Is it more rational to believe in God? (2/4)

[@zombiewhitegirl]

"Is rape wrong?" .......YES, it's wrong. Mystery solved for you. Honestly, I can't even believe he said that, as if that's something that "intellectuals" sit around pondering. Fucks sake.

[@gman4074]

The question is why and on what basis..Start at step 1.. not 3.. cuz Joe Smoe mite says it rite.. wats the deciding factor?

[@hahmed6209]

Absolute morons..

[@malcolmhodnett8874]

@@gman4074 clear and avoidable harm

[@stickyrubb]

I was completely dumbfounded when he said that as well, holy cow. 'The more important and deep questions; Is rape wrong?".... WHAT?!

[@VictorFPoB]

"Is rape wrong??!!" That's a deep question that warrants the use of a thoughtful answer? The idiocy...

[@rustyspygoat4089]

why is it wrong?

[@rustyspygoat4089]

@Thmb Print. Neither. However can you answer my question?

[@Magero2000]

@@rustyspygoat4089 for the same reason owning slaves is wrong.

[@rustyspygoat4089]

@@Magero2000 thats not a direct answer. I could then ask you why is slavery wrong?

[@Magero2000]

@@rustyspygoat4089 Well, I always wonder why Christians changed their mind about Slavery even though it is still approved in the Bible. Rape is also sanctioned there. But to answer your question, imagine one of your sister being raped. If you feel revulsion, then dont ask why it is wrong, if you dont then you must be an adent christian.

[@Jennralize]

"Yeah, I've written a book about some woman from ages ago, who says she saw something once in a spirit realm and I believe her, so religion is true." The fuck...

[@thumbprint7150]

You have to have a deep debate about whether rape is wrong? That in itself invalidates this man's thinking process.

[@caiobjj]

He is not saying that. He is saying that a deep debate is needed to account for the reason why you think it is wrong, and that only by using reason you cannot get to a conclusion. Science, for example, has no say in whether it is wrong, or whether the holocaust was wrong because there are philosophical topics. The reason why you came to the conclusion that rape is wrong is not by using reason from a purposeless, meaningless universe, but rather by using objective moral standards that we all have, that makes us all know that rape or murder is wrong. That is not achieved by reason or logic alone, that is his point.

[@myopenmind527]

@@caiobjj you are being an idiot. Of course rape is wrong and objectively wrong at that. Start being a moral agent and learn to think for yourself.

[@atrixsauza2068]

@@myopenmind527 Rape is only objectively wrong in our subjective morality view of humans. Rape isnt universally wrong.

[@myopenmind527]

@@atrixsauza2068 you my friend are an idiot.

[@atrixsauza2068]

@@myopenmind527 I'm not one. You're just too dumb and has a centralised world view without realising that our moral values are subjective only to us. Rape wasn't wrong in other animals, even to us several centuries ago. Rape was normalised pretty much since the dawn of civilisation and justified at times even in religious scriptures. It is only globally accepted as unlawful and immoral based in the modern standards of morality, but still not all forms of rape like marital rape. So even to us rape wasn't always immoral. What makes you to think rape is objectively wrong in an universal viewpoint ? So have a "open-mind".

[@richardmooney383]

IS RAPE WRONG? Yes. We don't need religion to answer that question (some religions would give the wrong answer), we just have to ask ourselves if we would prefer to love in a society where rape was tolerated or in one where it was not. The vast majority of rational pole would give the same answer.

[@Tr3Vel0cita]

Part 3/4: kzbin.info/www/bejne/e6jFhY2Virdrr80

[@mrpo3496]

"Overwhelming evidence of god" what alternate universe do these people live in?

[@myopenmind527]

They are so deluded and it’s clear that they just want to believe.

[@owenteamtraceur]

It’s genuinely painful how many ridiculous statements are allowed to pass without being dissected

[@FactStorm]

Most theists have been indoctrinated since childhood, so they grow up unable to think critically. It sickens me

[@iainrae6159]

Those who think critically and question the supernatural claims by priests generally reject religion.

[@socrates704]

8:26 Margaret Coles : "Julian of Norwich had a series of visions in the 14th century.........." Moderator : "This is from somebody's visions.. If somebody had visions like that now, we'd be extremely skeptical, wouldn't we?" Margaret : "But Julian's accepted by the church" (Oh, accepted by the church.. then, it must all be true!!) Margaret : "She's a blessed, which means she's being Beatified, on the way to being a saint" (Oh, beatified, you say.. How silly of me to have doubted the rationality of her claims!!) Margaret : "And she's accepted as a great theologian" (I see, a theologian from the middle ages.. must have had a divine vision.. no sane mind could doubt it..) Moderator : "So are we accepting that she really did have visions?" Margaret : "Oh yes.. yes.. And she wrote a book about it." (A book.. Now, that seals the deal for me.. If it's written and printed, how can I possibly doubt it!) Margaret : "Thomas Merton describes her as a true theologian, in that she has the true image of God, which is this benign, loving image, who never condemns us, and is full of only compassionate love for us." (Oh yes.. It's so nice to think of a truly benevolent God.. so comforting.. It has Got to be true.! I am convinced.)

[@nirmalvarma3386]

Should have seen the look on the 21st century Julian's face when she said - "Julian of Norwich had a series of visions in the 14th century..........".

[@yakovisaacs6441]

The audience in all these Big Question programmes applaud for the silliest reasons.

[@nnocon]

what the hell is going in with the turban guy in the background @ 3:00 ? :O

[@barrydelisle8655]

Don't worry about him he's not important in the debate as he is in second row they only listen

[@johnphelan7403]

Deen claims that "even if religion was false it would not prove that atheism was true."Atheism exists only as a counter position to religion.Therefore if religion were indeed false then the position of the atheist - either to outright reject it or to suspend accepting it until provided with better evidence - would have been shown to have been the correct position.

[@MrAgnosticman]

john phelan exactly, its a position on a claim. a claim of a god existing. and atheists don't believe the claim to be evident. atheism isn't a religion because we have no teachings based on atheism, no books or dogma to mold our lives to, no higher authority to worship or get information from. its simply the lack of acceptance of a positive god claim, whether it be the Christian or Muslim god, the gods of Norse religion, Greek religion, Roman religion, Egyptian religion, etc. Christians are atheists in terms of those gods, besides one.

[@TjamVideoMan]

Atheism need not be true or false. Theism MUST be true - you believe in the wrong god and you’re FUCKED!!

[@XiagraBalls]

Yes, it annoyed me that no-one countered that statement. Atheism is the null position, as Dillahunty would say; it doesn't make a positive claim, so claiming it can't be true is nonsense.

[@FactStorm]

Did you expect an apologist to be logical?

[@yakovisaacs6441]

Vision or hallucination ?

[@gotnothingclever]

6:30 This blatant appeal to popularity (restated again at 7:21 after it was explained and refuted) goes a long way to demonstrate the point that the theists' claims are based off of flawed rationalizations (or possibly just intellectual dishonesty on the case of the arguer).

[@myopenmind527]

What kind of a monster doesn’t know that rape is wrong or that we can’t reason that? McGrath is not a very bright Christian when it comes to the fundamentals of his religion nor is he much of a biblical scholar. His grasp of atheism is poor which makes me wonder how did he ground his atheism or even if he was ever an atheist.

[@tiagoscherer1158]

how can you accept someone had a vision ?? how can you prove it ?? let alone someone in the 14th century where much less was known about the power of our brain and superstition was even more rampant than it is today ?? this is baffling to me

[@iamservant8016]

How can you accept that you came from nothing? How can you call macro evolution a fact when noone has ever observed a amoeba turn into a goat? These are some of the things that baffle me.

[@tiagoscherer1158]

In simple terms we do not live long enough to see those things happening my friend. Evolution is gradual, it doesn't happen overnight. Bear in mind that 10 thousand years, is pretty much overnight when it comes the Universe. One more thing, evolution has been established and accepted as a fact, I tend to like facts. To be frank, not you nor me can be 100% certain about where we come from, at least not at this point in time. But if you want to believe what gullible and superstitious people said they'd seen 2 thousands years ago, thats your choice and you are free to make it.

[@iamservant8016]

@@tiagoscherer1158 so what you are saying is that evolution is neither observable nor testable.what you're saying is that in the history of evolution we have never seen one species turn into another species unless wild speculations are made about the time it takes for these changes to occur.which means noone of us would be alive to witness it. My point exactly.i am sorry but that is not how sciences work and I don't have enough faith to believe in it. LIKE I SAID EVOLUTION IS LIE

[@tiagoscherer1158]

hahahaha evolution is a lie ? so visions and walking over water is true ? funny that no one can prove that isnt it ? hahaha and you are wrong again, evolution is observable on fossils, its not observable as a "live show" for lack of a better term. once again, suit yourself and keep believing the bearded man that lives in the sky :):):)

[@iamservant8016]

@@tiagoscherer1158 evolution is not observable,the fossil records is filled with inconsistencies and wild assumptions about it's origin, physiology,speciation and time factor.i suggest you do some research on it. I believe in the historical account of Jesus.i believe in God due to several personal experiences.if I can believe in God it's only logical that i believe in miracles too or that those miracles happened.

[@jerichosharman470]

Religious people …….no matter how sophisticated you try to make your delusions sound ……you’re actually insane. Invisible talking people is actually beyond reason and sensibilities no matter how hard you try

[@thumbprint7150]

Why does The Big Questions program devote so much debate to religion? The debate never gets anywhere, nobody is ever swayed by anyone else. Simply, people spout what they think is right and often drown out others if they can get away with it.

[@adityarajan592]

What doesn't make sense to me is this idea that the debate is god vs no god rather than specific christian abrahamic god vs no god, they are talking about some general concept of a creator but religions describe the god they believe in in very specific ways with personality traits and opinions for instance and sometimes describe the way their god created the world, why isnt the debate more targeted towards that? The rationality of believing in some creative intelligence and the rationality of believing in a specific god of a particular religion with a personality who created the world in a specific way are two very different things.

[@MMAGUY13]

People when the former believer said something along the lines, I took off the dirty clothes of religion. That’s not an argument that’s just someone who doesn’t believe in religion, but he’s not given us any reason not to believe in religion, but the people still clap, like he made a good point. That’s like saying F the church and people applaud it’s not an argument.

[@christophedecavalla2941]

You know and understand or you don't. Anything else is a venture into the irrational.

[@Hyperpandas]

Quite a lot of people making pretty clear they have no idea what is and isn't rational.

[@Rico-Suave_]

Watched all of it

[@myopenmind527]

All religions can’t be right as they contain mutually exclusive claims. On the other hand all religions can be wrong. 🤔 If your god does not exist would you still want to believe? If yes tell me why.

[@solomonbleary1434]

I have a answer to this question what will happen to those who have never heard about Jesus? I believe that they will have a opportunity to be saved.

[@rosscarlson3701]

The example of asking the audience for help when answering a question is interesting, but in the end, it is irrelevant, because on those game shows, the questions are about actual proven facts or established knowledge. You wouldn't ask the audience about unfalsifiable claims like the existence of the supernatural, and just go with the consensus.

[@solomonbleary1434]

Look for this video on KZbin What will happen to those who have never heard about Jesus by Solomon.

[@tedgrant2]

The Bible is very important because it is used by millions of people. The average house in the USA has at least one Bible, but no books on Geology or Biology. Don't you agree that Christianity is more influential on our lives than Geology and Biology ? The "Proterozoic Eon" lasted for nearly 2 billion years, but is hardly ever mentioned in Church.

[@FQofNambour]

Is that why Americans appear to generally stupid?

[@indianmilitary]

@tedgrant2 More numbers do not mean credible.

[@tedgrant2]

@@indianmilitary It took you 2 years to answer !

[@rationalsceptic7634]

I didn't know Wiles' Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem was shallow ha ha

[@laeequenadvi4746]

THEORY OF MODERN EVOLUTION VS QUR'ANIC ACCOUNT OF CREATION (11) بدیع السموات و الارض اذا قضی امرا فانما یقول لہ کن فیکون o To Him is due 7 The primal origin Of the heavens and the earth: When He decreeth a matter, He saith to it:" Be," And it is. (Qur'an,2:117) Adam was taught to speak after creation as miracle. It must be born in mind that education or learning presupposes power of speech. It only goes to prove that prophet Adam was not merely endowed with power to speak but had a excellent mental power which enabled him to perceive things in nature of the and those on the earth. و علم ادم الاسما کلہا (2:31 ,Qur'an) And He taught Adam the names of all things. Which commentators take to mean the the inner nature and charactreristics of things, and things here would include feelings. The whole passage is charged with mystic meaning. Prophet Adam was put potentially by Almighty Allah all sciences which his children will be inherited in future and far-future. Prophet Adam being the خلیفہ (vicegeret) of Allah on the earth, was taught all about the nature and universe in order that he could make proper use of all elements of nature. Obviously, any person put in charge of a new post is briefed about every aspect of the responsibilities. It is why Adam was taught about use of everything. Therefore the interpretation of Adam can not be streched to mean any kind of creatures were eitther dumb or who used sighn language. The prophet Adam knew how to read and write. A few of verses throw some light on this aspect: " Proclaim! and thy Lord is most bountiful, He Who taught (the writing) by the pen,-- Taught man that which he knew not. (Qur'an, 96: 3 - 5 ) According to Ka'ab, the first literate man was prophet Adam (24). Ibne Qutiaba is of the opinion that Adam knew to read or write (25). Written language is clearly a much more recent human accusation, with no good evidence for it before 5,500 years ago. (26) The holy Qur'an says in absolute terms:-- " We have indeed created man in the best of moulds". (Qur'an, 95:4) Prophet Adam's personality comes out in a crystal clear manner from the accounts related by the Qur'an. Prophet Adam was not only a dignified, cultured and civilized man, but was a highly learned, graceful and debonair personality. It certainly does not apply to a chimpanzee, ape man or a sub-man. The explicit verses of Qur'an and Hadith portray Adam not merely as the father of the humanity but as the first man and as the first prophet. Continue:

[@arkatheistcc2353]

Creation like your myth are false. Science, has shown we evolved. Like flat earthers you use the outliers who are wrong, and ignore science.

[@yakovisaacs6441]

What lies beyond rationality ? Nothing. Reason is the acme of human endeavour.

[@paulsmith7579]

Reason isnt going to answer the question "is rape wrong"? Seriously?

[@sergeyfox2298]

It's humbling, but atheist and theist alike are probably inclined to think that an event they perceive is miraculous or supernatural, because our brains are just built to see this supernaturalism, Even if it's not there. I don't know why, but we are inclined to see the supernatural regardless of being and atheist or not, theist or not. Supernaturalism could be something we grew up with, socialized into, and would default too. The issue is not seeing the supernatural. The issue is that we are neurologically animalistic in our thinking and see the supernatural. Theists have a euphoria that tells them they are perceiving the supernatural, and that this perception is rational itself. I am of the opinion that we are animals, and like a cat that freaks out over a cucumber, we see cucumbers as well jumping at us. So humbling.

[@scorp10fl53]

Respectfully. I am an atheist. To prove a miraculous or supernatural event occurred would require a great deal of evidence. Supernatural by definition requires that no evidence is provided and the laws of nature have been suspended. The atheistic position on the supernatural is the same as it is on a god. I won't know whether either exists or not until some evidence is provided. It has nothing to do with any proclivity resulting from neurologic development. It's more a sign of an impediment to see the supernatural as being supernatural. Why? Because you"ve assumed that the event cannot be proven and therefore it must be a miracle. In essence, you gave up on your better senses and applied a tag which will forever be attached to things you cannot explain. Where would we be today if we were still fearful of lightning or thunder or an eclipse. We couldn't explain them then... But we understand them now...and that's because they weren't supernatural. They were things within our understanding of the laws of nature and science was there being developed to increase our understanding with each new fact or discovery.. So to say "...atheists and theists are probably inclined ....because our brains are just built to see this supernaturalism." is not correct in my opinion. It is true to say that some events are mysterious, but not unexplainable. You just have to be diligent enough to question things and seek the truth via the evidence.

[@Malspark3978]

Atheism means not being convinced that a god exists, it is not the belief that no god exists, therefore the statement "even if religion was proved false it does not mean atheism is true" makes no sense.

[@TjamVideoMan]

Everybody’s somebody’s ATHEIST!

[@nathanmckenzie904]

Exactly! If you are a believer in a specific god you are 99.00075% atheist. A "true atheist" just goes that extra .00025%

[@tedgrant2]

For thousands of years everybody thought the earth was stationary. Could they all be wrong ?

[@miguelbranquinho7235]

Knowledge which was propagated and enforced by the Church.

[@tedgrant2]

@@miguelbranquinho7235 Based on the fact that the Bible says the earth doesn't move and rests on pillars !

[@miguelbranquinho7235]

@@tedgrant2 The Bible also says we should stone disobedient children, and kill homosexual men. Will you be willing to defend those statements as well?

[@tedgrant2]

@@miguelbranquinho7235 What do you mean by "defend". Do you want chapter and verse ?

[@miguelbranquinho7235]

@@tedgrant2 I mean do you support these statements? I don't need chapter and verse thank you.

[@7wishbone7]

So religon is true even if if God is false? Uuuuuummm...........Ultra FAIL!!!!

[@bubblejuiceman]

This is only my opinion, but yeah... I mean, if God was proven wrong, people may start to worship the flying spaghetti monster, or Alien overlords, or robot with super computer brains. Religion is a belief system which can come out of anything as long as people truly believe in it. As religion "evolves" as some theist apologists like to claim, it seems to become much more vague and open to interpretation, thus harder to disprove. Unless science can squash religion in one fell swoop, there will always be a number to smudge, a verse to re-translate, and a song to re-interpret. "You can't win a argument against an idiot, because you'd have to get down to their level, and they have much more experience there than you do." Religious people aren't inherently idiots, but their beliefs are really hard to justify by any rational means. Even if our world is contained within something much more incredible than we can imagine, that doesn't prove anyone's theory to be correct, only that there is more that we currently don't understand. And a scientific ideology is the only honest one that says "I don't know the answer, but I'm working to find out."

[@stacielivinthedream8510]

Is Rape Wrong?!?!!!!! Hahaha!!!! I F&%$ shut off when I hear such idiocy!!!!!!

[@MrMdrscream]

Sarah Huckabee's doppelganger.....

[@pappy9473]

Great TV. To say there's...'overwhelming evidence', pleeez!!

[@TjamVideoMan]

They are talking like there’s something beyond “reason and rationality”... There is only the end of current knowledge and the need to find out more! If it can’t be known then it can’t be known, but philosophized, opinonized or speculated... They mention discussing these things - but that’s just sharing knowledge, philosophy, opinion and speculation. What they are trying to sneak in is that there is a god to decide these things by his holy rule! That is what they think anyway... And they speak as goddites speak, in final decrees: “There is an end to knowledge, beyond reason” to paraphrase. They speak these things with no proof but as usual, I BELIEVE! That is the problem - their BELIEF is at war with KNOWLEDGE!

[@sergeyfox2298]

There is evidence for God, because of the taken for granted assumptions about real and true underlying ACTUALITY.

[@ramicollo]

What the hell is Mr. Singh doing in the background? 🤣

[@bubbles6883]

Yeah I'm asking the same thing

[@sergeyfox2298]

as an animal, God is my cucumber.

[@schnaftipufti]

Belief doesn't come by witnessing miracles. Belief comes through answered prayers and the divine inspiration.

[@RR-mp7hw]

In practice, belief is reinforced through confirmation bias, which delineates the very need for an objective approach to gaining knowledge.

[@FactStorm]

But there are no answered prayers and divine inspiration..these are delusions for the gullible

[@yakovisaacs6441]

You don't need an extra-cosmic God who can create something out of nothing to explain the cosmos....

[@MCCaasi-ft1pt]

If i don't believe in the existing of God,and if it's true, what will I earned or what will i get? But if God is real and true,what will happen to all who denied him ?

[@RR-mp7hw]

Pascal's wager. It fails for all the reasons you can find through a quick internet search.

[@rationalsceptic7634]

So if String Theory explains the Big Bang,unites QM with Relativity..that's God is it ha

[@Aki-to]

Except even 98% of the audience can be wrong, which has been proven several thousand times.

[@stephensepan291]

their is no evidence of god.

[@nothingbutthetruth613]

What is going on here? Things don't just appear from nothing...EVER. How can any thinking person believe it's more rational that we just one day poof came from nothing than believing someone or something made us. How can our body just evolve by itself? Does anyone know how intricate our body alone is? Not to mention every element and structure in this world. Evolution is so far fetched and so much less rational. I don't care how many "scientists" say the opposite. They are wrong.

[@RR-mp7hw]

How many logical fallacies can you commit in one sitting?

[@nothingbutthetruth613]

@@RR-mp7hw Can you honestly say you believe this intricate world with its complexity and our bodies with their billions of cells all in perfect harmony (usually) just happened by themselves? I'm not talking about a religion. I'm just talking about some sort of higher power. Be honest. Do you really believe that? Ever hear of near death experiences? How do you explain them? They are experienced throughout the world by tens of millions of people of every age and nationality and they are all extremely similar and unexplainable.

[@RR-mp7hw]

@@nothingbutthetruth613 Not sure what you mean by "happened by themselves." We have natural mechanisms to explain patterns in the world. We have objective scientific evidence that supports those mechanisms. We have no objective evidence for a "higher power." The absence of a current natural explanation for a pattern does not imply that the laws of physical reality must have been suspended. NDE is most likely a natural phenomenon of the brain, much as we know that dreams and even waking perceptions are altered by the physiological conditions of the brain, like oxygen deprivation. Again, no evidence of anything that contravenes physical reality. I understand that science fiction and mysticism appeal to people but that doesn't make them true or even plausible.

[@nothingbutthetruth613]

@@RR-mp7hw We are going to have to just agree to disagree because you are very wrong and I don't think your mind will be changed. Have you ever studied these "mechanisms" or "objective evidence"? Do you really understand it? I highly doubt this because if you did study it you would know that this is merely a theory and an extremely weak one. The evidence you refer to is full of holes upon holes and everyone admits to this. Do you really believe your eye and brain just evolved over time into what it is? How can they have been functional in a more primitive stage? I know I'm simplifying it but do not just say that there are scientists who have studied this and they know what they're talking about. Study it yourself and come to a conclusion based solely on your research. You can not in good conscience still believe that we came from nothing as opposed to being created. As far as NDE's goes, you obviously have not researched this either. To assume that this a natural phenomenon or is comparable to a dream would make you a laughing stock to the millions and millions of people who have experienced this and have transformed their lives because of it. You and I have never experienced this (thank God) so it's hard to understand and easy to be a skeptic but they all say this was no dream. How do you explain blind people who have never seen a thing, able to describe color and light? How do you explain 5 year olds experiencing these same phenomenons? How do you explain how they are able to say what happened in the operating room and miles from where their body was while they were clinically dead? This is not an isolated thing but experienced by millions. Just admit there is no scientific explanation....unless you believe there is something after this.

[@RR-mp7hw]

@@nothingbutthetruth613 I'm an evolutionary biologist. Thanks for the tip about really studying it.

[@stevecoley8365]

Is it more rational to believe in love (truth), light and warmth that makes life grow and "creates" free, clean energy called "joy"? Or is it more rational to worship "greed" (absence of love) aka. "ignorance" which transforms joy, beauty and harmony into misery, ugliness and conflict. And rape is ugly (heavy lead) aka "evil" because it is absent of love (magic) and it sucks the joy out of life with it's heavy gravitational pull.

[@kjustkses]

It all starts with at least one miracle. We're all okay with that one...

[@FQofNambour]

I believe in the Tooth Fairy. The evidence is obvious, teeth exist.

[@tommym321]

I cannot argue with that logic!

[@yakovisaacs6441]

REBUTTING THE ARGUMENT FOR A DEITY FROM FINE TUNING OF THE UNIVERSE The fine tuning of the universe is only to be expected in keeping with the natural processes...and science predicts the same set of physical constants needed to maintain a universe like the one we inhabit. It cannot be otherwise. In a hypothesized multiverse, the correct mix of the finely tuned physical constants, supposedly happened, by statistical probability, to enter our universe, while other universes had a less stable combination of these physical constants...but the notion of a multiverse is hypothetical and invented by scientists to support the fine tuning of our universe that we observe and in the absence of verifiable data of a multiverse, well, it cannot be a sound answer. Now, to the main evidence... calculations and experimental data show that the physical constants cannot have any other values other than what they posses if the universe has to hold together and operate and for life to have arisen on earth.... Despite the fine tuning, most of the universe is lethal and inhospitable and violent in its phenomena. A short rebuttal to the argument from fine tuning as constituting evidence of a deity is this: Had life existed on say the Sun or on a planet without life sustaining conditions like water, oxygen, food and ambient temperature, then, for life forms to live and thrive in the absence of these critical life supporting conditions would not be explicable by science or by naturalistic explanations and would as a result constitute evidence of a miracle atrributed to a divine being. But, such is not the case and life thrives only on a planet like earth where billions of years of geochemical cycles with adjustments for just the right conditions to arise caused life to originate here and not on a star or on a planet devoid of say oxygen or water. So, just the right conditions, as predicted by science, are required for life to originate on earth and not elsewhere where such life sustaining conditions don't exist. So, the argument from fine tuning indicating a deity's presence is debunked.

[@biancavonmuhlendorf2608]

there is a need to realize, that what often ist called rationalizm is often pure materialism- a true intellect can contain much more( not to mention the human psyche)

[@alistairjclark2433]

I think most atheists get confused between the concept of God and religion (here mostly focusing on Christianity). When I answer that I believe in God many people jump to 'how can Jesus have existed' 'why would he created hell' I never said I was a Christian yet they jump to the assumption. Shows the rational as the gentlemen said @12:00 belief of the non existence is a belief

[@RR-mp7hw]

Straw man fallacy.

[@malcolmhodnett8874]

That’s not even what just happened

[@Incinerate1212]

The hero in evolution is death. Yup god is good.

[@tedgrant2]

It must be very upsetting for Moslems when they get to Heaven. They'll be met by Saint Peter at the Pearly Gates and join a long queue. In the distance they will see Jesus sat on the right hand of God. And Allah making the tea.

[@hitman5782]

And you know all this to be accurate because...you have read about it in an ancient book full of talking animals and plants?

[@tedgrant2]

@@hitman5782 No, I made it up.

[@tedgrant2]

@@hitman5782 plus, there are no talking plants in my garden.

[@jdl2180]

a person can know God! but an atheist can only believe that God doesn't exist.

[@amongussus4]

U cannot prove a negative