Disproving Gods with History and Science (Richard Carrier) 

Interesting that even Christianity itself is a product of evolution of myths and legends before.

Well done! Let's get this stuff out there people!!

I don't usually watch videos this long, but Richard Carrier is a mad genius! Thank you for being the one to tackle and talk about the Godless Universe. More theists needs to open their minds to understanding more about how the natural world works instead of worrying about how their supernatural afterlife might be. Great video!

In the beginning man made God.

The first 2 minutes really are all you need to see that there is no god.

god is santa claus for the grown ups.

One Of The Best And Easy To Understand Lectures I've Seen So Far

This is Beyond I MEAN IT'S FREAKING BEYOND INTERESTING & PRETTY AMAZING!!

This converted me to naturalism!!

People have been drawing supernatural causation ever since a Caveman saw an animal, thought to be dead, leap up and run away after a lightning bolt struck nearby.

potent lecture regarding the improbability of god!

Good talk. Thanks for sharing.

Love the Hitchhiker quote at the end, I could litteraly see the puffing cloud of logic ;-)

This was highly enjoyable.

As soon as you started reading 7 min, Raiders of the Lost Arc was exactly what I thought of. I always got a kick out of that movie, but I didn't realize it was biblically accurate, which means historically accurate. I'm going to have to re-watch it, with a new appreciation. 

Much Love to all people in this chat. Yes guys, I am a christian. (more baptist and protestant to be specific). But From the comments I notice that a lot of bright minds in here, are falling into a little into denial, and not free to really use their reasoning skills more honestly. Honestly while I am all for listening, and researching other points of views (bachelor in world religions), right off the bat, I see a red flag (from 0 to 1:48 min). While is definitely OK, to imagine. he then starts using God and scripture to support his argument against God and scripture. Saying God only revealed himself after so and so time, to a small village. Then withheld knowledge of Jesus for a thousand years. ---Even if this was true, this is not disproving God, this is simply bible study, and expressing a dislike in his actions. Just to clarify, through scripture, God revealed himself since the beginning, and people knew about him always, and God does mention Jesus, the redeemer, since the first promise to Adam and Eve. as well as through the whole history of the old testament, the messiah. But back to my point. Then this guy mentions how God's actions (not biblical sound, yet uses scripture), are senseless (according to his sense?). 0-0. At this point he is just making up an idea of God, that if God doesn't fall under that criteria, then he must not exist? The speaker, becomes God. Also, for many of you guys, we were made to think, and we have freedom to form conclusions, but something is off, when 'faithful' empirical fact based only thinkers, compromise on their own ideals. At least admit that some of your info, is more of a conclusion, rather than truth. Even I as a believer, and yes I do think that believing in Christ (the same one in the bible, not a made up one) does not sacrifice reason, honesty, nor knowledge, or rational, etc, but it enhances it. But even so, I cant say i know every little fact. and I can still respect conclusions, yet while disagreeing with them. (we have a strong ability to doubt even our own existence, I can even doubt my own parents if wanted to, ---meaning I am only human, I cannot possibly know everything!!, worse yet claim it) -(no one in this human world can, regardless of beliefs) (I do claim to know, i exist, I know God, and he loves me, I have a soul, and I came from parents. LOL. just having fun!) And YES, it is completely OK, to also conclude, that God is real. the God of the bible is the real one. Jesus was his son. Sacrificed for our sins, so we may have grace, fulfillment, eternity, and a relationship with the creator, who is the essence of life and all these other great stuff, we seek. That's all, I'll just leave my two cents in. P.S I actually do believe in God,so I know that while all humans can study God, and he can reveal himself, in an infinite amount of ways (including but not limited to , even using these very words, or even this video (free thinking human with speech (amazing!!, like a robot but with life, wow!!)),), God doesn't need me, to show himself in each of your lives, (although you never lose the choice to keep your eyes shut). and truth doesn't need me to defend it, It simply is (like its meaning), at the end of the day it will stand. and Like I said, I don't have to sacrifice Honesty, nor reason. (God is actually very patient, loving and reasonable with us humans --that's why we appreciate his grace) I do admit, I didn't watch the whole video. and again, much love, hope my comment was positive, yet challenging. God bless ya.

I love the "big picture" idea of seeing all the world's religions at once and how their ideas formed. This video is a "must watch" for anyone who is interested in the history of religion, regardless of personal beliefs. Start with facts and how we know them to be facts, and go on from there. That is exactly how you get to truth. This is the same process used by courts to determine guilt and by air crash investigators to determine the cause of the crash. Religion does not get a special pass.

thank you so much for this!

Very informative video, thank you and God bless you.

@ 19:00 he didn't know about malaria & mosquitoes either.

Well Done

I love it when really, really stupid people try to discredit a brilliant mind...read these comments and be entertained for at least an hour.!

Excellent like all his work. Thanks for posting this

Its funny how so many comments left by what im asuming are 'believers' just call Richard Carrier stupid but say very little about what he has actually said as a counter.

probably his best lecture to date,clear and concise, except for one thing, why does he have to talk so fast, or is my brain getting to old.

My god is really friendly and wags her tail when I give her a biskie

incredible!

EXCELLENT

"thereby refuting the entire Bible" just saying.... ;)

At eighteen minutes this gets animated! If you where to stumble across a Tardis... a brilliant historian.

I am the one true god and I demand you bring me a milkshake!

Before the Internet where would the ordinary person been able to access this kind of information, I mean any questioning of the validity of religion at all?

Nice

Good argument.. actually a great one. But those who insisted to be religious probably don't know what improbable means mathematically in the first place.

I don’t think he disproved science, but I think he did disprove history.

"if the universe is picked among from all the possible universes" -> who or what does the picking? Nothing comes out of pure chance, not even the slightest possibilities, since even those are something (opposed to nothing).

Yes he dose have good record of history, if you like it or not. Now prove history wrong an I'll believe you. Good job Richard.

Brilliant! I love science and evidence based logic. To bad the majority of humans are so ignorant and seem to like it.

Thank christ someone understands the world. Great video!

G.O.A.T IMHO 😊😊

I love that term "Douchebag God". I'm guessing that "Douchebag" is particularly an Americanism. 'Douche' is just French for 'shower' - or just to cleanse. Curious as to where the 'bag' part came from? Maybe the *_Big Bag Theory?_*

I wonder what he thinks of the statement that this world is ruled by evil/satan and the next by god....(such as in judaism and islam)

I am in love!!!!!*#$$

Worship bacon.

this guy mentioned all this stuff buy somehow left out ancient Kemet / Egypt where a lot of the stuff was taken from butt he seemed to credit Greece and Rome and Persia heavily leaving out the African influence of all this stuff

12 minutes in... can't help but remember that the original evidence was that these religions didn't have a consistent message. Yet at 12 minutes the fact that a few religions has similar messages is evidence against them. Double speak? Strawman? How about begging the question? A 40 second window and I've caught all 3. So, yeah, that's enough of this.

What he is not saying is that Osiris dates back 4000 B.C.E. in Kemmet, aka Egypt.

Wow modern christians really do live in a bubble

A quick search on Google informed me that there are far fewer than a trillion galaxies. It seems like exaggerating this point does not really help his case. It is still an interesting talk.

And then a freak impossible accident leaves this guy brain damaged and this lecture is redacted, retracted! I like the way he makes his way so quickly and articulately through pre-history to the present. It's the issue of the human need to have an imperfect comfort rag to cling onto that he also needs to address. He isn't an anthropologist, neither is Richard Dawkins. But they should be able to look in a more sympathetic way at why humans are able to have this supernatural belief system at the same time as a rational enquiry and curiosity which is where are technology comes from. Children's minds are malleable and after a few years of indoctrination and they will grow up believing anything.

Jesus

The Christianity quote was, I am pretty sure, said by Aron Ra.

The *funny* thing about this debate is you're meant to believe it's true. @2:00: Shows his ignorance - why would God conform to his view? It's the other way around. Which again shows at @2:21: Sure many religions (the 'silly ones') are just cultural based. The Abrahamic ones show a very common theme but their differences define them. One interesting thing is religious dating seems (to me) to be dated by the artifacts (which makes Hinduism and Zoroastrianism 'early' religions) doesn't seem to take into account religions (such as early Abrahamic Judaism) into account as idols and relics were forbidden. @7:30: Google the translation of the verse in Zechariah (unless you choose to read it in context).

Not a good ad for Apple.

The soundtrack of this video is artificially speeded up to an extent that makes the speaker nearly unintelligible.

And some folks think DT is a christian just like JC. Except for all his words and actions

what a surface level understanding of theistic morality.

👌🏼

To believe what Carrier we need faith.

Religion believes: Believes>>>proven facts

someone is out on a mission to destroy christianity before it was Jacklyn glenn today it is Richard Carrier

The universe was not designed to produce life

It has been (my) 'observation' (for many years)...that...'FAST TALKERS' (like 'this' guy) are very 'shallow' individuals. They have 'intelligence'...but...(not necessarily)...'WISDOM'.

Why not simply ask God Pretenders the ultimate question where did their God come from who made their God they want to present their God like it really exists without pointing out where their God came from who made their God

Carrier K’Od the bible on this one....

God is Love and Christ Jesus is the Lord God bless you reading this

So, religion was evolving, like everything else. I mean this in the concept of general evolution (Matt Ridley - "The Evolution of Everything"). Biological evolution is a specific case.

This is really very good isn't it? However we knew this already *didn't we?*

💫💥💫🧠💐👌✌

God is mankind's greatest invention

You might wanna look into the ancient Chinese writing. 4000 BC and is clearly based off the biblical narrative. Uh oh!

What you are arguing is that our Very existence is highly improbable and somewhat of a miracle in itself...

I want to download RC's Biblical knowledge into my brain.

Why doesn't this geezer line -up with other, better known anti religious leader's--like Dawkins ?

I can not wait until we are beyond the phase of religion. My only question that remains is how did we successfully program millions of minds about this God that isn’t real. I will never understand that.

So christianity isn't itself. But what about Hinduism?

😅😇

your speech comes forth directly from the university logic that is one sided and more bringing together past ideas in a structured way then exploding ideas and bringing something new and more fullfilling. Logic doesnt need to be build up from the small, but from the big, divided into the small, and how difficult it can be to understand why god would create such chaotic evolution in religion for a certain reason, the reason can not be seen as long as your worldview is centered around your own salvation, atheistic self selvation in consiousness or religious heaven salvation are both the same coin, they start to understand god/truth from their own perspective. Your speech has no sight on the esoteric that is hidden in all religion nor is it allready open to the faillure of science concerning all questions that step outside time. Logic, is a structure that is in need of detail, that relfects back to the total, and detail is created by division, and history is interwoven in such ways that opposites play each other out in the most smart and efficient way to create a glory not made for ourselves, but for the total of us, that controls us and our opportunitites, god. this evolution is the arc, put as methaphor in religion, as all things in religion are the literal mirror or methaphor of the abstract that could only become and exist through the development of the mind, which comes forward from the heart (the need to evolve). this is why something is,was, and never will be, or will be, was and never is. Revelation is a book that can only be understood by the rejection of faith so you could find it back. Truth and love become one in that place where logic becomes born and becomes god, and free from logic, to be able to choose to be it. God is the final paradox, and because of that the answer to all questions. Evil is a logic consequence of the existence of god, as love is the creating force behind evil, and also the solution. the lost sheep is the methaphor for god himself.

Your comment that the Jews were taken into captivity by the Persians may not be accurate. Someone has probably commented on this. The northern kingdom was taken into captivity by the Assyrians, but the southern kingdom of Judah was taken into captivity by the Babylonians. The Babylonians conquered Assyria, but the Persians conquered Babylonia and took over the Judeans/Jews. They didn't have to carry them off into captivity from Judah.

epic.

History and science actually completely obliterate any notion of gods. You only need the logic and common sense of a kid of about 12, to understand that gods are contrived.

Gods are so real people lose it at funerals.

What does he mean Christianity was 'borrowed' from Judaism? The prophets under the old law prophesied the coming of Christ. They are inextricably linked. Christ's life on Earth was written about several hundred years before He was born. He's just idly chattering around this being true. Just because a people are aware of the Bible doesn't mean that they can't cause harm on other people through cruelty. This man will spend his entire life debating the existence of a God he doesn't believe exists.

Where did the Zoroastrians get their idea. As a Jewish scholar I can say everything he said up to 9:00 is just wrong. There is no mention of Satan in the OT, the burning fire is in the NT, there are no gods fighting each other of good and evil..the Lord is One. Hey if you want to make stuff up, it would be nice to give references.

yahweh.... do you realize that JUPITER was actually called by the Romans IOVIS, and that at that time they pronounced it YOHWES...?

its kind of funny-but i would of thought that religion would have tryed to land on the moon first-but as we now know no fookin human has landed on the moon as yet-but the steel 1960 slinky toy can still go down yours stairs all bye itself.

So what he is saying is Popeye isn't a real person ! Although he might have been based on an actual sailor named Popeye. But all is not lost, because we have an eyewitness account of Popeye. Her name is Olive Oyl and she had a personal experience of Popeye.

This Zoroastrianism is exactly how Jehovah Witness religion believes.

If Richard Carrier were God, he would have done the God thing differently. He twists the Scritpteu to say what he wants it to say so he does not have to engage it on its own terms.

Sarcasm is not a good argument. By the way, I read the stories and legends about Jesus. He is "quoted" arguing for the importance of spirituality instead of rejecting proper hygiene practices. Watching hands affects our physical bodies, but does not make us more spiritually pure than others. Carrier needs to work on his Greek exegesis and Talmudic studies.

Jesus is not religious! He rebuked the religious leaders of His time for their acts plus He said if one is to take up a religion it's to heed the orphan and widow affliction and keep unstained from the world so how does that work... Dr. Richard!

if any 1 has read the bible and simply knows any history isreal was conquered by babylon not persia

there would be zero % of the probability for life

One criticism of this presentation is that the speaker seems to pull out the "10 to the power of 5,000,000,000" probability the way creationists pull out probabilities, out of their ass. No need to do that.

Satan is very clever, quick, cunning and persuasive, but not in this instance.

Joseph Murphy's Book "The power of your Subconscious Mind" absolutely destroys Richard Carrier....Religions were initiated by a genius...then they are destroyed because average humans cannot comprehend why things are done the way they are...resulting in the typical violence...and then we have Richard Carrier who is a smart human with tunnel vision...who further makes God unintelligible....Read the Murphy Book....it is free even in audio versions on RU-vid

Even though this is brilliantly played, and the facts do speak for themselves, there is one aspect of Christianity that is not being considered here, and will allow the Christians to simply ignore all of this as not being relevant to their belief. When we point out the way in which their God mistreats us, and allows horrors to be brought upon us, and does nothing to help, they (the Christians) will refer to the original sin of disobedience, and claim that all of the suffering is our punishment and that we deserve it. Their premise is, that the human race sinned against their creator, and were cast out of the garden, meaning cast from his presence and love, and now suffer at our own hand. They will maintain that god doesn't visit bad on us, that without his protection from it, we suffer. Then in the savior twist, their god has offered them a form of redemption, (a second chance for the garden) that is, by accepting the label of sinner, we are in essence begging forgiveness for our sinful ways. What they are doing is essentially looking for forgiveness for their own indiscretion that they don't believe is forgivable by fellow humans. Regardless of the psychological reality of their situation, they do believe that this god exists and that he is the only way to be saved from the imperfection of being "of the flesh" as they say. An animal, as it is. In other words, they do not respond to the inference that their God must be evil, because they are simply saying it is our own damned fault.....Furthermore, if you expect that anything you say can make them believe that their god was man made, they will simply refute that on the basis that you cannot prove he doesn't exist, blaming bad human interpretation of his word as the problem with your belief. Christians have an understanding that goes beyond anything visible, provable, testable or "of this world". You can't win that argument, because, in their minds, there really isn't one. There is a complete reality disconnect here. Logic does not apply. I know. I have discussed religion and reality with hundreds of them, one on one. It is always a one way conversation, with me talking to myself.

He is preaching to the converted but the problem with counting on probability as an argument is this: I am 100% certain that God might exist, while I am never certain that I can disprove the existence of a God. Science cannot disprove or prove with certainty, and all logical or reason based systems have mathematically been proven to be self-contradictory (the uncertainty theorem, correct me if I get the title wrong). The agnostic view is by definition outcome-neutral. The atheist argument deals in believing or trusting the assumption that a preponderance of evidence can reasonably qualify as proof. But the issue is not being reasonable or not, but absolute proof or disproof. The first is statistical or qualitative, the second is binary. The theist view apparently has no reason to feel threatened by atheist arguments. While errors or antiquated morality in a book can be laid bare for all to see, the basic idea that a God is working through history or was present it's start, remains out of scope of science. Even a working Big Bang theory, even if it works, cannot disprove an unmoving mover willfully giving it a nudge. And how would we ever go back in time to check? Maybe we will invent time travel, but for the time being, this is quite far away. So any scientist with the hunch that God might exist or believes he exist, can never be proven to be taking an absurd or untenable position. In fact, it turns out to be the more prudent view. (He will see it as more prudent or more correct, or more in tune with his intuition or belief, while an atheist scientist would more likely describe it as mental cowardliness). Again, a preponderance of evidence would never qualify as absolute proof because "belief" is not bound by strict reductionist scientific reasoning. Now, the opposite question; if God could be proven to exist; does not necessarily supersede the possibilities of science. God could possibly manifest as a measurable field or power today described as 'supernatural'. Electricity and lightning used to be 'supernatural'; God might be a "dude" moving about in a tenuous higgsfield. But as with taking a peak before the Big Bang, (how does nothing expand, in nothing, in no time, out of nothing, and make a matter filled room in it?), for now most atheist scientists feel it supersedes, the basic methodology available in the scientific toolkit, so there also is no way for scientists to deliver convincing persuading arguments. Those who do want to try to venture into this realm, or apply scientific methods to what atheists deem/assume unquestionable, like questioning if a consciousness-field exist outside of the brain, are ostracized. This too is lamentable.

Actually religion and science are both limited human attempts to understand God and God's creation which existed even before human beings arrived on the scene.

that is, you handle "godly" religions. Okay but you use science ... ou that is an ungodly religion.