Tony is the smartest dumb person I've seen. If their is any credit due to creationists it's that they are die hard contrarians at least when it comes to facts.
Tony gave one big ass argument from ignorance or incredulity "I don't know how life began so therefore god did it". Fails to understand the invalidity of pascal's gambit, fails to understand what atheism is and just plain fails in general. We don't need to take it as far as pointing out the problems with their particular form of theism, all we have to do is show the irrationality of the god belief in it's most basic form. We could go the extra mile but that's overkill, which amuses me
science could have proved the evolution theory correct hundreds of years ago if it wasnt for the cruel,sadistic,blood thirsty inqusitors whom forced great scientist to stop research and/or publication of their paper to the public!!!!
God seems to prefer a balance of evidence: there is enough reason to believe if we want to believe, but not enough to intellectually force belief against our will. Instead of overpowering us with undeniable logic or mighty miracles until we grudgingly give up and give in, God wants us to want to come to Him.
@musical149 How convenient. But I'll take the bate - consider now that God has disappeared. Somehow he's vanished, gone fishin' and he's never coming back. He doesn't tell anyone He's left. You wake up to this Godless day and what do you know? What will you do differently today than you ever have done before? I suggest nothing, because I suggest he doesn't exist and that the reasons he doesn't "overpower" us with his existence is simple - he doesn't exist.
Al-Quran has 1400 years ago and Muslim Scientists has been declared "He (God) makes you (human), in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness".
Al Quran sura Az Zumar;6
".....He (God) makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. . . ."
Have the Bible and scientists states "He (God ) makes you (human), in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness"?
Atheist want proof of God?,....God owe's us nothing!!!!....He does not have to prove to nonbeliever's He exists. Or when do you go to your boss at work and tell him what to do??? Be happy atheist's that if you repent and look for Him you will find Him.....and that He left a door open for you to enter heaven, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH SOME OF YOU HATE GOD HE WILL LOVE YOU UNTIL THE END. (unfortunately after you are dead it's game over you will want to repent and it will be too late.)
This Tony character is one of the smartest religious people I have ever heard.
He is also a moron.
Btw, I love how they know exactly what god wants down to his feelings on stem cells, two dudes holding hands and which country to bomb but then when confronted with a question they can not answer, they say "man can not understand the mind of god!"
I am glad that we have debate between theists and atheists because it helps us to understand the world a little better. Please, just keep it intelligent. Be a CapnOrdinary rather than a Tonybonez. Let's all be respectful, and logical, and debate in a way that is conducive to a thoughtful, productive atmosphere.
That being said, the reason why I choose to be religious is not because necessarily see absolute, physical truth. I feel happy because of my religious beliefs. Going to church makes me feel fulfilled. Volunteering at the food bank with my friends from church does the same. I believe it is time that religion becomes less of a way to explain the world and more of a way to live in the world.
I am a religious person. Tonybonez was hilarious. Not in a "Ha-ha" way but in a "I weep for humanity" way.
I don't think that it is possible to scientifically prove that there is a god. I think that belief in god requires faith. Maybe one has had a profound spiritual experience of some sort, but other than that, there is no tangible proof. That is why we say that one is a member of "the catholic faith" rather than "the catholic direct observation of one's tangible surroundings."
You can call me whatever you please, and believe whatever you like too. (I'm sure you're well practised in this "art".
Intelligent discussion???
You really have GOT to be joking now. SURELY? NO maybe not.
So far ALL your intelligent discussion has been to childishly name call, and tell leis.
Your non existent credibility, and complete lack of even the most basic of understanding, illustrates perfectly to anyone reading these posts, just how old you are (intellectually speaking).
Your UNBIASED opinion, (CHORTLE, SNIGGER, CHUCKLE), You just fail to get it, don't you. Every time you post this idiocy, you give someone new a chuckle, to brighten their day. You keep it up, the world needs to laugh more.
Your name itself merely adds an extra flavour of irony, especially after reading your posts. I at first thought it was sarcastic, or satirical, and was actually starting to smile, until I started to read your posts, and realised you REALLY think it is true.
And it isn't as though you've left me with no material, EH? AND, you keep on supplying me with a fresh lot, every post.
You sound very het up again, BTW using my name really won't bother me in the slightest it merely points to your level. But you aren't very old are you?
Ha ha ha ha, there you go again.
"Yes, my unbiased opinion is T-Bonez "won" this debate, because he was more convincing. But I don't know who is actually correct, and neither
Just look at all your completely unbiased comments.
I really have lost interest now, although it was one hell of a chuckle, going back through and reading some of the gems you've posted. Though I can understand how youd enjoy it less. What an embarrassment. Can you even bear it?
I urge anyone with 5 mins to spare, to just flip back a couple of pages, and soak in some "unbiased opinion".
I'll leave it up to those who can be bothered, to judge.
You really are worth no more time.
I've had more coherence and rationality from my 3 y old niece.
If you reply again, you'll leave me no choice but to collect some of your choice imbecilities, and your contradictory statements together, in one (or four) glorious postings.
If nothing else it will illustrate that I wasn't completely "out of order" with the initial sarcasm.
"honesty and dignity.or integrity" I'm shocked you can spell 'em
You really can't see where you've flip flopped, and contradicted yourself? You've answered umpteen questions, that weren't even asked, hardly any of the ones asked.
Quite apart from trying to "get my goat" by calling me grundy. You've actually admitted TWICE you were wrong, about a couple points.
I was sarcastic about a comment you made, YOU started the insults, and carried on with them.
Can you really go back through all these posts and NOT feel a chump?
OR, there is other lifeforms in the universe. Did YOUR god make these also? Do you suppose they are "created in his image"? Why no mention of this in a "holy" book?
These questions, no matter which side one comes down on, cause problems in a theistic world-view.
A Naturalistic view, has no such problems. There are no old stories, or dogma to adhere to.
the "firmament", as a dome over the FLAT disk of the earth, with tiny dots of light. Unless of course there actually was a god, BUT there is no such knowledge contained therein, is there? Why not I wonder?
It's only very recently WE'VE started to understand the size. Have YOU looked? Do you have a handle on this universe we inhabit, and just how BIG and old it really is?
BUT, If were alone in the universe. The upshot would be YOUR god made the
I may be wrong, but I don't recall reading anywhere in the christian bible that we are alone in the universe, but I cannot speak for the koran, or any others as of now."
So That's it is it? You do yet another climbdown, ramble a little more, and that's it?
What about all the BULLSHIT and LEIS, and INSULTS? (not that I'd expect an apology from you, it's usually only people of integrity).
How could they talk about the universe in an old book? They still imagined
I wouldn't expect you to understand, how could you.
Obsessed? No not at all, why would you think that? I "discus" with folk like you all the time.
"Perhaps not necessarily in our "BIG" <---(lol) universe, but maybe even in dimensons apart from our big ol' uni."
Ha Ha Ha. you really are a dim pathetic sort of clown really aren't you, I really won't bother with that, I'll leave it up to everyone else to draw their own conclusions.
How about YOU answer a question, I don't think you have yet.
just how big the universe is? You do? And you still imagine it's all for little old us?
And you still think your NOT deluded?
SNIGGER! CHORTLE! SNIGGER! GUFFAW! CHUCKLE!
BTW, You can insult me all day M8, it will not bother me in the least. I just wish you realised how much you were actually being laughed at here, imagining it could.
Go on, you keep "proving" just how thick I am. FAR easier than actually addressing a point, EH?
there is no god, (even though it's very highly improbable. Impossible if one want's to go with the self contradictory myth of the bible).
Arrogance??? HHMMMmmmm? Yes I suppose it's far more arrogant, than thinking the universe was created just for US. And by merely "praying" one can have the grand gaffer of the whole shebang actually listen, and even change the natural order, and events, in YOUR favour.
You keep telling yourself, if it makes you feel better. You'll be well practised in that art, I don't doubt.
"Fact is no one knows how life began".
NO, we don't. So in the absence of anything concrete well wish into existence a deity, to make us feel better. THERE THERE THERE!!! Pat's on head, a number of times.
There you go again, it's SO typical. Inventing what folk say to make you sound as if you know what your saying.
Remember what I said about emotional "knee jerk reactions"?
Not that I'm surprised, you don't strike me as the most rational of thinkers. I'm afraid you really don't make much sense.
O.J. Simpson, indeed.
And it's MY comments that were absurd? When one spins a 180, and completely contradicts one's self within a couple of posts, it comes across as a little flaky, to say the least.
I suggest you re read your posts, and try to come down on one side or the other.
"and Hmmm, if I were to have an opinion as to who was right wouldn't THAT make me biased???"
Well, YES absolutely. I couldn't agree more. Can I then take it you've done a complete turn around. It wouldn't be the first time I've debated with a believer who likes to flip flop around, not knowing actually what they think. Why I wonder did you change your mind? You DO remember your earlier opinion?
"in my unbiased opinion, I declare Toneybonez the winner, even though I have no idea who is right".
Evidently not on the content, or what is said, Its sounds to me as though you're the one who is over emotionally involved, desperate to try to defend your irrational, outdated, invisible man in the sky, belief system.
I know. How about you try to actually rebutt the things in the video, and at least give the odd reason, as to WHY you think "he won", that would carry a little more weight than an emotional "knee jerk" reaction.
If you read the old testement "God" is definetly NOT about being "loving" he is a "jealous god" he floods and kills innocents, turns innocent to salt, asks a man to kill his only son, has a wager with the devil and allows job to lose everything including his family and forsakes his only son. No in the old testement "god" is not the loving father he's EYE for a EYE. And as far as people believing that jesus was the son of god, there was a bunch of people who did'nt believe he was to back then
there are better factual arguments against the accuracy of the bible. and if you think about it if god is the moral standard... and he is a lovely person according to his own book, whatever he does is an act of love because he sets the standards for love. i think the idea of hell is fucking rediculous but saying it is evidence againt the bible doesnt really work out well.
to imnoadvertiser1: saying "However there is much evidence against the bible eg: the line: "suffer not the witch to live" " this isnt actually evidence against the bible this is evidence against a loving god. someone could just come back with saying hes a jealous/vengeful god.
Not much evidence that Jesus was the son of God? What about the ressurection, or wait let me guess--just a hoax right. Or What about Jesus miracles---let me guess another hoax right. Or what about the Roman empire (largest in the world at the time) Officially declaring Jesus as God---another hoax??
Do you see why it takes more faith to be atheist or agnostic than Christian. I simply dont have that much faith!
HOW CAN YOU BE 100% SURE ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF GOD?? I certainly am not!!
well you actually have to prove he was god using documents from that time that are non biblical. anyone can write a self fulfilling prophecy. the romans becoming christians isnt evidence just like people in iraq proclaiming muhammed is gods prophet isnt evidence of islam.
Why don't we seperate the OLD and NEW Testaments and consider some of the OT as a prediciton or prophecy and try to look at the historical evidence that Jesus was the son of God.
When investigated in depth there si only 1 logical conclusion, but I often think it is atheists fear that keeps them ignorant. They fear the possibility of God so much they risk hell!!
"When investigated in depth there si only 1 logical conclusion, but I often think it is atheists fear that keeps them ignorant. They fear the possibility of God so much they risk hell!!"
Sorry, but that statement is completely pisspotical!
Your talking complete broken biscuits.
We risk hell, because we fear the possibility of god??? BUT isn't hell the threat, why would we fear god, if it wasn't for hell? So we fear him, so we say he doesn't exist, is that it?
I think some atheists are afraid to admit that their might be a God because that means they are accountable for how they live, so they try to use a flawed logic to disprove God's existence, which is a fool's task, don't you agree?
I'm at a complete loss as to how you can come up with this nonsense. Maybe because I'm from the UK, but the way you think seems alien to me. AND you talk about "flawed logic".
We don't try to disprove god, it isn't possible to disprove something that doesn't exist.
Neither is it possible to prove he does exist.
BUT something that does exist has some kind of proof. IE something that is real, manifests in some way, hence it is detectable/measurable.
As I stated earlier. And you ignored, as you have with almost every point in every post.
"Obviously one cannot say anything with 100% certainty. But I'd say it's in the 99.9 odd% category, along with the existence of a god. YOUR god, I'd say 100% COULDN'T exist though."
If one hasn't been brainwashed into that way of thinking, it's simply a question of what is likely, or probable.
And I'm afraid god is very very very very unlikely. And as time goes on, and the worlds populace gets
If you were 1 of 1000 people---who had 1000 other people holding guns to all of your heads and they were going to fire in 3 seconds (giving everybody time to duck if they chose to); and only 1 gun had a bullet in the chamber would you choose to duck. Odds are that your gun does not have a bullet.
BTW: why do you assume I was born Christian. Remember to assume makes an ass out of "U" and "ME"!!!
NO ONE is born anything, you may be born into a christian or muslim houshold, however, how does one call a chld who cannot even comprehend anything, any denomination of religion?
I'm sorry but your pathetic analogy only illustrated just how irrational you are, and how far you misunderstand what I was saying, it's really merely Pascals wager, dressed in modern attire.
Stop keep trying to prove the bible with the bible. It CANNOT work.
progressively more educated, more and more people will naturally understand that.
And all this silly talk, (like satan and god) will be very largely assigned to the vualt of history, and myth, as have the one's that have fallen out of fashion, Thor, Dionysus, RA, etc, etc.
After all the only difference is you have been brought up to believe Yawah is the correct one. Had you been brought up elsewhere, or another time, you would believe something entirely different.
So you admit that trying to disprove God is a fools mission, right! Tell that to imnoadvertiser: he tells me he is going to disprove God (see his comments below)
God is detectable if you understand the life of Jesus and how astronomical the odds are that humans not only were created, but that we survived this long.
Faith is not just simply a question of what is likely, or probable.
It seems, after all, (how depressing, I was sure you'de get it in the end, and not merely LEAP onto the fact I'd mentioned not proving god, seems I gave you far too much credit), that indeed you are incapable of comprehending what I was saying. I'll say it again, in case you've forgotten.
""Obviously one cannot say anything with 100% certainty. But I'd say it's in the 99.9 odd% category, along with the existence of a god. YOUR god, I'd say 100% COULDN'T exist though.""
It seems my brain in a vat analogy, passed you by completely.
STRICTLY speaking, we can NEVER say anything is 100%, even that were here on earth.
In practical terms, absolutely we can, as I stated earlier.
Just HOW, is god detectable? Your talking completely at cross purposes, (after all Ive said), sorry but your reasoning is childish, and very rudimentary. Ive had far more grown up discussions with my 16 year old stepson. Sorry to insult you, but I dont know how else to say it.
The OT gives a time line of a man born in Bethlehem of a virgin, who would perform miracles, die, resurrect, and bring the entire world into the knowledge of the God of Israel.
And it all comes into fruition in the life of Jesus Christ.
SO, you " Played it smart, and threw in with jesus just in case "EH?
And you consider this a noble and worthy reason to "believe" in your creator, just to hedge your bets, and get into heaven?
You don't give your omnipotent, omnipresent, god too much credit for sense, do you? Don't you image he would see through this?
So this position is superior to someone who in all honesty, and with all integrity, just cannot bring themselves to believe in far fetched sounding Mythological stories?
The silly old myth your talking about doesn't threaten me in the slightest, can you people not get this into your heads? It's no different than telling me Santa clause won't come if I'm not good.
You see NO ONE is risking hell, it's a complete fantasy.
"atheists complete irrationality".
You evidently don't know the definition of ir/rationality either.
Just how is it rational to believe in something for which there is NO evidence whatsoever.
Well, I don't see that as in any way strange, it's a shame you do.
Obviously one cannot say anything with 100% certainty. But I'd say it's in the 99.9 odd% category, along with the existence of a god. YOUR god, I'd say 100% COULDN'T exist though.
So can I take it you don't believe that when we die (our bodies cease to function) we cease to exist.
luckily we are biodegradable, and so will rot down nicely back into the constituent elements that we temporarily borrowed from the universe. Naturally
What the fool lacks in knowledge he will make up in certainty!!!
Basically you have no idea what happens when you die or how life started on Earth. You just have a little voice in your head that says "it could not be God, it had to have happened naturally all on its own.....go ahead deny God against all reason"
and that little voice is the Devil trying to mess with you.
Bottom line no human besides Jesus fully understands God or the universe.
He's an idiot. You should point him to one of DonExodus2's videos on abiogenesis and tell him that many of the components that make up life have been created in the lab.
I have no idea if there is, or isn't a god or gods who created the universe and all mankind, and there's no way that anyone could ever know until they die, which does us here on earth no good. My personal beliefs are that If there IS a god/gods, i'll find out when i die, if not it doesn't matter, if you showed me irrefutable evidence that there was a god/gods i'll believe, if you show me evidence that they're isn't i'll believe that theyre isnt, if you dont show me any evidence, i just wont kno
I meant that I religious isn't the right word for athiesm, yeah you can't empirically prove god so its a belief but I don't think religious describes this.
Yes there is 0 difference between the actual context of them, but since athiesm is just saying there is no god(s),then pantheism is taking that one step further.Most athiest are probably panthiests without knowing it.I'd also say that generally science is the way of understanding the world and panthiesm is the human side of that. religion provides something for people and discarding that as athiesm might suggest ,panthiesm embraces that.
I disagree not with agnostic/athiest nonsense but that you can't know for sure that god doesn't exist,as in I don't think he can logically exist and loads of other different reasons. I believe 100% that I know God doesn't exist.Of course I could still be wrong I don't know how but I could be, so is that not 100%?If so why even bother with the full 100%?
you know I'm pretty god damn certain that agnosticism is someone who is not sure about whether god exists they think it could be but they can't be certain(the old joke what do you get if you cross a agnostic,a dyslexic and an insomniac-someone who stays up all night wondering if there is a dog)
An Athiest is just-they don't believe that god exists. Athiesm doesn't imply any other beliefs-its just no there is no God.
You are wrong about this. Agnostic means that you state that it is not possible to know either way. I am an atheist and I don't believe in god (at least not the desert god), and I think the odds are pretty low for a god, but I can't assert that there is no god with any certainty.
Matt D. discusses this occasionally on The Atheist Experience. Try searching for it on youtube.
Agnostic means you can't know if there is a god. Atheists do not believe in a god, but not necessarily that there definitely is no god. If you don't believe in something for which there is no proof or evidence, that doesn't need faith. You can't prove there is no flying spaghetti monster, but what is the likelihood of it actually existing? We have science that shows us the bible is wrong about the creation of the world and creation of life. Loss of creation is total loss of credibility.
Your definitions are wrong, and the above definition is right. In any event, it takes no faith at all to not believe in god or to believe that the god of the bible (as described) does not exist.
Atheism can also mean that you don't believe in the god of the bible or any other god that wants to be known or who is actively involved in the affairs of humans. Does it take faith to not believe in Thor or Zeus? Why not? Because there is no reason to believe in them. What reason is there to believe in JC or god of the bible or Allah? Remove the "holy" books and what do you have? All of the desert dogmas rely heavily on the bible, not something I would want to have as a foundation.
I heard a funny story and I don't know if it's true. "Issac newton, having reached a stage of financial success, had a clocksmith create a scale model of the solar system, with complete rotational and orbits. Later a visiting Atheist friend comes to visit and inquires about the makre. Newton replies that there is no maker. the atheist is outraged at the insult to his intelligence for surely this has a maker. Newton then burns him on his doublestandard. no fair,HLMGTFUing
This is absolutely silly. The real solar system isn't made out of processed iron or wood that has been cut to shape.
Does helium need to be "made by a maker"? We see it being made by the mega ton every single second in the sun. Chemical reactions and nuclear fusion take place without direction.
there is no god and only our worldly life exist we live and we die..some people live and others die replacing them.. and nothing destroys us except time.. stop believing in God!!!
Atheists shoudn't waste our time with theists. They just play semantic cheap tricks. They believe in god because they are afraid of dying. Technology will solve that and religions will not exist anymore other than in history books. Theists will try to stop this technologies. We, the atheist, should support these tecnology advances, like we have always done
I'm not sure technology cuold ever prevent death but I do think atheists should stop wasting time debating theists. I'm not a big fan of Dawkins but he came out with a great one-liner when invited to debate at some creationist diploma mill. He just said, 'That would look good on your CV, not on mine'. pwned
i like the math reason for believing in god, (just incase). Least it makes sense. The beauty with science, and atheism, is if you proove us wrong we'll happily follow you. Whereas you can demonstrate the bible is b.s (flood, ark), but they stick with it, literally blinded by faith
you could have gone into how DNA and RNA are made up of chains of amino acids. you could have stated that lipids form double walled vesicles under conditions that the early earth was prone to. maybe shown how single molecule monomers can link up into polymers, all by following the laws of physics....
but i think all of these points would have been lost on him.
(i personally refuse to argue with people who can't tell the difference between 'their' and 'there')
When he said that man's science cannot disprove god, I find myself wanting to shout at him, "So what the fuck WILL???"
I mean, whether there is a god or isn't, what evidence could possibly prove or disprove this god? And if the answer is "none," then on what basis should one assert that such a creature exists? Faith and faith alone? Because that's the very definition of gullible.
To find the most compelling arguments against one religion, ask a competing one's proponents opinion. In other words, to find what's wrong with Christianity, on simply has to ask a Muslim for instance.
The problem isn't only extra religious. Even amongst Christianity there is about 30 000 denominations. You'd think that the Holy Spirit would be more consistent than that in its revelations of the truth....
Guys, we seriously need to find a way to disprove god in a rhetorical sense, seeing as it's the kind of evidence they like. 1. Does god defeat himself in purpose or word? 2. ... Nevermind, that's the wrong route. But seriously, there must be some way, even if it ends up being an irrational argument. Irrational arguments are very effective, so even if they stroke a cord of immorality with you, do use them. They can be very productive when dealing with most people.
This argument is also moot. You consider our universe as a goal. This is simply wrong.
A simple illustration would involve playing cards. What are the odds that you would exactly get the queen of hearts? 1/52. Now what are the odds you'd get a playing card? 1/1.
The odds become enormous when you seek a particular outcome, and unless proved otherwise, our universe encompasses all that exists without any other configurations.
''Now to prove god is easy--how did we get here, look how complicated we are, a babys smile, and the fact that the odds against life are so great as to be astronomical!!!!!!!!!''
This argument is as asinine as claiming that presents under the Christmas tree, carols, decorations, etc, are evidence that Santa Claus exists.
Also, if this is convincing enough, why haven't you or any theist received his/her Nobel yet?
The funny thing, tony, is that your arguments can and have been used by many groups making supernatural claims all over the world for all kinds of reasons.
As a corollary of my argument, any claim that requires either bribes or threats to be believed is most likely not supported by tangible evidence and very immoral.
''Therefore it would be prudent and wise to throw your chips in with Jesus JUST IN CASE!!!!!!''
These are the words of a very cowardly one. Also, I doubt that an omniscient being, if one does exist, would be duped by someone believing just in case as you put it.
It is cowardly to believe in something just in case.
Face it, life isn't comforting and filled with uncertainties. Also, the universe doesn't owe us anything. Believing without any evidence, is wishful thinking.
I, contrary to most theists, live my life on life's terms. I also care if what I believe is supported by evidence, ergo true, or if it isn't, ergo false. Simple as that.
I really don't want to resort to ad hominems and attack your character instead of your ideas but...you didn't really present any to start with!
So I am done with you Mr.Tony. If you still have questions on my point, look back at this video's comment backlog. I have been very generous with my explanations.
Read them, understand them. If you can do that, then you would've at least displayed a minimum level of intellectual honesty, which is vital to be taken seriously in any debate.
I have never seen you present 1 single intelligent argument, heck I dont even know if you have made a coherent point---so allow me to take the liberty...We as humans simply can not prove, either, the existence of god or the non-existence of god. with that as the case we have to make the decision that we believe will have the most likely chance of giving us a positive consequence, right. Therefore it would be prudent and wise to throw your chips in with Jesus JUST IN CASE!!!!!!
And we're right back where we started, to the complete idiocy of Pascal's wager.
Talking to you, tonybonez, is deceptively similar to talking to a bucket of water. It seems your mind is so closed to argumentation, you can only mindlessly spout the same logical fallacies, misrepresentations, and bullshit arguments ad nauseum.
I'm done with you. Find someone else to pester with your persistant ignorance.
How is my mind closed to argumentation? We have been discussing Christianity vs. atheism, and just because you didn't convince me doesn't mean that I wasn't listening very intently to your arguments.
On which issue am I ignorant of?? Like I said If I am such a fool and my arguments are so illogical then just use logic (not name calling) to destroy me. It should be easy for you if its true!!
If you must throw in the towel, so be it, but remember you never showed 1 single benefit of atheism!!!!
I thought you said you watched my video response to KugelForBreakfast? Do it again, but this time pay attention!
And sorry, but using logic, reason, and evidence, doesn't work when you are selectively ignoring those comments that you can't answer, and mindlessly keep repeating the same drivel over and over and over again.
If you keep repeating the same bullshit over and over again, I will eventually just block you simply to get rid of you.
I did watch your video video response to KugelForBreakfast, and plan on making a response of my own to that..I will touch on every one of your points as to not leave anything out. I do feel I have learned a great deal from conversing with an intelligent atheist, but there are still so many topics about the atheist life/ position which I am unclear about and interested in!!!
I apologize if I'm being redundant, but I am simply presenting the best argument that I have.
And so should you believe in Zeus, and Osiris, and Satan, and The Flying Spaghetti Monster - JUST IN CASE. Any one of them promise to give you a positive consequence in the afterlife, so you gotta throw in your chips with ALL of them, if that's your logic!
I believe he was referring to me. So far, he has only been only arguing from ignorance or incredulity, which are of course very fallacious trains of thoughts.
Again, my point wasn't about the existence of god. I simply said that trying to explain a mystery with a bigger one has no explanatory power.
Human comprehension is a level up process. We start from what we know and understand to explain anything.
humans can not know whether god exists while here on earth, so we have to make a decision with that in mind. We have to go with the choice that will be most likely to give us a positive result. Christianity is the most likely because of the OT prophecy about Jesus, his miracles, and the fact that he healed the sick!!
''Jesus, his miracles, and the fact that he healed the sick!!''
This in no way is evidence. This is hearsay at best.
There is an infinite number of things we can't know. But, assuming that one exists (Yahweh) and another doesn't (Allah), when both are as unsupported by any tangible evidence, is applying a fallacious double standard and special pleading.
Even today, there are countless of people claiming that they are gods, reincarnation of prophets or holy men.
Are their assertions true and supported by evidence? No. Would they be more credible if supported by a book? No. What if this book was found 2000 years from now? Absolutely not.
Basing your conclusions solely on your holy book of predilection isn't evidence of anything.
Your book isn't evidence for Yahweh, no more that the Quran is evidence of Allah or the book of Mormon evidence of...whatever they believe.
And both these religions also claim miracles and so called accomplished prophecies. And yet, I am almost absolutely sure you don't believe in their claims.
Why the double standard again? These two religions do offer the same level of ''evidence''...
where did you crazy atheists get the idea that there is no evidence of Jesus divinity. How is it that he was able to become the most famous and beloved man in the history of the universe if he was just a hoax as you say.. JESUS--the great faker, right. oh thats rich!!
''where did you crazy atheists get the idea that there is no evidence of Jesus divinity.''
Mmmmm...it isn't an idea. For instance, you have been arguing for a week or so here, and you have yet to present any tangible evidence as to any of your claims.
And even if a Jesus did exist, in what way would that be evidence for (Yahweh)?
Remember, many people, even today, have claimed to be gods, holy men, etc. Does the mere fact of claiming it and have it written down in a book evidence?
tangible evidence, of course I dont have any tangible evidence, merely that scholars agree that a man named Jesus lived and was a healer that was crucified. Within a few years after his death the largest empire in the world at the time officially changed its religion to him..
Being skeptical is logical, rejecting a claim without evidence to reject it is not. Religion is not above scrutiny, but the bottom line is we may never know the truth, so we have to make a descision with that in mind!!!
''tangible evidence, of course I dont have any tangible evidence, merely that scholars agree that a man named Jesus lived and was a healer that was crucified.''
And voila! This is the problem with any religion. You believe supernatural claims on faith just as much as Muslims, astrologists or cultists.
Remember, any claim presented without evidence can be brushed off as easily without evidence.
I didnt say I didnt have tangible ( capable of being perceived especially by the sense of touch) evidence that you can touch, but there is plenty of evidence for Jesus---witness accounts to him (google it), the OT prophecies he fullfilled, his miracles, the fact that he healed the sick, the fact that the Roman empire officially changed its religion to Christianity!!
That's it? Simple denial? From someone claiming that there is an important body of evidence supporting his position, you are doing a very poor job of defending it.
Living humans can not know whether there is a god or not, so we have to make a choice as to which belief to throw in with, with that in mind. We should throw in with the belief that we think will have the most likely chance at giving us a positive result in the afterlife. Christianity is the most likely because of the witnesses to Jesus, his fulfillment of prophecy, his miracles, the fact that he healed the sick, and the fact that the Roman Empire officially changed its religion.
Its funny that you would only pick the definition that suits you...You are quote mining the dictionary now? Here's the full definition of tangible: 1. touchable; able to be touched or felt; perceptible by the sense of touch; palpable 2. possible to be treated as fact; real or concrete 3. comprehensible by the mind; understandable
I will also add empirical to the type of evidence that would be convincing: 1. Pertaining to or based on experience. 2. Pertaining to, derived from, or testable by observations made using the physical senses or using instruments which extend the senses. 3. (philosophy of science) Verifiable by means of scientific experimentation.
ok I was using the websters defintion of tangible, sorry!!
You want evidence for Jesus:
ALL The eyewitness acoounts (google it), the fact that he is the fullfilmet of OT prophecy, his miracles, the fact that he healed the sick, the fact that the Roman Empire (the biggest in the world at the time) officially changed their religion to Christianity, and the fact that he is the most famous and beloved character in the history of the world, Now that may not be enough evidence for you, but oh well
Again, this isn't any more evidence for your religion that it is for any other religion. This is the crux of the problem right here.
Also, if they really were evidence, they would be in every museum, story book, school curricula, there would be scientific fields created out of them, etc.
The fact that you keep claiming these as evidence defeats the very purpose of faith inherent to any religion.
Even amongst proponents of any religions, there are diverging opinions of what the truth is. Only in Christianity, there is about 30 00 denominations. You would think that the Holy spirit, which is claimed to be necessary to understand Christianity would be more consistent that that.
This is something you never see in science. Something is either true or false. If a theory is found out to be false when new evidence arise, it is updated or abandoned altogether.
We can not know whether there is a God or not, so we have to make a choice of which belief to follow based on that fact. We should go with the choice that seems the most likely to give us a positive result and follow the evidence. The evidence of Christianity is convincing: ALL The eyewitness accounts, the fact that he is the fulfillment of OT prophecy, his miracles, the fact that he healed the sick, the fact that the Roman Empire officially changed their religion to Christianity
You have posted this fallacious arguments five times now. And five times I have answered that it isn't any more substantiative as the similar claims made for any other religion.
Alien abductees claim to have countless eyewitnesses, so does bigfootists or Elvis followers.
If there is a god and thats a big if Jesus seems to be the single vessel for him and the bible seems to be a special book in this way. It is the most famous and reprinted book in the history of the world. Now to prove god is easy--how did we get here, look how complicated we are, a babys smile, and the fact that the odds against life are so great as to be astronomical!!!!!!!!!
If it were, faith wouldn't be necessary, you would be able to present them instead of making vague claims.
If there is evidence to support any supernatural claim, then it becomes assessable by science. Don't you think that religious scientists wouldn't have published peer reviewed science papers about your religion and won the Nobel yet?
If the evidence is so overwhelming, where is the god theory?
You can thank Constantine for Rome choosing Xtianity. Although he converted, he was always a pagan thru and thru. He infused pagan attributes into Xtianty. That's one of the reasons it was accepted by so many.
You should do some research of pre-Xtian Pagan influences in Xtianity and study how the early fathers of the church manipulated scripture. They created Xtianity in essence. Just study the Hell concept and where and how it came into scripture.
Yea another commenter said it already.
Tony is the smartest dumb person I've seen. If their is any credit due to creationists it's that they are die hard contrarians at least when it comes to facts.
dibaterman 1 year ago
@dibaterman
surely the same could be said of athiests :P
gammaray4evrr 9 months ago
@gammaray4evrr
Your statement says too much while saying too little. Please elaborate...
dibaterman 9 months ago
@dibaterman
it could be said that evolutionists are die hard contrarians when i comes to facts :P
gammaray4evrr 9 months ago
Tony gave one big ass argument from ignorance or incredulity "I don't know how life began so therefore god did it". Fails to understand the invalidity of pascal's gambit, fails to understand what atheism is and just plain fails in general. We don't need to take it as far as pointing out the problems with their particular form of theism, all we have to do is show the irrationality of the god belief in it's most basic form. We could go the extra mile but that's overkill, which amuses me
ShaolinSoldier 1 year ago
science could have proved the evolution theory correct hundreds of years ago if it wasnt for the cruel,sadistic,blood thirsty inqusitors whom forced great scientist to stop research and/or publication of their paper to the public!!!!
XStompsTheVillain3 1 year ago
This tony kid gets unlimited facepalm. >.<
Ye4hBuddy 1 year ago
1 benefit form atheism over Christianity... SUNDAYS OFF.
THEMADMANINYOURATTIC 1 year ago
God seems to prefer a balance of evidence: there is enough reason to believe if we want to believe, but not enough to intellectually force belief against our will. Instead of overpowering us with undeniable logic or mighty miracles until we grudgingly give up and give in, God wants us to want to come to Him.
musical149 1 year ago
@musical149 How convenient. But I'll take the bate - consider now that God has disappeared. Somehow he's vanished, gone fishin' and he's never coming back. He doesn't tell anyone He's left. You wake up to this Godless day and what do you know? What will you do differently today than you ever have done before? I suggest nothing, because I suggest he doesn't exist and that the reasons he doesn't "overpower" us with his existence is simple - he doesn't exist.
deed02392 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@deed02392
which cannot be proven
gammaray4evrr 9 months ago
@musical149 I won't go to a god who condones slavery.
EvilPieMaKer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Al-Quran has 1400 years ago and Muslim Scientists has been declared "He (God) makes you (human), in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness".
Al Quran sura Az Zumar;6
".....He (God) makes you, in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness. . . ."
Have the Bible and scientists states "He (God ) makes you (human), in the wombs of your mothers, in stages, one after another, in three veils of darkness"?
mollenth 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheist want proof of God?,....God owe's us nothing!!!!....He does not have to prove to nonbeliever's He exists. Or when do you go to your boss at work and tell him what to do??? Be happy atheist's that if you repent and look for Him you will find Him.....and that He left a door open for you to enter heaven, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH SOME OF YOU HATE GOD HE WILL LOVE YOU UNTIL THE END. (unfortunately after you are dead it's game over you will want to repent and it will be too late.)
TheDan4545 1 year ago
Perhaps the most peaceful resolution to the tiring debate of God's existence, is to assume an Agnostic stand.
The existence of God is difficult or currently impossible to prove or disapprove.
Matters little what history of both religion & science has shown us, for the only certainty is that time warps our history.
EmzekRufus 1 year ago
I just don't get how people can be presented with mountains of evidence and say.. nope it doesn't matter cuz I have faith.
iversonmatthew 2 years ago 4
@iversonmatthew
WHAT EVEIDENCE??????
tonybonez 6 months ago
The sad thing is, if I hadn't been on youtube for the last few years or so, I wouldn't have thought this real.
phocjame 2 years ago
This Tony character is one of the smartest religious people I have ever heard.
He is also a moron.
Btw, I love how they know exactly what god wants down to his feelings on stem cells, two dudes holding hands and which country to bomb but then when confronted with a question they can not answer, they say "man can not understand the mind of god!"
jimbrown257 2 years ago 18
very well said
zantiertasa 2 years ago
LOOOOL wth?? 9:05 he says "just to believe something because yo have seen it before sounds like something a crazy person would say"
you don't believe something you've seen before with your own eyes?? you don't believe what you see with your eyes?!?!?!?! what a retard.
rammy912 2 years ago
I am glad that we have debate between theists and atheists because it helps us to understand the world a little better. Please, just keep it intelligent. Be a CapnOrdinary rather than a Tonybonez. Let's all be respectful, and logical, and debate in a way that is conducive to a thoughtful, productive atmosphere.
Unclebobisnumber1 2 years ago
Cont.
That being said, the reason why I choose to be religious is not because necessarily see absolute, physical truth. I feel happy because of my religious beliefs. Going to church makes me feel fulfilled. Volunteering at the food bank with my friends from church does the same. I believe it is time that religion becomes less of a way to explain the world and more of a way to live in the world.
Unclebobisnumber1 2 years ago
I am a religious person. Tonybonez was hilarious. Not in a "Ha-ha" way but in a "I weep for humanity" way.
I don't think that it is possible to scientifically prove that there is a god. I think that belief in god requires faith. Maybe one has had a profound spiritual experience of some sort, but other than that, there is no tangible proof. That is why we say that one is a member of "the catholic faith" rather than "the catholic direct observation of one's tangible surroundings."
Unclebobisnumber1 2 years ago
You can call me whatever you please, and believe whatever you like too. (I'm sure you're well practised in this "art".
Intelligent discussion???
You really have GOT to be joking now. SURELY? NO maybe not.
So far ALL your intelligent discussion has been to childishly name call, and tell leis.
Your non existent credibility, and complete lack of even the most basic of understanding, illustrates perfectly to anyone reading these posts, just how old you are (intellectually speaking).
Keep it up.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
---Cont.
do you".
Your UNBIASED opinion, (CHORTLE, SNIGGER, CHUCKLE), You just fail to get it, don't you. Every time you post this idiocy, you give someone new a chuckle, to brighten their day. You keep it up, the world needs to laugh more.
Your name itself merely adds an extra flavour of irony, especially after reading your posts. I at first thought it was sarcastic, or satirical, and was actually starting to smile, until I started to read your posts, and realised you REALLY think it is true.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
NO problem, I can soon gain fresh interest.
And it isn't as though you've left me with no material, EH? AND, you keep on supplying me with a fresh lot, every post.
You sound very het up again, BTW using my name really won't bother me in the slightest it merely points to your level. But you aren't very old are you?
Ha ha ha ha, there you go again.
"Yes, my unbiased opinion is T-Bonez "won" this debate, because he was more convincing. But I don't know who is actually correct, and neither
Cont.---
martiangrundy 2 years ago
---Cont.
too, and that you're really NOT biased at all.
Just look at all your completely unbiased comments.
I really have lost interest now, although it was one hell of a chuckle, going back through and reading some of the gems you've posted. Though I can understand how youd enjoy it less. What an embarrassment. Can you even bear it?
I urge anyone with 5 mins to spare, to just flip back a couple of pages, and soak in some "unbiased opinion".
martiangrundy 2 years ago
"I have a very good friend that is a psychologist,"
YES, I'll just bet you do. Known him since childhood? I don't doubt.
"You asked me WHY I thought T-Bonez won...so I told you...end of story".
HHMMmmm. DID you indeed?
It seems you have a very short memory. I drew attention to the idiotic statement you made, you then proceeded to bury yourself, remember?
Didn't you start with, "In my unbiased opinion". And your name is again?
And I suppose you still image it wasn't an idiotic statement
Cont.---
martiangrundy 2 years ago
I'll leave it up to those who can be bothered, to judge.
You really are worth no more time.
I've had more coherence and rationality from my 3 y old niece.
If you reply again, you'll leave me no choice but to collect some of your choice imbecilities, and your contradictory statements together, in one (or four) glorious postings.
If nothing else it will illustrate that I wasn't completely "out of order" with the initial sarcasm.
"honesty and dignity.or integrity" I'm shocked you can spell 'em
martiangrundy 2 years ago
I'm stable enough?
Are you for real?
You really can't see where you've flip flopped, and contradicted yourself? You've answered umpteen questions, that weren't even asked, hardly any of the ones asked.
Quite apart from trying to "get my goat" by calling me grundy. You've actually admitted TWICE you were wrong, about a couple points.
I was sarcastic about a comment you made, YOU started the insults, and carried on with them.
Can you really go back through all these posts and NOT feel a chump?
martiangrundy 2 years ago
its not about winning.
ahaha
crow1448 2 years ago
---Cont.
whole "kit and caboodle", ALL for US.
OR, there is other lifeforms in the universe. Did YOUR god make these also? Do you suppose they are "created in his image"? Why no mention of this in a "holy" book?
These questions, no matter which side one comes down on, cause problems in a theistic world-view.
A Naturalistic view, has no such problems. There are no old stories, or dogma to adhere to.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
---Cont.
the "firmament", as a dome over the FLAT disk of the earth, with tiny dots of light. Unless of course there actually was a god, BUT there is no such knowledge contained therein, is there? Why not I wonder?
It's only very recently WE'VE started to understand the size. Have YOU looked? Do you have a handle on this universe we inhabit, and just how BIG and old it really is?
BUT, If were alone in the universe. The upshot would be YOUR god made the
Cont.---
martiangrundy 2 years ago
"To grundy;
I may be wrong, but I don't recall reading anywhere in the christian bible that we are alone in the universe, but I cannot speak for the koran, or any others as of now."
So That's it is it? You do yet another climbdown, ramble a little more, and that's it?
What about all the BULLSHIT and LEIS, and INSULTS? (not that I'd expect an apology from you, it's usually only people of integrity).
How could they talk about the universe in an old book? They still imagined
Cont.---
martiangrundy 2 years ago
I wouldn't expect you to understand, how could you.
Obsessed? No not at all, why would you think that? I "discus" with folk like you all the time.
"Perhaps not necessarily in our "BIG" <---(lol) universe, but maybe even in dimensons apart from our big ol' uni."
Ha Ha Ha. you really are a dim pathetic sort of clown really aren't you, I really won't bother with that, I'll leave it up to everyone else to draw their own conclusions.
How about YOU answer a question, I don't think you have yet.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
---Cont.
just how big the universe is? You do? And you still imagine it's all for little old us?
And you still think your NOT deluded?
SNIGGER! CHORTLE! SNIGGER! GUFFAW! CHUCKLE!
BTW, You can insult me all day M8, it will not bother me in the least. I just wish you realised how much you were actually being laughed at here, imagining it could.
Go on, you keep "proving" just how thick I am. FAR easier than actually addressing a point, EH?
martiangrundy 2 years ago
---Cont.
there is no god, (even though it's very highly improbable. Impossible if one want's to go with the self contradictory myth of the bible).
Arrogance??? HHMMMmmmm? Yes I suppose it's far more arrogant, than thinking the universe was created just for US. And by merely "praying" one can have the grand gaffer of the whole shebang actually listen, and even change the natural order, and events, in YOUR favour.
Absolutely, that isn't arrogant at all is it?
Do YOU have the first clue
Cont.---
martiangrundy 2 years ago
YES of course I'M thick.
You keep telling yourself, if it makes you feel better. You'll be well practised in that art, I don't doubt.
"Fact is no one knows how life began".
NO, we don't. So in the absence of anything concrete well wish into existence a deity, to make us feel better. THERE THERE THERE!!! Pat's on head, a number of times.
There you go again, it's SO typical. Inventing what folk say to make you sound as if you know what your saying.
I never said that I know 100% there
Cont.---
martiangrundy 2 years ago
Ha Ha Ha.
is that an attempt to try to upset me, as you sound to be.
You really do need to do better.
"this obsession with your invisible primordial soup god is really out of hand".
NO, don't be so silly, (although, of course I understand the challenge for you, believing as you do in fairy stories).
Tell you what, lets agree, and say abiogenisis, is wrong, and couldn't happen.
What is your alternative theory?
Surely you DO have one, don't you?
I'd be fascinated to hear it.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
OH DEAR, have I upset you?
Remember what I said about emotional "knee jerk reactions"?
Not that I'm surprised, you don't strike me as the most rational of thinkers. I'm afraid you really don't make much sense.
O.J. Simpson, indeed.
And it's MY comments that were absurd? When one spins a 180, and completely contradicts one's self within a couple of posts, it comes across as a little flaky, to say the least.
I suggest you re read your posts, and try to come down on one side or the other.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
"and Hmmm, if I were to have an opinion as to who was right wouldn't THAT make me biased???"
Well, YES absolutely. I couldn't agree more. Can I then take it you've done a complete turn around. It wouldn't be the first time I've debated with a believer who likes to flip flop around, not knowing actually what they think. Why I wonder did you change your mind? You DO remember your earlier opinion?
"in my unbiased opinion, I declare Toneybonez the winner, even though I have no idea who is right".
martiangrundy 2 years ago
So your making a judgment on WHAT exactly?
Evidently not on the content, or what is said, Its sounds to me as though you're the one who is over emotionally involved, desperate to try to defend your irrational, outdated, invisible man in the sky, belief system.
I know. How about you try to actually rebutt the things in the video, and at least give the odd reason, as to WHY you think "he won", that would carry a little more weight than an emotional "knee jerk" reaction.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
imnoadvertiser1:
I use the writings of trusted historians to find out about Jesus time period.
Stephen Hawking has estimated the chances of Earth forming all on its own to be about 1 in 10 to the 62nd power. I trust him more than you.
So the main benefit of being atheist is o you can have another man stick it in your butt?
That doesn't seem like enough of a benefit.
1 benefit of Christianity: an insurance policy on the eternal soul!!
If there is no God we both are dirt, but if there is?
tonybonez 2 years ago
"In my unbiased opinion"
Yes absolutely, we can see that.
indeed, let's hear WHY you think he won in a little more detail.
you say "even though I have no idea who is right, "capn" seemed less civil, and was on the defensive, without any real convincing comments"
You don't see this as pathetic, and completely self refuting? not even after two weeks?
What unbiased criteria did you use to judge this, in the light of having "no idea who is right".
"next please" HHMMmmmm!
Really, you think so?
martiangrundy 2 years ago
imnoadvertiser1:
There are plenty of witnesses to Jesus who are not mentioned in the Bible: Emperor Tiberitus, Josephus, Lucian... (I could go on).
Just because you don't believe in something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Remember, people believed that the world was flat until 1492.
You are going to disprove God; disprove away.
Let me ask you 1 thing: what benefits does atheism offer???
tonybonez 2 years ago
there are other accounts of Jesus life than the Bible, would you like some.
tonybonez 2 years ago
If you read the old testement "God" is definetly NOT about being "loving" he is a "jealous god" he floods and kills innocents, turns innocent to salt, asks a man to kill his only son, has a wager with the devil and allows job to lose everything including his family and forsakes his only son. No in the old testement "god" is not the loving father he's EYE for a EYE. And as far as people believing that jesus was the son of god, there was a bunch of people who did'nt believe he was to back then
vger1970 2 years ago
there are better factual arguments against the accuracy of the bible. and if you think about it if god is the moral standard... and he is a lovely person according to his own book, whatever he does is an act of love because he sets the standards for love. i think the idea of hell is fucking rediculous but saying it is evidence againt the bible doesnt really work out well.
uberownagemonkey 2 years ago
to imnoadvertiser1: saying "However there is much evidence against the bible eg: the line: "suffer not the witch to live" " this isnt actually evidence against the bible this is evidence against a loving god. someone could just come back with saying hes a jealous/vengeful god.
uberownagemonkey 2 years ago
Not much evidence that Jesus was the son of God? What about the ressurection, or wait let me guess--just a hoax right. Or What about Jesus miracles---let me guess another hoax right. Or what about the Roman empire (largest in the world at the time) Officially declaring Jesus as God---another hoax??
Do you see why it takes more faith to be atheist or agnostic than Christian. I simply dont have that much faith!
HOW CAN YOU BE 100% SURE ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF GOD?? I certainly am not!!
tonybonez 2 years ago
well you actually have to prove he was god using documents from that time that are non biblical. anyone can write a self fulfilling prophecy. the romans becoming christians isnt evidence just like people in iraq proclaiming muhammed is gods prophet isnt evidence of islam.
uberownagemonkey 2 years ago 6
and btw using the roman empire declaring jesus is god is just such a stupid argument i shat myself and came from the lulz AT THE SAME TIME
uberownagemonkey 2 years ago
Why don't we seperate the OLD and NEW Testaments and consider some of the OT as a prediciton or prophecy and try to look at the historical evidence that Jesus was the son of God.
When investigated in depth there si only 1 logical conclusion, but I often think it is atheists fear that keeps them ignorant. They fear the possibility of God so much they risk hell!!
tonybonez 2 years ago
WWHHAAATTTT!!!!!!!
"When investigated in depth there si only 1 logical conclusion, but I often think it is atheists fear that keeps them ignorant. They fear the possibility of God so much they risk hell!!"
Sorry, but that statement is completely pisspotical!
Your talking complete broken biscuits.
We risk hell, because we fear the possibility of god??? BUT isn't hell the threat, why would we fear god, if it wasn't for hell? So we fear him, so we say he doesn't exist, is that it?
This is crazy!
martiangrundy 2 years ago
I think some atheists are afraid to admit that their might be a God because that means they are accountable for how they live, so they try to use a flawed logic to disprove God's existence, which is a fool's task, don't you agree?
tonybonez 2 years ago
I'm at a complete loss as to how you can come up with this nonsense. Maybe because I'm from the UK, but the way you think seems alien to me. AND you talk about "flawed logic".
We don't try to disprove god, it isn't possible to disprove something that doesn't exist.
Neither is it possible to prove he does exist.
BUT something that does exist has some kind of proof. IE something that is real, manifests in some way, hence it is detectable/measurable.
god I'm afraid, doesn't seem to do this, ever.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
As I stated earlier. And you ignored, as you have with almost every point in every post.
"Obviously one cannot say anything with 100% certainty. But I'd say it's in the 99.9 odd% category, along with the existence of a god. YOUR god, I'd say 100% COULDN'T exist though."
If one hasn't been brainwashed into that way of thinking, it's simply a question of what is likely, or probable.
And I'm afraid god is very very very very unlikely. And as time goes on, and the worlds populace gets
Cont.---
martiangrundy 2 years ago
martiangrundy:
...continued from earlier post
If you were 1 of 1000 people---who had 1000 other people holding guns to all of your heads and they were going to fire in 3 seconds (giving everybody time to duck if they chose to); and only 1 gun had a bullet in the chamber would you choose to duck. Odds are that your gun does not have a bullet.
BTW: why do you assume I was born Christian. Remember to assume makes an ass out of "U" and "ME"!!!
tonybonez 2 years ago
I didn't assume you were "born" a christian.
NO ONE is born anything, you may be born into a christian or muslim houshold, however, how does one call a chld who cannot even comprehend anything, any denomination of religion?
I'm sorry but your pathetic analogy only illustrated just how irrational you are, and how far you misunderstand what I was saying, it's really merely Pascals wager, dressed in modern attire.
Stop keep trying to prove the bible with the bible. It CANNOT work.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
---Cont.
progressively more educated, more and more people will naturally understand that.
And all this silly talk, (like satan and god) will be very largely assigned to the vualt of history, and myth, as have the one's that have fallen out of fashion, Thor, Dionysus, RA, etc, etc.
After all the only difference is you have been brought up to believe Yawah is the correct one. Had you been brought up elsewhere, or another time, you would believe something entirely different.
How arbitrary is that?
martiangrundy 2 years ago
martiangrundy:
So you admit that trying to disprove God is a fools mission, right! Tell that to imnoadvertiser: he tells me he is going to disprove God (see his comments below)
God is detectable if you understand the life of Jesus and how astronomical the odds are that humans not only were created, but that we survived this long.
Faith is not just simply a question of what is likely, or probable.
continued in next post........
tonybonez 2 years ago
NO NO NO NO NO!!
It seems, after all, (how depressing, I was sure you'de get it in the end, and not merely LEAP onto the fact I'd mentioned not proving god, seems I gave you far too much credit), that indeed you are incapable of comprehending what I was saying. I'll say it again, in case you've forgotten.
""Obviously one cannot say anything with 100% certainty. But I'd say it's in the 99.9 odd% category, along with the existence of a god. YOUR god, I'd say 100% COULDN'T exist though.""
Cont.---
martiangrundy 2 years ago
---Cont.
It seems my brain in a vat analogy, passed you by completely.
STRICTLY speaking, we can NEVER say anything is 100%, even that were here on earth.
In practical terms, absolutely we can, as I stated earlier.
Just HOW, is god detectable? Your talking completely at cross purposes, (after all Ive said), sorry but your reasoning is childish, and very rudimentary. Ive had far more grown up discussions with my 16 year old stepson. Sorry to insult you, but I dont know how else to say it.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
The OT gives a time line of a man born in Bethlehem of a virgin, who would perform miracles, die, resurrect, and bring the entire world into the knowledge of the God of Israel.
And it all comes into fruition in the life of Jesus Christ.
tonybonez 2 years ago
SO, you " Played it smart, and threw in with jesus just in case "EH?
And you consider this a noble and worthy reason to "believe" in your creator, just to hedge your bets, and get into heaven?
You don't give your omnipotent, omnipresent, god too much credit for sense, do you? Don't you image he would see through this?
So this position is superior to someone who in all honesty, and with all integrity, just cannot bring themselves to believe in far fetched sounding Mythological stories?
WHY.
martiangrundy 2 years ago
see through what?? All he asked for was faith, right??
Faith in Christianity is superior because it means I go to heaven and you to hell, don't worry you will understand when you are there!!
I just dont see how it is worth trying to win some Youtube debate at the risk of hell!!!
I honestly don't and that is why I am on Youtube, to try and understand atheists complete irrationality......
tonybonez 2 years ago
Can you be saying these things tonybonez ?
The silly old myth your talking about doesn't threaten me in the slightest, can you people not get this into your heads? It's no different than telling me Santa clause won't come if I'm not good.
You see NO ONE is risking hell, it's a complete fantasy.
"atheists complete irrationality".
You evidently don't know the definition of ir/rationality either.
Just how is it rational to believe in something for which there is NO evidence whatsoever.
Idiocy
martiangrundy 2 years ago
Wow, the first person on youtube to know exactly what happens when you die!! Jeez I dont even know any Christians who are as certain as you.
Just because you profess endless faith in atheism, doesnt make it so........
No evidence of Christianity????
Where I start, have you ever heard of All the prophecies of the OT??
tonybonez 2 years ago
Well, I don't see that as in any way strange, it's a shame you do.
Obviously one cannot say anything with 100% certainty. But I'd say it's in the 99.9 odd% category, along with the existence of a god. YOUR god, I'd say 100% COULDN'T exist though.
So can I take it you don't believe that when we die (our bodies cease to function) we cease to exist.
luckily we are biodegradable, and so will rot down nicely back into the constituent elements that we temporarily borrowed from the universe. Naturally
martiangrundy 2 years ago
What the fool lacks in knowledge he will make up in certainty!!!
Basically you have no idea what happens when you die or how life started on Earth. You just have a little voice in your head that says "it could not be God, it had to have happened naturally all on its own.....go ahead deny God against all reason"
and that little voice is the Devil trying to mess with you.
Bottom line no human besides Jesus fully understands God or the universe.
tonybonez 2 years ago
He's an idiot. You should point him to one of DonExodus2's videos on abiogenesis and tell him that many of the components that make up life have been created in the lab.
WaxItYourself 2 years ago
I have no idea if there is, or isn't a god or gods who created the universe and all mankind, and there's no way that anyone could ever know until they die, which does us here on earth no good. My personal beliefs are that If there IS a god/gods, i'll find out when i die, if not it doesn't matter, if you showed me irrefutable evidence that there was a god/gods i'll believe, if you show me evidence that they're isn't i'll believe that theyre isnt, if you dont show me any evidence, i just wont kno
BayvilleGangsta 2 years ago
It's hard to take any debater seriously when they use that much text/IM shorthand. "OMFG" isn't exactly the language of intellectuals.
army103 2 years ago
Stupid to continue debate after disrespectful:
"Right....."'s
Just tell them to go kill themselves and go to heaven and block them.
Unknnnnn 2 years ago
How so?
I meant that I religious isn't the right word for athiesm, yeah you can't empirically prove god so its a belief but I don't think religious describes this.
venakew 2 years ago
I thought I'd point out I'm not an athiest-I'm a Pantheist.
Yeah I agree that Athiesm is a belief,but not religious but I know what you mean.
venakew 2 years ago
"I thought I'd point out I'm not an athiest-I'm a Pantheist."
Isn't pantheism just super-atheism, you just call nature god.
randomlylostperson 2 years ago
Yes there is 0 difference between the actual context of them, but since athiesm is just saying there is no god(s),then pantheism is taking that one step further.Most athiest are probably panthiests without knowing it.I'd also say that generally science is the way of understanding the world and panthiesm is the human side of that. religion provides something for people and discarding that as athiesm might suggest ,panthiesm embraces that.
venakew 2 years ago
I disagree not with agnostic/athiest nonsense but that you can't know for sure that god doesn't exist,as in I don't think he can logically exist and loads of other different reasons. I believe 100% that I know God doesn't exist.Of course I could still be wrong I don't know how but I could be, so is that not 100%?If so why even bother with the full 100%?
venakew 2 years ago
you know I'm pretty god damn certain that agnosticism is someone who is not sure about whether god exists they think it could be but they can't be certain(the old joke what do you get if you cross a agnostic,a dyslexic and an insomniac-someone who stays up all night wondering if there is a dog)
An Athiest is just-they don't believe that god exists. Athiesm doesn't imply any other beliefs-its just no there is no God.
venakew 2 years ago
You are wrong about this. Agnostic means that you state that it is not possible to know either way. I am an atheist and I don't believe in god (at least not the desert god), and I think the odds are pretty low for a god, but I can't assert that there is no god with any certainty.
Matt D. discusses this occasionally on The Atheist Experience. Try searching for it on youtube.
christo930 2 years ago
Agnostic means you can't know if there is a god. Atheists do not believe in a god, but not necessarily that there definitely is no god. If you don't believe in something for which there is no proof or evidence, that doesn't need faith. You can't prove there is no flying spaghetti monster, but what is the likelihood of it actually existing? We have science that shows us the bible is wrong about the creation of the world and creation of life. Loss of creation is total loss of credibility.
christo930 2 years ago
Agnostic: Can not be proven either way.
Atheist : I don't believe that a god exists
Your definitions are wrong, and the above definition is right. In any event, it takes no faith at all to not believe in god or to believe that the god of the bible (as described) does not exist.
christo930 2 years ago
Atheism can also mean that you don't believe in the god of the bible or any other god that wants to be known or who is actively involved in the affairs of humans. Does it take faith to not believe in Thor or Zeus? Why not? Because there is no reason to believe in them. What reason is there to believe in JC or god of the bible or Allah? Remove the "holy" books and what do you have? All of the desert dogmas rely heavily on the bible, not something I would want to have as a foundation.
christo930 2 years ago
Atheists FTW!!
ArrogantAtheist 2 years ago
I heard a funny story and I don't know if it's true. "Issac newton, having reached a stage of financial success, had a clocksmith create a scale model of the solar system, with complete rotational and orbits. Later a visiting Atheist friend comes to visit and inquires about the makre. Newton replies that there is no maker. the atheist is outraged at the insult to his intelligence for surely this has a maker. Newton then burns him on his doublestandard. no fair,HLMGTFUing
seankubin 2 years ago
This is absolutely silly. The real solar system isn't made out of processed iron or wood that has been cut to shape.
Does helium need to be "made by a maker"? We see it being made by the mega ton every single second in the sun. Chemical reactions and nuclear fusion take place without direction.
christo930 2 years ago
there is no god and only our worldly life exist we live and we die..some people live and others die replacing them.. and nothing destroys us except time.. stop believing in God!!!
hiawathabanias 2 years ago
I don't believe in god so score one for u.... Although it would take ALOT more persuasion to convince a God fanboy to actually see reason.
Science=EPIC WIN and PWNAGE!
hyperdude144 2 years ago 2
Holy shit that Tonybonz fellow is one of the biggest assholes I've ever seen
VitalSigns1 2 years ago 3
4:43 It was his mother, and she dipped him in the Styx to make him invulnerable.
PluralOfEverything 2 years ago
i think that all these people who argue about it on youtube, should organize a bush party go to it, drink and hang out with hot women.
Jcashrulez 2 years ago 4
Atheists shoudn't waste our time with theists. They just play semantic cheap tricks. They believe in god because they are afraid of dying. Technology will solve that and religions will not exist anymore other than in history books. Theists will try to stop this technologies. We, the atheist, should support these tecnology advances, like we have always done
Adlershof 2 years ago
I'm not sure technology cuold ever prevent death but I do think atheists should stop wasting time debating theists. I'm not a big fan of Dawkins but he came out with a great one-liner when invited to debate at some creationist diploma mill. He just said, 'That would look good on your CV, not on mine'. pwned
firthio2 2 years ago
Sing to the tune of "The Wheels on the Bus"
Debates with theists go round & round, round & round, round & round. Debates with theists go round & round, until you shoot yourself in face.
USMarineSgt 3 years ago 3
i like the math reason for believing in god, (just incase). Least it makes sense. The beauty with science, and atheism, is if you proove us wrong we'll happily follow you. Whereas you can demonstrate the bible is b.s (flood, ark), but they stick with it, literally blinded by faith
BrightonStudent 3 years ago
which is why there is not much debate, 'you cant use mans logic with god.' i think thats code for you cant use reason against religious people'.
i'll stick to math model, but im throwing my chips in with Zeus.
BrightonStudent 3 years ago
Screw Zeus! Kali all the way!!!
assatashakira 2 years ago
you could have gone into how DNA and RNA are made up of chains of amino acids. you could have stated that lipids form double walled vesicles under conditions that the early earth was prone to. maybe shown how single molecule monomers can link up into polymers, all by following the laws of physics....
but i think all of these points would have been lost on him.
(i personally refuse to argue with people who can't tell the difference between 'their' and 'there')
EricZombie 3 years ago
FACEPALM.
EricZombie 3 years ago
Sweet zombie Jeebus, what a fuckin' moron.
When he said that man's science cannot disprove god, I find myself wanting to shout at him, "So what the fuck WILL???"
I mean, whether there is a god or isn't, what evidence could possibly prove or disprove this god? And if the answer is "none," then on what basis should one assert that such a creature exists? Faith and faith alone? Because that's the very definition of gullible.
BionicDance 3 years ago
To find the most compelling arguments against one religion, ask a competing one's proponents opinion. In other words, to find what's wrong with Christianity, on simply has to ask a Muslim for instance.
The problem isn't only extra religious. Even amongst Christianity there is about 30 000 denominations. You'd think that the Holy Spirit would be more consistent than that in its revelations of the truth....
wynd2007 3 years ago 2
Guys, we seriously need to find a way to disprove god in a rhetorical sense, seeing as it's the kind of evidence they like. 1. Does god defeat himself in purpose or word? 2. ... Nevermind, that's the wrong route. But seriously, there must be some way, even if it ends up being an irrational argument. Irrational arguments are very effective, so even if they stroke a cord of immorality with you, do use them. They can be very productive when dealing with most people.
lordjavathe3rd 3 years ago
You want a irrational argument that terminates God?
You have to answer their Question:
"As nothing can't produce nothing,where does the big bang come from,what banged?"
Here my answer:
"God exploded."
Problem solved.We are here,God is gone.
gotohellfast 3 years ago 5
You made my day, I laughed so hard. Thanks man
lordjavathe3rd 3 years ago
You are welcome.
For more rational and irrational thoughts,visit my channel.
For utterly nonsense and exclusive irrational stuff,please visit venomfangx's channel.
gotohellfast 3 years ago
Great comment :-)
Adlershof 2 years ago
This argument is also moot. You consider our universe as a goal. This is simply wrong.
A simple illustration would involve playing cards. What are the odds that you would exactly get the queen of hearts? 1/52. Now what are the odds you'd get a playing card? 1/1.
The odds become enormous when you seek a particular outcome, and unless proved otherwise, our universe encompasses all that exists without any other configurations.
wynd2007 3 years ago
''Now to prove god is easy--how did we get here, look how complicated we are, a babys smile, and the fact that the odds against life are so great as to be astronomical!!!!!!!!!''
This argument is as asinine as claiming that presents under the Christmas tree, carols, decorations, etc, are evidence that Santa Claus exists.
Also, if this is convincing enough, why haven't you or any theist received his/her Nobel yet?
wynd2007 3 years ago
The funny thing, tony, is that your arguments can and have been used by many groups making supernatural claims all over the world for all kinds of reasons.
They are far from being in sync with reality.
wynd2007 3 years ago
''humans can not know whether god exists while here on earth, so we have to make a decision with that in mind.''
True. But we can't know for sure that pixies, leprechauns or Zeus exist or not. And I bet that you live your life assuming they don't exist, right?
Why? Is it because none of them, except Zeus, threatens (hell) or bribes (heaven) you into belief?
Absolute knowledge is a red herring.
wynd2007 3 years ago
As a corollary of my argument, any claim that requires either bribes or threats to be believed is most likely not supported by tangible evidence and very immoral.
wynd2007 3 years ago
''Therefore it would be prudent and wise to throw your chips in with Jesus JUST IN CASE!!!!!!''
These are the words of a very cowardly one. Also, I doubt that an omniscient being, if one does exist, would be duped by someone believing just in case as you put it.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Whis trying to dupe anybody JOHN 3:16, and cowardly to want heaven, thats rich..
tonybonez 3 years ago
It is cowardly to believe in something just in case.
Face it, life isn't comforting and filled with uncertainties. Also, the universe doesn't owe us anything. Believing without any evidence, is wishful thinking.
I, contrary to most theists, live my life on life's terms. I also care if what I believe is supported by evidence, ergo true, or if it isn't, ergo false. Simple as that.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Beethoven's Appassionata.
vysehrad 3 years ago
I CANT READ ANY MORE OF HIS STUPIDITY !
AtheistAtLARGE 3 years ago 2
I really don't want to resort to ad hominems and attack your character instead of your ideas but...you didn't really present any to start with!
So I am done with you Mr.Tony. If you still have questions on my point, look back at this video's comment backlog. I have been very generous with my explanations.
Read them, understand them. If you can do that, then you would've at least displayed a minimum level of intellectual honesty, which is vital to be taken seriously in any debate.
wynd2007 3 years ago
I have never seen you present 1 single intelligent argument, heck I dont even know if you have made a coherent point---so allow me to take the liberty...We as humans simply can not prove, either, the existence of god or the non-existence of god. with that as the case we have to make the decision that we believe will have the most likely chance of giving us a positive consequence, right. Therefore it would be prudent and wise to throw your chips in with Jesus JUST IN CASE!!!!!!
tonybonez 3 years ago
And we're right back where we started, to the complete idiocy of Pascal's wager.
Talking to you, tonybonez, is deceptively similar to talking to a bucket of water. It seems your mind is so closed to argumentation, you can only mindlessly spout the same logical fallacies, misrepresentations, and bullshit arguments ad nauseum.
I'm done with you. Find someone else to pester with your persistant ignorance.
CapnOrdinary 3 years ago
the comment below was not to you ...it was to someone else..
tonybonez 3 years ago
How is my mind closed to argumentation? We have been discussing Christianity vs. atheism, and just because you didn't convince me doesn't mean that I wasn't listening very intently to your arguments.
On which issue am I ignorant of?? Like I said If I am such a fool and my arguments are so illogical then just use logic (not name calling) to destroy me. It should be easy for you if its true!!
If you must throw in the towel, so be it, but remember you never showed 1 single benefit of atheism!!!!
tonybonez 3 years ago
I thought you said you watched my video response to KugelForBreakfast? Do it again, but this time pay attention!
And sorry, but using logic, reason, and evidence, doesn't work when you are selectively ignoring those comments that you can't answer, and mindlessly keep repeating the same drivel over and over and over again.
If you keep repeating the same bullshit over and over again, I will eventually just block you simply to get rid of you.
Try to LEARN something. Goodbye.
CapnOrdinary 3 years ago
I did watch your video video response to KugelForBreakfast, and plan on making a response of my own to that..I will touch on every one of your points as to not leave anything out. I do feel I have learned a great deal from conversing with an intelligent atheist, but there are still so many topics about the atheist life/ position which I am unclear about and interested in!!!
I apologize if I'm being redundant, but I am simply presenting the best argument that I have.
tonybonez 3 years ago
And so should you believe in Zeus, and Osiris, and Satan, and The Flying Spaghetti Monster - JUST IN CASE. Any one of them promise to give you a positive consequence in the afterlife, so you gotta throw in your chips with ALL of them, if that's your logic!
limegreensquid 3 years ago
Hey, tonybonez, everything you say is wrong. Why? Because it's not in any coherent KNOWN LANGUAGE.
LEARN TYPING. STOP USING PASCAL'S BULLSHIT WAGER.
ENDGAME.
AJComixII 3 years ago
I believe he was referring to me. So far, he has only been only arguing from ignorance or incredulity, which are of course very fallacious trains of thoughts.
Again, my point wasn't about the existence of god. I simply said that trying to explain a mystery with a bigger one has no explanatory power.
Human comprehension is a level up process. We start from what we know and understand to explain anything.
wynd2007 3 years ago
dispute this:
humans can not know whether god exists while here on earth, so we have to make a decision with that in mind. We have to go with the choice that will be most likely to give us a positive result. Christianity is the most likely because of the OT prophecy about Jesus, his miracles, and the fact that he healed the sick!!
tonybonez 3 years ago
''Jesus, his miracles, and the fact that he healed the sick!!''
This in no way is evidence. This is hearsay at best.
There is an infinite number of things we can't know. But, assuming that one exists (Yahweh) and another doesn't (Allah), when both are as unsupported by any tangible evidence, is applying a fallacious double standard and special pleading.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Even today, there are countless of people claiming that they are gods, reincarnation of prophets or holy men.
Are their assertions true and supported by evidence? No. Would they be more credible if supported by a book? No. What if this book was found 2000 years from now? Absolutely not.
Basing your conclusions solely on your holy book of predilection isn't evidence of anything.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Your book isn't evidence for Yahweh, no more that the Quran is evidence of Allah or the book of Mormon evidence of...whatever they believe.
And both these religions also claim miracles and so called accomplished prophecies. And yet, I am almost absolutely sure you don't believe in their claims.
Why the double standard again? These two religions do offer the same level of ''evidence''...
wynd2007 3 years ago
where did you crazy atheists get the idea that there is no evidence of Jesus divinity. How is it that he was able to become the most famous and beloved man in the history of the universe if he was just a hoax as you say.. JESUS--the great faker, right. oh thats rich!!
tonybonez 3 years ago
''where did you crazy atheists get the idea that there is no evidence of Jesus divinity.''
Mmmmm...it isn't an idea. For instance, you have been arguing for a week or so here, and you have yet to present any tangible evidence as to any of your claims.
And even if a Jesus did exist, in what way would that be evidence for (Yahweh)?
Remember, many people, even today, have claimed to be gods, holy men, etc. Does the mere fact of claiming it and have it written down in a book evidence?
wynd2007 3 years ago
For instance, the prophet Muhammad has been proven with tangible evidence to have existed. Is that enough to conclude that Allah does as well?
wynd2007 3 years ago
tangible evidence, of course I dont have any tangible evidence, merely that scholars agree that a man named Jesus lived and was a healer that was crucified. Within a few years after his death the largest empire in the world at the time officially changed its religion to him..
Being skeptical is logical, rejecting a claim without evidence to reject it is not. Religion is not above scrutiny, but the bottom line is we may never know the truth, so we have to make a descision with that in mind!!!
tonybonez 3 years ago
''tangible evidence, of course I dont have any tangible evidence, merely that scholars agree that a man named Jesus lived and was a healer that was crucified.''
And voila! This is the problem with any religion. You believe supernatural claims on faith just as much as Muslims, astrologists or cultists.
Remember, any claim presented without evidence can be brushed off as easily without evidence.
wynd2007 3 years ago
I didnt say I didnt have tangible ( capable of being perceived especially by the sense of touch) evidence that you can touch, but there is plenty of evidence for Jesus---witness accounts to him (google it), the OT prophecies he fullfilled, his miracles, the fact that he healed the sick, the fact that the Roman empire officially changed its religion to Christianity!!
tonybonez 3 years ago
These aren't any more evidence for your flavor of religion than they are from any other religion. Stop the double standard.
wynd2007 3 years ago
''tangible evidence, of course I dont have any tangible evidence''
This is what you said a couple messages back. That you didn't have tangible evidence. Are you retracting from this position now?
wynd2007 3 years ago
no.
tonybonez 3 years ago
That's it? Simple denial? From someone claiming that there is an important body of evidence supporting his position, you are doing a very poor job of defending it.
wynd2007 3 years ago
My position:
Living humans can not know whether there is a god or not, so we have to make a choice as to which belief to throw in with, with that in mind. We should throw in with the belief that we think will have the most likely chance at giving us a positive result in the afterlife. Christianity is the most likely because of the witnesses to Jesus, his fulfillment of prophecy, his miracles, the fact that he healed the sick, and the fact that the Roman Empire officially changed its religion.
tonybonez 3 years ago
This is all fine and good. But until tangible evidence supporting this is ever brought forward, you have to believe on faith.
In other words, your religion is indistinguishable from similar other religious or supernatural claims.
wynd2007 3 years ago
When you understand why you aren't a Muslim or a Buddhist, you will understand why I am not a Christian as well.
wynd2007 3 years ago
tangible just means you can touch it *sigh sigh sigh
tonybonez 3 years ago
Its funny that you would only pick the definition that suits you...You are quote mining the dictionary now? Here's the full definition of tangible: 1. touchable; able to be touched or felt; perceptible by the sense of touch; palpable 2. possible to be treated as fact; real or concrete 3. comprehensible by the mind; understandable
wynd2007 3 years ago 2
I will also add empirical to the type of evidence that would be convincing: 1. Pertaining to or based on experience. 2. Pertaining to, derived from, or testable by observations made using the physical senses or using instruments which extend the senses. 3. (philosophy of science) Verifiable by means of scientific experimentation.
wynd2007 3 years ago 2
ok I was using the websters defintion of tangible, sorry!!
You want evidence for Jesus:
ALL The eyewitness acoounts (google it), the fact that he is the fullfilmet of OT prophecy, his miracles, the fact that he healed the sick, the fact that the Roman Empire (the biggest in the world at the time) officially changed their religion to Christianity, and the fact that he is the most famous and beloved character in the history of the world, Now that may not be enough evidence for you, but oh well
tonybonez 3 years ago
Again, this isn't any more evidence for your religion that it is for any other religion. This is the crux of the problem right here.
Also, if they really were evidence, they would be in every museum, story book, school curricula, there would be scientific fields created out of them, etc.
The fact that you keep claiming these as evidence defeats the very purpose of faith inherent to any religion.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Even amongst proponents of any religions, there are diverging opinions of what the truth is. Only in Christianity, there is about 30 00 denominations. You would think that the Holy spirit, which is claimed to be necessary to understand Christianity would be more consistent that that.
This is something you never see in science. Something is either true or false. If a theory is found out to be false when new evidence arise, it is updated or abandoned altogether.
wynd2007 3 years ago
We can not know whether there is a God or not, so we have to make a choice of which belief to follow based on that fact. We should go with the choice that seems the most likely to give us a positive result and follow the evidence. The evidence of Christianity is convincing: ALL The eyewitness accounts, the fact that he is the fulfillment of OT prophecy, his miracles, the fact that he healed the sick, the fact that the Roman Empire officially changed their religion to Christianity
tonybonez 3 years ago
You have posted this fallacious arguments five times now. And five times I have answered that it isn't any more substantiative as the similar claims made for any other religion.
Alien abductees claim to have countless eyewitnesses, so does bigfootists or Elvis followers.
Your point is moot.
wynd2007 3 years ago
If there is a god and thats a big if Jesus seems to be the single vessel for him and the bible seems to be a special book in this way. It is the most famous and reprinted book in the history of the world. Now to prove god is easy--how did we get here, look how complicated we are, a babys smile, and the fact that the odds against life are so great as to be astronomical!!!!!!!!!
tonybonez 3 years ago
Again, these aren't empirical or tangible evidence supporting the claims of your book.
By the way, the IKEA catalog is the most printed book in the world. So what? Ad populum arguments are fallacies.
wynd2007 3 years ago
The nation of Iran also changed their religion to Islam, does it make it any more true?
wynd2007 3 years ago
''The evidence of Christianity is convincing''
If it were, faith wouldn't be necessary, you would be able to present them instead of making vague claims.
If there is evidence to support any supernatural claim, then it becomes assessable by science. Don't you think that religious scientists wouldn't have published peer reviewed science papers about your religion and won the Nobel yet?
If the evidence is so overwhelming, where is the god theory?
wynd2007 3 years ago 2
I sent u a message rad it!!!
tonybonez 3 years ago
I highly doubt you sent me arguments you haven't used here before. I would much rather if you stayed here please.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Please, take you time to type your messages! I also make a few typos here and there, but yours seems to be due to your eagerness to promptly reply.
Take it from a pro ( I write for a living), take the time to read and correct yourself.
wynd2007 3 years ago
Here's a corollary for my argument: If creationism is true, why has it been defeated 17 times in a row in the US courts?
Of course, this isn't evidence Creationism (or ID) is false. It is evidence that they were either ill prepared, incompetents or lying.
Which is astounding considering the amount of evidence you claim that supports your position...
wynd2007 3 years ago 2
tony
You can thank Constantine for Rome choosing Xtianity. Although he converted, he was always a pagan thru and thru. He infused pagan attributes into Xtianty. That's one of the reasons it was accepted by so many.
You should do some research of pre-Xtian Pagan influences in Xtianity and study how the early fathers of the church manipulated scripture. They created Xtianity in essence. Just study the Hell concept and where and how it came into scripture.
sixkiller111 3 years ago