APOLOGETICS: The art of arguing that whatever the Bible says is true - even when it contradicts itself and observed reality. Here's how to do it...
If the Bible said in one verse that 2=2=3 and in another verse that 2+2=5 a Scientist might test both claims by putting two objects with two more objects and counting the total objects. The Apologist, in contrast, would argue that 2+2 was literally 3 AND metaphorically 5 and that Satan was deluding the eyes of any scientist who counted four objects.
I love how your sarcastically practicing apologetics for your anti-biblical world view. here's the anti-Christian apologist argumentative method. Point out what appears to be a flaw in the Christian apologist, choose a rediculously and exaggerated, as well as illogical argument and assume you have figured Christian Apologetics.
step two. Attack everything but the argument itself, do anything but attack the argument itself, call the Christian ignorant, brainwashed, etc.
@ivantheterrableone My example illustrates the nature of ALL apologetic 'reasoning'. Apologetics STARTS with the premise that it's conclusion is true (ie God exists and the Bible is true) and then performs whatever intellectual gymnastics, reinterpretation of the text and denial of reality is necessary to justify that conclusion. No CONCIEVABLE contradiction within the Bible or between the Bible and reality would defeat an apologist because they have an endless repertory of intellectual tricks.
what a strong statement, "ALL". The fact that you cluster up all apologist into your own perception of them, without in fact addressing what they say says a lot about your argument. BTW, when two people debate, each side is representing the affirmative position for what they are defending, so starting with the premise that your conclusion is true, is what everyone does, just as you are arguing here that your premise about Christian apologist's is true. I love your contradictions
though. What better way to try to scrutanize an argument than by addressing everything but the argument itself right? Ad-hominem attacks are the usual indicator of the losing side. Christian Apologist, have demolished your world views, using the highest form of rhetoric, Logic.
@ivantheterrableone "Ad-hominem" means "against the person". An "Ad-hominem" argument is one that attacks the person presenting an argument rather than attacking the nature of the argument itself. I have said nothing at all about Mr Sproul or his character, I know nothing about him, I have purely addressed the generic weakness in apologetic reasoning. If you don't understand the basics of rational dialogue don't try arguing with me.
Ok I give that to you, you are absolutely right, you in fact never attacked anyone on the personal level, I guess I exaggarated that a bit right? I think you see my initial point now. I can easily sit here and point out the weakness in the skeptics world view, and their reasoning or lack thereof, but why argue on such a general term? My point was, that arguing based on generalized presuppositions instead of addressing the argument itself, is weak and generic.
@ivantheterrableone OK, we're agreed that we're discussing apologetics and not the speaker. Now, my question is "what does the apologist do when shown two Bible verses that appear to contradict one another?". The scientist would attempt to determine whether either of the verses was true. Wouldn't the apologist instead try to find a way of saying that BOTH were true and try to argue the contradiction away by saying that one verse was "meant metaphorically" or that "god works in mysterious ways"?
depending on the apparent contradiction at hand, the apologist would argue accordingly. Once again, you have presupposed that the apologist would argue according to the way you say he will. You presupposed his argument in advance and generalized it, I addressed this flaw in your argument already. A lot of times, there are deeper things addressed in supposed bible contradictions and depending on the case, it is addressed accordingly. Also you said scientists questioning a BIble
contradiction right? First off, I am against scientist arguing about philosophical topics, unless science is being used to prove the natural validity of something. I have never heard anyone address a contradiction with either of the two examples you gave, so unless you want to be specific about a certain instance, then I will conclude you are being intellectually dishonest or you are flat out lying. So far, your arguments have been fallacious.
@ivantheterrableone Any discrepancy between observed reality and a biblical text is a scientific matter, not a philosophical matter. When faced with such contradictions the apologist always defends the text, never the reality. If the Bible says the world was created in six days the apologist is free to deny evolution and the vast history of the planet or to say that a day doesn't mean a day but means 600,000,000 years or to say it's all "metaphorical" or anything EXCEPT admit the story is wrong.
@ivantheterrableone Any discrepancy between observed reality and a biblical text is a scientific matter, not a philosophical matter. When faced with such contradictions the apologist always defends the text, never the reality. If the Bible says the world was created in six days the apologist is free to deny evolution and the vast history of the planet or to say that a day doesn't mean a day but means 600,000,000 years or to say it's all "metaphorical" or anything EXCEPT admit the story is wrong.
@ivantheterrableone It's not a hasty generalization, its a SYSTEMIC problem intrinsic to the nature of apologetics. Whilst scientists are willing to adjust their models in the light of new facts or contradictory evidence, the apologist must stick to the a priori premise that his conclusion is true and explain away any evidence incompatible with this conclusion.
by definition it is a hasty generalization, so let's get that out of the way, your argument itself is fallacious. You have a biased view on Christian apologist, and because you disagree with them, you resort to saying that the whole Christian apologist approach is fundamentally flawed therefore all of their arguments and evidence is wrong. It's ok if you disagree, but don't project that fact on over to dismissing it as a whole without refuting individual arguments.
by definition it is a hasty generalization, so let's get that out of the way, your argument itself is fallacious. You have a biased view on Christian apologist, and because you disagree with them, you resort to saying that the whole Christian apologist approach is fundamentally flawed therefore all of their arguments and evidence is wrong. It's ok if you disagree, but don't project that fact on over to dismissing it as a whole without refuting individual arguments.
Obi-Wan reminds us that truths have a point of view. I know that an apple is small. An ant knows an apple is big. Both are correct. Why is it not possible to reconcile the story of expulsion from Paradise on a personal level and the evolution of our species on the scientific?
You must be kidding me.Thouest must be eloquent.You must eficate!Who made your mouth?Wow.Amazing,utterly amazing.It's all Greek to you,sir. Cannibals?Don't you still drink his blood?Wow.what BS.you are just as bad as WLC.I didn't know there could be two of you.
I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general secular social perspectives
8:50 laughable strawman of evolution, abiogenesis and the big bang
9:55 dishonest denial or ignorance, the bible contradicts what we see in nature more than just a few times
Wow, only 3 with this one, that's gotta be a new record, usually in the span of 10 or so minutes the count is around 10-20. Though it was mostly just a small reciting of history attested from sources outside the bible.
I read "The Language of God" and enjoyed it, although I think Dr. Collins draws some unwarranted conclusions from the evidence he presents.
I wouldn't call him an apologist per se, and I know he's caught a lot of flack from more conservative evangelicals for his acceptance of evolution. Nonetheless, it's always useful to have an intelligent, EDUCATED believer put in his two cents.
I think it's notable that Atheists keep coming back to listen to apologetics... you'd think if they were really SURE of their beliefs that they would have better things to do.
BUT: The truth is WAY DEEP DOWN they want to believe in God, and to know Him, because that's what they were created for - though they vehemently deny it.
u no y gays anal and wanking r imoral because it wount lead to babys and u need to have look of babys for a big tribe all the anal gay wanking tribs died out because the straight anit oral tribs killed them
I thought that this was just a great video explaining what Apologetics is. How Apologetics is not saying we are sorry for being Christians is great I think and how he explained what Apologetics is by using Bible characters and other influential people in the Christian Faith.
Interesting video, I had wondered what the origin of "apologetics" was, it's nice to know the answer. My question is, why is questioning the Christian faith always characterized as an "attack" or an "assault"? Essentially, why, even though Christianity is the largest religion in the world, do Christians always act as though they are the oppressed minority? Is this a leftover from the time in which Christians really were persecuted, and not just questioned?
@wendighoul In part I might have something to do with the end of persecution in SOME places. Its persecuted heavily in other countrys. People have bibles taken away and burned are martyred ect. On it being the biggest religion I would have to disagree....never confuse PROFESSION with POSSESSION, that is never assume that when one proclaims to be a christian he actually posses salvation. You cant repent and trust in Christ and not be changed any more than you can be ran over and not changed.
This is really great video. I think it's pretty interesting that Christian was treated as athiest because they were not worshipping Roman God. As the preacher says, Apologetic is to defend our beliefs if there is any people who assails our faith. Peter 3: 15-16 summarizes clearly that we need to give the answers to those who maliciously against our good behavior in Christ with "Gentleness and respect." This is how God teaches us to be.
The comments on this page serve as near perfect examples of how we have sacrificed clear conscience in the effort to gain worldly intelligence. The nonbeliever prides himself on his failing earthly knowledge, the Christian retaliates, creating a gap that virtually disallows the reconciliation of the two, and the Muslim or Buddhist has confidence in their faith because the Christian faith is "mean."
Tell me who is in the right, and who is in the wrong. We all need to see the logs in our eyes.
I'm reading the responses to this clip. Know what's funny? Hearing one person defending their invisible, supernatural, un-testable god against someone else's invisible, supernatural, un-testable, etc. "My fable trumps your fable!" "No no, my folklore is better than yours in every way!" LOL
I normally like these obnoxious windbags, but this guys is difficult to listen too. He needs to take a class on public speaking. I notice the Muslim vs Christian discussion and i think it's great how you both ignore each other and complain about who kills who, which inspires you to keep killing each other. Keep fighting the good fight.
I almost had to laugh when he said what "what god reveals in the bible will never ultimate contradict what god reveals in nature." That's an easy statement to make if you don't look at nature or listen to those who look at nature.
It is just as easy to make the comment you made with nothing whatever offered in support of your contention. So I guess YOUR opinion carries more weight than the scholarship of Sproul? BTW - the god Sproul refers to is the only big-g
God there is, so if you're going to refer to him, please call him by his proper name...the True and Living God. All the other small-g "gods" such as Allah, Kali-mai, Baal, Dagon, or any others that you'd care to add are non-existent entities !
@tigerlilly66 Fair enough, I did not sight my work. He did not sight his in the video ether, so I though I could get away with it. But I would like to see were God is the author of the bible, or at least those parts we know are not written by men.
As for the naming of God, I never much liked calling him that, even when I was a chiristen. Just seems odd calling him an name that is also a pronoun for what he is. Like calling your cat "Cat".
Former President Bush also said that "Islam means peace". OOOPS ! Muslims may believe that Allah is the "big-g god", but it is no more true than Bush's idiotic statement. Ask the families of the 3,000 murdered by this "peaceful" religion in New York, or simply read what it says about itself, and tell me that. Islam is a rather poorly designed counterfeit that must depend on coercion to. When was the last time you heard about a Christian "honor killing"?
@tigerlilly66 Nice way to paint 1 billion people with the same brush. Much of the fault people find in Islam comes down to bullshit local custom, that have little to do with the religion. Honor killings are sick. I have not heard of Christians doing them in a long time. I have heard of people (including children) being beaten and burned to death in Africa for being witches, by Christians. Add to that Bosnian Genocide. Add to that all pedophile priests.
How odd that you fail to mention the hundreds of Christians murdered in the Sudan as part of a government eradication effort. I am not Catholic, and the RCC does NOT speak for me, I'm happy to say.
@tigerlilly66 See what you did there: You effectively said don't judge me but what any Christian may have done, while you judged all Muslims for the actions of a few. There are just as many sud-divisions of Islam as there are of Christianity. Bad people do bad things, even when they believe in a loving God, which both Christians and Muslims claim.
Show me ONE verse in the Koran that says or even vaguely implies that Allah is "a loving god" and I'll eat my hat!
One doesn't have to be a scholar of Islam (I am not) to know with just a little bit of study that there are absolutely NO SIMILARITIES WHATSOEVER between the God of the Bible and the Moon-god Allah! I guess you as neither a Muslim or a Christian either check it out for yourself, or do as most unbelievers do and reject any and all "religion" out of hand.
@tigerlilly66 Check this out Koran 85.15 "And He [Allah] is the Forgiving, the Loving," Let me know how the hat tastes. Your deity is hardly as loving as people make him out to be: the Bible is full of people he has had killed, told his followers to kill, or allowed to be killed. Jesus is a fair better example to follow then his father.
Oh and because dropped the "Moon-god" bit, you should good Christ and Horus sometime.
R.C. Sproul is a brilliant man with a tremendous intellect. He can explain complex philosophical ideas in a down to earth way, and draw from his encyclopedic knowledge of biblical history (which contains a lot of middle east history) and overall world history in a way that few others can. Not to mention that he is a prolific author. He is one of the first men that helped convince my then very sceptical and closed mind of the truth of the Bible and of Christ Jesus.
Regarding the comment "Christian intellectual" Sir, just how many advanced degrees do you have and how many books have you written?....................................Silence.
What is your point? Are you suggesting that having advanced degrees ensures that his arguments are cogent? that his ideas are somehow validated by the fact that he's a prolific writer? Surely you recognize that such reasoning is logically fallacious.
There is no belief so bizarre that one cannot find a published Ph.D. who supports it.
I'll simply offer up an apt quote by Saul Bellow: "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
I'm intrigued by the entire apologetics enterprise. The fact that otherwise intelligent people will go to such lengths (and depths) to defend positions that are so transparently contrived is, to me, absolutely fascinating.
@ClumsyRoot Just because I find something fascinating doesn't give me the right to insult it. If the video makes you upset or you don't agree, there is a simple way to resolve it. Click the red box at the top of this window.
To me, because you are investing so much time into this topic raises the question of what you are actually trying to accomplish.
LOL! Hate to disappoint, but I have no "ulterior motives." I made an off-the-cuff comment, some people took issue and responded, and I in turn replied to them. Standard YouTube stuff.
"Just because I find something fascinating doesn't give me the right to insult it."
On the contrary, ALL of us have the right to critique ANYTHING we see on YouTube. And if my comments upset you or you don't agree, there is a simple way to resolve it: Don't respond to them. :)
An excerpt of ten minutes of probably a two hour sermon and you simply dismiss Sproul? You should read some of his books; he is very famous in the apologetic realm and well-spoken to. :)
I like your analogy...Atheism is the malignant tumor that needs to be removed. As far as replacing it with something, I'd think the patient who was now rid of his death sentence would be only too happy to consider the Christian gospel as the suitable replacement you failed to offer him! Alas and alack, such is the lot of atheism...tear down, attack, deny, and denigrate the Christian faith while having NOTHING whatever to offer as an antidote to the "opiate of the masses".
LOL! First of all, I'm not an atheist. Secondly, the "death sentence" you speak of is called reality.
We are born, we live, we die. That is the cycle of life. Now, I understand that the human ego is unhappy with such a state of affairs, which is why we invent this concept of an afterlife to assuage our fear of death. When it comes to believing what we want to believe, our capacity for self-delusion is almost limitless.
I will continue to attack all escapist ideologies, religious or otherwise.
@tigerlilly66 Cancer is caused by a defective form of cell replication. A tumor is a cluster of cancer cells that spread unchecked, damaging normal cells and ultimately kill the host. Myths are caused by a defective form of reasoning. A religion is a collection of myths that spreads unchecked by common sense, damaging our sense of morality and ultimately destroying society. Therefore, a malignant tumor is a better analogy for theism. Atheism, being exact the opposite, is more like a vaccine.
Your response is exactly why there will never be an accommodation between atheism and theism, nor should there be. We both have diametrically opposed world views and both cannot prevail. Atheists cannot tell the difference between theism and "religion", yet the differences are HUGE.Anything that smacks of a "god" is automatically relegated to the trash pile, without consideration or examination. This is why I maintain firmly that EVIDENCE is completely undesired by atheists!
@tigerlilly66 I completely agree with every point you made except the last one. The one thing that most distinguishes atheists is their desire for evidence. But there are two kinds of evidence- valid and invalid. Atheists desire valid evidence. The invalid evidence that we relegate to the trash pile is what theists cling to.
@ClumsyRoot I guess this is the reply you had for me? Well while I am not an evolution denier, I do have my reservations about it. There are a few minor questions I have about it, but that really isn't the issue. The issue is that science is supposed to be questioned and debated and there is a stigma that comes from questioning certain sciences (think evolution and global warming) As a consequence, its hard for people with legit concerns to come forward.
Questioning and debating is at the heart of all good science. And the mechanisms of evolution ARE debated, sometimes quite vociferously, by biologists all over the world. What is no longer at issue--what no educated personal can reasonably argue against--is that the process itself takes place. The evidence is unambiguous, overwhelming, and grows by the day.
I don't know enough about global warming to speak on the issue.
@ClumsyRoot I'd be interested in what you think about the "whatyououghttoknow" channel as it pertains to evolution. His case is that bacteria have only slightly changed since we have been looking at them for the past 200 years. Then if you compare that to the change from "Lucy" to modern human's and the change is huge. He then says that if you compare the number of lifetimes using the average life cycle, the equivalent for bacteria from Lucy to Us, is around 6 years.
@ClumsyRoot Now one of the weaknesses of his argument is he doesn't talk about asexual vs sexual reproduction where sexual reproduction would lead to faster evolution, but I think he does have a point that we should have seen more change than we have.
I definitely agree that there's a great deal about evolution that we don't yet understand. My point--and Colins'--is that evolution (descent with modification) does indeed take place.
@ClumsyRoot Oh and you did reply directly to me. It appeared in my inbox (which is how I know when I get comments) but I think you or the channel owner deleted it. It lists your name with "comment removed" anyway.
@jimbo525SE Actually you're right in that science is a discipline that asks questions, but that doesn't mean science doesn't have most of the answers. I even have questions for evolution but of course mine are true inquiry and not trying to prove it's validity, that has been done,it is the most valid theory to explain life etc. available. PERIOD....unless you believe in a magician in the sky then anything is possible, including healing amputees.
@ClumsyRoot You should know by now that Christians are much too sensitive and weak to handle fair comment. Is there such a being as a Christian intellectual when he is discussing the faith? No, because the intellect and faith are in opposition. :)
Yay, let's all pretend that the real purpose of apologetics isn't to cover up and obfuscate all the glaring inconsistencies and horrible content contained within the christian religion!
Wait ... oops!
Anyone can interpret the religion any way they want, INCLUDING this man. That's why there are over 30,000 different sects, and that's why there are apologetics.
Really Dr. R.C. SPROUL is one the remaining few conservative Christian preachers who preaches the true Gospel of the Holy Scriptures without compromise nowadays.
Where do I begin......This is not a forum for discussion but.....Who burned the Library in Alexandria 7 times?Who killed all the Hellenes in the Greek penisula(Hellenic thinkers)Who closed the Schools of Plato.Who distroyd 2000 greek Manuments and theaters. I can go on and on.Yes we are blind now.
How true is Judaism in Christianity? People are continuously proclaiming wars are necessary all the time that I hate those religions proclaiming holy wars for their gods. I regard they are primitive and that they are using their permittivity to lie for them selves. If their gods exist, they have no need to die for anything. THEY would be JUST LIVE without these craps because THEIR GODS EXIST. They proofed that their gods don't exist. Why wars? It is because there is no gods.
You need to understand that there is a price for sin. There is a physical price and there is a spiritual price. The physical price manifests itself in many ways, war being just one. And, if you look at most wars doing done in a gods name, you'll find that the victors often erected statues of themselves and not their god. Invoking the name of a god does not a religious war make. No more so than if I were to go to war invoking your own name. Remember that.
Hmmm, I don't recall the crusades being about idols, and I don't recall the Irish civil wars being about anything besides who worships god correctly? Do remember though that Yahweh is a war god...
I certainly haven't forgotten. The Yahweh of the OT is the same Yahweh of the NT. The judgments Yahweh dispensed in the OT continues to this day and will culminate in the events of Revelation and the Book of Daniel.
You see a vindictive and vicious God. I see a God of Laws and Righteousness. A God that says there are penalties for sin. And God ALWAYS provides a way out before judgment comes. Always. It's not His fault people choose not to do so.
A righteous god who kills 42 children? A righteous god who has children slain merely for being stuck with their parents? Are we really talking about the same loving lawful god? Yahweh is a bloody war god who commonly desired blood sacrifice (Animals then Jesus), and yet he is about peach and love... Right...
Your "objections" have been answered by apologists time, and time, and time again. You're not bringing out deep, dark secrets the Church doesn't want revealed. 10 seconds on Google will give you the answers to your questions - but I suspect they're not the answers you're looking for.
Your tone is not that of one that sincerely wishes answers. Rather, you merely wish to rub a Christian's nose in what you expect they'll blanch over. I'm not that Christian.
I have googled rationalizations to these bible verses actually. If I found a good response I would stop using it, and consider it reconciled; but as of yet, they all seem contradictory and inconsistent to what Christians seem to value.
Basically what I am getting from your response is "I can't defend my faith, I give up"
In your bible it says to defend your faith, and all your doing is fleeing as soon as you hear a tough question. At least for-fill your duty as a Christian.
Fulfill my duty? You are in not position to order me to do anything. I know your type and I'm not playing the game. You're not interested in answers, only conflict. Only showing off how smart you think you are.
If you've found Christian answers for those passages, or your feelings in general, wanting, a YouTube comment page isn't the place to reconcile them.
I can and do defend my faith. I just don't believe you're looking for answers and the faithful are not here to entertain you.
isn't that the perfect escape route... When someone challenges you they obviously aren't sincere enough to debate, but when someone comes groveling at your feet your more than happy to fill their head with your dogma. If you truly believe I am going to hell then what are you waiting for? What could possibly be more important than saving my soul from eternal damnation for my finite crimes on Earth? Your ego, are you joking?!
What hell are you talking about?? the one you don't believe in? the one you don't need salvation from? Make up your mind, or should I say minds?
You are trying to put a christian person down by putting down a God you don't believe in, using quotes from a Bible you don' take seriously, using Christian terminology you disdain... What are you playing at??? Debating for the sake of debate is just like trying to satisfy a pig's unquenchable desire to roll in the mud.
I am not trying to put a Christian down, I am trying to get him to be sincere enough to try and save my soul. If you truly believe I am going to hell the nicest thing you could possibly do is try and convince me god exists. Am I wrong?
I like debate, I find it entertaining. If I am wrong: I WANT TO KNOW! If god is real, please demonstrate the evidence. If not, then don't bother making the claim since you cannot defend it.
First of all, Christians ARE NOT called to convince ANYONE of ANYTHING... proclamation of the Gospel is not a debate. You can accept it, and that would be great, or you can reject it, either way when it's time for you to face the Creator (which you don't believe in) you will not be able to say "no one told me". We PROCLAIM because we KNOW, that's as far as our responsability goes. The Choice is yours.
All depends on how good of a Christian you are, and if you actually follow the bible: 1 Peter 3:15 (couldn't find this passage earlier I meant to throw it at selderane). I don't reject it, I simply demand the evidence. Same for god.
Its not a choice. I was determined to be a skeptic from my environment (external factors) and my experiences (internal factors) which lead me to demand evidence for all claims, including your claims. There was no truly free 'choice' involved.
Its not a matter of free-will, and if I happen to see god I wouldn't say sorry or 'if I had only known!' I was determined to be skeptical of any claim, and he didn't show me any evidence to believe in him. If god can still send me to hell (without have a truly free 'choice') then you are worshiping an evil god who creates atheists simply to send them straight to hell.
I really don't understand how using bible is self defeating simply because I am an atheist? Technically that is an ad hominem attack, even if I don't believe the bible to be true it still tells you to defend your faith. If you refuse then you are being inconsistent with you beliefs. You need to separate the message from the messenger. Just because I can abstractly argue with you about your god, despite the fact I don't believe in your god, will never make my point invalid.
Number 1) god omniscient and he understands atheists perfectly. This is just plainly obvious.
Number 2) "Judge not, lest ye be judged." -Matthew 7
Number 3) we judge everything all day long whether or not we like it, but this depends on how you define judgment which I the bible is pretty inconsistent on.
Number 4) 1 Peter 3:15 requires you to defend your faith. I don't see any way to avoid this personally?
OK, I'll engage, but first let me ask you a question: Are you being sincere in your quest for truth or are you just looking for more fuel to keep your hunger for argumments alive and for someone to keep you entertained?
Secondly: It seem to me that you have an answer to all the responses people have given you, tell me, are YOU omniscient?
or is your will clouding you judgement as to be able to discern what is true?
Please respond to these questions and I will respond to yours.
I want to be right about as many right things as I can possibly be right about. If god exists, I would love to see the evidence, and considering how at least 60+% of America believes in Christianity there must be a lot of evidence: that I am either not finding or not finding at all convincing. Do I want to debate? Of course, but if someone can falsify my arguments and ideas I would be open.
For instance perhaps a month ago I was an omnivore, but after watching videos, and debating vegetarian I have actually become a vegetarian myself. I am willing to change with the evidence.
Another example I used a bible passage that said something like, 'Jesus tells you to hate your mother and father' to mean that he actually wants you to have disdain for your parents. Contradicting the ten commandments.
Eventually a Christian demonstrated to me that the passage actually meant to put parents on a level below Jesus. I then realized it was just a misleading translation, and thanked him for the correction. I am defiantly not omniscient. Since that Christian corrected me I have never used that argument again because new evidence convinced me that I was wrong. I am willing to follow the evidence where ever it goes.
Thanx for your response, it does appear that you are being sincere, ta least for what I can read. It seems somewhat surprising that you yourself quote a percentage figure of the amount of americans that call themselves christians, at 60+% it is not an insignificant amount, that in itself is evidence of Christ life changing power.
2.& 3.- A lot of misunderstandings of biblical verses come from not understanding the context of the text, some passages require 'the whole council of the word of God', meaning you have to follow the subject from Gen. to Rev to get the full picture. Specially with subjects as complicated as the one of Judging and to what end we judge, and who or what we can judge. The short answer we are called to judge works, or results but not the heart of the man, or to what end someone does something.
4.- 1Pet 3:15. "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:" If we read the context we will understand that what Peter is saying is that if we, as christians live as we ought to, that will cause non-believers to wonder and ask of us what is it that makes us be (for example)joyfull when things are not that great. (it's like what they say, smile and ppl will wonder)
Well I understand that certain verse are extorted by people who don't understand them; like the hate thy mother and father above. This verse is a little different because I know atheists who said this verse destroyed their faith; they couldn't defend their belief. I also know Christians who do believe this verse gives them reason to debate their beliefs. You may be right, but as far as I can see (because I am ignorant) it would seem that the interpretation I hear is the correct one.
Yes it couldn't hurt to get through the entire bible. Finally got my hands on my own hand held bible, and I am starting to annotate it in between classes.
Well the population in the Middle East worships Allah so is that evidence that in the Middle East Allah exists? Also remember that perhaps a hundred years ago probably near 99% of America was Christian; its defaintly declining. Does that mean god is fading away? Even further so what if everyone in the world believed 2+2=5? Is any truth decided by popularity?
I agree with you, but the passage disagrees with both of us? If x * y = 0 one of the variables must be 0 (also known as false).
There are lots of verses in the Bible that could destroy anybody's faith if they cannot undestand them, or someone explains them to them. And I have personally gone through that, not that I have lost my faith, but I've had to dig deeper to get the full meaning of certain verses. Mind you I am not claiming to know the whole of the Bible (I am certainly not omncient). There are cultural, and spiritual things things we do not understand by simply reading the Bible.
There are spiritual things that cannot be understood by just reading. To dramatise this I'll give you the example of churches dividing themselves because of differences in interpretations. Does this mean the Bible contradicts itself? Absolutely not, many time we get the meaning we want to get , because it is convenient for us or we are interpreting things through our own experiences, which is the wrong way of understanding anything, let alone the Bible.
Also, what I meant to say in regards to the 'popularity' of christianity in a secular country was that I trust many people's lives have been changed by knowing Christ personaly. You see the change comes from within, not through circumstances, but it is, literally a change of HEART. and that is evidence. In the middle east, you have no choice, either you are a muslim or off with your head.
Vindictive yes, revengeful yes, jealous yes, still the same yes many people have forgotten that God is the same yesterday today and forever. He still cares about His people the same way He did then and He will return for the judgment of all men and the revelation of His glory.
Where you responding to me, if so, what are you referring to? I received a comment notice, but I cannot figure out which comment you are referring to?
Concepts that seem to be absolute doesn't prove god, its a non-sequator. Please explain how not having a god means that absolutes cannot exist? Just because A will always equal A doesn't mean god must exist :P
If your going to employ TAG at least do it right. Non-sequator ftl :/
Not to be rude, but I have never understood how someone can say "I am an atheist." Atheism claims that there is no god. However, you cannot know that for sure. You would have to know everything there is to know to know for sure that there is no god. But if you somehow have the ability to know everything, then you have just adopted a characteristic of god.
This is incorrect. Atheist do not see evidence of a god. They do not "believe" anything. Religion on the other hand beliefs there is a god. Religion has so far been unable to produce a God or show direct evidence of one.
In fact, much to the annoyance of religion, it appears that God is man-made and largely a psychological phenomenon.
Atheism is the default position... Are you an a-fairiest or do you just not believe in fairies? Are you an a-santist or do you just not believe in santa? To say that I have to prove to you that god doesn't exist is a fallacy (pushing the burden of proof) also atheists do not make a claim of certainty (that is for the amplification of either agnosticism or gnosticism). Atheism isn't even a positive claim because it is in fact a lack therefore of a belief in god.
This is a common arguement. A-theism is a RELIGION and evolution by natural selection is its creation story. Your attempts at hiding behind a cloak of nonreligion have failed miserably.
Apologists are salesman. Even the world does not trust salesmen.
StringPlunker 2 weeks ago
APOLOGETICS: The art of arguing that whatever the Bible says is true - even when it contradicts itself and observed reality. Here's how to do it...
If the Bible said in one verse that 2=2=3 and in another verse that 2+2=5 a Scientist might test both claims by putting two objects with two more objects and counting the total objects. The Apologist, in contrast, would argue that 2+2 was literally 3 AND metaphorically 5 and that Satan was deluding the eyes of any scientist who counted four objects.
EqualAndFree 5 months ago
@EqualAndFree
I love how your sarcastically practicing apologetics for your anti-biblical world view. here's the anti-Christian apologist argumentative method. Point out what appears to be a flaw in the Christian apologist, choose a rediculously and exaggerated, as well as illogical argument and assume you have figured Christian Apologetics.
step two. Attack everything but the argument itself, do anything but attack the argument itself, call the Christian ignorant, brainwashed, etc.
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
@ivantheterrableone My example illustrates the nature of ALL apologetic 'reasoning'. Apologetics STARTS with the premise that it's conclusion is true (ie God exists and the Bible is true) and then performs whatever intellectual gymnastics, reinterpretation of the text and denial of reality is necessary to justify that conclusion. No CONCIEVABLE contradiction within the Bible or between the Bible and reality would defeat an apologist because they have an endless repertory of intellectual tricks.
EqualAndFree 4 months ago
@EqualAndFree
what a strong statement, "ALL". The fact that you cluster up all apologist into your own perception of them, without in fact addressing what they say says a lot about your argument. BTW, when two people debate, each side is representing the affirmative position for what they are defending, so starting with the premise that your conclusion is true, is what everyone does, just as you are arguing here that your premise about Christian apologist's is true. I love your contradictions
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
@EqualAndFree
though. What better way to try to scrutanize an argument than by addressing everything but the argument itself right? Ad-hominem attacks are the usual indicator of the losing side. Christian Apologist, have demolished your world views, using the highest form of rhetoric, Logic.
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
@ivantheterrableone "Ad-hominem" means "against the person". An "Ad-hominem" argument is one that attacks the person presenting an argument rather than attacking the nature of the argument itself. I have said nothing at all about Mr Sproul or his character, I know nothing about him, I have purely addressed the generic weakness in apologetic reasoning. If you don't understand the basics of rational dialogue don't try arguing with me.
EqualAndFree 4 months ago
@EqualAndFree
Ok I give that to you, you are absolutely right, you in fact never attacked anyone on the personal level, I guess I exaggarated that a bit right? I think you see my initial point now. I can easily sit here and point out the weakness in the skeptics world view, and their reasoning or lack thereof, but why argue on such a general term? My point was, that arguing based on generalized presuppositions instead of addressing the argument itself, is weak and generic.
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
@ivantheterrableone OK, we're agreed that we're discussing apologetics and not the speaker. Now, my question is "what does the apologist do when shown two Bible verses that appear to contradict one another?". The scientist would attempt to determine whether either of the verses was true. Wouldn't the apologist instead try to find a way of saying that BOTH were true and try to argue the contradiction away by saying that one verse was "meant metaphorically" or that "god works in mysterious ways"?
EqualAndFree 4 months ago
@EqualAndFree
depending on the apparent contradiction at hand, the apologist would argue accordingly. Once again, you have presupposed that the apologist would argue according to the way you say he will. You presupposed his argument in advance and generalized it, I addressed this flaw in your argument already. A lot of times, there are deeper things addressed in supposed bible contradictions and depending on the case, it is addressed accordingly. Also you said scientists questioning a BIble
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
@EqualAndFree
contradiction right? First off, I am against scientist arguing about philosophical topics, unless science is being used to prove the natural validity of something. I have never heard anyone address a contradiction with either of the two examples you gave, so unless you want to be specific about a certain instance, then I will conclude you are being intellectually dishonest or you are flat out lying. So far, your arguments have been fallacious.
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
@ivantheterrableone Any discrepancy between observed reality and a biblical text is a scientific matter, not a philosophical matter. When faced with such contradictions the apologist always defends the text, never the reality. If the Bible says the world was created in six days the apologist is free to deny evolution and the vast history of the planet or to say that a day doesn't mean a day but means 600,000,000 years or to say it's all "metaphorical" or anything EXCEPT admit the story is wrong.
EqualAndFree 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ivantheterrableone Any discrepancy between observed reality and a biblical text is a scientific matter, not a philosophical matter. When faced with such contradictions the apologist always defends the text, never the reality. If the Bible says the world was created in six days the apologist is free to deny evolution and the vast history of the planet or to say that a day doesn't mean a day but means 600,000,000 years or to say it's all "metaphorical" or anything EXCEPT admit the story is wrong.
EqualAndFree 4 months ago
@EqualAndFree
look up hasty generalization.
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
@ivantheterrableone It's not a hasty generalization, its a SYSTEMIC problem intrinsic to the nature of apologetics. Whilst scientists are willing to adjust their models in the light of new facts or contradictory evidence, the apologist must stick to the a priori premise that his conclusion is true and explain away any evidence incompatible with this conclusion.
EqualAndFree 4 months ago
@EqualAndFree
by definition it is a hasty generalization, so let's get that out of the way, your argument itself is fallacious. You have a biased view on Christian apologist, and because you disagree with them, you resort to saying that the whole Christian apologist approach is fundamentally flawed therefore all of their arguments and evidence is wrong. It's ok if you disagree, but don't project that fact on over to dismissing it as a whole without refuting individual arguments.
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EqualAndFree
by definition it is a hasty generalization, so let's get that out of the way, your argument itself is fallacious. You have a biased view on Christian apologist, and because you disagree with them, you resort to saying that the whole Christian apologist approach is fundamentally flawed therefore all of their arguments and evidence is wrong. It's ok if you disagree, but don't project that fact on over to dismissing it as a whole without refuting individual arguments.
ivantheterrableone 4 months ago
Some efficacy that the 'Lord' used Moses mouth with. Leads one to see more impotence than omnipotence.
StephenWebb1980 5 months ago
Obi-Wan reminds us that truths have a point of view. I know that an apple is small. An ant knows an apple is big. Both are correct. Why is it not possible to reconcile the story of expulsion from Paradise on a personal level and the evolution of our species on the scientific?
OrdinaryHum 6 months ago
meh. atheists can't prove that God does not exist. they just have another faith-based religion.
synal 6 months ago
You must be kidding me.Thouest must be eloquent.You must eficate!Who made your mouth?Wow.Amazing,utterly amazing.It's all Greek to you,sir. Cannibals?Don't you still drink his blood?Wow.what BS.you are just as bad as WLC.I didn't know there could be two of you.
rickuj 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think it may also prove helpful to some of the viewers here to try to evaluate many of the more strident claims of the anti-theist critique ("brights") from a ideological/ metaphysics perspective. Check out the recent article by Jackson Lears in the May 16, 2011 issue of the The Nation entitled "Same Old New Atheism" .The article offers a compelling analysis of Sam Harris' works. Consideration is given to general secular social perspectives
shieldsff 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You need apologetics, because what you believe has no evidence.
tallliza 7 months ago
I could only manage 1:17 and nearly threw up.What a pile of utter shite.
naybobdenod 9 months ago
Let's play count the christian fallacies and lulz;
3:40 asserting truth without backing
8:50 laughable strawman of evolution, abiogenesis and the big bang
9:55 dishonest denial or ignorance, the bible contradicts what we see in nature more than just a few times
Wow, only 3 with this one, that's gotta be a new record, usually in the span of 10 or so minutes the count is around 10-20. Though it was mostly just a small reciting of history attested from sources outside the bible.
Feralus69 9 months ago
Comment removed
shieldsff 7 months ago
f u c k j e s u s .period
letempdoitdir 10 months ago
@letempdoitdir May God Forgive you because u do not know what u say, May God Bless you brother.
TheLifeOfAlvinLowery 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jimbo525SE
I read "The Language of God" and enjoyed it, although I think Dr. Collins draws some unwarranted conclusions from the evidence he presents.
I wouldn't call him an apologist per se, and I know he's caught a lot of flack from more conservative evangelicals for his acceptance of evolution. Nonetheless, it's always useful to have an intelligent, EDUCATED believer put in his two cents.
ClumsyRoot 11 months ago
The problem of evil is resolved by free will.
But in heaven we assume we have free will and that there is NO evil.
Do we have free will in heaven?
if yes:
Such a possible world where NO evil and free will can EXIST...
if not:
Then free will is NOT an adequate defense for evil.
-an atheist
skepticnyc 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I think it's notable that Atheists keep coming back to listen to apologetics... you'd think if they were really SURE of their beliefs that they would have better things to do.
BUT: The truth is WAY DEEP DOWN they want to believe in God, and to know Him, because that's what they were created for - though they vehemently deny it.
lastdaysguitar 1 year ago
u no y gays anal and wanking r imoral because it wount lead to babys and u need to have look of babys for a big tribe all the anal gay wanking tribs died out because the straight anit oral tribs killed them
sirbestnameever 1 year ago
Good Video
winner239 1 year ago
...dude that's messed up, "Bearded guy" sitting in the back is sleeping hard! Lol
Fwam95 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Great Apologetics Site:
thirdstreetapologetics.blogspot.com/
SydandReese 1 year ago
I thought that this was just a great video explaining what Apologetics is. How Apologetics is not saying we are sorry for being Christians is great I think and how he explained what Apologetics is by using Bible characters and other influential people in the Christian Faith.
bltallest 1 year ago
Interesting video, I had wondered what the origin of "apologetics" was, it's nice to know the answer. My question is, why is questioning the Christian faith always characterized as an "attack" or an "assault"? Essentially, why, even though Christianity is the largest religion in the world, do Christians always act as though they are the oppressed minority? Is this a leftover from the time in which Christians really were persecuted, and not just questioned?
wendighoul 1 year ago
@wendighoul In part I might have something to do with the end of persecution in SOME places. Its persecuted heavily in other countrys. People have bibles taken away and burned are martyred ect. On it being the biggest religion I would have to disagree....never confuse PROFESSION with POSSESSION, that is never assume that when one proclaims to be a christian he actually posses salvation. You cant repent and trust in Christ and not be changed any more than you can be ran over and not changed.
MrNoAvail 6 months ago
This is really great video. I think it's pretty interesting that Christian was treated as athiest because they were not worshipping Roman God. As the preacher says, Apologetic is to defend our beliefs if there is any people who assails our faith. Peter 3: 15-16 summarizes clearly that we need to give the answers to those who maliciously against our good behavior in Christ with "Gentleness and respect." This is how God teaches us to be.
enteranne 1 year ago
The comments on this page serve as near perfect examples of how we have sacrificed clear conscience in the effort to gain worldly intelligence. The nonbeliever prides himself on his failing earthly knowledge, the Christian retaliates, creating a gap that virtually disallows the reconciliation of the two, and the Muslim or Buddhist has confidence in their faith because the Christian faith is "mean."
Tell me who is in the right, and who is in the wrong. We all need to see the logs in our eyes.
MusicRodent 1 year ago
Jesus Christ is preached well here!
St Thomas Aquinas is mention well.
Law of contradiction.
Between catholic faith and reason can't be real contradiction, because both are from God. All truth is God's truth.
akwinata1 1 year ago
I'm reading the responses to this clip. Know what's funny? Hearing one person defending their invisible, supernatural, un-testable god against someone else's invisible, supernatural, un-testable, etc. "My fable trumps your fable!" "No no, my folklore is better than yours in every way!" LOL
drumrnva 1 year ago
I normally like these obnoxious windbags, but this guys is difficult to listen too. He needs to take a class on public speaking. I notice the Muslim vs Christian discussion and i think it's great how you both ignore each other and complain about who kills who, which inspires you to keep killing each other. Keep fighting the good fight.
InKa4484 1 year ago
Mass mental retardation seminal.
nonoxynol 1 year ago
I almost had to laugh when he said what "what god reveals in the bible will never ultimate contradict what god reveals in nature." That's an easy statement to make if you don't look at nature or listen to those who look at nature.
offroadjohnny 1 year ago
@offroadjohnny =
It is just as easy to make the comment you made with nothing whatever offered in support of your contention. So I guess YOUR opinion carries more weight than the scholarship of Sproul? BTW - the god Sproul refers to is the only big-g
God there is, so if you're going to refer to him, please call him by his proper name...the True and Living God. All the other small-g "gods" such as Allah, Kali-mai, Baal, Dagon, or any others that you'd care to add are non-existent entities !
tigerlilly66 1 year ago
@tigerlilly66 Fair enough, I did not sight my work. He did not sight his in the video ether, so I though I could get away with it. But I would like to see were God is the author of the bible, or at least those parts we know are not written by men.
As for the naming of God, I never much liked calling him that, even when I was a chiristen. Just seems odd calling him an name that is also a pronoun for what he is. Like calling your cat "Cat".
offroadjohnny 1 year ago
@tigerlilly66 Also, our Muslim friend would say that Allah and big 'g' God are the same being.
offroadjohnny 1 year ago
@offroadjohnny =
Former President Bush also said that "Islam means peace". OOOPS ! Muslims may believe that Allah is the "big-g god", but it is no more true than Bush's idiotic statement. Ask the families of the 3,000 murdered by this "peaceful" religion in New York, or simply read what it says about itself, and tell me that. Islam is a rather poorly designed counterfeit that must depend on coercion to. When was the last time you heard about a Christian "honor killing"?
tigerlilly66 1 year ago
@tigerlilly66 Nice way to paint 1 billion people with the same brush. Much of the fault people find in Islam comes down to bullshit local custom, that have little to do with the religion. Honor killings are sick. I have not heard of Christians doing them in a long time. I have heard of people (including children) being beaten and burned to death in Africa for being witches, by Christians. Add to that Bosnian Genocide. Add to that all pedophile priests.
offroadjohnny 1 year ago
@offroadjohnny =
How odd that you fail to mention the hundreds of Christians murdered in the Sudan as part of a government eradication effort. I am not Catholic, and the RCC does NOT speak for me, I'm happy to say.
Your "broad brush" is just as wide as mine.
tigerlilly66 1 year ago
@tigerlilly66 See what you did there: You effectively said don't judge me but what any Christian may have done, while you judged all Muslims for the actions of a few. There are just as many sud-divisions of Islam as there are of Christianity. Bad people do bad things, even when they believe in a loving God, which both Christians and Muslims claim.
offroadjohnny 1 year ago
@offroadjohnny =
Show me ONE verse in the Koran that says or even vaguely implies that Allah is "a loving god" and I'll eat my hat!
One doesn't have to be a scholar of Islam (I am not) to know with just a little bit of study that there are absolutely NO SIMILARITIES WHATSOEVER between the God of the Bible and the Moon-god Allah! I guess you as neither a Muslim or a Christian either check it out for yourself, or do as most unbelievers do and reject any and all "religion" out of hand.
tigerlilly66 1 year ago
@tigerlilly66 Check this out Koran 85.15 "And He [Allah] is the Forgiving, the Loving," Let me know how the hat tastes. Your deity is hardly as loving as people make him out to be: the Bible is full of people he has had killed, told his followers to kill, or allowed to be killed. Jesus is a fair better example to follow then his father.
Oh and because dropped the "Moon-god" bit, you should good Christ and Horus sometime.
offroadjohnny 1 year ago
why is he speaking greek if he cant... he suess ee nay kai ree ios, god, either learn to speak or don't try
FockerTheLopper 1 year ago
R.C. Sproul is a brilliant man with a tremendous intellect. He can explain complex philosophical ideas in a down to earth way, and draw from his encyclopedic knowledge of biblical history (which contains a lot of middle east history) and overall world history in a way that few others can. Not to mention that he is a prolific author. He is one of the first men that helped convince my then very sceptical and closed mind of the truth of the Bible and of Christ Jesus.
1967mustang100 1 year ago 3
Regarding the comment "Christian intellectual" Sir, just how many advanced degrees do you have and how many books have you written?....................................Silence.
1967mustang100 1 year ago 2
What is your point? Are you suggesting that having advanced degrees ensures that his arguments are cogent? that his ideas are somehow validated by the fact that he's a prolific writer? Surely you recognize that such reasoning is logically fallacious.
There is no belief so bizarre that one cannot find a published Ph.D. who supports it.
I'll simply offer up an apt quote by Saul Bellow: "A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot If you don't believe in God, why are you looking at youtube videos about Him?
jardineninja 1 year ago
@jardineninja
I'm intrigued by the entire apologetics enterprise. The fact that otherwise intelligent people will go to such lengths (and depths) to defend positions that are so transparently contrived is, to me, absolutely fascinating.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot Just because I find something fascinating doesn't give me the right to insult it. If the video makes you upset or you don't agree, there is a simple way to resolve it. Click the red box at the top of this window.
To me, because you are investing so much time into this topic raises the question of what you are actually trying to accomplish.
jardineninja 1 year ago
@jardineninja
LOL! Hate to disappoint, but I have no "ulterior motives." I made an off-the-cuff comment, some people took issue and responded, and I in turn replied to them. Standard YouTube stuff.
"Just because I find something fascinating doesn't give me the right to insult it."
On the contrary, ALL of us have the right to critique ANYTHING we see on YouTube. And if my comments upset you or you don't agree, there is a simple way to resolve it: Don't respond to them. :)
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot yes
jardineninja 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This is what passes for a Christian "intellectual"? Yikes.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
Precisely what would more fit your fancy?
LaneCh 1 year ago 8
Something more than a series of ad hoc rationalizations designed to justify belief in ideas which, while appealing, are unfounded.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@LaneCh somebody that is weak enough in the faith he could 'convert' to his f-a(i)theism. Atheism is "faitheism"
FallenButForgiven777 1 year ago
@FallenButForgiven777 your comment is confusing
JohnDoeBand1 11 months ago
An excerpt of ten minutes of probably a two hour sermon and you simply dismiss Sproul? You should read some of his books; he is very famous in the apologetic realm and well-spoken to. :)
Brightstar27 1 year ago
@Brightstar27
I'm sure the other hour and fifty minutes of this sermon were packed with insight...
I also watched an interview he did with Ben Stein on the issue of "intelligent design." So much abject ignorance on display.
Yes, Sproul is eloquent, which counts for absolutely nothing.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot
This man could think circles around you.
the13thof12 1 year ago
@the13thof12
LOL! Perhaps. But seeing as you don't know a thing about me, you're hardly in a position to make such a pronouncement.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@the13thof12
Alternative Response: I agree, because most of his reasoning seems to be circular.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot
You are what passes for an armchair atheist.
phi223 1 year ago
@phi223
Seeing as I'm not an atheist, I'll have to disagree.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot
Explain.
tracifish 1 year ago
@tracifis
Explain...?
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot =
How typical you are of opponents of Christianity...throw rocks, but offer nothing whatever in its place!
tigerlilly66 1 year ago
@tigerlilly66
Would you ask a doctor who removed a tumor, "What are you going to put in its place"?
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot =
I like your analogy...Atheism is the malignant tumor that needs to be removed. As far as replacing it with something, I'd think the patient who was now rid of his death sentence would be only too happy to consider the Christian gospel as the suitable replacement you failed to offer him! Alas and alack, such is the lot of atheism...tear down, attack, deny, and denigrate the Christian faith while having NOTHING whatever to offer as an antidote to the "opiate of the masses".
tigerlilly66 1 year ago
LOL! First of all, I'm not an atheist. Secondly, the "death sentence" you speak of is called reality.
We are born, we live, we die. That is the cycle of life. Now, I understand that the human ego is unhappy with such a state of affairs, which is why we invent this concept of an afterlife to assuage our fear of death. When it comes to believing what we want to believe, our capacity for self-delusion is almost limitless.
I will continue to attack all escapist ideologies, religious or otherwise.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
@tigerlilly66 Cancer is caused by a defective form of cell replication. A tumor is a cluster of cancer cells that spread unchecked, damaging normal cells and ultimately kill the host. Myths are caused by a defective form of reasoning. A religion is a collection of myths that spreads unchecked by common sense, damaging our sense of morality and ultimately destroying society. Therefore, a malignant tumor is a better analogy for theism. Atheism, being exact the opposite, is more like a vaccine.
VerumAdNauseam 1 year ago
@VerumAdNauseam =
Your response is exactly why there will never be an accommodation between atheism and theism, nor should there be. We both have diametrically opposed world views and both cannot prevail. Atheists cannot tell the difference between theism and "religion", yet the differences are HUGE.Anything that smacks of a "god" is automatically relegated to the trash pile, without consideration or examination. This is why I maintain firmly that EVIDENCE is completely undesired by atheists!
tigerlilly66 1 year ago
@tigerlilly66 I completely agree with every point you made except the last one. The one thing that most distinguishes atheists is their desire for evidence. But there are two kinds of evidence- valid and invalid. Atheists desire valid evidence. The invalid evidence that we relegate to the trash pile is what theists cling to.
VerumAdNauseam 1 year ago
@what kind of tangible evidence are you looking for bro?VerumAdNauseam
rebeca5491 1 year ago
@rebeca5491 The only kind there is.
VerumAdNauseam 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot That's how |I feel when I watch dan barker or richard dawkins.
TheCarydal 1 year ago
@ClumsyRoot Try Francis Collins sometime.
jimbo525SE 11 months ago
Comment removed
ClumsyRoot 11 months ago
@ClumsyRoot I guess this is the reply you had for me? Well while I am not an evolution denier, I do have my reservations about it. There are a few minor questions I have about it, but that really isn't the issue. The issue is that science is supposed to be questioned and debated and there is a stigma that comes from questioning certain sciences (think evolution and global warming) As a consequence, its hard for people with legit concerns to come forward.
jimbo525SE 11 months ago
@jimbo525SE
Sorry, I thought I'd replied directly to you.
Questioning and debating is at the heart of all good science. And the mechanisms of evolution ARE debated, sometimes quite vociferously, by biologists all over the world. What is no longer at issue--what no educated personal can reasonably argue against--is that the process itself takes place. The evidence is unambiguous, overwhelming, and grows by the day.
I don't know enough about global warming to speak on the issue.
ClumsyRoot 11 months ago
@ClumsyRoot I'd be interested in what you think about the "whatyououghttoknow" channel as it pertains to evolution. His case is that bacteria have only slightly changed since we have been looking at them for the past 200 years. Then if you compare that to the change from "Lucy" to modern human's and the change is huge. He then says that if you compare the number of lifetimes using the average life cycle, the equivalent for bacteria from Lucy to Us, is around 6 years.
jimbo525SE 11 months ago
@ClumsyRoot Now one of the weaknesses of his argument is he doesn't talk about asexual vs sexual reproduction where sexual reproduction would lead to faster evolution, but I think he does have a point that we should have seen more change than we have.
jimbo525SE 11 months ago
@jimbo525SE
I definitely agree that there's a great deal about evolution that we don't yet understand. My point--and Colins'--is that evolution (descent with modification) does indeed take place.
ClumsyRoot 11 months ago
@ClumsyRoot Oh and you did reply directly to me. It appeared in my inbox (which is how I know when I get comments) but I think you or the channel owner deleted it. It lists your name with "comment removed" anyway.
jimbo525SE 11 months ago
@jimbo525SE Actually you're right in that science is a discipline that asks questions, but that doesn't mean science doesn't have most of the answers. I even have questions for evolution but of course mine are true inquiry and not trying to prove it's validity, that has been done,it is the most valid theory to explain life etc. available. PERIOD....unless you believe in a magician in the sky then anything is possible, including healing amputees.
JstNEarthling 9 months ago
@ClumsyRoot You should know by now that Christians are much too sensitive and weak to handle fair comment. Is there such a being as a Christian intellectual when he is discussing the faith? No, because the intellect and faith are in opposition. :)
MzHellinahandbasket 9 months ago
Yay, let's all pretend that the real purpose of apologetics isn't to cover up and obfuscate all the glaring inconsistencies and horrible content contained within the christian religion!
Wait ... oops!
Anyone can interpret the religion any way they want, INCLUDING this man. That's why there are over 30,000 different sects, and that's why there are apologetics.
PeachyPeachPie 1 year ago
Absolutely!!!! Use the mind that God gave you for his glory, and He will show you his purpose.
wkialyleiam 2 years ago
Excelent.
pedrojesusfreakaoid 2 years ago
This is great. Thanks for posting it.
varsitycamplife 2 years ago
Really Dr. R.C. SPROUL is one the remaining few conservative Christian preachers who preaches the true Gospel of the Holy Scriptures without compromise nowadays.
God Bless.
tomcatjeff1985 2 years ago 10
@tomcatjeff1985 Did he sell his daughter into slavery?
ajuk1 1 year ago
apollo = one of satan's names. no need to apologize for christianity. it isn't a religion it's a reality.
loafybrown 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The Christians should APOLOGISE to the world for making the world blind.
triantis35 2 years ago
Did we make you blind??? This a self defeating statement. Use common sense when you post on you tube.
chrismac1980 2 years ago
Where do I begin......This is not a forum for discussion but.....Who burned the Library in Alexandria 7 times?Who killed all the Hellenes in the Greek penisula(Hellenic thinkers)Who closed the Schools of Plato.Who distroyd 2000 greek Manuments and theaters. I can go on and on.Yes we are blind now.
triantis35 2 years ago
triantis35: [7 times?]
SEVEN? Really? Exaggerate much? Does 48 BC count?
Paulomycin 2 years ago
Hey Paul, do you still think a baby T-Rex rode on Noah's ark?
And do you still believe Jesus rode from the dead on the 3rd day?
kenny582 2 years ago
care to defend your statement? id like to hear how Christianity has blinded the world? please elaberate...
ASONOFUNCLESAM 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
one and one is three......
thats the christian thought
triantis35 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
LoL @ From Slime...
Well, sexual reproduction is pretty slimey when you think about it.
Atheistx82 2 years ago
Hmmmm, Pagan Intellectuals like Hypatia of Alexandria?
Atheistx82 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
;) The greeks had apologetics for their gods too, so it was nice of him to mention Apologia and Mars Hill.
To call oneself an apologist is nothing to be proud of, almost any religion has it's apologists. What does it say of a god that needs apologists?
Why should the Hindu gods require Brahma's and the Muslim god Imams and the Christian god Preachers?
Anyway, yup, Romans called Christians atheist.
Everyone claims to have the one true god or the real true gods, by the way.
Atheistx82 2 years ago
I have sat at Dr. Sproul's feet as it were (through broadcasts and his books) for almost 20 years now. We need more men like this in our Faith.
NotYourTypicalNegro 2 years ago 15
Has been one of my favorite ~men of wisdom~ and ~knowledge, for the past 20years. Listen to Dr. Sproul's radio broadcast each week day morning at
6:00a.m. Very intriguing man. i enjoy very much, his eloguent, as well as relative delivery. YAH bless him.
valambiguous 2 years ago 2
Dr. Sproul is one of the integral people in my conversion to Calvinism
bluesboy25000 2 years ago 3
Dr. Sproul was also my door to Calvinism, no better translation of the bible than The Legioner Reformation Study Bible. , Thumbs up !!!
ASONOFUNCLESAM 2 years ago
Just like a begger, waiting for another hand out
taimamalam 2 years ago
you use your mouth you use your tongue...im too immature for these pharasee's ah hahaha perfecto
Babaretro222 2 years ago
I love this guy
stuntmanssp 3 years ago
How true is Judaism in Christianity? People are continuously proclaiming wars are necessary all the time that I hate those religions proclaiming holy wars for their gods. I regard they are primitive and that they are using their permittivity to lie for them selves. If their gods exist, they have no need to die for anything. THEY would be JUST LIVE without these craps because THEIR GODS EXIST. They proofed that their gods don't exist. Why wars? It is because there is no gods.
beancube2008 3 years ago
You need to understand that there is a price for sin. There is a physical price and there is a spiritual price. The physical price manifests itself in many ways, war being just one. And, if you look at most wars doing done in a gods name, you'll find that the victors often erected statues of themselves and not their god. Invoking the name of a god does not a religious war make. No more so than if I were to go to war invoking your own name. Remember that.
selderane 3 years ago
Hmmm, I don't recall the crusades being about idols, and I don't recall the Irish civil wars being about anything besides who worships god correctly? Do remember though that Yahweh is a war god...
(EX 15:3, IS 42:13, HE 12:29)
Christians seem to forget that before his miraculous refurbishing of the new testament; their god was a terribly vindictive and vicious god.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
I certainly haven't forgotten. The Yahweh of the OT is the same Yahweh of the NT. The judgments Yahweh dispensed in the OT continues to this day and will culminate in the events of Revelation and the Book of Daniel.
You see a vindictive and vicious God. I see a God of Laws and Righteousness. A God that says there are penalties for sin. And God ALWAYS provides a way out before judgment comes. Always. It's not His fault people choose not to do so.
There's no "refurbishing" in the NT.
selderane 2 years ago 2
Oh really? Funny I don't believe the sabbath is punishable by death or that we should stone adulterers anymore?
2 Kings 2:23-25
Samuel 15:3
Luke 19:27
Hosea 13:16
A righteous god who kills 42 children? A righteous god who has children slain merely for being stuck with their parents? Are we really talking about the same loving lawful god? Yahweh is a bloody war god who commonly desired blood sacrifice (Animals then Jesus), and yet he is about peach and love... Right...
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
Your "objections" have been answered by apologists time, and time, and time again. You're not bringing out deep, dark secrets the Church doesn't want revealed. 10 seconds on Google will give you the answers to your questions - but I suspect they're not the answers you're looking for.
Your tone is not that of one that sincerely wishes answers. Rather, you merely wish to rub a Christian's nose in what you expect they'll blanch over. I'm not that Christian.
I'll leave you to your game.
selderane 2 years ago
I have googled rationalizations to these bible verses actually. If I found a good response I would stop using it, and consider it reconciled; but as of yet, they all seem contradictory and inconsistent to what Christians seem to value.
Basically what I am getting from your response is "I can't defend my faith, I give up"
In your bible it says to defend your faith, and all your doing is fleeing as soon as you hear a tough question. At least for-fill your duty as a Christian.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
Fulfill my duty? You are in not position to order me to do anything. I know your type and I'm not playing the game. You're not interested in answers, only conflict. Only showing off how smart you think you are.
If you've found Christian answers for those passages, or your feelings in general, wanting, a YouTube comment page isn't the place to reconcile them.
I can and do defend my faith. I just don't believe you're looking for answers and the faithful are not here to entertain you.
selderane 2 years ago 2
isn't that the perfect escape route... When someone challenges you they obviously aren't sincere enough to debate, but when someone comes groveling at your feet your more than happy to fill their head with your dogma. If you truly believe I am going to hell then what are you waiting for? What could possibly be more important than saving my soul from eternal damnation for my finite crimes on Earth? Your ego, are you joking?!
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
You have a good day.
selderane 2 years ago 2
"To give truth to him that loves it not is, but to give him more plentiful material to misinterpret it" George McDonald.
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
What hell are you talking about?? the one you don't believe in? the one you don't need salvation from? Make up your mind, or should I say minds?
You are trying to put a christian person down by putting down a God you don't believe in, using quotes from a Bible you don' take seriously, using Christian terminology you disdain... What are you playing at??? Debating for the sake of debate is just like trying to satisfy a pig's unquenchable desire to roll in the mud.
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
minds?
I am not trying to put a Christian down, I am trying to get him to be sincere enough to try and save my soul. If you truly believe I am going to hell the nicest thing you could possibly do is try and convince me god exists. Am I wrong?
I like debate, I find it entertaining. If I am wrong: I WANT TO KNOW! If god is real, please demonstrate the evidence. If not, then don't bother making the claim since you cannot defend it.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
First of all, Christians ARE NOT called to convince ANYONE of ANYTHING... proclamation of the Gospel is not a debate. You can accept it, and that would be great, or you can reject it, either way when it's time for you to face the Creator (which you don't believe in) you will not be able to say "no one told me". We PROCLAIM because we KNOW, that's as far as our responsability goes. The Choice is yours.
God Bless
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
All depends on how good of a Christian you are, and if you actually follow the bible: 1 Peter 3:15 (couldn't find this passage earlier I meant to throw it at selderane). I don't reject it, I simply demand the evidence. Same for god.
Its not a choice. I was determined to be a skeptic from my environment (external factors) and my experiences (internal factors) which lead me to demand evidence for all claims, including your claims. There was no truly free 'choice' involved.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
(continued)
Its not a matter of free-will, and if I happen to see god I wouldn't say sorry or 'if I had only known!' I was determined to be skeptical of any claim, and he didn't show me any evidence to believe in him. If god can still send me to hell (without have a truly free 'choice') then you are worshiping an evil god who creates atheists simply to send them straight to hell.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
Again, using Bible verses to your own purpose is self defeating since you don't believe in it. But to give you something to think about ... 1Cor 2:14
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
I really don't understand how using bible is self defeating simply because I am an atheist? Technically that is an ad hominem attack, even if I don't believe the bible to be true it still tells you to defend your faith. If you refuse then you are being inconsistent with you beliefs. You need to separate the message from the messenger. Just because I can abstractly argue with you about your god, despite the fact I don't believe in your god, will never make my point invalid.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
(continued)
About 1Cor 2:14:
Number 1) god omniscient and he understands atheists perfectly. This is just plainly obvious.
Number 2) "Judge not, lest ye be judged." -Matthew 7
Number 3) we judge everything all day long whether or not we like it, but this depends on how you define judgment which I the bible is pretty inconsistent on.
Number 4) 1 Peter 3:15 requires you to defend your faith. I don't see any way to avoid this personally?
Number 5) Respond to all of my comment please.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
OK, I'll engage, but first let me ask you a question: Are you being sincere in your quest for truth or are you just looking for more fuel to keep your hunger for argumments alive and for someone to keep you entertained?
Secondly: It seem to me that you have an answer to all the responses people have given you, tell me, are YOU omniscient?
or is your will clouding you judgement as to be able to discern what is true?
Please respond to these questions and I will respond to yours.
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
I want to be right about as many right things as I can possibly be right about. If god exists, I would love to see the evidence, and considering how at least 60+% of America believes in Christianity there must be a lot of evidence: that I am either not finding or not finding at all convincing. Do I want to debate? Of course, but if someone can falsify my arguments and ideas I would be open.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
(continued)
For instance perhaps a month ago I was an omnivore, but after watching videos, and debating vegetarian I have actually become a vegetarian myself. I am willing to change with the evidence.
Another example I used a bible passage that said something like, 'Jesus tells you to hate your mother and father' to mean that he actually wants you to have disdain for your parents. Contradicting the ten commandments.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
(continued)
Eventually a Christian demonstrated to me that the passage actually meant to put parents on a level below Jesus. I then realized it was just a misleading translation, and thanked him for the correction. I am defiantly not omniscient. Since that Christian corrected me I have never used that argument again because new evidence convinced me that I was wrong. I am willing to follow the evidence where ever it goes.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
Thanx for your response, it does appear that you are being sincere, ta least for what I can read. It seems somewhat surprising that you yourself quote a percentage figure of the amount of americans that call themselves christians, at 60+% it is not an insignificant amount, that in itself is evidence of Christ life changing power.
In reponse to your questions re. 1Cor 2:14
1.- God not only understands atheists hearts, but knows EVERYONE's heart see Jer 17:9.
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
2.& 3.- A lot of misunderstandings of biblical verses come from not understanding the context of the text, some passages require 'the whole council of the word of God', meaning you have to follow the subject from Gen. to Rev to get the full picture. Specially with subjects as complicated as the one of Judging and to what end we judge, and who or what we can judge. The short answer we are called to judge works, or results but not the heart of the man, or to what end someone does something.
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
4.- 1Pet 3:15. "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:" If we read the context we will understand that what Peter is saying is that if we, as christians live as we ought to, that will cause non-believers to wonder and ask of us what is it that makes us be (for example)joyfull when things are not that great. (it's like what they say, smile and ppl will wonder)
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
Well I understand that certain verse are extorted by people who don't understand them; like the hate thy mother and father above. This verse is a little different because I know atheists who said this verse destroyed their faith; they couldn't defend their belief. I also know Christians who do believe this verse gives them reason to debate their beliefs. You may be right, but as far as I can see (because I am ignorant) it would seem that the interpretation I hear is the correct one.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
Yes it couldn't hurt to get through the entire bible. Finally got my hands on my own hand held bible, and I am starting to annotate it in between classes.
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you like poetry you will like this poem search " is the cross christian". It will blow your mind.
TheTruthUnderTheHood 2 years ago
Well the population in the Middle East worships Allah so is that evidence that in the Middle East Allah exists? Also remember that perhaps a hundred years ago probably near 99% of America was Christian; its defaintly declining. Does that mean god is fading away? Even further so what if everyone in the world believed 2+2=5? Is any truth decided by popularity?
I agree with you, but the passage disagrees with both of us? If x * y = 0 one of the variables must be 0 (also known as false).
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
S.A.B.
There are lots of verses in the Bible that could destroy anybody's faith if they cannot undestand them, or someone explains them to them. And I have personally gone through that, not that I have lost my faith, but I've had to dig deeper to get the full meaning of certain verses. Mind you I am not claiming to know the whole of the Bible (I am certainly not omncient). There are cultural, and spiritual things things we do not understand by simply reading the Bible.
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
There are spiritual things that cannot be understood by just reading. To dramatise this I'll give you the example of churches dividing themselves because of differences in interpretations. Does this mean the Bible contradicts itself? Absolutely not, many time we get the meaning we want to get , because it is convenient for us or we are interpreting things through our own experiences, which is the wrong way of understanding anything, let alone the Bible.
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
Also, what I meant to say in regards to the 'popularity' of christianity in a secular country was that I trust many people's lives have been changed by knowing Christ personaly. You see the change comes from within, not through circumstances, but it is, literally a change of HEART. and that is evidence. In the middle east, you have no choice, either you are a muslim or off with your head.
By the way, what are you studying?
AxeMan0170 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you like poetry you will like this poem search " is the cross christian". It will blow your mind.
TheTruthUnderTheHood 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you like poetry you will like this poem search " is the cross christian". It will blow your mind.
TheTruthUnderTheHood 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you like poetry you will like this poem search " is the cross christian". It will blow your mind.
TheTruthUnderTheHood 2 years ago
Vindictive yes, revengeful yes, jealous yes, still the same yes many people have forgotten that God is the same yesterday today and forever. He still cares about His people the same way He did then and He will return for the judgment of all men and the revelation of His glory.
croy726 2 years ago
Incredibly uninformed opinion. You should study before you assault.
varsitycamplife 2 years ago
Where you responding to me, if so, what are you referring to? I received a comment notice, but I cannot figure out which comment you are referring to?
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
Atheist worldview lacks the epistemic credentials to account for 2+2=5.
Since the Laws of Logic and the truth of mathematics are an expression of God's nature, they will never change.
but within atheism there is no reason to assume that math and the Laws of Logic will unremittingly remain the same.
theism alone has the epistemic credentials and ground account for necessities, immutables.
Those must exist, God must exist
Goddoesexist 3 years ago
Concepts that seem to be absolute doesn't prove god, its a non-sequator. Please explain how not having a god means that absolutes cannot exist? Just because A will always equal A doesn't mean god must exist :P
If your going to employ TAG at least do it right. Non-sequator ftl :/
SuperAtheistBrothers 2 years ago
I'm an atheist, but I absolutely love this guy. He's a brilliant Christian SCHOLAR, and I wish we had more R.C. Sprouls and less Pat Robertsons.
Sigil23 3 years ago
Sigil,
This is the first I have heard of this gentleman and will not be the last.
You are right that he is brilliant.
deluxmodel 3 years ago
Not to be rude, but I have never understood how someone can say "I am an atheist." Atheism claims that there is no god. However, you cannot know that for sure. You would have to know everything there is to know to know for sure that there is no god. But if you somehow have the ability to know everything, then you have just adopted a characteristic of god.
Heruhim 3 years ago
"Atheism claims that there is no god."
This is incorrect. Atheist do not see evidence of a god. They do not "believe" anything. Religion on the other hand beliefs there is a god. Religion has so far been unable to produce a God or show direct evidence of one.
In fact, much to the annoyance of religion, it appears that God is man-made and largely a psychological phenomenon.
4312ton 3 years ago
Atheism is the default position... Are you an a-fairiest or do you just not believe in fairies? Are you an a-santist or do you just not believe in santa? To say that I have to prove to you that god doesn't exist is a fallacy (pushing the burden of proof) also atheists do not make a claim of certainty (that is for the amplification of either agnosticism or gnosticism). Atheism isn't even a positive claim because it is in fact a lack therefore of a belief in god.
SuperAtheistBrothers 3 years ago
This is a common arguement. A-theism is a RELIGION and evolution by natural selection is its creation story. Your attempts at hiding behind a cloak of nonreligion have failed miserably.
internetpastortv 2 years ago