we can automatically assign our inception to something supernatural or beyond our recognized dimensions. That's an argument from ignorance, and it's similar to the facile watchmaker analogy. We merely haven't reached the scientific point where we can definitively assert that we know the answers to these questions, but an equally valid question would be: what examples of other supernatural deities do we have to compare to the one that supposedly made us and our universe? All I'm doing is siding with the null hypothesis until evidence, not speculation, is presented in a scientific manner.

***** What logical explanation? One that consists of an unfounded and unsubstantiated belief in a deity that hasn't been seen nor detected whatsoever by anyone, ever? All you're doing is appealing to complexity and ignorance. Just because you don't understand something or something is complex doesn't mean that a deity is responsible for it. That's absurd to assume that without evidence, hard evidence. That's the personification of irrational.

+B0badenvero8 Again, if you're going to insist on appealing to complexity or ignorance, then we have nothing to debate. I'm not going to keep reiterating that neither complexity nor being unaware of all the complexities this universe has to offer = deity. Without even knowing it, you made my point. Before we knew and understood electricity, it was thought that supernatural forces made lighting appear and disappear. Your stance is basically insinuating that they were justified in asserting that a deity caused said lightning. Reality and science shows otherwise, even if it took us longer to understand exactly what electricity was. That's why your argument is facile. No, we don't know EXACTLY how the universe formed, but we can make some damn good extrapolations based on evidence and mathematical calculations. Inserting a deity into the equation is superfluous.

+Phillip Moore Or maybe repeat, "How do you know that?" ad nauseam.

I, myself, am a KZfaq fossil.

Imagine my surprise when this gem of a channel was recommended 10 years late. Atleast I can enjoy it now

@@NonStampCollector You are best fossil we got

To be a theist, you have to make several assumptions without evidence. To be an atheist, all you have to do is not make m those assumptions and accept reality as it is. If kids were not indoctrinated into it, I dare say most of them would skip the assumptions altogether. Kids are a lot smarter than we give them credit for. I was raised in a religious home, and you could probably say I believed in god as a kid, just as much as I believed in Santa and the Easter Bunny. My family eventually told me the latter two were fake, but the first, totally real. Well, it doesn’t really take a genius to connect the dots. I didn’t have a massive de-conversion moment. Over time I just dropped the assumption of god’s existence because without evidence, there was no reason to hold on to it. As one might say of Santa or the Bunny, I just outgrew God. I didn’t need to lean on an imaginary being to explain anything. If not forced into their parents beliefs, but instead taught critical thinking and allowed to make up their own minds, I honestly think most kids would reject religion.

great point! especially given the immense age of the universe already, it is certainly plausible

@@swiftmk5480 Thank you!

I'm not enjoying it, actually i'm finding it pretty fucked. I agree with you're theory though, it's probably what happened/is happening and will happen continue to happen forever. We won't even be a memory. I can see why religious nuts have trouble processing that and choose fairy tales to comfort themselves to the fact. Fuck.

MadNotAngry another way to think about it is that we wouldn't be existing in a universe where it would be impossible to exist, so by the nature of existence, we had to be, by definition, within a universe that could support us

I logged in to comment the same thing poorly worded

@Alex Gowers but as long as gravity still affect on some level wouldn't it eventually consume the momentum of the big bang and start to pull everything back toward each other? even if it is an infinitesimal amount of pull if it just doesn't stop wont it eventually win?

@@NuclearLama No. Imagine this super simplified example: at time t1 something is moving away at speed 2 and gravity is slowing it down by rate 1. Now at time t2 the speed of 'something' is 1, but gravity is only slowing it down at rate 0.5 (because of increased distance). At time t3 it's moving at speed 0.5 but the slowing is 0.25 etc. time speed slowing (rate) t1 2 1 t2 1 0.5 t3 0.5 0.25 So in this example the speed is always double the slowing rate and it will never catch up. Gravitational pull will never stop but the speed is always ahead of it. (I realize that after all this might not be 'super simplified example' but I hope you get the point)

That's a good way to explain it.

@@NonStampCollector OH NO-GOD, AN ATHEIST CHANNEL ANSWERED ME. I am now a realized atheist.

Do you feel seen?

@@NonStampCollector Yeah

Still?

Oh my gosh nonstampcollector is still around?

​@@starsaversyes, he just doesn't upload that much. but he still actively reads and replies to comments

@@arytecht haha you're only 3 months late to this party

@@starsavers lmao

Kevin Tisano Personally, I reckon he should have sat there until the video ended, or go up to the podium and say "I win."

I thought that the atheist should stand up, walk toward the center of the stage, and take a bow.

I think he should've just turned to the audiance and said, "I rest my case."

Lol, btw, I just wanted to ask why you and others say jebus? (I'm an atheist btw!:)

Sammy Puro Simpsons.

I still don't get it? :(

Sammy Puro youtube search Jebus

cbbuntz exactly. even Thomas Aquinas conceded that no logical man could get from deism to theism.

@Hehe Hehe Someone's intellect doesn't surpass the room's temperature, because in the comment he actually stated that you should prove Zeus didn't create the world in the same way you claim that god created everything. Which doesn't make sense, claims become reality once they're proven, the same applies for everything, but since all deities lack evidence, how would you claim that your god is the only true god ?

@Hehe Hehe Oh and why isn't Yahweh too just mythology? Just like zeus What makes your god more credible ?

@Hehe Hehe Before one billion people believed that the solar system is geocentric, does that make this claim any more credible? Not in the slightest, only solid evidence has proven that the solar system is heliocentric. So the number of believers doesn't define a claim's truthness, only solid evidence does, the same can be applied to your god, give me one solid evidence and I'll convert to whichever cult you belong to.

@Hehe Hehe Well on the second one you completely missed the point, there is no mount Olympus with gods on top, I second that, but is there a magical creator hiding in the skies and clouds for 2 millennia, no, at least not until solid evidence is presented, and that is my point.

@Hehe Hehe Someone's got a very peculiar brain, because I never ever mentioned the big bang but whatever, let's see, so my unicorn has no proof, and your god too, therefore my unicorn is real, see ? You used the same reasoning to "respond" which does not make any sense, one entity not having evidence doesn't make your beliefs true in the sligtest. Second of all, you can't compare a simple, inconsistent, incoherent, unprovable belief to a theory that has loads and loads of evidence, supported by the whole world's scientific communities, and as a quick example, gravity is just a theory too.

It seems that God is more of an evil hateful tyrant than a good loving creator.

In a way. But since Judaism and Christianity essentially believe it's fanfiction he may as well be treated as a different character.

What's that got to do with the price of rice in china?

Yes and no.. Yes the word allah is word used for God. It is basically two words combinded. Al means "The" and Lah means "God". Are they essential the same for all religion yes and no. For judaism God is for a certain groups of people who are bound by commandments and instructions (torah etc..) ; For christians God is for those who believe in a Triune figure/s as the ultimate divine being.. And in the triune, one of them took earthly form..? Lived and died..? And resurrected.. They threw out the old laws and follow new belief but hold to the old laws as a reminder and a connection to show the continuity of religion ; For muslims, it is very simple just like what the bible says in the early books God is the Only, Unique noting like him. Nothing earthly of him. Not a Male or a Female. Not for one group or nation but for all. Does not share, no intermediaries. And that's about it..

S Clair But Judaism says that Jesus and the Father are fanfiction.

Bread Hime But they both use the old testament. Islam doesn't use it. They rewrote it.

That doesn't work. Athiest don't believe in ANY so they'll reject it ALL.

@@cameoshadowness7757 r/woooosh

Wow that was horrible

Hail Thor

praise Odin

Wildman Samurai the true god, the flying spaghetti monster

We all have Thursday!!! Thor's day!!!!

Joe Pesci. Because he comes across as the type of guy who can get things done.

Kevin Bacon yes it is ! Ramen

Ah yes, the Spaghetti lord Cheesus! Ramen!

No, God is a sun according to the Bible lol 🤣Psalm 84 :11 For the Lord God is a sun 🌞 John 8 :12 I am the Light of the world🌞 Malachi 4:2 Sun of righteousness 🌞 That's why they put a picture of the Sun on some the Bibles instead of a drawing of Jesus. The Old Testmement was written in Hebrew, Hebrew word for Sun is Shemash, Shemash was the Sun-God of the Sumerians and the Babylonians in 2,100 BC. That's why Christians worship on a SUNday🌞, they worship a ancient Sun-God and don't even know it🤣

That's not what an atheist would say

Kurt Huffman weird. For some reason, you didnt convince my atheist mind of that

@@francisluglio6611 well an atheist is someone who lacks belief in any gods. In this situation lacking belief in any dragon. Saying that it isn't a dragon is a positive statement that has nothing to do with atheism and requires evidence. If you claim it's not a dragon then you have to support it. In your scenario the only person who doesn't have faith is the agnostic which by the way is not a stance. Agnosticism is an extension of atheism or theism that describes the knowledge of the atheist or theist. An agnostic atheist for example is somebody who doesn't know if there is a God or not but, lives as rejects the notion until it is proven. And agnostic theist is someone who doesn't know if there is a God but, chooses to accept the notion.

Kurt Huffman you're saying that an atheist is someone who has faith in not having faith. That's pointless. I know that there's always a chance that I'll be hit by a car when I cross the street but I have faith that if I'm responsible then I wont get into an accident. Why? Because I need to live my life. Not because I'm dedicated to reminding myself that there's more than a 0% chance of getting hit every time I need to cross the street. An atheist is someone who made a decision. An atheist is not someone who turns that decision into their whole life

@@francisluglio6611 The only decision that marks an atheist is the decision to not believe in any dieties. In your original you had the atheist saying there were no dragons which is assertive a negative claim that is unprovable which would mean that the atheist had faith that there was no dragon. You are the one saying atheists have faith. That is not at all what an atheist is. Also that car analogy doesn't even make sense in a religious debate. The debate is about knowledge not responsibility. If you are responsible there is a zero percent chance because you could just not cross the street if there's a car. Stop misrepresenting the atheist viewpoint it makes us all look bad.

Wrong. Communist regimes. Mao and Pol Pot.

conscience aginBlackadder yeah i was gonna say that. And what about Nazis?

Guys let's be real everyone fights to different extremes to get their way for it's human nature. Does not matter what religion, race, or place that these fights occur since it happens in all three. Let's just be glad that social conditions are favorable for fighting strategically with verbal words so that we can discover for ourselves what truths are out there in the real world.

@vvenomm 492 one principle tenet of Marxism is atheism, because religion is a means for people to gain power over others

@Buddy3439 everybody serves something.

I think it wasn’t a man made god but rather a man god. We probably simulated a world

That's kinda untrue lol. Imagine flipping a coin and getting tails and saying that the probability that you would get tails on that exact flip is 100% because it already happened...

@@bedro_0 well the probability was 100% according to classical physics. But that’s a good point, this argument doesn’t make sense. A better one is, no one ever once demonstrated that it is unlikely that the universe turned out this way. Because we have never been able to experimentally test the formation of universes.

11 years and you finally got a like !!!