This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You said "This is the same book that condones slavery, the beating of children, the murder of homosexuals, and the oppression of women, none of which would have been prescribed by god in any context on the basis that they promote harmony."
Wow...If you think that's what the Scriptures say -then you need to read them in the original languages. I've studied them my entire life & what I think I recognize is MIStranslation being represented as original principle. I wish I had more space to write.
Something must be wrong with your ancient Hebrew and Greek.
The usual defense from christians and jews regarding such events described in the OT and NT pertain to changes in social norms and culturally accepted practices or the differing moral code between social life and war, etc.
All of which have fatal flaws and inconsistent views.
// Wow...If you think that's what the Scriptures say -then you need to read them in the original languages. //
I have. I'm a former minister/theologian. Trust me when I say there is 'nothing' in the Hebrew and/or Greek to suggest that slavery was anything 'other' than what we would define it to be: The "owning" of another person for your own gain. Period. Disobedient children were to be "stoned" -- not just beaten (the rod example Scott gives is, granted, improper.) But stoning... much worse.
@g0ysorg I'd like to know, if you are right about mistranslations, what the bible actually says about slavery, murder and the beating of women that has been lost and/or "corrupted" in these new translations? And by which transcripts are you basing as the a more original? Too, even if those verses are in error they're in the bible now, isn't this a problem for modern Christians? So much so that they truly need to reject modern Christianity?
For a while, I thought that this argument was entirely one of semantics, on both sides. Which is fine, if that's the intention.
Then I got to this:
"This is the same book that condones slavery, the beating of children, the murder of homosexuals, and the oppression of women, none of which would have been prescribed by god in any context on the basis that they promote harmony."
I think I read somewhere that Darfius means retard in Greek or Latin or something like that. That would explain why he hasn't responded to your rebuttal, huhaha.
Could you conceive that someone who says 'God is love' does not mean 'you can sub in the word love for the word God'?
Ie, you take the intellectual highground by imagining you yourself assume nothing, when in fact all the time you are makings assumptions about languange and how it is used.
Did you even watch the video? Because you're taking me out of context. I brought up the "god is love" thing because Darfius DID admittedly try to substitute the word "love" for the word "God."
I think I'm paying just as much attention as the content merits, mr Bullshit.
So far as I can remember, your target in this video - Pooky Bear, did you call him? - tooks a piece of Socrates and a piece of religious dogma and then threw a load of words into a blender. You're clearly a lot smarter than that guy, yet you post a condescending video which enacts the dishonesty of pretending to interact with his uninteractable 'argument',
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
...
but when you do so you continue your practice of adopting certain concepts authoratitively (premises, semantics, etc) which I don't think you really know how to use. Give a decent reply to Valyok and I'll be impressed. If not, I suggest you apply your intelligence to some reading, rather than eviscerating amateur religious apologists. Just a suggestion.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Come now, Scott, play fair - those who belittle should expect to be belittled in their turn.
The connection is simple: you presume ontological monism (specifically, materialism), which becomes a dogmatism that you use as a final word (as Valyok exposes), and this attitude is (perceived as) vindicated by Popper's falsificationism or Ayer's verificationism, both of which you invoke, intentioanlly or otherwise, when you make fun of 'wordy wordiness' like 'God is love'. In short: read Wittgenstein.
I smell sick too, but I don't think it's coming from any regurgitation on my part.
If you need a visual stimulus, try Valyok's reply to your reply to him, in which he explains why the burden of proof is on you to show that existence must be spatio-temporal - a point you previosuly misunderstood by telling him the burden of proof was his because he was claiming that God exists, which is irrelevant.
Sometimes, though, words written down can be as valuable as words in a youtube video. Your call.
For the... probably 56th time, you've impressed me. Each video you make is very thought through and logical, causing the Christians to think and, in my situation, abandon their former beliefs. Not to mention, I loved your fight with yourself. Did you and you make up? Haha
hi, my names Kai. Just wanted to say that I REALLY REALLY REALLY like your vids, the topics you address make me wanna scratch my own-grey matter and get into some theoreticalbullshit all of my own. Errm.. yeah. Anyways.
Absolutely. "God is equivalent to love" Is in serious need of qualification. It seems that God, morphs into whatever the argument for his existence seems to demand.
Scott, you have a knack for theory that blows my mind. I don't know how you were able to see through the fog of that guy's message so quickly. I was shell-shocked after I watched his video. However, your video cleared my mind and I was able to see where he confused me. Brilliant. You are like James Dean, Socrates and Bill Maher rolled into one.
you are fuckin hilarious, I had to favorite this video just for the convo part. Good work picking apart that argument though...oh and that scene from BB diaries has always stuck with me as one of the most powerful scenes Ive ever seen in a movie...and yes it was Heroin...it was about writer Jim Carol.
God is light so... turn on the god please! Can you really turn on God? Did virgin Mary turned on God? Then again Zeus was frecquently turned on by women. Is Zeus light too, then?
The ending was superb. I couldn't imagine even thinking about that word salad... Uh, you answered him exactly, but I don't think he even answered his own question. Still confusing as hell. Good job. =3
LMAO! The arguement was so good, man! You're fuckin' hilarious. "I think you mean: you devil me." HAHAHAHA! Awesome!
"Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division." - Luke 12:51
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple." Luke 14:26
For some reason that joke "I think you mean: you devil me." reminds of the show "scrubs". The way he says it is almost exactly like the main character of that show. Anyway, great job!
You bring up linguistics, in the sense that your interpreting "God is love" to mean that God is literally love, or God and Love are interchangeable words. But I'm not sure thats what Darfius meant. And as soon as we enter into the came of symantics we enter into subjectivity in the sense that "God is Love" can mean many different things to many different people.
I agree with Darfius's idea that "God is Love" or God is harmony. Harmony is creation, existence, experience, consciousness, with out it there would be no existence. But I totally agree with your final point hands down. Let me know what you think! and thanks again! :D
Why can't a feeling create a Universe?
MrLittletomdj 3 months ago
you know what i enjoy, barbershop quartets. 4 guys singing in beautiful love. .. yea harmony isn't love
jerf241 1 year ago
theoreticalbullshit, i guess i have to say: I devil you!! XD great video
Beldinc 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You said "This is the same book that condones slavery, the beating of children, the murder of homosexuals, and the oppression of women, none of which would have been prescribed by god in any context on the basis that they promote harmony."
Wow...If you think that's what the Scriptures say -then you need to read them in the original languages. I've studied them my entire life & what I think I recognize is MIStranslation being represented as original principle. I wish I had more space to write.
g0ysorg 3 years ago
Something must be wrong with your ancient Hebrew and Greek.
The usual defense from christians and jews regarding such events described in the OT and NT pertain to changes in social norms and culturally accepted practices or the differing moral code between social life and war, etc.
All of which have fatal flaws and inconsistent views.
anwyll 2 years ago 2
// Wow...If you think that's what the Scriptures say -then you need to read them in the original languages. //
I have. I'm a former minister/theologian. Trust me when I say there is 'nothing' in the Hebrew and/or Greek to suggest that slavery was anything 'other' than what we would define it to be: The "owning" of another person for your own gain. Period. Disobedient children were to be "stoned" -- not just beaten (the rod example Scott gives is, granted, improper.) But stoning... much worse.
rationalmuscle 2 years ago 7
@rationalmuscle "I'm a former minister/theologian"
what are you now? if you dont mind me asking
robertwc82 1 year ago
@robertwc82 Not at all. I'm a researcher; specifically nutritional science as it pertains to cancer.
rationalmuscle 1 year ago
@g0ysorg I'd like to know, if you are right about mistranslations, what the bible actually says about slavery, murder and the beating of women that has been lost and/or "corrupted" in these new translations? And by which transcripts are you basing as the a more original? Too, even if those verses are in error they're in the bible now, isn't this a problem for modern Christians? So much so that they truly need to reject modern Christianity?
dichotomyofone 1 year ago
For a while, I thought that this argument was entirely one of semantics, on both sides. Which is fine, if that's the intention.
Then I got to this:
"This is the same book that condones slavery, the beating of children, the murder of homosexuals, and the oppression of women, none of which would have been prescribed by god in any context on the basis that they promote harmony."
Absolutely brilliant.
jmthetank 3 years ago 2
God is love, because God loves unconditionaly....
it is not meant to be taken to the grammatical meaning of the sentence...
AlBasti102 3 years ago
What if your wife was an English professor and then she got into a whole lecture about gerunds and shit like that? What a headache, lol.
MaicoMoon 3 years ago
I think I read somewhere that Darfius means retard in Greek or Latin or something like that. That would explain why he hasn't responded to your rebuttal, huhaha.
MaicoMoon 3 years ago
Could you conceive that someone who says 'God is love' does not mean 'you can sub in the word love for the word God'?
Ie, you take the intellectual highground by imagining you yourself assume nothing, when in fact all the time you are makings assumptions about languange and how it is used.
untermenschen9 4 years ago
Did you even watch the video? Because you're taking me out of context. I brought up the "god is love" thing because Darfius DID admittedly try to substitute the word "love" for the word "God."
...Pay more attention.
TheoreticalBullshit 4 years ago 4
I think I'm paying just as much attention as the content merits, mr Bullshit.
So far as I can remember, your target in this video - Pooky Bear, did you call him? - tooks a piece of Socrates and a piece of religious dogma and then threw a load of words into a blender. You're clearly a lot smarter than that guy, yet you post a condescending video which enacts the dishonesty of pretending to interact with his uninteractable 'argument',
...
untermenschen9 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
...
but when you do so you continue your practice of adopting certain concepts authoratitively (premises, semantics, etc) which I don't think you really know how to use. Give a decent reply to Valyok and I'll be impressed. If not, I suggest you apply your intelligence to some reading, rather than eviscerating amateur religious apologists. Just a suggestion.
untermenschen9 4 years ago
And all of this has what to do with your original criticism? Do you still stand by that, or have you moved on to other attempts to belittle me?
By the way, I have made responses to Valyok. Parhaps you haven't seen them.
TheoreticalBullshit 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Come now, Scott, play fair - those who belittle should expect to be belittled in their turn.
The connection is simple: you presume ontological monism (specifically, materialism), which becomes a dogmatism that you use as a final word (as Valyok exposes), and this attitude is (perceived as) vindicated by Popper's falsificationism or Ayer's verificationism, both of which you invoke, intentioanlly or otherwise, when you make fun of 'wordy wordiness' like 'God is love'. In short: read Wittgenstein.
untermenschen9 4 years ago
...so that I can regurgitate other people's ideas like you do?
Make a video, then I'll give you my time.
TheoreticalBullshit 4 years ago 5
I smell sick too, but I don't think it's coming from any regurgitation on my part.
If you need a visual stimulus, try Valyok's reply to your reply to him, in which he explains why the burden of proof is on you to show that existence must be spatio-temporal - a point you previosuly misunderstood by telling him the burden of proof was his because he was claiming that God exists, which is irrelevant.
Sometimes, though, words written down can be as valuable as words in a youtube video. Your call.
untermenschen9 4 years ago
@TheoreticalBullshit I god you, Scott, I god you.
Oops. That proves that god isnt love. :[
cxsss 1 year ago
@TheoreticalBullshit That is embarrasing. I didnt watch the video and made that comment.
cxsss 1 year ago
For the... probably 56th time, you've impressed me. Each video you make is very thought through and logical, causing the Christians to think and, in my situation, abandon their former beliefs. Not to mention, I loved your fight with yourself. Did you and you make up? Haha
LadyLexiLego 4 years ago
hi, my names Kai. Just wanted to say that I REALLY REALLY REALLY like your vids, the topics you address make me wanna scratch my own-grey matter and get into some theoreticalbullshit all of my own. Errm.. yeah. Anyways.
AngelKaiLina 4 years ago
like i said to my dad one time, christianity is like living in a box.
he answered that it was a 5 star hotel.
and i answered, but it is still a box.
it has windows, you can see the world. you just can't play in it.
johnnierah 4 years ago
-snickersnort- "Unfortunately for you you're Christian".....God I hurt something there!
-chokes-
sparkleytangerine 4 years ago
WOW you just crushed my idea of the intelliangence of sitcom acters lol dw im only joking very clever you analisation skills are amazing
ratssniff 4 years ago
Absolutely. "God is equivalent to love" Is in serious need of qualification. It seems that God, morphs into whatever the argument for his existence seems to demand.
Keep him honest! 5*
bitbutter 4 years ago
I hope you made up with yourself after the fight.
Foslopac 4 years ago 2
Scott, you have a knack for theory that blows my mind. I don't know how you were able to see through the fog of that guy's message so quickly. I was shell-shocked after I watched his video. However, your video cleared my mind and I was able to see where he confused me. Brilliant. You are like James Dean, Socrates and Bill Maher rolled into one.
marcosdoliva 4 years ago 2
I think that is possibly the coolest compliment I've ever gotten.
TheoreticalBullshit 4 years ago
you look a lot like your future wife... spooky :p
ivarbt 4 years ago
You played your own wife very well. Good show! =]
CalvinCoooolidge 4 years ago
"I think you mean you Devil me." lmao pure gold Scott
Smog1050 4 years ago
lol, never new these existed.
faeriesrock 4 years ago
you are fuckin hilarious, I had to favorite this video just for the convo part. Good work picking apart that argument though...oh and that scene from BB diaries has always stuck with me as one of the most powerful scenes Ive ever seen in a movie...and yes it was Heroin...it was about writer Jim Carol.
Ambersonian 4 years ago
"I think you mean you devil me..." Cute moment! :D
Jessiqua42 4 years ago
you'll go crazy within a few months if you keep this up.. ;)
CPLains 4 years ago
You're a genius
rowsdowersavesus 4 years ago
ahaha...Oh my I love that! So funny, very very clever!
mrssbrady 4 years ago
I think you mean you "God" that...Just, FYI.
TheStig000 4 years ago
ahaha...Oh yeah hehe :)
mrssbrady 4 years ago
NOT TO BE F'D WITH
whankerNJ 4 years ago
lol @ the conversation
Castaa 4 years ago
"I devil you" brilliant :)
RosieDesire 4 years ago
"jumbled cluster-fuck of theory" that line alone would be a perfect response to his video lol.
Hooya2 4 years ago 2
Aha, that was great. Thank you for making my day.
moonie523 4 years ago
Exactly, how can a loving God condone and encourage such hateful things?
FTLNewsFeed 4 years ago
Holy crap... I'm going to have to start a playlist of your stuff. I want to favorite every one. 5*
DavidRandallCurtis 4 years ago
great as always.
deftone86 4 years ago
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!! Clever, and a great response video. ★★★★★
Katalyzt
Katalyzt 4 years ago
@ 1:14 I don't know which is worse: that you started singin that horrible techno song or that I actually recognized it.
BoozyBeggar 4 years ago
LOL. I devil you!
God is light so... turn on the god please! Can you really turn on God? Did virgin Mary turned on God? Then again Zeus was frecquently turned on by women. Is Zeus light too, then?
florinmiu 4 years ago 8
ROTFLMAO!
akylae101 3 years ago
"Jumbled Clusterfuck of Theory" made me lol.
WizardJim 4 years ago
The ending was superb. I couldn't imagine even thinking about that word salad... Uh, you answered him exactly, but I don't think he even answered his own question. Still confusing as hell. Good job. =3
gamerunknown 4 years ago
Damn, you're cluttering my favorites with all these recent great videos! :)
MightyTiny 4 years ago
"jumbled cluster-fuck-of-a-theory"? LOL
Caretzz 4 years ago
HAHAHHAHA. Pro actor for sure... =P
ps2babyboy 4 years ago 2
lol, i don't know why, but i love semantics.
THEoldy 4 years ago
L O L...
OnlyFearOfDeath 4 years ago
LMAO! The arguement was so good, man! You're fuckin' hilarious. "I think you mean: you devil me." HAHAHAHA! Awesome!
"Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division." - Luke 12:51
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple." Luke 14:26
Harmony my ass!!
Antichrist4Life 4 years ago 2
For some reason that joke "I think you mean: you devil me." reminds of the show "scrubs". The way he says it is almost exactly like the main character of that show. Anyway, great job!
KT45 4 years ago
You bring up linguistics, in the sense that your interpreting "God is love" to mean that God is literally love, or God and Love are interchangeable words. But I'm not sure thats what Darfius meant. And as soon as we enter into the came of symantics we enter into subjectivity in the sense that "God is Love" can mean many different things to many different people.
GeraldP1983 4 years ago
I agree with Darfius's idea that "God is Love" or God is harmony. Harmony is creation, existence, experience, consciousness, with out it there would be no existence. But I totally agree with your final point hands down. Let me know what you think! and thanks again! :D
GeraldP1983 4 years ago