I think "father Casey" deserves a big round of applause for wearing that ridiculous frock and staying in character with a straight face. I sure couldn't do it.
Casey's suggestion that going to the gym or on a diet is 'suffering" nails him as one (or more) of three things: 1) living an Incredibly sheltered life 2) deliberately deceptive 3) a dim tool
@@lnsflare1 It's like, I _want_ to laugh, but there are seriously people who think like this. I saw footage of a five year-old sobbing after being pepper sprayed by cops. While Trump was president, we were literally putting children in cages at the border. And there's no shortage of children among the many victims of Israel's genocide in Palestine. People can look at a crying child and instead of seeing something vulnerable and precious, see a monster that needs to be subdued. I myself am a humanist, but after knowing this, I can see why other people aren't.
@@KynaTiona or catholic priests... nobody knows if or when they'll get out the crusade manual again... ;) And they are waging a war against the bodily autonomy of minors
Good video. I've got nothing to add, so this one's for the algorithm (which might make us suffer bad recommendations, but at least never claims that they're character building).
@@GodlessGrannyYou are just showing how much toxic atheism is, always obsessed and on the edge of the war of belief so of religions... Just because you have nothing to offer us and neither to yourself, just like your sick atheism.
Ah, Casey-lad. My favourite piblit. A piblit is 100 lbs of shit stuffed into a 50 lb bag tied in the middle. Cute li'l bugger tho'. Bet he gets all the altar boys. . .
In all fairness, with how fast the rain would have had to have been coming down during the flood myths, everyone, including those who were sheltering in a big wooden box, would probably have been instantly disintegrated long before they could drown.
When I was thirteen, I was to ask a question that got me excommunicated. When my father died, my mother had to get special permission for me to attend his services. This from the religion of love and caring. (what would be here would have to be all kinds of symbols.) I had a friend, one of my best friends when in the seventh grade he took his life. Left a note that he could no linger trust the clergy at the church (same on that kicked me out) because the sexual acts were unnatural and against god. Said the note. He was an alter boy. This destroyed his family. The offender was shuffled off to another location. The church pushed it under the rug and called My Friend a week person, for he could not understand Grand Old Deceptions ways. It will be trillions of years past the end of our star Sol before I will begin to believe the 'Hog Wash' of these liars. I do believe that without the wholly fable book this drab clad fallower of an Iron Age Cult of Death could not make a decent choice of his own. I also believe that without that fable book, they could not prove the 'facts in the book.' I believe I have stood upon the soap box long enough. Peace
@@aosidh Years ago I taught someone and we had a discussion about phobias. He said that he was fine with spiders, claustrophobic spaces, heights, etc. No, what he said he was scared of was priests. I asked him why and he pointed out their proclivity for young children. I pointed out that he was 17,, but, he said, the fear still persisted. Creepy buggers who should be banned from being near children.
Do I doubt Genghis khans existence? I haven’t really thought about it, because nobody is passing laws based on Genghis or asking me to give money to them for Genghis or persecuting minorities and abusing their own families for Genghis so I’m not interested enough to take a position on his historicity. If a certain organization was doing those things, I might be more vocal about how believable its justifications are.
If Genghis Khan turned out to be a myth, I'd be like "Huh, that's weird," and continue on with my day absolutely unaffected. The "Well if you doubt the historicity of THIS Bible thing, you have to doubt the historicity of this OTHER thing!" is not the W that apologists think it is. Yeah, maybe it's not true that the past happened exactly the way historical documents claim. So what?
The very fact that fr Casey tried to put Temujin in the same historical boat as Jesus just shows either how ignorant he is, or how dishonest he is (or maybe both).
13:31 I am 100% sure that Casey has not been keeping up to date on the insane amount and quality of artistic works that are being made today, at a rate that is many times higher than at any other time in human history. And considering that he's using the Bible as his standard, I'm also confident that the social metrics he's mentioned are also far beyond any previous time in human history, at least in parts of the modern era.
I say this with complete sincerity, I love the "hello internets" at the beginning. It's easy to roast him for being way behind, but the fact that it's netspeak from the LiveJournal era is actually part of the charm for me.
In the church that I grew up in, nobody cared about animal suffering because animals did not have souls, and therefore did not need or deserve compassion from humans. That was back in the 70s. Things seemed to have changed now, I think.
For the better, then. Compassion isn't some kind of light switch that you can turn on and off according to some authoritarian doctrine which you must obey.
My father was sent to a dreadful prison for political prisoners at the age of 15 by a Catholic priest for refusing to kneel before him. At that time, his country was under the control of a fascist regime, and the Catholic Church was complicit in that regime.
Jesus, the SUN, has many names. As the sun falls into the underworld (southern hemisphere) he is swallowed buy a giant fish. That fish (Cetus constellation) has room for many suns. As Jason and the Argonauts he had lots of adventures.
I have a major beef with his claim that if people do bad things, then they weren't a REAL follower of Christ. According to his own religion, ALL have sinned and fallen short. I could phrase it more secularly and agree that everyone has done bad things from time to time. Sure, some of us do worse things than others, but if we disqualify people from Christianity based on the fact that they did bad things, then by Casey's own logic there is no such thing as a Christian. Somehow I doubt that is what he meant to say, though!
It was just a Iame attemtp at the old 'no true scottman'. He has already been called out for that, so he is trying his best (and failing) in not using it so blantantly.
Debatably, there actually AREN'T any true Christians; or at least, the case can be made. But that's a silly semantic game and I'm better than that. Usually.
Even though it is interesting that Casey proclaims the controversial idea, that Non-Christians can go to heaven, he specifically excludes us Atheists. I was surprised you didn't address that.
I’m not looking for a god, But if heaven is like chilling on a summer night watching fireflies then I guess that is what I’ve always been looking for. But Casey says my version of an ideal eternity doesn’t count because his ideal eternity can beat mine up unless I give Casey my lunch money.
@@DPaisleyDaisy-pr5wz a couple of years ago i got a job as a chauffeur to a catholic multi millionaire driving his £450,000 rolls royce phantom (a horrid car to drive) and in the evening of my first day at work, relaxing over a glass of champagne and talking with his house guests, an angolan minister and my bosses second in command, when i told them i was atheist he said that as an atheist but not particularly evil, i would likely spend eternity in limbo. my job was to pick him up from church every morning to go to work, i have no idea what he would pray for with his four houses, his casino business and five cars, but what i did find amusing was that limbo was torn down a few weeks later, presumably to make room for a casino. he is gay too, which for a catholic can't be easy. i suppose. religious people just do whatever they feel like and still expect god to like them.
@@soyevquirsefron990 i actually think that hell is going to be the place where dreams come true, heaven sounds like an eternity of sucking god's toes, i think satan has been trying to warn us. i mean why would satan want to torment sinners? he hates christians, not me. hell would be a place run by god to punish people, why satan would recruit then drive you away beats me, like i say he'd double cross god, not his followers.
I guess he likes the thought of people seeking out God in any way we could. I can see a bit where he is coming from. Even all those he agrees with as much as possible, can't have everything right about their religion. Why those that fail to find him should be penalized, sounds like a personal and religious bias. Especially as he admitted that the only way to find God is through faith.
EXCELLENT point about heathens in the leadership! If we can identify them as not true Christians, why does the church allow them to preach to congregations?
Another possibility: What if there is a god , and she's judging you based on whether we reject being manipulated by contradictory holy books? If god never shows up, you never know...
You are just showing how much toxic atheism is, always obsessed and on the edge of the war of belief so of religions... Just because you have nothing to offer us and neither to yourself, just like your sick atheism..
It would seem that the stronger the claim a Christian denomination makes for its moral authority and its interpretation of the Bible in regard to morality, the more likely it is to have protected offenders who target children. (Baptist, Catholic, Mormon, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.) And the retort is always the "bad apples" or the "tares" who grow amid the wheat. "Jesus ere long will weed the crop, /And pluck the tares in anger up." --Though in the Outward Church Below, John Newton My question is, "If the church holds a superior morality, why can't it be held to it?"
The problem is the stronger they have to sweep all their immoral actors under the rug instead of outing them, thereby moving them to where they can continue to do wrong.
Catholics would find the whole "stealing from God" concept silly. They would say that people doing good even without a belief in God were probably being influenced by their guardian angels or had become tools for a divine purpose. It's not God forcing behavior, just giving opportunity. But, there's a giant scale up on Heaven, so good and bad are getting weighed...at least that's how I was raised. Empathy and brotherhood are big deals.
I think they would also go down the 'anonymous Christian' route - doing good and being good really means you are a Christian but you just don't know it...
@Pb_Pencil I've always been curious about the guardian angel thing. That is actual doctrine? I kinda assumed it was just part of the cultural lexicon like the different levels of Hell. Interesting... Catholics have always fascinated me, most likely because we have next to no exposure to them in the Southern US.
@AllMyTishs I don't know that there is a specific doctrine that says what angels can and cannot do, but there are definitely prayers and specific references to angels. The named angels are called saints (St. Michael, St. Raphael, etc.), and you can request their intercession from evil or danger. You are taught that in Catholic school. As for cultural, there is that, too. I would describe it like this: my mother believes that close calls are often prevented by angels. Think of them like body guards (soul guards?) But, they are very real to Catholics. And, you can't become an angel . They are separate beings from humans. You don't die and become an angel. If you see them, they can either look like beings with wings or will appear as plain people but feel special.
This was a nice video to listen to and watch a little as I was doing my (granny) knitting. Not that this has to do with much of anything, although the goal of this knitting is to keep another atheist's feet warm in the coming months, consider it a sacrifice to the algorithm gods. :)
@@GodlessGranny Thanks for the reply. I couldn't see the link when I looked at the time. I haven't been back to check. It's not a problem, especially in the case of this monk who is not difficult to trace!
@@GodlessGranny 🫢 I’m glad u were “corrupted “ . I grew up in catholic schools. (I was really shocked at age 7 when I was expected to believe in transubstantiation). When Sister defined it, I immediately said to myself, “Oh, symbolism “. The next words out of her mouth…”not a SYMBOL of, but HIS ACTUAL BODY n BLOOD “😱. I hid it from my parents til college. Catholics often overlook “leaving the faith “. 😄
Answering the title cold: Well... That's what you get when you don't do the bell ringing right... You end up flying into the belfry and end up in a compromising position with a member of the order of st Chiroptera...
ronj etc: It is very interesting, isn't it? They manage to project forward a century or so and, if I have understood correctly - not at all a certainty! - predict that Christianity will be on the increase in terms of % of population. I can't help thinking that the authors may be hopeful Christians, not least because they used the term "AD".
ronj etc: And ... I was right. A few seconds on the big Internet search engine and I discover that both authors are Christians. The Rev Dr Barrett died in 2011.
This one? www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=H3xJoJYD&id=DE796A1CF1CCE04B005DA9DD11B0D6F0AA6FC08B&thid=OIP.H3xJoJYDR4i3NcYpJf_K-QHaGu&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2Ff0%2Fe1%2F82%2Ff0e182cc93c0e5976afeb16d3e33bae2.jpg&cdnurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FR.1f7c49a096034788b735c62925ffcaf9%3Frik%3Di8BvqvDWsBHdqQ%26pid%3DImgRaw%26r%3D0&exph=510&expw=561&q=world+and+christian+population+33ad+to+present&simid=608014636649553658&FORM=IRPRST&ck=72A14DF5391B2D859DB4D545FF4B3703&selectedIndex=49&itb=0&cw=1267&ch=712&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0
@@pineapplepenumbraYes, I can see why my post is ambiguous. In the video, the monk says that doubters will always find a reason to doubt. I am suggesting that if god knows all then he could provide individual proof for each of us. I have never believed, not even as a child, but I’m always ready to give god some suggestions.
16:39 Another very important point to make is that the first and third of Fr. Casey's comments are contradictory. His third point is that God appearing would remove the need for faith, but his first point is that according to scripture, God has indeed appeared before. Was faith not as important back then for some reason? And to piggyback off of your point about not necessarily believing even if God did decide to reveal himself: Satan has full knowledge of God and his capabilities, and yet still apparently decided to rebel and not follow him, which seems to imply that humans would be capable of making the same choice even if God gave us all the knowledge we could ever want about him.
Godless Granny is a cutie and had better watch out for the Nephilim, who want to mate with her. Nephilim (clouds) is plural for Nephele (cloud), The sons of Nephilim = RAIN. They are often accompanied by the fiery flying serpent (lightning).
Oh gods… just got to the ‘suffering isn’t inherently bad’ part… crikey he’s so dumb. Or dishonest. What the crap does going to the gym have to do with the suffering of Jews under the holocaust, or children raped by men who believe HIV can be cured through intercourse with a virgin? Do those have ‘higher purpose’? And even if accepted that they did, would that justify it? Bollocks.
18:00 it is odd that god has to obey _some_ rules but not others. one of the first things that compacted being atheist was the thought"what does god need a boat for, and why does he need people to make it for him?" instead of a flood god could have killed all the sinners by any number of means, machine guns, nuclear bombs, heart failure, but no, he has to use the preferred method of mythology, a flood. clearly god isn't allowed to spread anthrax or covid. the ONLY conclusion a sensible person can come to is that the story is DRIVEL. he could put noah in his pocket, wipe the slate, start over with a fence around the tree, and pop noah back in the garden with adam and eve 2.0
Similarly, he could've blessed Israel with advanced technology, or removed the need for them to own slaves by having angels do their agricultural work. Heck, this would even work better with the scheme proposed in the Old Testament: Give the Israelites magical God Guns that let them win any battles when they have Yahweh's favor, but if he is displeased with them he just remotely disables all their weapons so that their enemies can defeat them and recalls the angelic field-tenders so the Israelites starve. As soon as they repent, he puts everything back in place. Nobody would doubt his power then!
He's talking because he's hiding in a monastery and so doesn't have to face victims. Most of this stuff isn't ever going to be his problem even if he left the monastery. At least as far as he knows...
He's not. He is a fransiscan, which are friars that are active in daily life, often ministering to the homeless and poor. The fact he wears a habit does not mean he is a shut in monk in a monastery m
18:30 er, what's the virtue with faith? you need faith cos there is no evidence, you are required to believe given what little you have, but is faith prerequisite or a product? you have faith because there is no evidence, but if you had evidence, why would not having faith be a problem?
Were the apostles "forced to believe" by allegedly witnessing Jesus' alleged miracles, including him allegedly appearing embodied in his magic indestructible teleporting resurrected body to 500 people at once? If not, how are we "forced to believe" by having him show up in some collectively observable way for whoever asks? Given that he is God, it's not like it costs him anything in time, energy, or even attention, right?
Oh look, it’s the “I love homosexuals so much I want them not to be happy guy.” 🤭 regarding his comment about suffering. I have rheumatoid arthritis. The suffering I have endured all my life has not once, ever, brought me anything positive, good, or redeeming. It’s been hell. Actually, that’s not true…. It made it very clear to me that the mercy of god is non existent.
At 18:05 or so, the term "impractical" refers to the management of scarce resources. I go only once per week to the store because the impractical alternative of going once per day is expensive in time, effort, and transportation costs. But nothing is impractical for God. Showing himself or sending a son to die and resurrect are both finite expenses from an infinite pool of wealth. Doing one or the other once per millennium, or once per second, are both, for practical purposes, totally free. If God exists, he is absolutely and negligently ignorant of economics.
He says there were people during the time of Jesus who didn't believe in him after seeing his miracles.BUT there were many people that did believe in him because of the miracles. Jesus even told the Jewish leaders, that if they didn't believe his words, they should believe in him because of the miracles he did. I guess Jesus didn't know the scripture in Deuteronomy where god warned the people to not believe a prophet even if he did "wonders." You can bet that the Pharisees knew that scripture, though.
Plus, we're explicitly told why some people might not believe even after seeing miraculous events: They believed in magic, in sorcery, and in trafficking with demons. Celsus argued that Jesus could've faked his miracles with Egyptian magic, and Origen's response to this was not "Egyptian magic isn't real you dope," he actually acknowledged that Egyptians could do magic and just said Jesus couldn't have done it that way. Jesus's defense when accused of using the power of Satan to fake his miracles and mislead people is incredibly weak: He says Satan wouldn't work against his own purposes. Ummmm, wouldn't he though? Like, if I were Satan, and I were trying to fake a Messiah to mislead people, I would absolutely have him cast out some of my minions and heal people of afflictions I put on them, specifically so that people would think my fake Messiah was genuine! That weak response is exactly what I'd expect a fake Satanic Messiah to say, in fact...
What I find odd is that his followers saw these miracles over the course of 3 years and, we are told, that they believed him to be divine so… why did they abandon him when he was arrested? They abandoned god? If his ministry did not impress them, why should it impress me?
The all knowing, all powerful, God of the Bible, would know exactly what would convince me of his existence. He has yet to show me. If he did, I would explain how much better of a job I would have done.
Love how he answers the question about knowledge of the world. Firstly, it is not condescending to acknowledge that they didn't understand the composition and formation of the stars or germ theory, for example. There were no telescopes or microscopes in 500CE. We can still give them credit for their accomplishments. Secondly, Casey responds with a really dumb "whataboutism" with regard to modern art. Apart from this being a logical fallacy in itself, he does a bait and switch from scientific knowledge of the world to a criticism of modern arts which is based on what? His own conservative judgement? This is really weak sauce, Casey.
Its an interesting how the fastest response most believers have to atheist is 'you must be mad at god' , so you recognize that, if god, as you've described, exists we should be angry? The god of the old testimate is evil in every way a human understands the concept, an argument could be made a religion drawing ONLY from the words of Jesus might be less evil, but mostly its still a matter of degrees....
I keep hearing this "Glorious Sacrifice" term when it comes to the wonder of this god. What sacrifice? What glory. The story as told by men and interpreted by the same makes no sense. Two people I do not even know did something that this god knew they'd do and punished them for doing it and, later, this same god created himself as a person so that that person could sacrifice itself to itself for those of us that don't even know the two original "sinners". What??? Glory in the trinity?? Madness is what it is! Edit: As for the sacrifice, In the same story as told by men and interpreted by the same, did this person not then resurrect? That's no different to me sacrificing my salary by giving it to a friend that needs it, only for them to give me that entire amount back a day or so later. What did I sacrifice? What did this so called god sacrifice? If this god is all powerful, all knowing and timeless then it would appear that, if it were to be real, the only players on this field that are making sacrifices are us and all because someone ate an apple that their creator knew they would do.
Why would God even need glory? He's perfect in every way. He's completely content with himself and utterly secure from any harm. Saying bad things about him can't even make him feel bad. If every other thinking being despised him, it wouldn't harsh his mellow in the slightest. Why care if anyone respects you? Their opinions don't matter. If people want to hype him up, cool, whatever, but he wouldn't DEMAND it. Nothing about this God is supposed to change in any way regardless of how much "glory" he's given.
Christian ideas affect everyone in the western world, atheist or not. An atheist in a non western country would likely have a very different moral framework.
Granma, how you doing? Right off the bat (1:48 to be precise) I knew you had an issue, not with Christianity but with Protestantism. Protestants and Catholics have some differences on some doctrines and dogmas. Remember not to drink too much coffee and don't leave the stove on. 😊
No, I most definitely have as much an issue with any form of religion that says an all powerful being will send you to his torture chamber if you don't think the right thoughts about him. Hell (pun intended), I have a problem with any being that calls itself "loving" that would even consider torture to be "justice!"
I find it revealing whenever apologists point to other historical figures, in this case, Temujin "Genghis" Khan. It doesn't say what they seem to think it says when they compare the existence of Temujin, Augustus Caesar, or Alexander the Mildly Competent to the existence of Yeshua Christos. Because we HAVE archaeological evidence, we even have genetic evidence of Temujin. All it says is that apologists are too lazy to even google "Evidence for [Person]". If they're so lazy as to not look up even basic information on other historical figures, why should anyone think they weren't equally lazy looking up things about Christ? [Insert "Low Bar Bill" clip here.]
Plus, suppose tomorrow it's proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that Temujin, Augustus, and Alexander didn't exist. Okay, that's neat. Weird that a historical conspiracy managed to form three times around such a major figure, but ultimately irrelevant trivia. We live in a world that continues to exist regardless of how it actually got here. If Jesus never existed, Christianity's hosed. I can freely concede that I cannot be sure that Genghis Khan existed, or even openly acknowledge the possibility (or even plausibility) that he did not, and that just works AGAINST Jesus, because there's a lot less evidence for him. I can make the concession for argument's sake, but the Christian can't do the same.
Fr Casey's brainwashing has been very successful. He can now excuse anything and his views do not change. Being fact free has its advantages. Proof is not his goal. His goal is the evangelization of the big lie - and his number one tool is wish craft. I am not without sympathy. Fr Casey is a creation of the Catholic church and his ability to reason has been seriously impaired. Great video GG, keep them coming,...
He kinda gives away the flaw in his argument against the problem of suffering with the examples he gives of worthwhile suffering. He only gives examples of "suffering" which are generally not considered traumatizing, and which are usually undertaken willingly. Now would his example work as well if he talked about being physically dragged to the gym and prevented from leaving, or about being forced to give birth to a child you never wanted to have? Would a diet be worthwhile if you had no choice in the matter? No, it wouldn't. If his answer were a valid objection to the problem of evil, then it should work just as well with examples of unwilling and/or significant suffering. The examples the gives simply do not accurately represent the reality of suffering. It's a heavy sampling bias with no concern for what factors actually make those examples worthwhile and with no attempt to examine whether those factors are present in all examples of suffering. And it's undue extrapolation of a statement which can be true about some specific examples of suffering to all suffering, even though this extrapolation is not justified in any way by Casey. "Some people's suffering leads to worthwhile results so all suffering must bring worthwhile results in the end." => "Some people survive getting stabbed so all people who get stabbed must survive in the end." There is no solution to the problem of suffering. It's a done deal. To argue against it is to deny at least one of the tri-omni God's traits. And even still, any weaker kind of god would have to be far more effective at combatting and preventing evil than this in order to really qualify as a god worth following. God as defined can do anything he wants without any side effects, because he can just poof away the side effects, or make some new mechanism to achieve the result without the side effect. So there's literally no goal god could endeavor towards that requires suffering except for the pursuit of suffering itself. And that would be an evil act by all useful definitions of evil (I'm watching you, you "objective" "morality" proponents).
(We typically call involuntary diets "starvation" or "malnutrition" or "severe allergies". And yet voluntary diets can be quite healthy depending on the specifics of how they are undertaken and when. Doesn't make starving to death good for you though.)
what is he sitting on? and - knotted rope? what is it with god and apparel? criticising drag queens while wearing frocks. every religion needs it's headgear, the gods all have their own flag it seems in the shape of a hat, but god isn't bothered by shoes.
@@HarryNicNicholas 😮😮 …😀🤣 I have to admit I had to look up shibari up (I always just called that …SM. (Oh, I also used to call Social Media “SM” in posts. Then someone asked me “what’s SM” 🤣🤣🤣🤣. I STILL suck at “S Media”, but, my ego can handle it. 😉
@11:00 By his own standard, Father Casey isn't a True Christian either, lol. In a video he did 3 or 4 years ago about confession... he admitted that he will never tell nor direct a person to tell others about abusing their kids. Furthermore, he directs people to look _only_ at the good Christians do... and he has done _none_ of that. Worse, he doesn't _want_ to be judged by how certain _Popes_ (like the previous one, iirc) covered up systemic abuse of children. His job is "to bring people closer to god", he really doesn't care how he does that. If he needs to lie to do so. Though, he mostly uses fallacies and contradicts himself. He has never taken the time to _really_ study why he believes in his god. Many atheists have done that. They challenged themselves to demonstrate what they believe is true, is actually true. I would _love_ to see someone interview Friar Tuck, and point out, to his face, the hypocrisy of his own church... the contradictions of his own positions. Starting with "You're visiting Canada and a priest during confession, confesses to recently harming a child [which activates the Mandatory Reporting Laws regarding suspected child abuse], what would you do?" Followed up with... "Why wouldn't you report him to anyone?" Then... "Isn't it aiding and abetting in child abuse to not report it?" Followed by "you recently said those who do bad things, like covering abuse of children aren't Christian, are you a Christian?" Finished with "Why is it that your god requires you to protect abusers, by ordering you to protect the sanctity of confession, instead of doing what Jesus would do and protect the children from those who would abuse them?" *Shrugs* It would be interesting to see what anatomically impossible shape his spine is by the time he answered the final question... but he would never permit himself to be in such a position to begin with. He doesn't even acknowledge that one of the people who made videos with is currently going through trial for harming children (iirc). :/
Father Casey's point about gravity doesn't really do it for me. If proof was all it took to make people believe, why do we have flat-earthers? Some flat earthers have _interesting_ opinions about gravity. And surely if god did exist, he'd exist regardless of people believing in him or not... just like gravity does. It's a bizarre point to make. The way he says it, it's almost like he thinks if enough people believe, they can just wish a god into existence.
"There is something critically important about having to trust and take a leap of faith." Yes, he is right. It's important to Christianity that we can fail to believe the simple prerequisite that God exists - otherwise, it would be very obvious that Christianity is false when people inevitably fail to do what should guaranteed. So it must be a failing of ours when the all-powerful God of the universe can't do something he has every reason to make happen; the alternative is their beliefs fall apart. Only such a flimsy system would tell you that leaps of faith are virtuous and simultaneously that there is a nearly-omnipotent evil adversary who is constantly trying to trick you. "Go on, the only way to walk the path is with eyes closed, but it's on you and you alone if you step off of it by mistake, and there will be Hell to pay." He is right, but he's speaking the quiet (and stupid, and evil) part out loud by saying it.
How does something outside of time can "do" anything within time. Really how do verbs work at all to something outside of time? Outside of time just doesn't work for me. If you know everything, you know the consequences and results of everything, so how do you think anything or come up with anything new? Omi-anything just doesn't work for me. It seems like some apologists have figures this out, though and are moving from "Omni" to "maximally." But then it's quite clear that they are just making things up. ...weird
In general, how does God actually "do" anything? It's not enough to say "he's all-powerful," that still entails having some form of power that can be described and explained. It's not enough to say he "speaks" or "wills" things to happen and they do, because I can speak and will and nothing just happens when I do that, so there's some additional mechanism that actualizes God's desires. What is it? If he's immaterial and somehow outside spacetime, how does he interact with material objects in spacetime? There's gotta be some nexus where the immaterial and atemporal divine interfaces with the material and temporal universe. Where is it, how does the theist know, and what's the evidence of it?
Fr. Casey is bending over backwards to make it sound like it's totally unreasonable to expect God to show up in person and spend time with us, just because he supposedly loves us enough to die for us so that we could be together forever. That's an even harder sell given that Fr. Casey also expects us to believe that God _did_ show up and spend a relatively brief amount of time with his "beloved" disciples before ascending into heaven and abandoning them to centuries of church division, heresies, and corruption. Far simpler to just acknowledge that God does not show up because the Gospel is a myth.
Why is faith required? What's the point of believing things you have no proof of? does religion not work if you don't believe a bunch of stuff without evidence? That's just weird.
There was a time, not that long ago, when I would watch Fr.Casey. And be swayed by his arguments. Oh how times have changed.
I think "father Casey" deserves a big round of applause for wearing that ridiculous frock and staying in character with a straight face. I sure couldn't do it.
Delusional pretentious thinking will cause you to dress like that.
Casey's suggestion that going to the gym or on a diet is 'suffering" nails him as one (or more) of three things:
1) living an Incredibly sheltered life
2) deliberately deceptive
3) a dim tool
Father Casey nailed some more. 4, 5, and 6: a combination of any two of these things. My choice, 7: all three. Also, "nails him" is a nice touch.
“1, 2, or 3?”
Yes.
@@heiyuall poor fella, he really is dim (n 1 n 2). ✌️🫶😶🌫️
@@ziploc2000 but he’s wearing a burlap sack with a rope for a belt! He must be acquainted with suffering, right?!
All of the above. especially 2) but not exclusively so.
“The road to atheism is paved with bibles that were read.”
Oh hey, it's father "the little girls were enemy combatants anyway" Casey.
Hey, you ain't seen the little girls in my hood. 🫣
@@AtheismActually I don't think there's anything a little girl could do to make me see them that way. Now cops on the other hand...
@@KynaTiona I don't know, I've babysat my family members before.
@@lnsflare1 It's like, I _want_ to laugh, but there are seriously people who think like this. I saw footage of a five year-old sobbing after being pepper sprayed by cops. While Trump was president, we were literally putting children in cages at the border. And there's no shortage of children among the many victims of Israel's genocide in Palestine. People can look at a crying child and instead of seeing something vulnerable and precious, see a monster that needs to be subdued. I myself am a humanist, but after knowing this, I can see why other people aren't.
@@KynaTiona or catholic priests... nobody knows if or when they'll get out the crusade manual again... ;) And they are waging a war against the bodily autonomy of minors
Good video. I've got nothing to add, so this one's for the algorithm (which might make us suffer bad recommendations, but at least never claims that they're character building).
Your points are well-put and thoughtful. Thank you for your videos! You'd be a wonderful person to have a chat with.
Brilliant as always. Thanks GG.
Poor Obi Wan. He’s had so many response videos made to his stuff.
Shows your brilliance as always, Godless Granny. Cheers🥂.
Thank you kindly
@@GodlessGrannyYou are just showing how much toxic atheism is, always obsessed and on the edge of the war of belief so of religions... Just because you have nothing to offer us and neither to yourself, just like your sick atheism.
We have multiple attestations of the Batman.
Your answers to the questions in the video were excellent! Right on, Granny!
'Don't judge my bad behavior, only my good behavior '
Makes it easy, nothing to see there, move on.
Ah, Casey-lad. My favourite piblit. A piblit is 100 lbs of shit stuffed into a 50 lb bag tied in the middle. Cute li'l bugger tho'. Bet he gets all the altar boys. . .
In all fairness, with how fast the rain would have had to have been coming down during the flood myths, everyone, including those who were sheltering in a big wooden box, would probably have been instantly disintegrated long before they could drown.
Some of the water was coming up, according to some of them, so that would no doubt have been bloody hot, too.
When I was thirteen, I was to ask a question that got me excommunicated. When my father died, my mother had to get special permission for me to attend his services. This from the religion of love and caring. (what would be here would have to be all kinds of symbols.) I had a friend, one of my best friends when in the seventh grade he took his life. Left a note that he could no linger trust the clergy at the church (same on that kicked me out) because the sexual acts were unnatural and against god. Said the note. He was an alter boy. This destroyed his family. The offender was shuffled off to another location. The church pushed it under the rug and called My Friend a week person, for he could not understand Grand Old Deceptions ways. It will be trillions of years past the end of our star Sol before I will begin to believe the 'Hog Wash' of these liars. I do believe that without the wholly fable book this drab clad fallower of an Iron Age Cult of Death could not make a decent choice of his own. I also believe that without that fable book, they could not prove the 'facts in the book.'
I believe I have stood upon the soap box long enough.
Peace
GG's burns are low key, I love it 😆😂
Excellent title.
Maybe better: "Father" Casey IS bats.
Ha!
I love the juxtaposition of Friar Tuck filming on an iPhone, but still with the arguments of the 16th Century.
Glad you covered his nonsense!
💖
If God exists, the dude could stand to spare an occasional moment to point a finger at us and say, "Don't make me come down there, you little shits!"
If Jesus lives, maybe he could do convention appearances or something more often.
I think I saw Father Casey's outfit at Spirit Halloween! It was labelled "aspiring diddler" 🤔
It really does look like a cheap costume doesn't it?
@@disgrunty to be fair, it's a great choice! a Catholic priest is one of the most frightening monsters in existence
@@aosidh Years ago I taught someone and we had a discussion about phobias.
He said that he was fine with spiders, claustrophobic spaces, heights, etc. No, what he said he was scared of was priests.
I asked him why and he pointed out their proclivity for young children. I pointed out that he was 17,, but, he said, the fear still persisted.
Creepy buggers who should be banned from being near children.
The mighty Casey is addicted to striking out, even when it comes to softball.
I wish you and fr Casey were one on one! To me, you make so much sense, and he confidently speaks, but doesn’t back anything up
They try every "mental backflip" in order to avoid answering the only question that really counts: "can you prove there is a god?"
I'm late to the party (again) but very glad to have seen your video. Keep up the great work!
I like learning about Bible contradictions. Thanks!
Thank you!
It doesn't take much to be better than the biblical gods.
You don't even have to do anything for that.
Do I doubt Genghis khans existence? I haven’t really thought about it, because nobody is passing laws based on Genghis or asking me to give money to them for Genghis or persecuting minorities and abusing their own families for Genghis so I’m not interested enough to take a position on his historicity.
If a certain organization was doing those things, I might be more vocal about how believable its justifications are.
If Genghis Khan turned out to be a myth, I'd be like "Huh, that's weird," and continue on with my day absolutely unaffected. The "Well if you doubt the historicity of THIS Bible thing, you have to doubt the historicity of this OTHER thing!" is not the W that apologists think it is. Yeah, maybe it's not true that the past happened exactly the way historical documents claim. So what?
The very fact that fr Casey tried to put Temujin in the same historical boat as Jesus just shows either how ignorant he is, or how dishonest he is (or maybe both).
i love your channel
13:31 I am 100% sure that Casey has not been keeping up to date on the insane amount and quality of artistic works that are being made today, at a rate that is many times higher than at any other time in human history. And considering that he's using the Bible as his standard, I'm also confident that the social metrics he's mentioned are also far beyond any previous time in human history, at least in parts of the modern era.
I say this with complete sincerity, I love the "hello internets" at the beginning. It's easy to roast him for being way behind, but the fact that it's netspeak from the LiveJournal era is actually part of the charm for me.
@@DC_Prox LiveJournal... wow, that takes me back! I didn't switch over to FB for the longest time because I was so attached to that format.
Yes, Casey, murder is wrong. It's in the definition.
But if God tells you to do the act, that's cool, right?
In the church that I grew up in, nobody cared about animal suffering because animals did not have souls, and therefore did not need or deserve compassion from humans. That was back in the 70s. Things seemed to have changed now, I think.
For the better, then.
Compassion isn't some kind of light switch that you can turn on and off according to some authoritarian doctrine which you must obey.
Sounds like those in that church were the soulless ones who didn't deserve compassion.
My father was sent to a dreadful prison for political prisoners at the age of 15 by a Catholic priest for refusing to kneel before him. At that time, his country was under the control of a fascist regime, and the Catholic Church was complicit in that regime.
"Christianity is unique in its theology of the Trinity and Incarnation-"
Hinduism: "Are you *SURE* about that?"
17:00 Casey, I know God is busy, and all, but can't He drop in and say "Hi" every now and then?
As eloquent and brutal as always. 👍
Jesus, the SUN, has many names. As the sun falls into the underworld (southern hemisphere) he is swallowed buy a giant fish. That fish (Cetus constellation) has room for many suns. As Jason and the Argonauts he had lots of adventures.
@@harveywabbit9541 Totally irrelevant!
@@elricthebald
One name for the underworld was Tehom, the primordial sea of stars. This is the six nights in Genesis one.
I have a major beef with his claim that if people do bad things, then they weren't a REAL follower of Christ. According to his own religion, ALL have sinned and fallen short. I could phrase it more secularly and agree that everyone has done bad things from time to time. Sure, some of us do worse things than others, but if we disqualify people from Christianity based on the fact that they did bad things, then by Casey's own logic there is no such thing as a Christian. Somehow I doubt that is what he meant to say, though!
It was just a Iame attemtp at the old 'no true scottman'. He has already been called out for that, so he is trying his best (and failing) in not using it so blantantly.
Debatably, there actually AREN'T any true Christians; or at least, the case can be made. But that's a silly semantic game and I'm better than that. Usually.
👏😊
Yay Granny. Great Video.
Thanks! 😄
Even though it is interesting that Casey proclaims the controversial idea, that Non-Christians can go to heaven, he specifically excludes us Atheists. I was surprised you didn't address that.
@@christianhohenstein1422 I didn’t catch that, but, it’s a very good point. (I’m pretty sure we’re destined for 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥😈😈😈)
I’m not looking for a god, But if heaven is like chilling on a summer night watching fireflies then I guess that is what I’ve always been looking for. But Casey says my version of an ideal eternity doesn’t count because his ideal eternity can beat mine up unless I give Casey my lunch money.
@@DPaisleyDaisy-pr5wz a couple of years ago i got a job as a chauffeur to a catholic multi millionaire driving his £450,000 rolls royce phantom (a horrid car to drive) and in the evening of my first day at work, relaxing over a glass of champagne and talking with his house guests, an angolan minister and my bosses second in command, when i told them i was atheist he said that as an atheist but not particularly evil, i would likely spend eternity in limbo.
my job was to pick him up from church every morning to go to work, i have no idea what he would pray for with his four houses, his casino business and five cars, but what i did find amusing was that limbo was torn down a few weeks later, presumably to make room for a casino.
he is gay too, which for a catholic can't be easy. i suppose. religious people just do whatever they feel like and still expect god to like them.
@@soyevquirsefron990 i actually think that hell is going to be the place where dreams come true, heaven sounds like an eternity of sucking god's toes, i think satan has been trying to warn us. i mean why would satan want to torment sinners? he hates christians, not me. hell would be a place run by god to punish people, why satan would recruit then drive you away beats me, like i say he'd double cross god, not his followers.
I guess he likes the thought of people seeking out God in any way we could. I can see a bit where he is coming from. Even all those he agrees with as much as possible, can't have everything right about their religion.
Why those that fail to find him should be penalized, sounds like a personal and religious bias.
Especially as he admitted that the only way to find God is through faith.
EXCELLENT point about heathens in the leadership! If we can identify them as not true Christians, why does the church allow them to preach to congregations?
Another possibility: What if there is a god , and she's judging you based on whether we reject being manipulated by contradictory holy books? If god never shows up, you never know...
You are just showing how much toxic atheism is, always obsessed and on the edge of the war of belief so of religions... Just because you have nothing to offer us and neither to yourself, just like your sick atheism..
It would seem that the stronger the claim a Christian denomination makes for its moral authority and its interpretation of the Bible in regard to morality, the more likely it is to have protected offenders who target children. (Baptist, Catholic, Mormon, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.) And the retort is always the "bad apples" or the "tares" who grow amid the wheat.
"Jesus ere long will weed the crop, /And pluck the tares in anger up." --Though in the Outward Church Below, John Newton
My question is, "If the church holds a superior morality, why can't it be held to it?"
The problem is the stronger they have to sweep all their immoral actors under the rug instead of outing them, thereby moving them to where they can continue to do wrong.
He didn't seem to answer any of the questions.
Catholics would find the whole "stealing from God" concept silly. They would say that people doing good even without a belief in God were probably being influenced by their guardian angels or had become tools for a divine purpose. It's not God forcing behavior, just giving opportunity. But, there's a giant scale up on Heaven, so good and bad are getting weighed...at least that's how I was raised. Empathy and brotherhood are big deals.
I think they would also go down the 'anonymous Christian' route - doing good and being good really means you are a Christian but you just don't know it...
@PDG1956 quite likely.
@Pb_Pencil I've always been curious about the guardian angel thing. That is actual doctrine? I kinda assumed it was just part of the cultural lexicon like the different levels of Hell. Interesting... Catholics have always fascinated me, most likely because we have next to no exposure to them in the Southern US.
@AllMyTishs I don't know that there is a specific doctrine that says what angels can and cannot do, but there are definitely prayers and specific references to angels. The named angels are called saints (St. Michael, St. Raphael, etc.), and you can request their intercession from evil or danger. You are taught that in Catholic school. As for cultural, there is that, too. I would describe it like this: my mother believes that close calls are often prevented by angels. Think of them like body guards (soul guards?) But, they are very real to Catholics. And, you can't become an angel . They are separate beings from humans. You don't die and become an angel. If you see them, they can either look like beings with wings or will appear as plain people but feel special.
@@PDG1956that's a very shaky and refuteable stance
This was a nice video to listen to and watch a little as I was doing my (granny) knitting. Not that this has to do with much of anything, although the goal of this knitting is to keep another atheist's feet warm in the coming months, consider it a sacrifice to the algorithm gods. :)
15:22 _What about love?_
*_Chemically no different than eating large quantities of chocolate_* 🍫
Love, in biblespeak, is primarily the male point thing.
Another excellent response, GG. Have you decided that you will no longer provide links to the videos to which you are responding?
Did I miss the link? I did that one a week in advance as I was out of the country when I released it. But no, the links should have been there.
@@GodlessGranny Thanks for the reply. I couldn't see the link when I looked at the time. I haven't been back to check. It's not a problem, especially in the case of this monk who is not difficult to trace!
I thought you did not want to cover this guy anymore? I am a bad influence tee hee!
My memory is terrible. Did I say that?
@@GodlessGranny 🫢 I’m glad u were “corrupted “ . I grew up in catholic schools. (I was really shocked at age 7 when I was expected to believe in transubstantiation). When Sister defined it, I immediately said to myself, “Oh, symbolism “. The next words out of her mouth…”not a SYMBOL of, but HIS ACTUAL BODY n BLOOD “😱. I hid it from my parents til college. Catholics often overlook “leaving the faith “. 😄
I'm your God 😢 now taste my power mindless sheep
Answering the title cold: Well... That's what you get when you don't do the bell ringing right... You end up flying into the belfry and end up in a compromising position with a member of the order of st Chiroptera...
The main driver of the moral feeling x is bad and y is good is a narcissistic desire for something to justify self-worth.
@30:12, where did you get that meme from?
26:00 ah. back peddling. nice.
😊
I reject human sacrifice
So does the tenakh. Christianity is completely incommensurate with its parent religion.
We have conflicting evidence that can not be reconciled in order to put Jesus in a coherent timeline.
Hey whats the link to that graph you showed? Its great data
ronj etc: It is very interesting, isn't it? They manage to project forward a century or so and, if I have understood correctly - not at all a certainty! - predict that Christianity will be on the increase in terms of % of population. I can't help thinking that the authors may be hopeful Christians, not least because they used the term "AD".
ronj etc: And ... I was right. A few seconds on the big Internet search engine and I discover that both authors are Christians. The Rev Dr Barrett died in 2011.
This one? www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=H3xJoJYD&id=DE796A1CF1CCE04B005DA9DD11B0D6F0AA6FC08B&thid=OIP.H3xJoJYDR4i3NcYpJf_K-QHaGu&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginals%2Ff0%2Fe1%2F82%2Ff0e182cc93c0e5976afeb16d3e33bae2.jpg&cdnurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FR.1f7c49a096034788b735c62925ffcaf9%3Frik%3Di8BvqvDWsBHdqQ%26pid%3DImgRaw%26r%3D0&exph=510&expw=561&q=world+and+christian+population+33ad+to+present&simid=608014636649553658&FORM=IRPRST&ck=72A14DF5391B2D859DB4D545FF4B3703&selectedIndex=49&itb=0&cw=1267&ch=712&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0
Doubters will always find ways to doubt..God knows everything. He could tailor proof for every person on the planet.
I'm slightly confused as to which direction you're coming from, as the post is ambiguous.
@@pineapplepenumbraYes, I can see why my post is ambiguous.
In the video, the monk says that doubters will always find a reason to doubt. I am suggesting that if god knows all then he could provide individual proof for each of us.
I have never believed, not even as a child, but I’m always ready to give god some suggestions.
@@lieslceleste3395 Thank you for clarifying, and yes, I agree.
I’m sure the genesis creation stories are just typos…😂😂😂😂
Doubters will always find reasons to doubt.
So God’s answer to that is to just not bother?
16:39 Another very important point to make is that the first and third of Fr. Casey's comments are contradictory. His third point is that God appearing would remove the need for faith, but his first point is that according to scripture, God has indeed appeared before. Was faith not as important back then for some reason? And to piggyback off of your point about not necessarily believing even if God did decide to reveal himself: Satan has full knowledge of God and his capabilities, and yet still apparently decided to rebel and not follow him, which seems to imply that humans would be capable of making the same choice even if God gave us all the knowledge we could ever want about him.
I have no idea why faith means anything. People had faith in Anubis and Zeus. How is their faith different?
My question, how on earth do professional proper little liars for the baby jesus keep on getting away with it?
Godless Granny is a cutie and had better watch out for the Nephilim, who want to mate with her.
Nephilim (clouds) is plural for Nephele (cloud), The sons of Nephilim = RAIN. They are often accompanied by the fiery flying serpent (lightning).
Casey clearly demonstrates the fact that while deism is intellectually defensible, theism sure as hell isn’t.
Oh gods… just got to the ‘suffering isn’t inherently bad’ part… crikey he’s so dumb. Or dishonest. What the crap does going to the gym have to do with the suffering of Jews under the holocaust, or children raped by men who believe HIV can be cured through intercourse with a virgin? Do those have ‘higher purpose’? And even if accepted that they did, would that justify it? Bollocks.
Zeus aka god, never was
18:00 it is odd that god has to obey _some_ rules but not others. one of the first things that compacted being atheist was the thought"what does god need a boat for, and why does he need people to make it for him?" instead of a flood god could have killed all the sinners by any number of means, machine guns, nuclear bombs, heart failure, but no, he has to use the preferred method of mythology, a flood. clearly god isn't allowed to spread anthrax or covid. the ONLY conclusion a sensible person can come to is that the story is DRIVEL.
he could put noah in his pocket, wipe the slate, start over with a fence around the tree, and pop noah back in the garden with adam and eve 2.0
Similarly, he could've blessed Israel with advanced technology, or removed the need for them to own slaves by having angels do their agricultural work. Heck, this would even work better with the scheme proposed in the Old Testament: Give the Israelites magical God Guns that let them win any battles when they have Yahweh's favor, but if he is displeased with them he just remotely disables all their weapons so that their enemies can defeat them and recalls the angelic field-tenders so the Israelites starve. As soon as they repent, he puts everything back in place. Nobody would doubt his power then!
casey is a Stick in Carrot’s clothing.
Jesus does exist, he was my server at Starbucks last week. At least that's what his name tag said.
He's talking because he's hiding in a monastery and so doesn't have to face victims. Most of this stuff isn't ever going to be his problem even if he left the monastery. At least as far as he knows...
He's not. He is a fransiscan, which are friars that are active in daily life, often ministering to the homeless and poor. The fact he wears a habit does not mean he is a shut in monk in a monastery m
Obviously both infallible decrees are correct. It’s too bad they directly contradict each other. 🤷♂️
He used labor pain which God forced on humanity as "God sometimes not intervening"?
18:30 er, what's the virtue with faith? you need faith cos there is no evidence, you are required to believe given what little you have, but is faith prerequisite or a product? you have faith because there is no evidence, but if you had evidence, why would not having faith be a problem?
Were the apostles "forced to believe" by allegedly witnessing Jesus' alleged miracles, including him allegedly appearing embodied in his magic indestructible teleporting resurrected body to 500 people at once? If not, how are we "forced to believe" by having him show up in some collectively observable way for whoever asks? Given that he is God, it's not like it costs him anything in time, energy, or even attention, right?
"The living and true god"? Kinda begging the question ain't ya Mr. Sandals & Brown Dress?
We also have the dead and lying god.
Oh look, it’s the “I love homosexuals so much I want them not to be happy guy.” 🤭 regarding his comment about suffering. I have rheumatoid arthritis. The suffering I have endured all my life has not once, ever, brought me anything positive, good, or redeeming. It’s been hell. Actually, that’s not true…. It made it very clear to me that the mercy of god is non existent.
At 18:05 or so, the term "impractical" refers to the management of scarce resources. I go only once per week to the store because the impractical alternative of going once per day is expensive in time, effort, and transportation costs. But nothing is impractical for God. Showing himself or sending a son to die and resurrect are both finite expenses from an infinite pool of wealth. Doing one or the other once per millennium, or once per second, are both, for practical purposes, totally free.
If God exists, he is absolutely and negligently ignorant of economics.
He says there were people during the time of Jesus who didn't believe in him after seeing his miracles.BUT there were many people that did believe in him because of the miracles. Jesus even told the Jewish leaders, that if they didn't believe his words, they should believe in him because of the miracles he did. I guess Jesus didn't know the scripture in Deuteronomy where god warned the people to not believe a prophet even if he did "wonders." You can bet that the Pharisees knew that scripture, though.
Plus, we're explicitly told why some people might not believe even after seeing miraculous events: They believed in magic, in sorcery, and in trafficking with demons. Celsus argued that Jesus could've faked his miracles with Egyptian magic, and Origen's response to this was not "Egyptian magic isn't real you dope," he actually acknowledged that Egyptians could do magic and just said Jesus couldn't have done it that way.
Jesus's defense when accused of using the power of Satan to fake his miracles and mislead people is incredibly weak: He says Satan wouldn't work against his own purposes. Ummmm, wouldn't he though? Like, if I were Satan, and I were trying to fake a Messiah to mislead people, I would absolutely have him cast out some of my minions and heal people of afflictions I put on them, specifically so that people would think my fake Messiah was genuine! That weak response is exactly what I'd expect a fake Satanic Messiah to say, in fact...
What I find odd is that his followers saw these miracles over the course of 3 years and, we are told, that they believed him to be divine so… why did they abandon him when he was arrested? They abandoned god?
If his ministry did not impress them, why should it impress me?
“do you have to be religious to be a good person”.
Obi-Wan answers '
No, not at all'.
Then why the rest of the video?
Okay, I get it,
Comedy.
The all knowing, all powerful, God of the Bible, would know exactly what would convince me of his existence. He has yet to show me. If he did, I would explain how much better of a job I would have done.
Love how he answers the question about knowledge of the world.
Firstly, it is not condescending to acknowledge that they didn't understand the composition and formation of the stars or germ theory, for example.
There were no telescopes or microscopes in 500CE.
We can still give them credit for their accomplishments.
Secondly, Casey responds with a really dumb "whataboutism" with regard to modern art. Apart from this being a logical fallacy in itself, he does a bait and switch from scientific knowledge of the world to a criticism of modern arts which is based on what? His own conservative judgement?
This is really weak sauce, Casey.
Its an interesting how the fastest response most believers have to atheist is 'you must be mad at god' , so you recognize that, if god, as you've described, exists we should be angry? The god of the old testimate is evil in every way a human understands the concept, an argument could be made a religion drawing ONLY from the words of Jesus might be less evil, but mostly its still a matter of degrees....
Yeah, it was great in the past when the church ruled everything if you think a 50% chance of surviving childhood is great.
"Humble sacrifice"? He must not be talking about John's gospel.
I keep hearing this "Glorious Sacrifice" term when it comes to the wonder of this god. What sacrifice? What glory. The story as told by men and interpreted by the same makes no sense. Two people I do not even know did something that this god knew they'd do and punished them for doing it and, later, this same god created himself as a person so that that person could sacrifice itself to itself for those of us that don't even know the two original "sinners". What??? Glory in the trinity?? Madness is what it is!
Edit: As for the sacrifice, In the same story as told by men and interpreted by the same, did this person not then resurrect? That's no different to me sacrificing my salary by giving it to a friend that needs it, only for them to give me that entire amount back a day or so later. What did I sacrifice? What did this so called god sacrifice? If this god is all powerful, all knowing and timeless then it would appear that, if it were to be real, the only players on this field that are making sacrifices are us and all because someone ate an apple that their creator knew they would do.
Why would God even need glory? He's perfect in every way. He's completely content with himself and utterly secure from any harm. Saying bad things about him can't even make him feel bad. If every other thinking being despised him, it wouldn't harsh his mellow in the slightest. Why care if anyone respects you? Their opinions don't matter. If people want to hype him up, cool, whatever, but he wouldn't DEMAND it. Nothing about this God is supposed to change in any way regardless of how much "glory" he's given.
It's true , as long as you know god is wheat and jesus is bread .... anthropomorphized .....
Christian ideas affect everyone in the western world, atheist or not. An atheist in a non western country would likely have a very different moral framework.
Granma, how you doing? Right off the bat (1:48 to be precise) I knew you had an issue, not with Christianity but with Protestantism. Protestants and Catholics have some differences on some doctrines and dogmas. Remember not to drink too much coffee and don't leave the stove on. 😊
No, I most definitely have as much an issue with any form of religion that says an all powerful being will send you to his torture chamber if you don't think the right thoughts about him. Hell (pun intended), I have a problem with any being that calls itself "loving" that would even consider torture to be "justice!"
I find it revealing whenever apologists point to other historical figures, in this case, Temujin "Genghis" Khan.
It doesn't say what they seem to think it says when they compare the existence of Temujin, Augustus Caesar, or Alexander the Mildly Competent to the existence of Yeshua Christos.
Because we HAVE archaeological evidence, we even have genetic evidence of Temujin. All it says is that apologists are too lazy to even google "Evidence for [Person]".
If they're so lazy as to not look up even basic information on other historical figures, why should anyone think they weren't equally lazy looking up things about Christ?
[Insert "Low Bar Bill" clip here.]
Plus, suppose tomorrow it's proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that Temujin, Augustus, and Alexander didn't exist. Okay, that's neat. Weird that a historical conspiracy managed to form three times around such a major figure, but ultimately irrelevant trivia. We live in a world that continues to exist regardless of how it actually got here.
If Jesus never existed, Christianity's hosed.
I can freely concede that I cannot be sure that Genghis Khan existed, or even openly acknowledge the possibility (or even plausibility) that he did not, and that just works AGAINST Jesus, because there's a lot less evidence for him. I can make the concession for argument's sake, but the Christian can't do the same.
Fr Casey's brainwashing has been very successful. He can now excuse anything and his views do not change. Being fact free has its advantages. Proof is not his goal. His goal is the evangelization of the big lie - and his number one tool is wish craft. I am not without sympathy. Fr Casey is a creation of the Catholic church and his ability to reason has been seriously impaired. Great video GG, keep them coming,...
He kinda gives away the flaw in his argument against the problem of suffering with the examples he gives of worthwhile suffering. He only gives examples of "suffering" which are generally not considered traumatizing, and which are usually undertaken willingly. Now would his example work as well if he talked about being physically dragged to the gym and prevented from leaving, or about being forced to give birth to a child you never wanted to have? Would a diet be worthwhile if you had no choice in the matter? No, it wouldn't. If his answer were a valid objection to the problem of evil, then it should work just as well with examples of unwilling and/or significant suffering. The examples the gives simply do not accurately represent the reality of suffering. It's a heavy sampling bias with no concern for what factors actually make those examples worthwhile and with no attempt to examine whether those factors are present in all examples of suffering. And it's undue extrapolation of a statement which can be true about some specific examples of suffering to all suffering, even though this extrapolation is not justified in any way by Casey.
"Some people's suffering leads to worthwhile results so all suffering must bring worthwhile results in the end." => "Some people survive getting stabbed so all people who get stabbed must survive in the end."
There is no solution to the problem of suffering. It's a done deal. To argue against it is to deny at least one of the tri-omni God's traits. And even still, any weaker kind of god would have to be far more effective at combatting and preventing evil than this in order to really qualify as a god worth following. God as defined can do anything he wants without any side effects, because he can just poof away the side effects, or make some new mechanism to achieve the result without the side effect. So there's literally no goal god could endeavor towards that requires suffering except for the pursuit of suffering itself. And that would be an evil act by all useful definitions of evil (I'm watching you, you "objective" "morality" proponents).
(We typically call involuntary diets "starvation" or "malnutrition" or "severe allergies". And yet voluntary diets can be quite healthy depending on the specifics of how they are undertaken and when. Doesn't make starving to death good for you though.)
what is he sitting on? and - knotted rope?
what is it with god and apparel? criticising drag queens while wearing frocks. every religion needs it's headgear, the gods all have their own flag it seems in the shape of a hat, but god isn't bothered by shoes.
For real tho, what's with the Ellie May belt? 😅
😂😂😂 My family’s Catholic Church still do nun habits…but, I don’t know about rope that looks like it was just tying up a goat 🐐. ✌️🫶😶🌫️
@@DPaisleyDaisy-pr5wz maybe i have a perverse mind but the thought "throttling" popped into my head. (not to mention shibari).
@@HarryNicNicholas 😮😮 …😀🤣 I have to admit I had to look up shibari up (I always just called that …SM. (Oh, I also used to call Social Media “SM” in posts. Then someone asked me “what’s SM” 🤣🤣🤣🤣. I STILL suck at “S Media”, but, my ego can handle it. 😉
Dear GG - I try hard to watch all your videos but I'm going to have to skip this one, as FC is the embodiment of cringe-worthy unctuousness.
father casey's habit looks cheap, not the wool that i would expect and why does he not have a tonsure. i dont have the faith that he is a priest.
@11:00 By his own standard, Father Casey isn't a True Christian either, lol.
In a video he did 3 or 4 years ago about confession... he admitted that he will never tell nor direct a person to tell others about abusing their kids. Furthermore, he directs people to look _only_ at the good Christians do... and he has done _none_ of that. Worse, he doesn't _want_ to be judged by how certain _Popes_ (like the previous one, iirc) covered up systemic abuse of children.
His job is "to bring people closer to god", he really doesn't care how he does that. If he needs to lie to do so. Though, he mostly uses fallacies and contradicts himself. He has never taken the time to _really_ study why he believes in his god. Many atheists have done that. They challenged themselves to demonstrate what they believe is true, is actually true.
I would _love_ to see someone interview Friar Tuck, and point out, to his face, the hypocrisy of his own church... the contradictions of his own positions. Starting with "You're visiting Canada and a priest during confession, confesses to recently harming a child [which activates the Mandatory Reporting Laws regarding suspected child abuse], what would you do?" Followed up with... "Why wouldn't you report him to anyone?" Then... "Isn't it aiding and abetting in child abuse to not report it?" Followed by "you recently said those who do bad things, like covering abuse of children aren't Christian, are you a Christian?" Finished with "Why is it that your god requires you to protect abusers, by ordering you to protect the sanctity of confession, instead of doing what Jesus would do and protect the children from those who would abuse them?"
*Shrugs* It would be interesting to see what anatomically impossible shape his spine is by the time he answered the final question... but he would never permit himself to be in such a position to begin with. He doesn't even acknowledge that one of the people who made videos with is currently going through trial for harming children (iirc). :/
Father Casey's point about gravity doesn't really do it for me. If proof was all it took to make people believe, why do we have flat-earthers? Some flat earthers have _interesting_ opinions about gravity. And surely if god did exist, he'd exist regardless of people believing in him or not... just like gravity does. It's a bizarre point to make.
The way he says it, it's almost like he thinks if enough people believe, they can just wish a god into existence.
I have said it many times and I will say again. I'm angry at myself for believing religious nonsense . Just wanted to comment for the algorithm
"There is something critically important about having to trust and take a leap of faith."
Yes, he is right. It's important to Christianity that we can fail to believe the simple prerequisite that God exists - otherwise, it would be very obvious that Christianity is false when people inevitably fail to do what should guaranteed. So it must be a failing of ours when the all-powerful God of the universe can't do something he has every reason to make happen; the alternative is their beliefs fall apart. Only such a flimsy system would tell you that leaps of faith are virtuous and simultaneously that there is a nearly-omnipotent evil adversary who is constantly trying to trick you. "Go on, the only way to walk the path is with eyes closed, but it's on you and you alone if you step off of it by mistake, and there will be Hell to pay."
He is right, but he's speaking the quiet (and stupid, and evil) part out loud by saying it.
How does something outside of time can "do" anything within time. Really how do verbs work at all to something outside of time? Outside of time just doesn't work for me.
If you know everything, you know the consequences and results of everything, so how do you think anything or come up with anything new? Omi-anything just doesn't work for me.
It seems like some apologists have figures this out, though and are moving from "Omni" to "maximally." But then it's quite clear that they are just making things up.
...weird
In general, how does God actually "do" anything? It's not enough to say "he's all-powerful," that still entails having some form of power that can be described and explained. It's not enough to say he "speaks" or "wills" things to happen and they do, because I can speak and will and nothing just happens when I do that, so there's some additional mechanism that actualizes God's desires. What is it?
If he's immaterial and somehow outside spacetime, how does he interact with material objects in spacetime? There's gotta be some nexus where the immaterial and atemporal divine interfaces with the material and temporal universe. Where is it, how does the theist know, and what's the evidence of it?
Fr. Casey is bending over backwards to make it sound like it's totally unreasonable to expect God to show up in person and spend time with us, just because he supposedly loves us enough to die for us so that we could be together forever. That's an even harder sell given that Fr. Casey also expects us to believe that God _did_ show up and spend a relatively brief amount of time with his "beloved" disciples before ascending into heaven and abandoning them to centuries of church division, heresies, and corruption. Far simpler to just acknowledge that God does not show up because the Gospel is a myth.
Why is faith required? What's the point of believing things you have no proof of? does religion not work if you don't believe a bunch of stuff without evidence? That's just weird.
Well said. I also don’t see anyway to differentiate how any faith is any better than any other.