Hey to all you readers with your heads screwed on straight, pretend you had a gun to your head and had to PROVE the heliocentric model was right to some contemporary fool who's stuck in the dark ages. Wouldn't all the spacecraft we've sent to the outer planets prove it conclusively? If we sent a lander to Mars assuming the truth of the HELIOcentric model when the geocentric model was actually true, then surely the spacecraft would have no chance of actually going to Mars. But they do.
Hello there! Have you ever tried bee4biz (do a search on google)? It is a tiny url locker that pays. Its tons better than other sites and they always pay. Check that out if you want to make good money shortening and sharing links online
The sad thing is that the layman is easily duped by creationists like Hovind. They know even less about science than he does, and can eat up whatever he tells them, hence the need for more science education.
I think it's certainly good to point out any falsehood a creationist teaches as well as point out the falsehood that evolutionist teach. I am going with the Word of God account on the creation. The evolution idea isn't even logical. Was it Sagan who said we were put here by aliens? At least that seems more logical than evolution.
@pgfracing In the words of Darwin himself, simply because it seems absurd, doesn't mean it isn't true. It also seemed absurd in ancient times that the Earth rotated around the sun, now look where we are. Simply because you don't understand evolution, doesn't mean it isn't logical. In fact, if evolution wasnt logical, then the entirety of biology isn't logical. And the fact that you follow a few poor pyschotic bastards mad ramblings, then decide to call legitimate theories illogical, is hilarious
@pgfracing Um, oh, I don't know. How about the countless amounts of evidence supporting it. Including gravity itself, The Big Bang, the shifting of night and day, our moon. The list goes on and on. Believeing the universe goes around the Earth, is insane. No doubt about it, it is purely insane.
Yes, purely insane. At that guy's channel there's a video about biblical sources for geocentrism and I shudder to think that the only reason he'd make a video on that could be that he actually thinks the earth sits motionless while the heavens wheel around it, a primitive notion put to bed hundreds of years ago. Please tell me he doesn't REALLY believe the Earth is stationary. That would be sickening beyond belief.
@leisulin At this point, I've stopped aruging with idiots like him, that have fallen so deep into that hole of ignorance, it's pointless. His kind will die out, as will his religion. As for now, keep fighting the good fight.
@pgfracing Are you kidding me? How about the countless amounts of physics classes, and science classes that prove we wouldn't be alive, and we wouldn't have seasons if it wasn't. If you're trying to play the whole, "faith," card, you're doing a pathetic job at it.
No, the fact that the earth is tilted on its axis AND orbits the sun is what causes the seasons. The sun plays a part, naturally, since we wouldn't be here talking about it if the sun didn't exist. However WITH the sun but WITHOUT the tilt, there would be no seasons.
Why does it "travel up and down" (if we can even be sure what you mean by that or that what you mean implies a real understanding of the phenomenon)? Because the earth is tilted on its axis and revolves around the sun. If you mean, for example, how the sun's position at sunset moves further and further south as winter comes on and further and further north as summer approaches, then yes, both caused by the tilt and the revolution.
In other words, assuming that's what you meant, the sun appearing to do that is a direct result of the Earth's tilt on its axis and its revolution around the sun. You are referring to an EFFECT of the tilt/revolution, not a CAUSE.
And if by "the sun traveling up and down (North and South)" you mean you actually think the Earth is sitting still and the sun is doing stuff relative to the earth to create the seasons, then, dude, join the human race and the modern era and read a book on basic astronomy or something. It's impossible to believe that there's anyone left in the world (aside from isolated aboriginal tribes who have no contact with the outside world) who doesn't understand how the solar system functions
Evidence the earth is orbiting the sun? Stellar parallax. If the earth were fixed in space and everything else moving around it, the stars in the sky would likewise be moving in circles around the earth and not moving relative to each other, right? Except they DO move relative to each other. A nearby star can be seen in one position relative to its neighbors, and can be seen to have moved slightly 6 months later (when the earth is on the opposite side of the sun) then back again.
This is easily explained by the heliocentric model: wherever the earth is right now, it will be 186 million miles away, on the opposite side of the sun, 6 months from now. That provides two different viewpoints for observing nearby stars, which appear to have moved against the background of much more distant stars because of the change in perspective. Then 6 months later they're back where they started. Try explaining stellar parallax using the geocentric model. Good luck!
In addition to stellar parallax (as proof), we've sent spacecraft whizzing around the solar system, in many cases sending them near other planets for a gravity assisted course change, and had them arrive at their ultimate destinations with extreme precision. All those spaceflights were made possible by and based on what we know of the workings of the solar system, i.e. that it is a heliocentric system.
@leisulin The angles involved in these calculations are very small and thus difficult to measure. The nearest star to the Sun (and thus the star with the largest parallax), Proxima Centauri, has a parallax of 0.7687 ± 0.0003 arcsec.[7] This angle is approximately that subtended by an object 2 centimeters in diameter located 5.3 kilometers away. (This is an example of the largest parallax known and that is within the margin of error. Do you have any better evidence)
Yeah, and if astronomers were unable to measure such an angle accurately, your objection might be worth something. But it isn't. They're perfectly capable of making accurate measurements of that level of precision. They'd be "difficult to measure" if you didn't have the proper equipment, but with the sort of telescopes in operation today, not to mention the Hubble Space Telescope, it's easy. Do you have any better objection?
I mean, c'mon. Your entire objection to the stellar parallax evidence for heliocentrism is that such measurements are difficult. We could just as easily say "climbing Mt. Everest is difficult" but we can't conclude from that that no one has ever climbed it. In fact we know people have climbed it, lots of people. If geocentrism is correct, then the parallax angle for Proxima Centauri should be exactly 0 arcsec. Instead, we know it's between 0.7684 and 0.7690 arcsecs.
By the way, had you wanted to TRY to be more convincing, you shouldn't have included the margin of error...you DO understand what "0.7687 ± 0.0003 arcsec" means, right? DESPITE that it's such a small angle, they're still capable of measuring it to THREE significant figures of accuracy. They're CERTAIN the angle is somewhere from 0.7684 and 0.7690 arcsecs. Difficult to measure? Sure. But not so difficult they can't figure it out pretty damn precisely. Next objection?
Well, the highest resolution commercial satellite can resolve objects as small as 41 cm from an altitude of 684 kilometers. I just got this from a Science News article from two years ago. That's an object 20 times larger but it can be resolved from a distance of approximately 130 times farther. So, yeah, I'd say they can. You're the one who quoted the figure 0.7687 ± 0.0003 arcsec. It speaks for itself. By the geocentric model, it should be ZERO, not from 0.7684 to 0.7690 ...
@leisulin your right we have the capabilities to measure that accurate. That was quite foolish of me. I will try and get you some more reliable information.
@pgfracing Hi! Do you really believe in geocentrism? I've never met one of you before. My niece is doing a report on How Idiots Survive in the Modern Age for her grade school class. Can she interview you?
No creationist will ever admit they're wrong. I've been arguing for years with a lady friend of mine who just refuses to open her mind to the possiblilty that religion is wrong. I mean come on, the Bible claims darkness and light were created 3 days before the moon and the sun. In addition to the fact that Earth is two days older than the sun. When the sun is much older than the solar system. If I told you guys her explanation of how the light was created, you die of laughter. >.<
I find it amusing that someone like Hovind who believes that the earth is less than 10,000 years old will say "if you go back 25,000 years" at 2:33 in the video.
I actually was in an argument with a devoted creationist at school a few days ago. After debating for a while, I simply stated that the religion you believe in is only based on the fairy tales you were told by your parents. If you were born in the Middle East, you would have been told different fairy tales and would now be believing in a different God. That fool had no response, just a condescending whimper on how my soul is damned yada yada yada yada etc.
Free energy can change the world!But some very powerfull ppl don't want you and me to be free from energy costs,if you want a real Free energy Magnet Motor, get the blueprints at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Let the revolution begin!
"some of them may try to overwhelm you with technical arguments". In other words what you are attempting to do. To bad that Hovind is right and you are blind to the facts.
facts don't mean blinding your opponent with big words so they don't question your argument. facts are observable provable and testable events in real life.
Doing the maths on imaginary events: Not exactly proof, especially if the maths is for events physically impossible (fine tuning argument)
Using the stats from only one area and not considering the other aspects: deceptive, as you can't then take into account the relationships
Yeah and if America followed that example it would have been freed from Colonialism at the same time as Canada. The Ethiopians when Italy attacked them. Should they let the Italians into their country in their quest for imperialism and abuse them. If Martin Luther King followed Jesus example then segregation would still be apart of the south. also the examples you just mentioned are way complicated then they appear to be.
I'm not surprised the disarming power of non violent protest evades you - it evades most people and thats why it's immesurable effects elude you. The examples you give, should those people "turned the other cheek" they would have changed the hearts and minds of most people seeking to impose their will. The only time this would not work in the real world is if everyone had the heart of a murderer, or was truely evil. Civil rights succeeded b/c most Americans arn't evil.
The consequence of the Holocaust was the Jews being relocated to "the promised land" (promised as in God promised them) and given their country of Isreal back. This would not have happened otherwise so in the end they were well rewarded for their suffering. Also just because you "do the right thing" doesn't mean nothing bad will ever happen to you. Look up the definition of a marter.
As far as Hitler, I keep point things out to people like you - "the inability to read" often forces me to repeat shit you actually are responding to. Here's my quote "The only time this would not work in the real world is if everyone had the heart of a murderer, or was truely evil". Only an athiest would put Hitler in the non murder, non evil category. Good job dipshit.
Everyone in the world did not murder the Jews... Dipshit is a term that I use for the clueless, someone that thinks the Jews were murdered by everyone would surely fall into teh category of dipshit. Even Jesus called people names that were best representative of their actions/words, in your case lack of thought in making me respond to ridiculous statements.
Being a Christian does not mean stupid statements become less frustrating. Where did you read that virtue? Don't forget, you responded to me with something do with the Holocaust working out well for the Jews immediately after I said turning the other cheek doesn't work out in the presence of murderers/evil people which Hitler clearly was. What word other than dipshit should I have used that could be any more discriptive of your statement given the facts?
That is bs. Dr. King explicitly preeched turning the other cheek. Those in the military are given the most respect out of all citizens because they are willing to give their lives, yet we do it with an M16. Those that stand for their beliefs non violently no matter what the cost achieve the highest degree of morality above thier enemies. Unless they are truely evil, convictions seen to this degree cannot help but change their minds regardless of their current doctrine.
Creation astronomy is when they look at a bible with a really powerful telescope ... or a microscope ... and find out that its made of paper! gasp... not some indestructible god made substance that can never be disproven!?
thanks, the warning was very helpful. i have no need for your arrogance so i didnt watch it! i wish more hateful people would put such warnings on youtube videos. thanks again! ~lls
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Newton and Einstein believed in God so we can have good science and faith. Science is looking for the true meaning of things so it should fit in with faith.
Yeah that was Einstein. He often talked about "God" for illustrative purposes, but made clear on several occasions that he did NOT believe in a personal god.
No, Einstein clearly believed in God and your trying to make it sound like he didn't. Yes, he didn't believe in a personal god that listens to your prayers, but he did believe in a higher power and said he wasn't an atheist. What your doing is called "neglecting the facts".
because with the current knowledge we couldnt explain life well enough yet ... i gaurentee you he'd be athiest if he were here today ... but thats just doing what you were ... not providing evidence ... the fact that einstein believed in it makes NO difference, and adds no credit to your argument
You gaurentee he'd be athiest... I gaurentee that if Mother Teresa were alive today she'd be just like Hitler. Both these statments have one thing in common - their ridiculous and even waisting your time spelling them out only adds to the idiocy involved in first thinking them up. The fact that Einstien believed in God says that the smartest man in the 20th century believed in God. That's all it says, I'm not saying anything more than that.
You can't use Einstein believing in a "higher power" as evidence for your god (whoever that is). The smartest man in the 20th century believed that there could possibly be something more than what we can see, that is absolutely no evidence for or against any religion, it's simply irrelevant.
I don't believe it's evidience. Again I was responding to someone else that was using Einstien as an avocate for athieism which we both agree is stupid.
The purpose of the bible was not to explain life, those that use religion and for some reason juxtipose it with science are stupid and/or don't understand that the point was to show us how to live and treat eachother. The only part of the bible that even minutely relates to science is one book of 66 and was written around ~1450 BC by practical cavemen. Athiests that go after religion on scientific grounds are just as stupid as the religious nuts using it to explain science.
You should choose to follow up a random comment with something that even minutely resembles a quote or passage that would give me some idea of your level of stupidity. Even hard core atheists like Dawkins openly admit that Jesus's "teachings" were very wise words to live by. If you're reffering to the old testiment then I'd have to say your search for how to live is a little out dated. That book was written 3400 years ago.
Turning the other cheek, I you look upon a woman you have already commited adultery never mind the fact your not married. And do you mean all of them or some of them becuase not all of them are wise.
"Turning the other cheek"... I guess other than giving blacks equal rights, that quote didn't make anyones life better... You have got to be the stupiest atheist on the planet. Yes if you look at another women lustfully thats a sin. Seriously, do you go home from the strip club feeling like you just donated to the Red Cross? Where the fuck to you people come from?
You know what happens when you don't turn the other cheek. Why don't you pick up a history book and read about the Shiita and Sunni conflicts Jews and Palestinians, the Hutu and Tootsies. They've been going on now for over 2000, 50, 3000 years and still going strong, Dr. King set his people free and gave them piece in less than 15, and that quote was the center piece of his legacy.
No. Jesus said he did not come to change the old testiment which is compeletely different from what you said. He obviously changed how people interpreted it, however he did not change the intention behind it. The whole point of the old testiment was to show that laws were not enough to save us from sin, Jesus needed to come and show us.
I apologize for whatever I said that seemed cruel. I did however point out that "doing the right thing" when in the presence of evil does nothing to "physically benifit" you. Even in the mists of slightest compassion, doing what Jesus said will allow you to gain the most, where as fighting does very little and often takes a much larger toll.
grozde, your questions would take too much time to answer, but if you were smart and or thought about these things deeply/more than just a few instants, you would see the wisdom in his words. Jesus was a carpenter for 15 years... <--so insert dipshit here. Invest? The first bank opened in what century? Hint not anywhere near 30AD. <-- Stick foot in mouth here. Not to have justice? Justice is saved for the end of days, until then we are to forgive but God promises justice for all.
1. Jesus might've been a mine-worker. However, from his followers he expected to sell EVERYTHING and follow him! How would one work? (You might want to keep the "dipshit" for yourself).
2. If you think you can only invest in banks - well, you're too ignorant for this discussion (How does your foot taste?)
3. God gave us laws. Then, when people were following them (stoning the hooker), JC said that only the sinless can judge! Shall we close all courts?!!
Why did Jesus not tell us that rape and slavery are bad? Is it because Moses ordered the rape of Midianite women, sure, he spared the female children to a life of slavery, but he sure slaughtered all the male children. Some morals eh? So if Jesus doesn't speak out against it, are you for it?
@jeans1515 The fact that there is no written word of Jesus dispelling slavery or rape, does not mean it was never said. Moses was a man and God surely did not order him to rape anyone. Jesus never spoke out about child pornography on the internet but I suppose we would have to require brain function for someone to put the pieces together and conclude Jesus would probably object...
Because a comment was made that the NT does not erase the OT, and there are SO MANY examples of the forces of god raping, murdering, and committing genocide. Yet Jesus never says "um... maybe you shouldn't do that stuff". Fundamentalists christians take the OT as the word of god and that stuff is pretty clear. Yet Jesus, meek and mild does nothing to dissuade the behavior.
Only a complete idiot would be unsure of whether or not Jesus condoned servatude or rape. If Jesus said dont have sex until your married, how in the hell could you ever get confused about rape Sure... rape all you want folks, but if your in love wait until your married - hilarious. Jesus told his disciples explicitly to be servents for others (and showed them by washing THEIR feet), in what alternate universe would you need to rationalize slavery given his example?
First, the misuse of the word "your" in place of the contraction "you're" (meaning: you are) is noted, and draws a question to your education, or lack thereof.
Next, you equate sex and rape? Rape is not sex, it is a crime of violence and control. Sex is an act and love is an emotion, so do not confuse those two.
Lastly, jesus never bothered to write a word, I question his existence.
@messiahjonz I'll take the fact that given only 500 chararacters to respond or refute someones comments you pend half critiquing my grammar that YOU ARE not too confident in your debating skills. I don't EQUATE sex and rape, I asked what universe would some moron need to live in to question Jesus's take on rape if he didn't even condone consentual sex without marriage?
@messiahjonz .. actually the Jewish Talhmud goes into extensive detail about Jesus, so again I don't know if we should stating talking about UFO's existing next or what. You have every right to be an idiot and ignore the 5,001,000 google hits you can get on Talmud + Jesus, I rather teach claculus to a chimp. Good luck with your consipracy theories I could care less what you think.
"While it is the standard disinformation practice of apologists for the Talmud to deny that it contains any scurrilous references to Jesus Christ, certain Orthodox Jewish organizations are more forthcoming and admit that the Talmud not only mentions Jesus but disparages him (as a sorcerer and a demented sex freak)."
Truth about the Talmud: Racist, Rabbinic Hate Literature
by Michael Hoffman, foremost scholar of Judaism in the English-speaking world
@messiahjonz Well there you go it mentions him like I said before. So basically you waisted 2 sets of comments to tell me what I told you in the beginning. Being a lazy thinker is sounding more like a compliment the more you comment.
"A passage from Sanhedrin 106 gloats over the early age at which Jesus died: "Hast thou heard how old Balaam (Jesus) was?--He replied: It is not actually stated but since it is written, Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days it follows that he was thirty-three or thirty-four years old."
same reference.
As I said, it does not mention jesus (yeshu) by name, just derogatory remarks.
@messiahjonz I've read parts of the Talmud and Sanhedrin, why the hell do you think I mentioned it genious? So I could have you repeat to me shit I already know? Thanks man!
@messiahjonz You are entitled to question Jesus's existance, Julius Ceasar or that we ever when to the moon. There are plenty of skeptics and always will be. However one true test of history has been looking at those opposed to an event or person at the time. If we didn't go to the moon wouldn't the USSR have done their homework and exposed it if there was a shadow of a doubt it never happened? Then why does the Jewish Talhmud and the Koran document the existence of Jesus - think about that.
@messiahjonz The book of mormon IS IN SUPPORT OF Jesus - lol you are hilarious. I'll spell it out for you rainman, Jesus-Mormon is not analogous to the US-USSR relations which were ADVERSARY if your eclectic fasciantion with grammar can spell that. Mormans believe Jesus was GOD genious, Muslims and Jews do not. I didn't expect this simple analogy to be so difficult for the "non-lazy brains".
Strange, my analogy was referring to how xians believe mormons to be a cult, yet they believe jesus existed and was a god, just like Joseph Smith, his brother.
Weird that you refused to see the irony.
So what if islam, or as you put it, "muslims", and jews (I guess leaving out the jews for jesus) believe jesus existed, it is irrelevant.
You are a typical numbers guy, going with the majority... nice follower you are.
@messiahjonz I'm just saying that if Jesus were ficticious it's funny that the Jew's and Muslims didn't refute that point specfifically - instead they called him a "wise prophet" or socerer. Numbers have nothing to do with it, being able to read is.
"@messiahjonz Also I didnt say the word PROVE DID IT. Can you read anything. I didn't say sex and rape are equal did I? Can you read? Were made in a labratory vat of jelly beans? Why don't you copy and paste what I said and show me anything resembling the word PROVES or SEX = RAPE. You atheists are dumb as shit I can see why spelling and grammar as so high on your list of priorities anything resembling higher thinking is out of scope."
@messiahjonz You copied what I removed... Do you want a gold star? lol how about you cope were I said the words PROVE or SEX = RAPE atheistbop. If you can do that then all those insults I removed to save you some dignity I'll take back along with the last one about you not being able to READ.
@messiahjonz I made no such analogy between sex and rape, I stated Jesus's view of consentual sex, used 3rd grade logic to expand the thought process to a more evil and obviously not consentual form of sex - rape. That's not an analogy brainiac. It's not an association. It's not sex = rape. It seems even capitalizing words for you like a 3rd grader doesn't help, do you want me to make it ryhme next time atheist swine?
I am happy to see that you pretend to know the views of a person you never spoke to, that never bothered to write a thought down, and has a questionable existence at best.
Tell me, what did jesus think concerning calling others names?
Tell me, what did jesus think concerning anger toward another person?
You are a fool at best.
And not being an atheist and being called one means nothing to me, yet makes you appear more the fool.
@messiahjonz I'm not pretending it's his words written down and those who documented them. Jesus called the Pharesses a brood of vipers, I'm pretty sure he was honest about who people were at their core. Jesus also expressed feelings of anger towards evil. Lol I'm a fool because? Your the idiot contracdicting your self saying I implied the book of morman woud "prove" anything then said I didn't and that I said SEX = RAPE. The aptitude of a chimp would be an upgrade for you.
@messiahjonz Quote 1: "As I stated previously, you did not use the word "prove(s)" Quote 2: "By this lack of logic, the book of mormon proves jesus existed... right". Conclusion - You site my logic, and used the word PROVE. You made an association between the book of mormon (my analogy) and "proving" something which is not what I said. Is it lazy thinking that I know more about what you say than you do?
@messiahjonz Quote 1: "As I stated previously, you did not use the word "prove(s)" Quote 2: "By this lack of logic, the book of mormon proves jesus existed... right". Conclusion - You site my logic, and used the word PROVE. You made an association between the book of mormon (my analogy) and "proving" something which is not what I said. Is it lazy thinking that I know more about what you say than you do?
@AtheistBrit I think it's obvious that Newton was not a conformist. Regardless of whether or not everyone else was religious, he probably would have been religious himself still. Probably because he was simply genetically prone to religiosity/spiritualism. But none of that really matters. The man was a genius and being a theist doesn't change that.
@haltensie "The man was a genius and being a theist doesn't change that." That's exactly my point. Whether he was a theist or a deist or an atheist is totally irrelevant to how great a scientist he was. The person I was originally replying to was saying that his deism mattered in that respect.
The other point I was that when Newton was around, there was no other scientific explanation for many phenomena - no Darwin, no germ theory etc. so these things were commonly attributed to god.
No jesus did not agree with the Old Testiment - at least not to the letter. The only reason that "Jews" still exist is the fact that Jesus disagreed so profoundly with it how it was interpreted. The Old testiment was written not by God - but by humans, and the Phereses (orthidox Jews at the time) like most Athiests read it to the letter, missing the intention. So again - Jesus did not condemn nor make a point of ridculing gays. He befriended prostitutes, and they are far more sinful.
Matthew 5:18-19 Luke 16:17 Matthew 5:17 2 Timothy 3:16 2 Peter 20-21 Mark.7:9-13 Matthew 15:4-7 1 Peter 2:18 John 1:17 John7:19 John 10:35 Seems pretty clear-cut: Obey the Old Testament because it is inspired by God or is God's word.
Atheists (and it's not a capital A, and learn to spell) read it to the letter because the alternative is called heresy.
You realize that the bible is god's divine word, right? By interpreting it, you are making yourselves out to be better than god, because you think you can understand its intention and meaning better than it can.
It's ironic that atheists make better christians than christians. If they were more like atheists, we'd be living in paradise.
Your an idiot/and or no nothing about why Jew's arn't Christians and why the Phereses gave Jesus to the Romans - it was because they followed the Old Testiment to the "letter" and missed the entire point. Jesus turned the Old Testiment on it's head (eye for an eye, killing sinners, working on the Sabath, ... etc.) I realize that you don't know what the fuck your talking about, but can tell the difference between an A and an a. I'll call you if I need a porfessional punctuator.
Jews are jewish because they don't believe Jesus was their messiah. They don't believe Jesus was the messiah because the scripture that christians think confirmed Jesus actually doesn't in their texts.
Easiest thing to point out: Jews were expecting the messiah to be named Immanuel. There's more.
Oh, and by the way, Jesus didn't turn the old testament on its head. He confirmed it.
Jew are jewish because they don't believe Jesus was Messiah - really!? Can you tell me why circles are round or anything else almost perfectly worhtless? No fuckin shit they don't believe in him genious. They don't believe in him because Matthew 5:38-42, Luke 6:27-31 Matthew 12:1-14, Mark 2:23-28, Luke 6:1-5 all contradicted "to the letter" following of the Old Testiment and threw it in the devote Jew's face. It's not up for debate atheistjeet.
So your brilliance has narrrowed down this argument to: If you can throw in a few passages that show Jesus agreed with the old testament, this then proves that he never turned it on it's head? Honestly think about how ridiculously stupid what you just said is. If you apply this level of reasoning to real life I hope you enjoy operating plungers.
Hey Devil. Edward is just arguing for arguments sake. He is not standing for any singular belief. He just wants to win the argument. He has gone all over the spectrum in this blog with everybody.
Circles are round because we call perfectly round things circles. You're backwards. Also, that has nothing to do with jews. You also then go on to agree with me, so you're the one debating for no reason. Nicely done.
Also, my brilliance is in pointing out that the bible argues both sides. Some passages are of Jesus claiming the old testament is no more, while other passages are of him confirming the old testament must be obeyed. Perfect messiah he is not. Thanks for proving my second point.
The Old Testiment was written by men, so it's flawed. The fact that Jesus corrected man's flaws in recording God word does not prove God or Jesus is flawed or not messiah. I don't agree with you on anything and most of these arguments you present (except this last one however) are devoid of substance and lack any noticable intellect or reasoning - "the jews don't believe Jesus was Messiah", "Jesus agreed with parts of the OT". Both obvious, both coherent with your IQ level.
Sigh. Do you even pay attention? Jesus is supposed to be the messiah that the Jews were waiting for. The Jews had the prophecies he was supposed to fulfill in the first place. Jesus comes along, fails to fulfill the Jewish prophecies, so Jesus is not the messiah.
Also, the "fact" that Jesus corrected God's word only goes to show that the bible is completely worthless because no person can know which parts aren't flawed. Thanks for pointing that out for everyone. You just proved your faith wrong
He fufilled over 2000 prophesies. He didn't correct God's word he corrected man's understanding of Gods word like I continually correct your ignorance.
Hovind's Deliverance accent pisses me off almost as the bullshit that comes forth from it.
Forcefield23 2 months ago
Hey to all you readers with your heads screwed on straight, pretend you had a gun to your head and had to PROVE the heliocentric model was right to some contemporary fool who's stuck in the dark ages. Wouldn't all the spacecraft we've sent to the outer planets prove it conclusively? If we sent a lander to Mars assuming the truth of the HELIOcentric model when the geocentric model was actually true, then surely the spacecraft would have no chance of actually going to Mars. But they do.
leisulin 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hello there! Have you ever tried bee4biz (do a search on google)? It is a tiny url locker that pays. Its tons better than other sites and they always pay. Check that out if you want to make good money shortening and sharing links online
Kasin214 6 months ago
The sad thing is that the layman is easily duped by creationists like Hovind. They know even less about science than he does, and can eat up whatever he tells them, hence the need for more science education.
Akira625 6 months ago 2
pgfracing Seasons are caused by a round earth being tilted on it's axis.
Incidentally, this is the 21st century.
SpaceOdyssey56 6 months ago
@SpaceOdyssey56
Yeah, the trouble is there's a lot of insane, backward christians out there who haven't joined us here in the 21 century.
leisulin 4 months ago
Excellent video, but the narrator talks a little too fast.
SpaceOdyssey56 6 months ago
I thought the second guy as the Taxmaster....It wasn't.
Tomtaylorross 7 months ago
yo i follow creation"alism" and i completely agree with what this guy is saying this thomas barnes guy is a knob..
TheDJRiffin 7 months ago
Whoops I think that was Dawkins who said that.
pgfracing 7 months ago
I think it's certainly good to point out any falsehood a creationist teaches as well as point out the falsehood that evolutionist teach. I am going with the Word of God account on the creation. The evolution idea isn't even logical. Was it Sagan who said we were put here by aliens? At least that seems more logical than evolution.
pgfracing 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pgfracing You do not know what logic means
splicedenergy 7 months ago
@pgfracing In the words of Darwin himself, simply because it seems absurd, doesn't mean it isn't true. It also seemed absurd in ancient times that the Earth rotated around the sun, now look where we are. Simply because you don't understand evolution, doesn't mean it isn't logical. In fact, if evolution wasnt logical, then the entirety of biology isn't logical. And the fact that you follow a few poor pyschotic bastards mad ramblings, then decide to call legitimate theories illogical, is hilarious
suicidefilming 7 months ago
@suicidefilming what is it that makes you think the earth is orbiting the sun?
pgfracing 7 months ago
@pgfracing Um, oh, I don't know. How about the countless amounts of evidence supporting it. Including gravity itself, The Big Bang, the shifting of night and day, our moon. The list goes on and on. Believeing the universe goes around the Earth, is insane. No doubt about it, it is purely insane.
suicidefilming 7 months ago
@suicidefilming
Yes, purely insane. At that guy's channel there's a video about biblical sources for geocentrism and I shudder to think that the only reason he'd make a video on that could be that he actually thinks the earth sits motionless while the heavens wheel around it, a primitive notion put to bed hundreds of years ago. Please tell me he doesn't REALLY believe the Earth is stationary. That would be sickening beyond belief.
leisulin 4 months ago
@leisulin At this point, I've stopped aruging with idiots like him, that have fallen so deep into that hole of ignorance, it's pointless. His kind will die out, as will his religion. As for now, keep fighting the good fight.
suicidefilming 4 months ago
@pgfracing Are you kidding me? How about the countless amounts of physics classes, and science classes that prove we wouldn't be alive, and we wouldn't have seasons if it wasn't. If you're trying to play the whole, "faith," card, you're doing a pathetic job at it.
suicidefilming 6 months ago
@suicidefilming the sun causes the seasons that is pretty simple to figure out
pgfracing 6 months ago
@pgfracing
No, the fact that the earth is tilted on its axis AND orbits the sun is what causes the seasons. The sun plays a part, naturally, since we wouldn't be here talking about it if the sun didn't exist. However WITH the sun but WITHOUT the tilt, there would be no seasons.
leisulin 4 months ago
@leisulin the sun traveling up and down (North and South) also causes seasons
pgfracing 4 months ago
@pgfracing
Why does it "travel up and down" (if we can even be sure what you mean by that or that what you mean implies a real understanding of the phenomenon)? Because the earth is tilted on its axis and revolves around the sun. If you mean, for example, how the sun's position at sunset moves further and further south as winter comes on and further and further north as summer approaches, then yes, both caused by the tilt and the revolution.
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing
In other words, assuming that's what you meant, the sun appearing to do that is a direct result of the Earth's tilt on its axis and its revolution around the sun. You are referring to an EFFECT of the tilt/revolution, not a CAUSE.
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing
And if by "the sun traveling up and down (North and South)" you mean you actually think the Earth is sitting still and the sun is doing stuff relative to the earth to create the seasons, then, dude, join the human race and the modern era and read a book on basic astronomy or something. It's impossible to believe that there's anyone left in the world (aside from isolated aboriginal tribes who have no contact with the outside world) who doesn't understand how the solar system functions
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing
Evidence the earth is orbiting the sun? Stellar parallax. If the earth were fixed in space and everything else moving around it, the stars in the sky would likewise be moving in circles around the earth and not moving relative to each other, right? Except they DO move relative to each other. A nearby star can be seen in one position relative to its neighbors, and can be seen to have moved slightly 6 months later (when the earth is on the opposite side of the sun) then back again.
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing
This is easily explained by the heliocentric model: wherever the earth is right now, it will be 186 million miles away, on the opposite side of the sun, 6 months from now. That provides two different viewpoints for observing nearby stars, which appear to have moved against the background of much more distant stars because of the change in perspective. Then 6 months later they're back where they started. Try explaining stellar parallax using the geocentric model. Good luck!
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing
In addition to stellar parallax (as proof), we've sent spacecraft whizzing around the solar system, in many cases sending them near other planets for a gravity assisted course change, and had them arrive at their ultimate destinations with extreme precision. All those spaceflights were made possible by and based on what we know of the workings of the solar system, i.e. that it is a heliocentric system.
leisulin 4 months ago
@leisulin The angles involved in these calculations are very small and thus difficult to measure. The nearest star to the Sun (and thus the star with the largest parallax), Proxima Centauri, has a parallax of 0.7687 ± 0.0003 arcsec.[7] This angle is approximately that subtended by an object 2 centimeters in diameter located 5.3 kilometers away. (This is an example of the largest parallax known and that is within the margin of error. Do you have any better evidence)
pgfracing 4 months ago
@pgfracing
Yeah, and if astronomers were unable to measure such an angle accurately, your objection might be worth something. But it isn't. They're perfectly capable of making accurate measurements of that level of precision. They'd be "difficult to measure" if you didn't have the proper equipment, but with the sort of telescopes in operation today, not to mention the Hubble Space Telescope, it's easy. Do you have any better objection?
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing
I mean, c'mon. Your entire objection to the stellar parallax evidence for heliocentrism is that such measurements are difficult. We could just as easily say "climbing Mt. Everest is difficult" but we can't conclude from that that no one has ever climbed it. In fact we know people have climbed it, lots of people. If geocentrism is correct, then the parallax angle for Proxima Centauri should be exactly 0 arcsec. Instead, we know it's between 0.7684 and 0.7690 arcsecs.
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing
By the way, had you wanted to TRY to be more convincing, you shouldn't have included the margin of error...you DO understand what "0.7687 ± 0.0003 arcsec" means, right? DESPITE that it's such a small angle, they're still capable of measuring it to THREE significant figures of accuracy. They're CERTAIN the angle is somewhere from 0.7684 and 0.7690 arcsecs. Difficult to measure? Sure. But not so difficult they can't figure it out pretty damn precisely. Next objection?
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing. So you're saying we can measure 2cm difference 5.3 kilometers away?
pgfracing 4 months ago
@pgfracing
Well, the highest resolution commercial satellite can resolve objects as small as 41 cm from an altitude of 684 kilometers. I just got this from a Science News article from two years ago. That's an object 20 times larger but it can be resolved from a distance of approximately 130 times farther. So, yeah, I'd say they can. You're the one who quoted the figure 0.7687 ± 0.0003 arcsec. It speaks for itself. By the geocentric model, it should be ZERO, not from 0.7684 to 0.7690 ...
leisulin 4 months ago
@leisulin your right we have the capabilities to measure that accurate. That was quite foolish of me. I will try and get you some more reliable information.
pgfracing 4 months ago
@pgfracing
Don't look for it in the bible, you won't find it there.
leisulin 4 months ago
@pgfracing Hi! Do you really believe in geocentrism? I've never met one of you before. My niece is doing a report on How Idiots Survive in the Modern Age for her grade school class. Can she interview you?
fdasherv 2 months ago
At 6:52 when he said "Really?Nothing else in the Solar System?" he sounds EXACTLY like Charlieisocoollike! :)
BlueChewingGum 7 months ago
@BlueChewingGum Or was it Nerimon??
BlueChewingGum 7 months ago
Wow this is sped up tp much! But the videos are Awesome!
HighPoweredLasers 9 months ago
If you follow the biblical account of creation, the rest of the universe is kind of pointless. The firmament, with the water above and below etc.
If the earth and humanity are the point of creation, why bother creating anything other than the earth and the sun?
TychoCelchu 11 months ago
No creationist will ever admit they're wrong. I've been arguing for years with a lady friend of mine who just refuses to open her mind to the possiblilty that religion is wrong. I mean come on, the Bible claims darkness and light were created 3 days before the moon and the sun. In addition to the fact that Earth is two days older than the sun. When the sun is much older than the solar system. If I told you guys her explanation of how the light was created, you die of laughter. >.<
Remememea 1 year ago
@Remememea Please do.
Pinage 1 year ago
I find it amusing that someone like Hovind who believes that the earth is less than 10,000 years old will say "if you go back 25,000 years" at 2:33 in the video.
prstoddard1 1 year ago 7
I actually was in an argument with a devoted creationist at school a few days ago. After debating for a while, I simply stated that the religion you believe in is only based on the fairy tales you were told by your parents. If you were born in the Middle East, you would have been told different fairy tales and would now be believing in a different God. That fool had no response, just a condescending whimper on how my soul is damned yada yada yada yada etc.
CRISNCHIPS12398 1 year ago
Great video - very much enjoyed and appreciated. Thanks for your effort in making a fab video.
bagospannerz 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Free energy can change the world!But some very powerfull ppl don't want you and me to be free from energy costs,if you want a real Free energy Magnet Motor, get the blueprints at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Let the revolution begin!
hungarylnnjsd 1 year ago
"some of them may try to overwhelm you with technical arguments". In other words what you are attempting to do. To bad that Hovind is right and you are blind to the facts.
bwrpwr 1 year ago
@bwrpwr What facts?
themardybum08 1 year ago
@bwrpwr
facts don't mean blinding your opponent with big words so they don't question your argument. facts are observable provable and testable events in real life.
Doing the maths on imaginary events: Not exactly proof, especially if the maths is for events physically impossible (fine tuning argument)
Using the stats from only one area and not considering the other aspects: deceptive, as you can't then take into account the relationships
non peer-reviewed work: questionable at best
mortuus8 1 year ago
What ever happened to that Venomfang guy?
battia01 1 year ago
@battia01
He got the help he needed--though he may be black-sliding.
HConstantine 1 year ago
Bravo.
eksyte 1 year ago
it must be hard for creationist these days getting owned so bad :D...great vid
Kanawanu 1 year ago
@Kanawanu but its fun to watch the pwnage.
Xamaza 1 year ago
im not sure what jesus said i wasnt there to hear him say it
513nj 1 year ago
the dumbest religion in the wold is 4,100 years old.lol
blacklionhearth 1 year ago 29
@blacklionhearth - I think the dumbest religion is one of the latest which is about 1,400 years old. And it came from Saudi Arabian desert.
indogitrust 1 year ago
@indogitrust THANKS FOR THE INFO. STILL IT WAS JUST TO GET A LAUGH
blacklionhearth 1 year ago
@blacklionhearth
Is that one of the Egyptian religions? Christianity is no where near that old, neither is Judaism or Islam.
JamesThWilliams 1 year ago
@JamesThWilliams are u stupid or being sarcastic cause that was confusing
54321nicolaskurtf 1 year ago
@54321nicolaskurtf
It was in responce to an earlier comment hence the @blacklionhearth before the message.
He said the dumbest religion is 4100 years old.
JamesThWilliams 1 year ago
@JamesThWilliams oldest known religion would be Hindu
SlayerofFiction 1 year ago
@SlayerofFiction
I believe you mean oldest contemporary religion.
JamesThWilliams 1 year ago
@SlayerofFiction
I disagree. I believe the oldest known religion would be fire worship.
jmlew 1 year ago
@blacklionhearth
even dumber is the creationist statement at 05:55
'the moon is 1/400 of the size of the sun'
no
the moon is 1/400 of the diameter of the sun
there is quite a bit of difference between size [ ie mass] [ a cube increase] and diameter [ a square increase]
a few times larger than the earth then
whitesquirrel7 7 months ago
Minor critique: Our galaxy is not normal and our sun is not standard.
tongueboy1027 1 year ago
I see you took my satirical joke seriously, just when you think the world ran out of idiots...
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Outdated Fairytales + Deep Deep Denial - Logic/Reality = Creation "Science"
(AKA Bullshit with the word Science after it)
TheScienceguy77 2 years ago 28
@TheScienceguy77 All I ever hear out of these creationist fuckblobs is HHHHHUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRP Derp Derp.
TheCaptainLulz 9 months ago
I nominate Kunt Horvind as fail of the (15th) century.
LaingGod 2 years ago
Yeah and if America followed that example it would have been freed from Colonialism at the same time as Canada. The Ethiopians when Italy attacked them. Should they let the Italians into their country in their quest for imperialism and abuse them. If Martin Luther King followed Jesus example then segregation would still be apart of the south. also the examples you just mentioned are way complicated then they appear to be.
slicingwater 2 years ago
I'm not surprised the disarming power of non violent protest evades you - it evades most people and thats why it's immesurable effects elude you. The examples you give, should those people "turned the other cheek" they would have changed the hearts and minds of most people seeking to impose their will. The only time this would not work in the real world is if everyone had the heart of a murderer, or was truely evil. Civil rights succeeded b/c most Americans arn't evil.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
The Jews turned the other cheek at Hitler - and what a wonderful time they had with him, right?
grozde 2 years ago
The consequence of the Holocaust was the Jews being relocated to "the promised land" (promised as in God promised them) and given their country of Isreal back. This would not have happened otherwise so in the end they were well rewarded for their suffering. Also just because you "do the right thing" doesn't mean nothing bad will ever happen to you. Look up the definition of a marter.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
This is both incredibly stupid AND cruel! Let's pretend you've never said it!!!
grozde 2 years ago
As far as Hitler, I keep point things out to people like you - "the inability to read" often forces me to repeat shit you actually are responding to. Here's my quote "The only time this would not work in the real world is if everyone had the heart of a murderer, or was truely evil". Only an athiest would put Hitler in the non murder, non evil category. Good job dipshit.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
So, because Hitler was evil - EVERYBODY in the world at that time were evil???
And I guess "dipshit" is your way to demonstrate you Christian virtues, right?
Niiiice! ;-)
grozde 2 years ago
Everyone in the world did not murder the Jews... Dipshit is a term that I use for the clueless, someone that thinks the Jews were murdered by everyone would surely fall into teh category of dipshit. Even Jesus called people names that were best representative of their actions/words, in your case lack of thought in making me respond to ridiculous statements.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Being a Christian does not mean stupid statements become less frustrating. Where did you read that virtue? Don't forget, you responded to me with something do with the Holocaust working out well for the Jews immediately after I said turning the other cheek doesn't work out in the presence of murderers/evil people which Hitler clearly was. What word other than dipshit should I have used that could be any more discriptive of your statement given the facts?
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
That is bs. Dr. King explicitly preeched turning the other cheek. Those in the military are given the most respect out of all citizens because they are willing to give their lives, yet we do it with an M16. Those that stand for their beliefs non violently no matter what the cost achieve the highest degree of morality above thier enemies. Unless they are truely evil, convictions seen to this degree cannot help but change their minds regardless of their current doctrine.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Creation astronomy is when they look at a bible with a really powerful telescope ... or a microscope ... and find out that its made of paper! gasp... not some indestructible god made substance that can never be disproven!?
Th3Shadow0fDeath 2 years ago
thanks, the warning was very helpful. i have no need for your arrogance so i didnt watch it! i wish more hateful people would put such warnings on youtube videos. thanks again! ~lls
likelivingstones 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Newton and Einstein believed in God so we can have good science and faith. Science is looking for the true meaning of things so it should fit in with faith.
Very interesting video !
nickharvey7 2 years ago
Actually Einstein didn't believe in a personal god. Newton believed in God because EVERYONE at the time did.
AtheistBrit 2 years ago 13
@AtheistBrit
and your charged with heresy and that nonsense if you didnt believe
Red0502 2 years ago
@AtheistBrit God doesn't play dice - I'll give you one guess whose quote that was...
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Yeah that was Einstein. He often talked about "God" for illustrative purposes, but made clear on several occasions that he did NOT believe in a personal god.
AtheistBrit 2 years ago
Yeah but he clearly believes in God. There are just as many quotes of him saying he's "not an atheist".
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Oh yes, and what you did just there is called "quote mining" - it's deceitful and manipulative.
AtheistBrit 2 years ago
No, Einstein clearly believed in God and your trying to make it sound like he didn't. Yes, he didn't believe in a personal god that listens to your prayers, but he did believe in a higher power and said he wasn't an atheist. What your doing is called "neglecting the facts".
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
He believed in a higher power, but he didnt believe in the christian god ...
Th3Shadow0fDeath 2 years ago
So what?
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
because with the current knowledge we couldnt explain life well enough yet ... i gaurentee you he'd be athiest if he were here today ... but thats just doing what you were ... not providing evidence ... the fact that einstein believed in it makes NO difference, and adds no credit to your argument
Th3Shadow0fDeath 2 years ago
You gaurentee he'd be athiest... I gaurentee that if Mother Teresa were alive today she'd be just like Hitler. Both these statments have one thing in common - their ridiculous and even waisting your time spelling them out only adds to the idiocy involved in first thinking them up. The fact that Einstien believed in God says that the smartest man in the 20th century believed in God. That's all it says, I'm not saying anything more than that.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
You can't use Einstein believing in a "higher power" as evidence for your god (whoever that is). The smartest man in the 20th century believed that there could possibly be something more than what we can see, that is absolutely no evidence for or against any religion, it's simply irrelevant.
AtheistBrit 2 years ago
I don't believe it's evidience. Again I was responding to someone else that was using Einstien as an avocate for athieism which we both agree is stupid.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Oh ok sorry, it came up as a reply to me, sent to my inbox. Stupid YouTube comments system!
AtheistBrit 2 years ago
Ya it's a piece of shit.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
The purpose of the bible was not to explain life, those that use religion and for some reason juxtipose it with science are stupid and/or don't understand that the point was to show us how to live and treat eachother. The only part of the bible that even minutely relates to science is one book of 66 and was written around ~1450 BC by practical cavemen. Athiests that go after religion on scientific grounds are just as stupid as the religious nuts using it to explain science.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
You should choose a different book because the Bible gives the worst way to live life.
slicingwater 2 years ago 2
You should choose to follow up a random comment with something that even minutely resembles a quote or passage that would give me some idea of your level of stupidity. Even hard core atheists like Dawkins openly admit that Jesus's "teachings" were very wise words to live by. If you're reffering to the old testiment then I'd have to say your search for how to live is a little out dated. That book was written 3400 years ago.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Turning the other cheek, I you look upon a woman you have already commited adultery never mind the fact your not married. And do you mean all of them or some of them becuase not all of them are wise.
slicingwater 2 years ago
"Turning the other cheek"... I guess other than giving blacks equal rights, that quote didn't make anyones life better... You have got to be the stupiest atheist on the planet. Yes if you look at another women lustfully thats a sin. Seriously, do you go home from the strip club feeling like you just donated to the Red Cross? Where the fuck to you people come from?
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
When I go to the WC and poo, I don't feel like I'm donating to the Red Cross, too. Does this mean that it's a sin? Shall I stop defecating?...
grozde 2 years ago
You know what happens when you don't turn the other cheek. Why don't you pick up a history book and read about the Shiita and Sunni conflicts Jews and Palestinians, the Hutu and Tootsies. They've been going on now for over 2000, 50, 3000 years and still going strong, Dr. King set his people free and gave them piece in less than 15, and that quote was the center piece of his legacy.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
1. Dawkins IS an atheist; this doesn't make him an expert on religion, though! And - yes, JC IS a stupid "moral" example!
2. Didn's this very JC said that NOT A WORD of the "old" law (ie Old Testament) shall change before the end of times?!!!
Was Jesus lying???
grozde 2 years ago
No. Jesus said he did not come to change the old testiment which is compeletely different from what you said. He obviously changed how people interpreted it, however he did not change the intention behind it. The whole point of the old testiment was to show that laws were not enough to save us from sin, Jesus needed to come and show us.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Yeah. And what did he told us? Not to care for tomorrow, not to work and invest, not to have justice - all cool things, right?
i wonder how can you interpret the "He/She must be put to death!", which is so common in the divine laws!...
grozde 2 years ago
I apologize for whatever I said that seemed cruel. I did however point out that "doing the right thing" when in the presence of evil does nothing to "physically benifit" you. Even in the mists of slightest compassion, doing what Jesus said will allow you to gain the most, where as fighting does very little and often takes a much larger toll.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
grozde, your questions would take too much time to answer, but if you were smart and or thought about these things deeply/more than just a few instants, you would see the wisdom in his words. Jesus was a carpenter for 15 years... <--so insert dipshit here. Invest? The first bank opened in what century? Hint not anywhere near 30AD. <-- Stick foot in mouth here. Not to have justice? Justice is saved for the end of days, until then we are to forgive but God promises justice for all.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
@98DevilDog79
I sorry to reply so late.
1. Jesus might've been a mine-worker. However, from his followers he expected to sell EVERYTHING and follow him! How would one work? (You might want to keep the "dipshit" for yourself).
2. If you think you can only invest in banks - well, you're too ignorant for this discussion (How does your foot taste?)
3. God gave us laws. Then, when people were following them (stoning the hooker), JC said that only the sinless can judge! Shall we close all courts?!!
grozde 2 months ago
Why did Jesus not tell us that rape and slavery are bad? Is it because Moses ordered the rape of Midianite women, sure, he spared the female children to a life of slavery, but he sure slaughtered all the male children. Some morals eh? So if Jesus doesn't speak out against it, are you for it?
jeans1515 1 year ago
@jeans1515 The fact that there is no written word of Jesus dispelling slavery or rape, does not mean it was never said. Moses was a man and God surely did not order him to rape anyone. Jesus never spoke out about child pornography on the internet but I suppose we would have to require brain function for someone to put the pieces together and conclude Jesus would probably object...
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
Because a comment was made that the NT does not erase the OT, and there are SO MANY examples of the forces of god raping, murdering, and committing genocide. Yet Jesus never says "um... maybe you shouldn't do that stuff". Fundamentalists christians take the OT as the word of god and that stuff is pretty clear. Yet Jesus, meek and mild does nothing to dissuade the behavior.
jeans1515 1 year ago
Only a complete idiot would be unsure of whether or not Jesus condoned servatude or rape. If Jesus said dont have sex until your married, how in the hell could you ever get confused about rape Sure... rape all you want folks, but if your in love wait until your married - hilarious. Jesus told his disciples explicitly to be servents for others (and showed them by washing THEIR feet), in what alternate universe would you need to rationalize slavery given his example?
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
First, the misuse of the word "your" in place of the contraction "you're" (meaning: you are) is noted, and draws a question to your education, or lack thereof.
Next, you equate sex and rape? Rape is not sex, it is a crime of violence and control. Sex is an act and love is an emotion, so do not confuse those two.
Lastly, jesus never bothered to write a word, I question his existence.
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz I'll take the fact that given only 500 chararacters to respond or refute someones comments you pend half critiquing my grammar that YOU ARE not too confident in your debating skills. I don't EQUATE sex and rape, I asked what universe would some moron need to live in to question Jesus's take on rape if he didn't even condone consentual sex without marriage?
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
Ah! I see, you were misusing the word "your" as a shorthand for "you're"...next explanation.
The laziness I see when people whine about 500 characters is puzzling to me, simply make another post if you have something to say.
Actually, the jewish talhmud does not mention jesus (yeshu), that is the babylonia talhmud.
As for debate, I do not debate, I have discussions.
jesus never condoned or condemn because he did not bother to write a word down.
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz .. actually the Jewish Talhmud goes into extensive detail about Jesus, so again I don't know if we should stating talking about UFO's existing next or what. You have every right to be an idiot and ignore the 5,001,000 google hits you can get on Talmud + Jesus, I rather teach claculus to a chimp. Good luck with your consipracy theories I could care less what you think.
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
"While it is the standard disinformation practice of apologists for the Talmud to deny that it contains any scurrilous references to Jesus Christ, certain Orthodox Jewish organizations are more forthcoming and admit that the Talmud not only mentions Jesus but disparages him (as a sorcerer and a demented sex freak)."
Truth about the Talmud: Racist, Rabbinic Hate Literature
by Michael Hoffman, foremost scholar of Judaism in the English-speaking world
continued
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz Well there you go it mentions him like I said before. So basically you waisted 2 sets of comments to tell me what I told you in the beginning. Being a lazy thinker is sounding more like a compliment the more you comment.
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
"A passage from Sanhedrin 106 gloats over the early age at which Jesus died: "Hast thou heard how old Balaam (Jesus) was?--He replied: It is not actually stated but since it is written, Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days it follows that he was thirty-three or thirty-four years old."
same reference.
As I said, it does not mention jesus (yeshu) by name, just derogatory remarks.
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz I've read parts of the Talmud and Sanhedrin, why the hell do you think I mentioned it genious? So I could have you repeat to me shit I already know? Thanks man!
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
@messiahjonz You are entitled to question Jesus's existance, Julius Ceasar or that we ever when to the moon. There are plenty of skeptics and always will be. However one true test of history has been looking at those opposed to an event or person at the time. If we didn't go to the moon wouldn't the USSR have done their homework and exposed it if there was a shadow of a doubt it never happened? Then why does the Jewish Talhmud and the Koran document the existence of Jesus - think about that.
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
By this lack of logic, the book of mormon proves jesus existed... right?
Lazy thoughts from a lazy brain.
Then again, you think sex and rape are equal, so...
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz The book of mormon IS IN SUPPORT OF Jesus - lol you are hilarious. I'll spell it out for you rainman, Jesus-Mormon is not analogous to the US-USSR relations which were ADVERSARY if your eclectic fasciantion with grammar can spell that. Mormans believe Jesus was GOD genious, Muslims and Jews do not. I didn't expect this simple analogy to be so difficult for the "non-lazy brains".
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
Strange, my analogy was referring to how xians believe mormons to be a cult, yet they believe jesus existed and was a god, just like Joseph Smith, his brother.
Weird that you refused to see the irony.
So what if islam, or as you put it, "muslims", and jews (I guess leaving out the jews for jesus) believe jesus existed, it is irrelevant.
You are a typical numbers guy, going with the majority... nice follower you are.
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz I'm just saying that if Jesus were ficticious it's funny that the Jew's and Muslims didn't refute that point specfifically - instead they called him a "wise prophet" or socerer. Numbers have nothing to do with it, being able to read is.
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
Islam came a few centuries later, so I fail to see why you mention them.
jesus wrote nothing, and the terxts which people claim cite him are less than reliable.
So, again, you spew forth out of emotion, rather than substance.
messiahjonz 1 year ago
From: 98DevilDog79
"@messiahjonz Also I didnt say the word PROVE DID IT. Can you read anything. I didn't say sex and rape are equal did I? Can you read? Were made in a labratory vat of jelly beans? Why don't you copy and paste what I said and show me anything resembling the word PROVES or SEX = RAPE. You atheists are dumb as shit I can see why spelling and grammar as so high on your list of priorities anything resembling higher thinking is out of scope."
Then you removed it...weird
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz You copied what I removed... Do you want a gold star? lol how about you cope were I said the words PROVE or SEX = RAPE atheistbop. If you can do that then all those insults I removed to save you some dignity I'll take back along with the last one about you not being able to READ.
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
I just find it amusing that you keep typing words in caps like a grade school kid.
Too funny.
My dignity is just fine, as I am correct, the jewish talhmud does not mention jesus (yeshu) by name, as I stated.
It does make references to someone in derogatory words...is it jesus? who knows, make an assumption and claim it does. Many say otherwise.
You made the analogy opf sex=rape not me, live with it.
As I stated previously, you did not use the word "prove(s)"
I can type it again for you
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz I made no such analogy between sex and rape, I stated Jesus's view of consentual sex, used 3rd grade logic to expand the thought process to a more evil and obviously not consentual form of sex - rape. That's not an analogy brainiac. It's not an association. It's not sex = rape. It seems even capitalizing words for you like a 3rd grader doesn't help, do you want me to make it ryhme next time atheist swine?
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
I am happy to see that you pretend to know the views of a person you never spoke to, that never bothered to write a thought down, and has a questionable existence at best.
Tell me, what did jesus think concerning calling others names?
Tell me, what did jesus think concerning anger toward another person?
You are a fool at best.
And not being an atheist and being called one means nothing to me, yet makes you appear more the fool.
Hey, the bell rang, better get in line kid!
messiahjonz 1 year ago
@messiahjonz I'm not pretending it's his words written down and those who documented them. Jesus called the Pharesses a brood of vipers, I'm pretty sure he was honest about who people were at their core. Jesus also expressed feelings of anger towards evil. Lol I'm a fool because? Your the idiot contracdicting your self saying I implied the book of morman woud "prove" anything then said I didn't and that I said SEX = RAPE. The aptitude of a chimp would be an upgrade for you.
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@messiahjonz Quote 1: "As I stated previously, you did not use the word "prove(s)" Quote 2: "By this lack of logic, the book of mormon proves jesus existed... right". Conclusion - You site my logic, and used the word PROVE. You made an association between the book of mormon (my analogy) and "proving" something which is not what I said. Is it lazy thinking that I know more about what you say than you do?
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@messiahjonz Quote 1: "As I stated previously, you did not use the word "prove(s)" Quote 2: "By this lack of logic, the book of mormon proves jesus existed... right". Conclusion - You site my logic, and used the word PROVE. You made an association between the book of mormon (my analogy) and "proving" something which is not what I said. Is it lazy thinking that I know more about what you say than you do?
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
Comment removed
98DevilDog79 1 year ago
This isn't Christianity debunked is it? These are athiests bebunking religion as a whole.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
no but as you are english speaking first i assumed some form of christian denomination
Th3Shadow0fDeath 2 years ago
When did I ever say that Einstein was an atheist? I said that he didn't believe in a personal god and you said exactly the same thing.
AtheistBrit 2 years ago 2
You didn't .. the guy I repsonded to did. Then you repsonded to me based off of what I said.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
@AtheistBrit I think it's obvious that Newton was not a conformist. Regardless of whether or not everyone else was religious, he probably would have been religious himself still. Probably because he was simply genetically prone to religiosity/spiritualism. But none of that really matters. The man was a genius and being a theist doesn't change that.
haltensie 1 year ago
@haltensie "The man was a genius and being a theist doesn't change that." That's exactly my point. Whether he was a theist or a deist or an atheist is totally irrelevant to how great a scientist he was. The person I was originally replying to was saying that his deism mattered in that respect.
The other point I was that when Newton was around, there was no other scientific explanation for many phenomena - no Darwin, no germ theory etc. so these things were commonly attributed to god.
AtheistBrit 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
.
Paranormal Activity Was just leaked Hours Agoo. Go
Watch it on OnlineFreeCinema*com
(Replace * with . )
artisticcuesport 2 years ago
Comment removed
sjcpal 2 years ago
abort faeces!
PonguigPeopinn 2 years ago
No jesus did not agree with the Old Testiment - at least not to the letter. The only reason that "Jews" still exist is the fact that Jesus disagreed so profoundly with it how it was interpreted. The Old testiment was written not by God - but by humans, and the Phereses (orthidox Jews at the time) like most Athiests read it to the letter, missing the intention. So again - Jesus did not condemn nor make a point of ridculing gays. He befriended prostitutes, and they are far more sinful.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
onijester56 2 years ago
Atheists (and it's not a capital A, and learn to spell) read it to the letter because the alternative is called heresy.
You realize that the bible is god's divine word, right? By interpreting it, you are making yourselves out to be better than god, because you think you can understand its intention and meaning better than it can.
It's ironic that atheists make better christians than christians. If they were more like atheists, we'd be living in paradise.
EdwardHowton 2 years ago
Your an idiot/and or no nothing about why Jew's arn't Christians and why the Phereses gave Jesus to the Romans - it was because they followed the Old Testiment to the "letter" and missed the entire point. Jesus turned the Old Testiment on it's head (eye for an eye, killing sinners, working on the Sabath, ... etc.) I realize that you don't know what the fuck your talking about, but can tell the difference between an A and an a. I'll call you if I need a porfessional punctuator.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Jews are jewish because they don't believe Jesus was their messiah. They don't believe Jesus was the messiah because the scripture that christians think confirmed Jesus actually doesn't in their texts.
Easiest thing to point out: Jews were expecting the messiah to be named Immanuel. There's more.
Oh, and by the way, Jesus didn't turn the old testament on its head. He confirmed it.
Read these:
Mat 5:17-19
Luke 16:17
2Tim 3:16
2Peter20-21
Mark 7:10
You show your ignorance of your own magic book
EdwardHowton 2 years ago
Jew are jewish because they don't believe Jesus was Messiah - really!? Can you tell me why circles are round or anything else almost perfectly worhtless? No fuckin shit they don't believe in him genious. They don't believe in him because Matthew 5:38-42, Luke 6:27-31 Matthew 12:1-14, Mark 2:23-28, Luke 6:1-5 all contradicted "to the letter" following of the Old Testiment and threw it in the devote Jew's face. It's not up for debate atheistjeet.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
So your brilliance has narrrowed down this argument to: If you can throw in a few passages that show Jesus agreed with the old testament, this then proves that he never turned it on it's head? Honestly think about how ridiculously stupid what you just said is. If you apply this level of reasoning to real life I hope you enjoy operating plungers.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Hey Devil. Edward is just arguing for arguments sake. He is not standing for any singular belief. He just wants to win the argument. He has gone all over the spectrum in this blog with everybody.
runnercbc 2 years ago
If I've gone all over the spectrum, it's because I follow liars and hypocrites and stop them from staking a claim wherever they go. Like yourself.
Of course I'm not standing for a singular belief; that's small-minded idiocy. I'm just revealing when others are wrong.
EdwardHowton 2 years ago
Circles are round because we call perfectly round things circles. You're backwards. Also, that has nothing to do with jews. You also then go on to agree with me, so you're the one debating for no reason. Nicely done.
Also, my brilliance is in pointing out that the bible argues both sides. Some passages are of Jesus claiming the old testament is no more, while other passages are of him confirming the old testament must be obeyed. Perfect messiah he is not. Thanks for proving my second point.
EdwardHowton 2 years ago
The Old Testiment was written by men, so it's flawed. The fact that Jesus corrected man's flaws in recording God word does not prove God or Jesus is flawed or not messiah. I don't agree with you on anything and most of these arguments you present (except this last one however) are devoid of substance and lack any noticable intellect or reasoning - "the jews don't believe Jesus was Messiah", "Jesus agreed with parts of the OT". Both obvious, both coherent with your IQ level.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Sigh. Do you even pay attention? Jesus is supposed to be the messiah that the Jews were waiting for. The Jews had the prophecies he was supposed to fulfill in the first place. Jesus comes along, fails to fulfill the Jewish prophecies, so Jesus is not the messiah.
Also, the "fact" that Jesus corrected God's word only goes to show that the bible is completely worthless because no person can know which parts aren't flawed. Thanks for pointing that out for everyone. You just proved your faith wrong
EdwardHowton 2 years ago
Prophsies:
Save the Jews/bring them to heaven
Save non Jews
He will be a prophet Duetoronomy18:15
He will be smeared and mocked Psalm22:7
He will be crucified by his own people Psalm22
He will be accused of false witness Psalm35
He will pleade on our behalf Isaiah 59:16.
He fufilled over 2000 prophesies. He didn't correct God's word he corrected man's understanding of Gods word like I continually correct your ignorance.
98DevilDog79 2 years ago 5
It's easy to make prophesies like that AFTER THE FACT!
Glacies12 2 years ago
Those Prophesies were written between 1450BC and 735BC
98DevilDog79 2 years ago
Yes, and there was no editing.
And how much do you know of jebus? You can't even prove he existed.
Glacies12 2 years ago
Go ask a Rabi, and get HIM to tell you the prophesies that Jebus did not fulfill.
The ones that he DID fulfill are made up, and vary depending on your sources.
The bible could not even keep the number of the beast for 1600 years, and you expect anyone to buy into your bullshit propaganda.
Glacies12 2 years ago