Why Humanity Must Overcome Religion | Carl Sagan

"In this video, Carl Sagan explores the vastness of the universe, the power of science, and the limitations of religious belief. He emphasizes the importance of skepticism, evidence, and the scientific method in shaping humanity’s future while questioning the role of faith and mythology in understanding our place in the cosmos."

 

Click on this link for a video compilation of some of Carl Sagan's more famous quotes, leading to the conclusion that humanity's most common and dangerous false belief must be marginalized for humanity to survive.

Reincarnation Debunked

 Click on the link below for a video discussion between two atheists and a Christian caller:

"Reincarnation Is The Most Likely After Life"

Who Created God?

Special pleading is an informal fallacy wherein one cites something as an exception to a general or universal principle, without justifying the special exception.[1][2][3][4][5] It is the application of a double standard.[6][7] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading)

Click on the link below for a great rebuttal to religious apologists claiming that God created everything:

Kent Hovind Thinks He's Really Clever

Memory And The Bible

"Did this psych student from the University of Wilmington prove Frank Turek to be 'patently false' about impact events? Watch me watch Frank to unpack the heart of Frank's argument and the importance of identifying the distinction between major and minor details."

Click on the link below to understand that our memories of "Impact Events" are flawed:

Psych Student Tells Christian Apologist He's Wrong

Logic Is Not Magic

"There are some apologists who want us to believe that logic is magic. What is a materialist atheist? It's someone who believes that everything in the universe is made of matter molecules and nothing outside of that can exist. See, this is why I prefer the term physicalist rather than materialist. I don't think even most people who call themselves materialists believe that energy and space-time don't exist. I don't believe that any anything non-physical exists, but there are plenty of things that are immaterial that are still physical. That means a Transcendent God cannot exist because God is a spirit but if that's the case how can we explain immaterial realities like laws of logic? 

"The laws of logic describe the boundaries of what our physical brains can do. They describe physical phenomena. I believe in the law of non-contradiction, for example, because if I try to imagine something both existing and not existing at the same time and in the same respect I find that I can't. that's a limitation of my physical brain. There's nothing non-physical about it."

Click on the link below for a video attempting to correct a religious apologist regarding logic:

Why Logic Isn't Magic 

To Repeat: ANY Belief Without Evidence Is ALWAYS Harmful

One of the hardest tasks in counter-apologetics is to get the liberal religious person to understand that ALL beliefs without evidence are harmful. Click on the link below for a ten-minute video by Richard Dawkins that is one of the best efforts I have seen that succinctly covers all the bases regarding this important matter.

Why Religion Threatens Rational Thought

Truth: The Most Abused Word

Truth: in accord with fact or reality (Webster's Dictionary)

- - - - - - - - - -
"Absolute truth is a statement that is true at all times and in all places. It is something that is always true no matter what the circumstances.[1] It is a fact that cannot be changed. For example, there are no round squares.[2] There are also no square circles.[2] The angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees. These are all true by definition. Very similar are the propositions of Euclid, because they are proved once the axioms are accepted. One way or another, these are all truths because they are logically true. 

"Absolute truths are different from empirical truths. All the findings of science are empirical: based on evidence, and even if they are true in this world they don't need to be so in all the other possible worlds; they might also be wrong or incomplete due to lack of sufficient evidence. On the other hand, absolute truths might be based on logical truths, which are true by definition of their axioms." (Wikipedia)

- - - - - - - -

"Religious views on truth vary both between and within religions. *The most universal concept of religion that holds true in every case is the inseparable nature of truth and religious belief.

(*all religious opinions can't be correct, and none of them can verify/justify their beliefs)

"Truth is the sine qua non (without which, not) of politics. When lies overpower truth, politics dies. When politics dies, our world collapses, and we humans die too—because it is only in the world, among other humans, that we exist." " - - - We talk about polarization and the impossibility of dialogue, and what we mean is that we are no longer engaged in politics: We are not making a society together. This predicament is consistent with Arendt’s assertion that politics is impossible in the absence of truth.(link)

- - - - - - - - -

"However common it is to hear talk of “my truth, “your truth,” “her truth,” and even “no truth,” it’s worth asking: Is any of this actually true? We’re going to try and persuade you that this question matters most—making the case that

  a shared pursuit of truth (shaped by our unique perceptions, yes—but not completely constrained by them) is the only thing that makes conversation truly meaningful. 

If we enter into a conversation assuming that the truth itself is common to us both, yet recognizing that we don’t see it the same way, then we can at least begin to compare and contrast our perceptions of reality in order to sift out the truthful wheat from the troublesome chaff (exaggerations, omissions, mistakes, errors, lies, fake news, etc.)." (link)

Republicans don't respect the concept

"Something From Nothing" Explained In Two Minutes

Click below for a concise YouTube video that explains what science knows about the controversial hypothesis that the universe came from nothing:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Ej4Xj-w03CI

No, The Religious Are NOT More Moral. In Fact - - -

Phil Zuckerman's book "What It Means to Be Moral: Why Religion Is Not Necessary for Living an Ethical Life" is one of the best counter-apologetics to the claim that one must be religious to be moral.

Click on the link below for his video presenting the main evidence for countering this claim:

Are Religious People More Moral than Atheists? Here are the Facts

"You" Are Not What The Religious Say You Are

Click on the link below for a 15-minute video that shatters the concept of a supernatural soul as the base of our consciousness:

Another Failed Refutation of Atheism

The experiments and treatments splitting the brain's corpus callosum
falsify the supernatural human soul.

The Universe Is Probably Eternal, No God Necessary

"- - - there was no when there was no Universe. There was never a time when the universe did not exist. The Universe is the SpaceTime Continuum so whenever there is time there is a universe, even if there was nothing but time. Time isn't an extension of the universe. The reason I don't believe that the Universe could have a cause is because to cause something to exist means to do something that results in a change from a time when that thing does not exist to a time when it does exist. Since there never was, or even coherently could be, a time when the SpaceTime Continuum didn't exist, the universe could not have had a cause."

Click on the link below for a strong rejection of the Cosmological Argument for a God. Actually, ALL arguments for a God are generated from the intuitive parts of the brain, which are unreliable for determining what is real. Also, they have NO way to test their validity/justification because they don't come from science:

Why the Big Bang Doesn't Point to God

An Excellent Tool For Teaching Critical Thinking To Children

Don't be put off by the title:

"The Sunday school teacher is out. Good thing a substitute is available: Satan! 

"SATAN'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE is an animated documentary. Join Satan as he shares Bible secrets, secrets the students' pastor learned at Christian seminary but is afraid to share. Thankfully, Satan's not afraid of losing his job. 

"Satan has amassed an impressive list of biblical scholars ready to reveal the 'standard stuff' taught in Christian seminaries: Bart Ehrman (UNC Chapel Hill), John J. Collins (Yale), Dale Allison (Princeton Seminary), Susan Niditch (Amherst), Ron Hendel (UC Berkeley), and Hector Avalos (Iowa State). This is an established seminary curriculum about biblical history, biblical morals, authorship claims, and early Christianity — a curriculum never shared with the congregation. 

"Darkly comedic, but thoroughly researched, SATAN'S GUIDE TO THE BIBLE is a fascinating journey into the secrets of the world's best-selling book.

Directed by documentary filmmaker Zeke Piestrup (APOCALYPSE LATER: HAROLD CAMPING VS THE END OF THE WORLD) and produced by animation filmmaker Tim Johnson (ANTZ, OVER THE HEDGE, HOME)"

Click here for the hour-and-a-half video

The Fine Tuning Argument AGAIN?

Click on the link below for debunking of the Fine Tuning argument with a different approach:

Why Fine Tuning Is Evidence Against God

Religious Apologists: Your Services Are Useless

Religious apologists, you depend on philosophy and theology to support your claims. However, opinions from such cannot be verified/justified. They have reached the end of usefulness to humanity, especially since modern science is able to verify/justify its findings. They are dead academic disciplines.

 
All religious claims have been evaluated by branches of science with the strong probability that there is nothing new that will change the findings that religion is a construct of the human brain for comforting and controlling.

You instead need to adopt the state of the art regarding knowledge/information encased within the scientific disciplines of modern science. Since religion takes advantage of the weakness of the unassisted brain to understand reality, the understanding of the basic science of psychology is necessary to change the brains of you folks.

Neil deGrasse Tyson: A Clear And Concise Rebuttal Of Religion

"In this video, Neil deGrasse Tyson explains how science and religion are *somewhat incompatible both in a historical and contemporary manner."

* ?

Click on the link below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzfIE9SW-Jc

Christian Theology Does Not Support A Non-Material Soul

To hear conservative Christians, and even most liberal Christians, speak of the Soul or Spirit, one would assume that the Bible supports an immaterial quality to such. In fact, the Old Testament is clear that the Soul or Spirit is associated with the material "Breath." In addition, Jesus preached this same concept of the Soul. Click on the link below for a video on the matter, which, once again, debunks apologist William Lane Craig:

Why We Shouldn't Believe in a Soul

The Criteria For A Prophecy Being True

Christians talk about how Jesus was prophesized in the Bible but is that true? The list of criteria for a prophecy to be true, according to the counter-apologist Paulogia, is as follows

• It was made clearly and demonstrably prior to the events predicted.
• It was intended to be a prediction.
• It was a non-mundane claim.
• It was answerable only by a single, transparent, and verifiable occurrence.
• It is not open to interpretation.
• It is not something that people are actively attempting to fulfill. 

In analyzing the above criteria, as well as pondering noted Biblical scholar Bart Ehrman's opinion on the subject (here), it is clear that the claims of the Bible prophesizing Jesus as "The Savior" assists in stretching Christianity's credibility to the absurd.

The Way Christian Counter-Apologetics Should Be Done

"In this episode, @TheCounselofTrent responds to critics like Paulogia and Candida Moss who critique the evidence for the Resurrection in the apostle's willingness to die for their faith in Christ."

One of my favorite Christian counter-apologist is the YouTuber Paulogia. Click on the link below for an example of his knowledge and skill in debunking Christian dogma. In this example, he picks apart virtually every statement of Trent Horn, one of my least favorite people, let alone apologists (link to my prior blog posts addressing his actions), regarding his claim that, because the apostles died for their beliefs, Jesus' resurrection is true. Oh, also read at least some of the comments, as there are essentially none that support Trent:

This Resurrection Argument Doesn't Add Up (Trent Horn response)

Exhibit A For Pretending To Be An Expert

One of the main flaws of religious apologists is rejecting the consensus of scientific experts in fields pertinent to the claims made by the apologists. While that's bad enough, some, like William Lane Craig, pretend that they actually know more about the subjects than the true experts!. Click on the link below for a video debunking such nonsense:

William Lane Craig Thinks He Knows Evolution Better than Biologists

Emergence Explained, From Atoms To Humans

God of the gaps (or a divine fallacy) is a logical fallacy that occurs when believers invoke Goddidit (or a variant) in order to account for some natural phenomena that science cannot (at the time of the argument) explain. This concept resembles what systems theorists[1] refer to as an "explanatory principle".[2] "God of the gaps" is a bad argument not only on logical grounds, but on empirical grounds: there is a long history of "gaps" being filled and the remaining gaps for God thus getting smaller and smaller, suggesting "we don't know yet" as an alternative that works better in practice; naturalistic explanations for still-mysterious phenomena always remain possible, especially in the future where research may uncover more information.[3] (link)

Click on the link below for a counter-apologetic video presenting a concise and complete rebuttal to this ubiquitous attempt to justify belief in a god. It centers around the well-known natural phenomenon of emergence in nature:

Answers to Questions for Atheists