Added: 2 years ago
From: Superchargerman
Views: 2,050
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (34)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • agnostic to the question of whether their is a divine creator at all,but then talk about the "spiritual category" into which you fit.As for early Christians revising the gospels i'll just say that in Christianity and Judaism it is a mortal sin to change or add to any sacred text.For example "I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book." Revelations 22:18

  • ..When people say science has disturbed their view of sin?do they think sin is something to eat?or when they say science has shaken their faith in immortality,do they think that immortality is a gas?.You say"im stuck in a two-pole, either/or rut regarding religion and spirituality.But you must understand that Christ is not religion,Christ is life.He said he came"to bring life,and life more abundantly".That is not a religious matter,it is a spiritual one.I find it funny that you call yourself..

  • ....that science has disproved the existence of god or has shown that miracles are impossible or shown that traditional ideas of morality merely reflect our animal evolution.The fallacy is,of course ,science is limited to the work of discovering and applying truths about the material word.If there is a spiritual presence in the material world,physical science will not discover it;and if we discover it,physical science will have no idea what it means.

  • When speaking of materialistic evidende,i meant supposed evidende used as an argument against the existance of God(maybe i could have phrased that part differently,made it clearer).Yet,as i said before,the true sceptic must question everything - logic,reason and even reality.He must ask himself why the Universe should be intelligible to him at all.(when i used the phrase bewilderd ape,i meant not just atheists,but all people).Too often a physicist or biologist is believed when he declares,..

  • regardless of what you think, cs lewis is a great writer and thinker....that was deep

  • agreed nameofthepen...

  • Nice reading of C.S. Lewis.

    Guilt is truly a hammer in a velvet glove.

    Are there any absolute victims?

    Perhaps Jesus had some keen insight into giving a man a chance for a fresh start.

    P.S.: I am an agnostic, so have no "dog in the fight".

  • P.S i am an agnostic?that does not clarify anything."agnostic" is simply the greek word for the latin word "ignorant".The problem with agnostism is that if the agnostic is truly sincere in his scepticim he can't think at all because thinking involves accepting certain things which cannot be proved,but can only be accepted on faith.All thinking and logic begins with assumptions that can't be proved (in logic called axioms)but the real sceptic has nowhere to begin because he must doubt everything

  • @godriczimmerman - Hey, pathetic, backstabbing coward - next time you leave a snarky reply to someone on a forum, have the courage and basic decency not to erase the automatic routing address YT puts on it, so they are notified of your response.

  • @nameofthepen LOL finally realized have you.Yes,i was quoting Chesterton.Thought you might have got there quicker seeing as almost everything i said was from Chesterton video's favourited on my channel.I'm sorry but the conversation was quite funny the completely ridiculous and we were as you say trolling.Though you did seem to go on and on for someone with no "dog in the fight" who "normally steers clear of the religion issue"LOL.If you check your inbox you'll see this pathetic,backstabbing?..

  • ..coward sent you a personal message saying much the same thing as that reply with no automatic routing address..i didn't see the need to send it to you twice,you see.I'm a big admirer of Chesterton's writing and i do believe in a genaral way what i was sending,but mostly i was picking on an "agnostic who had no dog in the fight".YT forums are really not the place to be dicussing these issues seriously.Anyway, as i said before good luck to you,and the other spirit inhabiting your body ; )

  • @godriczimmerman - Wow...what a remarkably bad ambassador for your "religion". :D

    Yeah, when I said I had "no dog in the fight", I wasn't talking to you. But, apparently YOUR "godvoices" were, which galvanized you to respond, and start the whole thing. You're spooky, dude.

  • @nameofthepen.I'm spooky?LOL tell me this other spirit or soul in your body is it a he or she? or maybe it's a cat?

  • @godriczimmerman - maybe.  :D

  • @nameofthepen But what's even more disturbing to me than your obvious delusion about your soul not being completely your own is how your managing to send me messages when i blocked you months ago?can you explain that to me?

  • @godriczimmerman - you blocked me? Ha hahaaa. So you admit you're a pussy. :D

  • @nameofthepen Ha i've really got to you haven't i?.You just can't help yourself LOL.Pussy eh?so much for taking the higher moral ground in this discussion.Although, now i think of it, "pussy" may be meant as a compliment if its your cat spirit talking.You really are stupid you know.You say"when I said I had no dog in the fight, I wasn't talking to you" well who the fuck were you talking to then it was just your general view on the video.It was either for everyone or no one.Moron!

  • Yes, when i heard you were having delusional episode's.That you thought there was someone else's spirit inhabiting your body i was starting to regret entering in on a discussion with you at all.Mind,i dont believe for a second this pretense that you didn't already know i had blocked you.The question was how your still managing to send me message's?

  • @godriczimmerman - I find it fascinating, in a sad way, that you can't read and comprehend any better than what you have just demonstrated by trying to paraphrase what I said to you. No wonder you are so very, very confused about other things, too.

  • @nameofthepen Well,while your enlightening me on that you can also explain how your able to send me message's?

  • @godriczimmerman - Nope.  No tickee, no washee. :D

  • @nameofthepen This conversation is going nowhere, I've obviously touched a nerve if your unwilling to answer such a simple question.But feel free to send me more message's.You obviously have no life if you've the time to hack into people youtube accounts and reply to messages sent over 3 months ago by people who you know have had you blocked.So long psycho!!

    @otherpartofnameofthepenssoul MEOWWWWWWW

  • @godriczimmerman - the "conversation" can't go anywhere as long as you are acting like a putz. (shrug)

  • ...and so he sinks through floor after floor of a bottemless universe.Reason can only be built on faith,and that faith is the foundation of of our civilisation.Man is an animal who makes dogmas.Above all,its that which sets us apart from every other creatures on this earth.The whole point is that Christ's life and words are of such a nature that they are not something you can be neutral about.He gives you a clear choice,either a madman,a liar,a demon or God,the highest truth in the cosmos.

  • @godriczimmerman - perhaps a bit hair-splitting, but well-written. But, I think we both know the "agnostic" by which I described myself pertained, in this context, to "God: yes or no?".

    When you refer to Christ's life and words as being something about which I *must* have a stance, aren't you asking me to pre-suppose, along with you, that any of those belatedly-memorialized, oft-translated, ruthlessly-revised words arrived in anything resembling their original meaning?

  • I think i understood your meaning in your use of the word agnostic as pertaining, in this context, to nothing.But the other part of your comment (in part) to"Christ as God: yes or no?".Yes,when i refer to Christ's life and words as being something about which you must have a stance, i am asking you to feel that the four gospel's are,in large part,historically accurate references to Jesus Christ's life and message.I disagree with you that they have been ruthlessly-revised etc ...

  • @godriczimmerman - you misquote me. My exact description of the hub of the question was NOT "Christ as God". Ha ha...I'm not even going there with you. I leave the arguments of the "trinity" and "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" to people who are interested in that sort of stuff. You disagree that the bible was revised - OK. That's your choice. :-)

  • @nameofthepen Pst... mate... he was quoting G.K. Chesterton. A Catholic apologist. ;-)

  • @GenghisKhan44 - Oh! Thank you. I appreciate the info. :-)

  • @nameofthepen He is worth a read. Unlike some apologists, he concedes arguments where they are sensible, and points out where they are in error. Chesterton doesn't argue to be right. He argues to try to get you to see what he is saying. And that's what apologetics is - explaining what our faith is about. It's not about being right, or trying to turn you into a Christian. Only God and you can do that. All we can do is tell you things the way they are and let non-Christians decide for themselves.

  • @GenghisKhan44 - thank you again. Yes, when you mentioned him, I went out and found a page with some of his more famous quotes, just to get a feel for who he was. Seems he was quite a delightful fellow. :-)

    I normally steer clear of the "religion issue" out here on YT forums. I really should have followed my own rule, and ignored godriczimmerman's trolling, lol. Anyway, thanks again for your time and info. Peace/out

  • @nameofthepen That is a very wise thing to do - both the looking up GK and the avoiding arguing about religion.

    The Lord be with you (even if you don't know He is). :) Peace.

  • Their is no serious evidende against the New Testement story, yet you believe that the gospels are historically inaccurate.So you will not have faith in God without materialistic evidende,but you will have faith in materialistic evidende without God. If you are just a skeptic, you must sooner or later ask yourself"Why should anything go right; even observation and deduction? Why should not good logic be as misleading as bad logic if they are just movements in the brain of a bewilderd ape?.

  • @godriczimmerman - well, lol. If I hit myself on the head with a hammer, and it hurts, and I stop doing it, and I feel better, I'd say that's pretty good materialistic logic, wouldn't you? And I don't think of atheists as "apes".

    And you do not have a word to describe the spiritual "category" into which I fit. For you are stuck in a two-pole, either/or rut regarding religion and spirituality.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more