G'day kids! Naughty adults go to gaol, it's more severe that way. Don't blame crazy or sensible religions! The crazy dog knows the way, nature, that's your god. Trees and butterflies, and any of that man's stuff, try a protein bar. Or that girlie stuff, try kindness and honour for your fellow earth and creatures. Conduct your own morals, by not eating meat, dairy or seedless plants, you're soft to and respect a plant. (I have annihilated the fake meat & chickpeas in pasta, this is more ideal).
Why is it okay for people who say they've seen ghosts and dead people get sent to mental hospitals and people like this insane women claim to see JESUS get to roam freely in the streets? America should not be based on GOD!
God is the route of all evil... If you do believe in the god allmighty, the lord and the holy spirit, (All BS BTW!) god is the creator of everything... (How did he make himself? The world will never know) He created the devil, pain, suffering, hell, serial killers, and Mc.Donald's...
I once had an experience that a team of businessmen were building a huge skyscraper-complex in my brain, it was very real to me. Turned out it was just a fever-dream, I was so sick I could've died. I guess maybe if I believed in god, I might've dreamed of god instead of businessmen building stuff in my brain.
this lady dont even know what a star is. and apparently doesn't know what "air" as we know it is, let alone how its made. things we have known for a very long time
im starting to think that they pay complete idiots to call in to make christians look stupid. I am an atheist myself, and many, many christians I meet strike me as quite dumb, but NEVER as bad as all but 2 of the christian callers I have heard here.
@myndzyeful I was in the military for a few years, and during my travels, I did meet some Christians that were honestly as dumb as the callers on this show, it is definitely true
and by the way: god (even if he existed) didnt give us the ability to choose between right and wrong because in the bible adam and eve ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil...
their bunny reminds me of when i was 6 and i asked my sister if easter started cause one day a bunch of bunnies hid some eggs and a farmer made his kids look for them. my sister then yelled at me and said i was stupid. yet no body ever told me about easter. i was just supposed to magically know about the resurrection. i guess original sin made me forget, but eve ate the fruit of knowledge, so i should know everything? 24 years later and i'm still confused. help me understand you god! amen.
@emailtheoldies Ok, nobody listen to emailtheoldies about watching the "Y RELIGION IS BETTER THAN SCIENCE" video. Don't do it to yourself. Oh no....nooooo..... What has been seen can now not be unseen! My eyes!! My brain!!! Have you see the horror movie "The Ring"? Pretend it's like that and you will die in 7 days if you watch it. Save yourself!!! Run away!!!!!!!! It BURNS!!!!!!!
@elibeth121 Ok, well as soon as he pops over to my house and says "Hey I am Jesus, fill up the bath tub and I will walk on water" then we can have a discussion. Until then you can tell me "There is Jesus" until you're blue in the face and I am just going to keep saying "Prove it"
Right now I believe Jesus is about as real to me as Harry Potter - Harry Potter is cooler though.
@elliesmellyjean why dont you ask him to reveal himself to you? But not because you want to see it to believe but through faith, grace and trust. He does reveal himselves for those who ask. But, then again he also knows your heart and will know if you are sincere or not. You are not worth of miracles, nor does he do miracles when an unbeliever asks.
@elibeth121 You lady are deluded. I won't even bother arguing with you because clearly you just don't care about logic. What I will say is FUCK JESUS!
@elibeth121 you've set up an unfalsifiable standard. anyone who sincerecely asks for god to reveal himself,and does not get a response,will simply be thought of as not really sincere. it's called the no true scotsman fallacy.
worse than that,u require faith and trust in order to get a revelation. someone who has faith and trust in god doesn't need a sign,and/or will interpret reality through that perception,and see "signs" in anything..
@elibeth121 finding a house with a cheap mortgage,a fellow believer helping u out in some way,a headache that goes away,reading the bible,or some vague feelings, will all be percieved as "signs from god" to reinforce the belief u already had.this is why believers see mary in a bagel,or the name of allah in the clouds. non-believers won't accept such a standard
I sure hope none of this lady's thoughts get broadcast to space, otherwise if an alien civilization gets wind of the shite people like her spew, they may blow up this planet in a fit of extreme rage.
The caller is an excellent example of someone who has been brainwashed. She was also rude in "talking over" the other person,but eventually Matt had to put his foot down to explain to her there are other viewpoints in the world as well. But I fear no matter what Matt said to her it would fall on deaf ears..this lady is too far gone and duped to believe any different.
Why are you arguing on bible based "facts",its been written by men who were not educated,its no more true than koran or anything else based on myth and superstition,dont forget it wasnt that long ago gods good people were burning witches.Nitpicking bits of the bible is easy meat its so full of contradictions ,fantasy and cruelty you cant fail but the theists will say oh it didnt mean that or ignore that part because we dont like that bit.Science is the way forward not religion its dying out
One thing a lot of people miss is that slavery was different back then. People sold themselves as slaves when they couldn't afford things or were backed into debt. Sometimes even lawyers and doctors of that time sold themselves. It wasn't race dependent - which God is completely against.
Exodus 21:16 also condemns 'man-stealing'; something that happened in Africa.
@KeusFrench you dumb mother fucker. read exodus 21, it details how to keep slaves. and also how to sell your daughter as a maid servant, saying they cant go out at night like the men do..
@phallictractor Unless you haven't realized, I briefly explained the idea of slavery back then, as it was completely different then it is now. Also, a lot of people were servants back then too, which is by technical definition an employable occupation.
And what are you talking about? Exodus 13 clearly maintains the fact that God does not condone slavery and actually helps the people out of it. Maybe you should have read clearly and not made off-base accusations.
@DrPeatore I just reread it. Please notify me where in Exodus 13 it states what you said it does.
And also, you seem to be saying that religion is based off the OT. Well, a lot of what Christianity, (and actually, 99% of it) is based off of the NT, as that is where Christ is the central figure, hence "Christ"-ianity.
@KeusFrench Peter 2:18: "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel."
1 Timothy 2:12, : "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent."
Those are just 2 examples of bad morality in the new testament.
Keep in mind that Jesus himself says that the laws of the Old Testament should still be followed (Matthew 5:18) I could go on, but there is a character limit.
First Peter 2:18 in the NLT says: "You who are slaves must accept the authority of your masters with all respect. Do what they tell you--not only if they are kind and reasonable, but even if they are cruel."
That doesn't condone slavery. It just says "those" who already are slaves, do " ".
As for 1 Timothy 2:12, Paul allows women to speak in 1 Corinthians, though I don't remember the exact verse.
@DrPeatore I've never once denied the idea of some contradictions in the Bible. But that definitely doesn't make the Bible invalid, wrong or any less meaningful. There are tons of literature that have contradictions, as well as scientific theories, philosophical methods, etc.
Contradiction doesn't mean "completely off-scale never look at it again".
@KeusFrench i would agree with most of what you said apart from "There are tons of literature that have contradictions, as well as scientific theories" scientific theory by definition has to change in response to new evidence (unless said evidence is il concieved) and therefore cannot contradict. but do give me an example im interested
@super3slug Well basically for science, I meant that there are plenty of scientists that form theories that are different than/contradictory to those theories of other scientists. That could be on the most minor of sciences or hefty subjects.
But genocide,rape,slavery,torture, smashing children's heads on rocks, oppression of women all in a book supposed to be the ultimate moral code and written by god most definitely makes it invalid. Read thomas paine's age of reason, if you can deal with the truth.
It's scary to think that there are people like this lady out there, but it's even more scary when you realize you personally know people that are just like her.
"God can't be obvious or faith would be gone and free will would compromised"
This makes no sense. In order to have free will to choose something, the choices have to be demonstrated IN REALITY. Having no evidence for something that is a hypothetical choice actually COMPROMISES free will.
If your assertion was correct, we wouldn't be able to freely make choices between Coke and Pepsi because we have evidence of Coke and Pepsi and that compromises our free will to choose between them.
@greyeyed123 ""the choices have to be demonstrated IN REALITY"" they are, you just decide not to see them and dismiss them. The fact is the statistical data supports the existence of God over any theory put together to explain the origin of the universe until this date.
"we have evidence of Coke and Pepsi" If God were obvious, do you think people would be able freely choose, when they know the consequence for not wanting to be with God is eternal suffering?
@dejesusluisx You can't have it both ways. Either the choices are demonstrated in reality, or god is not obvious so we can freely choose while being ignorant of eternal suffering, but NOT BOTH.
Besides, apparently YOU are aware that not choosing your god leads to eternal suffering, right? And you still freely choose your god, right? Or do you have no free will?
There is no statistical data in support of the existence of your god. What you are referring to is an argument from ignorance.
@greyeyed123 ""YOU are aware that not choosing your god leads to eternal suffering, right?"" indeed, but that awareness didn't come until I decided freely to look for God. As you, I was a non-believer, for almost 30 yrs.
@dejesusluisx You were not a nonbeliever like me. I dare you to explain my position.
Now you've changed the argument. Is god obvious or isn't he? You can "freely" believe whatever you wish, and people do, but for there to be a choice IN REALITY, both the options must be obvious. If they are not obvious, you are not making a choice at all.
Do you have free will now that you have freely looked for god, chosen god, and know about both god and hell? If yes, then your argument fails.
@greyeyed123 "but for there to be a choice IN REALITY, both the options must be obvious" No, people make choices about ambiguous situations with partial information all the time, that doesn't mean the choice you make isn't free."Do you have free will now that you have freely looked for god" For all practical purposes, no, when I decided to accept God I renounced my free will and put my life in God's will. Now that I have revelations others don't have, it would be foolish to renounce
@dejesusluisx "that doesn't mean the choice you make isn't free" Yes it does. If you don't know what the choices are, then what you do cannot be a choice. Not only does this apply ambiguous situations, but unknown situations, and also situations purposefully set up to be a trick. If an old woman is called by a con artist who makes her believe she is sending her life savings to help crippled orphans, the choice she is making is to SAVE ORPHANS, not give her money to a con artist.
@greyeyed123 "what you do cannot be a choice" even when you are blindfolded choosing a closed door, you are making a free will choice. It may not be an informed choice, but is a choice. I find difficult to believe you can't grasp that simple concept. "the choice she is making is to SAVE ORPHANS, not give her money to a con artist" she choose to send her money to a stranger, that was a free choice, the reasons she had to has nothing to do with the act itself.
@dejesusluisx A choice is not a choice if you don't know what the choice is, doofus. If you are blind folded and choosing a closed door, you are choosing to reach out and find information. If you find a door and you want to leave, you choose to try to open it. If you feel through and it feels like and escape route, you walk through. If two feet in you fall off a cliff, YOU DID NOT CHOOSE TO FALL OFF A CLIFF, you chose to escape.
How can you not understand the very nature of choice?
@greyeyed123 "you chose to escape" this is where you are confused, you've chosen to open a closed door, the goal you had was to escape, but the choice you made didn't get you the goal you expected, get it? It happens all the time, you chose to change lanes to exit the freeway and instead you hit another car, the goal was not met but you freely chose to change lanes.
@dejesusluisx "you chose to change lanes to exit the freeway and instead you hit another car, the goal was not met but you freely chose to change lanes."
You freely CHOSE TO CHANGE LANS, you didn't freely choose to hit another car. (Hence the term "accident".)
Why? Because you didn't know a car would be there at the time.
Thank you for making my argument for me. You can't make a choice to do a thing if the options are not clear or defined. Doofus.
@greyeyed123 "You freely CHOSE TO CHANGE LANS" That is what I'm talking about, the free will consist of the act not the consequences, that was my point since the beginning, you are so confused that forgot you were defending the premise that free will had to do with the consequences. My point is you freely choose to take a leap of faith with the information you have at hand.
@dejesusluisx I was not defending the free will had to do with the consequences. I'm saying that when you CHOOSE something, you have to know what the options are or it cannot be called a CHOICE.
People don't CHOOSE to get into accidents. Likewise, you cannot say someone cannot choose god if they know clearly that NOT choosing god leads to hell. Even in the myth, Satan knew god existed, and rejected him anyway! Why does Satan get a clear and obvious choice, but humans do not?
@greyeyed123 "you have to know what the options are or it cannot be called a CHOICE" a choice is a decision you take freely regardless you know what you are doing or not, you are confusing the term conscious decision with just decision or choice. "they know clearly that NOT choosing god leads to hell" everyone KNOWS that, some people CHOOSE not to believe the information given, is all a matter of choice.
@dejesusluisx No, a choice is not a "decision you take freely regardless you know what you are doing or not".
All you have to do to test your silly assertion is ask the old lady who was conned out of her life savings if she CHOSE TO GIVE HER LIFE SAVINGS TO A CON MAN. She did not, because that would be idiotic. She chose to give her money to crippled orphans. The fact that she had no clue this was not what she was doing means that IT WASN'T A CHOICE TO GIVE MONEY TO A CON MAN.
@greyeyed123 "if she CHOSE TO GIVE HER LIFE SAVINGS TO A CON MAN" the question is misleading. The question should be if she chose to give her life savings, the answer is yes, it was a free choice regardless the purpose of her choice.
@dejesusluisx "the question is misleading. " No, YOUR question is misleading because a choice is always defined by a reason. If you divorce her choice to give her money from the REASON she gave the money, then you are taking the "choice" out of choice.
If you want to do that, fine. Then you have no idea if you are choosing god, nor does anyone else. Is that really the position you want to take? That god wants to be chosen by people who have no idea what they are choosing?
@greyeyed123 "then you are taking the "choice" out of choice" a choice is translated into an act and the act cannot be undone, so the choice was made regardless, it might have been through a deception, but it was a free choice to give the money
You know God is the creator of the universe, He's an immaterial consciousness that created our own consciousness to His image, He's just, merciful, and compassionate. If God was capable of creating so much beauty on earth, imagine His kingdom
A choice is an act, but an act is not necessarily a choice. Once you figure out the difference, you will figure out how you are wrong.
No, I don't know god is the COTU. How do you know that? (If you want to redefine knowledge to mean "have faith that", or "feel that", or "I can't understand how else it could work so that's what I'm going with", then that's NOT KNOWLEDGE. You said god was not obvious. Knowledge IS OBVIOUS.)
@greyeyed123 "an act is not necessarily a choice" only if is unconscious, is the one acting is an animal, or a child, or is an involuntary reflex; otherwise an act is a choice.
The second part of your post don't make any sense.
@dejesusluisx "only if is unconscious, is the one acting is an animal, or a child, or is an involuntary reflex; otherwise an act is a choice."
What makes those acts not choices? Is it because the beings doing those acts don't know what they are doing? If so, then a choice that results in something that was not foreseen, or COULD NOT BE foreseen, then THAT UNFORESEEN RESULT IS NOT A CHOICE.
@dejesusluisx "The question should be if she chose to give her life savings, the answer is yes, it was a free choice regardless the purpose of her choice."
Another example. If someone takes your keys out of your living room, steals your car, and crashes it, the judge doesn't ask you if you chose to leave your keys in the living room, if you chose to have a lock that didn't stop the person from breaking into your living room, if you chose to have a car that could be stolen.
@greyeyed123 "If someone takes your keys out of your living room" the person making an act if making a choice. I don't see the relevance of your example.
@dejesusluisx "the person making an act if making a choice. I don't see the relevance of your example."
The relevance is that your definition of "choice" as an act that results in anything, even things unforeseen, makes the car owner who left their keys in their living room to be stolen by a thief who broke in and took them and the car...responsible. It was HIS CHOICE to buy a car that could be stolen, leave keys in his living room that was locked unsecurely.
@greyeyed123 ""makes the car owner who left their keys in their living room to be stolen by a thief who broke in and took them and the car...responsible"" of course, leaving the keys in your car makes your responsible of the choice of leaving the keys in your car; the thief responsible for steeling the car, get it? There are two choices in your example, two responsibilities but just one guilty. It doesn't matter the consequences, a choice is always made when you act.
@dejesusluisx "For all practical purposes, no, when I decided to accept God I renounced my free will and put my life in God's will."
So what is the purpose of ever having free will at all the god wants everyone to get to the point where they have none? Why didn't he just START with no free will? (And what good is the choice you continuously make in favor of god if you have no free will? It is pointless without free will to choose otherwise.)
@greyeyed123 "all the god wants everyone to get to the point where they have none?" I was not commanded to, I decided to give my free will, as free will is the most precious gift God gave us and was the most valuable thing I could give to Him once I discovered He was real. That doesn't mean everyone have to do the same or that Gods demands it.
"free will is the most precious gift God gave us "
Read this carefully. Do you see the problem with it? There is a glaring flaw that you apparently don't see. Since you used to be an atheist, I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. Please explain what the flaw is to conclusively prove you "used to be" a nonbeliever like me, as you claimed. Then explain how you got around t his problem to become a believer.
@greyeyed123 Sorry, but I can't read you mind, there are a dozen apparent flaws someone can imagine, but they are just apparent and not real, because the argument is honest and flawless.
@dejesusluisx You don't need to read my mind. You just need to remember back when you were a nonbeliever like me for 30 years. Unless you were lying about being a nonbeliever like me? (You had no problem reading my mind when declaring you were a nonbeliever like me. Why is it a problem NOW?)
I again dare you to define my position. You don't even know what it is, and it doesn't take mind reading if you were an atheist for 30 years.
@dejesusluisx "you are sitting right now, am I right?"
I'm glad you find intellectual dishonesty funny. You tell me you know my position, you tell me you were an nonbeliever for 30 years "just like you", and YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT MY POSITION IS.
Do you CARE what my position is? What if your position is wrong? How will you ever know if you utterly ignore all other positions, and tell yourself in your own mind you already know what they are despite being unable to define them?
@greyeyed123 When I say I was a non-believer just like you, I meant you do not believe there is a God, not that I know your position. Every person's position is different, and unless someone can read your mind they can't possibly know your position. Why don't you cut the bull and just state what your position is?
@dejesusluisx You say a nonbeliever is one who does not believe there is a god. Do you think I would rephrase that to say, "I believe there is no god"?
What is the difference between "I do not believe there is a god" and "I believe there is no god"?
the sun the air ..and its all in the bible you say ..wow i wish someone had told me that years ago.someone had to do it so it must be god it must be the god i picked.you can't argue with that logic.
And why shouldn't mankind base our laws on our understanding of what's right and wrong? Animals have an instinctual version of morality ingrained in them that's no different from secular laws made by rational discourse and discussion.
@ozweblogs ... you're religiously incorrect. My knowledge of good and evil came from his noodly appendages as he touched me as a child. He said "you better be damn good kid, or no stripper factories or beer volcanoes for you" and then i said "oh shit, i better do what he says!" so please refer to the his Noodlieness because the prophet Bobby Henderson said he's god and that the great FSM said Bobby Henderson was his prophet. It's only logical.
Since humans stepped out of the caves, we were constantly expanding our circle of love to include more people. We now reject genocide, racism and incest, things common centuries ago. We're in a crucial point in our development. Becoming completely spiritual by rejecting all selfish instincts and materialism is the next step. Rejecting Jesus, which represents 100% love, as a role model, is a step back for our consciousness. The time has come to raise our consciousness to the next level. Wake up!
@dejesusluisx I think it's the other way around. Closing your mind and leaving it to "God did it!" Is a step backward. We have been moving forward thanks to science, reason, and study. Religion played no part in getting from 2000 years ago to now.
@DaGrox94 Science vs religion is a false dichotomy. Mendel -father of Genetics, Lemaitre -physicist proponent of the BB, Copernicus, Ockham - Occam's razor, Mercally -creator of the earthquake scale, and over 200 scientists were Catholic priests. Many believers had embrace the scientific method to understand the world around us, and yet can discern there's a transcendent spirituality in all of us that science can't explain and only the knowledge of God and a relationship with Him can satisfy.
@dejesusluisx Their being priests or belonging to the church had nothing to do with the inventions themselves. Also, transcendent spirituality? I've yet to see any proof of this.
This is what it boils down to.
There is no proof.
If you can present substantial evidence, I will believe there is a god.
@DaGrox94 Yes, but we are not parading with the evidence flag, atheists are, we know we believe on faith, so which way is it? Make up your mind atheist!!!
@dejesusluisx I wouldn't even ask for 'substantial' evidence... I just want evidence that isn't personal experience, or because it says so in the bible. It really should be very simple. God supposedly wants us to believe in him and follow his law... think how easy it would be for him (being god) to prove he's real. It would literally take less than 30 min and the 99% of the world would instantly be converted.
@blahblahreadabook "It would literally take less than 30 min and the 99% of the world would instantly be converted" probably a second, but that will only happen once, and when that day comes, you don't want to be caught up in the wrong side of the fence. God can't be obvious or faith would be gone and free will would compromised, people would be converted because they have to or else, not because they freely chose to be with the Lord. That is the whole purpose of God not being obvious.
@dejesusluisx With all do respect, ridiculous! Why would it have to be that way? "god cant be obvious or faith would be gone" "people would convert because they had to or else" This is STILL the reason people believe in god, fear of hell, without it religion would of died a lot faster than it is. but instead you think that god is giving us just a little, nothing to credible as proof, and if we use our brains and doubt, BAM!!! he sends you to hell, is life just a sadistic game for god? CONT'd
@blahblahreadabook "This is STILL the reason people believe in god" I call those people just in case believers, and they don't have a greater chance of salvation than you do. God is energy and to be saved you need to be in His same wavelength, to tune your consciousness to His, that can only be obtained trough prayer and living a life rejecting our selfish animal instincts.
Energy is not magic. Is god electricity? Heat? Nuclear?
God has a wavelength? That we must "tune to"? If so, then god is IN the universe also? You better tell people like Turek to stop making arguments that god is OUTSIDE the universe, since he says that is why he believes in him (all the other gods, like Zeus and Thor, he says, are IN the universe, which is why he says Christians don't believe in them).
@greyeyed123 God has 100% of the attributes given to energy, so God can be defined as energy, on the other hand, energy has only a fraction of the attributes given to God, so energy can't be defined as God. There are many forms of energy and God is one of them, so God can be compared to energy but energy can't be compared to God.
@dejesusluisx "God has 100% of the attributes given to energy"
Now all you have to do is provide evidence that god is one form of energy. We have evidence for energy, not for god. Therefore you are just making up stuff.
I can't believe they actually have patience with these people. So retarded....
MrEstarmes 4 hours ago
I used to believe I was feeling the Holy Spirit, then I realized it was just indigestion....
Barrlounge 1 day ago
Comment removed
mikematosinsurance 4 days ago
My balls are that they are. All praise be to my balls.
3234718 4 days ago 3
@3234718 lmao, I bow down to ye holy balls.
I feel so enlightened , I need a pendant of you balls to wear around my neck.
LogicalStatements3 8 hours ago
@LogicalStatements3 That'll cost you. The Holly Balls, (praise their names) need money.
3234718 6 hours ago
Is...is that the Easter bunny crucified? That's awesome.
nychold 4 days ago 2
god must not have created us intelligently if he made this women.
taylan637 6 days ago
G'day kids! Naughty adults go to gaol, it's more severe that way. Don't blame crazy or sensible religions! The crazy dog knows the way, nature, that's your god. Trees and butterflies, and any of that man's stuff, try a protein bar. Or that girlie stuff, try kindness and honour for your fellow earth and creatures. Conduct your own morals, by not eating meat, dairy or seedless plants, you're soft to and respect a plant. (I have annihilated the fake meat & chickpeas in pasta, this is more ideal).
Hoobifta 6 days ago
Why is it okay for people who say they've seen ghosts and dead people get sent to mental hospitals and people like this insane women claim to see JESUS get to roam freely in the streets? America should not be based on GOD!
HxCDeathMetalHead 1 week ago
Matt has unbelievable tolerance for these crazy people, no way I could do it
michaelflorida56 1 week ago 3
this is your brain on food stamps
funcpl2741054 1 week ago 3
@funcpl2741054 that is hilarious, good one!
michaelflorida56 1 week ago
the bunny on the cross gives me the giggles. brilliant.
sknathan13 2 weeks ago
how is it some people are too stupid to realise they are stupid.
spoddog1 2 weeks ago
@spoddog1 It's called the Dunning-Kruger effect. It's because they are incompetent that they cannot recognize their own incompetence.
MSJjoshua 2 weeks ago
whats that song :D:D
solisvictor1991 2 weeks ago
The intro music to these clips always crack me up.
jezmundberserker 2 weeks ago
God is the route of all evil... If you do believe in the god allmighty, the lord and the holy spirit, (All BS BTW!) god is the creator of everything... (How did he make himself? The world will never know) He created the devil, pain, suffering, hell, serial killers, and Mc.Donald's...
1988Cubanito 3 weeks ago
I once had an experience that a team of businessmen were building a huge skyscraper-complex in my brain, it was very real to me. Turned out it was just a fever-dream, I was so sick I could've died. I guess maybe if I believed in god, I might've dreamed of god instead of businessmen building stuff in my brain.
Pinkaugust 3 weeks ago
this lady dont even know what a star is. and apparently doesn't know what "air" as we know it is, let alone how its made. things we have known for a very long time
S0vereignX 3 weeks ago
OH MY GOD I LOVE YOU GUYS! Mostly because of your show, but also, TOM LEHRER! <3
floppaboppa 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Antiks72 3 weeks ago
For anyone interested , the song played is "Poisoning pidgeons in the park" by Tom Lehrer.
bradkey98765 4 weeks ago
im starting to think that they pay complete idiots to call in to make christians look stupid. I am an atheist myself, and many, many christians I meet strike me as quite dumb, but NEVER as bad as all but 2 of the christian callers I have heard here.
myndzyeful 4 weeks ago
@myndzyeful I was in the military for a few years, and during my travels, I did meet some Christians that were honestly as dumb as the callers on this show, it is definitely true
RaveriusMax 4 weeks ago
@myndzyeful Living in Canada I have never met a christian this stupid.
owenwestland 3 weeks ago
I Y'am what I Y'am - Popeye
Let's start worshiping the one eye'd sailor.
holikdad 4 weeks ago in playlist Atheist Experience 2
They gave this caller way too much air time. I knew this was a hopeless cause 5 seconds into the call.
amnt2more 1 month ago
I am that I am sam
I am
heathsawyer 1 month ago
and by the way: god (even if he existed) didnt give us the ability to choose between right and wrong because in the bible adam and eve ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil...
GalliadII 1 month ago
please dont post the word brain in the titel of a video that is about a woman saying such crap.
GalliadII 1 month ago
This woman has a great circular argument. "I Am That I Am. I Am That I Am. I Am That I Am" Ad infinitum.
blackmichael75 1 month ago
I like the way Matt needs to explain to this fucktard what 'demonstrable' means. It must get so frustrating talking to people like this.
LondonIrishRover 1 month ago
i must have that opening song
joshhedgepeth 1 month ago
@joshhedgepeth Poisoning Pigeons in the Park by Tom Lehrer.
zebezd 1 month ago
There is no sense talking to people that do not understand what a circular argument is. Not to mention that this person is amazingly uneducated.
veronicats100 1 month ago
I think I'm in love. No homo.
affinity2412 1 month ago
@affinity2412
You shouldn't bash homosexuals.
You might have one as a son or a daughter one day.
SinnFein4ever 1 month ago
Sorry, but this woman is FUCKING RETARDED.
TheOutzman 1 month ago
Religion...the death of the mind
Killer0fTheSun 1 month ago
their bunny reminds me of when i was 6 and i asked my sister if easter started cause one day a bunch of bunnies hid some eggs and a farmer made his kids look for them. my sister then yelled at me and said i was stupid. yet no body ever told me about easter. i was just supposed to magically know about the resurrection. i guess original sin made me forget, but eve ate the fruit of knowledge, so i should know everything? 24 years later and i'm still confused. help me understand you god! amen.
emailtheoldies 1 month ago
i experienced a video today involving the next pregnant virgin.
Y RELIGION IS BETTER THAN SCIENCE
that's the title. 6 minutes and 47 seconds of pure north american hilarity. if your ready for a laugh check it out.
emailtheoldies 1 month ago
@emailtheoldies Ok, nobody listen to emailtheoldies about watching the "Y RELIGION IS BETTER THAN SCIENCE" video. Don't do it to yourself. Oh no....nooooo..... What has been seen can now not be unseen! My eyes!! My brain!!! Have you see the horror movie "The Ring"? Pretend it's like that and you will die in 7 days if you watch it. Save yourself!!! Run away!!!!!!!! It BURNS!!!!!!!
GrandmasterBBC 1 month ago
@GrandmasterBBC two words: MAN TITS
emailtheoldies 1 month ago
@emailtheoldies Ohhhhhh....reminds me of Fight Club.
GrandmasterBBC 1 month ago
@GrandmasterBBC god IS Tyler Durden.
emailtheoldies 1 month ago
Poor manners, ignorant, seemingly incapable of grasping even the most basic ideas, yup...gods PR crew is up to their usual standards.
sheikhyaboooty 1 month ago
Holy Hell, is everyone who calls into this show an idiot?
J0NA5TeVi 1 month ago 2
@J0NA5TeVi No but most are.
Nergal134 1 month ago
"I've..I've had an experience..." aw did jesus rape you? :'(
XChallen 1 month ago
I think the rabbit on the cross is just a little overboard...
skydragon4ever 1 month ago
I almost want there to be a Jesus, just so this lady does not seem so pitiful.
elliesmellyjean 1 month ago
@elliesmellyjean There is Jesus.
elibeth121 1 month ago
@elibeth121 Ok, well as soon as he pops over to my house and says "Hey I am Jesus, fill up the bath tub and I will walk on water" then we can have a discussion. Until then you can tell me "There is Jesus" until you're blue in the face and I am just going to keep saying "Prove it"
Right now I believe Jesus is about as real to me as Harry Potter - Harry Potter is cooler though.
elliesmellyjean 1 month ago
@elliesmellyjean why dont you ask him to reveal himself to you? But not because you want to see it to believe but through faith, grace and trust. He does reveal himselves for those who ask. But, then again he also knows your heart and will know if you are sincere or not. You are not worth of miracles, nor does he do miracles when an unbeliever asks.
elibeth121 1 month ago
@elibeth121 You lady are deluded. I won't even bother arguing with you because clearly you just don't care about logic. What I will say is FUCK JESUS!
elliesmellyjean 1 month ago
@elliesmellyjean I love you. FUCK JESUS! FUCK GOD! FUCK CHRISTIANITY! "He who cums in the ass of the lord will be truly blessed a-fucking-men!!!!!!"
ShaGojyo2612 1 month ago
@elibeth121 you've set up an unfalsifiable standard. anyone who sincerecely asks for god to reveal himself,and does not get a response,will simply be thought of as not really sincere. it's called the no true scotsman fallacy.
worse than that,u require faith and trust in order to get a revelation. someone who has faith and trust in god doesn't need a sign,and/or will interpret reality through that perception,and see "signs" in anything..
mebe84 1 month ago
@elibeth121 finding a house with a cheap mortgage,a fellow believer helping u out in some way,a headache that goes away,reading the bible,or some vague feelings, will all be percieved as "signs from god" to reinforce the belief u already had.this is why believers see mary in a bagel,or the name of allah in the clouds. non-believers won't accept such a standard
mebe84 1 month ago
I sure hope none of this lady's thoughts get broadcast to space, otherwise if an alien civilization gets wind of the shite people like her spew, they may blow up this planet in a fit of extreme rage.
slyfoxrocks 1 month ago
"I am that I am"...just like Popeye
jcgadfly 1 month ago
@jcgadfly I yam wut I yam.
Ninvus2 1 month ago
There is a sun, ergo there is a god. Shoot me.
rsr789 1 month ago
god never existed and this woman is a nut...
EnlightenedUniverse 1 month ago 15
@EnlightenedUniverse He still exists, he did exist and he will always exist
elibeth121 1 month ago
@EnlightenedUniverse Why is it that the religious people who call this show never stop talking long enough to let the people on the show to talk?
ANIMELORD1989 3 weeks ago
@LAKAIGUY27 String theory hasn't been proven yet, and GRAVITY forms everything in the universe.
uplandassault 1 month ago
Everyone is wrong there is a cosmic creator and he's invisible!! His name is GRAVITY!!!!
uplandassault 1 month ago
@uplandassault Nope, it's Strings.
LAKAIGUY27 1 month ago
"because I've had . . . an experience"
HyperSchmizzle 1 month ago 44
@HyperSchmizzle Did her experience involve a crackpipe or a metal rod or a car and a wall?
omnissience 1 month ago
@HyperSchmizzle I have had an experience, with Jesus, Jesus Christ.
pv2dhill 1 month ago
@HyperSchmizzle "... point on this bunny where you were touched."
LeoRikimaru 1 week ago
@HyperSchmizzle perhaps an....atheist experience???
blarghblarghblargh 1 week ago 2
@HyperSchmizzle I had an experience too, but band camp was a long time ago. :)
nychold 4 days ago
@fywacia Thaaaaanks, Ese. I'll tell my cousin you approve.
RamoneHoffman 1 month ago
The Easter Bunny died for your sins!
evilemperordude 2 months ago
@evilemperordude don't you DARE saying ITS name or you'll go to fucking bunny hell!
dieghettozz 1 month ago
Pay not attention to the content of what they say/thier idea's but rather their emotional output. Then you'll see who's right. Neither.
maxwellpassion 2 months ago
Oh my goodness. o.o I wanna shoot all these people.
maxwellpassion 2 months ago
Using the callers logic, I know that everything fox news says is true because fox news said so.
Martinzepplin 2 months ago
I'm pretty sure that 'I yam what I yam' is actually Popeye.
TheSkunkCat 2 months ago
Is Popeye Jesus?
HyperSchmizzle 2 months ago
Crazy preaching callers...so sad.
LiamXaoh 2 months ago
The caller is an excellent example of someone who has been brainwashed. She was also rude in "talking over" the other person,but eventually Matt had to put his foot down to explain to her there are other viewpoints in the world as well. But I fear no matter what Matt said to her it would fall on deaf ears..this lady is too far gone and duped to believe any different.
brindow1 2 months ago
Why are you arguing on bible based "facts",its been written by men who were not educated,its no more true than koran or anything else based on myth and superstition,dont forget it wasnt that long ago gods good people were burning witches.Nitpicking bits of the bible is easy meat its so full of contradictions ,fantasy and cruelty you cant fail but the theists will say oh it didnt mean that or ignore that part because we dont like that bit.Science is the way forward not religion its dying out
TheTomtuffy 2 months ago
The Bible doesn't "advocate" slavery. :/
KeusFrench 2 months ago
@KeusFrench read it u fucker, god tells people to take others as slaves
why dont u read it first before typing bullshit ?
mikesomething 2 months ago
@KeusFrench Dude, even Jesus advocated slavery. Yeah, yeah, throw out the Old Testament all you want. The new one isn't moral either though.
mrrhinohead31three 2 months ago
@mrrhinohead31three Actually, Exodus 13:14 proves God's disapproval of slavery, of the Hebrews.
One thing a lot of people miss is that slavery was different back then. People sold themselves as slaves when they couldn't afford things or were backed into debt. Sometimes even lawyers and doctors of that time sold themselves. It wasn't race dependent - which God is completely against.
Exodus 21:16 also condemns 'man-stealing'; something that happened in Africa.
KeusFrench 2 months ago
@KeusFrench you dumb mother fucker. read exodus 21, it details how to keep slaves. and also how to sell your daughter as a maid servant, saying they cant go out at night like the men do..
phallictractor 2 months ago
@KeusFrench yeah it does, read it.
MAZ1N00 2 months ago
@MAZ1N00 "yeah it does, read it"...
what in the heck are you responding to?
KeusFrench 2 months ago
@KeusFrench also, read the context, its the hebrews as slaves to another kingdom, dumb ass. hate people who know not speaking.
phallictractor 2 months ago
@phallictractor Unless you haven't realized, I briefly explained the idea of slavery back then, as it was completely different then it is now. Also, a lot of people were servants back then too, which is by technical definition an employable occupation.
And what are you talking about? Exodus 13 clearly maintains the fact that God does not condone slavery and actually helps the people out of it. Maybe you should have read clearly and not made off-base accusations.
KeusFrench 2 months ago
@KeusFrench Yes it does.
It also advocates women being property, murdering your child if they disobey you, tribal genocide, the killing of non-believers,
I think that if people actually read the bible objectively they would understand why it is such a barbaric and back-wards book.
DrPeatore 2 months ago
@DrPeatore I just reread it. Please notify me where in Exodus 13 it states what you said it does.
And also, you seem to be saying that religion is based off the OT. Well, a lot of what Christianity, (and actually, 99% of it) is based off of the NT, as that is where Christ is the central figure, hence "Christ"-ianity.
KeusFrench 2 months ago
@KeusFrench Peter 2:18: "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel."
1 Timothy 2:12, : "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent."
Those are just 2 examples of bad morality in the new testament.
Keep in mind that Jesus himself says that the laws of the Old Testament should still be followed (Matthew 5:18) I could go on, but there is a character limit.
DrPeatore 2 months ago
@DrPeatore What version are you reading?
First Peter 2:18 in the NLT says: "You who are slaves must accept the authority of your masters with all respect. Do what they tell you--not only if they are kind and reasonable, but even if they are cruel."
That doesn't condone slavery. It just says "those" who already are slaves, do " ".
As for 1 Timothy 2:12, Paul allows women to speak in 1 Corinthians, though I don't remember the exact verse.
Also, he means temporarily. (Out of space.)
KeusFrench 2 months ago
@KeusFrench Wait, you mean there are contradictions in the Bible? Ding Ding Ding I think someone just got the point.
DrPeatore 2 months ago
@DrPeatore I've never once denied the idea of some contradictions in the Bible. But that definitely doesn't make the Bible invalid, wrong or any less meaningful. There are tons of literature that have contradictions, as well as scientific theories, philosophical methods, etc.
Contradiction doesn't mean "completely off-scale never look at it again".
KeusFrench 2 months ago
@KeusFrench i would agree with most of what you said apart from "There are tons of literature that have contradictions, as well as scientific theories" scientific theory by definition has to change in response to new evidence (unless said evidence is il concieved) and therefore cannot contradict. but do give me an example im interested
super3slug 2 months ago
@super3slug Well basically for science, I meant that there are plenty of scientists that form theories that are different than/contradictory to those theories of other scientists. That could be on the most minor of sciences or hefty subjects.
KeusFrench 2 months ago
@KeusFrench
But genocide,rape,slavery,torture, smashing children's heads on rocks, oppression of women all in a book supposed to be the ultimate moral code and written by god most definitely makes it invalid. Read thomas paine's age of reason, if you can deal with the truth.
FellOnSoundGarden 2 months ago
I remember singing Poisoning pigeons in the park in a concert in the school chapel- didn't got down too well...
MrOnionterror 2 months ago
Her IQ is not in the triple digits. I would bet my life on it.
Johnf85 2 months ago
@Johnf85 it is including the zeros before it.
megabeaver23 2 months ago
She is a slave but she doesn't know it!
1964nichi 2 months ago
It's scary to think that there are people like this lady out there, but it's even more scary when you realize you personally know people that are just like her.
auroraman56 3 months ago
"God can't be obvious or faith would be gone and free will would compromised"
This makes no sense. In order to have free will to choose something, the choices have to be demonstrated IN REALITY. Having no evidence for something that is a hypothetical choice actually COMPROMISES free will.
If your assertion was correct, we wouldn't be able to freely make choices between Coke and Pepsi because we have evidence of Coke and Pepsi and that compromises our free will to choose between them.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 ""the choices have to be demonstrated IN REALITY"" they are, you just decide not to see them and dismiss them. The fact is the statistical data supports the existence of God over any theory put together to explain the origin of the universe until this date.
"we have evidence of Coke and Pepsi" If God were obvious, do you think people would be able freely choose, when they know the consequence for not wanting to be with God is eternal suffering?
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx You can't have it both ways. Either the choices are demonstrated in reality, or god is not obvious so we can freely choose while being ignorant of eternal suffering, but NOT BOTH.
Besides, apparently YOU are aware that not choosing your god leads to eternal suffering, right? And you still freely choose your god, right? Or do you have no free will?
There is no statistical data in support of the existence of your god. What you are referring to is an argument from ignorance.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 ""YOU are aware that not choosing your god leads to eternal suffering, right?"" indeed, but that awareness didn't come until I decided freely to look for God. As you, I was a non-believer, for almost 30 yrs.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx You were not a nonbeliever like me. I dare you to explain my position.
Now you've changed the argument. Is god obvious or isn't he? You can "freely" believe whatever you wish, and people do, but for there to be a choice IN REALITY, both the options must be obvious. If they are not obvious, you are not making a choice at all.
Do you have free will now that you have freely looked for god, chosen god, and know about both god and hell? If yes, then your argument fails.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "but for there to be a choice IN REALITY, both the options must be obvious" No, people make choices about ambiguous situations with partial information all the time, that doesn't mean the choice you make isn't free."Do you have free will now that you have freely looked for god" For all practical purposes, no, when I decided to accept God I renounced my free will and put my life in God's will. Now that I have revelations others don't have, it would be foolish to renounce
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "that doesn't mean the choice you make isn't free" Yes it does. If you don't know what the choices are, then what you do cannot be a choice. Not only does this apply ambiguous situations, but unknown situations, and also situations purposefully set up to be a trick. If an old woman is called by a con artist who makes her believe she is sending her life savings to help crippled orphans, the choice she is making is to SAVE ORPHANS, not give her money to a con artist.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "what you do cannot be a choice" even when you are blindfolded choosing a closed door, you are making a free will choice. It may not be an informed choice, but is a choice. I find difficult to believe you can't grasp that simple concept. "the choice she is making is to SAVE ORPHANS, not give her money to a con artist" she choose to send her money to a stranger, that was a free choice, the reasons she had to has nothing to do with the act itself.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx A choice is not a choice if you don't know what the choice is, doofus. If you are blind folded and choosing a closed door, you are choosing to reach out and find information. If you find a door and you want to leave, you choose to try to open it. If you feel through and it feels like and escape route, you walk through. If two feet in you fall off a cliff, YOU DID NOT CHOOSE TO FALL OFF A CLIFF, you chose to escape.
How can you not understand the very nature of choice?
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "you chose to escape" this is where you are confused, you've chosen to open a closed door, the goal you had was to escape, but the choice you made didn't get you the goal you expected, get it? It happens all the time, you chose to change lanes to exit the freeway and instead you hit another car, the goal was not met but you freely chose to change lanes.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "you chose to change lanes to exit the freeway and instead you hit another car, the goal was not met but you freely chose to change lanes."
You freely CHOSE TO CHANGE LANS, you didn't freely choose to hit another car. (Hence the term "accident".)
Why? Because you didn't know a car would be there at the time.
Thank you for making my argument for me. You can't make a choice to do a thing if the options are not clear or defined. Doofus.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "You freely CHOSE TO CHANGE LANS" That is what I'm talking about, the free will consist of the act not the consequences, that was my point since the beginning, you are so confused that forgot you were defending the premise that free will had to do with the consequences. My point is you freely choose to take a leap of faith with the information you have at hand.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx I was not defending the free will had to do with the consequences. I'm saying that when you CHOOSE something, you have to know what the options are or it cannot be called a CHOICE.
People don't CHOOSE to get into accidents. Likewise, you cannot say someone cannot choose god if they know clearly that NOT choosing god leads to hell. Even in the myth, Satan knew god existed, and rejected him anyway! Why does Satan get a clear and obvious choice, but humans do not?
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "you have to know what the options are or it cannot be called a CHOICE" a choice is a decision you take freely regardless you know what you are doing or not, you are confusing the term conscious decision with just decision or choice. "they know clearly that NOT choosing god leads to hell" everyone KNOWS that, some people CHOOSE not to believe the information given, is all a matter of choice.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx No, a choice is not a "decision you take freely regardless you know what you are doing or not".
All you have to do to test your silly assertion is ask the old lady who was conned out of her life savings if she CHOSE TO GIVE HER LIFE SAVINGS TO A CON MAN. She did not, because that would be idiotic. She chose to give her money to crippled orphans. The fact that she had no clue this was not what she was doing means that IT WASN'T A CHOICE TO GIVE MONEY TO A CON MAN.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "if she CHOSE TO GIVE HER LIFE SAVINGS TO A CON MAN" the question is misleading. The question should be if she chose to give her life savings, the answer is yes, it was a free choice regardless the purpose of her choice.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "the question is misleading. " No, YOUR question is misleading because a choice is always defined by a reason. If you divorce her choice to give her money from the REASON she gave the money, then you are taking the "choice" out of choice.
If you want to do that, fine. Then you have no idea if you are choosing god, nor does anyone else. Is that really the position you want to take? That god wants to be chosen by people who have no idea what they are choosing?
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "then you are taking the "choice" out of choice" a choice is translated into an act and the act cannot be undone, so the choice was made regardless, it might have been through a deception, but it was a free choice to give the money
You know God is the creator of the universe, He's an immaterial consciousness that created our own consciousness to His image, He's just, merciful, and compassionate. If God was capable of creating so much beauty on earth, imagine His kingdom
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "a choice is translated into an act"
A choice is an act, but an act is not necessarily a choice. Once you figure out the difference, you will figure out how you are wrong.
No, I don't know god is the COTU. How do you know that? (If you want to redefine knowledge to mean "have faith that", or "feel that", or "I can't understand how else it could work so that's what I'm going with", then that's NOT KNOWLEDGE. You said god was not obvious. Knowledge IS OBVIOUS.)
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "an act is not necessarily a choice" only if is unconscious, is the one acting is an animal, or a child, or is an involuntary reflex; otherwise an act is a choice.
The second part of your post don't make any sense.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "only if is unconscious, is the one acting is an animal, or a child, or is an involuntary reflex; otherwise an act is a choice."
What makes those acts not choices? Is it because the beings doing those acts don't know what they are doing? If so, then a choice that results in something that was not foreseen, or COULD NOT BE foreseen, then THAT UNFORESEEN RESULT IS NOT A CHOICE.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "The question should be if she chose to give her life savings, the answer is yes, it was a free choice regardless the purpose of her choice."
Another example. If someone takes your keys out of your living room, steals your car, and crashes it, the judge doesn't ask you if you chose to leave your keys in the living room, if you chose to have a lock that didn't stop the person from breaking into your living room, if you chose to have a car that could be stolen.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "If someone takes your keys out of your living room" the person making an act if making a choice. I don't see the relevance of your example.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "the person making an act if making a choice. I don't see the relevance of your example."
The relevance is that your definition of "choice" as an act that results in anything, even things unforeseen, makes the car owner who left their keys in their living room to be stolen by a thief who broke in and took them and the car...responsible. It was HIS CHOICE to buy a car that could be stolen, leave keys in his living room that was locked unsecurely.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 ""makes the car owner who left their keys in their living room to be stolen by a thief who broke in and took them and the car...responsible"" of course, leaving the keys in your car makes your responsible of the choice of leaving the keys in your car; the thief responsible for steeling the car, get it? There are two choices in your example, two responsibilities but just one guilty. It doesn't matter the consequences, a choice is always made when you act.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "For all practical purposes, no, when I decided to accept God I renounced my free will and put my life in God's will."
So what is the purpose of ever having free will at all the god wants everyone to get to the point where they have none? Why didn't he just START with no free will? (And what good is the choice you continuously make in favor of god if you have no free will? It is pointless without free will to choose otherwise.)
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "all the god wants everyone to get to the point where they have none?" I was not commanded to, I decided to give my free will, as free will is the most precious gift God gave us and was the most valuable thing I could give to Him once I discovered He was real. That doesn't mean everyone have to do the same or that Gods demands it.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "I decided to give my free will"
"free will is the most precious gift God gave us "
Read this carefully. Do you see the problem with it? There is a glaring flaw that you apparently don't see. Since you used to be an atheist, I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. Please explain what the flaw is to conclusively prove you "used to be" a nonbeliever like me, as you claimed. Then explain how you got around t his problem to become a believer.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 Sorry, but I can't read you mind, there are a dozen apparent flaws someone can imagine, but they are just apparent and not real, because the argument is honest and flawless.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx You don't need to read my mind. You just need to remember back when you were a nonbeliever like me for 30 years. Unless you were lying about being a nonbeliever like me? (You had no problem reading my mind when declaring you were a nonbeliever like me. Why is it a problem NOW?)
I again dare you to define my position. You don't even know what it is, and it doesn't take mind reading if you were an atheist for 30 years.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 "I again dare you to define my position" you are sitting right now, am I right?
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "you are sitting right now, am I right?"
I'm glad you find intellectual dishonesty funny. You tell me you know my position, you tell me you were an nonbeliever for 30 years "just like you", and YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT MY POSITION IS.
Do you CARE what my position is? What if your position is wrong? How will you ever know if you utterly ignore all other positions, and tell yourself in your own mind you already know what they are despite being unable to define them?
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 When I say I was a non-believer just like you, I meant you do not believe there is a God, not that I know your position. Every person's position is different, and unless someone can read your mind they can't possibly know your position. Why don't you cut the bull and just state what your position is?
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx You say a nonbeliever is one who does not believe there is a god. Do you think I would rephrase that to say, "I believe there is no god"?
What is the difference between "I do not believe there is a god" and "I believe there is no god"?
Please explain. You're doing fine so far.
greyeyed123 3 months ago
These people vote. :(
AlmostAlwaysFabulous 3 months ago 5
Omg I totally have the exact same shirt as Matt in this video. It's one of my favorite Hawaiian shirts.
+2 more internet points to TAE.
GrantRants 3 months ago 2
the sun the air ..and its all in the bible you say ..wow i wish someone had told me that years ago.someone had to do it so it must be god it must be the god i picked.you can't argue with that logic.
alltiedup217 3 months ago 2
The knowledge of good and evil came from a tree in Eden. Until eating from the tree Adam and Eve could not tell the difference between good and evil.
Every time you make a judgement of what is good and bad you are eating from that tree.
ozweblogs 4 months ago
@ozweblogs does the tree have a name?
ncdangale112 3 months ago
@ozweblogs And where is your proof that Adam and Eve ever even existed?
MythicSolider989 3 months ago
@ozweblogs
And why shouldn't mankind base our laws on our understanding of what's right and wrong? Animals have an instinctual version of morality ingrained in them that's no different from secular laws made by rational discourse and discussion.
NUTCASE71733 3 months ago
@ozweblogs ... you're religiously incorrect. My knowledge of good and evil came from his noodly appendages as he touched me as a child. He said "you better be damn good kid, or no stripper factories or beer volcanoes for you" and then i said "oh shit, i better do what he says!" so please refer to the his Noodlieness because the prophet Bobby Henderson said he's god and that the great FSM said Bobby Henderson was his prophet. It's only logical.
lolimauser 3 months ago
Since humans stepped out of the caves, we were constantly expanding our circle of love to include more people. We now reject genocide, racism and incest, things common centuries ago. We're in a crucial point in our development. Becoming completely spiritual by rejecting all selfish instincts and materialism is the next step. Rejecting Jesus, which represents 100% love, as a role model, is a step back for our consciousness. The time has come to raise our consciousness to the next level. Wake up!
dejesusluisx 4 months ago
@dejesusluisx I think it's the other way around. Closing your mind and leaving it to "God did it!" Is a step backward. We have been moving forward thanks to science, reason, and study. Religion played no part in getting from 2000 years ago to now.
DaGrox94 3 months ago
@DaGrox94 Science vs religion is a false dichotomy. Mendel -father of Genetics, Lemaitre -physicist proponent of the BB, Copernicus, Ockham - Occam's razor, Mercally -creator of the earthquake scale, and over 200 scientists were Catholic priests. Many believers had embrace the scientific method to understand the world around us, and yet can discern there's a transcendent spirituality in all of us that science can't explain and only the knowledge of God and a relationship with Him can satisfy.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx Their being priests or belonging to the church had nothing to do with the inventions themselves. Also, transcendent spirituality? I've yet to see any proof of this.
This is what it boils down to.
There is no proof.
If you can present substantial evidence, I will believe there is a god.
DaGrox94 3 months ago
@DaGrox94 "If you can present substantial evidence, I will believe there is a god" that's very subjective.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx And the same can be said for faith.
DaGrox94 3 months ago
@DaGrox94 Yes, but we are not parading with the evidence flag, atheists are, we know we believe on faith, so which way is it? Make up your mind atheist!!!
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx I wouldn't even ask for 'substantial' evidence... I just want evidence that isn't personal experience, or because it says so in the bible. It really should be very simple. God supposedly wants us to believe in him and follow his law... think how easy it would be for him (being god) to prove he's real. It would literally take less than 30 min and the 99% of the world would instantly be converted.
blahblahreadabook 3 months ago
@blahblahreadabook "It would literally take less than 30 min and the 99% of the world would instantly be converted" probably a second, but that will only happen once, and when that day comes, you don't want to be caught up in the wrong side of the fence. God can't be obvious or faith would be gone and free will would compromised, people would be converted because they have to or else, not because they freely chose to be with the Lord. That is the whole purpose of God not being obvious.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx With all do respect, ridiculous! Why would it have to be that way? "god cant be obvious or faith would be gone" "people would convert because they had to or else" This is STILL the reason people believe in god, fear of hell, without it religion would of died a lot faster than it is. but instead you think that god is giving us just a little, nothing to credible as proof, and if we use our brains and doubt, BAM!!! he sends you to hell, is life just a sadistic game for god? CONT'd
blahblahreadabook 3 months ago
@blahblahreadabook "This is STILL the reason people believe in god" I call those people just in case believers, and they don't have a greater chance of salvation than you do. God is energy and to be saved you need to be in His same wavelength, to tune your consciousness to His, that can only be obtained trough prayer and living a life rejecting our selfish animal instincts.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "God is energy"
Energy is not magic. Is god electricity? Heat? Nuclear?
God has a wavelength? That we must "tune to"? If so, then god is IN the universe also? You better tell people like Turek to stop making arguments that god is OUTSIDE the universe, since he says that is why he believes in him (all the other gods, like Zeus and Thor, he says, are IN the universe, which is why he says Christians don't believe in them).
greyeyed123 3 months ago
@greyeyed123 God has 100% of the attributes given to energy, so God can be defined as energy, on the other hand, energy has only a fraction of the attributes given to God, so energy can't be defined as God. There are many forms of energy and God is one of them, so God can be compared to energy but energy can't be compared to God.
dejesusluisx 3 months ago
@dejesusluisx "God has 100% of the attributes given to energy"
Now all you have to do is provide evidence that god is one form of energy. We have evidence for energy, not for god. Therefore you are just making up stuff.
greyeyed123 3 months ago