Did Dr. Flew even come prepared? It's mainly philosophical twaddle. He talks down to his audience. Why would Craig be pissed about this second-class performance?
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
"attempts to explain away these three facts, like disciples stole the body, or Jesus was never really dead, have been universally rejected by contemporary scholarship." Well then W.L....why are there still so many scholars who don't buy into your religion's claims? You wordy moron. I'm so sick of this guy's rhetoric tricks, and in this case, total lies. Enough appeals to authorities and obfuscations, this guy "wins" debates because he's sly like a fox, and no other reason.
@jhaggerty93 he is not referring to scholarship at large, he is referring to those sectors of scholarship which actually have a bearing on the subject at hand, in which there is a fairly general consistence on the historicity of the account. Also I don't see what is obfuscation, I have no trouble understanding what Craig says, which is why I disagree with much of it, incidentally. haha.
LOL, He was hit with a "dry mouth infliction, something he has never experienced before" Maybe it's because the lord was involved in trying to stop his blasphemy?
I could care less if a bunch of fairy tale believers respect me or not. I dont need their respect and neither does science. What you should show respect for are things like reason, critical thinking, scientific methods, actual evidence, and so on. I live in the south (bible belt) and creationism is alive and well. No science cannot see everything, but nothing can see everything. Why would Israel offer their presidency to Einstein if he wasnt a Jew?
The interpretation you make, that is about some christians and relatively about christianity, and what you do with it is fallacious. Do you want to shut up other group in favor of yours, mainly on unfinished questions?
Respect to other beliefs, in spite of christian preaching, which cannot be ceased and which is like an obligation and taste to him/her, is also a christian concept. But seems to not to be a new atheism one (hate or rebellion from new atheism towards christianity?).
Another example of circular reasoning: science can explain everything NATURALLY (defended by you).
And what if the christians of the place you live in are creationists? If you are an atheist, you have YOUR life. Atheism is particular of each one. It is an existencialism. Or could you interfer on christian mind, but cannot it on your atheist mind?
Sincerely, and finally finishing this, I say: I preach to everyone who needs, but cease it when someone reject. However, I preach and duel more and more to and against people like new atheists, the ones who want to have the world only for them. Atheism, for his nihilism, is respectable, but new atheism, is not. It is the new atheists who fight for a lost cause. Insistent duels produce stone-hearted people in both sides. From this, go out this: WAR. In a near of distant future...
@rudybdes Atheists dont want the world to ourselves, we're just tired of putting up with everyones fairy tales being jammed down our throats. Lost cause? See this is what bothers us. You think things like truth, reason, critical thinking, science, logic, etc... you think these are lost causes? You could teach Jesus' message without all of this religious BS
@MrKGatl I'm a christian and i don't believe "truth, reason, critical thinking, science, logic, or etc are lost causes. And I agree with you that there is alot of religious BS out there, but that doesn't make atheists right
@IslayaC Why cant atheism be right? There's a chance that we might be wrong as well, but we believe there is no convincing evidence of a god or gods. Nor do we feel there is a need for religion. Put some of your Christian beliefs up against truth, reason.... Yet you believe in a virgin birth, the dead rising, walking on water, turning water to wine, etc..
@MrKGatl I'm not saying atheism is wrong. Atheism states that there is no God and trie to place the responsibility of proof on the theists. Put some of your Atheistic beliefs up against truth, reason, etc... and not assumption like nothing out of nothing comes nothing, the fact that information has never been created from nothing, even in mutation; and that there is no solid proof against the existence God, just those who reject him and wish to live for themselves.
@junlt It seems nonsense to me that everything must have a purpose. To the universe we are no more significant than ants. Do you think each individual ant has a purpose? Purpose is something that we make up because to give us motivation. And who thinks that we came from nothing. People who believe that god just snapped his finger to bring us into existence is closer to believing that we came from nothing. Religion is non sense.
@junlt Your logic is backwards, you set your beliefs first, then you look for evidence. Thats not good logic at all. How are we evidence of god? If you mean the imperfect human body, then your god would be imperfect and who would want an imperfect god? There is zero evidence that there is a god or gods, that is why I dont believe any of it.
@MrKGatl You should read Antony Flew's book "There is a God: How the most notorious atheist changed his mind". He is now a deist. But in his book he asks the question to his atheist/agnostic friends: What evidence/arguments would it take for you to even consider an intelligent mind that created the universe? Take a few days and think about that question.
@REDRAGON12345 Flew was getting old and losing his mind when that book was written. Roy Abraham Varghese, was the coauthor and wrote most of the book. His conversion didnt come during his most formative years, but in the end of his life when his mind was slipping.
I am not going to pretend that it isnt a great question, what would it take for us to consider intellegent design. It would take evidence, im not sure what form, but some kind of proof
@corioa Yes I watched the video. But for people who have been to university, embrace knowledge, and dont believe in fairy tales this hardly counted as evidence. It really doesnt take much at all to reaffirm peoples brainwashed beliefs. Continue on being a sheep and not questioning. I am open minded and if there was evidence that proved me wrong I would change my beliefs. You are a fundamentalist and dont care about logic, reason, or facts. You are a very primitive person
@REDRAGON12345 For me, the following. If mathematical messages were discovered in the cosmic microwave background radiation. If the existence of a multiverse could be reasonably excluded or be shown to be highly problematic. If the human genome contained features that could only be explained by intelligence, like if it contained the digits of pi. Or if naturalism were shown to be self-refuting or an insufficient basis for knowledge.
@MrKGatl Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Why don't you provide a positive argument for the non-existence of God? There is plenty for the existence of God: fine-tuning of the initial conditions, irreducible complexity of the cell and the eyes, the fact being cannot spring from non-being ergo there is a supreme being greater than creation. Don't respond to those. Give your own positive argument for God's non-existence.
@corioa With terrible logic like yours we should just believe in everything. There is no evidence that the Flying Spaghetti Monster isnt living inside Neptune, controlling our world. None of the evidence you gave would count as evidence to educated people. I dont have to prove a negative. Its on the ones making the claims that have to provide evidence. The basic problem is you're uneducated and dont take much convincing. The human body is not perfect, hence imperfect/no god
@corioa What is "God"? In other words when someone says "God" what comes into your mind? How would you describe him or her or whatever to a visitor from another planet?
@IslayaC I went and looked at your channel, and I could care less if you respect me. Your a fundamentalist christian who takes everything you read literally. Also you bash atheism as "unsound and invalid". Your the type of arrogant brainwashed christian who asks for respect, but gives nothing in return.
@MrKGatl Don't need a decent youtube channel to be respected. Wasn't giving any and didn't ask for it. Judging an entire person based from a few comments sounds like i'm not the one taking things literally here. I'm sorry dude, besides, I'm not bashing anyone. I simply take the atheistic point of view to be false.
HE IS NOT A HISTORIAN OR DOCTOR ANY MORE THAN MS. CLEO IS A PSYCHIC.
he is "educated" if you can call it that, in CHRISTIAN INSTITUTIONS. This doesnt make him a historian. He might as well be on LSD, it would be more believable
Being educated in a christian institution is not good, acceptable and rational, but in a secular one it is? Why? Is there a rule, universal or not, which dictates that christian people educated in christian institutions will always be intelectually unacceptable and low and secularly educated people, christian or not, no? If there is, where is such rule?
With your alegation, it seems better to be on LSD than to be on prejudice.
@rudybdes No, being educated in a Christian institution is fine for the vast majority of people. But not if you want to debate evolutionary biology. Its hard for someone like Dawkins who was educated at Oxford to debate someone whos school believes in talking snakes and pregnant virgins.
Ah, beyond the prejudice and the pejorative way you treat traditional creationists, you commited petitio principii and forgot that at least one christian helped to develop S.E.T. (synthetic evolution theory).
And, obviously, atheists are better than christians, isn't it?
@rudybdes Petitio principii, impressive word usage. Circular reasoning is what makes religions work, not atheism. So what if christians helped develop S.E.T.. Einstein was a Jew and he helped advance physics. Does that mean physics cant speak against Judeism now? Being a religious person doesnt dimish the scientific advances one makes. Yes I treat traditional creationists with disrespect. But if i believed in Mother Goose as my god, would you respect me?
Hehehe, circular reasoning could not be commited in atheism, but yes in religious belifs? Is that a rule? Heheh... More prejudice. Well, Einstein WAS NOT jew. He was ethnicly a jew, not a religious one - more prejudice. And if you believed in Mother Goose as your god, obviously I would respect you, beucase that was your choice - more prejudice of your part.
@rudybdes Whats wrong with you? You shouldnt respect people who believe in Mother Goose as their god. Grow a pair of balls man. And please give me an example of atheistic circular reasoning.
Nothing wrong with me. It is just a misunderstanding of yours towards christianity. You create an interpretation of christianity and christians as a rule or rules, attribute to them and then try to refute your own interpretation of it to knock down christianity.
Observe this: try to alert a person about his/her beliefs/lies - what you try to do to me and what I try do to to you - is one thing, but insist on it, trying to restrict people's freedom, and what you do with your freedom is everything (in favor of you or against), is another thing. When people reject some beliefs, they simply reject. And such rejection cannot as well interfer on other people lives. Why can a group impose or expose their concepts, but another cannot do it? Respect.
Christians having helped to develop S.E.T. is a sign of that your pejorative speaking (talking skanes, for example) has fails. It is not a rule or a general behavior in christianity. Literal criationism is a thing of Middle Age protestants. And science is limited to what it can see - can it see everything? About your disrespect to literal creationists... well, you respect when you want to be respected, isn't it, or there is an axception only for you?
@realtyofislam quote the bible some more, that should convince us all us that god exists! That's basically the equivalent of asking a mechanic if his prices are good.. of course he's going to say they're good! and of course the bible is going to say only fools don't believe in god!
How will it be, then, when we bring from every people a witness and bring you as a witness against these?
42- on that day will those who disbelieve and disobey the apostle desire that the earth were leveled with them, and they shall not hide any word from allah.
@lightbrownpoop Converted to deism and continued to maintain that the God Craig believed it was completely nonsense and unsubstantiated. Deism is so far removed from Christianity that it isn't in the same category as theism
@thepickletrain Ourselves (and the Universe), silly. Just like tangible evidence for Humans can be airplanes or spears. And just how tangible evidence for Aliens can be some super technology on one of Jupiter's moons. Or how tangible evidence for a butterfly can be it's cocoon it metamorphosed from.
We have tangible, teleological, logical, evidence for God. What evidence do we have that God does NOT exist? None. Oh, and if you are talking about 'touching' God, He is immaterial, of course!
@6thwing Aeroplanes and spears are NOT evidence for humans, just as super technology is not evidence for aliens.
Are you telling me that if aliens existed with greater technology than ours that they couldn't build a spear or an aeroplane? If you found a spearhead on Mars, you could not deduce that humans must have lived there because it could just as easily been any other intelligent species with the ability to craft such items. Ergo, your logic is flawed.
@aliasbrush LOL wut? Please don't attack someone's logic with arguments like that. There IS evidence for humans, currently there is not evidence for ANY simple or complex life outside this planet. This is the same bad argument as Dawkins teapot fallacy. Read more about philosophy and less about sociology. I can tell you have a post-modern view of epistemology.
@6thwing I wasn't even aware that there was a definition of god, that you could say you have evidence for, or evidence contradicting, much less so much evidence to make someone like yourself sure it is there.
And when my servants ask you concerning me, then surely I am very near; I answer the prayer of suppliant when he calls on me, so they should answer my call and believe in me that they may walk in the right way.
Many of our accepted attributes of God, Allah and / or the Supreme Being was established within our consciousness as far as we could remember. Ever since our earliest memories of our childhood, many of us learned and embrace the almighty, regardless of what specific terminology of the divine we've accepted. Our families, schools, local culture, and even nations included God, Allah, Elohim in our lives and influenced the way we perceive things and act upon any situation.
No one told me that, it's a logical extrapolation from Protestant doctrine and Craig's claims. Salvation is through Jesus Christ alone, correct? Craig claims at 1:55 that sincerely seeking god will reveal him. 2/3rds of the world is not Christian, so they are going to hell for their lack of faith in Jesus, and according to Craig they don't have faith in Jesus because they haven't been "sincere" enough. I reiterate: what an ass.
theism is the more plausible world view?.. i thought it was does god exist?.. shouldn't he say that's why he thinks christianity is true... or deism... because he's not really using scripture, he's using the same ol' apologetics/back wards reasoning. ugh.
@HonestTechnoAtheist Sort of, but Craig has all his work available for research, and has debated using the same 5 arguments for many years. It was Flew's responsibility to find this out prior to the debate, and come prepared to answer all those things that Craig says in every single debate, it's just a smart thing to do.
lol plz explain that. tell me how flew said anything relevant to craig's debate. "One has at least to (couldnt catch this word.. synonym to accept) the possiblity that it is not ridiculous popping out of nothing" This scentence is basically just ignoring thiesim's most important argument. "We are not in a position to answer the question" I laughed.
God of the Gaps is what you do when you say "I don't know; therefore, god did it." It's a ridiculous leap in logic and what led the Greeks to conclude that lightning came from Zeus. It has never, ever produced real knowledge. Craig is saying, we don't know how the universe began; therefore, god did it. A lack of explanation is not proof positive for something equally lacking in explanation.
and btw when craig says 'we dont know how the universe began', he isnt saying thats the reason why we should believe god did it. His general point is that its impossible for the universe to exist out of nothing. (He summarizes his points at the end too)
2. More importantly, that still has nothing to do with god, especially not a specific god like YHWH. He's still saying "the universe can't begin from nothing; therefore, goddidit." It's a leap in logic. He has no evidence the universe came from a "god" as opposed to some other natural phenomenon we don't understand.
great point.... "god done it" is one of the most childish, simplistic explanations i've ever heard. I realized that at the age of 6 or 7. yet college educated individuals say it with such confidence. An explanation that explains everything usually explains nothing.
@RichardMNixon Your relating all religion as the same. The only diff. between Christianity and all other religions is the Bible, and eye witness accounts of God over a period of 10,000 years.
@libertyman10 actually, early historians talked about a man named Jesus who was known for doing miraculous works. He is talked about by Josephus in the work The Antiquities of the Jews! Look it up!!!!
@libertyman10 Yes and factions of Islam try to tell us too that the holocaust never occurred. The evidence for both are overwhelming. Not only is Jesus documented by sources that are not Christian, the Christian sources themselves evidence men who thought their leader was dead. Indeed he was. It was worth more than a Roman soldiers life not to complete an execution. He was dead. He left a tomb empty, not by waking up by being raised Acts 10:40 and there were over 500 witnesses to the fact
@libertyman10 If those who claimed Jesus had risen were wrong it'd have been easy for their adversaries to prove. He was buried in the tomb of a prominent man: Joseph of Arimathea. They would have taken them there and said "here is the body" but no such debate was entered into except the idea that a bunch of frightened disciples overpowered armed guards to start a religion they would face torture and death for proclaiming. Knowing the truth, that's exactly what they did. Proclaimed Jesus risen.
Respond to this video...Now if Jesus was raised, how could that happen? Only God could. And if there is a God who created life then restoring life would be possible for Him. Only Him
no one knows where the universe came from,but there are some other ideas.....the univierse could have been a safer place for life in the tunning, so there is no reason to conclude a designer.....there was no evidence for objective moral values, he just said he felt them.....people also wittnessed others using witchcraft in history.....the last point was him preaching.
@bary1234 i pity u wen u see 4 urself wat is 2 come and bare witness 2 the removin of the veil how will u contend withit .if a man who believes in ghosts sees 1 he is sply frightened but if an unbeliever sees a spirit he dies from the shoc
@dualscioneer : Nonsense, bullshit, superstitious gibberish. You are a willfull slave of disgusting fiction from dark ages. You need imaginary friends to live, how pathetic are you?
The channel operator would do well to ban the user spamming the same 8 or 9 messages over and over again. It is making it impossible for real users to converse.
The Lord has already proven Himself to all of civilized humanity. All of mankind already accepts His appearance and activities as scientific facts, with the single exception of the deluded atheist, whose beliefs are in the extreme miniscule minority worldwide.
The lunatic atheist must present a viable argument in favor of his bizarre personal belief that God somehow doesn't exist before being taken seriously, which he has failed to do, sadly.
Problem is, nobody believes you, and that's because you have no evidence for your bizarre claims about God.
The reason why the vast majority of human beings easily comprehend the ample scientific and logical evidence for God's factual appearance and activities is that they are smarter than animals. The reason why you don't is because you're not.
You fantasize that someone will someday believe you, but it won't happen: face reality.
The lower animals, such as the pig, the mosquito, and the jellyfish, also lack the intelligence to grasp any portion of the ample scientific evidence for God's factual appearance and activities that the vast majority of intelligent human beings comprehend easily.
Sadly, the fact that a single Youtube member is on the exact same intelligence level as the lower animal disproves nothing about God's factual appearance or activities.
With the single exception of the crackpot atheist, everybody already accepts God's appearance and activities as scientific facts, so who exactly do you expect me to convince?
The atheist, in the extreme miniscule minority, insists that he has made no claim contrary to the long-accepted scientific facts anyway, so there is truly no challenge to meet.
The scientific facts stand unchallenged and universally accepted.
There is ample observational evidence that all human beings ever born were born from other human beings.
Conversely, there is absolutely no evidence that any human being or group of human beings could ever have been born from any member of any different species. Such a phenomenon has never been observed, and is nothing but a fantastic, unsupported, irrational, and unscientific belief of atheist dogma.
@Purushadasa There is zero evidence to show that dirt can turn into humans or animals. There is evidence however that slight change can occur over time such as a bactierium becoming resistant to a drug and thus allowing for all future generations of that bactierium to be resistant to that drug. Such a thing is referred to as natural selection and is the primary driving force in evolution.
All of God's scriptures prohibit violence and killing, and disobedience to God's scriptures is atheistic. Therefore, all violence and killing are atheistic activities, and real Theists are always in accordance with God's injunctions to be peaceful.
Would Jesus have approved of Hitler's well-known campaign to exterminate all Jews and all Catholics? Certainly not! Jesus WAS a Jew, and also a pacifist!
If the atheist posits that Hitler was honest in his statements, then the atheist acknowledges his sick hero-worship of Hitler.
The Theists understand that Hitler was a liar, a believer in atheist dogma™, and a mass-murderer of Theists.
Only an atheist fool would quote Hitler's lies as if reliable.
The Catholic Church endorsed Hitler on. This "well-known" plan to exterminate Catholics isn't real.
Einstein was ethnically Jewish. He expressly stated that he did not think Jews were "chosen people," and he thought the concept of a personal god was childish.
There are plenty of people who disrespect your flavor of god's commands without being atheists and there are plenty of murderous theists. Your arguments reek.
@RichardMNixon Ur using the words that einstein used early in his life. In his later years he eventually came to the conclusion that there could be a god. Nice try though, valient effort
@lukeism2 I'm not sure Einstein was never very clear about it, I know Michio Kaku said the other day that Einstein believe in Baruch Spinoza god who some people say is a pantheist but he made it clear he wasn't
Hitler loved Darwin's nonsense, and he based his eugenics program on it directly. Thus Hitler is one of the main "heroes" of atheism.
The number one tenet of official atheist dogma™ is to lie at every opportunity, and Hitler was clearly a liar. Only a fool puts his faith in the words of a liar like Hitler, as you do, above.
CONCLUSION: Hitler was a believer in atheist dogma™, a hater of Theists (Jews and Catholics), and a ruthless killer and liar.
Knowing that this believer in atheist dogma™ is just about to awake to the dawn of wisdom and accept the scientific and logical evidence for God's factual appearance and activities makes it easier to actually sit through his long-winded, bumbling, pseudo-intellectual garbage. LOL
3:49 -- Textbook example of a believer in atheist dogma™ who has no arguments to support his bizarre belief system retreating into the illusory shelter of covert agnosticism.
Face it -- the atheist posits a possibility that God somehow doesn't exist, but he fails to provide as much as a shred of evidence for that personal belief.
Conversely, the Theists have provided tons of evidence for God's factual appearance and activities, and that's why the world rejects atheist dogma™ wholesale.
People ought to be able to rationally explain their beliefs. Dr. Craig was excellent in his cogent presentation of facts and reasonable theories about the existence of God. Flew, on the other hand, was disorganized, incoherent, and unable to make a reasoned case for atheism.
Alas the arguments craig presented are not evidence for god as much of them contain errors and problems.
For example, he just assumes there is objective morality and then declares that means there is a god. However he has not established there IS objective morality, so he has assumed one thing, assumed another, and then used the first to support the second.
This has been flagged as spam show
The true hypocrite is the one who ceases to perceive his deception, the one who lies with sincerity.
Nietzschean1000 1 week ago
Did Dr. Flew even come prepared? It's mainly philosophical twaddle. He talks down to his audience. Why would Craig be pissed about this second-class performance?
corioa 1 month ago
Craig only asks them to have Flew speak "louder" because people in the audience yelled out. Craig is also being respectful.
onlyonechoice 2 months ago
7:55 Craig says "Make him speak better" Craig is only smiles and laughs on camera but he gets pissed when no ones looking!
scar504 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK (DONATED) FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: WINNING ARGUMENTS NOW ADDED For The Creationism-Evolutionism Debate (See Subchapter 10.2.2.), The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
etc.
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
"attempts to explain away these three facts, like disciples stole the body, or Jesus was never really dead, have been universally rejected by contemporary scholarship." Well then W.L....why are there still so many scholars who don't buy into your religion's claims? You wordy moron. I'm so sick of this guy's rhetoric tricks, and in this case, total lies. Enough appeals to authorities and obfuscations, this guy "wins" debates because he's sly like a fox, and no other reason.
jhaggerty93 6 months ago
@jhaggerty93 he is not referring to scholarship at large, he is referring to those sectors of scholarship which actually have a bearing on the subject at hand, in which there is a fairly general consistence on the historicity of the account. Also I don't see what is obfuscation, I have no trouble understanding what Craig says, which is why I disagree with much of it, incidentally. haha.
ShawDAMAN 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why would they put such an old man against my man William. This grandfather had no chance since the beginning
jmanxiv1 6 months ago
Why would they put such an old man against my man William. This grandfather had no chance since the begining
jmanxiv1 6 months ago
Knowing that Anthony Flew will believe in God is like knowing the end of a movie before you see it! XD This is actually pretty fun!
BeyondtheChaos1 6 months ago
Beat Down! 5 Craig 0 Flew!!
IslayaC 7 months ago
LOL, He was hit with a "dry mouth infliction, something he has never experienced before" Maybe it's because the lord was involved in trying to stop his blasphemy?
MrLas74 7 months ago
I could care less if a bunch of fairy tale believers respect me or not. I dont need their respect and neither does science. What you should show respect for are things like reason, critical thinking, scientific methods, actual evidence, and so on. I live in the south (bible belt) and creationism is alive and well. No science cannot see everything, but nothing can see everything. Why would Israel offer their presidency to Einstein if he wasnt a Jew?
MrKGatl 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
The interpretation you make, that is about some christians and relatively about christianity, and what you do with it is fallacious. Do you want to shut up other group in favor of yours, mainly on unfinished questions?
Respect to other beliefs, in spite of christian preaching, which cannot be ceased and which is like an obligation and taste to him/her, is also a christian concept. But seems to not to be a new atheism one (hate or rebellion from new atheism towards christianity?).
rudybdes 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
"Love your enemies, pray for the ones who persecute you... Love one as yourself".
I think YOU ALL, nw atheists, are the ones who, in the name of Science and prejudice, violate this. Mainly on unfinished questions.
And do you want an example of circular reasoning? Well, here is it: just the material world exists.
rudybdes 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Finishing this adolescent fighting, a question:
"No science cannot see everything, but nothing can see everything".
What does, so, you feel so certain about a thing which is not absolutely certain and on what science cannot touch?
rudybdes 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
"What you should show respect for are things like reason, critical thinking, scientific methods, actual evidence, and so on".
Well, do I not show respect for them? :P
rudybdes 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Another example of circular reasoning: science can explain everything NATURALLY (defended by you).
And what if the christians of the place you live in are creationists? If you are an atheist, you have YOUR life. Atheism is particular of each one. It is an existencialism. Or could you interfer on christian mind, but cannot it on your atheist mind?
rudybdes 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Sincerely, and finally finishing this, I say: I preach to everyone who needs, but cease it when someone reject. However, I preach and duel more and more to and against people like new atheists, the ones who want to have the world only for them. Atheism, for his nihilism, is respectable, but new atheism, is not. It is the new atheists who fight for a lost cause. Insistent duels produce stone-hearted people in both sides. From this, go out this: WAR. In a near of distant future...
rudybdes 8 months ago
@rudybdes Atheists dont want the world to ourselves, we're just tired of putting up with everyones fairy tales being jammed down our throats. Lost cause? See this is what bothers us. You think things like truth, reason, critical thinking, science, logic, etc... you think these are lost causes? You could teach Jesus' message without all of this religious BS
MrKGatl 7 months ago
@MrKGatl I'm a christian and i don't believe "truth, reason, critical thinking, science, logic, or etc are lost causes. And I agree with you that there is alot of religious BS out there, but that doesn't make atheists right
IslayaC 7 months ago
@IslayaC Why cant atheism be right? There's a chance that we might be wrong as well, but we believe there is no convincing evidence of a god or gods. Nor do we feel there is a need for religion. Put some of your Christian beliefs up against truth, reason.... Yet you believe in a virgin birth, the dead rising, walking on water, turning water to wine, etc..
MrKGatl 7 months ago
@MrKGatl I'm not saying atheism is wrong. Atheism states that there is no God and trie to place the responsibility of proof on the theists. Put some of your Atheistic beliefs up against truth, reason, etc... and not assumption like nothing out of nothing comes nothing, the fact that information has never been created from nothing, even in mutation; and that there is no solid proof against the existence God, just those who reject him and wish to live for themselves.
IslayaC 7 months ago
@MrKGatl Big chance your wrong Somewhere in time somthing had to be "uncreated" Not created, if it was mathmatical points connecting or God.
junlt 6 months ago
@junlt I never said that nothing has ever been created, but I certainly do believe that there is no divine creator.
MrKGatl 6 months ago
@MrKGatl Oh i mis-read your comment sorry. But its complete non-sense to believe we all came from nothing, and have no purpose.
junlt 6 months ago
@junlt It seems nonsense to me that everything must have a purpose. To the universe we are no more significant than ants. Do you think each individual ant has a purpose? Purpose is something that we make up because to give us motivation. And who thinks that we came from nothing. People who believe that god just snapped his finger to bring us into existence is closer to believing that we came from nothing. Religion is non sense.
MrKGatl 6 months ago
@MrKGatl Evidense of god is us. So its non-sense to deny it, You just rather not except theres a god.
junlt 6 months ago
@junlt Your logic is backwards, you set your beliefs first, then you look for evidence. Thats not good logic at all. How are we evidence of god? If you mean the imperfect human body, then your god would be imperfect and who would want an imperfect god? There is zero evidence that there is a god or gods, that is why I dont believe any of it.
MrKGatl 6 months ago
@MrKGatl You should read Antony Flew's book "There is a God: How the most notorious atheist changed his mind". He is now a deist. But in his book he asks the question to his atheist/agnostic friends: What evidence/arguments would it take for you to even consider an intelligent mind that created the universe? Take a few days and think about that question.
REDRAGON12345 5 months ago
@REDRAGON12345 Flew was getting old and losing his mind when that book was written. Roy Abraham Varghese, was the coauthor and wrote most of the book. His conversion didnt come during his most formative years, but in the end of his life when his mind was slipping.
I am not going to pretend that it isnt a great question, what would it take for us to consider intellegent design. It would take evidence, im not sure what form, but some kind of proof
MrKGatl 5 months ago
@MrKGatl The "some kind of" proof is in the video. Did you watch it?
corioa 1 month ago
@corioa Yes I watched the video. But for people who have been to university, embrace knowledge, and dont believe in fairy tales this hardly counted as evidence. It really doesnt take much at all to reaffirm peoples brainwashed beliefs. Continue on being a sheep and not questioning. I am open minded and if there was evidence that proved me wrong I would change my beliefs. You are a fundamentalist and dont care about logic, reason, or facts. You are a very primitive person
MrKGatl 1 month ago
@REDRAGON12345 For me, the following. If mathematical messages were discovered in the cosmic microwave background radiation. If the existence of a multiverse could be reasonably excluded or be shown to be highly problematic. If the human genome contained features that could only be explained by intelligence, like if it contained the digits of pi. Or if naturalism were shown to be self-refuting or an insufficient basis for knowledge.
ClamCrunchy 5 months ago
@MrKGatl Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Why don't you provide a positive argument for the non-existence of God? There is plenty for the existence of God: fine-tuning of the initial conditions, irreducible complexity of the cell and the eyes, the fact being cannot spring from non-being ergo there is a supreme being greater than creation. Don't respond to those. Give your own positive argument for God's non-existence.
corioa 1 month ago
@corioa With terrible logic like yours we should just believe in everything. There is no evidence that the Flying Spaghetti Monster isnt living inside Neptune, controlling our world. None of the evidence you gave would count as evidence to educated people. I dont have to prove a negative. Its on the ones making the claims that have to provide evidence. The basic problem is you're uneducated and dont take much convincing. The human body is not perfect, hence imperfect/no god
MrKGatl 1 month ago
@MrKGatl Not only do you have to prove a negative, it's impossible to prove a negative.
kdavisification 2 weeks ago
@kdavisification Those are the rules that religious people make up.
MrKGatl 1 week ago
@corioa What is "God"? In other words when someone says "God" what comes into your mind? How would you describe him or her or whatever to a visitor from another planet?
kdavisification 2 weeks ago
@MrKGatl "Men are respectable only as they respect" - Ralph Waldo Emerson,
IslayaC 7 months ago
@IslayaC I went and looked at your channel, and I could care less if you respect me. Your a fundamentalist christian who takes everything you read literally. Also you bash atheism as "unsound and invalid". Your the type of arrogant brainwashed christian who asks for respect, but gives nothing in return.
MrKGatl 7 months ago
@MrKGatl Don't need a decent youtube channel to be respected. Wasn't giving any and didn't ask for it. Judging an entire person based from a few comments sounds like i'm not the one taking things literally here. I'm sorry dude, besides, I'm not bashing anyone. I simply take the atheistic point of view to be false.
IslayaC 7 months ago
HE IS NOT A HISTORIAN OR DOCTOR ANY MORE THAN MS. CLEO IS A PSYCHIC.
he is "educated" if you can call it that, in CHRISTIAN INSTITUTIONS. This doesnt make him a historian. He might as well be on LSD, it would be more believable
MrKGatl 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Being educated in a christian institution is not good, acceptable and rational, but in a secular one it is? Why? Is there a rule, universal or not, which dictates that christian people educated in christian institutions will always be intelectually unacceptable and low and secularly educated people, christian or not, no? If there is, where is such rule?
With your alegation, it seems better to be on LSD than to be on prejudice.
rudybdes 8 months ago
@rudybdes No, being educated in a Christian institution is fine for the vast majority of people. But not if you want to debate evolutionary biology. Its hard for someone like Dawkins who was educated at Oxford to debate someone whos school believes in talking snakes and pregnant virgins.
MrKGatl 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
So, that is really a prejudice. Even more mentioning, at a pejorative way, "talking snakes" and "pregnant virgins".
rudybdes 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rudybdes Yes I have already told you I am prejudice against fairy tale believers
MrKGatl 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Ah, beyond the prejudice and the pejorative way you treat traditional creationists, you commited petitio principii and forgot that at least one christian helped to develop S.E.T. (synthetic evolution theory).
And, obviously, atheists are better than christians, isn't it?
rudybdes 8 months ago
@rudybdes Petitio principii, impressive word usage. Circular reasoning is what makes religions work, not atheism. So what if christians helped develop S.E.T.. Einstein was a Jew and he helped advance physics. Does that mean physics cant speak against Judeism now? Being a religious person doesnt dimish the scientific advances one makes. Yes I treat traditional creationists with disrespect. But if i believed in Mother Goose as my god, would you respect me?
MrKGatl 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Hehehe, circular reasoning could not be commited in atheism, but yes in religious belifs? Is that a rule? Heheh... More prejudice. Well, Einstein WAS NOT jew. He was ethnicly a jew, not a religious one - more prejudice. And if you believed in Mother Goose as your god, obviously I would respect you, beucase that was your choice - more prejudice of your part.
rudybdes 8 months ago
@rudybdes Whats wrong with you? You shouldnt respect people who believe in Mother Goose as their god. Grow a pair of balls man. And please give me an example of atheistic circular reasoning.
MrKGatl 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Nothing wrong with me. It is just a misunderstanding of yours towards christianity. You create an interpretation of christianity and christians as a rule or rules, attribute to them and then try to refute your own interpretation of it to knock down christianity.
rudybdes 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Observe this: try to alert a person about his/her beliefs/lies - what you try to do to me and what I try do to to you - is one thing, but insist on it, trying to restrict people's freedom, and what you do with your freedom is everything (in favor of you or against), is another thing. When people reject some beliefs, they simply reject. And such rejection cannot as well interfer on other people lives. Why can a group impose or expose their concepts, but another cannot do it? Respect.
rudybdes 8 months ago
@MrKGatl
Christians having helped to develop S.E.T. is a sign of that your pejorative speaking (talking skanes, for example) has fails. It is not a rule or a general behavior in christianity. Literal criationism is a thing of Middle Age protestants. And science is limited to what it can see - can it see everything? About your disrespect to literal creationists... well, you respect when you want to be respected, isn't it, or there is an axception only for you?
rudybdes 8 months ago
Nice try Lane Craig, almost had me there. I'm afraid your argument is flawed. He killed it with his last 3 points.
josephboy1000 8 months ago
FOOL said in His heart that is No God.
realtyofislam 9 months ago
@realtyofislam quote the bible some more, that should convince us all us that god exists! That's basically the equivalent of asking a mechanic if his prices are good.. of course he's going to say they're good! and of course the bible is going to say only fools don't believe in god!
idreamtofflight 8 months ago
At the end of this video, skip to 2:49 of part 5.
MrLas74 10 months ago
I've spent hours watching those debates and now i've come to the conclusion that it is a waste of time since no-one can give an answer.
oleh2007 10 months ago
@oleh2007 Quran:
(Surah-4-the women-vs-41)
How will it be, then, when we bring from every people a witness and bring you as a witness against these?
42- on that day will those who disbelieve and disobey the apostle desire that the earth were leveled with them, and they shall not hide any word from allah.
quranresponse 10 months ago
@quranresponse what do you mean by that?
oleh2007 10 months ago
*clears throat* "Anyone in here familiar with science?" (no one raises their hands) "Okay then, let me begin my argument." -Dr Craig
2nDoppelganger 11 months ago
Another atheist put me to sleep...with their stubborn nothingness!
ZZZZZ Oh, excuse me ...I need some LIGHT.
GoodyBob 1 year ago
antony is a terrible public speaker... idk much abt him, does he have experience at this sort of thing??
Bkkhngr81 1 year ago
@Bkkhngr81 actually...antony converted to theism and is dead now.
lightbrownpoop 1 year ago
@lightbrownpoop nicee (if its true)
eagleeye2102 1 year ago
@lightbrownpoop
No we converted to Deism and what's your point?
MeetYourMeaker 1 year ago
@lightbrownpoop Converted to deism and continued to maintain that the God Craig believed it was completely nonsense and unsubstantiated. Deism is so far removed from Christianity that it isn't in the same category as theism
bernlin2000 11 months ago
I think the slowest of us, are the ones still stuck on this question. But, hey thats just me.
RastafariPoet 1 year ago
Somebody get Flew some oxygen.
Thx.
RCRhythm 1 year ago
Comment removed
Rookerman32 1 year ago
@Rookerman32 dark matter exists without physically appearing.
thepickletrain 1 year ago
@thepickletrain
So does wind.
Rookerman32 1 year ago
@Rookerman32 we have tangible evidence for wind
thepickletrain 1 year ago
@thepickletrain
So did Jesus Christ.
Rookerman32 1 year ago
@Rookerman32 what'd he do?
thepickletrain 1 year ago
@thepickletrain
Mastered English Grammar unlike you.
Rookerman32 1 year ago
@Rookerman32 i don't think jesus spoke english. i doubt very much that you have "mastered" english grammar either
thepickletrain 1 year ago
@thepickletrain
If dumb as a drug, you'd overdose.
Rookerman32 1 year ago
@Rookerman32 was*
thepickletrain 1 year ago
@thepickletrain
Are you an atheist?
Rookerman32 1 year ago
@Rookerman32 could be
thepickletrain 1 year ago
@thepickletrain
True.
Rookerman32 1 year ago
@thepickletrain And we have tangible evidence for God
6thwing 1 year ago
@6thwing where?
thepickletrain 1 year ago
@thepickletrain Ourselves (and the Universe), silly. Just like tangible evidence for Humans can be airplanes or spears. And just how tangible evidence for Aliens can be some super technology on one of Jupiter's moons. Or how tangible evidence for a butterfly can be it's cocoon it metamorphosed from.
We have tangible, teleological, logical, evidence for God. What evidence do we have that God does NOT exist? None. Oh, and if you are talking about 'touching' God, He is immaterial, of course!
6thwing 1 year ago
@6thwing Aeroplanes and spears are NOT evidence for humans, just as super technology is not evidence for aliens.
Are you telling me that if aliens existed with greater technology than ours that they couldn't build a spear or an aeroplane? If you found a spearhead on Mars, you could not deduce that humans must have lived there because it could just as easily been any other intelligent species with the ability to craft such items. Ergo, your logic is flawed.
aliasbrush 1 year ago
@aliasbrush LOL wut? Please don't attack someone's logic with arguments like that. There IS evidence for humans, currently there is not evidence for ANY simple or complex life outside this planet. This is the same bad argument as Dawkins teapot fallacy. Read more about philosophy and less about sociology. I can tell you have a post-modern view of epistemology.
mgundy 9 months ago
@6thwing I wasn't even aware that there was a definition of god, that you could say you have evidence for, or evidence contradicting, much less so much evidence to make someone like yourself sure it is there.
pjnlsn 10 months ago
@pjnlsn Quran:
(Surah-2-the cow-vs-186)
And when my servants ask you concerning me, then surely I am very near; I answer the prayer of suppliant when he calls on me, so they should answer my call and believe in me that they may walk in the right way.
quranresponse 10 months ago
Comment removed
Rookerman32 1 year ago
Anthony Flew made an ironic stament at 3:00 - 3:15.
Rookerman32 1 year ago
didnt antony become a deist
AdemaLevel 1 year ago
@AdemaLevel he became a believer in God
hughesjd83 1 year ago
For a Senile Person Flew was very sharp, so senile He can put forth good arguments and good rebuttals
MrMohjong 1 year ago
@MrMohjong haha i didn't really hear any... watch some old videos of flew.. it's like watching his grandpa banging his fists at the dinner table
lukeism2 1 year ago
oooh he's so cute
beaverB0B 1 year ago
@beaverB0B bahahahaahahaha i was thinking the same thing and then i saw this post. thanks for making me laugh for 10 min.
squint1991 1 year ago
There is no sound!
amapola53 1 year ago
Many of our accepted attributes of God, Allah and / or the Supreme Being was established within our consciousness as far as we could remember. Ever since our earliest memories of our childhood, many of us learned and embrace the almighty, regardless of what specific terminology of the divine we've accepted. Our families, schools, local culture, and even nations included God, Allah, Elohim in our lives and influenced the way we perceive things and act upon any situation.
VerseInfinitum 1 year ago
@VerseInfinitum Indeed, we are made to believe in God.
IloveYOUviruses 1 year ago
search "Famous Atheist Antony Flew Changes Mind, Believes in God"
At the end, God always wins :)
IloveYOUviruses 1 year ago
@IloveYOUviruses at the end, senility always wins..
carryall69 1 year ago
@carryall69 :o good way to see it! :D THANK YOU BRO!!!
IloveYOUviruses 1 year ago
@IloveYOUviruses cheers, thanx a lot..**
carryall69 1 year ago
@IloveYOUviruses It is a shame he has became senile and people are manipulating him =/
Absortus 1 year ago
@Absortus
Antony Flew or Craig has become senile?
ErebusGodOvDarkness 1 year ago
@ErebusGodOvDarkness Flew
Absortus 1 year ago
@Absortus Yeah I just read that about him. He passed away though earlier this year.
ErebusGodOvDarkness 1 year ago
So 2/3rds of the world's population is going to hell because they just aren't trying hard enough to find god? What an ass.
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon
I dont know who told you that. But dont speak about religion if you dont know anything about it and call people asses for it
dxbblackwolf 1 year ago
@dxbblackwolf
No one told me that, it's a logical extrapolation from Protestant doctrine and Craig's claims. Salvation is through Jesus Christ alone, correct? Craig claims at 1:55 that sincerely seeking god will reveal him. 2/3rds of the world is not Christian, so they are going to hell for their lack of faith in Jesus, and according to Craig they don't have faith in Jesus because they haven't been "sincere" enough. I reiterate: what an ass.
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
theism is the more plausible world view?.. i thought it was does god exist?.. shouldn't he say that's why he thinks christianity is true... or deism... because he's not really using scripture, he's using the same ol' apologetics/back wards reasoning. ugh.
lukeism2 1 year ago
@lukeism2 Deism is belief that God exists.He is saying this is the more plausible world view.
GodLovesUs100 1 year ago
Flew sums up Craig's debate strategy quite nicely here.
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago
@HonestTechnoAtheist Sort of, but Craig has all his work available for research, and has debated using the same 5 arguments for many years. It was Flew's responsibility to find this out prior to the debate, and come prepared to answer all those things that Craig says in every single debate, it's just a smart thing to do.
FadedChroma 1 year ago
@FadedChroma I only watched a couple parts of this debate. It is too repetitive and similiar to other debates.
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago
@HonestTechnoAtheist
lol plz explain that. tell me how flew said anything relevant to craig's debate. "One has at least to (couldnt catch this word.. synonym to accept) the possiblity that it is not ridiculous popping out of nothing" This scentence is basically just ignoring thiesim's most important argument. "We are not in a position to answer the question" I laughed.
dxbblackwolf 1 year ago
@dxbblackwolf I don't remember it was several weeks ago. But if the KCA is theisms best then the entire thing is god of the gaps.
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago
@HonestTechnoAtheist
lol I dont get it.. but whatever xD
dxbblackwolf 1 year ago
@dxbblackwolf
God of the Gaps is what you do when you say "I don't know; therefore, god did it." It's a ridiculous leap in logic and what led the Greeks to conclude that lightning came from Zeus. It has never, ever produced real knowledge. Craig is saying, we don't know how the universe began; therefore, god did it. A lack of explanation is not proof positive for something equally lacking in explanation.
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon
hmm interesting.
and btw when craig says 'we dont know how the universe began', he isnt saying thats the reason why we should believe god did it. His general point is that its impossible for the universe to exist out of nothing. (He summarizes his points at the end too)
dxbblackwolf 1 year ago
@dxbblackwolf
1. No it isn't: 7ImvlS8PLIo
2. More importantly, that still has nothing to do with god, especially not a specific god like YHWH. He's still saying "the universe can't begin from nothing; therefore, goddidit." It's a leap in logic. He has no evidence the universe came from a "god" as opposed to some other natural phenomenon we don't understand.
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon
great point.... "god done it" is one of the most childish, simplistic explanations i've ever heard. I realized that at the age of 6 or 7. yet college educated individuals say it with such confidence. An explanation that explains everything usually explains nothing.
whatupth0 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon Your relating all religion as the same. The only diff. between Christianity and all other religions is the Bible, and eye witness accounts of God over a period of 10,000 years.
squint1991 1 year ago
@squint1991
You don't think other religions claim to have spoken to and witnessed their gods? What makes your delusions so much more special than theirs?
Did Jesus visit the Polynesians 2000 years ago or did they just go to hell for 1600 years until some missionaries finally arrived?
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
Well I was certainly anticipating better argumentation from Craig's side. I got a deja-vu feeling of familiarity instead.
cromwell99 1 year ago
wow that atheist is the worst debater ive ever seen, i would have done a better job and im 15
libertyman10 1 year ago
@libertyman10 Well, then give it your best shot, kid.
YesYou123333 1 year ago
its not proven that jesus ever existed let alone was killed let alone he lived after he was killed
libertyman10 1 year ago
@libertyman10 actually, early historians talked about a man named Jesus who was known for doing miraculous works. He is talked about by Josephus in the work The Antiquities of the Jews! Look it up!!!!
daunderhill1 1 year ago
@libertyman10 Yes and factions of Islam try to tell us too that the holocaust never occurred. The evidence for both are overwhelming. Not only is Jesus documented by sources that are not Christian, the Christian sources themselves evidence men who thought their leader was dead. Indeed he was. It was worth more than a Roman soldiers life not to complete an execution. He was dead. He left a tomb empty, not by waking up by being raised Acts 10:40 and there were over 500 witnesses to the fact
KincumberBoy 1 year ago
Comment removed
KincumberBoy 1 year ago
@libertyman10 If those who claimed Jesus had risen were wrong it'd have been easy for their adversaries to prove. He was buried in the tomb of a prominent man: Joseph of Arimathea. They would have taken them there and said "here is the body" but no such debate was entered into except the idea that a bunch of frightened disciples overpowered armed guards to start a religion they would face torture and death for proclaiming. Knowing the truth, that's exactly what they did. Proclaimed Jesus risen.
KincumberBoy 1 year ago
Respond to this video...Now if Jesus was raised, how could that happen? Only God could. And if there is a God who created life then restoring life would be possible for Him. Only Him
KincumberBoy 1 year ago
Poor Antony Flew got smashed !!! And He now believes in God.
Set4Life22 1 year ago
no one knows where the universe came from,but there are some other ideas.....the univierse could have been a safer place for life in the tunning, so there is no reason to conclude a designer.....there was no evidence for objective moral values, he just said he felt them.....people also wittnessed others using witchcraft in history.....the last point was him preaching.
freeatheist1 1 year ago
I wonder where Dr.Flew is now?
FatalKnight 1 year ago
@FatalKnight "I wonder where Dr Flew is now?"
I don't know but would speculate he's quietly riding out his senility in seclusion.
queenastilon 1 year ago
"If you're sincerely seeking God, God will make himself evident to you." If that's not begging the question, I don't know what is.
lordabacu 1 year ago
Craigs final point was a preaching.
Crunkmastaflexx 1 year ago
Lane Craig is a smart sounding-idiot. Shame that this kind of debate still is needed, people should be able to shake of the stone age superstitions.
bary1234 1 year ago
@bary1234 i pity u wen u see 4 urself wat is 2 come and bare witness 2 the removin of the veil how will u contend withit .if a man who believes in ghosts sees 1 he is sply frightened but if an unbeliever sees a spirit he dies from the shoc
dualscioneer 1 year ago
@dualscioneer : Nonsense, bullshit, superstitious gibberish. You are a willfull slave of disgusting fiction from dark ages. You need imaginary friends to live, how pathetic are you?
bary1234 1 year ago
Lol Flew rocked a doobie 4 the debate
TheEddymunster 1 year ago
@TheEddymunster LOL definitely
js569 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Purushadoucha can go fuck himself
Tyler4981 1 year ago
The channel operator would do well to ban the user spamming the same 8 or 9 messages over and over again. It is making it impossible for real users to converse.
irishmauddib 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Lord has already proven Himself to all of civilized humanity. All of mankind already accepts His appearance and activities as scientific facts, with the single exception of the deluded atheist, whose beliefs are in the extreme miniscule minority worldwide.
The lunatic atheist must present a viable argument in favor of his bizarre personal belief that God somehow doesn't exist before being taken seriously, which he has failed to do, sadly.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
get a life
musiciankara 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Problem is, nobody believes you, and that's because you have no evidence for your bizarre claims about God.
The reason why the vast majority of human beings easily comprehend the ample scientific and logical evidence for God's factual appearance and activities is that they are smarter than animals. The reason why you don't is because you're not.
You fantasize that someone will someday believe you, but it won't happen: face reality.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The lower animals, such as the pig, the mosquito, and the jellyfish, also lack the intelligence to grasp any portion of the ample scientific evidence for God's factual appearance and activities that the vast majority of intelligent human beings comprehend easily.
Sadly, the fact that a single Youtube member is on the exact same intelligence level as the lower animal disproves nothing about God's factual appearance or activities.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
With the single exception of the crackpot atheist, everybody already accepts God's appearance and activities as scientific facts, so who exactly do you expect me to convince?
The atheist, in the extreme miniscule minority, insists that he has made no claim contrary to the long-accepted scientific facts anyway, so there is truly no challenge to meet.
The scientific facts stand unchallenged and universally accepted.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is ample observational evidence that all human beings ever born were born from other human beings.
Conversely, there is absolutely no evidence that any human being or group of human beings could ever have been born from any member of any different species. Such a phenomenon has never been observed, and is nothing but a fantastic, unsupported, irrational, and unscientific belief of atheist dogma.
atheist total fail
Purushadasa 1 year ago
@Purushadasa There is zero evidence to show that dirt can turn into humans or animals. There is evidence however that slight change can occur over time such as a bactierium becoming resistant to a drug and thus allowing for all future generations of that bactierium to be resistant to that drug. Such a thing is referred to as natural selection and is the primary driving force in evolution.
Purushadasa total fail. 8D
HonestTechnoAtheist 1 year ago
All of God's scriptures prohibit violence and killing, and disobedience to God's scriptures is atheistic. Therefore, all violence and killing are atheistic activities, and real Theists are always in accordance with God's injunctions to be peaceful.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
Einstein was a Theist (a Jew), Hitler was a believer in atheist dogma, a mass-murderer of Theists (Jews).
Purushadasa 1 year ago
Hitler hated all Jews, especially Jesus.
Would Jesus have approved of Hitler's well-known campaign to exterminate all Jews and all Catholics? Certainly not! Jesus WAS a Jew, and also a pacifist!
If the atheist posits that Hitler was honest in his statements, then the atheist acknowledges his sick hero-worship of Hitler.
The Theists understand that Hitler was a liar, a believer in atheist dogma™, and a mass-murderer of Theists.
Only an atheist fool would quote Hitler's lies as if reliable.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
@Purushadasa
The Catholic Church endorsed Hitler on. This "well-known" plan to exterminate Catholics isn't real.
Einstein was ethnically Jewish. He expressly stated that he did not think Jews were "chosen people," and he thought the concept of a personal god was childish.
There are plenty of people who disrespect your flavor of god's commands without being atheists and there are plenty of murderous theists. Your arguments reek.
RichardMNixon 1 year ago
@RichardMNixon Ur using the words that einstein used early in his life. In his later years he eventually came to the conclusion that there could be a god. Nice try though, valient effort
squint1991 1 year ago
@squint1991 he didn't believe in a personal god, he remained a pantheist
lukeism2 1 year ago
@lukeism2 flew wasn't a pantheist he was a deist
MrMohjong 1 year ago
@MrMohjong i was talking about einstein
lukeism2 1 year ago
@lukeism2 I'm not sure Einstein was never very clear about it, I know Michio Kaku said the other day that Einstein believe in Baruch Spinoza god who some people say is a pantheist but he made it clear he wasn't
MrMohjong 1 year ago
Hitler loved Darwin's nonsense, and he based his eugenics program on it directly. Thus Hitler is one of the main "heroes" of atheism.
The number one tenet of official atheist dogma™ is to lie at every opportunity, and Hitler was clearly a liar. Only a fool puts his faith in the words of a liar like Hitler, as you do, above.
CONCLUSION: Hitler was a believer in atheist dogma™, a hater of Theists (Jews and Catholics), and a ruthless killer and liar.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
The lower animal, such as the sand-flea, the snail, and the pig, also lack the intelligence to apprehend the ample scientific evidence for God.
The atheist is on the exact same level of intelligence as those creatures, and their ignorance of the facts does not change the facts.
God's factual appearance and activities are as much scientific facts as any other scientific fact known to man.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
Flew is very different. Extremely intelligent, but different.
Kind of reminds me of an old professor of mine from college.
destine4hope 1 year ago
Knowing that this believer in atheist dogma™ is just about to awake to the dawn of wisdom and accept the scientific and logical evidence for God's factual appearance and activities makes it easier to actually sit through his long-winded, bumbling, pseudo-intellectual garbage. LOL
Purushadasa 1 year ago
"accept the scientific and logical evidence for God's factual appearance"
Maybe if you find out what his scientific basis for the claim was you can let me know too.
irishmauddib 1 year ago
3:49 -- Textbook example of a believer in atheist dogma™ who has no arguments to support his bizarre belief system retreating into the illusory shelter of covert agnosticism.
Face it -- the atheist posits a possibility that God somehow doesn't exist, but he fails to provide as much as a shred of evidence for that personal belief.
Conversely, the Theists have provided tons of evidence for God's factual appearance and activities, and that's why the world rejects atheist dogma™ wholesale.
Purushadasa 1 year ago
"the atheist posits a possibility that God somehow doesn't exist"
False, the position is in fact that if there is no evidence, argument, reason or data to support a claim, you simply dismiss the claim.
Give you have not provided any for a god, we merely dismiss the claim there is a god. Simple.
irishmauddib 1 year ago
People ought to be able to rationally explain their beliefs. Dr. Craig was excellent in his cogent presentation of facts and reasonable theories about the existence of God. Flew, on the other hand, was disorganized, incoherent, and unable to make a reasoned case for atheism.
ScreeminMeeme 1 year ago
Alas the arguments craig presented are not evidence for god as much of them contain errors and problems.
For example, he just assumes there is objective morality and then declares that means there is a god. However he has not established there IS objective morality, so he has assumed one thing, assumed another, and then used the first to support the second.
irishmauddib 1 year ago