Are Christianity and Atheism Just "Different Worldviews?" 

Sort of related my kids want my ashes put in one of those biodegradable tree growing pods. They picked and apple tree. They said then it’s like I’m still here giving them apples. Aww. If my kids can be happy knowing that death is the end I find it really odd that so many adults can not. My 10yo last night said seeing one beautiful sunrise was enough happiness for having been born.

@@trishayamada807 your kids sound wise beyond their years. And by raising them to consider these philosophical questions rather than just accepting what a book or pastor says, you will save them so much heartache and at least one existential crisis

@@ashleyrhy5722 exactly. I was raised in fear and in-line things were scary. My kids are ok with saying “I don’t know” and along with that to have the intellectual freedom to explore how to find out more. They have a genuine curiosity that isn’t held back by any religious dogmas.

In the afterlife you will have many shade tree's available to you. I know i'll see you there. And we can talk about all the meanness in the used ta be. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pBLnR06-jiw.html

Um, what about the heat death of the universe?

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Sagan would be proud.

@@RoseInTheWeeds Carl Sagan was a materialistic idiot. Not in the least bit qualified to speak about anything beyond the physical realm.

omg that would be hilarious! With the robes and everything! :):):):)lol

Yeah, in the end I guess that's the point that "we have different worldviews" is trying to gloss over.

@@ProphetofZod And failed, of course.

@Ad Lockhorst I'll ck it out. It is in English ...?

@Ad Lockhorst Dutch ?!?# That's not very helpful.

@Ad Lockhorst Well I'm an American. Thank you very much !!!! Yeah, I might have a problem with that. I'm still trying to decode Trump's last speech. Is there an idiot to human translator ?

It dont, in fact i would go so far as to say that it would diminish the actuall "meanings" (i say meanings because that is really subjective, what makes life meaningfull is after all different from person to person) of said life. Think about it, if there really were some magical afterlife where everything is "perfect" (another subjective term) then why bother with *this* life? If theists were consinstent in their beliefs they would rush to get to that "promised land" and ironicly view this life as a mere annoyance easily discarded. In short, they would have to be the strawman nihilists they project to atheists in order to faithfully follow their beliefs.

Laid is not even a remote possibility in the Evangelical mindset...and, rightly so, because nobody wants to fuck them.

What about an afterafterafterlife?

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-lK3xsZpU3zw.html

@@nickwadson5731 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CZplzRg6ZP4.html

@1 Corinthians 13:12 KJV You failed to get the point. It's about meaning here. If the goal/meaning of life is the afterlife, then, in order for the afterlife to be meaningful, it requires the existence of an afterafterlife you strive for. But if the afterlife is meaningful without the need of an afterafterlife, then it shows it doesn't require an afterlife in order for life to be meaningful. Either way, you lose.

@1 Corinthians 13:12 KJV It's a response to the people who say "life has no meaning unless there's an afterlife". If they wanted to be consistent, then they'd also have to admit that the afterlife is pointless unless there's an afterafterlife, and so on. As for the squishy embryos, I really don't know. TL;DR - saying that life's purpose is the afterlife introduces an infinite regression of afterlives or the admission that _one_ of those lives doesn't derive purpose from the one that comes after it. If you really want to poke around in our heads, btw, you can just ask. I'm curious as to why you're curious. The proud religious types generally don't want to know things they don't think they know already. You're not just digging for a response you like, are you?

Depending on the equipment being used, they both could flatline. A _heart_ would flatline as the electrocardiograph ceases picking up any heart rate and a _brain_ would flatline when all function ceased being detected by an electroencephalograph machine(though this does not mean that the brain is actually dead, as comas can shut down feasible brain activity while still retaining some brain function). Hopes this clears it up, cheers :)

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-lK3xsZpU3zw.html

*"Now I'm no scientist, but isn't it your heart that flatlines?"* Your heart can _also_ flatline, but that's not game over, that's the countdown timer telling you to put in more quarters to keep playing.

I'm a bit late to this party, but I brought something really good: Jell-O registers as having brain activity on an EEG. Makes determining if someone is brain dead really tricky, because it's pretty arbitrary.

Death by steamroller flattens both.

The problem is that in real life this wacko will not even use the fire extinguisher to deal with this imaginary “fire” but rather he will recommend you do things that wouldn’t help if the “fire” was real! So I would change the “house on fire” analogy some more: “A guy with crazy eyes bursts into my home in the middle of the night knocking down my door, cries that there’s fire somewhere in the house, sprays his own piss on me, then shits in the middle of the living room before I’m able to stop him and says it’s to take the fire away. And yes, there are no signs of fire anywhere in the house...”

@@Boris99999 Then he goes to court to sue so children in schools are taught the importance of pissing and shitting in other people's houses, and he votes to elect leaders who believe in pissing and shitting all over your house, and will take your tax dollars and give them to everyone who goes around pissing and shitting all over other people's homes. But you should be tolerant of all that because after all it's just another worldview. We both see the world the same but interpret it differently. We see no fire and think "there's no fire". He sees no fire and thinks: "I can't see it, but I know there must be fire there, because it would make me feel better, and it would justify my desire to piss and shit all over your house". See? Exactly the same.

1 Corinthians 13:12 KJV It’s a great song! XD

except that isn't the same, at all

and then he sends you a reoccurring bill for 10% of your income for being "on call" as a firefighter. to your fake house fire that he made up. and he also hands you a list of random demands about how you'll live the rest of your life, and he'll personally come back and set your house on fire if you break them. makes sense to me.

Yeah. Your examples remind me of my discussion with the Modern Day Debate guy where he kept trying to say that you should multiply the asserted amount of a reward into your assessment of whether you should pursue it. It's absurd.

None of them! The $1 offer is probably some coupon trying to get you to buy something, or some political party that wants you to send the $1 back along with hundreds of others. The $1000 offer is some sham charity trying to get you to donate. The $1,000,000,000 is a good old Nigerian scam. Throw that junkmail out!

I would like to take a moment and tell you of the major lynch pins for Christianity to be true. #1. There must be a resurrection of the dead. Season 3 Episode 6 of Through the Wormhole (Starring Morgan Freeman) called Can We Raise the Dead, he introduces us to most of the known science behind the resurrection of the dead. #2. There must be eternal life. In Season 2 Episode 9 of the same TV series called Can We Live Forever He goes through most of the known science and methods for eternal life. We must also be resurrected into incorruptible bodies. #3. The dead in Christ shall rise first. There is no evidence for that until #2. begins to occur. If ALL of those items are fulfilled then Christianity has won the debate without question. That means that a fourth primary premise is the judgement of all mankind, then the inevitable fifth primary premise of casting non-believers into the lake of fire.

@@DanielHorton-oz6rp I would argue that no, if 1-3 are all true, Christianity finally gains the right to assert that a dead person can come back to life without necessarily needing to appeal to the supernatural, but little more.

@@david2869 No. Don't throw those out! Never waste good kindling.

Hahahah! I didn't even catch that. Great call.

Something they refuse to ever consider: "What if you're wrong? Think about it, if Heaven, Hell, God, Devil, etc does not exist, then you've been just wasting your time on a delusion that will get you nothing except 'comforting thoughts'." They have an odd view of "comforting thoughts", being threatened to suffer in agony for eternity in a evil place unless you do this, this, this, this, this, and this, then you'll probably end up in a place where you worship someone for eternity. Both sound like a nightmare. Yet they are somehow comforted by these frankly horrific beliefs.

@@Gyrannon Ahhh but they just know they're definitely the special ones who will totally go to heaven.

​@@snooganslestat2030Exactly. Though I think it takes a sociopath to not be too bothered about billions of people going to hell while they are the "special ones".

@@paulread7113 I wouldn't say that as i don't believe billions of people are sociopaths lol. However i think its extreme cognitive dissonance as they justify to themselves being a good virtuous person whilst believing hell is defensible. Some will be 'nice' about it saying they hope you see the light etc whilst a lot of others will say (after mumbling & deflecting) that you deserve it for being bad.

It's also a problem in Christian art. That's one of the main reasons why so many Christian songs sound the same, (to stay relevant to enough of a Christian audience to gain and maintain popularity, by "staying true to Christian practice" according to however enough Christians define "true Christianity" or "true Christian practice"). That's one of the main reasons why some denominations or groups of Christians almost seem like clones of each other, with sometimes severely limited individuality or personal uniqueness; it is because so many ways of self-expression are considered sinful, leaving only a few left to be allowed, and thus results in so many of them sharing many of the same patterns of speech and mannerisms in behavior, dress, style, decoration, discussion, thought, ..etc.) It's also one of the main reasons why many Christian shows and movies are so highly propagandistic and indoctrinating, like the famous example of the God's Not Dead movies.

Follow up... Have to laugh. My wife revived a book titled "where its God in coronavirus" from her church today. The need to write God into things is unending. Opened it on a random page and it was taking about "corona" meaning "crown" and that linking it to the kingship of God in some significant way... Etemology, the preachers' alternative to actually addressing the things themselves

@@johnwalker1058 indeed When people defend religion by saying "what about the art that it inspired" I think "what about the art that it took from us". Do people really think that we wouldn't have been producing art without religion? No! And it would inevitably have reflected a wider range of subjects and perspectives. Just look at the US today, majority Christian at least until recently and, as you point out, compare the secular music, film, poetry, visual art to the Christian alternatives. Now tell me that religion inspires creativity.

so you believe in the supernatural but not god? im confused. god is the supernatural, and so are spirits. you cant be an atheist and believe in the supernatural. I dont accept the supernatural as even possible, let alone existing.

@@byronkelly4374 no, I don't believe in the supernatural, I don't even think that it is a coherent idea. By "spiritual life" I just mean my furthering of my understanding of morality, consciousness, free will, "my place in the universe" and finding a fulfilling "way to be" that draws on my understanding of those things. I'm saying that those "spiritual questions" are answered in a much more satisfying and useful way when you don't take the "spiritual answers". It takes more work, maybe studying epistemology, maybe logic maybe neuroscience, maybe complexity theory etc etc. But the pay-off is that with study you get explanations rather than answers. For example: Question : what is life? Answer : the breath of God (sounds nice but ultimately useless) Explaination: study biology, you will get an explanation (but not a clear "answer" to the question, because reality is more complex than that)

Yeah, it's all about the value YOU assign to other people based on empathy and obligation. If a Christian doesn't feel that obligation to someone without a soul, that's a reflection of their attitude.

Sadly I remember that feeling leaving religion. "Oh damn, life ends? I was basically promised immortality!" Had people told me that it's all bullshit I would have worked through it myself ages ago - instead I did it at age twenty five. Oof. ):

I think they fear and demonize nihilism mistakenly. Often moral nihilism will be conflated with philosophical nihilism. If you understand what nihilism is, it's still a leap of logic to go from: nihilism is true, to: therefore, do horrific violence and kill indiscriminately. If you understand nihilism, and you actually believe that there is no such thing as value, and all actions are truly without point or merit, you would just as likely to conclude: therefore, do nothing, continue to do nothing, do nothing whatsoever, until you eventually starve to death. I would submit that basically no one actually thinks this way, so it's a nonissue. But no matter which conflation or misunderstanding of nihilism might be present, people are no more likely to start killing indiscriminately one day, then they are to give up doing anything at all, because they've concluded that everything is pointless and valueless. The thing they should be afraid of is that people will loose motivation, if they should take some of the propositions of nihilism a bit too seriously. There are all sorts of implications of this loss of motivation, and I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about them. Fortunately, as I said before, basically no one actually thinks this way, and the way they fear monger about nihilism is just a propaganda tool.

@S Gloobal Oh, hey Glooball! Do you _ever_ convert people trolling around in the comments on atheist videos?

@S Gloobal I did you one better - I showed you why your question is badly worded and filled with - intentionally or not - disingenuous conversation tactics. Guess I wasted my time on that one, huh? :P

I think the phrase "making the world a better place" implies to other Christians that this guy wants to make everyone an atheist. Maybe.

My speculation. Truth and beauty are things Christians use to say God exists. Big T truth 'can only come from God'. The existence of beauty is proof of God creating the world (sort of a watchmaker argument). And making the world a better place is owned only by the religious. Then they'll say things like "science only males sense because God made it that way " Things like that I'm guessing

Tolerance is often being used as dog whistle. You know, you have to tolerate my intolerance kind of thing. But this is the issue with dog whistles. One can easily become oversensitive to them and become slightly paranoid I personally became paranoid of the word "family". There's nothing wrong about it and yet whenever a politician starts talking about family there's 75% chance it'll turn homophobic "Family values" is even more suspect. And again, I have nothing against family but it has been used by bigots so often I feel apprehension whenever a politician mentions it

conservative christians don't like science when it conflicts with their "worldview"

I've seen many evangelical conservatives mock the concept of environmentalism.

I at least meant to say “sack.” Knowing me, I might have said “stack.” 😆

Easy: if you make a small frame to restrain the bottom layer (or even set them in soft dirt/sand) - you can then stack the marbles in a pyramid on top of the lower layers, in the gaps.

LMFAO!

Random funny story... I remember back when I was a christian in high school I met a vocal atheist--the kind that would wear spaghetti monster shirts and loudly call people out for being christian. I don't remember how he found out, but once he knew I was a christian he started confronting me about it. The first time, he walked up to me randomly and was like "did you know the bible says here and here not to pray to men?" I was like "sure?" And he goes, "Well then it's wrong to pray to the virgin Mary and the saints!" I blink. "Yeah. Sounds right to me." His turn to blink. "So you admit you're being hypocritical!" I just kinda smile, amused, saying, "I'm a baptist, not a catholic. We think they are wrong, and so we don't do that." You could tell it blew his mind to realize that this wasn't a universal christian belief. We talked about it and ended up becoming friends, at least through high school, and I think we both learned how to be a little more tolerant. Today, as an atheist, I still think back and laugh about that confrontation. Don't assume what other people believe.

@@vulcanus7127 There's a Christian on RU-vid who recently posted "100 Questions for Atheists." Many (most?) of them are like that. He just assumes what we atheists believe and then demands that we provide evidence backing up what he's imagined. It's really silly. He appears to have lived his entire life, so far, inside a Christian bubble.

And that the biggest mistake people make. Binary and judgemental thinking ruins any interaction with that person. Not all Christians are like Westboro Baptist, and not all athiest (almost no athiest) is like the ones depicted by Christian apologetics and media. And that's the difference between the channels, atheists constantly have to break down, ask, and examine which version of christianity they are interacting with, because they dont want to put words in peoples mouths that arent there, yet apologists slap every athiest with all kinds of labels and assertions with no regard.

I prefer to call it the analytic/synthetic distinction. Synthetic statements are about the external world and can be examined using science. Analytic statements are about mental constructs like math and thus cannot be examined by science. "Beliefs about the world should be subjected to scientific investigation" is an analytic statement.

Not all of them include an afterlife (EG Neopaganism) and one of the key issues that led to the crucifixion of Christ (which is a historically verified fact attested to by anti-Jewish sources and please remember Christianity was a sect of Judaism till about 70AD) was the argument between the two Jewish religious councils one of which believed in an afterlife and the other which did not. IE the Pharisees and Sadducee's respectively. Rivkin "what crucified Jesus" goes into the politics in some detail (Rivkin is a senior Rabbi and the Jewish people generally believe Jesus was either a heretic or a political agitator and often both). Just thought you might find that interesting.

And they do not let other people live their lives because this "afterlife" nonsense.

All your fortune cookie are belong to us.

SigmaTauri2 he was an atheist and assumed I was a theist because of what I responded with “love”.

To be fair it's pretty common to see christians completely avoid any kind of debate by replying "God loves you" to an actual question or attempt to have a polite debate. (Which basically means "go fuck yourself stupid atheist")

It's outright childish, to be honest.

for christians ''earth'' is the waiting room at a good restaurant , close to the shitter

The next step is "deconstruction" where the interlocutor talks less about defending his/her faith, questions your rational inquiry and calls out your arguments as bullshit.....'>.......

@Ad Lockhorst Whatever works, I guess haha

I agree. Religion gives us the illusion of philosophical answers to often invented philosophical problems.

Considering the goals that God shows, I think we'd be obliged to work against him if he did exist. Since, you know he killed every Egyptian firstborn because of pharaoh's obstinance- obstinence that God caused.

Hey, if you're going to take off shoes, you might as well not do a half-way job of it.

@@ProphetofZod Damn skippy, lol

@@thatguyguy3777 > Why do you need evidence for god? Because I have a lot of people claiming that god does exists, and this belief makes them do stupid things that *I* have to then deal with. > What are you gonna do if there will eventually evidence for god? Will you A) finally believe and OBEY his word? B) Or will you just shrug and continue on your sinful day? Your answer would obviously be B No, it would not obviously be B, but while you are making these stupid black and white fallacy and knowing my thoughts, can you be a dear and tell me why these are the two only options? After I would have sufficient evidence that *a* god exists, I can start looking if other supernatural phenomena exist. You know, *other* gods for example, like those mentioned *in* the Bible? > What's the point in giving you evidence? Your not really gonna care, sure you'll finally believe god exist but you will still continue to move on about your day and not obey his rules, so (if there would be evidence one day) all that hard work research of god would be for nothing. Oh my cow, you are doing the same thing the fictional woman in the video! This is so funny! Evidence of god would give me more information about our reality. If a god does exists, I would have more information to reflect on and *maybe* I would obey his word. Maybe. That's a big maybe, because god as shown in the bible is a bit of a dick, and I'm not entirely sure if I want to obey, let alone worship, that thing. > So giving you evidence is POINTLESS!!! I am really getting sick and annoyed by atheists always ending things with "you still didn't provide evidence" because it's just foolish You are being foolish. It's a very natural thing when someone comes to me and starts talking about outlandish things to ask for evidence. If I told you that no, it's not your god of the Bible that actually is the creator of the universe, but it's magical unicorns and they farted the universe into being and they would very much like you to pet them with your good vibes, otherwise they will trample you after you die for all eternity, would you now just jump at the chance to pet the unicorns with you thoughts or, would you maybe perhaps possibly, *ask for evidence for such a claim?* Or would you just dismiss it out of hand because reasons? You give special consideration to the god of the bible, and I just wonder why you would do that when there are so many other possibilities out there for how the world works if we assume the supernatural to be a thing.

@@thatguyguy3777 You're tired of this? Didn't you seek out this video? I mean I could walk into a church and say I'm tired of this but that doesnt make much sense does it? You say it's pointless to provide evidence, but you haven't provided any that would substantiate your claims. It's all arguments from ignorance, and I feel it in my heart, and this ancient text says. And you assume that I am an atheist because I want to sin, well... I don't steal, I try to be kind to people. I dont assert thinks I don't know, and I'm celebrate, so which huge sin am I indulging in that I need to be an atheist for?

@@Heroltz998 it made me laugh. When asked for evidence he just said what's the point? I've never seen anyone give up so fast. Do you have evidence bigfoot exists? Ahhhhhh what's the point?

@@thatguyguy3777 I'm not super angry at theists. Just not convinced, and you're right the things that theists consider evidence are probably not going to sway me, but that's ok. We don't have to agree. I don't think everyone needs to give up their religion. But I'd like to see them stop making assumptions about people outside their religion.

"God in the bible seems to be a dick and I'm not sure if I want to worship that thing" I get what you're saying and I can understand...but at the same time, so is nature yet for some reason nature still gets respect while god gets all the hate. How is it that it's ok for nature to be cruel yet when god kind of does something similar he gets all the shame. It's like as if you're saying "doing evil things can be good if done correctly" Of course im not calling god evil I'm just trying to make a point, why does one get a pass and the other doesn't?

hackdog..your fake and only for display..Do you have any Ideas what programming was? Are you not a conscious being?How do you views reality?

@@MultiEps1 WTF?

if they had experience, they would not be grasping at straws....same thing applies to atheist.

That's how I view a lot of Christian apologetics now that I'm an atheist. I wonder to myself how I ever found arguments like that compelling. I guess I just wanted any reason to keep believing

Richardj I suspect it’s just a COPPA thing since it’s an animation. They probably have to mark it for kids and therefore no comments

@@harrispinkham I went to the Impact 360 video and i can confirm that it isn't marked for kids. I can use the mini-player, i can add the video to a playlist and i can download the video. Videos marked for kids have those features disabled along with the comments.

Hirsisuo ah okay ☹️ was hoping to give them the benefit of the doubt

Hahaha! I remember chapel lessons where the speaker would talk about putting on our god glasses.

accept the one were god is none existent is the true one. we can prove there is no god. because you cant prove there is! well that means we dont need to disprove him, if you cant present something that might prove he is real! btw. you a furry? if so, NICE!

Thank you!

I have never seen a call in show about gravity. If atheists did not have a worldview and an agenda they would have nothing to take about. Atheists are in opposition to God snd those that belong to him.

@@redeemedone8553 If religitards would stop trying to turn every government into their wackadoodle theocracies, we wouldn't bother.

@@LogicAndReason2025 what is it that the religious people have taken from you? How are they controlling the government so they didn't upset you so much?

@@redeemedone8553 www.au.org/

@@LogicAndReason2025 your link does not work. Tell me your story of how christians are controlling your life through government.

What if it never was a party? What if you have a life that is just plain bad and a vast improvement only makes it less terrible..... there are those. The problem with this line of thinking is that it confutes well being with meaning and that doesn't wash.......