Why do you not understand my words? Because you listen to and follow your Father, for you are born from and are programmed by your Father. You are of your Father, The Devil !!! And he does not stand in The Truth, but rather speaks from his own resources believing the lie burning in your own lustful passions and desires, are blinded from the Truth that is Jesus Christ!!! You love the lie so much, you probably see my words as hate speech.
@klfly Jesus did return within one generation! "before this (Jesus') generation passes away". On the 3rd day He rose again! When Jesus rose from the dead, that was the fullfillment of Matthew 24! And in Revelation 19:11 is the prophecy how Christ will return for the righteous. Jesus didn't use magic or witchcraft, for that is rebellion against God, by wanting to use spiritual powers but without submitting to God's authority. The Salem Witch Trials were horrible, and not the will of God!
@jhschlarb Jesus didn't just say "I'll be back" he said that the kingdom of God would return and he described a series of events, very specifically, a series of events that you're all still waiting for.
Wow, this supposedly very educated guy has almost ten minutes to disprove Christ and all he can do is stammer & stutter & ramble about some crazy comparison to the Salem witch trials? For real? He never even makes one real point. As for the Xerox argument, all those 'copies of copies' have been proven to say the exact same thing as the oldest texts. Why doesn't he open his mind on that one. He's doing exactly what he says Christians do, he has his mind made up before he even starts. Typical.
@1jomel1 "As for the Xerox argument, all those 'copies of copies' have been proven to say the exact same thing as the oldest texts." No, they absolutely do not. Early versions of Mark even have several verses missing at the end. Second, you don't have the originals to say anything about them anyway. McCormick's argument is an epistemological one that's clearly gone over your head if all you see is "some crazy comparison to the Salem Witch Trials." Listen harder, it's about double standards.
@Gmodhacka Though, you know, not caring, well that goes against the very teachings you're defending so... I guess you'll be burning with me. That's unfortunate. I was kind of hoping to finally be rid of you and your ilk.
@Gmodhacka I'm a Christian and your comment is more anti-Jesus than this whole video. You should be a ashamed of yourself. Grace isn't a privaledge, it's a gift, that is available to all. If someone does not believe that Jesus is the Christ, that is their decisions and I respect their choice to do so, but that does not mean that I could care less. Jesus died for us while we were still sinners, so maybe you should give a crap.
If I'm not mistaken, real critical thinking requires one to say "what if I'm wrong" and even try to prove what they don't believe in. If you are trying to disprove something you already don't believe in where is the critical thinking? Try taking a different approach and you might find more hard evidence for your claim, or you might find out you're wrong. Of course someone coming back from death is unreasonable, but that is why it is so special.
@perfectfailure23 If I spent my life trying to prove everything I don't believe... well its a ridiculous proposition. The Christians make a claim and we're judging the evidence they've presented. It's not holding up.
The Jews were promised a savior. This guy shows up along with many others claiming to be said savior, the Jews say "Nope, not him." and then a bunch of non-Jews say, "No, no, you're wrong that's your savior." He's the Jewish savior not recognized by the Jews? Crazy.
@klfly God said in Isaiah 53 not only that the Jews would not recognize their savior, but that they would crucify him (along with quite a few other predictions). That was all part of the plan so that Jesus would be available not only to the Jews, but to everyone else as well. It's the best news ever and there's no down-side, still so many want to discredit it. No wonder the bible also says God's gonna be really pissed at the people who rejected such an incredible gift.
@klfly who do you think were Christs apostles ? they were Jews !!! It is a case of some Jews believed and some did not, up to date, we have the "Messianic Jews" who do believe in Jesus
This guy is not a real philosopher !!! There is a lot of Criticism for Christians but no real logical thinking. Why do you not go deep into the subject. If there are corroboration from 3rd hand historical sources, that pretty much says unconnected people are saying the same thing. This basically at worst would be called pretty heavy circumstantial evidence. Salem witch trials ? that has nothing to do with the "Case for Christ" , that has to do with how the church interpreted activities
The witches evidence was found at the end to be false, up to date, there is no such evidence in "the case for Christ". Instead of just criticizing, state some facts. for a man who bases himself on facts; I would expect to see something like :" It was found that the actual gospels were not written in 5--70 AD but were written in the year 300-400 AD" You should take a look at how you present your case, look at "logical thinking" and "scientific methods".
@joedoe4 You seem to have missed his point entirely. We apply a level of skepticism to the claim that there were witches that many do not apply to the claim that Christ was magic. I think the professor draws a very apt analogy. Yes, in the end there was not found to be sufficient evidence to support the claim of witches in Salem but it is also true that the evidence to support Jesus being magic is even more wanting, especially since he said he'd be back in one generation. Time to move on
Ps I am really not hating on this guy. I have a very good Athiest friend, and I was trying to understand his point of view. But I just can't. Thanks for the effort though.
Serious, this dude is taking FOREVER to get to the point. He is going around talking about human personalities, and individual imperfections....then starts to go into the point, then goes off the point. I think you should just edit it a bit. I really was trying to give this a chance. But I like the way "The case for Christ" just gets to the point..with interviews from philosophists, and professors...I am leaning toward that one. I tried. But this is not very interesting, well to me anyway.
He seems not understand or know reality. The Gospels were written by eyewitnesses during the lifetimes of other eyewitnesses. As to copying errors, we have literally thousands of ancient documents (albeit most of them incomplete, or even just fragments) that are extremely consistent. We do not yet have the originals, but the older manuscripts we find that agree with younger documents just indicate that our present copies are quite similar to the originals.
For a guy who's supposed to be a teacher on religion at Sac State, he doesn't seem to know a whole lot about the meticulous methods used in copying and preserving New Testament documents. Let's also remember that the earliest copies of the surviving works of the great Roman historians or Greek philosophers come from codexes made 1000 years after the originals. Somehow, nobody questions the authority of those works.
Secularists love to demand much more of Biblical texts
@stoogemaniac The problem is not with the texts and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't hear him questioning that they came from the time period they purport to be from. He is questioning the quality and number of the witnesses who generated said texts.
On a historical perspective, the time of the Salem witch trials had two belief systems. One was the folklore about magic and forest spirits passed down from pre-Christian times. The second was the biblical teachings of the Christian and Jewish scriptures. In the minds of most people, Christian teachings about miracles, saints, and devils mixed with folklore.
@dukemengsk The belief that witches existed was not exactly uncommon, as it was already thought that women not under the influence of men would be prone to evil influences. As such, there would already be a social stigma against people accused of being witches, perhaps an analogy would be an innocent person accused of being a rapist, and having the media report on all the "suspicious happenings" of his background.
@dukemengsk To say that the jury would not be influenced would be false, and rather than having people focus on the evidence, they would probably also be heavily biased by what they have heard about the person. So as such, the people making the decisions in the Salem witch trials could have also been prone to the same prejudices and not made decisions based on the evidence.
@dukemengsk I would say the same kind of bias and prejudice would apply to the witnesses of Christ's miracles, who were far fewer in number and who had already abandoned their lives to follow him and support his teachings.
athiests are a joke. they spend more time talking about god than jesus did. why try to find something to not believe in? plus these fools do a horrible job at presenting a strong case for atheists and this guy is a teacher, wow. i cant believe he actually compares that amount of evidence available of something from 400 years ago with something 2000 years ago. also, i bet people wouldnt be out to destroy that evidence like im sure many were with things jesus and bible related.
@ConsumedByDrums We talk about religion because we live in a world that is being adversely affected by religion. If people holding these beliefs did not try to thwart scientific progress, deny the basic human rights of women, gays and people with different beliefs, subvert education and cause further tensions and violence between the people of this planet I would not bother with them.
Can you state your argument without childish name calling & citing some actual evidence to support your beliefs?
@klfly well blame the people not the belief system.
can you just suck it up, stop trying to act like the 'bigger person' here on the internet and just respond to my argument? there couldnt be evidence in what i stated, i said evidence was destroyed or done away with, and it wouldnt be much of a 'doing away with' if there were evidence of it.
@ConsumedByDrums Suck it up? Trying to act like the bigger person? Excuse me but aren't you the one who opened your argument with "Atheists are a joke."? I'm willing to have a reasonable discussion but you seem incapable.
Yes, evidence could've been done away with. The same could be said of anything not supported by evidence. You're arguing that it's reasonable to believe in this thing despite a lack of evidence because it's possible that evidence which may have existed could have been destroyed
@ConsumedByDrums Suck it up? Trying to act like the bigger person? Excuse me but aren't you the one who opened your argument with "Atheists are a joke."? I'm willing to have a reasonable discussion but you seem incapable.
Yes, evidence could've been done away with. The same could be said of anything not supported by evidence. You're arguing that it's reasonable to believe in this thing despite a lack of evidence because it's possible that evidence which may have existed could have been destroyed
You are not seeing all the facts. When they copied the bible they wear accurate about it. They added up all the letters in one line and the words and if they didn't add up to the origonal they threw it out. I would encourege you to seek the truth of Christ. He has answerd so many of my prayers and thats how I know its true. Most people belive in some sort of God and they feel that that is good enuff to get into heaven. What if your not right and end up in hell. I will pray for you and God Bless
No, I believe in Jesus Christ. But Jesus taught us to love. What is the point of me writing a hateful message? All people are entitled to believe what they want. I am just trying to be a descent fellow human, as best i can be.
@amykso What are you talking about? Nobody accused you of writing a hateful message or suggested you should. You seem to be a perfectly decent human as well. I thought we were just having a nice conversation.
I told you how your message read to me, when you said you're not worried about facts, and this reply is baffling to me. I fear you may have a bit of a martyr complex.
@klfly I guess we are both misunderstanding each other.
I guess when I stated that "it is not so much about the facts"- what I should have stated was that it is even more than the facts....of course there are facts. Jesus appeared to hundreds after the Resurrection. I could go on and on listing facts....but the point I was trying to make was that there are many things in the Bible which we don't understand and perhaps never will in this life. But the amazing Wisdom which is found ..
Thanks for sharing your opinion. Just wanted to say that I am a Christian and the thing is- for us, it is not so much about the "facts" but about the amazing and undeniable wisdom in the Word. And the message of love- that Jesus came to the world not to condemn it but to save it by giving His life. There is no other gift that I can see that is more beautiful. Jesus came to change hearts. And how wonderful it is, as a human being, to receive his Grace.
I suggest that you refrain from making ignorant remarks about ones education. It seems to me that you are the one that needs to do a little more research before you start debating the bible.
In Luke 16:8, "the children of this world are in respect to their own (so the Greek) generation (i.e. in relation to men of their own kind, men of this world) wiser than the children of light," are in respect to their generation (men of their kind, godly, men of the world to come).
@klfly When people witnessed about Jesus's (NON- MAGICAL) resurection, it was neither socially up-bringing, nor would they fight so srongly for something that they had merely invested in. One can always start their life over, but you can only die once! (As they knew that they could and probably would for fighting for Him) Lastly, I would just like ot ask, Why if you don't even take Jesus and our Faith seriously, Why would you spend so much time and effort on something you consider a joke!??!
@18mia65 Don't you see people all around who are equally as convinced, who give their lives, for beliefs that you think are not correct? Every religion has it's martyrs.
As for why I'd put my time and energy into Christianity, it's not a joke. It's a destructive force in the world I live in.
@klfly Some people's greatest drive isn't to protect their family, so you couldn't say that it is first off. Secondly, it would be good for their social standing to go against their own family if the rest of the town believed that the person really was a witch. It is called going with the flow and doing what the crowd wants.
Another thing Mr Philosopher. People back in those days didn't have the technologies that we "depend" on today to make critical decisions. They had to rely on their own perception and think critically in every day to day situation. They had to depend on their own interpretations and relied on their own abilities to take care of themselves and their families. I bet you that they were much more skeptical than you think. These guys show nothing accept their own lack of critical thinking.
@truwired I like the way you say "Mr Philosopher." Let's us know right up front what we're dealing with.
In my experience, people with less education and access to technology are not more skeptical but are instead more superstitious. If you consider every religion, other than the one you yourself believe in, to be superstitious and then look at the world you'll see this is true.
The problem with his comparing witnesses from the Salem trials to those who witnessed the resurrection of Christ is that the witch witnesses gave testimony based on fear and to protect their own life/social standing. Those that gave testimony on behalf of Jesus were doing so knowing that they would be ridiculed and eventually killed. This in itself is not something that any person would do for any reason unless they new it was true and witnessed the Risen Jesus with their own eyes.
@truwired Our greatest drive would be to protect our family and yet people got whipped into hysteria where they testified against their own families for fear that satan had gotten to them. And how is that good for one's social standing?
As for the witness of Christ's resurrection, they had given their lives and livelihoods over to following him so they were invested strongly in his being right.
In the sermon on the mount he says he'll return within one generation. He's late.
@klfly Read and understand Christ is by no means late, save your soul - Luke 29
Then He spoke to them a parable: “Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near. 32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.
Please explain: Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Jesus states that all the signs marking the end of the world in Matthew 24 would be fulfilled before his generation ended. That generation ended 2000 years ago, and the world has not come to an end, neither has all those signs been fulfilled.
@klfly In Matthew 24:34 "this generation shall not pass (namely, the Jewish race, of which the generation in Christ's days was a sample in character; compare Christ's address to the generation, Matthew 23:35-36, in proof that generation means at times the whole Jewish race) until all these things be fulfilled," a prophecy that the Jews shall be a distinct people still when He shall come again.
mmmm.... ok...well let me tell you my side of the story... christ is not god his a prophet.. he came to tell everyone the word of god.... GOD is a spirit not a man... god has no image... so if you looking for god look at your inner self first... i like line(john 17:15 and 17:17) i know book it was rewritten... but in other to understand it more u have to read it in a different languages to get a different point of view. have u heard the story... the tower of babel???
@luckyluciano310 Please explain/clarify this statement "i like line(john 17:15 and 17:17) i know book it was rewritten... but in other to understand it more u have to read it in a different languages". It looks as though you were quoting scripture passages to dispute Jesus Christ's divinity. ???
@msrparks1 the book was made for those who understand different languages... i understand it but only cus theirs many things happening in life... we are all the truth. everything u do is the truth. everything u say or act. theirs always two forces fighting each other... in other words we are like robots and every decision dat u make(to do or not to do)has an outcome.. u should research other cultures too... like the egyptians the truth is based on the six senses. is about reaching a divine state
@luckyluciano310 I'm sorry, I am still not understanding what you're writing. Perhaps you could use complete sentences. I'm not saying this to be rude or 'smart-a**', honestly, I just don't understand what you're saying/writing. If my attempt to comprehend what you've written is correct, it sounds like you're referring to the Holy Bible as "the book" that "was made for those who understand different languages". Is that what you were trying to say at the beginning of your reply?
The gospels were not written on hearsay. Matthew was an apostle to Christ. Mark was a close associate of Peter. Luke was companion to Paul. John's gospel was only written at most 90 years after Jesus' death, and it was the latest written. To put that in context, the most reliable biographies we have of Alexander the Great weren't written for 500 years after his death, and yet we still accept them. I'm just trying to dispute the argument that the gospels are unreliable.
@pickes13 There are many diverse sources from Alexander's time that speak of Alexander's exploits, not biographies but references to the man. No contemporary records of Christ exist except those of people invested in the Christian movement. Roman records do not record Christ. Josephus is the only contemporary historian who mentions Christianity at all and he mentions only the early Christians, not Christ himself. The Gospels are unreliable.
These guys live for themselves and will alway reject God even if all of the evidence is right in their face....people forget that guys like Josh Mcdowell and Lee Strobel were big skeptics that would argue Christians...they changed their entire lives.
The fact that the Bible is the most documented, most criticized, most influential book to ever exist should give atheists a pause to first off respect it and then read and research like Strobel did to see if it is really possibly true.
@yobro3535 As one of "these guys" let me say that I honestly and sincerely looked for evidence of a God. I had been raised Christian and wanted very badly to remain one so if I had a bias it was in favor of believing in the Bible.
Now then, if you have this compelling evidence just put it out here. Maybe look up the word evidence first so you don't waste more time telling us how popular the book is. Thanks.
Sad to hear that. Usually the transformation from Christian to atheism occurs because of a weak pulpit, a pastor who does not know how to lead his sheep(his people). This is a why Ezekial 38 talks about how no Shepard causes the sheep to get lost. We need a shepherd, or a good pastor to help us understand scripture, along with the daily assignment of making sure he/she is accurate or not.
Have you ever seen Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ? The whole thing? It answers common questions.
@yobro3535 i always said that a good pastor know each of his sheep by name!!! even if the sheep is lost and hears his pastors voice it will go to him. but theirs some wolfs dress as sheeps... for me is like a person knows his ppl but he need to make sure they are his by testing them by word and actions.i experienced this. cant explain more in process of choosing whats right. Life is a game.
@yobro3535 As an athiest, I have been a christian. I have read the Bible, read the Koran, spoken to priests, tried to believe in it all... Nothing. I just came out of a pit of nothing. The bible, though it teaches morals, contradicts itself more times than GW's presidency.
In all those years I searched, not once did "God" speak to me. Not once did I find evidence in God. All I found was a history of contradictions and coverups that built up a religion on a shaky foundation.
What got to me was bible prophecy, old testament writings hundred of years even a thousand years before Christ, talking about a Messiah that would come and gave explicit details of what would happen to him etc, The Book of Isiah is littered with it, Chapter 53 is a big one but i have talked to atheists who see all the bible as just figurative language and not literal, the bible is literal, symbolic, etc. You have to understand one book to fully understand another..ex: Dan to Rev.
If I were to write an article about "great quaterbacks" of our time, and in my article I mentioned how the Patriots drafted Tom Brady in the first round, how far do you think my article would reach? And how seriously do you think other sports fans would take me? Many would certainly come forward to correct my mistake.
It's funny to me how people that live now, assume that people who lived 2000 yrs ago were incapable of being critical.
@HeReformedMe First off, look at how educated people were 2000 years ago. It's a pretty reasonable assumption that they weren't great critical thinkers. It was an age of mythology and magic.
Now, look at modern society and the ridiculous crap people are willing to believe.
@klfly " It's a pretty reasonable assumption that they weren't great critical thinkers"
I don't want to get myself in a situation here where I'm making unnecessary inferences pertaining to this statement made above. So I think I would ask you to qualify this position for me. Give some examples of what it is your saying. If a P.M. is what you will need, I'm open to that.
@HeReformedMe Look at the level of critical thinking in your average person today and then compare that with how much education we receive today and with how much education was available to people then. People will still accept ridiculous new religions like Scientology and Mormonism. Why would the masses be less susceptible then?
clearly a philosophy teacher. He completely discounts the concept of oral history as just a bunch of people gossiping. Two angry, spoiled children who think that their intellect is greater than that of the creator of the universe. 1 Corinthians 1:18 "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."
@dryroastedseanathon He didn't discount oral history at all. He did a thorough breakdown of how we go about evaluating oral testimony.
It is you who thinks too much of your intellect. You're so sure you understand this universe and that you know who created it, etc. I am the one saying I don't know, and what stick in your craw is that I say you don't know either.
For the record, I'm not angry. Funny you come in calling names and such and yet you think I'm the angry one.
@klfly, I do know. Nice straw man argument with the whole "for the record, I am not angry" thing. I won't argue that point. If you say you are not angry I take you at your word and withdraw my accusation. Have an awesome 4th of July!
@dryroastedseanathon Terrible use of the term straw man. You specifically used the term angry so I pointed out that I'm not. Where do you see a straw man argument there? I hope you have a good 4th as well.
Paul says that 500 witnesses at once encountered Christ. Jesus was with them and others for 40 days before his ascension into heaven. The pharisees and the roman officials found the tomb empty. while during that night there were 70 roman soldiers guarding the tomb to make sure the his disciples would not take the body or let Jesus out if he were to come back to life.
this guy a is prime example of i want to do what i want to do and i can't have a GOD in the way. i am not sure why some people will never come to believe. i know GOD did not have to save anyone. i guess some body has to be here during the tribulation. maybe some hearts will just be hardened for such a time. the Pharisee's hearts were hardened. the pharaoh's heart also. who are we to question the master potter.
@crhoads62 Who are we to question? But you question and deny lots of other people's takes on God or Gods. Who are YOU to be so sure you got it right.
And your first comment is presumptuous. I am married with a kid, I don't drink or do drugs, in short I don't live my life very differently than my friends who are Christian so what is it that you think I want to do that I can't have God in the way?
@klfly remember GOD is a judge. that makes sin a legal matter. if JESUS is not your lawyer you are going to be found guilty. JESUS allows a full pardon of all sin. GOD is not going to see if your good deeds out weigh your bad. no more then a human judge would. JESUS is called mighty counselor. counselor is a term still used today to mean lawyer. GOD takes sin very seriously, so serious he sent his own son to pay the penalty for all that will accept his offer of mercy and grace. 500 char. is not
@crhoads62 You did not address as single point I made instead just filling in more details about your mythology. Your inability to have an actual discussion doesn't speak well for your ability to understand the workings of the universe.
@klfly believe what ever you want to believe. i don't let the fact that a lot of people are going to hell bother me to much. i don't feel the need to defend what i believe especially when it does not matter what evidence is presented because you like many will continue to not believe. would just be a waste of time
@crhoads62 My favorite part : "i don't let the fact that a lot of people are going to hell bother me to much." That's great.
You say you don't bother but you are bothering & defending. That you're not presenting any real evidence is you defending poorly. You say I'll never believe but I'm not stubborn. It was my flexibility that led me away from Christianity to begin with. If that compelling argument I was seeking ever materialized I could certainly be converted but in 2,000 + years it hasn't.
Oh and by the way, it seems we were right about Global Warming. Haha, now they call it Man Made Climate Change because they cant even figure out whats going on.
I've got a good book for all of you that don't believe the proof that can be given for God and Jesus. And there is proof enough that I know them to be true beyond a reasonable doubt... The book is called "I don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist." If you can honestly read that and still not believe the truth, then your not looking at scientific evidence, you're just not wanting to admit that there could be a higher being above you.
this makes me upset as a christian because I actually have experienced salvation and the peace that comes with knowing and walking with Jesus...I believe in Jesus because he litterly saved my life... I try not to judge people, I try to love people as much as I can and I try to help people with whatever they need, what is so wrong with that????
Lol, when you rid an individuals sense of ego and condition them to live for something "larger than themselves" you can fool them into believing anything. Charles Manson used this same technique as do a number of cults.
wow, who is this mavis beacon? you must have had past issues in another lifetime my friend... that's proof that there is more out there than you atheists buddies in this video say... lol
His statements against the fallibility of Jesus' witnesses also proves the point against evolution - that evidence that's archaic or millions of yrs. old is highly subject to error.
According to the tourist guide book in Salem, only 18 people were killed so this is hilarious considering just ONE atheist leader, Mao, murdered at least 70 milion of his own people. Actually, between just two nations run by atheists, China and Russia, over 100 MILLION were murdered.
Evolution isn't a matter of eyewitnesses, we have other evidence in abundance so your comparison misses.
Mao and Stalin both were atheists. They also both had mustaches. They did not kill in the name of atheism, but in the name of communism and revolution.
My point is, any event you didn't personally witness is hearsay. Secular historians validate the existence of Jesus. The same standards used to validate every other historical figure was used to determine his existence. Therefore, if the validity of Jesus' existence & divinity are in question based on the evidence, then the existence and personal data about every single person that ever existed - famous or non-famous - is questionable as well.
There is a difference between hearsay and something that left evidence. May secular historians debate the existence of Jesus but if you pay attention this gentleman did not question his existence at all, he only questioned his miracles.
If you used the same standards that Matt is using on other historical figures the majority of them pass with flying colors. A person who did the things Jesus supposedly did would have been recorded during his life and by people other than his followers.
But who are the people who found the evidence for evolution? How accurate and trustworthy were they? You don't know because you weren't there. Just because you believe what the "evidence" supposedly proves, there's no way it could be bogus? Come on! Open up your mind!
One, the overwhelming majority of biologists in the world today. Two, look further into it and you can see much of the evidence for yourself. That is how science works, things are constantly scrutinized and retested and applied. Like I said before, biology and particularly genetics has advanced a long way since Darwin's time and yet it continues to support the ideas he put forth.
That is a copout statement in attempts to disassociate yourself with atheist murderers. Do atheist leaders need to hoist a neon banner stating, "I'm an atheist and I'm executing in the name of atheism" or should they slap a label on their forward in capital letters saying, "ATHEIST" with an arrow pointing downward? I'm being facetious but you get the point.
So every bad act done by any atheist ever is on me & every bad act done by any Christian is on you? Ridiculous. Both men you mention were communist revolutionary leaders. You want to associate their actions with something, associate them with revolutionary communists.
Neither targeted the religious specifically. They targeted people in power, mostly the rich. Weak argument. Want to look at crime rates in relation to the degree in which a community is non-religious in our modern world?
Did I say that every bad atheist act is on you? Don't put words in my mouth. I have family members who came out of a communist country; I know of what I speak. Moreover, what does it matter if atheist leaders targeted the religious or not? What a preposterous statement! A murderer is a murderer. Period.
Well then what are you saying when you talk about the murders committed by communist leaders and associate it with their being atheists.
As for why it matters if they targeted the religious, I mention it because it speaks as to their motives. Look, I've wasted enough time here. You sir are a very silly person and I just don't have the time or patience to help you with your comprehension skills. Best of luck to you. Peace.
Those who present opposing views lack comprehension skills and are silly? That's quite an intolerant accusation. You obviously just don't want to see my point of view, lest it make you think outside the atheist box. However, I thank you, too, for the discussion and I, too, bid you true peace and happiness - which I only found not in mindless religiosity but with a true relationship with God.
I feel sorry for this guy. He's spending his whole life arguing with people, that doesn't sound very fun. If you don't believe in an afterlife, live it up on earth. But I know that there is an afterlife, and this guy isn't going to spend eternity in heaven. For eternity. And even if there isn't heaven and hell, he's wasted his whole earthly life. Heaven exists, and hell exists also. I want to ask all atheists just to keep that in mind. Is it worth the risk?
@christfollower4x4 I think it's unlikely that professor McCormick has spent his "whole life" arguing with people, seeing as he has found the time to obtain a PhD.
You know that there is an afterlife? On what basis?
I'd be interested to know why you think that someone whom you know almost nothing about has wasted his life.
I don't really want to aruge because you have your beliefs and I have mine. I'm not out to "christianize" you. But I've started living for God about two years ago and I know that he's there. I'm not an expert on the topic, but there's plenty of material out there that discusses scientific proof of God's existance. I would suggest "The Case For A Creator" by Lee Strobl. He was an atheist trying to disprove God but ended up discovering God in the process.
But in the end, it's an act of faith, not science. I can't impart to you the wonder of knowing God as a merciful redeemer in quantities. Also, I would suggest watching the movie "The Priveleged Planet". It's made from a secular standpoint, it never mentions religion. But it obviously points to God. I have experienced God's presence in a way that I can't explain. You can't tell me that I haven't. So if you aren't willing to take a step of faith, then I have no reason to consider arguing with you.
You haven't actually addressed anything I've said, you've just talked over me. Why do you judge McCormick as having wasted his life when you know little about him?
I've seriously considered the various arguments for God's existence, and have found them unconvincing, but I'm not interested in persuading you of this if you don't want to be. I just ask that you talk to me, rather than giving me the "spiel".
First off, I'm not juding McCormick. But to put it completely bluntly, a life without God is wasted. I'm not any more "righteous" than you are. I'm a sinner and have no room to judge. All that is different between you and me is that I've accepted God's grace. So I'm saying that he's wasting his life, but I'm not judging him. As I originally stated, I feel sorry for him.
Since judging means evaluating something's worth, and you have evaluated professor McCormick's life as "wasted", how can you not be judging him?
"a life without God is wasted."
In your original message, you said "even if there isn't heaven and hell, he's wasted his whole earthly life" implying that he had wasted his life because he spent his time arguing, rather than because he's an atheist.
You know what, if you hate the idea of God and really are going to analyze me like this, then I have no debate with you. I'm praying that you will find the beauty and glory of God but nothing that I can say will convince you. Please don't be so callous to Christianity. If you don't believe it, I don't agree with you. But don't disregard it. Whether you believe it or not, our country's heritage is based in Christianity and it can't hurt to know some about it. I'm not going to continue this debate
You think that I don't know much about Christianity? On what basis? Perhaps you need to foster a little humility, and not be so presumptuous about people you know little about.
As I said earlier, Christianity is a step of faith and not something that proof will convince you of. If you aren't going to take a step of faith, then I have no argument with you.
No, science has proved many aspects of Christianity and Jesus. But I'm not well-versed in those points. I suggested earlier that you look into Lee Strobl and his books and I still suggest that. he knows a lot more about it than I do.
But even after reading that, you won't be convinced into Christianity, guarenteed. No one will convince you to believe in Jesus. You have to take a step out into something that, though proved valid by science, is only ever experienced by faith.
I've read one of Strobel's books, I think the case for faith, and didn't learn anything new. Arguments for God that draw upon modern scientific information tend to suffer from the same problems as their earlier versions. Either their premises are false, or fail to warrant their conclusions.
May I ask you, if all the arguments for Christianity were overturned, would you stop believing? If not, then are the arguments all that important to you, really?
No, I wouldn't! That's the glorious thing that I think you understand now. My God isn't limited to science! He isn't limited to history! Isn't that beautiful? That's why I've fallen hopelessly in love with him. He's as glorious as the heavens yet cares intensely for a sinner like me.
Thank you for this discussion, it has made me see more clearly my own belief. I hope that you someday come to see God's glory and love!
Yeah, that seems a little strange. But I've experienced God. Not scientifically, not in quantifications, not in knowledge. It's one of those mystical things that's super weird but super cool at the same time. That's how I know. It's not completely blind devotion. I have experienced God and I have prayer with him. So no, it doesn't bother me. I'm not living a religion, but experiencing a relationship. Isn't it wonderful?
I don't question these experiences you've had but I do question the conclusions you've drawn from them. Again, what do you say to people of complete different faiths who have also experienced the divine, the mystical, etc. in their churches or in their prayers?
To be honest, I really don't know. But my guess is that they're experiencing God too, just differently. Islam, for example, isn't evil in and of itself. It's not their actions that are disrespectful but rather their lack of belief in the true God. Once one believes in God, anyone can have those experiences despite which religion they call themselves.
Also, this sounds terrible, but the devil is able to deliver a divine experience. I'm not saying all other religions are demonic, but some
experiences may be of that content. I know that I'm serving my God because I'm following his word. But this isn't a comprehensive, air-tight answer. I can't really explain the supernatural realm as I don't understand it myself. that's where the faith that I've been talking about is applied.
@christfollower4x4 You sir are wrong. I have experienced the grand power of ra. I see him every mourning in the sky. How would u dare disagree with that? I can see my god every day.
if you, or anyone, would like to find out about the non-mystical, evidential, quantifyable (real word?) evidence, then I encourage you to read or watch the documentary versions of the following by Lee Strobel:
The Case for Christ
The Case for Faith
The Case for a Creator
You will find the critical scruitiny of Christ, Creatianty, and an existance of God coming from the investigations of a Harvard Law Graduate, former law editor of the Chicago tribule, and former active atheist.
And as you earlier stated, yes, I am arrogant and most likely presuptuous. But what's so wonderful about it is that the God and Savior in whom you don't believe has forgiven me! I thank you for bringing this sin into my sight so that I can strive to become more like my Savior.
Know that I'm continuing to pray for you and that God would work in you.
Why not ask the same questions to historians? Why do many of todays top scholars believe the NT? Surely 'critical thinking' would have made them all atheist. So give them the Salem evidence and see if they come up with "they were witches" I doubt it, are you suggesting that all Christians are stupid? What about those who go from sceptic to believer? Did they turn off their 'critical thinking'?
Many of todays top 'CHRISTIAN' scholars believe the NT, try asking a non christian scholar or a skeptic historian, you'll get a much different answer. Those scholars start off their study with a bias so they keep trying to fit things in with their religion even if it literally says something different, take Josephus for example, his works don't prove Jesus of Nazareth or even anything close to it not including how much of it is a forgery, except most christian scholars say it does...coincedence?
First of all the guy who wrote "The Case for Christ" used to be an atheist and began his investigative journey with a mindset of 'disproving' Christianity, so your 'double standard' argument goes out the window here.
Secondly you cannot use the Salem witches trials this way because you are not considering the motives of the witnesses in both cases. And thirdly, you guys just don't make any sense. :)
critical thinking=self delusion & ideas of self morality ( if i think it ; i'm not bad so i must be right... not only right but the one in control of what is right.)
If people started telling the Jesus stories as recorded in the gospels but substituted other names ("When Bill had come down from the mountain great crowds followed him .... and stretched forth his hand and healed [the leper]") people wouldn't buy it. They would think it's ludicrous. Only because it's familiar (even to non-Christians in the West) do we lend the stories credibility
@JoshReed0 ...
jhschlarb 2 months ago
Why do you not understand my words? Because you listen to and follow your Father, for you are born from and are programmed by your Father. You are of your Father, The Devil !!! And he does not stand in The Truth, but rather speaks from his own resources believing the lie burning in your own lustful passions and desires, are blinded from the Truth that is Jesus Christ!!! You love the lie so much, you probably see my words as hate speech.
jhschlarb 2 months ago
@klfly Jesus did return within one generation! "before this (Jesus') generation passes away". On the 3rd day He rose again! When Jesus rose from the dead, that was the fullfillment of Matthew 24! And in Revelation 19:11 is the prophecy how Christ will return for the righteous. Jesus didn't use magic or witchcraft, for that is rebellion against God, by wanting to use spiritual powers but without submitting to God's authority. The Salem Witch Trials were horrible, and not the will of God!
jhschlarb 6 months ago
@jhschlarb Jesus didn't just say "I'll be back" he said that the kingdom of God would return and he described a series of events, very specifically, a series of events that you're all still waiting for.
klfly 6 months ago
@klfly the Kingdom of God is HERE!
jhschlarb 3 months ago
@jhschlarb The prophecy was fulfilled "before" it was written/claimed? Nostradamus has some competition.
I think I might want to try my hand at this too. I predict Obama will win the 2008 election.
Wow! I must be just as good as Matthew!
JoshReed0 2 months ago
Wow, this supposedly very educated guy has almost ten minutes to disprove Christ and all he can do is stammer & stutter & ramble about some crazy comparison to the Salem witch trials? For real? He never even makes one real point. As for the Xerox argument, all those 'copies of copies' have been proven to say the exact same thing as the oldest texts. Why doesn't he open his mind on that one. He's doing exactly what he says Christians do, he has his mind made up before he even starts. Typical.
1jomel1 7 months ago
@1jomel1 "As for the Xerox argument, all those 'copies of copies' have been proven to say the exact same thing as the oldest texts." No, they absolutely do not. Early versions of Mark even have several verses missing at the end. Second, you don't have the originals to say anything about them anyway. McCormick's argument is an epistemological one that's clearly gone over your head if all you see is "some crazy comparison to the Salem Witch Trials." Listen harder, it's about double standards.
gatogreensleeves 4 months ago
I don't give a rat's bum if you don't believe, just don't blame me if you spend eternity burning in hell.
Gmodhacka 8 months ago 2
@Gmodhacka Deal.
klfly 8 months ago
@Gmodhacka Ok, I won't
EvolveBeyond 8 months ago
@Gmodhacka actually, hell was invented by the roman catholics.
haleygoeswhoohoo 8 months ago
@Gmodhacka Though, you know, not caring, well that goes against the very teachings you're defending so... I guess you'll be burning with me. That's unfortunate. I was kind of hoping to finally be rid of you and your ilk.
klfly 6 months ago
@Gmodhacka I'm a Christian and your comment is more anti-Jesus than this whole video. You should be a ashamed of yourself. Grace isn't a privaledge, it's a gift, that is available to all. If someone does not believe that Jesus is the Christ, that is their decisions and I respect their choice to do so, but that does not mean that I could care less. Jesus died for us while we were still sinners, so maybe you should give a crap.
jensenc86 3 weeks ago
Lol.
Q) You know what makes a stronger case against xtianity than anything in the video above?
A)...reading the idiotic comments from the fundies and apologists.
If the only thing you had to judge christianity on was the actions of its followers....
HellspawnICX 8 months ago
If I'm not mistaken, real critical thinking requires one to say "what if I'm wrong" and even try to prove what they don't believe in. If you are trying to disprove something you already don't believe in where is the critical thinking? Try taking a different approach and you might find more hard evidence for your claim, or you might find out you're wrong. Of course someone coming back from death is unreasonable, but that is why it is so special.
perfectfailure23 10 months ago
@perfectfailure23 If I spent my life trying to prove everything I don't believe... well its a ridiculous proposition. The Christians make a claim and we're judging the evidence they've presented. It's not holding up.
The Jews were promised a savior. This guy shows up along with many others claiming to be said savior, the Jews say "Nope, not him." and then a bunch of non-Jews say, "No, no, you're wrong that's your savior." He's the Jewish savior not recognized by the Jews? Crazy.
klfly 10 months ago
@klfly God said in Isaiah 53 not only that the Jews would not recognize their savior, but that they would crucify him (along with quite a few other predictions). That was all part of the plan so that Jesus would be available not only to the Jews, but to everyone else as well. It's the best news ever and there's no down-side, still so many want to discredit it. No wonder the bible also says God's gonna be really pissed at the people who rejected such an incredible gift.
1jomel1 7 months ago
@klfly who do you think were Christs apostles ? they were Jews !!! It is a case of some Jews believed and some did not, up to date, we have the "Messianic Jews" who do believe in Jesus
joedoe4 6 months ago
This guy is not a real philosopher !!! There is a lot of Criticism for Christians but no real logical thinking. Why do you not go deep into the subject. If there are corroboration from 3rd hand historical sources, that pretty much says unconnected people are saying the same thing. This basically at worst would be called pretty heavy circumstantial evidence. Salem witch trials ? that has nothing to do with the "Case for Christ" , that has to do with how the church interpreted activities
joedoe4 6 months ago
The witches evidence was found at the end to be false, up to date, there is no such evidence in "the case for Christ". Instead of just criticizing, state some facts. for a man who bases himself on facts; I would expect to see something like :" It was found that the actual gospels were not written in 5--70 AD but were written in the year 300-400 AD" You should take a look at how you present your case, look at "logical thinking" and "scientific methods".
joedoe4 6 months ago
@joedoe4 You seem to have missed his point entirely. We apply a level of skepticism to the claim that there were witches that many do not apply to the claim that Christ was magic. I think the professor draws a very apt analogy. Yes, in the end there was not found to be sufficient evidence to support the claim of witches in Salem but it is also true that the evidence to support Jesus being magic is even more wanting, especially since he said he'd be back in one generation. Time to move on
klfly 6 months ago
Ps I am really not hating on this guy. I have a very good Athiest friend, and I was trying to understand his point of view. But I just can't. Thanks for the effort though.
Blackiechan77 10 months ago
Serious, this dude is taking FOREVER to get to the point. He is going around talking about human personalities, and individual imperfections....then starts to go into the point, then goes off the point. I think you should just edit it a bit. I really was trying to give this a chance. But I like the way "The case for Christ" just gets to the point..with interviews from philosophists, and professors...I am leaning toward that one. I tried. But this is not very interesting, well to me anyway.
Blackiechan77 10 months ago
He seems not understand or know reality. The Gospels were written by eyewitnesses during the lifetimes of other eyewitnesses. As to copying errors, we have literally thousands of ancient documents (albeit most of them incomplete, or even just fragments) that are extremely consistent. We do not yet have the originals, but the older manuscripts we find that agree with younger documents just indicate that our present copies are quite similar to the originals.
RooftopViolinist 10 months ago
For a guy who's supposed to be a teacher on religion at Sac State, he doesn't seem to know a whole lot about the meticulous methods used in copying and preserving New Testament documents. Let's also remember that the earliest copies of the surviving works of the great Roman historians or Greek philosophers come from codexes made 1000 years after the originals. Somehow, nobody questions the authority of those works.
Secularists love to demand much more of Biblical texts
stoogemaniac 11 months ago
@stoogemaniac The problem is not with the texts and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't hear him questioning that they came from the time period they purport to be from. He is questioning the quality and number of the witnesses who generated said texts.
klfly 11 months ago
On a historical perspective, the time of the Salem witch trials had two belief systems. One was the folklore about magic and forest spirits passed down from pre-Christian times. The second was the biblical teachings of the Christian and Jewish scriptures. In the minds of most people, Christian teachings about miracles, saints, and devils mixed with folklore.
dukemengsk 1 year ago
@dukemengsk The belief that witches existed was not exactly uncommon, as it was already thought that women not under the influence of men would be prone to evil influences. As such, there would already be a social stigma against people accused of being witches, perhaps an analogy would be an innocent person accused of being a rapist, and having the media report on all the "suspicious happenings" of his background.
dukemengsk 1 year ago
@dukemengsk To say that the jury would not be influenced would be false, and rather than having people focus on the evidence, they would probably also be heavily biased by what they have heard about the person. So as such, the people making the decisions in the Salem witch trials could have also been prone to the same prejudices and not made decisions based on the evidence.
dukemengsk 1 year ago
@dukemengsk I would say the same kind of bias and prejudice would apply to the witnesses of Christ's miracles, who were far fewer in number and who had already abandoned their lives to follow him and support his teachings.
klfly 1 year ago
Comment removed
dukemengsk 1 year ago
athiests are a joke. they spend more time talking about god than jesus did. why try to find something to not believe in? plus these fools do a horrible job at presenting a strong case for atheists and this guy is a teacher, wow. i cant believe he actually compares that amount of evidence available of something from 400 years ago with something 2000 years ago. also, i bet people wouldnt be out to destroy that evidence like im sure many were with things jesus and bible related.
ConsumedByDrums 1 year ago 2
@ConsumedByDrums We talk about religion because we live in a world that is being adversely affected by religion. If people holding these beliefs did not try to thwart scientific progress, deny the basic human rights of women, gays and people with different beliefs, subvert education and cause further tensions and violence between the people of this planet I would not bother with them.
Can you state your argument without childish name calling & citing some actual evidence to support your beliefs?
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly well blame the people not the belief system.
can you just suck it up, stop trying to act like the 'bigger person' here on the internet and just respond to my argument? there couldnt be evidence in what i stated, i said evidence was destroyed or done away with, and it wouldnt be much of a 'doing away with' if there were evidence of it.
ConsumedByDrums 1 year ago
@ConsumedByDrums Suck it up? Trying to act like the bigger person? Excuse me but aren't you the one who opened your argument with "Atheists are a joke."? I'm willing to have a reasonable discussion but you seem incapable.
Yes, evidence could've been done away with. The same could be said of anything not supported by evidence. You're arguing that it's reasonable to believe in this thing despite a lack of evidence because it's possible that evidence which may have existed could have been destroyed
klfly 1 year ago
@ConsumedByDrums Suck it up? Trying to act like the bigger person? Excuse me but aren't you the one who opened your argument with "Atheists are a joke."? I'm willing to have a reasonable discussion but you seem incapable.
Yes, evidence could've been done away with. The same could be said of anything not supported by evidence. You're arguing that it's reasonable to believe in this thing despite a lack of evidence because it's possible that evidence which may have existed could have been destroyed
klfly 1 year ago
I agree...
If these atheist demand to debate someone worthy, why not Craig, lmao!
He's the beast of all debators, lmao!
KevinVang1000 1 year ago
Comment removed
ConsumedByDrums 1 year ago
This would be funny if it weren't so sad.
almightykenshin 1 year ago
You are not seeing all the facts. When they copied the bible they wear accurate about it. They added up all the letters in one line and the words and if they didn't add up to the origonal they threw it out. I would encourege you to seek the truth of Christ. He has answerd so many of my prayers and thats how I know its true. Most people belive in some sort of God and they feel that that is good enuff to get into heaven. What if your not right and end up in hell. I will pray for you and God Bless
bassman284 1 year ago
No, I believe in Jesus Christ. But Jesus taught us to love. What is the point of me writing a hateful message? All people are entitled to believe what they want. I am just trying to be a descent fellow human, as best i can be.
amykso 1 year ago
@amykso What are you talking about? Nobody accused you of writing a hateful message or suggested you should. You seem to be a perfectly decent human as well. I thought we were just having a nice conversation.
I told you how your message read to me, when you said you're not worried about facts, and this reply is baffling to me. I fear you may have a bit of a martyr complex.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly I guess we are both misunderstanding each other.
I guess when I stated that "it is not so much about the facts"- what I should have stated was that it is even more than the facts....of course there are facts. Jesus appeared to hundreds after the Resurrection. I could go on and on listing facts....but the point I was trying to make was that there are many things in the Bible which we don't understand and perhaps never will in this life. But the amazing Wisdom which is found ..
amykso 1 year ago
@klfly oh, and no martyr complex here! LOL Although thanks for your concern!
amykso 1 year ago
Thanks for sharing your opinion. Just wanted to say that I am a Christian and the thing is- for us, it is not so much about the "facts" but about the amazing and undeniable wisdom in the Word. And the message of love- that Jesus came to the world not to condemn it but to save it by giving His life. There is no other gift that I can see that is more beautiful. Jesus came to change hearts. And how wonderful it is, as a human being, to receive his Grace.
Have a good night.
amykso 1 year ago
@amykso So, you like the story too much to worry about whether or not it's true?
klfly 1 year ago
weak video
b0ondockz 1 year ago
@b0ondockz weak comment
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly weak comment for a weak video
b0ondockz 1 year ago
@b0ondockz weak reply
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly weak conversation
b0ondockz 1 year ago
@b0ondockz but strong on weakness
klfly 1 year ago
1:07 Shapeshift
MrLinolinares 1 year ago
I suggest that you refrain from making ignorant remarks about ones education. It seems to me that you are the one that needs to do a little more research before you start debating the bible.
truwired 1 year ago
In Luke 16:8, "the children of this world are in respect to their own (so the Greek) generation (i.e. in relation to men of their own kind, men of this world) wiser than the children of light," are in respect to their generation (men of their kind, godly, men of the world to come).
truwired 1 year ago
@klfly When people witnessed about Jesus's (NON- MAGICAL) resurection, it was neither socially up-bringing, nor would they fight so srongly for something that they had merely invested in. One can always start their life over, but you can only die once! (As they knew that they could and probably would for fighting for Him) Lastly, I would just like ot ask, Why if you don't even take Jesus and our Faith seriously, Why would you spend so much time and effort on something you consider a joke!??!
18mia65 1 year ago
@18mia65 Don't you see people all around who are equally as convinced, who give their lives, for beliefs that you think are not correct? Every religion has it's martyrs.
As for why I'd put my time and energy into Christianity, it's not a joke. It's a destructive force in the world I live in.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly Some people's greatest drive isn't to protect their family, so you couldn't say that it is first off. Secondly, it would be good for their social standing to go against their own family if the rest of the town believed that the person really was a witch. It is called going with the flow and doing what the crowd wants.
18mia65 1 year ago
God bless you all.
truwired 1 year ago
Another thing Mr Philosopher. People back in those days didn't have the technologies that we "depend" on today to make critical decisions. They had to rely on their own perception and think critically in every day to day situation. They had to depend on their own interpretations and relied on their own abilities to take care of themselves and their families. I bet you that they were much more skeptical than you think. These guys show nothing accept their own lack of critical thinking.
truwired 1 year ago
@truwired I like the way you say "Mr Philosopher." Let's us know right up front what we're dealing with.
In my experience, people with less education and access to technology are not more skeptical but are instead more superstitious. If you consider every religion, other than the one you yourself believe in, to be superstitious and then look at the world you'll see this is true.
klfly 1 year ago
The problem with his comparing witnesses from the Salem trials to those who witnessed the resurrection of Christ is that the witch witnesses gave testimony based on fear and to protect their own life/social standing. Those that gave testimony on behalf of Jesus were doing so knowing that they would be ridiculed and eventually killed. This in itself is not something that any person would do for any reason unless they new it was true and witnessed the Risen Jesus with their own eyes.
truwired 1 year ago
@truwired Our greatest drive would be to protect our family and yet people got whipped into hysteria where they testified against their own families for fear that satan had gotten to them. And how is that good for one's social standing?
As for the witness of Christ's resurrection, they had given their lives and livelihoods over to following him so they were invested strongly in his being right.
In the sermon on the mount he says he'll return within one generation. He's late.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly Read and understand Christ is by no means late, save your soul - Luke 29
Then He spoke to them a parable: “Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. 30 When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near. 31 So you also, when you see these things happening, know that the kingdom of God is near. 32 Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.
inaxinax 1 year ago
@inaxinax That generation did pass, and we're still waiting. I'd say he's quite late. About 2,000 years since that generation passed.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly you are incorrect about the Sermon on the Mount my friend. I don't know what you are reading but you've been misled.
truwired 1 year ago
@truwired
Please explain: Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Jesus states that all the signs marking the end of the world in Matthew 24 would be fulfilled before his generation ended. That generation ended 2000 years ago, and the world has not come to an end, neither has all those signs been fulfilled.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly In Matthew 24:34 "this generation shall not pass (namely, the Jewish race, of which the generation in Christ's days was a sample in character; compare Christ's address to the generation, Matthew 23:35-36, in proof that generation means at times the whole Jewish race) until all these things be fulfilled," a prophecy that the Jews shall be a distinct people still when He shall come again.
truwired 1 year ago
@truwired Typical apologist stance. If it doesn't work out for you, redefine a word.
klfly 1 year ago
Damn what a brilliant analogy..
boricuamm707 1 year ago
mmmm.... ok...well let me tell you my side of the story... christ is not god his a prophet.. he came to tell everyone the word of god.... GOD is a spirit not a man... god has no image... so if you looking for god look at your inner self first... i like line(john 17:15 and 17:17) i know book it was rewritten... but in other to understand it more u have to read it in a different languages to get a different point of view. have u heard the story... the tower of babel???
luckyluciano310 1 year ago
@luckyluciano310 I've looked inside myself. I see guts, some bones, other rather gory stuff.
klfly 1 year ago
@luckyluciano310 Please explain/clarify this statement "i like line(john 17:15 and 17:17) i know book it was rewritten... but in other to understand it more u have to read it in a different languages". It looks as though you were quoting scripture passages to dispute Jesus Christ's divinity. ???
msrparks1 1 year ago
@msrparks1 the book was made for those who understand different languages... i understand it but only cus theirs many things happening in life... we are all the truth. everything u do is the truth. everything u say or act. theirs always two forces fighting each other... in other words we are like robots and every decision dat u make(to do or not to do)has an outcome.. u should research other cultures too... like the egyptians the truth is based on the six senses. is about reaching a divine state
luckyluciano310 1 year ago
@luckyluciano310 I'm sorry, I am still not understanding what you're writing. Perhaps you could use complete sentences. I'm not saying this to be rude or 'smart-a**', honestly, I just don't understand what you're saying/writing. If my attempt to comprehend what you've written is correct, it sounds like you're referring to the Holy Bible as "the book" that "was made for those who understand different languages". Is that what you were trying to say at the beginning of your reply?
msrparks1 1 year ago
The gospels were not written on hearsay. Matthew was an apostle to Christ. Mark was a close associate of Peter. Luke was companion to Paul. John's gospel was only written at most 90 years after Jesus' death, and it was the latest written. To put that in context, the most reliable biographies we have of Alexander the Great weren't written for 500 years after his death, and yet we still accept them. I'm just trying to dispute the argument that the gospels are unreliable.
pickes13 1 year ago 2
@pickes13 There are many diverse sources from Alexander's time that speak of Alexander's exploits, not biographies but references to the man. No contemporary records of Christ exist except those of people invested in the Christian movement. Roman records do not record Christ. Josephus is the only contemporary historian who mentions Christianity at all and he mentions only the early Christians, not Christ himself. The Gospels are unreliable.
klfly 1 year ago
He's a philosopher, not a historian.
HeatherOfOz 1 year ago
@HeatherOfOz He is a professor of philosophy. The two are not mutually exclusive. He is also a historian.
klfly 1 year ago
These guys live for themselves and will alway reject God even if all of the evidence is right in their face....people forget that guys like Josh Mcdowell and Lee Strobel were big skeptics that would argue Christians...they changed their entire lives.
The fact that the Bible is the most documented, most criticized, most influential book to ever exist should give atheists a pause to first off respect it and then read and research like Strobel did to see if it is really possibly true.
yobro3535 1 year ago
@yobro3535 As one of "these guys" let me say that I honestly and sincerely looked for evidence of a God. I had been raised Christian and wanted very badly to remain one so if I had a bias it was in favor of believing in the Bible.
Now then, if you have this compelling evidence just put it out here. Maybe look up the word evidence first so you don't waste more time telling us how popular the book is. Thanks.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly
Sad to hear that. Usually the transformation from Christian to atheism occurs because of a weak pulpit, a pastor who does not know how to lead his sheep(his people). This is a why Ezekial 38 talks about how no Shepard causes the sheep to get lost. We need a shepherd, or a good pastor to help us understand scripture, along with the daily assignment of making sure he/she is accurate or not.
Have you ever seen Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ? The whole thing? It answers common questions.
yobro3535 1 year ago
@yobro3535 i always said that a good pastor know each of his sheep by name!!! even if the sheep is lost and hears his pastors voice it will go to him. but theirs some wolfs dress as sheeps... for me is like a person knows his ppl but he need to make sure they are his by testing them by word and actions.i experienced this. cant explain more in process of choosing whats right. Life is a game.
luckyluciano310 1 year ago
@yobro3535 As an athiest, I have been a christian. I have read the Bible, read the Koran, spoken to priests, tried to believe in it all... Nothing. I just came out of a pit of nothing. The bible, though it teaches morals, contradicts itself more times than GW's presidency.
In all those years I searched, not once did "God" speak to me. Not once did I find evidence in God. All I found was a history of contradictions and coverups that built up a religion on a shaky foundation.
Dlerue 1 year ago
@Dlerue
What got to me was bible prophecy, old testament writings hundred of years even a thousand years before Christ, talking about a Messiah that would come and gave explicit details of what would happen to him etc, The Book of Isiah is littered with it, Chapter 53 is a big one but i have talked to atheists who see all the bible as just figurative language and not literal, the bible is literal, symbolic, etc. You have to understand one book to fully understand another..ex: Dan to Rev.
yobro3535 1 year ago
If I were to write an article about "great quaterbacks" of our time, and in my article I mentioned how the Patriots drafted Tom Brady in the first round, how far do you think my article would reach? And how seriously do you think other sports fans would take me? Many would certainly come forward to correct my mistake.
It's funny to me how people that live now, assume that people who lived 2000 yrs ago were incapable of being critical.
HeReformedMe 1 year ago
@HeReformedMe First off, look at how educated people were 2000 years ago. It's a pretty reasonable assumption that they weren't great critical thinkers. It was an age of mythology and magic.
Now, look at modern society and the ridiculous crap people are willing to believe.
I think your argument collapses.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly " It's a pretty reasonable assumption that they weren't great critical thinkers"
I don't want to get myself in a situation here where I'm making unnecessary inferences pertaining to this statement made above. So I think I would ask you to qualify this position for me. Give some examples of what it is your saying. If a P.M. is what you will need, I'm open to that.
HeReformedMe 1 year ago
@HeReformedMe Look at the level of critical thinking in your average person today and then compare that with how much education we receive today and with how much education was available to people then. People will still accept ridiculous new religions like Scientology and Mormonism. Why would the masses be less susceptible then?
klfly 1 year ago
Oral HIstory is not 100% reliable obviously
bassbaby82 1 year ago
clearly a philosophy teacher. He completely discounts the concept of oral history as just a bunch of people gossiping. Two angry, spoiled children who think that their intellect is greater than that of the creator of the universe. 1 Corinthians 1:18 "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."
dryroastedseanathon 1 year ago
@dryroastedseanathon He didn't discount oral history at all. He did a thorough breakdown of how we go about evaluating oral testimony.
It is you who thinks too much of your intellect. You're so sure you understand this universe and that you know who created it, etc. I am the one saying I don't know, and what stick in your craw is that I say you don't know either.
For the record, I'm not angry. Funny you come in calling names and such and yet you think I'm the angry one.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly, I do know. Nice straw man argument with the whole "for the record, I am not angry" thing. I won't argue that point. If you say you are not angry I take you at your word and withdraw my accusation. Have an awesome 4th of July!
dryroastedseanathon 1 year ago
@dryroastedseanathon Terrible use of the term straw man. You specifically used the term angry so I pointed out that I'm not. Where do you see a straw man argument there? I hope you have a good 4th as well.
klfly 1 year ago
Paul says that 500 witnesses at once encountered Christ. Jesus was with them and others for 40 days before his ascension into heaven. The pharisees and the roman officials found the tomb empty. while during that night there were 70 roman soldiers guarding the tomb to make sure the his disciples would not take the body or let Jesus out if he were to come back to life.
USSSANJACINTO 1 year ago
@USSSANJACINTO "Paul says" How many witnesses is that? One.
klfly 1 year ago
whats the story for shoutin..im not fuckin deaf..can you imagine going for a drink with these 2??HEY YA WANNA BEER??
shoah42 1 year ago
@shoah42 Neither of us are shouting. You may wanna adjust your volume.
klfly 1 year ago
this guy a is prime example of i want to do what i want to do and i can't have a GOD in the way. i am not sure why some people will never come to believe. i know GOD did not have to save anyone. i guess some body has to be here during the tribulation. maybe some hearts will just be hardened for such a time. the Pharisee's hearts were hardened. the pharaoh's heart also. who are we to question the master potter.
crhoads62 1 year ago
@crhoads62 Who are we to question? But you question and deny lots of other people's takes on God or Gods. Who are YOU to be so sure you got it right.
And your first comment is presumptuous. I am married with a kid, I don't drink or do drugs, in short I don't live my life very differently than my friends who are Christian so what is it that you think I want to do that I can't have God in the way?
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly remember GOD is a judge. that makes sin a legal matter. if JESUS is not your lawyer you are going to be found guilty. JESUS allows a full pardon of all sin. GOD is not going to see if your good deeds out weigh your bad. no more then a human judge would. JESUS is called mighty counselor. counselor is a term still used today to mean lawyer. GOD takes sin very seriously, so serious he sent his own son to pay the penalty for all that will accept his offer of mercy and grace. 500 char. is not
crhoads62 1 year ago
@crhoads62 You did not address as single point I made instead just filling in more details about your mythology. Your inability to have an actual discussion doesn't speak well for your ability to understand the workings of the universe.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly believe what ever you want to believe. i don't let the fact that a lot of people are going to hell bother me to much. i don't feel the need to defend what i believe especially when it does not matter what evidence is presented because you like many will continue to not believe. would just be a waste of time
crhoads62 1 year ago
@crhoads62 My favorite part : "i don't let the fact that a lot of people are going to hell bother me to much." That's great.
You say you don't bother but you are bothering & defending. That you're not presenting any real evidence is you defending poorly. You say I'll never believe but I'm not stubborn. It was my flexibility that led me away from Christianity to begin with. If that compelling argument I was seeking ever materialized I could certainly be converted but in 2,000 + years it hasn't.
klfly 1 year ago
@klfly " If that compelling argument I was seeking ever materialized I could certainly be converted but..."
What would qualify as "compelling" to you?
HeReformedMe 1 year ago
@crhoads62 idk y... but this kinda make sense in my life...
luckyluciano310 1 year ago
aww, Matt was my Philosophy professor...he's one tough motherfucker, but borderline amazing..he really knows his stuff
kandy131313 1 year ago
Oh and by the way, it seems we were right about Global Warming. Haha, now they call it Man Made Climate Change because they cant even figure out whats going on.
FactorUnknown 1 year ago
I've got a good book for all of you that don't believe the proof that can be given for God and Jesus. And there is proof enough that I know them to be true beyond a reasonable doubt... The book is called "I don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist." If you can honestly read that and still not believe the truth, then your not looking at scientific evidence, you're just not wanting to admit that there could be a higher being above you.
FactorUnknown 1 year ago
this makes me upset as a christian because I actually have experienced salvation and the peace that comes with knowing and walking with Jesus...I believe in Jesus because he litterly saved my life... I try not to judge people, I try to love people as much as I can and I try to help people with whatever they need, what is so wrong with that????
bunnybaby811 2 years ago
Lol, when you rid an individuals sense of ego and condition them to live for something "larger than themselves" you can fool them into believing anything. Charles Manson used this same technique as do a number of cults.
FuttBucker667 2 years ago
i got to admit, this video is pretty weakly structured.
bballcardcollector09 2 years ago
What I think are weak are vague comments like the two you've left. Anything specific you disagree with?
klfly 2 years ago
its not what the video is about, its the structure of the video.
bballcardcollector09 2 years ago
Still very vague. What about the structure?
klfly 2 years ago
i've learned for every view is an opposing viewpoint.
bballcardcollector09 2 years ago
Wow, that's really deep. Are you just practicing your typing skills here? Mavis Beacon, is that you?
klfly 2 years ago
wow, who is this mavis beacon? you must have had past issues in another lifetime my friend... that's proof that there is more out there than you atheists buddies in this video say... lol
bballcardcollector09 2 years ago
Well, after numerous posts you've managed to say nothing substantive so I'll just let you prattle on by yourself then. 'night.
klfly 2 years ago
His statements against the fallibility of Jesus' witnesses also proves the point against evolution - that evidence that's archaic or millions of yrs. old is highly subject to error.
According to the tourist guide book in Salem, only 18 people were killed so this is hilarious considering just ONE atheist leader, Mao, murdered at least 70 milion of his own people. Actually, between just two nations run by atheists, China and Russia, over 100 MILLION were murdered.
mzklover 2 years ago
Evolution isn't a matter of eyewitnesses, we have other evidence in abundance so your comparison misses.
Mao and Stalin both were atheists. They also both had mustaches. They did not kill in the name of atheism, but in the name of communism and revolution.
klfly 2 years ago
(Mao didn't actually have a mustache, I was just making a point. :D)
klfly 2 years ago
My point is, any event you didn't personally witness is hearsay. Secular historians validate the existence of Jesus. The same standards used to validate every other historical figure was used to determine his existence. Therefore, if the validity of Jesus' existence & divinity are in question based on the evidence, then the existence and personal data about every single person that ever existed - famous or non-famous - is questionable as well.
mzklover 2 years ago
There is a difference between hearsay and something that left evidence. May secular historians debate the existence of Jesus but if you pay attention this gentleman did not question his existence at all, he only questioned his miracles.
If you used the same standards that Matt is using on other historical figures the majority of them pass with flying colors. A person who did the things Jesus supposedly did would have been recorded during his life and by people other than his followers.
klfly 2 years ago
But who are the people who found the evidence for evolution? How accurate and trustworthy were they? You don't know because you weren't there. Just because you believe what the "evidence" supposedly proves, there's no way it could be bogus? Come on! Open up your mind!
mzklover 2 years ago
One, the overwhelming majority of biologists in the world today. Two, look further into it and you can see much of the evidence for yourself. That is how science works, things are constantly scrutinized and retested and applied. Like I said before, biology and particularly genetics has advanced a long way since Darwin's time and yet it continues to support the ideas he put forth.
klfly 2 years ago
If evolution isn't a matter of eyewitnesses, then all the collected data, specimens, etc. are essentially worthless.
mzklover 2 years ago
What? That makes no sense at all.
People are fairly convicted of crimes without eyewitness accounts all the time. Evidence.
klfly 2 years ago
That is a copout statement in attempts to disassociate yourself with atheist murderers. Do atheist leaders need to hoist a neon banner stating, "I'm an atheist and I'm executing in the name of atheism" or should they slap a label on their forward in capital letters saying, "ATHEIST" with an arrow pointing downward? I'm being facetious but you get the point.
mzklover 2 years ago
So every bad act done by any atheist ever is on me & every bad act done by any Christian is on you? Ridiculous. Both men you mention were communist revolutionary leaders. You want to associate their actions with something, associate them with revolutionary communists.
Neither targeted the religious specifically. They targeted people in power, mostly the rich. Weak argument. Want to look at crime rates in relation to the degree in which a community is non-religious in our modern world?
klfly 2 years ago
Did I say that every bad atheist act is on you? Don't put words in my mouth. I have family members who came out of a communist country; I know of what I speak. Moreover, what does it matter if atheist leaders targeted the religious or not? What a preposterous statement! A murderer is a murderer. Period.
mzklover 2 years ago
Well then what are you saying when you talk about the murders committed by communist leaders and associate it with their being atheists.
As for why it matters if they targeted the religious, I mention it because it speaks as to their motives. Look, I've wasted enough time here. You sir are a very silly person and I just don't have the time or patience to help you with your comprehension skills. Best of luck to you. Peace.
klfly 2 years ago
Those who present opposing views lack comprehension skills and are silly? That's quite an intolerant accusation. You obviously just don't want to see my point of view, lest it make you think outside the atheist box. However, I thank you, too, for the discussion and I, too, bid you true peace and happiness - which I only found not in mindless religiosity but with a true relationship with God.
mzklover 2 years ago
I feel sorry for this guy. He's spending his whole life arguing with people, that doesn't sound very fun. If you don't believe in an afterlife, live it up on earth. But I know that there is an afterlife, and this guy isn't going to spend eternity in heaven. For eternity. And even if there isn't heaven and hell, he's wasted his whole earthly life. Heaven exists, and hell exists also. I want to ask all atheists just to keep that in mind. Is it worth the risk?
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
@christfollower4x4 I think it's unlikely that professor McCormick has spent his "whole life" arguing with people, seeing as he has found the time to obtain a PhD.
You know that there is an afterlife? On what basis?
I'd be interested to know why you think that someone whom you know almost nothing about has wasted his life.
logician360 2 years ago
I don't really want to aruge because you have your beliefs and I have mine. I'm not out to "christianize" you. But I've started living for God about two years ago and I know that he's there. I'm not an expert on the topic, but there's plenty of material out there that discusses scientific proof of God's existance. I would suggest "The Case For A Creator" by Lee Strobl. He was an atheist trying to disprove God but ended up discovering God in the process.
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
But in the end, it's an act of faith, not science. I can't impart to you the wonder of knowing God as a merciful redeemer in quantities. Also, I would suggest watching the movie "The Priveleged Planet". It's made from a secular standpoint, it never mentions religion. But it obviously points to God. I have experienced God's presence in a way that I can't explain. You can't tell me that I haven't. So if you aren't willing to take a step of faith, then I have no reason to consider arguing with you.
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
You haven't actually addressed anything I've said, you've just talked over me. Why do you judge McCormick as having wasted his life when you know little about him?
I've seriously considered the various arguments for God's existence, and have found them unconvincing, but I'm not interested in persuading you of this if you don't want to be. I just ask that you talk to me, rather than giving me the "spiel".
logician360 2 years ago
First off, I'm not juding McCormick. But to put it completely bluntly, a life without God is wasted. I'm not any more "righteous" than you are. I'm a sinner and have no room to judge. All that is different between you and me is that I've accepted God's grace. So I'm saying that he's wasting his life, but I'm not judging him. As I originally stated, I feel sorry for him.
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
"First off, I'm not juding McCormick."
Since judging means evaluating something's worth, and you have evaluated professor McCormick's life as "wasted", how can you not be judging him?
"a life without God is wasted."
In your original message, you said "even if there isn't heaven and hell, he's wasted his whole earthly life" implying that he had wasted his life because he spent his time arguing, rather than because he's an atheist.
logician360 2 years ago
You know what, if you hate the idea of God and really are going to analyze me like this, then I have no debate with you. I'm praying that you will find the beauty and glory of God but nothing that I can say will convince you. Please don't be so callous to Christianity. If you don't believe it, I don't agree with you. But don't disregard it. Whether you believe it or not, our country's heritage is based in Christianity and it can't hurt to know some about it. I'm not going to continue this debate
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
"if you hate the idea of God"
When did I say that?
"and really are going to analyze me like this"
So you can easily hand out criticism to someone you've never met, but you have trouble taking criticism?
"nothing that I can say will convince you."
Do you know that, or are you just presuming that I will reject any evidence you have?
"Please don't be so callous to Christianity."
Where was I callous to Christianity?
logician360 2 years ago
"our country's heritage is based in Christianity"
I didn't know we lived in the same country.
"it can't hurt to know some about it"
You think that I don't know much about Christianity? On what basis? Perhaps you need to foster a little humility, and not be so presumptuous about people you know little about.
logician360 2 years ago
As I said earlier, Christianity is a step of faith and not something that proof will convince you of. If you aren't going to take a step of faith, then I have no argument with you.
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
I don't require proof, evidence will do.
If by faith, you mean belief without evidence, then would you agree that belief in Christianity is unjustified?
logician360 2 years ago
No, science has proved many aspects of Christianity and Jesus. But I'm not well-versed in those points. I suggested earlier that you look into Lee Strobl and his books and I still suggest that. he knows a lot more about it than I do.
But even after reading that, you won't be convinced into Christianity, guarenteed. No one will convince you to believe in Jesus. You have to take a step out into something that, though proved valid by science, is only ever experienced by faith.
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
I've read one of Strobel's books, I think the case for faith, and didn't learn anything new. Arguments for God that draw upon modern scientific information tend to suffer from the same problems as their earlier versions. Either their premises are false, or fail to warrant their conclusions.
May I ask you, if all the arguments for Christianity were overturned, would you stop believing? If not, then are the arguments all that important to you, really?
logician360 2 years ago
No, I wouldn't! That's the glorious thing that I think you understand now. My God isn't limited to science! He isn't limited to history! Isn't that beautiful? That's why I've fallen hopelessly in love with him. He's as glorious as the heavens yet cares intensely for a sinner like me.
Thank you for this discussion, it has made me see more clearly my own belief. I hope that you someday come to see God's glory and love!
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
And it doesn't worry you that this same blind devotion is fueling all the other religions, and someone has to be wrong?
klfly 2 years ago
Yeah, that seems a little strange. But I've experienced God. Not scientifically, not in quantifications, not in knowledge. It's one of those mystical things that's super weird but super cool at the same time. That's how I know. It's not completely blind devotion. I have experienced God and I have prayer with him. So no, it doesn't bother me. I'm not living a religion, but experiencing a relationship. Isn't it wonderful?
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
I don't question these experiences you've had but I do question the conclusions you've drawn from them. Again, what do you say to people of complete different faiths who have also experienced the divine, the mystical, etc. in their churches or in their prayers?
klfly 2 years ago
To be honest, I really don't know. But my guess is that they're experiencing God too, just differently. Islam, for example, isn't evil in and of itself. It's not their actions that are disrespectful but rather their lack of belief in the true God. Once one believes in God, anyone can have those experiences despite which religion they call themselves.
Also, this sounds terrible, but the devil is able to deliver a divine experience. I'm not saying all other religions are demonic, but some
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
experiences may be of that content. I know that I'm serving my God because I'm following his word. But this isn't a comprehensive, air-tight answer. I can't really explain the supernatural realm as I don't understand it myself. that's where the faith that I've been talking about is applied.
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
@christfollower4x4 You sir are wrong. I have experienced the grand power of ra. I see him every mourning in the sky. How would u dare disagree with that? I can see my god every day.
mercenary616 1 year ago
if you, or anyone, would like to find out about the non-mystical, evidential, quantifyable (real word?) evidence, then I encourage you to read or watch the documentary versions of the following by Lee Strobel:
The Case for Christ
The Case for Faith
The Case for a Creator
You will find the critical scruitiny of Christ, Creatianty, and an existance of God coming from the investigations of a Harvard Law Graduate, former law editor of the Chicago tribule, and former active atheist.
iceykola 1 year ago
@iceykola The Case for Christ is an excellent book isnt it?
FactorUnknown 1 year ago
And as you earlier stated, yes, I am arrogant and most likely presuptuous. But what's so wonderful about it is that the God and Savior in whom you don't believe has forgiven me! I thank you for bringing this sin into my sight so that I can strive to become more like my Savior.
Know that I'm continuing to pray for you and that God would work in you.
christfollower4x4 2 years ago
Why not ask the same questions to historians? Why do many of todays top scholars believe the NT? Surely 'critical thinking' would have made them all atheist. So give them the Salem evidence and see if they come up with "they were witches" I doubt it, are you suggesting that all Christians are stupid? What about those who go from sceptic to believer? Did they turn off their 'critical thinking'?
stephjh2006 2 years ago
He's not suggesting they're all stupid but he is indeed suggesting that believers don't apply the same scrutiny due to a desire to believe.
As for those who go from sceptic to believer they are an anomaly.
klfly 2 years ago
Many of todays top 'CHRISTIAN' scholars believe the NT, try asking a non christian scholar or a skeptic historian, you'll get a much different answer. Those scholars start off their study with a bias so they keep trying to fit things in with their religion even if it literally says something different, take Josephus for example, his works don't prove Jesus of Nazareth or even anything close to it not including how much of it is a forgery, except most christian scholars say it does...coincedence?
Feralus69 2 years ago
seems a bit vague
stephjh2006 2 years ago
First of all the guy who wrote "The Case for Christ" used to be an atheist and began his investigative journey with a mindset of 'disproving' Christianity, so your 'double standard' argument goes out the window here.
Secondly you cannot use the Salem witches trials this way because you are not considering the motives of the witnesses in both cases. And thirdly, you guys just don't make any sense. :)
orvsa 2 years ago
i will pray for you. May my real living present God have mercy on your soul.
rocamik 2 years ago
If I got a scientific question wrong, I have to hope your God will have mercy on me? Wow, sounds like he must be a real jerk.
klfly 2 years ago
critical thinking=self delusion & ideas of self morality ( if i think it ; i'm not bad so i must be right... not only right but the one in control of what is right.)
rocamik 2 years ago
So critical thinking is a bad thing then?
klfly 2 years ago
If people started telling the Jesus stories as recorded in the gospels but substituted other names ("When Bill had come down from the mountain great crowds followed him .... and stretched forth his hand and healed [the leper]") people wouldn't buy it. They would think it's ludicrous. Only because it's familiar (even to non-Christians in the West) do we lend the stories credibility
StarTrekLivz 2 years ago
Excellent!! More like this please!
RodHullIOnceWasHim 2 years ago 2
Thanks for this, learnt something else to challenge religious moderates on.
Xinadium 2 years ago 2