You thank him when good things happen, but nobody blames him when bad things happen. So when you play a sport and you are safe, its god that kept you safe. When when a small child dies of disease, god had nothing to do with it, thats human error right?
im a wrestler and i thank god before and after every match if i win or loose, its not about him cheating for me, it's about thanking him for giving me the sport i love and saving my soul. Im thanking him because i kno that no matter what happens on that mat, or in life, he is my rock and redeemer and in the end i kno im secure. what better pedestle to tell people about the good news than in sports where everyone is watching. God's will will always prevail, if your christian or not
6:30 to 7:20 is legendary!Jesus Christ's fist and elbow:)Perfect point.I mean,this whole video makes perfect sense.That's exactly how it is.People are not thinking about what they're actually talking about,when it comes to God.Shame.Great job IG.
when u thank God for winning u are thanking Him for keeping u safe and thanking Him for giving u the strength to preform good. u are thanking Him for being there for u. God gave u things to use for His Glory so u thank God for winning to show ppl that if God is with u no one can be against u
@RobBizar Unless you lose. Why can't people say they deserve it for hard work and practice. I have seen people believe in God and still fail. Its false hope! Thank you.
Phillipians 2:3,4 "Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself; not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others."
If there is a god, do people honestly think their deity cares about if Lebron stays in Cleveland or the next Super Bowl winner? If that's true, then Christian schools should go undefeated every year in high school sports. People shouldn't practice if they believe prayer will help them win. Do they think about God when they go to the after party or engage in one night stands with a groupie? Oh waith they can pray it away.
I' not trying to insult you or anything, so let's get that out of the way. However, i believ you're missing the point sir. people thank god for the opportunities He has given them, for the people they know, and even for the ability to breathe. God doesn't take sides, and I feel that many atheists fail to see that point. And when we thank God we acknowledge him not because he gave us an edge, but because he has given us the opportunity to better ourselves.
Most athletes pray for a victory and thank God for their victory. There was a segment on ESPN about God and sports, this devout Christian who was a former NFL player thought prayer for a victory or thanking God for a victory in a sport where people can die, get hurt, and lose is stupid. Stop trying to sugar coat things. God doesn't take sides?! Read the Bible.
God gives favour to those who ask for it, and those who serve him faithfully. God will give you favour over someone who does not know him, or has rejected him. Infedel, you are saying that God has cheated by giving his followers an edge, then you are saying God is cheating by giving us these blessed ABILITYs to do what we need to do, then God has always cheated is what you said. God gives favour to his followers, and it can't be against free will if we ask for it. Don't be against God.
If they are equally matched in skill and spirit, then they should tie. If one has more skill than the other but the other has more spirit, it might just depend on if the team with less skill prays more. If neither cares, then God just might let someone lose that won't get mad about it. God has a way of doing things. If one team sucks, and the other team is great, then the team that sucks just might get lucky one time and God might hand them the victory.
Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of God. If you feel that favor isn't fair, which its not, then go ahead and help out those starving kids. If you serve God, He is for you. Doesn't matter the situation you are in. God is omnipresent. Why limit God?
If you know the bible so well why not live according to its word, that is if you want to make a point with validity to it. Taking out a piece and making it work for your life is not right. Know the truth and live it ;)
besidemymind- i said is your faith less than those who beat Jesus was because they could physically see Him, knew of what He did and the gospel He spread but yet still hated Him. Makes no sense, just like people who acknowledge His life and the soldiers who beat Him but don't chose to live for Him.....really missing the point.
I thank God because He knew what He was doing and why Jesus had to go through what He did, so I may receive everlasting life. So i thank GOD, good times and bad.
"Is your faith less then those who beat Jesus?" I will say mine is. Those who beat Jesus were roman soldiers and jewish preachers.
And it's always interesting to hear this point to... shouldn't you be thanking god for those people. If it wasn't for the ones who beat and killed Jesus, then christianity would be nulled.
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth and it's irrational.
Take a spelling class... it's 'you're' as in 'you are', not 'your'.
As the gentleman in the video asked, why favor one over the other? Why give attention and favor to one playing a sport and not a strarving child?
You claim to constantly praise god, but you put sarcastic laughs in your comment. Is that what Jesus did, laugh at the fools and sinners as you believe us to be?
You are not a Christ-like christian. And i am only judging you by the fruits you are presenting as the Bible states.
thanking God has nothing to do with people thinking God cheated for them or the fact that God chose one Christian fighter over another. its about them saying: "it's God who gave me the ability to do what i do, so the praise does not go to me, but to Him.
people play sports/fight knowing that there is a chance of pain. i dont think a Christian would glory in the fact that someone was hurt during the process. why do it vs being a minister? God intends for His light to shine in ALL areas of life.
being able to thank God for even the losses IS something people do all the time. it's like thanking God for times of tribulation, because you can see what good it brought in your life as well.
when you pray for a car with bad credit and you get it, God is not messing with another person's free will. many things come into play with decisions that are made. no matter what God "does" on a person's behalf, at the end, any man-made decision will be just that: man-made.
I don't know if you believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God, but for what it's worth, check out Romans chapter 9. It talks about the "unfairness."
As for God getting credit only for the good- like I said before, being to thank God for the bad (ex. the losses), is something people do all the time, including myself.
God is ... not matter. Every thing that we can prove exists or existed is composed of antimatter or antimatter, the existence of God cannot be proven or dis-proven. Your claim does not refute mine. Example: I could claim that God is made of material "X" which is neither matter nor energy, you can't prove that material X does not exist, therefore you can't disprove my claim, only discredit it since it has no base, but my base is faith and my own experience and that's all that I need.
The Christian life is foolishness to those that are perishing and this video is proof of that. I would encourge you to do some research before making videos of this nature and prayerfully consider this verse-
1Cor 4:7 For who makes you differ from another? And what do you have that you did not receive? Now if you did indeed receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?
We praise God in success and defeat! He is worthy to be praised always!
we know that matter is neither created nor destroyed, therefore the big bang must have come from somewhere. When I tell my atheist friends this there response is usually "well then where did God come from?" My answer is A) God is not matter. B) Your question does not rule out the absolute truth that God created the universe, whether God was created by another being or God's existence is a complete paradox in itself does not rule out that the big bang must have come from someone/somewhere greater
A) What is god then? Everything is composed of matter or antimatter, so where does god fall into? If neither, then he doesn't exist. B) Ever heard of the big crunch? It's a new theory that suggests that the Universe recycles itself. In another words, it expands, then collapses, expands, and collapses. This would suggest that the Universe is infinite and that it has always been.....gee sounds a lot like what you religious folk say god is. "God always was!" No, my friend. The Universe always was.
here is a proposal ,infedelguy: what if Diego, for example, was thanking God for the strength that he gave him during training sessions when his mental attitude lacked luster? Why couldn't Diego have thanked him for that? Why must God have ONLY helped him out during the fight in order for the atlhlete to thank him? You make many faulty assumptions.
it is pretty sad that you actually sat down God knows how long just to make that vid. First thing you sound so unsure of what you are saying.. asking so many questions, the second thing after asking all those questions you say "Dont allow God to cheat for you", which implies that you believe that He can. Check your self, and before you go bashing people for their beliefs check yours, plus bashing people and not the subject it is a weakness in constructive arguing. try again.
How about this. D. Sanchez is giving Glory to God for helping him do his best to win the fight. Maybe he just wanted to give glory to God just because he had a great opportunity to do so.
lol you guys are missing the point..Its not that God makes you win its up to you how much effort you put into it, maybie theyre thanking God for helping them stay focused cause they trust in him.Nothing I think you would understand.Stupid humans (like me also) will allways try to find proof and understand everything,somethings are not made for us to understand,I realize it though
How can you proof it happene because of prayer.If you know the mechanism of prayer/meditation,you can direct prayer to anything with faith, and feel satisfaction...just mental. No direct physical effect. If you have a sound mentality, your interaction in the physical world becomes better, but prayer can NOT change physical stuff directly. if you prayer works, the Bible shoots itself in the foot thus: "maybe it is Satan who helped, deceiving you that you are on the right track".
Proof is simply something that convinces someone, so if someone is convinced by something, then that automatically makes it proven. To say that mental isn't also physical is to say that your brain isn't physical and therefore doesn't exist. How do you know what prayer can and cannot change? Obviously you have no faith so prayer probably wouldn't do much for you. How does prayer cause the bible to shoot itself in the foot? What is your first language? Your English is terrible.
nice attempt at defining proof. i think the word you are looking for is propaganda. that is a very, very dangerous definiton that you give. your philosophy is terrible.
So, if I can convince a three-year-old that 2 + 2 = 5, then I have proved it? If I wave a treat in front of a three-year-old and say they may have it if they agree 2 + 2 = 5, then that proves it? This is essentialy what preachers do to adults because they wave a blissful afterlife in front of them, not to mention the big stick of eternal torture if they don't believe it. That's why the description of hell has to be so awful: otherwise, it wouldn't have the desired effect.
That's why "proof" is only relevant on an individual basis. I didn't create the word or create the misconception that "proof" is somehow absolute truth or something along those lines. To prove something to a person or a group simply means to convince the person or the group. How else would you have it defined? That it's not proven unless you believe it? Well that's partially true because it's not proven to you until you believe it. However, it's still proven to others, which is just as valid.
You used an interesting analogy, haha, because teachers do the exact same thing with children. They wave a blissful after-school life and an A+ and praise and everything else in front of them if they agree that 2+2=4, and also do conversely so with punishing disagreement. Does their perhaps seemingly questionable method mean that they must be lying and that 2+2 does not =4 and that there is not an after-school life? Haha.
Like most believers in a personal God, you set the bar low and then use semantics to clould the issue. Here are some facts that make it very unlikely there is a personal God:
1. Almost no one living 200 years ago thought the earth was 5 billion years old. Why? Because the Bible implied otherwise.
2. Almost every living 200 years ago thought God created humans out of dust. Why? Because the Bible said so.
Now we know, beyond reasonable doubt, that (1) and (2) are false.
Hahahahaha! It's impossible for semantics to cloud a point. Semantics is the study of meaning. Knowing the real meaning of the words I use (something you apparently aren't interested in, haha) is what allows me to make my points clear and precise.
1. People 200 yrs ago misinterpreting the bible has nothing to do with the likelyhood of God.
2. The only word they had back then for anything approaching the microscopic, ex: microorganisms, atoms, subatomic particles, ect, was "dust". So you say this is false? Then what do you think do you think humans were created from? Car parts? Haha. )
You should see someone about that nervous tic you have: laughing in blogs.
Typical apologetics: "people 200 years ago misinterpreted the Bible." How come the Bible was only "correctly" interpreted by some -- hardly all, as most Christians STILL believe the earth is 6,000 years old -- after science proved it. And science has proved it. The old-earth hypothesis is testable, and it is still standing. So is evolution. That the value of pi is 3 -- as stated in the Bible -- is known to be false.
I laugh because you're funny, not because I'm nervous.
What most Christians believe is not relevant to what I believe. I have my own beliefs just like you do. You're discussing with me not with "most Christians". Darwin, who created the theory of evolution, was Christian. Evolution supports my belief in God.
Pi=3 is just another misinterpretation. I'm not the type of person who thinks that everything in the bible is 100% perfect. It was written by the hands of men and rewritten many times.
If I find a flaw in a science book, of which there are many, does that mean the whole book is 100% absolutely wrong? Obviously not. I've never heard of any belief system that's 100% wrong. Some Christians probably have a fair percentage of their beliefs wrong, according to what you and I believe. However, that has absolutely no bearing on the likelihood of a God/Supreme Creator or whatever you'd like to call Him.
I apologize if my laughing seems rude or offensive or whatever. I'll try not to do that if you think it's disrespectful, assuming that you also try not to be disrespectful.
Maybe you can explain why more than 90% of the National Academy of Sciences, essentially the smartest people in the United States, reject a personal God -- and therefore, Christianity. If you believe that a being that could have created this universe, and us via evolution, would rig it so that the evidence for Christianity is so murky and contradictory that the best minds can't believe any of it, then you will believe anything. But that's faith, isn't it?
I can explain it easily: I think for myself. Most people these days seem to just say "My science teacher doesn't believe in God, so he must be right!" There are no "best minds". People have different strengths and weeknesses. You wouldn't ask a board of nutritional experts to teach you astronomy, would you? Then why would you ask a panel of scientists to tell you about God?
Any point you're smart enough to bring up, I will be smart enough to discuss with you. However, if you just say "these smart dudes agree with me!" That doesn't really mean anything. 10% of those smart dudes disagree with you, and they are probably the most intelligent of the lot, when it comes to God, in my opinion.
Don't flatter yourself. Your answers are essentially "I believe it because I believe it." That's not being smart. That's being indoctrinated.
Given the power of this being you think exists, it is at least as likely that you and others who embrace obvious myths will be the ones left behind. God has plans for those of us who think rationally and go where the evidence takes me. I don't believe in eternal rewards, yet I live a very good life.
So, if there is a God, this is the only thing that makes sense. He put evolution in motion, then waited to see what happened once humans developed critical thinking skills. A small percentage of those developed inquiring minds and did not obsess about the afterlife. An even smaller percentage put those talents to good use, and bettered life for others -- expecting no rewards after death. Those are the chosen ones. Others killed each other over myths. They are not going anywhere after death.
I don't see any reason to believe that humans evolved from un-humans. There is no evidence whatsoever to support this. It makes more sense to believe that narwhals evolved from unicorns. If whoever created us was intelligent enough to create something that evolved into humankind, then he could have just as easily started with an actual human.
Oh, finally, you now reveal yourself as someone who doesn't believe in evolution. Okay, that's it for me. You're an idiot, then. Sorry, but that's how I feel. If you don't believe the very smart scientists IN THEIR FIELD who think evolution is a fact, then you're thoughts are worth nothing. What is your Ph.D. in? Biology? Are the 99% of biologists who make your pitiful life better by using evolution wrong, and your right?
I BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION. YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION.
I've already explained this but you seem to dense to get it. According to Darwin's (who was a christian) theory of evolution, we didn't evolve from apes or neanderthals. Both of them have bodies that are more fitted to this planet. A mutation that created a breed with weaker bodies more like ours would not have been able to compete with the apes or neanderthals.
I should have read this more carefully. It's the final blow to you. It always comes when I "debate" Christians. Do you see the logical problem here? Let me help. You have now assumed what it is we're supposed to be debating. That an intelligent being created us. Given that, you conclude evolution doesn't make sense.
You know what? I agree with you! Now, take the next step. If God implies not evolution, then evolution implies not God. And we have plenty of evidence for evolution. QED.
Evolution makes perfect sense, to me. It supports the idea of a supreme being. Who else could have created beings so intelligently designed as to be able to adapt and evolve? You still can't answer that question. That's why you're resorting to insults, because you know you're wrong and can't answer the most basic question of life.
Those people who you say "killed each other over myths," weren't Christian. They went against everything Christ taught. They obviously wanted to rebel against and destroy his teachings. What better way to do so than to claim to be Christians? Christ taught that we should be motivated to help others by love, not rewards.
Oh, not only don't you know anything about science, you don't even know your Bible very well. I've noticed that all Christians are masters at selective reading.
Let's see. Who said he came not to bring peace, but a sword? (Jesus) Who said any true following would have to renounce his family. He wanted to pit father against son, and son on. (Jesus).
Who thought demons caused viruses? (Jesus). Who talked about gathering withering twigs and casting them into the fire? (Jesus)
No, you didn't say that explicitly, but everything you've said amounts to that. Consider your stupid comment about the smart scientists. I prefer a smart person's opinion on most things, ESPECIALLY when it comes to religion. Whose opinion do you suggest I ask? Clergy? What an unimpressive bunch that is. Anyone can read the Bible and/or Koran and see for themselves whether they hold up. They don't. Not to any modern analysis. Smart people see that easily. I'm one of those.
What I've said in no way amounts to anything even vaguely similar to that. On the contrary, I've explained the reasoning behind my beliefs much more thoroughly than you have yours.
Name one thing in the bible that doesn't hold up to your analysis.
The only reasoning you seem to be stating behind your beliefs is "some guy said that he was smart and then he said he didn't believe in God. I wanna be a smart guy like that smart guy so I'm not gonna believe in God either." Pssht. How retarded is that?
"I prefer a smart person's opinion on most things". So you're not a smart person? You just blindly follow the opinions of such supposedly "smart" people? You can't come up with your own opinion?
I am not a Ph.D. biologist (but I do have a Ph.D.), and clearly neither are you. So I don't understand all details of evolution. Luckily, I am smart and can understand logic and mountains of evidence. And, I have regard for informed opinion. That's the 99% of Ph.D. biologists that know humans evolved from simpler life forms. They use it every day in their research.
Do you defer to your clergy or yourself for maintenence on the jet engine that you fly? I doubt it.
Although evolution within a given species is pretty much common knowledge by now, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support inter-species evolution.
I may not engineer jets, but I am a cad engineer who normally tests in the upper one tenth of one percent on intelligence and aptitude tests. So no, I'm not an idiot like you seem to think.
Just answer the question. Yes or no: if an engine on an airplane you are about to board needs maintenance, will you allow someone trained in jet engines to do the repairs, or will you go do it? (It's rhetorical. Of course you let the expert do it.)
Then you say "there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support inter-species evolution." This reveals that you are not a serious thinker. The evidence is indisputable, and supported by 99% of people whose opinion matters.
And I'm sorry, but willful ignorance deserves to be ridiculed. You exclude humans from the evolutionary chain ONLY because it seems inconsistent with a deity.
Because Darwin started off a devout Christian, his accomplishment is all the more remarkable. He was not a Christian at the end. He might have been a deist, believing in a first cause, but even that is doubtful.
Darwin, unlike you, followed the evidence to its obvious conclusion. Those who stop short are basically cowards.
I already explained why humans evolving from physically superior life forms makes no sense. The fact that you ignore what I'm saying, pretend to be arguing with someone else, and keep pointing to a peice of paper and saying "loooook this thing says i'm smaaart! And, and, these other smart guys agree with meeeee!" Just shows that you're incapable of bringing up intelligent points that contradict mine. I'm not saying that you're stupid. I'm just saying that you're wrong.
"He was not a Christian at the end." This is wrong. The only religious beliefs he ever professed were christian and he never denied it. "At the end" he confessed to have doubts, but these revolved around the death of his wife and around the existence of deep sea creatures which he thought no one would ever see. Why would God make them if not for man to appreciate? We can see now that Darwin was also wrong in doubting God because of deep sea life that is important for our eco system.
"Those who stop short are basically cowards." I agree. Those who stop short of the obvious conclusion that intelligent life must have been created by life with superior intelligence are cowards. Why? Because they are afraid to admit that they will be held accountable for their actions in the after life.
You still seem to simply be saying "I'm smarter than you! I'm smarter than you! These other guys agree and their smarter than you too!" Well if you're so much smarter than me then why can't you compete with my arguments? Why can't you use your own logic and your own reasoning to challenge any of my statements, as I have with you?
Why can't you answer any of my simple questions like "How was intelligent life formed if not by intelligent life?" and "How could physically inferior beings evolve from physically superior beings within a harsh environment such as ours?" and, if you know your Bible so much better than I do, "where are your references to back up your claims about the inaccuracy of the Bible?"
Obvious question that Christians have never answered: Who created the intelligent life that then created us?
You're the coward. If God wants to send me to hell for eternal torture, then I say "bring it on." I'll tell him what I think, too, if He can't read my thoughts now. If he used a blood sacrifice that has no historical support to separate those living in eternal bliss from those in eternal hell, then your God is evil and repulsive. Have fun with this being in the afterlife.
The answer to that question is simple. It always was. Either that or I suppose it could have been created by another intelligent life, perhaps, but at some point there must have been some intelligence that always was, just like matter.
"used a blood sacrifice that has no historical support to separate those living in eternal bliss from those in eternal hell". Whoa... where'd ya get that one? A sci-fi novel? Haha. You've completely misinterpreted everything. I could clarify it for you, but I don't think you'd listen.
Besides, although the of course differ in religious opinion, virtually all historians agree on the reality of Christ.
I would suggest you read Earl Doherty's "The Jesus Puzzle," but you won't. Doherty leaves me with about a 60-40 chance that Jesus never existed. One thing is indisputable: no non-Christian historian in the entire first century ever heard of Jesus. And don't bring up Josephus. Go to Doherty's web site and read "Josephus on the Rocks." Josephus is an obvious forgery.
No one in 70 years after "the crucifixion" heard of Jesus outside the contradictory Gospels? Hmmm.
This is rich. You "explained" it to me? And the half-dozen books on evolution, written by leading thinkers in biology, are wrong. You explained it to me in a Youtube blog? Good grief. Do you realize how foolish that sounds?
The chutzpah of Christians like you is breathtaking. You want all the advantages of modern life, courtesey of science. But the first time science treads on your little blankey (an eternal afterlife), you say: "the experts are obviously wrong in this case!"
Oh I'm sorry, I guess I forgot that experts are Gods. They're flawless omnipotent beings and I should just bow down like a sheep like you do and not think for myself. When will you stop pointing to other people and think for yourself? It seems you're not capable of such.
Einstein had roughly the same IQ that I do and he contradicted the experts and was correct in doing so. Whether or not they are experts is totally irrelevant. What's relevant is what makes logical sense and is reasonable to believe. A bomb in a junkyard forming a supercomputer is ridiculous. By the same principles the "big bang" creating intelligent life is completely ludicrous. Explosions destroy things, they don't organize them intelligently. We can prove that scientifically.
I'm the real scientist. You just buy into whatever your drugged up hippie professors told you, whether it holds up against known scientific evidence such as the theory of evolution or not. Evolution only works one way; survival of the fittest. Mutations in other primates of weaker bodies would have been less fit to survive and would have died out.
Darwin was right. The ones contradicting him are wrong. It's not a matter of whether or not I believe in science, it's a matter of which scientists I agree with. Darwin knew that there was no evidence to support inter-species evolution.
I'm not claiming to have a monopoly on absolute truth. Any of the points I've brought up are open for discussion and if you gave me evidence to support a different theory then I would listen to it. However, "I'm smart and some other smart guys are smart and we don't believe you" is just opinion, not scientific evidence.
I'm realizing that in my haste to make some points I've forgotten punctuation, misspelled things, and phrased things in ways that are awkward. If anyone requires clarification on any part, please feel free to quote me and ask me to rephrase it or correct spelling or whatever.
What an ungrateful boob. Scientists work their butts off daily to better help us understand the human condition, and to come up with better medical treatments based precisely on the fact that we evolved from other species. And you think they are using the wrong theory.
Go read several Tuesday Science Times sections in the New York Times to see evolution being applied virtually weekly.
You're a disgrace to humanity -- at least that part that uses its brains.
I did go look across several New York Times Science News articles. I even found one that heavily involved evolution. However, it did not necessitate the application of the theory of inter-species evolution in the research thereof. If you're going to purport that such exists, you'll have to find the quote yourself. I see no reason to believe it exists.
Again more insults in a vain attempt to compensate for your lack of capacity to reason properly, haha. If you really want to make a case against mine then you'll have to do better than name calling and crying about your supposed scientific research and evidence that really doesn't exist.
Anyone else reading this exchange deserves to at least have the facts properly presented. Google Darwin, or go to Darwin's Wikepedia entry, to see whether Darwin thought there was evidence to support interspecies evolution. Or, go read one of Darwin's classics, including "The Descent of Man."
Honnis seems mentally unstable, as he/she appears to "win" this argument at any cost, including outright lies.
Again, I do think for myself, but cannot know everything.
I've reread/reskimmed the Wikipedia on Darwin. Although the author of that Wikipedia seems to disagree with me, I still see no evidence that Darwin actually disagreed with me on this point. If you say that he had evidence to support inter-species evolution, then you'll need to say what evidence. Theories are not evidence. Yes he presented the theory, but that's just one possible explanation among many, not actual evidence. The evidence that he found was all inner-species, not inter-species.
You come up with all sorts of lies and BS that you say is in the Bible that obviously isn't there at all, or else you would have responded to my challenge to back up your claims, and then you have the hypocrisy to call ME the liar?
Honnis: Is it really your position that there is no evidence for inter-species evolution? If so, I'm just wasting my time. People from across the religious spectrum, who know anything about Darwin, know his position was we all evolved from a single, very early life forms. Did he have all the evidence then? Of course not. Do you know how science works, and the mountains of evidence for inter-species evolution in the last 150 years? You can't have looked at it. The evidence is stunning.
Hey dunderhead. Go out and read one of the dozens of books written by people who understand it better than I do. I'm not going to try to persuade someone as thick-headed as you on a YouTube blog. Talk about a wasted effort.
luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division
the division he's talking about is the division between good and evil
matthew 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
Variance means difference. He's saying he'll bring them a different teachings and not all will believe.
luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
When read in context with the rest of the bible, it's clear to see that "hate" in this instance means something along the lines of "reject". Disciple means follower. What he's saying is that to follow him, you can't also follow others. "Hate" is probably not the right word here. Like I said, the bible isn't perfect.
"Which one, do you suppose, did God want us to follow."
The King James version, accompanied by the Joseph Smith translation. If you read it with an open mind and an open heart, and are generally a good and/or somewhat intelligent person, then you'll probably understand it just fine. I'm sure you can try to misinterpret some verses out of context to try to show otherwise, but open minded, good people have always understood that Jesus was teaching us to love each other and be good to each other.
"and a mans enemies will be those of his own household." Matthew 10:36 (New King James)
"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned." John 15:6 (New King James)
Try to spin it any way you want. Especially this last line, made up by "John" (since, fortunately, Jesus is a myth), was likely responsible for the countless burnings of heretics over many centuries.
To try to say that the Bible was responsible for murder is absolutely ludicrous, haha. This is part of a parable about branches and trees. It's not talking about killing people, haha. People will use any excuse they can to murder, even the Bible that commands "Thou shalt not kill, nor do anything like unto it".
Genius: Read the passage again: "he is cast out as a branch." Then, notice the semi-colon.This means the remainder of the sentence is a continuation of the previous thought.
How do you live with yourself when it is so obvious that you are just lying to yourself because you are too cowardly to admit there might not be an afterlife? Grow up and enjoy this life, and help people in this life -- the one we know we have.
A semicolon is used to join two complete sentences, not to continue a previous thought. Look it up. It's obvious that he's talking about branches. This is part of a larger parable about trees, which goes on and on about various parts of the trees. Anyone who wants to know the truth can find it easily. Just read the bible, the King James version, not these supposedly improved but obviously wrong versions.
I would be a coward, and I would by lying to myself, if I thought to excuse myself from taking responsibility for my actions by claiming, as you claim, that there is no God or afterlife.
You're the one who should start doing something constructive and helpful with your time, like I am, and build up whatever belief system you feel is true, rather than trying to tear down other people's beliefs.
Read what you have written. It is gobbeldy-gook. I guarantee I have had more positive effects on people than you. I given tens of thousands to charity each year. People buy and enjoy books of mine. I coach kids in basketball and a math club. I give them pleasure in this live. Not one knows I'm an atheist, except my son. Children, unfortunately, are brainwashed, like you undoubtedly were.
And, no, I don't push my nonbelief on my children. I just encourage them to think.
'Slaves, you should obey your masters respectfully, not only those who are kind and reasonable but also those who are difficult to please.' 1 Peter 2:18
'Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law of Moses or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.' Matthew 5:17
'Whoever divorces someone and marries another commits adultery' Mark 10:11
Honnis: Moses' punishment for adultery is death, so Jesus thinks divorce and remarriage deserves the death penalty.
Hahahahaha! It doesn't say "slaves", it says "servants". Haha, that's a good one. Try to take a verse about being a good employee and try to make it about slavery, haha.
I don't see any problem with fulfilling the laws of the prophets...
They had higher standards and lower divorce rates back then, and he was making a point about it. He never proposed the death penalty. On the contrary, the rescued and adulterous woman from being stoned to death.
Where are you getting your quotes from? As far as I know, Biblical scholars agree that the King James version is the most accurate English interpretation.
You are more likely a myth than Jesus. Less people believe in you. Although they don't agree on the details, to the best of my knowledge, all reputable historians agree on the reality of Jesus. Look up "historical jesus" on google or wikipedia.
My quotes were all from the King James version. This "New King James", or whatever you're supposedly quoting, is obviously deceitfully attempting to twist the original into something completely opposite from it's true original meaning. Taking "servant" out and replacing it with "slave" is a flagrant lie. Taking "division" out and replacing it with "hostility" is a flagrant lie. It should be completely clear now to anyone reading this that you spread lies and cannot be trusted in the least bit.
If you want evidence, there are volumes and volumes of it. For example, look up "The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ" on Amazon and there will be lots of links to other similar books. Jesus is not a myth, his life is a well-documented historical fact. In fact, all history is based on his life because our numerical system of dates/years is based on such.
Showing again that you don't know anything about recent Biblical scholarship. It is now well known that the King James version is an awful translation. In the 1800s an attempt was made to go back to earlier, more reliable Hebrew manuscripts. This has led to much better translations, including the New Revised Standard Edition, New American Standard Bible, and the Contemporary English version. These were all published by religious groups, and ALL use "slave." Go look it up on the web. It's SLAVE!
"An attempt" yes, it was exactly that, and obviously a failed one. What makes people think they can translate it better than before? Or that those Hebrew manuscripts were not less accurate than the Hebrew manuscripts that were translated into the King James version? Or that both languages haven't changed in the past few centuries? I have looked it up on the web in multiple places and it was "servant" in both of them. "Slave" just doesn't make sense. Anyone who reads the bible can see that.
Same old apologetics. Is there an objective bone in your body? Go do some research. It is well know the KJV is based on lousy translations of a lousy manuscript. How come you are willing to accept advances in science that lead to the computer you're typing on, but not advances in biblical scholarship? Because you start with the assumption that the Bible is divinely inspired, you can't accept anything else.
Good thing there's no hell; God would send you there for being so cowardly.
Anyone who refuses to believe what a moment of rational thought is telling them is not going to an eternal afterlife. You think a being capable of creating this universe wants you in the afterlife, when you can't even read a basic sentence for what it is? You are a hypocrite of the worst kind. Repent while you still have the chance.
A moment of rational thought would tell you that there is a God. Who else could have created us?
I'm not the one who doesn't know what a semi-colon is used for, haha.
You're only calling me a hypocrite because I already pointed out your hypocrisy and it made you mad. If you could back up that claim, you would, but you obviously can't.
It is so typical of a Christian to nitpick about a semicolon, instead ignoring the evidence in front of his face. You tell me, then, what Jesus meant here. Clearly John -- and this is the character of most of John's Gospel -- is taken with the fire and brimstone side of Jesus. And Jesus doesn't disappoint. Jesus clearly likens men who do not follow him as branches. In the next thought, the branches are to be gathered and burned. Nothing would change if a period were used.
What they're saying is that those who rebel against God are going to Hell. Hell is separation from God. It's thier own choice. The pain of separation from god is likened unto the pain of fire. Millions of people have understood this for hundreds of years. It doesn't take genius, it just takes an open mind.
If your claim is really that hell is just "separation from God," then you are not truly a Christian. It's likely this is pointless, but let me quote yet again from the Bible, supposedly in Jesus' own words:
Matthew 25:41: 'Then he (the Son of Man) will say to those on his left, "Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.'" Matthew 25:46: 'Then they will go away to eternal punishment.'
You just proved me right. "Depart from me". It is fundamental christian doctrine. The pain is so much like fire, that the difference is not really significant enough to mention most of the time. And yes, it is likely that this is pointless.
And yet for 18 centuries all Christians believed in the existence of an actual place where one burns eternally and is tortured eternally. And the majority of Christian still do. The leading Christian body, the Catholic church, adamantly believes in such a place. In fact, the are reduced to such absurdities as debating which an infant who has not been baptized goes to the fiery place, heaven, or limbo?
Notice the phrase "prepared for the devil and his angels." This rules out that Jesus just means the pain from being away from His glory.
Literally billions of people over the years have read these entries and took them to mean what they say: there is an actual place of eternal torture. But it is so odious that people with a conscious -- which you seem to have -- must reinvent its meaning. The words of the Bible don't change, so one has to misinterpret it to be a thoughtful Christian.
How am I the one nitpicking about a semicolon when you're the one who brought it up in a false attempt to translate my beliefs into something completely opposite? Haha. Your apparent hypocrisy is humorous to me.
No one created God. At least not that I know. He always was. Our bodies had to have been created. However, for intelligent order to exist in the universe, it had to have always existed somewhere. We can prove scientifically that intelligent order comes only from intelligent order.
then why dont you think the intelligent order that exist today that is substantial, that you can see, is the intelligent order that always existed? Why label that order god or a particular god?
Yes, I should hope to have enough thoughtfulness to form a solid opinion, enough bravery to state it, enough intelligence to back it up, and enough wisdom to let my opinion grow, progress, and even change as I learn and grow myself.
I don't remember making any speculative statements, although anything anyone says could, perhaps, in theory, be regarded as "simply [their] opinion". Your statement seems to me to be of little or no significance. If that was supposed to be a rebuttal of one of my previous points, then would you please restate yourself in a more direct manner?
you said the origin of intelligent order is god, not the order itself. i said that is your opinion. for all you know the alien JUVUCU who lives on the star just ear of the sun created that which you credit to god. that would be my opinion which is equally as speculative and unproven as yours. you then said something about your bravery, wisdom, and intelligence. which again were unproven, instead they are just claims. Where is the objectivity in all of this?
To clarify, the wisdom, bravery, and intelligence of which I spoke was that associated with being the type of opinionated which I am hoping to be. So, I'm not really claiming those attributes directly. I'm simply agreeing with your apparent assertion/question about my being opinionated, while describing the manner in which I'm hoping to be opinionated.
Again, everything anyone says comes from their own mind and could perhaps therefore be considered their own opinion. That in no way effects the truthfulness of their statement. God is the Creator. He has many names and could be said to live in many places. Juvucu could be one of his names. That all seems pretty irrelevant to me.
"God is the creator" is your opinion. Essentially what you are saying is there is no other possible explanation for the existence of ourselves and this planet other than a creator created us, call him what you will but that part is definately true. I understand that is your opinion, but it's far from the 'truth' by definately of the word true.
Is there an objective bone in yours? Or a brain that processes information rather than just accepting whoever claims to be the smartest as God? Unlike you, I don't accept things simply because someone told me that they're an "advance." I analyze it and see if it makes sense or not. Because you start with the assumption that there is no God, you can't accept anything else. I know there are flaws in the Bible. I admit it. Do you know that there are flaws in science? You would if you were a thinker
Of course I know there are flaws in science. The key difference is that science has a method for correcting its mistakes. It's called the scientific method. If someone makes a claim in science, they have to support the claim with evidence. There are plenty of people out there policing science. One cannot get a claim widely accepted without having it looked over by many, many people, who try to reproduce results, or make predictions.
Religion is just the opposite: it's based on faith.
Religion is based on revelation, not faith. Revelation coming from God, the only allegedly omniscient being known to man. I think it no coincidence that omniscience, if you break it down to it's latin roots, is parallel to "omni-science" or "all-science". Do you really think the puny minds of supposed "scientists" can judge the creator of the universe and creator of all science, the omni-scientist God of the Galaxy?
To show how little you know about me: I was a believer until about 8 years ago. Both of my children are baptized Lutherans. With everything else, I threw myself into reading and researching the Bible. It became obvious that there's little there. The Old Testament is a horrific document. Jesus the myth does little to salvage it; and doesn't want to. ("I have come to uphold the laws of Moses.")
No event triggered it. Just a careful analysis over a few years.
Then you know nothing. Period. And the correct usage is "fewer" people. And you would be surprised how many people worldwide know me. And they actually know me, not some mythical version of me. They've seen me lecture. This year. Not, supposedly, 2000 years ago.
"Then you know nothing." Hahaha! What a melodramatic attempt to cop-out of a discussion. You still have faaaaar less followers than Jesus, and for good reason.
Hmmm. You want to just count? So I guess you're actually a Muslim, since Muhammed has more followers than Jesus. Or, maybe you're a Mormon; after all, that's the fastest growing religion.
How do you know the Koran and Book of Mormon aren't the Word of God? If you're a non-Mormon Christian, then you're an atheist with respect to their God. I just take it one further.
The Bible is more believable than the Koran? Not by a long shot. Both are silly and fiction.
Just because I believe that Muhammad existed doesn't make me Muslim, haha. Jesus existed. It's a known fact. That doesn't mean that everyone who knows he existed has to believe in his teachings.
I think most religious texts were inspired by God, though imperfect by being written by man, and sometimes even confused by Satan. Good people will find the good in them. It's pretty simple.
I believe that God works in different ways with everyone, I also believe that it's much more than just about the team that wins, you can lose a football game by 1 or 100 or win by that same margin at the end of the day as a Christian the score isn't what matters its playing for God that matters, everyone has ups and downs in life, and God shows us this through sports, when you play through Christ then at the end of the day win or lose you will still have the most important thing, God's glory
A nearly 5 billion-year-old earth and evolution by natural selection -- based entirely on science, and in direct contradiction to the Bible -- explains almost everything. It only does not explain where this version of our universe came from. But assuming it always existed in some form -- the Big Bang just being the latest expansion -- is just as plausible as the eternal existence of a supernatural force.
God as a first cause can never be ruled out. Fortunately, the God of Abraham can be.
The 2 scientific theories that you stated support my interpretation of the Bible. On the other hand, the theory of evolution by natural selection contradicts the non-scientific garbage the drugged up hippie school teachers normally present as science. Example: a relatively harsh environment such as this planet would not give cause for the supposed "neanderthals" to lose many characteristics that helped them to survive and to become weaker and "evolve" into humans.
How convenient. I will give you credit, at least, for not denying the obvious.
You also admit that he Bible is at least partly a human product. There's the rub. What parts are God's word, and what parts have been corrupted? And how come God didn't make sure his uncorrupted Word is available to us all.
If I had more time, I'd love to know how you get from evolution to a blood sacrifice for redemption. Funny: God chose the same method as the other primitive religions.
To answer your first question: Pray and ask God. That's why it's important to have continuing revelation from God, and also His spirit. I feel my words are falling on deaf ears here, but you asked.
Second question: He did make sure, but the people rejected it and killed his prophets many times. He has raised another prophet every time. Between times, He has always answered prayers.
God is the only way to explain the creation of creatures so intricate and intelligent in design as to be able to adapt and evolve to fit their environment. Science has no theory for this. As I stated before, the neanderthal garbage goes against the theory of evolution by natural selection: survival of the fittest. Features less fit for our environment couldn't have developed through this process. Ex: our fragile bodies. (I'd go into better detail but comment space is limited.)
Wow.God gives everyone different talents. NOt everyone is meant to be a minister.(Ephesians 11-13)God creates differences in everyone and blesses us in many different ways. It is not cheating if some athlete praises God for giving them the talent to make a big play or whatever. They are being thankful for in all this it is God who strengthens us.(Php 4:13) YOu obviously don't know the Grace of God.
Let's not forget the children born with such severe birth defects that they barely even know they exist, yet they require care from productive adults for, in some cases, decades. Nice work God!
God: I know a Down Syndrome child at the local school who could really use your help. Please, make one fewer Plaxico Burress and heal this child's birth defect.
Gee, I wonder why God has NEVER healed a Down Syndrome child. But He does care that Plaxico score the winning touchdown. Go figure.
Your logic seems to be to be parallel to that of a child who, when presented with a difficult learning situation by their parents, says that their parents must hate them and not be their real parents, because if they were, they would always make everything easy for the child.
My point is that yes, life is difficult. If it wasn't, we wouldn't learn and grow and become stronger. That means that God loves us enough to present us with difficult situations that cause us to learn and grow.
I like what your saying about God not being apart in sports. But you need to find out who you are.
falseteaching 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The fool has said in his heart there is no God"
wahbamark 11 months ago
You thank him when good things happen, but nobody blames him when bad things happen. So when you play a sport and you are safe, its god that kept you safe. When when a small child dies of disease, god had nothing to do with it, thats human error right?
kareemthedream33 1 year ago
im a wrestler and i thank god before and after every match if i win or loose, its not about him cheating for me, it's about thanking him for giving me the sport i love and saving my soul. Im thanking him because i kno that no matter what happens on that mat, or in life, he is my rock and redeemer and in the end i kno im secure. what better pedestle to tell people about the good news than in sports where everyone is watching. God's will will always prevail, if your christian or not
meattastic1 1 year ago
6:30 to 7:20 is legendary!Jesus Christ's fist and elbow:)Perfect point.I mean,this whole video makes perfect sense.That's exactly how it is.People are not thinking about what they're actually talking about,when it comes to God.Shame.Great job IG.
phillozoph50 1 year ago
when u thank God for winning u are thanking Him for keeping u safe and thanking Him for giving u the strength to preform good. u are thanking Him for being there for u. God gave u things to use for His Glory so u thank God for winning to show ppl that if God is with u no one can be against u
RobBizar 1 year ago
@RobBizar Unless you lose. Why can't people say they deserve it for hard work and practice. I have seen people believe in God and still fail. Its false hope! Thank you.
evandiablo 1 year ago
Christians fighting?
Phillipians 2:3,4 "Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself; not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others."
CountryRoadTrip 1 year ago
Read the Bible, you are really IGNORANT !!!
usarod02 1 year ago
If there is a god, do people honestly think their deity cares about if Lebron stays in Cleveland or the next Super Bowl winner? If that's true, then Christian schools should go undefeated every year in high school sports. People shouldn't practice if they believe prayer will help them win. Do they think about God when they go to the after party or engage in one night stands with a groupie? Oh waith they can pray it away.
HybridD91 1 year ago
I' not trying to insult you or anything, so let's get that out of the way. However, i believ you're missing the point sir. people thank god for the opportunities He has given them, for the people they know, and even for the ability to breathe. God doesn't take sides, and I feel that many atheists fail to see that point. And when we thank God we acknowledge him not because he gave us an edge, but because he has given us the opportunity to better ourselves.
islandboy91 2 years ago
Most athletes pray for a victory and thank God for their victory. There was a segment on ESPN about God and sports, this devout Christian who was a former NFL player thought prayer for a victory or thanking God for a victory in a sport where people can die, get hurt, and lose is stupid. Stop trying to sugar coat things. God doesn't take sides?! Read the Bible.
HybridD91 1 year ago
i remember reading in the bible that God can give someone favor if they put their whole life into him.
Terrell8976 1 year ago
I feel the same way I'm a fighter
iwanttofight69 2 years ago
God gives favour to those who ask for it, and those who serve him faithfully. God will give you favour over someone who does not know him, or has rejected him. Infedel, you are saying that God has cheated by giving his followers an edge, then you are saying God is cheating by giving us these blessed ABILITYs to do what we need to do, then God has always cheated is what you said. God gives favour to his followers, and it can't be against free will if we ask for it. Don't be against God.
Terrell8976 2 years ago
Two Christian high school teams play against each other all the time, guess who loses?
HybridD91 1 year ago
If they are equally matched in skill and spirit, then they should tie. If one has more skill than the other but the other has more spirit, it might just depend on if the team with less skill prays more. If neither cares, then God just might let someone lose that won't get mad about it. God has a way of doing things. If one team sucks, and the other team is great, then the team that sucks just might get lucky one time and God might hand them the victory.
Terrell8976 1 year ago
Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of God. If you feel that favor isn't fair, which its not, then go ahead and help out those starving kids. If you serve God, He is for you. Doesn't matter the situation you are in. God is omnipresent. Why limit God?
If you know the bible so well why not live according to its word, that is if you want to make a point with validity to it. Taking out a piece and making it work for your life is not right. Know the truth and live it ;)
kingkino1021 2 years ago
besidemymind- i said is your faith less than those who beat Jesus was because they could physically see Him, knew of what He did and the gospel He spread but yet still hated Him. Makes no sense, just like people who acknowledge His life and the soldiers who beat Him but don't chose to live for Him.....really missing the point.
I thank God because He knew what He was doing and why Jesus had to go through what He did, so I may receive everlasting life. So i thank GOD, good times and bad.
kingkino1021 2 years ago
i did think about it and i def doubt you! you really are missing the reason why people thank God.
I will praise God at all times.
Praise will continually be in my mouth.
Rejoice at all times.
cheating because you got a new car? hahah its called favor. And why don't you want it! haha
is this how you disguise what your doing, you don't even realize what your doing. Is your faith less then those who beat Jesus?
kingkino1021 2 years ago
This makes no sense.
"Is your faith less then those who beat Jesus?" I will say mine is. Those who beat Jesus were roman soldiers and jewish preachers.
And it's always interesting to hear this point to... shouldn't you be thanking god for those people. If it wasn't for the ones who beat and killed Jesus, then christianity would be nulled.
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth and it's irrational.
Take a spelling class... it's 'you're' as in 'you are', not 'your'.
besidemymind 2 years ago
As the gentleman in the video asked, why favor one over the other? Why give attention and favor to one playing a sport and not a strarving child?
You claim to constantly praise god, but you put sarcastic laughs in your comment. Is that what Jesus did, laugh at the fools and sinners as you believe us to be?
You are not a Christ-like christian. And i am only judging you by the fruits you are presenting as the Bible states.
besidemymind 2 years ago
thanking God has nothing to do with people thinking God cheated for them or the fact that God chose one Christian fighter over another. its about them saying: "it's God who gave me the ability to do what i do, so the praise does not go to me, but to Him.
people play sports/fight knowing that there is a chance of pain. i dont think a Christian would glory in the fact that someone was hurt during the process. why do it vs being a minister? God intends for His light to shine in ALL areas of life.
rowancv 2 years ago
being able to thank God for even the losses IS something people do all the time. it's like thanking God for times of tribulation, because you can see what good it brought in your life as well.
when you pray for a car with bad credit and you get it, God is not messing with another person's free will. many things come into play with decisions that are made. no matter what God "does" on a person's behalf, at the end, any man-made decision will be just that: man-made.
rowancv 2 years ago
But is it really a "ghost" that gives them the ability or perhaps good genetics from their parents and hardwork/training on that person's part?
If that's the case why wouldn't the ghost give everybody the ability to do whatever it is they attempted to acheive? Or does he pick & choose?
And if he does pick & choose, then can people blame him for their failures? I can answer that for you: NOPE!
Apparently he can only get credit for the good but never the blame for the bad...WOW!
klmbaby4 2 years ago
I don't know if you believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God, but for what it's worth, check out Romans chapter 9. It talks about the "unfairness."
As for God getting credit only for the good- like I said before, being to thank God for the bad (ex. the losses), is something people do all the time, including myself.
rowancv 2 years ago
God is ... not matter. Every thing that we can prove exists or existed is composed of antimatter or antimatter, the existence of God cannot be proven or dis-proven. Your claim does not refute mine. Example: I could claim that God is made of material "X" which is neither matter nor energy, you can't prove that material X does not exist, therefore you can't disprove my claim, only discredit it since it has no base, but my base is faith and my own experience and that's all that I need.
willftalbot 2 years ago
The Christian life is foolishness to those that are perishing and this video is proof of that. I would encourge you to do some research before making videos of this nature and prayerfully consider this verse-
1Cor 4:7 For who makes you differ from another? And what do you have that you did not receive? Now if you did indeed receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?
We praise God in success and defeat! He is worthy to be praised always!
chekeepink 2 years ago
so true, there are kids dying all over the world from famine and these people think that some god helped them win a game. thats selfish
EdgeRatedR007 2 years ago
The amazing elbow of Lord Jesus Christ. LOL
ThePsychoguy 2 years ago
we know that matter is neither created nor destroyed, therefore the big bang must have come from somewhere. When I tell my atheist friends this there response is usually "well then where did God come from?" My answer is A) God is not matter. B) Your question does not rule out the absolute truth that God created the universe, whether God was created by another being or God's existence is a complete paradox in itself does not rule out that the big bang must have come from someone/somewhere greater
willftalbot 2 years ago
A) What is god then? Everything is composed of matter or antimatter, so where does god fall into? If neither, then he doesn't exist. B) Ever heard of the big crunch? It's a new theory that suggests that the Universe recycles itself. In another words, it expands, then collapses, expands, and collapses. This would suggest that the Universe is infinite and that it has always been.....gee sounds a lot like what you religious folk say god is. "God always was!" No, my friend. The Universe always was.
yamilink03 2 years ago
here is a proposal ,infedelguy: what if Diego, for example, was thanking God for the strength that he gave him during training sessions when his mental attitude lacked luster? Why couldn't Diego have thanked him for that? Why must God have ONLY helped him out during the fight in order for the atlhlete to thank him? You make many faulty assumptions.
willftalbot 2 years ago
I agree
Honnis 2 years ago
Forget sports, how about pornstars thanking god for letting them have a good sex scene
deelnyc 2 years ago
it is pretty sad that you actually sat down God knows how long just to make that vid. First thing you sound so unsure of what you are saying.. asking so many questions, the second thing after asking all those questions you say "Dont allow God to cheat for you", which implies that you believe that He can. Check your self, and before you go bashing people for their beliefs check yours, plus bashing people and not the subject it is a weakness in constructive arguing. try again.
ODayner 2 years ago
I agree. Very interesting points and well put.
Honnis 2 years ago
i cant wait for someone to thank Satan for the victory. thanks to the man downstairs.
moviemaker1865 2 years ago
haha, that would be hilarious
Honnis 2 years ago
How about this. D. Sanchez is giving Glory to God for helping him do his best to win the fight. Maybe he just wanted to give glory to God just because he had a great opportunity to do so.
Jasper50 3 years ago
lol you guys are missing the point..Its not that God makes you win its up to you how much effort you put into it, maybie theyre thanking God for helping them stay focused cause they trust in him.Nothing I think you would understand.Stupid humans (like me also) will allways try to find proof and understand everything,somethings are not made for us to understand,I realize it though
RHurricanez 3 years ago
How can you proof it happene because of prayer.If you know the mechanism of prayer/meditation,you can direct prayer to anything with faith, and feel satisfaction...just mental. No direct physical effect. If you have a sound mentality, your interaction in the physical world becomes better, but prayer can NOT change physical stuff directly. if you prayer works, the Bible shoots itself in the foot thus: "maybe it is Satan who helped, deceiving you that you are on the right track".
mrcuteblackie 3 years ago
Proof is simply something that convinces someone, so if someone is convinced by something, then that automatically makes it proven. To say that mental isn't also physical is to say that your brain isn't physical and therefore doesn't exist. How do you know what prayer can and cannot change? Obviously you have no faith so prayer probably wouldn't do much for you. How does prayer cause the bible to shoot itself in the foot? What is your first language? Your English is terrible.
Honnis 3 years ago
nice attempt at defining proof. i think the word you are looking for is propaganda. that is a very, very dangerous definiton that you give. your philosophy is terrible.
johhny3rubs 3 years ago
Hahaha, it's called a dictionary, not my philosophy, haha. Look it up, smart guy.
Honnis 3 years ago
So, if I can convince a three-year-old that 2 + 2 = 5, then I have proved it? If I wave a treat in front of a three-year-old and say they may have it if they agree 2 + 2 = 5, then that proves it? This is essentialy what preachers do to adults because they wave a blissful afterlife in front of them, not to mention the big stick of eternal torture if they don't believe it. That's why the description of hell has to be so awful: otherwise, it wouldn't have the desired effect.
MetricSU 3 years ago
That's why "proof" is only relevant on an individual basis. I didn't create the word or create the misconception that "proof" is somehow absolute truth or something along those lines. To prove something to a person or a group simply means to convince the person or the group. How else would you have it defined? That it's not proven unless you believe it? Well that's partially true because it's not proven to you until you believe it. However, it's still proven to others, which is just as valid.
Honnis 3 years ago
You used an interesting analogy, haha, because teachers do the exact same thing with children. They wave a blissful after-school life and an A+ and praise and everything else in front of them if they agree that 2+2=4, and also do conversely so with punishing disagreement. Does their perhaps seemingly questionable method mean that they must be lying and that 2+2 does not =4 and that there is not an after-school life? Haha.
Honnis 3 years ago
Like most believers in a personal God, you set the bar low and then use semantics to clould the issue. Here are some facts that make it very unlikely there is a personal God:
1. Almost no one living 200 years ago thought the earth was 5 billion years old. Why? Because the Bible implied otherwise.
2. Almost every living 200 years ago thought God created humans out of dust. Why? Because the Bible said so.
Now we know, beyond reasonable doubt, that (1) and (2) are false.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Hahahahaha! It's impossible for semantics to cloud a point. Semantics is the study of meaning. Knowing the real meaning of the words I use (something you apparently aren't interested in, haha) is what allows me to make my points clear and precise.
Honnis 3 years ago
1. People 200 yrs ago misinterpreting the bible has nothing to do with the likelyhood of God.
2. The only word they had back then for anything approaching the microscopic, ex: microorganisms, atoms, subatomic particles, ect, was "dust". So you say this is false? Then what do you think do you think humans were created from? Car parts? Haha. )
Honnis 3 years ago
You should see someone about that nervous tic you have: laughing in blogs.
Typical apologetics: "people 200 years ago misinterpreted the Bible." How come the Bible was only "correctly" interpreted by some -- hardly all, as most Christians STILL believe the earth is 6,000 years old -- after science proved it. And science has proved it. The old-earth hypothesis is testable, and it is still standing. So is evolution. That the value of pi is 3 -- as stated in the Bible -- is known to be false.
MetricSU 3 years ago
I laugh because you're funny, not because I'm nervous.
What most Christians believe is not relevant to what I believe. I have my own beliefs just like you do. You're discussing with me not with "most Christians". Darwin, who created the theory of evolution, was Christian. Evolution supports my belief in God.
Pi=3 is just another misinterpretation. I'm not the type of person who thinks that everything in the bible is 100% perfect. It was written by the hands of men and rewritten many times.
Honnis 3 years ago
If I find a flaw in a science book, of which there are many, does that mean the whole book is 100% absolutely wrong? Obviously not. I've never heard of any belief system that's 100% wrong. Some Christians probably have a fair percentage of their beliefs wrong, according to what you and I believe. However, that has absolutely no bearing on the likelihood of a God/Supreme Creator or whatever you'd like to call Him.
Honnis 3 years ago
I apologize if my laughing seems rude or offensive or whatever. I'll try not to do that if you think it's disrespectful, assuming that you also try not to be disrespectful.
Honnis 3 years ago
Maybe you can explain why more than 90% of the National Academy of Sciences, essentially the smartest people in the United States, reject a personal God -- and therefore, Christianity. If you believe that a being that could have created this universe, and us via evolution, would rig it so that the evidence for Christianity is so murky and contradictory that the best minds can't believe any of it, then you will believe anything. But that's faith, isn't it?
MetricSU 3 years ago
I can explain it easily: I think for myself. Most people these days seem to just say "My science teacher doesn't believe in God, so he must be right!" There are no "best minds". People have different strengths and weeknesses. You wouldn't ask a board of nutritional experts to teach you astronomy, would you? Then why would you ask a panel of scientists to tell you about God?
Honnis 3 years ago
Any point you're smart enough to bring up, I will be smart enough to discuss with you. However, if you just say "these smart dudes agree with me!" That doesn't really mean anything. 10% of those smart dudes disagree with you, and they are probably the most intelligent of the lot, when it comes to God, in my opinion.
Honnis 3 years ago
Don't flatter yourself. Your answers are essentially "I believe it because I believe it." That's not being smart. That's being indoctrinated.
Given the power of this being you think exists, it is at least as likely that you and others who embrace obvious myths will be the ones left behind. God has plans for those of us who think rationally and go where the evidence takes me. I don't believe in eternal rewards, yet I live a very good life.
MetricSU 3 years ago
So, if there is a God, this is the only thing that makes sense. He put evolution in motion, then waited to see what happened once humans developed critical thinking skills. A small percentage of those developed inquiring minds and did not obsess about the afterlife. An even smaller percentage put those talents to good use, and bettered life for others -- expecting no rewards after death. Those are the chosen ones. Others killed each other over myths. They are not going anywhere after death.
MetricSU 3 years ago
I don't see any reason to believe that humans evolved from un-humans. There is no evidence whatsoever to support this. It makes more sense to believe that narwhals evolved from unicorns. If whoever created us was intelligent enough to create something that evolved into humankind, then he could have just as easily started with an actual human.
Honnis 3 years ago
Oh, finally, you now reveal yourself as someone who doesn't believe in evolution. Okay, that's it for me. You're an idiot, then. Sorry, but that's how I feel. If you don't believe the very smart scientists IN THEIR FIELD who think evolution is a fact, then you're thoughts are worth nothing. What is your Ph.D. in? Biology? Are the 99% of biologists who make your pitiful life better by using evolution wrong, and your right?
Have a nice afterlife with the worms.
MetricSU 3 years ago
I BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION. YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION.
I've already explained this but you seem to dense to get it. According to Darwin's (who was a christian) theory of evolution, we didn't evolve from apes or neanderthals. Both of them have bodies that are more fitted to this planet. A mutation that created a breed with weaker bodies more like ours would not have been able to compete with the apes or neanderthals.
Honnis 3 years ago
I should have read this more carefully. It's the final blow to you. It always comes when I "debate" Christians. Do you see the logical problem here? Let me help. You have now assumed what it is we're supposed to be debating. That an intelligent being created us. Given that, you conclude evolution doesn't make sense.
You know what? I agree with you! Now, take the next step. If God implies not evolution, then evolution implies not God. And we have plenty of evidence for evolution. QED.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Evolution makes perfect sense, to me. It supports the idea of a supreme being. Who else could have created beings so intelligently designed as to be able to adapt and evolve? You still can't answer that question. That's why you're resorting to insults, because you know you're wrong and can't answer the most basic question of life.
Honnis 3 years ago
Those people who you say "killed each other over myths," weren't Christian. They went against everything Christ taught. They obviously wanted to rebel against and destroy his teachings. What better way to do so than to claim to be Christians? Christ taught that we should be motivated to help others by love, not rewards.
Honnis 3 years ago
Oh, not only don't you know anything about science, you don't even know your Bible very well. I've noticed that all Christians are masters at selective reading.
Let's see. Who said he came not to bring peace, but a sword? (Jesus) Who said any true following would have to renounce his family. He wanted to pit father against son, and son on. (Jesus).
Who thought demons caused viruses? (Jesus). Who talked about gathering withering twigs and casting them into the fire? (Jesus)
MetricSU 3 years ago
What does burning twigs have to do with anything? Haha.
Are you saying that bringing a sword makes you a murderer? Maybe you should tell that to the millions of sword collectors out there.
The rest of it you're misinterpreting. Give me exact verses and I'll tell you what they mean.
Honnis 3 years ago
"I believe it because I believe it."... Where the hell did you get that crap? I never said anything remotely similar to that.
Neanderthals are myth. God is fact. God has been proven to more people than neanderthals have.
If there is no God, then would you please explain how such intelligently designed beings as humans were organized?
Honnis 3 years ago
No, you didn't say that explicitly, but everything you've said amounts to that. Consider your stupid comment about the smart scientists. I prefer a smart person's opinion on most things, ESPECIALLY when it comes to religion. Whose opinion do you suggest I ask? Clergy? What an unimpressive bunch that is. Anyone can read the Bible and/or Koran and see for themselves whether they hold up. They don't. Not to any modern analysis. Smart people see that easily. I'm one of those.
MetricSU 3 years ago
What I've said in no way amounts to anything even vaguely similar to that. On the contrary, I've explained the reasoning behind my beliefs much more thoroughly than you have yours.
Name one thing in the bible that doesn't hold up to your analysis.
Honnis 3 years ago
The only reasoning you seem to be stating behind your beliefs is "some guy said that he was smart and then he said he didn't believe in God. I wanna be a smart guy like that smart guy so I'm not gonna believe in God either." Pssht. How retarded is that?
Honnis 3 years ago
"I prefer a smart person's opinion on most things". So you're not a smart person? You just blindly follow the opinions of such supposedly "smart" people? You can't come up with your own opinion?
Honnis 3 years ago
I am not a Ph.D. biologist (but I do have a Ph.D.), and clearly neither are you. So I don't understand all details of evolution. Luckily, I am smart and can understand logic and mountains of evidence. And, I have regard for informed opinion. That's the 99% of Ph.D. biologists that know humans evolved from simpler life forms. They use it every day in their research.
Do you defer to your clergy or yourself for maintenence on the jet engine that you fly? I doubt it.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Although evolution within a given species is pretty much common knowledge by now, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support inter-species evolution.
I may not engineer jets, but I am a cad engineer who normally tests in the upper one tenth of one percent on intelligence and aptitude tests. So no, I'm not an idiot like you seem to think.
Honnis 3 years ago
Just answer the question. Yes or no: if an engine on an airplane you are about to board needs maintenance, will you allow someone trained in jet engines to do the repairs, or will you go do it? (It's rhetorical. Of course you let the expert do it.)
Then you say "there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support inter-species evolution." This reveals that you are not a serious thinker. The evidence is indisputable, and supported by 99% of people whose opinion matters.
MetricSU 3 years ago
And I'm sorry, but willful ignorance deserves to be ridiculed. You exclude humans from the evolutionary chain ONLY because it seems inconsistent with a deity.
Because Darwin started off a devout Christian, his accomplishment is all the more remarkable. He was not a Christian at the end. He might have been a deist, believing in a first cause, but even that is doubtful.
Darwin, unlike you, followed the evidence to its obvious conclusion. Those who stop short are basically cowards.
MetricSU 3 years ago
I already explained why humans evolving from physically superior life forms makes no sense. The fact that you ignore what I'm saying, pretend to be arguing with someone else, and keep pointing to a peice of paper and saying "loooook this thing says i'm smaaart! And, and, these other smart guys agree with meeeee!" Just shows that you're incapable of bringing up intelligent points that contradict mine. I'm not saying that you're stupid. I'm just saying that you're wrong.
Honnis 3 years ago
"He was not a Christian at the end." This is wrong. The only religious beliefs he ever professed were christian and he never denied it. "At the end" he confessed to have doubts, but these revolved around the death of his wife and around the existence of deep sea creatures which he thought no one would ever see. Why would God make them if not for man to appreciate? We can see now that Darwin was also wrong in doubting God because of deep sea life that is important for our eco system.
Honnis 3 years ago
"Those who stop short are basically cowards." I agree. Those who stop short of the obvious conclusion that intelligent life must have been created by life with superior intelligence are cowards. Why? Because they are afraid to admit that they will be held accountable for their actions in the after life.
Honnis 3 years ago
You still seem to simply be saying "I'm smarter than you! I'm smarter than you! These other guys agree and their smarter than you too!" Well if you're so much smarter than me then why can't you compete with my arguments? Why can't you use your own logic and your own reasoning to challenge any of my statements, as I have with you?
Honnis 3 years ago
Why can't you answer any of my simple questions like "How was intelligent life formed if not by intelligent life?" and "How could physically inferior beings evolve from physically superior beings within a harsh environment such as ours?" and, if you know your Bible so much better than I do, "where are your references to back up your claims about the inaccuracy of the Bible?"
Honnis 3 years ago
Obvious question that Christians have never answered: Who created the intelligent life that then created us?
You're the coward. If God wants to send me to hell for eternal torture, then I say "bring it on." I'll tell him what I think, too, if He can't read my thoughts now. If he used a blood sacrifice that has no historical support to separate those living in eternal bliss from those in eternal hell, then your God is evil and repulsive. Have fun with this being in the afterlife.
MetricSU 3 years ago
The answer to that question is simple. It always was. Either that or I suppose it could have been created by another intelligent life, perhaps, but at some point there must have been some intelligence that always was, just like matter.
Honnis 3 years ago
"used a blood sacrifice that has no historical support to separate those living in eternal bliss from those in eternal hell". Whoa... where'd ya get that one? A sci-fi novel? Haha. You've completely misinterpreted everything. I could clarify it for you, but I don't think you'd listen.
Besides, although the of course differ in religious opinion, virtually all historians agree on the reality of Christ.
Honnis 3 years ago
I would suggest you read Earl Doherty's "The Jesus Puzzle," but you won't. Doherty leaves me with about a 60-40 chance that Jesus never existed. One thing is indisputable: no non-Christian historian in the entire first century ever heard of Jesus. And don't bring up Josephus. Go to Doherty's web site and read "Josephus on the Rocks." Josephus is an obvious forgery.
No one in 70 years after "the crucifixion" heard of Jesus outside the contradictory Gospels? Hmmm.
MetricSU 3 years ago
This is rich. You "explained" it to me? And the half-dozen books on evolution, written by leading thinkers in biology, are wrong. You explained it to me in a Youtube blog? Good grief. Do you realize how foolish that sounds?
The chutzpah of Christians like you is breathtaking. You want all the advantages of modern life, courtesey of science. But the first time science treads on your little blankey (an eternal afterlife), you say: "the experts are obviously wrong in this case!"
MetricSU 3 years ago
Oh I'm sorry, I guess I forgot that experts are Gods. They're flawless omnipotent beings and I should just bow down like a sheep like you do and not think for myself. When will you stop pointing to other people and think for yourself? It seems you're not capable of such.
Honnis 3 years ago
Einstein had roughly the same IQ that I do and he contradicted the experts and was correct in doing so. Whether or not they are experts is totally irrelevant. What's relevant is what makes logical sense and is reasonable to believe. A bomb in a junkyard forming a supercomputer is ridiculous. By the same principles the "big bang" creating intelligent life is completely ludicrous. Explosions destroy things, they don't organize them intelligently. We can prove that scientifically.
Honnis 3 years ago
I'm the real scientist. You just buy into whatever your drugged up hippie professors told you, whether it holds up against known scientific evidence such as the theory of evolution or not. Evolution only works one way; survival of the fittest. Mutations in other primates of weaker bodies would have been less fit to survive and would have died out.
Honnis 3 years ago
Darwin was right. The ones contradicting him are wrong. It's not a matter of whether or not I believe in science, it's a matter of which scientists I agree with. Darwin knew that there was no evidence to support inter-species evolution.
Honnis 3 years ago
I'm not claiming to have a monopoly on absolute truth. Any of the points I've brought up are open for discussion and if you gave me evidence to support a different theory then I would listen to it. However, "I'm smart and some other smart guys are smart and we don't believe you" is just opinion, not scientific evidence.
Honnis 3 years ago
I'm realizing that in my haste to make some points I've forgotten punctuation, misspelled things, and phrased things in ways that are awkward. If anyone requires clarification on any part, please feel free to quote me and ask me to rephrase it or correct spelling or whatever.
Honnis 3 years ago
What an ungrateful boob. Scientists work their butts off daily to better help us understand the human condition, and to come up with better medical treatments based precisely on the fact that we evolved from other species. And you think they are using the wrong theory.
Go read several Tuesday Science Times sections in the New York Times to see evolution being applied virtually weekly.
You're a disgrace to humanity -- at least that part that uses its brains.
MetricSU 3 years ago
I did go look across several New York Times Science News articles. I even found one that heavily involved evolution. However, it did not necessitate the application of the theory of inter-species evolution in the research thereof. If you're going to purport that such exists, you'll have to find the quote yourself. I see no reason to believe it exists.
Honnis 3 years ago
Again more insults in a vain attempt to compensate for your lack of capacity to reason properly, haha. If you really want to make a case against mine then you'll have to do better than name calling and crying about your supposed scientific research and evidence that really doesn't exist.
Honnis 3 years ago
Anyone else reading this exchange deserves to at least have the facts properly presented. Google Darwin, or go to Darwin's Wikepedia entry, to see whether Darwin thought there was evidence to support interspecies evolution. Or, go read one of Darwin's classics, including "The Descent of Man."
Honnis seems mentally unstable, as he/she appears to "win" this argument at any cost, including outright lies.
Again, I do think for myself, but cannot know everything.
MetricSU 3 years ago
I've reread/reskimmed the Wikipedia on Darwin. Although the author of that Wikipedia seems to disagree with me, I still see no evidence that Darwin actually disagreed with me on this point. If you say that he had evidence to support inter-species evolution, then you'll need to say what evidence. Theories are not evidence. Yes he presented the theory, but that's just one possible explanation among many, not actual evidence. The evidence that he found was all inner-species, not inter-species.
Honnis 3 years ago
You come up with all sorts of lies and BS that you say is in the Bible that obviously isn't there at all, or else you would have responded to my challenge to back up your claims, and then you have the hypocrisy to call ME the liar?
Honnis 3 years ago
Honnis: Is it really your position that there is no evidence for inter-species evolution? If so, I'm just wasting my time. People from across the religious spectrum, who know anything about Darwin, know his position was we all evolved from a single, very early life forms. Did he have all the evidence then? Of course not. Do you know how science works, and the mountains of evidence for inter-species evolution in the last 150 years? You can't have looked at it. The evidence is stunning.
MetricSU 3 years ago
opinion is not evidence. show me the evidence.
Honnis 3 years ago
Hey dunderhead. Go out and read one of the dozens of books written by people who understand it better than I do. I'm not going to try to persuade someone as thick-headed as you on a YouTube blog. Talk about a wasted effort.
MetricSU 3 years ago
I am one of those people who understands it better than you.
Honnis 3 years ago
For those who are interested, quotes (supposedly) from Jesus:
'Do you think I have come to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but hostility!' Luke 12:51
'I have come to set son against father, daughter against mother...' Matthew 10:35
'If anyone does not hate his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, and yes, even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.' Luke 14:26
'I have come to bring fire to the earth. And how I wish it were blazing already!' Luke 12:49
MetricSU 3 years ago
the actual verses read as follows:
luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division
the division he's talking about is the division between good and evil
matthew 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
Variance means difference. He's saying he'll bring them a different teachings and not all will believe.
Honnis 3 years ago
luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
When read in context with the rest of the bible, it's clear to see that "hate" in this instance means something along the lines of "reject". Disciple means follower. What he's saying is that to follow him, you can't also follow others. "Hate" is probably not the right word here. Like I said, the bible isn't perfect.
Honnis 3 years ago
I posted lots more but youtube deleted it. It's too late now. I'll have to try to repost it after work tomorrow if I have time.
Honnis 3 years ago
The "actual" verses? Hmmm. Ever notice there are multiple translations of the Bible? Which one, do you suppose, did God want us to follow.
Sorry, Honnis. But I can read. And the quotes say what you would admit they say if only they weren't attributed to Jesus.
To say the Bible "isn't perfect" might be the understatement of the New Year.
MetricSU 3 years ago
"Which one, do you suppose, did God want us to follow."
The King James version, accompanied by the Joseph Smith translation. If you read it with an open mind and an open heart, and are generally a good and/or somewhat intelligent person, then you'll probably understand it just fine. I'm sure you can try to misinterpret some verses out of context to try to show otherwise, but open minded, good people have always understood that Jesus was teaching us to love each other and be good to each other.
Honnis 3 years ago
More:
"and a mans enemies will be those of his own household." Matthew 10:36 (New King James)
"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned." John 15:6 (New King James)
Try to spin it any way you want. Especially this last line, made up by "John" (since, fortunately, Jesus is a myth), was likely responsible for the countless burnings of heretics over many centuries.
MetricSU 3 years ago
To try to say that the Bible was responsible for murder is absolutely ludicrous, haha. This is part of a parable about branches and trees. It's not talking about killing people, haha. People will use any excuse they can to murder, even the Bible that commands "Thou shalt not kill, nor do anything like unto it".
Honnis 3 years ago
Genius: Read the passage again: "he is cast out as a branch." Then, notice the semi-colon.This means the remainder of the sentence is a continuation of the previous thought.
How do you live with yourself when it is so obvious that you are just lying to yourself because you are too cowardly to admit there might not be an afterlife? Grow up and enjoy this life, and help people in this life -- the one we know we have.
MetricSU 3 years ago
A semicolon is used to join two complete sentences, not to continue a previous thought. Look it up. It's obvious that he's talking about branches. This is part of a larger parable about trees, which goes on and on about various parts of the trees. Anyone who wants to know the truth can find it easily. Just read the bible, the King James version, not these supposedly improved but obviously wrong versions.
Honnis 3 years ago
I would be a coward, and I would by lying to myself, if I thought to excuse myself from taking responsibility for my actions by claiming, as you claim, that there is no God or afterlife.
You're the one who should start doing something constructive and helpful with your time, like I am, and build up whatever belief system you feel is true, rather than trying to tear down other people's beliefs.
Honnis 3 years ago
Read what you have written. It is gobbeldy-gook. I guarantee I have had more positive effects on people than you. I given tens of thousands to charity each year. People buy and enjoy books of mine. I coach kids in basketball and a math club. I give them pleasure in this live. Not one knows I'm an atheist, except my son. Children, unfortunately, are brainwashed, like you undoubtedly were.
And, no, I don't push my nonbelief on my children. I just encourage them to think.
MetricSU 3 years ago
'Slaves, you should obey your masters respectfully, not only those who are kind and reasonable but also those who are difficult to please.' 1 Peter 2:18
'Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law of Moses or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.' Matthew 5:17
'Whoever divorces someone and marries another commits adultery' Mark 10:11
Honnis: Moses' punishment for adultery is death, so Jesus thinks divorce and remarriage deserves the death penalty.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Hahahahaha! It doesn't say "slaves", it says "servants". Haha, that's a good one. Try to take a verse about being a good employee and try to make it about slavery, haha.
I don't see any problem with fulfilling the laws of the prophets...
They had higher standards and lower divorce rates back then, and he was making a point about it. He never proposed the death penalty. On the contrary, the rescued and adulterous woman from being stoned to death.
Honnis 3 years ago
Putting "Honnis" in front of something doesn't mean I said it, haha.
That's no more fair than the following:
MetricSU: I beat my wife.
Haha.
Honnis 3 years ago
Where are you getting your quotes from? As far as I know, Biblical scholars agree that the King James version is the most accurate English interpretation.
You are more likely a myth than Jesus. Less people believe in you. Although they don't agree on the details, to the best of my knowledge, all reputable historians agree on the reality of Jesus. Look up "historical jesus" on google or wikipedia.
Honnis 3 years ago
My quotes were all from the King James version. This "New King James", or whatever you're supposedly quoting, is obviously deceitfully attempting to twist the original into something completely opposite from it's true original meaning. Taking "servant" out and replacing it with "slave" is a flagrant lie. Taking "division" out and replacing it with "hostility" is a flagrant lie. It should be completely clear now to anyone reading this that you spread lies and cannot be trusted in the least bit.
Honnis 3 years ago
If you want evidence, there are volumes and volumes of it. For example, look up "The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ" on Amazon and there will be lots of links to other similar books. Jesus is not a myth, his life is a well-documented historical fact. In fact, all history is based on his life because our numerical system of dates/years is based on such.
Honnis 3 years ago
Showing again that you don't know anything about recent Biblical scholarship. It is now well known that the King James version is an awful translation. In the 1800s an attempt was made to go back to earlier, more reliable Hebrew manuscripts. This has led to much better translations, including the New Revised Standard Edition, New American Standard Bible, and the Contemporary English version. These were all published by religious groups, and ALL use "slave." Go look it up on the web. It's SLAVE!
MetricSU 3 years ago
"An attempt" yes, it was exactly that, and obviously a failed one. What makes people think they can translate it better than before? Or that those Hebrew manuscripts were not less accurate than the Hebrew manuscripts that were translated into the King James version? Or that both languages haven't changed in the past few centuries? I have looked it up on the web in multiple places and it was "servant" in both of them. "Slave" just doesn't make sense. Anyone who reads the bible can see that.
Honnis 3 years ago
Same old apologetics. Is there an objective bone in your body? Go do some research. It is well know the KJV is based on lousy translations of a lousy manuscript. How come you are willing to accept advances in science that lead to the computer you're typing on, but not advances in biblical scholarship? Because you start with the assumption that the Bible is divinely inspired, you can't accept anything else.
Good thing there's no hell; God would send you there for being so cowardly.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Anyone who refuses to believe what a moment of rational thought is telling them is not going to an eternal afterlife. You think a being capable of creating this universe wants you in the afterlife, when you can't even read a basic sentence for what it is? You are a hypocrite of the worst kind. Repent while you still have the chance.
MetricSU 3 years ago
A moment of rational thought would tell you that there is a God. Who else could have created us?
I'm not the one who doesn't know what a semi-colon is used for, haha.
You're only calling me a hypocrite because I already pointed out your hypocrisy and it made you mad. If you could back up that claim, you would, but you obviously can't.
Honnis 3 years ago
Who created God?
It is so typical of a Christian to nitpick about a semicolon, instead ignoring the evidence in front of his face. You tell me, then, what Jesus meant here. Clearly John -- and this is the character of most of John's Gospel -- is taken with the fire and brimstone side of Jesus. And Jesus doesn't disappoint. Jesus clearly likens men who do not follow him as branches. In the next thought, the branches are to be gathered and burned. Nothing would change if a period were used.
MetricSU 3 years ago
What they're saying is that those who rebel against God are going to Hell. Hell is separation from God. It's thier own choice. The pain of separation from god is likened unto the pain of fire. Millions of people have understood this for hundreds of years. It doesn't take genius, it just takes an open mind.
Honnis 3 years ago
If your claim is really that hell is just "separation from God," then you are not truly a Christian. It's likely this is pointless, but let me quote yet again from the Bible, supposedly in Jesus' own words:
Matthew 25:41: 'Then he (the Son of Man) will say to those on his left, "Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.'" Matthew 25:46: 'Then they will go away to eternal punishment.'
Fundamental Christian doctrine.
MetricSU 3 years ago
You just proved me right. "Depart from me". It is fundamental christian doctrine. The pain is so much like fire, that the difference is not really significant enough to mention most of the time. And yes, it is likely that this is pointless.
Honnis 3 years ago
And yet for 18 centuries all Christians believed in the existence of an actual place where one burns eternally and is tortured eternally. And the majority of Christian still do. The leading Christian body, the Catholic church, adamantly believes in such a place. In fact, the are reduced to such absurdities as debating which an infant who has not been baptized goes to the fiery place, heaven, or limbo?
MetricSU 3 years ago
Notice the phrase "prepared for the devil and his angels." This rules out that Jesus just means the pain from being away from His glory.
Literally billions of people over the years have read these entries and took them to mean what they say: there is an actual place of eternal torture. But it is so odious that people with a conscious -- which you seem to have -- must reinvent its meaning. The words of the Bible don't change, so one has to misinterpret it to be a thoughtful Christian.
MetricSU 3 years ago
How am I the one nitpicking about a semicolon when you're the one who brought it up in a false attempt to translate my beliefs into something completely opposite? Haha. Your apparent hypocrisy is humorous to me.
No one created God. At least not that I know. He always was. Our bodies had to have been created. However, for intelligent order to exist in the universe, it had to have always existed somewhere. We can prove scientifically that intelligent order comes only from intelligent order.
Honnis 3 years ago
then why dont you think the intelligent order that exist today that is substantial, that you can see, is the intelligent order that always existed? Why label that order god or a particular god?
iv4444444 2 years ago
The origin of the order is God, not the order its self.
Honnis 2 years ago
clearly opinionated?
iv4444444 2 years ago
Yes, I should hope to have enough thoughtfulness to form a solid opinion, enough bravery to state it, enough intelligence to back it up, and enough wisdom to let my opinion grow, progress, and even change as I learn and grow myself.
Honnis 2 years ago
you made one statement which was speculative and simply your opinion. There was none of what you mentioned included in that sole sentence.
iv4444444 2 years ago
I don't remember making any speculative statements, although anything anyone says could, perhaps, in theory, be regarded as "simply [their] opinion". Your statement seems to me to be of little or no significance. If that was supposed to be a rebuttal of one of my previous points, then would you please restate yourself in a more direct manner?
Honnis 2 years ago
you said the origin of intelligent order is god, not the order itself. i said that is your opinion. for all you know the alien JUVUCU who lives on the star just ear of the sun created that which you credit to god. that would be my opinion which is equally as speculative and unproven as yours. you then said something about your bravery, wisdom, and intelligence. which again were unproven, instead they are just claims. Where is the objectivity in all of this?
iv4444444 2 years ago
To clarify, the wisdom, bravery, and intelligence of which I spoke was that associated with being the type of opinionated which I am hoping to be. So, I'm not really claiming those attributes directly. I'm simply agreeing with your apparent assertion/question about my being opinionated, while describing the manner in which I'm hoping to be opinionated.
Honnis 2 years ago
Again, everything anyone says comes from their own mind and could perhaps therefore be considered their own opinion. That in no way effects the truthfulness of their statement. God is the Creator. He has many names and could be said to live in many places. Juvucu could be one of his names. That all seems pretty irrelevant to me.
Honnis 2 years ago
"God is the creator" is your opinion. Essentially what you are saying is there is no other possible explanation for the existence of ourselves and this planet other than a creator created us, call him what you will but that part is definately true. I understand that is your opinion, but it's far from the 'truth' by definately of the word true.
iv4444444 2 years ago
Is there an objective bone in yours? Or a brain that processes information rather than just accepting whoever claims to be the smartest as God? Unlike you, I don't accept things simply because someone told me that they're an "advance." I analyze it and see if it makes sense or not. Because you start with the assumption that there is no God, you can't accept anything else. I know there are flaws in the Bible. I admit it. Do you know that there are flaws in science? You would if you were a thinker
Honnis 3 years ago
Of course I know there are flaws in science. The key difference is that science has a method for correcting its mistakes. It's called the scientific method. If someone makes a claim in science, they have to support the claim with evidence. There are plenty of people out there policing science. One cannot get a claim widely accepted without having it looked over by many, many people, who try to reproduce results, or make predictions.
Religion is just the opposite: it's based on faith.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Religion is based on revelation, not faith. Revelation coming from God, the only allegedly omniscient being known to man. I think it no coincidence that omniscience, if you break it down to it's latin roots, is parallel to "omni-science" or "all-science". Do you really think the puny minds of supposed "scientists" can judge the creator of the universe and creator of all science, the omni-scientist God of the Galaxy?
Honnis 3 years ago
To show how little you know about me: I was a believer until about 8 years ago. Both of my children are baptized Lutherans. With everything else, I threw myself into reading and researching the Bible. It became obvious that there's little there. The Old Testament is a horrific document. Jesus the myth does little to salvage it; and doesn't want to. ("I have come to uphold the laws of Moses.")
No event triggered it. Just a careful analysis over a few years.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Then you know nothing. Period. And the correct usage is "fewer" people. And you would be surprised how many people worldwide know me. And they actually know me, not some mythical version of me. They've seen me lecture. This year. Not, supposedly, 2000 years ago.
MetricSU 3 years ago
"Then you know nothing." Hahaha! What a melodramatic attempt to cop-out of a discussion. You still have faaaaar less followers than Jesus, and for good reason.
Honnis 3 years ago
Oh, sorry Mr. English professor. I meant "far fewer followers", haha.
Honnis 3 years ago
Hmmm. You want to just count? So I guess you're actually a Muslim, since Muhammed has more followers than Jesus. Or, maybe you're a Mormon; after all, that's the fastest growing religion.
How do you know the Koran and Book of Mormon aren't the Word of God? If you're a non-Mormon Christian, then you're an atheist with respect to their God. I just take it one further.
The Bible is more believable than the Koran? Not by a long shot. Both are silly and fiction.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Just because I believe that Muhammad existed doesn't make me Muslim, haha. Jesus existed. It's a known fact. That doesn't mean that everyone who knows he existed has to believe in his teachings.
I think most religious texts were inspired by God, though imperfect by being written by man, and sometimes even confused by Satan. Good people will find the good in them. It's pretty simple.
Honnis 3 years ago
I believe that God works in different ways with everyone, I also believe that it's much more than just about the team that wins, you can lose a football game by 1 or 100 or win by that same margin at the end of the day as a Christian the score isn't what matters its playing for God that matters, everyone has ups and downs in life, and God shows us this through sports, when you play through Christ then at the end of the day win or lose you will still have the most important thing, God's glory
cerny50 3 years ago
A nearly 5 billion-year-old earth and evolution by natural selection -- based entirely on science, and in direct contradiction to the Bible -- explains almost everything. It only does not explain where this version of our universe came from. But assuming it always existed in some form -- the Big Bang just being the latest expansion -- is just as plausible as the eternal existence of a supernatural force.
God as a first cause can never be ruled out. Fortunately, the God of Abraham can be.
MetricSU 3 years ago
The 2 scientific theories that you stated support my interpretation of the Bible. On the other hand, the theory of evolution by natural selection contradicts the non-scientific garbage the drugged up hippie school teachers normally present as science. Example: a relatively harsh environment such as this planet would not give cause for the supposed "neanderthals" to lose many characteristics that helped them to survive and to become weaker and "evolve" into humans.
Honnis 3 years ago
How convenient. I will give you credit, at least, for not denying the obvious.
You also admit that he Bible is at least partly a human product. There's the rub. What parts are God's word, and what parts have been corrupted? And how come God didn't make sure his uncorrupted Word is available to us all.
If I had more time, I'd love to know how you get from evolution to a blood sacrifice for redemption. Funny: God chose the same method as the other primitive religions.
MetricSU 3 years ago
To answer your first question: Pray and ask God. That's why it's important to have continuing revelation from God, and also His spirit. I feel my words are falling on deaf ears here, but you asked.
Second question: He did make sure, but the people rejected it and killed his prophets many times. He has raised another prophet every time. Between times, He has always answered prayers.
Honnis 3 years ago
God is the only way to explain the creation of creatures so intricate and intelligent in design as to be able to adapt and evolve to fit their environment. Science has no theory for this. As I stated before, the neanderthal garbage goes against the theory of evolution by natural selection: survival of the fittest. Features less fit for our environment couldn't have developed through this process. Ex: our fragile bodies. (I'd go into better detail but comment space is limited.)
Honnis 3 years ago
Wow.God gives everyone different talents. NOt everyone is meant to be a minister.(Ephesians 11-13)God creates differences in everyone and blesses us in many different ways. It is not cheating if some athlete praises God for giving them the talent to make a big play or whatever. They are being thankful for in all this it is God who strengthens us.(Php 4:13) YOu obviously don't know the Grace of God.
guppers50 3 years ago
Let's not forget the children born with such severe birth defects that they barely even know they exist, yet they require care from productive adults for, in some cases, decades. Nice work God!
God: I know a Down Syndrome child at the local school who could really use your help. Please, make one fewer Plaxico Burress and heal this child's birth defect.
Gee, I wonder why God has NEVER healed a Down Syndrome child. But He does care that Plaxico score the winning touchdown. Go figure.
MetricSU 3 years ago
Your logic seems to be to be parallel to that of a child who, when presented with a difficult learning situation by their parents, says that their parents must hate them and not be their real parents, because if they were, they would always make everything easy for the child.
Honnis 3 years ago
My point is that yes, life is difficult. If it wasn't, we wouldn't learn and grow and become stronger. That means that God loves us enough to present us with difficult situations that cause us to learn and grow.
Honnis 3 years ago