Greg Stafford VS TheSnarkyApologist Debate! VERY FUNNY!!!

[givanilson49]

alguém por favor poderia traduzir isso para eu pois não sei ingles

[jamesandchante]

LOL

[MBI3030]

you are funny...

[2911tx]

haha hilarious pete the pickle



[TheSnarkyApologist]

@2911tx Thanks for appreciating that line. I thought that was one of the funnier ones myself. I hope Larry doesn't take offense at it? ; )

[Jbeliski]

haha that gave me a chuckle too with the apple.... What??... Thanks! The JW really scrambled his mind, as everyone else. Boy o boy

[SixStringDeity]

thisnis actually the funniest thig youve ever done.



[TheSnarkyApologist]

@SixStringDeity Tell ya what. Next time you are in Chicago, look me up, dinners on me my friend!

[SixStringDeity]

@TheSnarkyApologist deal. if your passing thru tampa fla, let me know

[letloosethelion]

i dont know how many times I have watched this,..way too many,..I think I may have a problem!! too funny:)

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@drakejones1 You missed the point my friend. We should be able to laugh at ourselves a bit, as I poke fun at me. I think laughter and humility creates a better environment to come together in. Let's not take ourselves toooooo seriously.

It was simply meant to help some folks lighten up a bit. Sorry you didn't approve.

By the way, Cool Hand Luke is one of my favorites as well! : )

[wowamonn]

So why DID Jesus of Nazereth say the the father is the only true god?

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn Jesus was contrasting the false idols and "deities" that are imaginary to the TRUE God.

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist Who AmunRa?

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn Surely you jest. Many people were polytheistic and had gods for many varied purposes. These gods were idolized in stone and wood, etc. Jesus was contrasting them to the TRUE God, who is living and NOT made of stone or wood.

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist I see, how do you know that the god that jesus worshipped is living and real?

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn Have you ever read the entire Bible and have an understanding of what it is all about?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist Yes I have but how can reading a book written by humans who thought that diesase was caused by demons and that Earthquakes occured because they thought they displeased thier gods. Now we know that diesase is caused by bacteria ad that Earthquakes occur because of the movement of the Earth's crust. These humans thought that humans were created now we know that humans and all living organisms on our planet evolved so how can we trust this flawed patchwork of primitive knowledge

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn

Respectfully, you as an agnostic (no such thing as an atheist), start from a position of hating God, as such you only accept as truth, the things you view as supporting your hatred of that God. Your worldview is internally inconsistent with itself. Let me show you an example for you to see....

You stated "NOW WE **KNOW** that humans and all living organisms on our planet evolved".

Question: Has the THEORY of evolution you speak of here been deemed as factual, or are you incorrect?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist Frist, Why do you equate disblief to hate? The god of the bible along with every other god that has been conceived by the human mind has never ever been proven to exist.Second, I recommend that you reseach the defination of the word ' Theory 'when it is used in science. Evolution is a fact, if it was not, then the scientific community would say the Hypothosis of Evolution. Third, there is more evidence for Evolution than there is for gravity.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn So you are saying that your THEORY of evolution is no longer a theory "when it is used in science" but fact, is that correct?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact" part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess.

Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn So, respectfully, it would appear to me that you are an atheist, and as such, you allow for contradictions as opposed to accepting absolute truth. Am I close?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist " you allow for contradictions as opposed to accepting absolute truth. Am I close? "

Contradictions can be observed in many circumstances did you have one in particular?

Well you have to present this absolute truth and then demonstrate that it is falsifible. If this truth is NOT falsifible then it is not truth but a human concept that cannot be proven because there is no evidence for this concept.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn "If this truth is NOT falsifible then it is not truth but a human concept that cannot be proven because there is no evidence for this concept."

Did you mean to state "If this truth***IS*** falsifible then it is not truth but a human concept that cannot be proven because there is no evidence for this concept.

Typo error? or are you TRULY saying that if the truth is NOT falsifiable then it is NOT truth but a human concept...

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist Well lets test my claim, present a ' truth ' that is falsifible.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn I am confused....are you saying that there is NO absolute truth?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist Frist we need a define what is aboslute truth then we have to create a model of what makes something true in the field of science, philosophy, sports Etc.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn let's try morals. Are morals of right and wrong absolute or relative?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist From my understaning of the term moral(s) is that most humans can learn lessons from an event or story. Whether what is learned is right or wrong, depends on the person.. Now if something is ethical or not depends on the individual,family,tribe,nation Etc. Now an Ethic may be regarded as absolute in the sense that something that has been clearly demonstrated to work for the benefit of an individual or society. For e.g we humans do not eat our offspring because this will.....

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist ....cause our species to go extinct, if this was practiced on a regular basis. When human societies became more complex I would assume that more comlpex ethical stratergies were adopted that also benfited individuals and socities. I also believe that ethics can be relative to a society like the classic example of slavey. Societies in th past practiced slavery which was implented under various conditions. Like being captured in battle or if you owed a debt etc.....

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist ....now all human societies have reasoned that owning and selling another human being as property is ethically wrong no matter what the circumstance that caused that individual to become a slave. Evan if certain laws were supposdly divinely authored to prevent the mis-treatment of slaves, it has been demosnstrated to be a realtive ' moral ' because it has been abandoned by all the major religons of the world who at one time supported this horrendus practice

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn I am in total agreement that it was and is a horrendous practice.

I believe that there ARE moral absolutes. Things that are wrong regardless of anything else.

For instance, is there any time and place where raping children for fun would be allowed? Or to bring it closer to home, what conditions would have to be set up for you to accept the it is okey dokey to rape your/child/cousin/sibling, etc...?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist A definate moral absolute may not be as strong as it may seem because the concept hinges dangerously on that particular moral to be accepted by the entire tribe/nation society and if it is not, I think in my opinion, it cannot be viewed as a moral abosolute. A may be relative, evan if this view is held by a minority of the poplulation. However a moral can be classified as absolute if it is not detrimental to an individual or on a broader application to a species

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn you stated.."A definate moral absolute may not be as strong as it may seem because the concept hinges dangerously on that particular moral to be accepted by the entire tribe/nation society and if it is not, I think in my opinion, it cannot be viewed as a moral absolute."

Agreed.

So then if some "tribes/nations" agreed raping children for fun was acceptable would it be wrong of you to say what they were doing was morally wrong?

Their truth= it's ok

Your truth= not ok

is either wrong?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist " So then if some "tribes/nations" agreed raping children for fun was acceptable would it be wrong of you to say what they were doing was morally wrong? "

To an outsider yes. To the individuals of the society no, because somehow in thier culture they have convinced each other that raping children is not morally wrong thus the society has accepted this practice.

So the conclusion is that absolute truth is in the eye of the beholder? What do you think.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn I think if truth is as relative as you say... "So the conclusion is that absolute truth is in the eye of the beholder" then we have a problem....my truth tells me that you ABSOLUTELY CANNOT, HAVE your car in your garage and NOT HAVE your car in your garage at the same time in the same sense. I would see this as an absolute. Would you see this as an acceptable contradiction since truth is relative?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist You do make a good point, however I can think of only one situation were this point of view can be challenged and this is if the person tries to convince someone who is skeptical of this claim who is not there with the person who is making the claim and cannot verify what the person is saying. The skeptic then has an option to not believe the claim. So now even though it may be true to the person making the claim the skeptic can deny it thus the claim is relative to them.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn I think you lost me on that one..... Let me make it simpler. Let's say it is just you and I standing together. I am attempting to show that laws of logic, for instance, are absolute.

If I asked you if it were possible for me to HAVE a $5.00 dollar bill in my wallet and NOT HAVE a $5.00 dollar bill in my wallet at the same time in the same way, would you agree with me that THAT would be an absolute statement of truth?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist Yes, once it can be verified by the other person I think it is worthy of being called a statement of truth.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn A statement of truth such as the you've agreed to here in this example of the $5 dollar bill, is known as a law of logic, or more specifically in this case, the Law of Non-contradiction. This law of logic is an absolute, thus it must come from an absolute law giver, that would be God.

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist. Well thats good to know. Now you have to present evidence that this comes from a god. Let me ask you a question you think that humans were created in our present form?

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn sure...it can't come from man because then you would have man created absolute truths, and that is not possible. Laws of logic are consistent with Gods thinking. He cannot deny himself, so the laws of logic that are IMMATERIAL and truth come from God.

Look at it this way....as a man (or woman?) is there anything you could do to change the law of non contradiction. Could you of yourself, change the fact of having a $5 and NOT having a $5 in your wallet at the same time in the same way?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist The asseration that you have presented has never actually been demonstrated all you did was reverse Engineer an Emergant and then assigned the concept to a god of your choosing. I view your god as a place holder for other dieties for this asseration. AlI someone has to do is replace the christian god with Zesus, Shiva, Krishna, apply the same asseration and it fits the mold. Frist you have to demonstrate that your god exists then has exclusive rights to this asseration.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn I never said it was the Christian God. Laws of logic, i.e., the Law of non contradiction, is no respecter of men, because it comes from a designer. Seeing how you agree with me on that point, are you willing to admit it comes from a god, we just don't know which one?

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist Err....No. Frist you have to demonstrate that it came from a diety.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn Well, if it didn't come from man, as we both agree, I will accept the idea that it was by a higher intellect. Of course you are free to think whatever you want as well, whatever that may be???

Thanks much!

[wowamonn]

@TheSnarkyApologist As you may guess I would come to a diffrent conclusion but I must say I enjoyed the discussion.

Live long and Prosper.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@wowamonn thanks spock! ;)

[gnawaserge]

Why would GOd come down in his natural essence, He would have to come down in a way he could relate to us and in a way he can interact with us. So in his plan of Salvation which came through the same nation he revealed himself to (Israel), Included a messiah that no one knew would be GOD until Jesus revealed himself in the New Testament. which the Jews hated because he was the truth and was a perfect mirror (the word became flesh). JW's are modern Pharisees

[gnawaserge]

WOw its so silly how the Jehova's witnessess cult, tries to sound so authoritarian on scripture, s in order to avoid confronting the Revelation the bible teaches about the Deity of Christ. John 3:16 "FOr GOd so loved the ....only begotten... that none shall perish, BUt AHve Eternal LIFE.. john 17:3 "And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. The latter supports the former and it also claims Jesus true Identity as GOD

[MrShazoolo]

Clever editing Bill! Hey, any idea what the latest is on Stafford these days? Seems to be a few like him about these days, who aren't official witnesses yet retain a lot of the belief system.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@MrShazoolo It appears that he is starting his own following I believe. I just yesterday through out some of his teachings and can't recall them right now. I would thing a google search will yield the info however. Blessings to you old chap!

[ytany84]

@MrShazoolo - You don't have to be a Witness to hold the positions these "few" have of Jehovah, Jesus and Christianity in general.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@jehovahistheonlytrue YOU'VE NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE!!!! WOWSERS!!!

(Jesus) Rev 2:23 I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds.

(Jehovah)Jeremiah 17:10 "I the LORD search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve."

THANKS FOR THE REMINDER!

READ AND LEARN MY FRIEND!

[October31st1517]

@jehovahistheonlytrue It doesn't call Moses God, it says that he was AS God. In otherwords, he carried God's authority. But Moses is not God by nature. So I ask again, Since the Father is the only true God, then what kind of god is Jesus?

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@jehovahistheonlytrue Is Moses a God by "nature"? No he was appointed BY God. How long have you been polytheistic?

[October31st1517]

@TheSnarkyApologist Exactly brother Bill.

[urinfamousr79]

lol this video is exactly wut trinitarians do when asked such questions lol make jokes :p

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@urinfamousr79 Better making one than being one! hoo hoo!!!!

[October31st1517]

@jehovahistheonlytrue Since the Father is the only true God, then what kind of god is Jesus?

[barbsinclair]

@jehovahistheonlytrue

I love the way you show us all the only way you think you win the argument is to not reply to any question you can't answer !!! haha your so funny

[OurGr8God]

you're a nutcase!!!! lol :-)~

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@OurGr8God Thanks!......i think?

[ETHANGELIST]

LOL at 5:45

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@ETHANGELIST what am I missing? It wasn't one of the Transformers? lol!!!

[Ozzi4Japan]

Nicely put together, entertaining. You got talent my friend.

[1914watcher]

Apple and a nap? I've seen the couch in the basement, now I know why it was there..LOL! So funny :)

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@1914watcher Hey!!!!! You're Cheating!!!! lol.....

[1914watcher]

@TheSnarkyApologist We need a repeat of past events, I know "our" visit really helped me out. Thanks Bill, you have a beautiful family :)

[nobunaga86]

The microphone is a LIGHTER!! Hilarious Snarky, loved the yardstick joke too.

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@nobunaga86 EXCELLENT MY FRIEND!!!!!! You WIN!

hahahahahahaha....

[robotwookie]

Awesome!

[October31st1517]

To funny dude. LOL!!!!

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@jehovahistheonlytrue

You saw THAT as a win????? Oh, well, the lesson here is that we all try to lighten up a bit and have a good chuckle from time to time, even if it is at my expense! Laughter is the best medicine!

Blessings!

[supermanny73]

Man, that apple looks sooo goooood....now i feel like eating an apple...but they give me gas too...LOL!

[pretoshohmoofc]

"...we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ, THIS IS THE TRUE GOD and eternal life."

1 John 5:20.

[msm1876]

HA!

[pande4509]

Forget Mike I want to be like Bill........ You have the gift of funny!!!

[JC4U21]

Funny!

[earnestlyseeking]

Ha-Ha!

[theapologeticfront]

Absolutely brilliant!

[supermanny73]

Bill, this has to b one of ur funnirest videos...u should b on TV my friend!

Had me cracking up the whole time!

[TheSnarkyApologist]

@supermanny73 I've over been told I should be on stage! The next one headed west! hahahaha lol!!!!