Do you believe in Mithra? I'm guessing 'no'; you're an atheist. Do you believe in Thor? I'm guessing 'no'; you're an atheist. Do you believe in Babd Catha? I'm guessing 'no'; you're an atheist. There's a great quote, I wish I could remember who said it, "We are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you. When you understand why it is that you reject all other possible gods, you will understand why I reject yours."
@Pyre Spirit Can't believe no one has chimed in on this for 8 years. That was Dawkins. From clips and The God Delusion. "We're both atheists. I'm just atheist toward one more god than you are." Kinda funny your version was just the converse (removing a not from each side of the equation). As JC's golden rule was just the converse of Confucius.
I am currently writing a paper on adding and subtracting elements to/from claims which tend to make claims more unstable. Exactly for the reasons you stated - the added elements can make the claims more vulnerable to tests; the added elements can make a claim self-contradicting; the subtracted elements make the claim nonsensical or incomplete; and so forth. The paper then addresses how to handle the elements in each occasion. But now onto clearing up your other points (see part 2)
One of the flaws in Micah's argument that I don't think that Jen or Matt mentioned is that Micah is essentially arguing that if we don't have a natural explanation about how a snowball can melt and reconstitute itself three days later exactly as it was without a snowflake out of place, then there is no way that we can have a natural explanation for how a snowball could form in the first place. The comparing the two different situations is like comparing apples and oranges.
I want to start a new religion called "The Church of Catastrophic Accidentus" It's a belief that god blew himself up, with the big bang, while creating the earth.
I am a godfather and an atheist. Recently (June 2012), I found it very difficult to sit through my goddaughter's confirmation. I am not 'out' to her parents. Fortunately I have not been asked to discharge specifically religious duties. I do not believe I could. So, any other atheist godparent out there struggling with the apparent deceit?
Truly you are the greatest intellect of this time. Such a well reasoned argument will surely convince anyone who reads it. Thank you so very much for enlightening us all.
In our family, "godparents" were/are the people, who would take me/child in, if the parents are killed it was a way to know that the family would care for lack of better wording care for their own.
the isaac call was hillarious. and as far as i know, he is still sitting in his favourite chair and yelling at his favourite phone, and he is sooo happy.
You do realize that was 70 years after the supposed death of christ, right? That's no longer counted as 'witnesses.' A book written now about WW2 wouldn't be counted as a witness, especially if it wasn't able to demonstrate that it did, in fact, talk to people, and accurately quote them, who lived through it. What you have is something you've just yourself demonstrated is an unreliable source.
Matt's emotion was justified. He did not get Glen-Beck-emotional. He controlled it very well while Isaac did not on hold. His rant was accurate and passionate, and in my view quite restrained. I applaud his courage to say what needs to be said.
But there IS evidence that people have been awakened from deep comas. Twenty centuries ago, a Bronze Age society in a small mid-eastern country did not have access to high-tech medical equipment that could identify an irregular heartbeat, electrical discharges in the brain and other indications that what appears to be a "corpse" is still a living if unconscious body. Deep shock can mimic death. My guess is that the Roman soldiers supervising the executions were bored silly, sick of all the mourners' wailing, and more than ready for a drink with their buddies. When Yeshua ben Miriam didn't react to being poked with a spear the "officer in charge" decided he was as dead as he was going to get and told the victim's friends and family to take him away. It's entirely possible a skilled healer was waiting in the tomb, applied restorative herbs and healing potions (some possibly counteracting the heavy sedatives given to the victim earlier via the vinegar-soaked sponge), and soon Jesus began breathing normally again. What is more likely: For the first and only time in history a human being has come back from the dead OR that the person was never dead to begin with? It's easier to believe what we desperately WANT to believe than consider the possibility of a misdiagnosis made by a bored amateur executioner anxious to finish an unpleasant assignment. Jesus was a relatively young, strong, healthy man who died less than three days following the crucifixion -- some people hung on the cross for weeks before dying. "Resurrection" is a far more rewarding belief than acknowledging the possibility than he never died at all.
For further clarity, the word "law," as used in science, is: "A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances." - NCSE
Whether or not it is possible for self replicatingt molecules can arise from non self replicating matter is completely unrelated to a complex organism which has died being able to be revived.
My wife was just made a god parent by her sister, and her sister gave my wife a book on how to be a good god parent. My wife is a believer in her own personal god, and really hates all of the hypocrisy of the religious. I am an atheist. I have no problem with my wife's beliefs. Both of us laughed our asses off reading this "guide" book on being a good god parent.
Fossils do not form everywhere , in fact there are few places they do form . If there is a species that lives in a place where fossils do not form we will have no record of them at all . If a species lives where fossils form often then there will be a large record . Now take your backyard , life has existed for 3.5 billion years and it has been living and dying in your backyard all that time . How many fossils did you find in your backyard ? There is probably no record at all of all the life that lived there .
Sounds very interesting. If you still have the research on it I'd love to read it. There are some interesting theories on the demiurge and the old testament god as well that you may find interesting.
"He will use every kind of evil deception to fool those on their way to destruction, because they refuse to love and accept the truth that would save them. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe what is false and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness" 2 TH 10-13
I'm an atheist and have 4 god children from 3 separate families. One was when I was quite young, but the last two have been recent additions and the families know I'm a complete atheist. My job is one of moral guidance, not religious. These people have chosen me to be the moral compass for their children. I am honoured to have been chosen.
I'm an atheist godparent. I used to be Catholic (before ate started asking questions) but while I was I became a godmother. I was present for her baptism and all that, but in south Louisiana the terms Nanny and Paran (godmother and father, respectively) are more titular than religious. I'm more a favored aunt than anything.
Hitchens/Fry debate - "Is the Catholic Church a force for good?" To summarize: Hell no. /watch?v=d5OMNPmoVAw This is a great showing for Fry and Hitch, and worth watching.
The fact that an explanation for something exists in a very specific context with very specific evidence does not mean that explanation can be appropriated without that context or evidence for an entirely different purpose.
22:00 we probably don’t have more fossils of our ancestors because our ancestors we smaller and more fragile and also a tad smarter than to wonder into tar pits ? 🤷♂️
Thank you sir for putting all of these good quality videos up, looking around at this archive of knowledge is making me as excited as a fat kid in a candy store!
I was asked to be my nephew's godfather and it caused me a lot of "soul-searching" as my sister-in-law is a serious Catholic. In the end, I accepted, but only after we discussed how I would teach him about the faith. That I would make it clear that this is not my personal belief, but that his mother strongly believed it. As a confirmed Catholic, I could teach him what the church would teach, and I would not argue against it to him. That was acceptable to my sister-in-law, so I did it.
In all fairness to the abiogenesis guy, he was correct. Scientists have not been able to demonstrate that a protein (enzyme) could arise through natural means. However, they have been able to demonstrate that amino acids, and vesicles made of a lipid bilayer CAN. As for proteins, no. At least not yet.
Plastic is a nonbiological material without a central nervous system. It's like saying because a clod of dirt doesn't undergo nuclear fusion, that nuclear fusion is directed by a magical force which flows throughout the universe and happens to really care whom a person sleeps with.
i never used to watch this show because i was looking for debate untill i watched one by accident. best debate based group appealed video. there are many contradictory christians on here. love it.
Just a note on people "rising from the dead after 3 days." Stuff like that actually happened a lot before the advent of modern medicine and better diagnostic tools. It's in fact, the historical basis for a traditional "wake" before burial. The concept is actually not at all "extraordinary," or in any way supernatural. It just shows medicine wasn't always able to differentiate between conditions like comas and actually dead.
I have to give kudos to Brent from CA. He seems willing to learn and admits when he doesn't know something. You don't see a lot of callers like that. Keep reading and learning, man.
Im an atheist, my friend is an atheist and his wife is wickin(wicken?) They told me all i needed to do as thier sons godfather is be there for him when he needs it. An extra branch of support in his life basically. His godmother is also wicken.
in response to what Micah said about, proteins need ribozymes inorder to fold. The Urey-Miller experiment was just to show that amino acids COULD form in pre biotic conditions. They donot assert that they were the FIRST to form , neither do the scientists now. There are all different kinds of hypothesis for abiogenesis, One such is the RNA world hypothesis, where ribozymes, catalyic RNAs capable of both holding genetic information as well as function as enzyme.
Greetings from Mexico, I like your program but I was very difficult language and would like to make a request if possible sumtitularlos to Castilian. thank you very much
Even though I know this nonsensical question still comes up. I'm still somewhat surprised to still see it, but It still gives me a chuckle. So thanks for the nonsensical question it kind of reminds me of the old show "kids say the darnedest things".
What if the parents are Atheists, and they want you to protect their child from religion, in the event that they are not there? What do you call that role? "Godless Parent"? or "Atheist-Parent"?
I'm an atheist and godfather to my nephew. His godmother is a Protestant whose mother is a priest.. I always wondered would he be excommunicated if the church found out.
(part 3) I noticed this as a kid when I watched my classmates talk about weird things that happen. One kid would say "ghosts" another would say "demons" and sometimes someone might say something smart. Usually the smart conclusion is so different from the other conclusions that it tends to becomes the odd one out. My guess is that this is similar to what happened in the past that formed cultures of superstition.
I agree with you. If someone's family and social circle revolves around church events, it is very hard to admit being atheist or even consider the possibility.
He's trying to compare the resurrection to abiogenesis, but I think it's an equivocation fallacy. Because killing something and reanimating it after constructed cells have had time to rot, is not the same as the building blocks of life forming, or becoming animate.
ps..If after questioning your own truths you STILL come to the conclusion that you are a Christian, then just be happy, enjoy it, spread peace and love, just realise it is YOUR truth, and shouldn't be imposed on others.
Being a 25 yr old atheist raised by atheists, my 'godparents' were my parents closest friends, the people who had been their best man and maid of honour. And while, obviously, there was no baptism/christening, I grew up knowing that couple to by my godparents and knowing if anything happened to my parents those were the people who would raise me. I'd love for there to be a secular term for this position!
Just tried talking to my mom about me beliefs or "lack of beliefs". She started talking about how I need to get baptized and she started talking like, "Lord have mercy on her. Forgive her." things like that. She says I'm dwelling with the devil, which makes no sense. I tried to bluntly tell her and she assumes I'm "falling prey to the devil" and that I'll regret this when I die because she doesn't want me to go to "eternal hell". I'm not saying her beliefs are wrong. I just don't believe he is
I feel like the first caller had a valid point and definition for a "soul" but they never really got around to discussing it because they argued semantics the whole time.
There should be more shows like this that addresses atheism in a social context like what to do at an atheist funeral or how to raise children without faith but still introducing them to a society that is full with religiosity
you wouldn't get proteins until quite a while after the first replicator. Probably before proteins came the amino acid holders (tRNA) which was a slight improvement somehow. Perhaps being wrapped around an AA provided more stability than the naked RNA strands. The business of linking AAs into chains would obviously have to come even later than that.
It's like when ppl go "why is (they say "is" here) 1 and 1 equal 2?" Like something had to make that rule. Thats a rule because that's what describes the universe and it's interactions. 1 and 1 can't be 3 because then 1 =/= 1 and we would have a different set of descriptive rules about our universe
I live in England and was Christened when I was young, but have since grown up totally atheist. I was asked to be a godparent by a close friend of mine as well as my girlfriend in a CoE ceremony and neither of us were confirmed or anything. We were just expected to say Amen to a couple of prayers. I didn't say them, I just mimed because I didn't want to be a giant hypocrite - but everyone (including the mother) knows I am an atheist. You don't need to be a believer to be a role model. End of.
lol oh right i thought u meant the resurrection is similar to abiogenesis in the way that they are both evquivication fallacies lol. Thats why i was confused.
(part 2) My suggestion would be to continue to show her respect and love (obviously). Rather than fight her desire to bring you closer to faith maybe try learning more about her "relationship with god", her "faith in god". This may (though not guaranteed to) help reveal some of the deeper reasons for her belief. This may also help strengthen your relationship with your mother at the same time. Until her actions cause you harm I see no real threat with her actions. She's trying to keep you safe.
That's because theist callers often go on a tangent and Matt wants to respond to particular points before he loses his train of thought. Most people don't know how to present just a few ideas at a time, and have a back and forth conversation.
Holy shit. Matt's statement cleared so much up for me that I would often think about before. Like wandering often about the laws of physics. I can't believe I never realized it, but it's not laws set in place, it's reactions between substances in the universe. I think that I think of them that way because of theistic arguments always cramming in "Laws DEMAND a law giver!" They don't realize that that statement doesn't make sense, and I didn't before either. Even though I'm atheist. Thanks Matt.
Matt, at 33:25 you stated that "things continue improving, because reason wins out..." I would humbly suggest that historically speaking, that doesn't always hold. Perhaps, if it hasn't already been covered, a good topic might be, "Why does reason sometimes lose out to superstition?".
I agree, there's also a huge influence in language and culture that we don't even think about. Religion was one of the first concepts to bring structure to knowledge or the lack of knowledge. Now that we have been conditioned our whole lives of the concept of god it's hard to get away from.
Read the post where he accidently wrote "wandering" and should have written "wondering". Words that sounds the same but are spelled differently are called homophones.
I have other stuff to do, and there's lots to write, so it'll take some time before my message can be sent. You have already made me a certain deist to an agnostic deist.
I don't quite understand this. You bring up the "Testemonium" which has been widely exposed as a forgery and then go on to admit that it was doctored (forged). What's your point exactly?
So what if they were living? Go and ask someone about something they witnessed 30-40 years prior you'll get accounts which diverge wildly from what actually happened (this is demonstrated even in the case of accounts written right after - hence why eyewitness testimony is one of the weakest forms of evidence in the legal arena) Just because someone asserts something is true and manufactures evidence doesn't make it true - and the null hypothesis is disbelief until sufficient evidence is provided
it retreats further back into the gaps of knowledge we don't know, the god of the gaps is a reclusive creature who only exists in what we don't understand/know
About resurrections, you guys should have talked about all the cases of modern 'resurrections' where people have 'come back to life' after 'being dead' after X amount of days (some people even waking up at their own funerals) These aren't supernatural occurrences yet they happen.
Theistic reasoning...there are more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on all the beaches of the world....but there's only one star with life on it, just so that the Hebrew war god could pull off a plan to rescue a minority of earth humans from the consequences of his own hatred.
Do you believe in Mithra? I'm guessing 'no'; you're an atheist. Do you believe in Thor? I'm guessing 'no'; you're an atheist. Do you believe in Babd Catha? I'm guessing 'no'; you're an atheist.
There's a great quote, I wish I could remember who said it, "We are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you. When you understand why it is that you reject all other possible gods, you will understand why I reject yours."
@Pyre Spirit Can't believe no one has chimed in on this for 8 years. That was Dawkins. From clips and The God Delusion. "We're both atheists. I'm just atheist toward one more god than you are."
Kinda funny your version was just the converse (removing a not from each side of the equation). As JC's golden rule was just the converse of Confucius.
I guess I'm quite randomly asking but do anybody know of a good place to stream newly released movies online ?
@Ernest Nikolai Try FlixZone. You can find it on google =)
Someone once referred to me as a 'fairy godmother' because I'm a godmother who's an atheist. Gotta say, I love that term!
I am currently writing a paper on adding and subtracting elements to/from claims which tend to make claims more unstable. Exactly for the reasons you stated - the added elements can make the claims more vulnerable to tests; the added elements can make a claim self-contradicting; the subtracted elements make the claim nonsensical or incomplete; and so forth. The paper then addresses how to handle the elements in each occasion. But now onto clearing up your other points (see part 2)
Micah, even if abiogenesis IS completely and utterly wrong, it HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EXISTENCE OF A GOD.
Or the relevance/correctness of evolution
Brent was a cool caller, it's cool to see someone willingly admit they learn new things and have this kind of curiosity.
Lol, the mutes on Isaac were hilarious. "BUT THIS IS *mute* ... *unmute* I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE A SHOUTING MATCH WITH *mute*"
“This will continue to improve”. Just wait until 2020 Matt!
Thank you for doing these shows :)
One of the flaws in Micah's argument that I don't think that Jen or Matt mentioned is that Micah is essentially arguing that if we don't have a natural explanation about how a snowball can melt and reconstitute itself three days later exactly as it was without a snowflake out of place, then there is no way that we can have a natural explanation for how a snowball could form in the first place. The comparing the two different situations is like comparing apples and oranges.
Micah's script did not allow for hosts' actual answers and clarifications.
"Let's redefine God to be my coffee cup."
I like how Matt can completely destroy people's philosophy in a single sentence.
I want to start a new religion called "The Church of Catastrophic Accidentus"
It's a belief that god blew himself up, with the big bang, while creating the earth.
The cup is my body, hold me securely, the coffee is my blood, drink and be ye saved.
A group of athiests?
Just reading the comments while at the 24 minutes mark. I'm looking forward to this Isaac guy :)
I am a godfather and an atheist. Recently (June 2012), I found it very difficult to sit through my goddaughter's confirmation. I am not 'out' to her parents. Fortunately I have not been asked to discharge specifically religious duties. I do not believe I could.
So, any other atheist godparent out there struggling with the apparent deceit?
I like Brent - REFRESHINGLY honest about what he doesn't know and doesn't understand. Such a rare quality!
Truly you are the greatest intellect of this time. Such a well reasoned argument will surely convince anyone who reads it. Thank you so very much for enlightening us all.
In our family, "godparents" were/are the people, who would take me/child in, if the parents are killed it was a way to know that the family would care for lack of better wording care for their own.
the isaac call was hillarious.
and as far as i know, he is still sitting in his favourite chair and yelling at his favourite phone, and he is sooo happy.
You do realize that was 70 years after the supposed death of christ, right? That's no longer counted as 'witnesses.' A book written now about WW2 wouldn't be counted as a witness, especially if it wasn't able to demonstrate that it did, in fact, talk to people, and accurately quote them, who lived through it.
What you have is something you've just yourself demonstrated is an unreliable source.
Pyre
You're just spinning you wheels in piles of hot air.
Matt's emotion was justified. He did not get Glen-Beck-emotional. He controlled it very well while Isaac did not on hold. His rant was accurate and passionate, and in my view quite restrained. I applaud his courage to say what needs to be said.
I only discovered it a month ago. I've watched over 50 episodes. It's the best stuff on TV/RUclips.
There is no evidence a person ever rose from the dead .
But there IS evidence that people have been awakened from deep comas. Twenty centuries ago, a Bronze Age society in a small mid-eastern country did not have access to high-tech medical equipment that could identify an irregular heartbeat, electrical discharges in the brain and other indications that what appears to be a "corpse" is still a living if unconscious body.
Deep shock can mimic death. My guess is that the Roman soldiers supervising the executions were bored silly, sick of all the mourners' wailing, and more than ready for a drink with their buddies. When Yeshua ben Miriam didn't react to being poked with a spear the "officer in charge" decided he was as dead as he was going to get and told the victim's friends and family to take him away.
It's entirely possible a skilled healer was waiting in the tomb, applied restorative herbs and healing potions (some possibly counteracting the heavy sedatives given to the victim earlier via the vinegar-soaked sponge), and soon Jesus began breathing normally again.
What is more likely: For the first and only time in history a human being has come back from the dead OR that the person was never dead to begin with? It's easier to believe what we desperately WANT to believe than consider the possibility of a misdiagnosis made by a bored amateur executioner anxious to finish an unpleasant assignment. Jesus was a relatively young, strong, healthy man who died less than three days following the crucifixion -- some people hung on the cross for weeks before dying.
"Resurrection" is a far more rewarding belief than acknowledging the possibility than he never died at all.
There is historical evidence and testimonial evidence , I think your statement should be like there is physical or there is no good evidence
For further clarity, the word "law," as used in science, is:
"A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances." - NCSE
Whether or not it is possible for self replicatingt molecules can arise from non self replicating matter is completely unrelated to a complex organism which has died being able to be revived.
we all live in the same world, this is as peaceful as its going to get regardless of one's beliefs.
Thank you, even though it took me a sec to let it register. You speak the truth!
Dear, Hosts of The Atheist Experience, I applaud your patience.
My wife was just made a god parent by her sister, and her sister gave my wife a book on how to be a good god parent. My wife is a believer in her own personal god, and really hates all of the hypocrisy of the religious.
I am an atheist. I have no problem with my wife's beliefs.
Both of us laughed our asses off reading this "guide" book on being a good god parent.
51:41 is when the conversation started turning from painful to hysterical
Fossils do not form everywhere , in fact there are few places they do form . If there is a species that lives in a place where fossils do not form we will have no record of them at all . If a species lives where fossils form often then there will be a large record .
Now take your backyard , life has existed for 3.5 billion years and it has been living and dying in your backyard all that time . How many fossils did you find in your backyard ? There is probably no record at all of all the life that lived there .
Sounds very interesting. If you still have the research on it I'd love to read it. There are some interesting theories on the demiurge and the old testament god as well that you may find interesting.
Thank you so much for posting this, I was confused about the official roles of godparents and I wanted to learn more.
"He will use every kind of evil deception to fool those on their way to destruction, because they refuse to love and accept the truth that would save them. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe what is false and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness" 2 TH 10-13
Wow the audio quality is getting better
I'm an atheist and have 4 god children from 3 separate families. One was when I was quite young, but the last two have been recent additions and the families know I'm a complete atheist. My job is one of moral guidance, not religious. These people have chosen me to be the moral compass for their children. I am honoured to have been chosen.
I'm an atheist godparent. I used to be Catholic (before ate started asking questions) but while I was I became a godmother. I was present for her baptism and all that, but in south Louisiana the terms Nanny and Paran (godmother and father, respectively) are more titular than religious. I'm more a favored aunt than anything.
Hitchens/Fry debate - "Is the Catholic Church a force for good?"
To summarize: Hell no.
/watch?v=d5OMNPmoVAw
This is a great showing for Fry and Hitch, and worth watching.
it was more a discussion about whether dead or nonliving things could be made to live again.
The fact that an explanation for something exists in a very specific context with very specific evidence does not mean that explanation can be appropriated without that context or evidence for an entirely different purpose.
What a fabulous rebuttal. Would you give me permission to use it, after I'm done LMAO at it?
Full call (worth it): 47:58
Dillahunty destoyer: 52:41
22:00 we probably don’t have more fossils of our ancestors because our ancestors we smaller and more fragile and also a tad smarter than to wonder into tar pits ? 🤷♂️
Thank you sir for putting all of these good quality videos up, looking around at this archive of knowledge is making me as excited as a fat kid in a candy store!
I live in rural Alabama. I only know two other atheists personally. But on the internet, it is so different. It gives me hope!
The resurrection being similar to abiogenisis is a huge equivocation fallacy.
I was asked to be my nephew's godfather and it caused me a lot of "soul-searching" as my sister-in-law is a serious Catholic. In the end, I accepted, but only after we discussed how I would teach him about the faith. That I would make it clear that this is not my personal belief, but that his mother strongly believed it. As a confirmed Catholic, I could teach him what the church would teach, and I would not argue against it to him. That was acceptable to my sister-in-law, so I did it.
In all fairness to the abiogenesis guy, he was correct. Scientists have not been able to demonstrate that a protein (enzyme) could arise through natural means. However, they have been able to demonstrate that amino acids, and vesicles made of a lipid bilayer CAN. As for proteins, no. At least not yet.
Plastic is a nonbiological material without a central nervous system. It's like saying because a clod of dirt doesn't undergo nuclear fusion, that nuclear fusion is directed by a magical force which flows throughout the universe and happens to really care whom a person sleeps with.
That rant after Matt hung up on Issac is the best.
i never used to watch this show because i was looking for debate untill i watched one by accident. best debate based group appealed video. there are many contradictory christians on here. love it.
the vote results at the end was epic! Great debate, a must see.
Just a note on people "rising from the dead after 3 days." Stuff like that actually happened a lot before the advent of modern medicine and better diagnostic tools. It's in fact, the historical basis for a traditional "wake" before burial. The concept is actually not at all "extraordinary," or in any way supernatural. It just shows medicine wasn't always able to differentiate between conditions like comas and actually dead.
I have to give kudos to Brent from CA. He seems willing to learn and admits when he doesn't know something. You don't see a lot of callers like that. Keep reading and learning, man.
The hiding and moving rapist pedophiles part was a pretty argument that its not a force for good, lol.
when are you going to post the recent shows?
It wouldn't have been unheard of, especially in the days before ekgs and such, for someone to have been prounounced to be dead to "come back to life".
Im an atheist, my friend is an atheist and his wife is wickin(wicken?) They told me all i needed to do as thier sons godfather is be there for him when he needs it. An extra branch of support in his life basically. His godmother is also wicken.
in response to what Micah said about, proteins need ribozymes inorder to fold. The Urey-Miller experiment was just to show that amino acids COULD form in pre biotic conditions. They donot assert that they were the FIRST to form , neither do the scientists now. There are all different kinds of hypothesis for abiogenesis, One such is the RNA world hypothesis, where ribozymes, catalyic RNAs capable of both holding genetic information as well as function as enzyme.
Greetings from Mexico, I like your program but I was very difficult language and would like to make a request if possible sumtitularlos to Castilian. thank you very much
Just on the Godparent thing... You could also say Guardian
Even though I know this nonsensical question still comes up. I'm still somewhat surprised to still see it, but It still gives me a chuckle. So thanks for the nonsensical question it kind of reminds me of the old show "kids say the darnedest things".
What if the parents are Atheists, and they want you to protect their child from religion, in the event that they are not there? What do you call that role? "Godless Parent"? or "Atheist-Parent"?
damn 771 that's a lot of episodes. :D
Here's to 1000 and beyond.
so what channel does this come on or is it like an internet thing because i would like to call in and pick their brains
I'm an atheist and godfather to my nephew. His godmother is a Protestant whose mother is a priest.. I always wondered would he be excommunicated if the church found out.
Haha, that guy 'from Canada' is the same one from calls before, from Texas.
(part 3)
I noticed this as a kid when I watched my classmates talk about weird things that happen. One kid would say "ghosts" another would say "demons" and sometimes someone might say something smart. Usually the smart conclusion is so different from the other conclusions that it tends to becomes the odd one out. My guess is that this is similar to what happened in the past that formed cultures of superstition.
I agree with you. If someone's family and social circle revolves around church events, it is very hard to admit being atheist or even consider the possibility.
He's trying to compare the resurrection to abiogenesis, but I think it's an equivocation fallacy. Because killing something and reanimating it after constructed cells have had time to rot, is not the same as the building blocks of life forming, or becoming animate.
ps..If after questioning your own truths you STILL come to the conclusion that you are a Christian, then just be happy, enjoy it, spread peace and love, just realise it is YOUR truth, and shouldn't be imposed on others.
Garry - fastest deconversion ever
Thanks! Watched it.
Being a 25 yr old atheist raised by atheists, my 'godparents' were my parents closest friends, the people who had been their best man and maid of honour. And while, obviously, there was no baptism/christening, I grew up knowing that couple to by my godparents and knowing if anything happened to my parents those were the people who would raise me. I'd love for there to be a secular term for this position!
Just tried talking to my mom about me beliefs or "lack of beliefs". She started talking about how I need to get baptized and she started talking like, "Lord have mercy on her. Forgive her." things like that. She says I'm dwelling with the devil, which makes no sense. I tried to bluntly tell her and she assumes I'm "falling prey to the devil" and that I'll regret this when I die because she doesn't want me to go to "eternal hell". I'm not saying her beliefs are wrong. I just don't believe he is
I feel like the first caller had a valid point and definition for a "soul" but they never really got around to discussing it because they argued semantics the whole time.
There should be more shows like this that addresses atheism in a social context like what to do at an atheist funeral or how to raise children without faith but still introducing them to a society that is full with religiosity
you wouldn't get proteins until quite a while after the first replicator. Probably before proteins came the amino acid holders (tRNA) which was a slight improvement somehow. Perhaps being wrapped around an AA provided more stability than the naked RNA strands. The business of linking AAs into chains would obviously have to come even later than that.
Just out of curiosity, have you seen the movie "The Man from Earth"?
It's like when ppl go "why is (they say "is" here) 1 and 1 equal 2?" Like something had to make that rule. Thats a rule because that's what describes the universe and it's interactions. 1 and 1 can't be 3 because then 1 =/= 1 and we would have a different set of descriptive rules about our universe
I live in England and was Christened when I was young, but have since grown up totally atheist. I was asked to be a godparent by a close friend of mine as well as my girlfriend in a CoE ceremony and neither of us were confirmed or anything. We were just expected to say Amen to a couple of prayers. I didn't say them, I just mimed because I didn't want to be a giant hypocrite - but everyone (including the mother) knows I am an atheist. You don't need to be a believer to be a role model. End of.
lol oh right i thought u meant the resurrection is similar to abiogenesis in the way that they are both evquivication fallacies lol. Thats why i was confused.
(part 2)
My suggestion would be to continue to show her respect and love (obviously). Rather than fight her desire to bring you closer to faith maybe try learning more about her "relationship with god", her "faith in god". This may (though not guaranteed to) help reveal some of the deeper reasons for her belief. This may also help strengthen your relationship with your mother at the same time. Until her actions cause you harm I see no real threat with her actions. She's trying to keep you safe.
That's because theist callers often go on a tangent and Matt wants to respond to particular points before he loses his train of thought.
Most people don't know how to present just a few ideas at a time, and have a back and forth conversation.
Holy shit. Matt's statement cleared so much up for me that I would often think about before. Like wandering often about the laws of physics. I can't believe I never realized it, but it's not laws set in place, it's reactions between substances in the universe. I think that I think of them that way because of theistic arguments always cramming in "Laws DEMAND a law giver!" They don't realize that that statement doesn't make sense, and I didn't before either. Even though I'm atheist. Thanks Matt.
Did they not do an episode this week where is #772?
Matt, at 33:25 you stated that "things continue improving, because reason wins out..."
I would humbly suggest that historically speaking, that doesn't always hold. Perhaps, if it hasn't already been covered, a good topic might be, "Why does reason sometimes lose out to superstition?".
I agree, there's also a huge influence in language and culture that we don't even think about. Religion was one of the first concepts to bring structure to knowledge or the lack of knowledge. Now that we have been conditioned our whole lives of the concept of god it's hard to get away from.
That's really helpful information on godparenting. Thanks.
Read the post where he accidently wrote "wandering" and should have written "wondering". Words that sounds the same but are spelled differently are called homophones.
Hitchens & Fry did the best job of speaking on the Catholic church being a force of good or evil in the world, as asked about 48min in
Greg doesn't want to let go of his mysticism, and so he's trying to rationalize and redefine his old believes to better fit his new beliefs.
I have other stuff to do, and there's lots to write, so it'll take some time before my message can be sent. You have already made me a certain deist to an agnostic deist.
Nine times on hold for Isaac - is that a record?
I don't quite understand this. You bring up the "Testemonium" which has been widely exposed as a forgery and then go on to admit that it was doctored (forged). What's your point exactly?
where can you buy one of those red buttons?
So what if they were living? Go and ask someone about something they witnessed 30-40 years prior you'll get accounts which diverge wildly from what actually happened (this is demonstrated even in the case of accounts written right after - hence why eyewitness testimony is one of the weakest forms of evidence in the legal arena) Just because someone asserts something is true and manufactures evidence doesn't make it true - and the null hypothesis is disbelief until sufficient evidence is provided
it retreats further back into the gaps of knowledge we don't know, the god of the gaps is a reclusive creature who only exists in what we don't understand/know
About resurrections, you guys should have talked about all the cases of modern 'resurrections' where people have 'come back to life' after 'being dead' after X amount of days (some people even waking up at their own funerals) These aren't supernatural occurrences yet they happen.
You deserve to get as good as you give.
Hey guys! Great episode as always, I wanted to know if any of you have twitter? There are some profiles but I am unsure if they are legitimate.
Theistic reasoning...there are more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on all the beaches of the world....but there's only one star with life on it, just so that the Hebrew war god could pull off a plan to rescue a minority of earth humans from the consequences of his own hatred.
I'm wondering if they can keep their bs believes, when we finally find Live outside of earth.