10 Minutes of Religion being DESTROYED by Sam Harris #2 

Amen

There are no religions in Hell.

@@ThroneofDavid8 Hell will be full of self righteous religious people

NO.

@@Artman1 True

Well they only showed 3 minutes of the debate with Craig. Maybe look that up to get a more balanced view.

@@martinmoffat5417WLC is a vapid thinker. This was his peak and it’s only been downhill from here

Nice to have you!!!

And I just got here

Not even his own ilk accept his moral framework as it must be accepted as a brute fact. Refer to Alex O’Connor

He's a Primate

@@matimus100 As are all human beings.

@@martinmoffat5417 I'm of his "ilk" and I accept his moral framework. And by looking at the comments, many others do too.

@@The-Doubters-Diary Sam Harris is right to be skeptical of secularism as it is more properly understood as Historian Tom Holland suggests to be partially lapsed form of Christianity which is why it is fundamentally western in origin. Secularism is akin to a farmer saying, "We no longer need to plant seed or work the land because we have all its produce."

Christians brought us the hospitals and moe fundamentally the concept of caring for the weak. Darwin brought us eugenics and preservation of the favoured r@ces

How about all the children saved by kind committed doctors and nurses.

​@@martinmoffat5417 the earliest known hospital was the temple of Epidaurus, where people could receive care and treatment, built in 4th century BC The code of Hammurabi had legal protections which displayed the concept of caring for the weak, over 500 odd years before the OT was written It had legal protections for vulnerable peoples, like widows and orphans Then you need to realize that caring for the weak is a concept displayed even in some animals, there's literally no evidence to suggest it began with the Christian movement. Even the good Samaritan cared for the weak and they had their own religious beliefs and gods Also Darwin had nothing to do with eugenics. A bunch of racists used his work to justify eugenics

And what of 73 Milli0n innocént lives that are premàturely st0len each year. Livés that are ènded as sàcrifice to protect h00kup culture. Christianity has always been a voice for the voiceless and we will not be silenced.

@@micklumsden3956 They had someone take them to these healers.

What/who makes you having empathy?

​@@railyntempey "Mirror" neurons.

Doesn't it mean that atheists are "rely" on others to develop empathy?

@@railyntempey Nice superficial rtard analysis of the root word.

@@rimbusjift7575 Does atheists rely on what the others do to developing their empathy?

I am a former atheist Who did not believe in God or his existence. It took yrs for me to come to the realization that God is God.

⁠@@user-fq9ij4we4rGo to your enclave then. Stay away from the rest of us.

@@user-fq9ij4we4r😂😂😂 wtf

Tell me more about the 'REAL world'

Oh you know of God exists of not wow heu everyone deevnn knows everything and has the answer to life's biggest question, let's listen to him

Daymn! Why didn't I think of that! Lol!😅

"He knows when you've been bad or good, so be good, for goodness' sake. Oh, you better not pout..."

Magical thinking, perverted faith. Not the good kind of faith that persistence, diligence, and passion that everything will work out in the end.

They???????

Why do you give yourself the right to speak for others?

@@__-tz6xx "Work out in the end"? You mean, after you're dead? That absolutely *is* magical thinking.

@@martinmoffat5417 The same reason the rest of the world does, I have a voice and have the right to use it. The person on stage does the same thing.

And, you people are REALLY cruel.

@@TheMilitantMazdakite I don't know about the people you're talking about, as I'm not part of any group or doctrine, but, I'm actually a nice person. I don't think homosexuals are an abomination, like the Bible says. I don't think women are second class citizens, like the Bible shows. I don't think people that don't accept God or jesus, deserve hell. So, in general, I have a much fairer and humane moral code than what the Bible would make me have, don't you think?

@@Guanda70 I am not a Christian, in fact, I consider Christianity ahrimanic (Satanic). I am a Mazdakite Zoroastrian, and my religion teaches absolute equality. I want every man, woman, and child in the world to be equal, from the laboring slave to the king. (That phrase is derived from an account of Mazdak's revolt in the Shahmenah) I do NOT condemn nonbelievers to hell, and I love all of Ahura Mazda's creatures. A much better world than the imperialist world order you defend, don't you think?

@@TheMilitantMazdakite I'm an atheist. I don't believe in the supernatural. I don't follow any doctrine or institution. I only have a philosophy that could be described as humanism.

No she straw-manned the question at the beginning so you're justified in seeing the argument as weak. The framing of the question would have the theists denying its claim. Of course there can be morality without God. Its what we call subjective morality. The philosophical argument is that there can be no objective moral framework from which to discern good and evil that is binding on all mankind without a creator.

It seems to promote tribalism, doesn't it? It separates us through myth telling and pits us against each other for no good reason other than some twisted pride in a fantasy that can never be proven.

Anne Lamott - 'You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.'

Imagine what mankind would do without the fear of consequence

@@martinmoffat5417 You are talking about Christians. Christianity teaches that it doesn't matter what you do, god will forgive you. No consequences.

@@martinmoffat5417 I imagine a world without the murdering of innocents over religious myths.

Agreed, and unfortunately women in those cultures often convince themselves that submitting to those ideologies is an act of choice and agency, not the result of fear or peer pressure.

No, that's when he gets especially cruel in how he blames the west's victims.

The map he shows is literally the evidence that Christianity is good for society. All the Western nations are literally the highest on his index. But of course you object and say, “Not anymore”. This is a fundamental misunderstanding firstly of how long it takes to input values into a culture to then receive benefits and secondly of where the secular values come from in the first place. Don’t believe me. Ask secular Historian Tom Holland

The statistic literally show expansion of Christianity in the western world. Even the values today called secular are Christian in their origin. It takes a long time for the input of values to create an output of cultures. Thank you Sam Harris for the testament to Christianity

Stats represent the Christianized nations

Religion does not abdicate morality at a personal level. It seems you suggest people should insist on their own morality in culture which is called anarchism. All religions believe the law of God is written on the conscience of mankind.

@@martinmoffat5417 Then we don't need prophets or texts telling us how to live life. Having no religion is not anarchism, it's secularism. Big difference.

@@randyhilton6629 Secularism is lapsed Christianity. It shares our fruits but rejects its roots. Your statement is akin to a farmer saying we don’t need to work the land anymore because we have its produce

@@martinmoffat5417 "All religions belief the law of God is written on the conscience of mankind." The Hindus don't. The Sikhs don't. The Wiccans don't. And if you believe in the god of the Bible and you believe the Bible, why would this god need to hand down any commandments ( old testament has a total of 613 commandments) at all? Did god forget they had already written the law on people's hearts? or did this god realize they left out a whole bunch of the laws?

@@cnault3244 You are absolutely wrong about those religious groups. They absolutely have God's moral standard written on their hearts as they believe in human dignity, moral duties and inalienable rights.

If you want your eyes opened watch the whole debate between WLC and Harris. After losing the philosophical debate Harris results to slandering religions.

2. The God Debate II: Harris vs. Craig ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-yqaHXKLRKzg.html

They're listed above in the video description. Sources: 1. Sam Harris : The End of Faith ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-f28AAkLm9ZA.html 2. The God Debate II: Harris vs. Craig ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-yqaHXKLRKzg.html

You just quoted the royal law of Christ. Do as you would be done by. We have nothing to fear because while we were still slnnérs Christ died for us. We love because he first loved us. "Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wràth through him! For if, while we were God’s enèmies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!" Pauls Letter to the Romans 57 AD

​@martinmoffat5417 The golden rules existed thousands of years before Christians invented the figure of jesus.

@@martinmoffat5417 Your jesus sanctioned slavery and genocide. Don’t pretend I’m borrowing a standard of ethics from your imaginary friend.

@@martinmoffat5417 Read a bible. Any bible. Then say that.

christianity and islam are weird in the sense that they start off by declaring everybody a sinner ... I'd say it's a framework of narcissistic abuse, if you get them young enough and can indoctrinate them into thinking they are worthless you can basically abuse them and demand their forgiveness ...

But his thinking is limited to the value of the fruits of Christianity while lacking any mechanism to sustain them which he acknowledges in this video. This video in which he in fact poisons their roots

@@martinmoffat5417 Wtf are you talking about? He poisons what roots? Also he doesn't only talk about Christianity. I think I'm missing whatever point you're trying to make here

The values of the secular world are indistinguishable from Christianity. Don’t believe me look into the work done by Historian Tom Holland in Dominion

@@mikefufuffalo8487 Won't let me post to explain but perhaps if you comment on this post

@@martinmoffat5417 The values of the secular world are indistinguishable from christianity? No. Christianity's basis is the bible, and the bible is very, very morbid.

Nope. It's part of how they blame the victims of western imperialism.

On the contrary they are self defeating. If you enjoy the fruits why poison the roots. That's why the 2 of them have stepped back from criticizing Christianity. They have come to understand that it is the basis of the western values which is fully unpacked in Historian Tom Hollands work on Dominion

@@martinmoffat5417 Which is why religion continues to lose ground, day by day.

I desire lots of coffee, how that that negativly affect anybody?

@@youtubestudiosucks978 you'll note I said "many", not all actions. However, I don't think it's a stretch to see some effects of your coffee consumption. It was likely imported from another country, and there is some climate damage always involved in over seas shipping. It may have been processed by workers living in poverty. It might effect your personality negatively, making you agitated or stressed. In every scenario, the benefits must be weighed against the costs. Is it morally justified to drink coffee? I can not judge on this matter fully, but my first instinct is to say it's not so bad.

@@yamahkogribbis6212 every product sold is made by underpaid workers, the world is corrupt and slavery is still being practiced in anfrica

@@yamahkogribbis6212 every product made is done by underpaid workers. Slav3ry is still being practized in africa btw

@@youtubestudiosucks978 not just Africa, and of course I think that is immoral. No person can be perfectly moral in this world, so much of our existence is predicated on the suffering of others. We just try our best knowing we are flawed.

Really?...like really? "only religious people can be truly evil." Wow! You haven't spent much time on the internet have you? 🤣 Good for you.

@@shyman3000 Struck a nerve? Atheists have no absolute morality so there is only being good and bad. Religious people have absolute morality, so when they commit bad acts, they are evil.

Easy loving love

“Philosophies require human compliance” … religious moralities _don’t_ require compliance? Theology supplies lots of conflicting moral standards. No compliance required? Is the objective one the one you happen to favour? Or all of them are?

@@damienschwass9354 I never said you don't need compliance or philosophy. I was speaking of the limitation of each of the disciplines regarding morality. You certainly need compliance, philosophy in any moral system and theology at its base to derive meaning. Otherwise we are just discussing labels designed to control you.

@@martinmoffat5417 your argument is incomprehensible. “Philosophies require compliance whereas theology ….” Now you say you certainly need compliance whilst also talking about without compliance it’s just a system to control you?!! Complying is not adhering to a system of control?? You’re contradicting yourself martin

​@@damienschwass9354 Or perhaps you misunderstand. A person could theoretically develop the perfect moral framework that accounts for everything from a philosophical stand point. But what is it value if it fails to obligate anyone to comply with its statutes? In reality it would only need to fail to capture the powerful and the rest is history. 170 million Rest In Peace.

@@martinmoffat5417 “what is it value if it fails to obligate anyone to comply with its statutes” people are no more or less obligated to comply with any other moral framework, and that includes any that invoke deities. Compliance is a matter of choice in every case.

Pentecostals are terrible people and not peaceful at all! I was around Pentecostals for a bit and the amount of HATE was astounding! Even where I live now, the Pentecostals are the right wingers and Republicans who make our lives worse with their hate and lies!

Stop lying Stuart

Sure is.

I'm an atheist, so there is no god, but as a backup plan... I'm not interested anymore in why he would have created what he created... how is what I'd like to know, why is not relevant. It was actually a happy day when I realised this.

You skipped the good parts, Mr. Scientific Theist. The 6-day creation. The moon turning into blood. The rod turning into a serpent. The 3 men in a furnace. A tribe wandering in the desert for 40 years. Scientific? Or laughable?

@@Sue-xv8os Hi Sue. Of course I skipped them, those are the "same old playing field" of interpreting ancient metaphorical analogies literally. Even when rejecting the idea of "God", our thinking has been put inside very old religious boxes. Your "good parts" still release a little information however, even if not of the direct and honest kind. "Following a pillar of fire at night, and a pillar of smoke by day" tells any forensic sociologist that the Hebrew tribe wasn't wandering in the desert for forty years, they were headed for the great Ptolemaic lighthouse at Alexandria on which a fire burned 24/7. It was there to guide ships, and please note that the camel is "the ship of the desert". If "the Lord" had intended them to wander the Sinai sands for 40 years he would have told them to take water-skins, but no, he told them to pillage the Egyptians of jewelry and fine clothing, the type of item that can be exchanged for water, food, and cash at any market town on the way to Alexandria. Clearly (to me at least), the exodus story is a cover-up, an "official and politically correct version" of an account of escaping slaves, written much later. The rod turning into a serpent may have its origins in the Hippocratic symbol used by the medical profession, two entwined snakes separating at the top of a rod. Like you I don't take the bible literally, but to simply divide your thinking into just two categories, "scientific" or "laughable" doesn't do justice to the knowledge we have. When dealing with twaddle, tommyrot, and balderdash, each has its own unique perspective from which much can be learned. In other words, rubbish can be prophetably recycled. Cheers, P.R.

@@philliprobinson7724 Honest question: If the book MEANT to read that the Hebrews were headed to the lighthouse yada yada -- why didn't it say that? Why call a ship a camel? The Hippocratic serpent on the rod originated in Greece so there's a big problem with the logistics of travel to get to your thoughts about it. And yes, there are parts in the book that are quite laughable, such as a woman turning to salt, or 2 bears mauling a bunch of mischievous kids. What'd they do -- stand in line & wait? Don't you think a book inspired by "The Word of God" should say what it means, for all time and for all people?

​@@Sue-xv8os Hi Sue. A camel is called "the ship of the desert" because it carries goods across vast seas of sand to destinations that can only be reached by navigating by the stars.; just like ships! Hippocrates? The early bible was written in Greek because it was universal language of scholarship back then. Naturally Greek concepts flowed like water wherever people sought knowledge. (Google "Rosetta stone") Lot's wife turning to a pillar of salt refers to her trauma and bitterness at seeing all her friends and their children killed in a military operation against the city of Sodom. The story of Elijah's bears is just a dramatic way of teaching kids not to make fun of others because of their personal appearance, there are always consequences. HONESTY will be true for all time for all people, but it's the only moral concept that can be "nailed down" in simple concrete terms. (That's not a literal "nailed down".) All the more abstract ideas like love, humility, grace, etc, are better expressed in story-form. You are being too literal. Try reading poetry, it may give you another perspective. Cheers, P.R.

Easy.

Why?

Because the Christian cult thinks they need to spread their hate and lies instead of keeping that crap to themselves!

When people will stop kill in the name of supernatural sky daddies.

easy, when they stop arguing that it's important to find jesus and try to adopt cult leader apostel Paul's ideas in 21st century legistlation... and the same goes for Mohammed and allah...

When did he ever say he supports the genocide?

@@drsatan3231 listen to the last couple of podcasts. It's acceptable collateral damage in his eyes

​@@SiRushBass what exactly were his words You're the one making the claim, the burden of proof is upon you

Baloney.

@@njhoepner Why conclude in your ignorance?

@@martinmoffat5417 Someone doesn't read, understand, or believe their bible. Which one is yours?

@@martinmoffat5417 No ignorance involved...your statement is pure baloney. The nations you mentioned have bypassed Christian "morality." That's why they're not burning witches, hunting down gay people, prosecuting blasphemy, and censoring their education systems any more.

And look at religious societies and the crime, hate, etc….. and education is terrible, all to keep children dumbed down for religion. It’s disgusting! Most in prison in America today are Christian’s! Seems like Christians do more evil for their gods.

Because political affiliation have nothing to do with that, right? Illiterate.

All of the countries you mentioned are much, much more peaceful than USA. And yes they are atheistic societies. As the world continues to drop religion(s), the world continues to become more peaceful. Fact.

Two of them are communist

And don't conflate atheism with communism.

Yes, and they are the imperial core, AKA the countries benefitting from western imperialism.

Importantly, for his point, they have low religious adherence. So any argument that this leads to moral decline or a worse society is baseless.

@@damienschwass9354 Please, these countries are MUCH more evil than the countries that they plunder, such as India.

@@damienschwass9354 He literally showed the map of Christian expansion and influence. Cultures don't change over night and secularism originates from Christianity and proclaims all its virtues.

@@martinmoffat5417 nothing that you said contradicts the fact that most of the countries that score highly on standard of living indicators have low amounts of religious adherence in their population.

Morality imposed by a "creator" is by definition subjective, unless it is binding on that creator as well. Since the Abrahamic religions reject that notion, the morality they propose is subjective.

@@njhoepner Subjective is how you play the game. Objective is how the game is to be played. In this way objectivity is directly linked to design. If the universe was designed it follows that we are subject to the designers rules regardless as to whether we consider them moral or not. If on the other hand we are somehow born out of blind pitiless indifference then everything is permissible and nothing is truly good or evil but simply labels made up by those who wish to control you. This ideology binds us to the whims of those who hold power and there is no God to stop them. This ideology disproportionately empowers those who hold the seat of influence and is thus highly corruptible. As for me I will take my seat at the foot of mountain and receive the teaching of Jesus.

@@martinmoffat5417 Surely by religion you are not talking about the Abrahamic god of the bible?

@@martinmoffat5417 You're redefining what "objective" and "subjective" mean to suit your argument. An objective morality, by the actual definition, is a standard not based on the will of any being - it stands on its own and is binding on all beings. If it is merely the will of some being, including some creator, then it is subjective by definition. If it is merely the will of said being, then indeed "good or evil are simply labels," in this case "made up" by the being that wants to control you. This being, of course, is a faith claim. The fact is that religions are human inventions, and the morals they preach are too. Their morality is therefore not only just as subjective as "secular" morality, it comes from the same source - it merely pretends to a higher source in order to reinforce the control attempt...and thus "disproportionately empowers" those clever enough to get themselves into the position of speaking for god or jesus or allah or whatever. It is completely obvious that the universe is completely indifferent to life, including us. In the bronze age this was less obvious, given how small their concept of it was and how immediate their "gods" were, being earth-dwelling anthropomorphic entities who walked around in gardens and lived in temples (including "Yahweh"). This conception is no longer tenable...we are on our own and have to deal with that reality - and I think we can.

@@njhoepner This is really is not a hard concept. A) The creator of soccer(football) determines that if you kick the ball in the opponents net you score one point. Whoever has more points at the end of 90 minutes wins. Simple B) The creator of Mario Bros. determines that you run to the right, collect as many points as possible in the shortest time possible and jump on the tip of the flag to repeatedly beat each level and you win. Simple Adherence to the design scores points and rejection only makes you look like a f00l until your time runs out or you get kicked off the team. Simple

No, religion is pefectly rational.

​@@TheMilitantMazdakite nice troll

@@Lordidude Nope.