Kokesh on Atheism + Libertarians

[fr33]

Interesting topic to jump into.

I like the video.

What both atheists and religious people need to do is to consider others' perspectives.

I can both understand and relate to a christian that practices the golden rule and pays no attention to the Old Testament when deciding how to live their life.

Can you understand me? An atheist surrounded by Christians that want to use the state to enforce religious laws and bring about "end times" by warring nations in the middle east?

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Interesting topic to jump into.

I like the video.

What both atheists and religious people need to do is to consider others' perspectives.

I can both understand and relate to a christian that practices the golden rule and pays no attention to the Old Testament when deciding how to live their life.

Can you understand me? An atheist surrounded by Christians that want to use the state to enforce religious laws and bring about "end times" by warring nations in the middle east?

Like the Rapture Cult?

 

[fr33]

Like the Rapture Cult?

I wouldn't call it a cult only because I'm a nice guy But most debates I've had about the state of Israel end up referring to "the bible" with neocons.

 

[Elfshadow]

Like I said. I cant disprove the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, or invisibly flying spaghetti monsters. Give nor take a little, these random assumptions have approximately the same probability as the assumption that there is a "creator". Its very very close to 0. Close enough for it to be ridiculous. (to me at least)

What is the cause of the universe. In science all effects have causes. Whats the cause. And your right all of those are possible, not probable, but possible.

 

[Elfshadow]

Oh, and when we are talking about Deities, the term Agnostic is a misnomer. Gnosticism means "to know" Theism means the implication of a deity. So Theism ad gnosticism measure two completely different things. One (theism or atheism) describes your belief in deities, or in no deities. The other measures the degree of certainty you have of your beliefs. So a very devoted preacher would be a Gnostic Theist. A casual churchgoer who has very loose beliefs might be described as an Agnostic Theist. Someone like me, who is an Atheist, and is quite entrenched in that belief might be calld a Gnostic Atheist. You are sounding like you may be an Agnostic Atheist, which is the one belief that I find the most puzzling, because I find it to be less rational than even a Gnostic Theist.

In my opinion, Agnostic Atheists are essentially conceding that there is virtually no evidence to support the existence of Deities.... however they cling to the notion that deities cant be disproven 100%, and therefore have the same credibility as well established scientific theories. Based on this logic, my 5 year old nephew could scribble something random onto a piece of paper, and it would be just as credible as a team of scientists pouring over empirical data for decades, and then making their best guess based on the evidence.

I think when someone is an atheist, they have to be willing to accept that this universe is a very very complicated thing, and that we humans are quite finite creatures when it comes to our understanding. I think we have to come to the realization that it is OK if we dont ever know the answer to everything. But it sure is fun to try to find out the Truths in the universe without taking the cop-out explanation of "magic" or The Easter Bunny.

Qdog, alot of rationing in based off of solipsism. If actualy start taking solipsism, into account it throws into dought any reasoning based off of physical evidence.

 

[tttppp]

What is the cause of the universe. In science all effects have causes. Whats the cause. And your right all of those are possible, not probable, but possible.

Zero=infinity. Everything is in existence today because everything equals nothing. There is no beginning or end to the universe. Please explain to me how God created the universe, or how the universe was created from nothing.

 

[tttppp]

Just to be clear, there are some theories on the existence of life that I believe some types of creationism do a very good job of explaining. One is that it is possible for highly advanced life on one planet to biogenetically engineer new life that can exist on a different planet. So, as an example that is very much within the realm of possiblity would be this: Humans biogenitically engineer a new kind of microorganism for a specific reason, such as to convert C02 on Mars back to Oxygen and Carbon for example. It is quite plausible that these sythnthetically created organism could be relaesed on Mars, and then in 1 billion years or so when we are long extinct they could evolve into a higher life form on Mars.

In that example WE would be the creators, and this would be what I would consider to be a plausible creationist theory. But IMO that does NOT make us God in the sense that most people think of it.

EDIT: sorry, I used the term "creationist" but more accurate would have been the term "intelligent design".

This is a realistic scenario of how someone can be God. Anyone with power is capable of being someone's God. There are an infinite amount of Gods throughout the universe, all with varying degrees of power.

However, the God that most people refer to does not exist. When people say God created the universe, they don't know what they are talking about. It is impossible for someone to create the universe.

 

[eduardo89]

This is a realistic scenario of how someone can be God. Anyone with power is capable of being someone's God. There are an infinite amount of Gods throughout the universe, all with varying degrees of power.

However, the God that most people refer to does not exist. When people say God created the universe, they don't know what they are talking about. It is impossible for someone to create the universe.

And you know what you're talking about?

 

[Deborah K]

How can the universe have no beginning or end and at the same time be created by God? If the universe had no beginning, there would be no need for a God to create it.

I don't believe God created the Universe because I believe God IS the Universe, and the Universe has no beginning or ending. That is an unorthodox view for a Christian, I know. But I am not your run-of-the-mill Christian.

 

[tttppp]

I don't believe God created the Universe because I believe God IS the Universe, and the Universe has no beginning or ending. That is an unorthodox view for a Christian, I know. But I am not your run-of-the-mill Christian.

Thats definitely not something I've ever heard from a Christian before. How does your theory work?

 

[tttppp]

And you know what you're talking about?

I do.

 

[WilliamC]

 

[Deborah K]

Thats definitely not something I've ever heard from a Christian before. How does your theory work?

Okay, this always gets me in hot water with Christians, and atheists alike but here goes:

I do not see God in the traditional sense - like how He is portrayed on the Sisteen Chapel. I do not see God as a puppetmaster either, controlling everything going on. I do not take the Bible literally in the way that say, a fundamentalist Christian would. I see it as being a compilation over a few thousand years of history, metaphors, parables, literature, etc., and yet I see it all as being divinely inspired. For me, as I stated, God is the Universe. God is in everything. I believe in the Holy Trinity - Father, Son, Holy Spirit - or - God, Jesus, and the two combined. It's not hard for me to see them as separate, and as one at the same time, because it isn't hard for me to see H20 as water, steam, and ice.

Christ was the human manifestation of God. He was sent to us to teach us the timeless message of love and being lovable, forgiveness, charity, and I think he was also sent to teach us a different way of understanding human suffering, but we're far from understanding that yet. I do believe he performed the miracles proclaimed in the Bible because I believe we can all perform miracles, if we could tap into our amazing brains the way he could, as well as his disciples, and others since. Look at Edgar Cayce, for example.

I also believe that creation is completely plausible. It is ridiculous and presumptuous, and ignorant for our race of beings to claim that we are unique in this Universe. I believe there are literally billions of civilizations millions of years more advanced than we are, and YES, I believe we are visited and tampered with. If you can accept that possibility, is it so far-fetched that we were created by an intelligent being who loves us and looks after us when we acknowledge His existence, and ask for His help?

So, yes I believe in a Creator. I also believe that along with creation, there is evolution. We have both on this planet. For me, God is my Creator, and Christ was a manifestation of God, given to us as a gift that we either accept or reject. I've chosen to accept him into my life.

 

[tttppp]

Okay, this always gets me in hot water with Christians, and atheists alike but here goes:

I do not see God in the traditional sense - like how He is portrayed on the Sisteen Chapel. I do not see God as a puppetmaster either, controlling everything going on. I do not take the Bible literally in the way that say, a fundamentalist Christian would. I see it as being a compilation over a few thousand years of history, metaphors, parables, literature, etc., and yet I see it all as being divinely inspired. For me, as I stated, God is the Universe. God is in everything. I believe in the Holy Trinity - Father, Son, Holy Spirit - or - God, Jesus, and the two combined. It's not hard for me to see them as separate, and as one at the same time, because it isn't hard for me to see H20 as water, steam, and ice.

Christ was the human manifestation of God. He was sent to us to teach us the timeless message of love and being lovable, forgiveness, charity, and I think he was also sent to teach us a different way of understanding human suffering, but we're far from understanding that yet. I do believe he performed the miracles proclaimed in the Bible because I believe we can all perform miracles, if we could tap into our amazing brains the way he could, as well as his disciples, and others since. Look at Edgar Cayce, for example.

I also believe that creation is completely plausible. It is ridiculous and presumptuous, and ignorant for our race of beings to claim that we are unique in this Universe. I believe there are literally billions of civilizations millions of years more advanced than we are, and YES, I believe we are visited and tampered with. If you can accept that possibility, is it so far-fetched that we were created by an intelligent being who loves us and looks after us when we acknowledge His existence, and ask for His help?

So, yes I believe in a Creator. I also believe that along with creation, there is evolution. We have both on this planet. For me, God is my Creator, and Christ was a manifestation of God, given to us as a gift that we either accept or reject. I've chosen to accept him into my life.

Do you believe people are capable of one day having powers as great as God?

Also, do you believe in infinity?

 

[Deborah K]

Do you believe people are capable of one day having powers as great as God?

As great as Christ, not as great as God the Creator.

 

[tttppp]

As great as Christ, not as great as God the Creator.

Thats also, not a traditional Christian view. Whats the difference in God's power and Christ?

 

[Deborah K]

Do you believe people are capable of one day having powers as great as God?

Also, do you believe in infinity?

Sort of, as it pertains to no end or beginning to the Universe. This is a simplistic example, but in my mind, if you could launch a rocket and have it go straight out into space for eternity, I kind of think at some point it would return on the opposite side from where it was launched.

 

[Deborah K]

Thats also, not a traditional Christian view. Whats the difference in God's power and Christ?

Christ refered to God as his Father. He never claimed that he created us. There is a distinction there. So in the case of God's power or Christ's power, when Christ was in human form, I think his power was different from God's power.

 

[otherone]

Christ refered to God as his Father. He never claimed that he created us. There is a distinction there. So in the case of God's power or Christ's power, when Christ was in human form, I think his power was different from God's power.

from wikipedia:
Arius taught that God the Father and the Son did not exist together eternally. Arians taught that the pre-incarnate Jesus was a divine being created by (and therefore inferior to) God the Father at some point, before which the Son did not exist.[4] In English-language works, it is sometimes said that Arians believe that Jesus is or was a "creature", in the sense of "created being". Arius and his followers appealed to Bible verses such as Jesus saying that the father is "greater than I" (John 14:28), and "The Lord created me at the beginning of his work" (Proverbs 8:22).[5] The latter quote has provided some controversy because it is technically speaking of wisdom. However, many people, notably Jehovah's Witnesses, believe that the wisdom in this proverb symbolizes Jesus Christ because he is later described in a similar way.[6]

Of all the various disagreements within the Christian Church, the Arian controversy has held the greatest force and power of theological and political conflict, with the possible exception of the Protestant Reformation. The conflict between Arianism and Trinitarian beliefs was the first major doctrinal confrontation in the Church after the legalization of Christianity by the Roman Emperors Constantine I and Licinius.[7]

The controversy over Arianism began to rise in the late 3rd century and extended over the greater part of the 4th century and involved most church members, simple believers, priests and monks as well as bishops, emperors and members of Rome's imperial family. Yet, such a deep controversy within the Church could not have materialized in the 3rd and 4th centuries without some significant historical influences providing the basis for the Arian doctrines. While some historians define and minimize the Arian conflict as the exclusive construct of Arius and a handful of rogue bishops engaging in heresy, other historians recognize Arius as providing a conservative response against the politicization of Christianity, or a defender of original Christianity. Of the roughly three hundred bishops in attendance at the Council of Nicea, only two bishops did not sign the Nicene Creed.[8] However, to minimize the extent of Arianism ignores the fact that extremely prominent Emperors such as Constantius II and Valens were Arians, as well as prominent Gothic, Vandal and Lombard warlords both before and after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.

After the dispute over Arius politicized and a general solution to the debate was sought – with a great majority holding to the Trinitarian position – the Arian position was officially declared to be heterodox. Lucian of Antioch had contended for a christology very similar to what would later be known as Arianism and is thought to have contributed much to its development. Arius was a student of Lucian's private academy in Antioch.

While Arianism continued to dominate for several decades even within the family of the Emperor, the Imperial nobility, and higher-ranking clergy, in the end it was Trinitarianism which prevailed in the Roman Empire at the end of the 4th century. Arianism, which had been taught by the Arian missionary Ulfilas to the Germanic tribes, was dominant for some centuries among several Germanic tribes in western Europe, especially Goths and Lombards (and significantly for the late Empire, the Vandals), but ceased to be the mainstream belief by the 8th century, as it was successfully crushed through a series of military and political conquests, culminating in the political-religious domination of Europe over the next 1,000 years by Trinitarian forces in the Catholic Church. Trinitarianism remained the dominant doctrine in all major branches of the Eastern and Western Church and later within Protestantism until modern times.

 

[TeaPartyHistorian]

Kokesh just reminds me of a little spoiled daddy's boy that never grew up. I'd love to know how much money was in his trust fund or whatever, that he is still able to live this lavish life of travel without ever having a real job in his life.