I think Matt makes a good point. As a Christian who is also getting into some serious theology, I find it very interesting the massive disconnect from the proper theologians and that which is heard from the pulpit. Perhaps this bridge needs to be surmounted.
In responce to the opening, what would it be like if Dilahunty actually did portray the Doctor? Okay, for several reasons they probably wouldn't do that, but at least let him be on the show.
There may not be an actual goal such as there is no intended end product in mind, because natural selection is a NATURAL process, but certainly the "goal" is ultimately the preservation of those desirable traits as passed on by reproductively fit individuals. Creationists can't seem to comprehend the idea of natural laws. They seem to think that if something is lacking in consciousness or mind, then it must be random by definition. It's simplistic and ignorant, but that's creationism isn't it?
Then genetic drift and these variations ultimately result in speciation, or the creation of a new species. This is roughly an outline of macroevolution. It makes me incredibly angry when I hear creationists call evolution random, because it is anything but that.
Evolution is random variation followed by selective pressures (natural selection). For macroevolution to occur aka speciation, a part of a population becomes geographically isolated from the other part of the population. These two groups, now separated by a geographic boundary, undergo random variation which is then acted upon by natural selection. The variations better suited for the environment will be preserved through the passing on of genes from reproductively fit individuals.
When i was really young like 4 or 5 i think, i used to pray and i used to hear answers. but as i grew older and matured a little by about 6 or 7 i think, i realised the answers from god were actually my own conscious thought telling me what i wanted to hear. I think people who are still christians somehow didn't make that transition and are still living in the minds of 5 year olds.
But isn't this guy asking for a bit TOO much? We're lucky to have ANY tidbits of information from 1rst Century Palestine let alone 4 different accounts that tell largely the same story.
Copy/paste worked wonders, and they also failed. Largely the same story? There are so many inconsistencies between them and they also contradict the old testament. I would expect nothing but perfection from verses inspired by the an all-powerful entity.
@Roflsinternets They DO tell largely the same story, why do you think matt,mark, and luke are called SYNOPTIC gospels?John on the fundamentals too. Nearly all of the inconsistensies within the gospels are on insidental points anyway.Have you ever read Daniel 9? There's different opions about what "inspired" implies, but when paul said "all scipture is inspired" 2timothy3:16 he couldn't have been referring to the gospels too coz none of the gospels would have been written yet.
"But isn't this guy asking for a bit TOO much? We're lucky to have ANY tidbits of information from 1rst Century Palestine let alone 4 different accounts that tell largely the same story. "
you make a valid point here...
were SO LUCKY that when the christians burned ancient repositories of knowledge... they didnt get them all....
@SonnyDelight55 Yeah, is saw you bragging about this "victory" on shockofgod's channel....you kinda fail, to every possible human extend of fail. You clearly dont understand the argument they're making, that the bible alone doesn't prove the existence of god any more than the lord of the rings proves the existence of frodo without external evidence.
Heres ur argument back to u - I write on a piece of paper that i am god. The paper must be true cuz I am god, and i am god cuz the paper says so.
Matthew and Luke both used Mark as a source. Whenever we compare the two we see that they stuck to their sources better than any other writer in the ancient world. We have four ancient biographies written by eyewitnesses or associates of eyewitnesses 20-40 years after his life. There is nothing else like that in history. Please explain to me why you don't apply the same criteria to other history. And please give me one good reason to doubt apostolic authorship of the gospels. Good luck.
You make a lot of claims but you don't bother to back any of it up. "The gospels were written in Greek"...I already answered that objection. Please explain why the gospels being written in greek prohibits apostolic authorship. The gospels are more reliable than any other accounts in history. Luke is a historian of the first rank. Almost everything in the book of Acts is confirmed from outside sources
I'm afraid you are ignorant. Paul was a contemporary with Jesus and he was very close to his disciples. His earliest epistle was written in about the year 50. How does the gospels being written in greek prohibit them from being written by Matthew Mark Luke and John. Matthew was a tax collector. Mark and Luke were both greek speaking gentiles. There is no evidence that John was illiterate, even if he was he still could have used a scribe. The author tells us that he is an eyewitness.
The key is in the title "Gospel according to ..." - normally when you write somehting you dont say "according to". So you can see that it wasnt even authored by the author. Its urban legend retold and retold and eventually written down.
@BiblePreacher889 And you know this...how? God speaks directly to people in the bible? Well, Batman spoke directly to Robin in the comic books. The bible proves nothing. When will people learn this?
Just like bears, cats, wolves, sloths, and elephants. They were much bigger in prehistoric times. Now they are much smaller. Things change over time. Why can't creationists accept that? I don't get it.
Not even the Bible says Luke and Mark were disciples. Its ironic that those who assume that the gospels were written by those who walked with Jesus, haven't read it carefully enough to know that.
@estragon9 wait!! You mean we are supposed to read that book and not just listen to what the good preacher says it says?!!?!? The world would end if I read the good book. I am just a sinner and could not possibly understand what it all means. I am not worthy enough to read the holy words in all its holiness. Thats why the good preacher has to read it to me and TELL me what it all means :)
One should read the Gnostic Bible if one wants an alternate outside the bible. the Gnostic Jesus is cooler I think. He's like a super mystical Yoda teacher! :D xD
my own 98yr old grandmother who has been a devout christian all her life shocked me when she told me that the church is just a way to control the people!
@BiblePreacher889 I really don't want to get into one of those useless YT argument wars, but why would the all powerful creator of everything need mortals to speak for him?
(early part of video) These are Lemarkian concepts, often confused for evolution. (Jean-Baptiste Lamarck) The whole girraffes endowing their offspring with linger necks by stretching for higher tree limbs ect.
I could be wrong but I think (by giving lots of credit here) that back then medicine wasn't great and well we know that people used to bury people alive, mistaking them for being dead plus the whole bury them the same day ignorance would contribute. So depending on how deep they were buried and the type of soil it's perhaps plausible that someone could 'rise from the dead' except for the fact that they were never dead in the first place... That's the best I can do for zombie theory. (guessing)
Yeah i thought about that for a long time, Why not magically make a book that changes its language to what the viewer is reading, that would fix translation idiocy.
i cannot fall victim to the bible. humans are famous for exaggerating stories or plain lie for gain.the human race are followers the`ll believe anything if told over and over about a certain subject.at the same time they wont believe something even if they just witnessed it. hence the term wow! thats unbelievable.right after they have been smacked in the face by reality.science is the answer.
Before the bible canon was assembled each gospel and such were its own book..therefore it is accurate to say that Jesus is mentioned in many books, not necessarily that that is evidence of his existence, but the possibility is more plausible. Like Matt said though..the details are murky and it is safe to say that the major miracles did not happen if they are not recored elsewhere. If a miracle is stated only in 1 gospel or 1+another plagarized that is definitley insufficient evidence4the claim.
I'll answer that: in the bible the killing of ten people by Satan are recorded, one of them permitted by God, while God personally kills many millions more on several occasions and orders killings about as often, often the exact amount of people killed is not specified.
Christians perpetuate this lie all the time also. "Mark wrote...", "Mathew wrote...", etc. Just add that to the list of lies, like "Einstein believed in god," or "Anthony Flew, famous atheists, converted to Christianity," or "Evolution says we came from monkeys," or, "Atheists say there absolutely is no god." How is it ok to lie in service of your belief, when your belief says thou shalt not bear false witness? Just add that to the list of hypocrasies next to the list of lies.
Debbie wrote 'Matthew', Gladys-Inez wrote 'Mark', Shahnaynay! wrote 'Luke', and Gertrude Ethelbert wrote 'John'. Lady Gaga wrote 'Revelation', and Chuck Norris edited the whole shit-n-kiboodle to 'harmonize' them. Chuck don't know shit about harmony!
ok u christians arround who decided what books were put in the bible?cause i see the book of tobias nowhere in the normal bible.and thats one of my favorite books.but i take it that they left it out because he did an exorsism not in the name of jesus but it looked like witchcraft.
@witchcerridwen Athanasius of Alexandria, a 4th century Bishop, in his 39th letter to the Christians he wrote to anually to tell when to celebrate Easter, he made a list of the 27 books that make up the canon, saying that these books and only these books should be permitted. Gospels of Matt,Mark,Luke, and John permitted. Gospels of Mary,Phillip and Peter not. Acts of Apostles allowed but Acts of Teklah not. 1st and 2nd letters to the Corithians accepted, the 3rd was condemned...and so on.
@SkinnyWmn69 Back in Jerusleum during the days of jesus, There had to be a census and concensus to have people (Mary) from outside to give birth in their town. There was NO such records at this time, there are records before and after. Why would they make this ONE exception, for a known whore nonetheless . Its hogwash man you know this.
@2ndBestAllTime Thats fine, I'm not professing that any of it is true, just stating facts. However, according to those books,it wasn't in Jerusalem.the family was from Nazareth and he was born at Bethlehem, just outside of the town. I'm sure there are way more than this one exception as well to be fair.we are talking about a famous story, how would we know of any of the others.And known whore?Where do you get that information? I DO NOT SAY THE STORY IS TRUE!You must know where you get your facts
@Omnicron777 can i get a job ,,i dont mind doing the killing on your behalf as long as i get rich out of it and can keep a few of the women ,,oh and a yacht would be pretty cool for weekends ,,i can start anytime
ive never seen them mention the truth of how the bible was compiled and all that. that was a big turning point for me back when i went to church and everything
@SampleArtist91 We and almost every creature on this planet are still evolving.Not physically in our lifetimes but through passing on our DNA.Evolution does not happen in a generation,its minor changes that occur over many many years(depending on the species,fruit flies for example reproduce within a few days of being hatched).Some animals are at there evolutionary peak and therefore have no need to evolve anymore.Primates (thats us) still have a way to go before evolutionary perfection.
Do you know anything about Jewish tradition? Do you know that most Biblical accounts were passed down through the word of mouth through oral tradition? Well, it is not surprising that the books are anomyous......
@SampleArtist91 If evolution is true, it is highly likely that we are still evolving, but I don't really like the direction humanity is most likely to be going...
@SampleArtist91 Increased rates of suicide and more prevalence of mental health problems, especially in young people... And decreased physical activity and natural immunity, etc. Too much dependence on technology, I see people use their cars when the destination was just across 2 or 3 short streets.
@SampleArtist91 Um, but you know Physical Inactivity is actually highly dangerous to human health. I have done this in Health Promotion, it is shocking.
QUESTION : You asked - Wouldnt we still be evolving?
ANSWER:
Erm, yes, and we are.
Evolution is a very very slow process that takes many many generations.
We, and indeed everythign that is alive is evolving and will never stop evolving although some things have adapted to its lifestyle perfectly and will change VERY SLOWLY while other things will change quicker if their environment isnt well suited to them.
the various Human races alone are a very good example of evolution.
Hi, my name is Ed. God revealed his word to me last night in my kitchen. I wrote it all down. He told me that it's the final addition to the bible. You should read it. You must read it. It tells you how to get to heaven. God himself told me this, so you better believe it. I have proof, remember, because I wrote it down. In a book.
It is a funny thing that as of now there are 157 dislikes for this video when all that is stated is what believing and non-believing bible scholars agree on - the 157 dislikes are people who simply vote down the video based on "The Atheist Experience" title and/or they have not studied this subject in detail with honesty.
I am not an atheist but I agree completely with what was discussed in this video. The info is valid regardless of religious belief or the lack of it by the people speaking.
@iluvugo Yes, Zombies (people who come back from the dead). Matthew 27:52-53 specifically states that the dead saints crawled out of their graves and walked into Jerusalem, being witnessed by many.
The Hobbit is actually referred to in the Lord of the Rings, as a book called "There and Back Again, by Bilbo Baggins". Does that mean Bilbo was a real living person?
@eurisko67 As for the Hobbit, I vaguely remember someone doing something on that in grade school as for the Lord of Rings I never watched the movie. So I don't know if Bilbo Baggins was a real living person or not. Ok but it doesn't use the word Zombies. Zombies are the dead that are raised by magic and are still dead, ghosts. Here it says"...and the bodies of many holy people...were raised to life" life being the key word. whereas zombies would be raised and still dead. and no magic was used.
@iluvugo Bud, according to the bible, the dead were raised through the magic of Christ's resurrection. I fail to see your distinction. Also, I'm not sure what bible you're reading from but the King James Version (the original English version) states nothing about them coming back to life. Quote "and many bodies of the saints which slept arose; and came out of their graves; and went into the holy city". Coming back to life is never claimed.
@eurisko67 I am not a bud, unless it's a rosebud. The scripture you quoted never said anything about magic either. I am reading the Complete Jewish Version and it is the same as the KJV. Neither say Zombie. Look up the word Zombie in the dictionary. If you can find anywhere in the bible where the word "magic" is used to describe any miracle Jesus or God the Father did then I will give you a million dollars. You have to find the word "magic" or doesn't count. Have fun reading.
@iluvugo So you're a fundamentalist? The words must be present for the meaning to be understood? Magic, Noun: The power of apparently influencing events by using supernatural forces. This accurately describes Jesus supposed "miracles". Zombie, Noun: The revival of a corpse using magic, especially in African/Caribbean religions (I would add Christianity to that list). Also accurately describing what Jesus supposedly did. The scripture I quoted describes Jesus making Zombies via magic. Get it?
@eurisko67 Fundamentalist: one who remains faithful to the fundamental tenets or doctrines, especially of faith.
Magic would also include the appearance of existence from nothing.
A zombie is missing a soul, or consciousness. the bokkor kills the zombie, extracts the soul, and then revives the unconscious zombie. Zombi is also the name of a voudun loa of death. Christians come back to life with their souls, and Jesus came back to life with His "soul" (consciousness).
@vikeyev1 disbelief and lack of belief are similar. both are passive positions. which is accurate. some dictionaries. even say atheist is a person that does not believe in god. true still. but it is not believing that there is no god.
That was the Tom Baker's "Doctor Who" opening credits, and the girl who played his companion "Romana" played by Larla Ward who married Tom Baker, is now married to richard Dawkins.
there are arguments for accepting the gospels as valid and there are arguments for rejecting it. no one can be absolutely sure either way. the best explanation i've heard for accepting the bible is that extensive study of its true teachings and practice of these teachings have made certain person's lives much happier and peaceful. my brother is a perfect example. he believed based on various apologetics arguments. he then studied and practiced and now continues to believe because it truly helped
@service2others And what about Bill Gates, who is an atheist who has given tens of billions to charity? You think that the only way to be unselfish is to have religion? In the end, religion IS about selfishness in order to avoid the wrong afterlife. Some of the biggest philanthropists are atheists and they're not doing it in the hope of some reward in the afterlife, they just do it because they feel it's the right thing to do.
@TheAtheistExperience You wouldn't be surprised how often I've argued that very same point to stubborn ears (or eyes as the case may be) who simply stoically choose to ignore or disbelieve it. Basic dictionary definitions even fail to dislodge the almost religious need of the religious to brand atheism as something akin to themselves. The false sense of legitimacy by way of false association simply never materializes, and yet they hold on to it with, well, zealous devotion.
I can definitely see why Atheists are the way they are. If the idea of God that you all have gotten is one of a "celestial child abuser", I understand your resentment. I argue with any Christian who thinks that God is "out to get us". Why cant God be a kind and loving God? why must we all be "fucked",(only word that seems to have the gravity I'm looking for), if we don't acknowledge him? Do me a favor, look up Pascal's Wager...seems to fit in this circumstance...
Pascal's wager is for chickens who does not dare follow the evidence.
DESPERATE after worshipping a genocidal maniac in ETERNITY.
It is YOU religious fanatics who claim we are all fucked, and we NEED jeebus to save us. Original sin and all. Don't project your own flaws unto others.
"Why can't god be a kind and loving god?" - Because the bible clearly contradicts that.
If jesus existed, then why don't we find artwork with jesus depicted from that time period? Cave paintings? Papyrus scrolls with his portrait on? At least his name should be written everywhere when he performed his miracles. Woodwork, small statues as a souvenir of the miracle....
@obaeyens ummm....there were writings about him from that time period...the earliest of the synoptic gospel was written 40 years after the crucifixion. What about Paul's letters?? those were written during that time. The way you say it, its as if they came up with those stories at the council of Nicaea and threw them into a book. research first before commenting please.
@FXMaster03 if you do miracles like converting wine and replicating fish, walk over water and return dead people then people would have painted this on walls, caves, made artwork,.... Probably souvenirs depicting him. And all you have is this lousy letter?
@obaeyens well there are several letters actually. The point you make supports Aryanism. Aryanism was based on the idea that Jesus' divinity was not given by God...or plainly, that Jesus was not God. This was popular from the 2nd to 4th century I believe. It was of course tossed out by Irenaeus and later by Constantine as being works of heresy. Gnosticism ran rampant from the late first century to around the 4th...there are more works on the subject and are called the Gnostic Gospels.........
But even if jesus is not god or son as god. He did these cool magical tricks. You expect some pottery with his picture on it as a souvenir or remembrance to be dug up by now. Wall paintings, stone figures, wood carvings of him form the years 30-33 itself.
@obaeyens ...It wasn't a "get rich quick" scheme,lol. Jesus was not popular back then, he was a peasant. Society as a whole was mainly Jewish, several Pagans(among the Romans). So, when he was crucified, he was only known among his followers. I'm sure if this happened in our time, the internet would have spread his word quicker. There just wasn't any quick way to communicate then. That is why it took a good 300 years to gain a foothold. So by the time it was popular you DID see art and writings
@obaeyens truth or fiction is for you to decide though. I know the early church threw them out quickly. The Gospel of Thomas for instance, portrays Jesus as a Buddhist would portray Buddha. A prominent Roshi even went as far as to say, "If I had know of the Gospel of Thomas, I wouldn't have needed Buddhism!"
ok first off, it takes much faith to be an atheist...think on that. Secondly, after the crucifixion, the disciples thought that the second coming of Christ was going to happen in their lifetime...hence the reason for not writing anything down. The disciples left, preaching the word of God and had many followers of their own. For instance, Polycarp was a student of John the Apostle and Irenaeus was a student of Polycarp....and Irenaeus was responsible for most of the New Testament...
You're exactly wrong! Atheists have NO faith, not 'much' faith. We don't say "There is no God coz thats what I want to believe." In fact what we do say is "There has yet to any testable scientific evidence presented for the existance of a God, therefore we do not believe in one."
@cherylsalo have you any idea the definition of Atheist and Agnostic? Atheist= "there is no God" Agnostic= "I don't know" Your response would fall under the Agnostic category...since "you don't know" because you are looking for scientific proof. You cant say, "until there is scientific proof that there is a God, I'm going to go ahead and disprove it" What kind of scientific hypothesis is that? you can neither prove or disprove sounds more scientific than what you say.
You have completely misread and misinterpreted what I have said. No where did I said "I do not know if there is a God" I am not agnostic. I am an atheist = I do not believe in any gods.
Speaking of points...you get 10 for following blindly just as your bible would dictate that you do!
@cherylsalo ...I know you say you are atheist, but you are backing up your point with the assumption that SCIENCE says there is no God. If you were using the proper logic of science, you would have to hypothesize that since science cannot prove God's existence, therefore it cannot disprove God's existence as well. Catch my drift?
3: Gnostic Atheists, who believe there is no god, and believe it is possible to prove that there is no god. (This position is also known as Strong Atheism)
4: Agnostic Atheists, who believe there is no god, but dont believe that it is possible to proof this. (This position is also known as Weak Atheism)
The truth is that almost all Atheists are of the 4th combination, and almost none are of the 3rd combination.
@nowayout001 Well, its similar to saying that you are quite sure that no Fairies or Unicorns exist. You cant say with 100% certainty that they dont exist, but you can say that you are pretty sure that they dont exist.
Furthermore, the biblical God as described in the bible contains contradictions so it cannot exist exactly as the bible says it does.
@omegastar19 I agree with what you said, this biblical God can still exist (as an imperfect entity mightier than we are). God doesn't have to be perfectly good and holy. If someone keeps on telling you that he is perfectly holy, will you be gullible enough just to believe him. Just because someone said something doesn't mean that he really is who he says he is. If you see contradictions between his actions and words, and changes of attitudes, that only means God is not unchangable.
@cherylsalo As a matter of fact, I do NOT follow the bible "blindly". I am not Southern Baptist,lol. I support the theory that the Gospels were probably(most likely) not written by their supposed authors. Since the synoptic Gospels contradict each other...(Matthew and Luke) for instance, one cannot take the bible "literally". Nor do I think Revelation holds any water. Remember, even 2nd century theologians wanted the Gospel of John tossed out as heresy.
so what do YOU beleive in then? You like to ridicule others' beleifs, what are your beleifs? do you have any?. Me thinks thou protest too much, you seem to want Christians to prove to you there is a God. What do you beleve in ?
@service2others Okay, here is one of Jesus teachings. you need to read Rev 2:18-29. here a a few highlights of his fantastic teachings. "22 So I will cast her on a bed of suffering", "23 I will strike her children dead." ... What a great, loving teacher..
@service2others If you truely believe the words inthe Bible are from your God, then you can have him. What kind of person would say Murder, Rape and selling your children as sex slaves is a good thing? You can't "Pick and choose" what you want from the Bible, you rather believe in it all, or nothing at all. If this is your God, you can have him.
"If any man come to me, and HATE not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, HE CANNOT BE MY DISCIPLE.open your eyes fool.
I'm not even making a claim about your faith, and, in fact, I don't even know what you believe. I'm just making a claim about what you said; I was just outlining that nearly all of the time, atheists aren't concerned with Jesus' moral teachings as much as they are concentrating on the supernatural accounts regarding Christ, and his crucifixion and the purpose that supposedly proposed his death. That's all I was getting at.
jesus wasnt born dec. 25th. staring at Luke 2:8 the new testement says that the day jesus was born, the shepherds watch over their flock all night long. the only time of year they would do this is when their live stock were reering young, and they had to protect the offspring from preditors, that would have been spring time. not in the middle of winter. isnt it strange that people wouldnt have recorded the birthday of their own messiah? until centuries after he died no-one gave it any thought,
the bible was re-written by a blue blood illumiati, that why it's called the "king James version" lies mixed with truth. most of you on this channell havn't woken up. You just bicker with you egos
Loving your neighbour is a beneficial value. But to worship and believe that your life is infinite over that is another thing. I believe Christ existed, but not in the form that is described in the Bible. The idea that Jesus resurrected people, healed by miracle, and that he rose from the dead and was crucified by "God's will" is extremely asinine. Why is it that God can allegedly create everything, but a human being must be crucified for humans to enter Heaven?
@TwentyYearDenial you havn't the faintest idea about my beliefs. Go back to the start. Read my "aboutme' info on my channel. Don't speak thru your ego.
@service2others Us Atheists don't need a book to tell us what is right from wrong, and what morals are. In fact, if you get your morals from the Bible, I truly feel sorry for you. I love helping others and being a good person, and I do it because I want to, not because I think there's an invisible man watching me and is going to punish me if I don't. I'm glad I am not brainwashed like you are. :)
after a very short time of living in space e.g working on the space station the body starts to adapt very fast to its new surroundings for instance ...sheading body mass this shows how fast we can evolve....
I should add that in my opinion the Bible is just bad fantasy and it is a shame so many people think it is an historical textbook. To me, the "Religion" section at the local bookstore is just another name for institutionalised science fiction and/or fantasy.
I think there were dozens of Gospels at one time - even a Gospel of Judas - and some bishop back in the second century decided to just use four of them. On what basis was this decision made?
Constantine (the emperor who converted to this superstition after seeing clouds that looked like an "X") set up the Council of Nicea to decide what would get included and what wouldn't; the simple answer is, the bishops on that council had a vote.
Grow up, god isn't real, religion is used to control idiots.
MrFatkid1992 6 days ago
That opening made me realise something. The apostles apparently didn't recognise Jesus. Given he only died 2-3 days prior, he must of regenerated.
Jesus must be The Master!
Symos 2 weeks ago
Dr Who time traveller on BBc,Check out the daleks,by the way its for kids.
tontobones 2 months ago
I think Matt makes a good point. As a Christian who is also getting into some serious theology, I find it very interesting the massive disconnect from the proper theologians and that which is heard from the pulpit. Perhaps this bridge needs to be surmounted.
iMentieth 5 months ago
In responce to the opening, what would it be like if Dilahunty actually did portray the Doctor? Okay, for several reasons they probably wouldn't do that, but at least let him be on the show.
DeathsPictures 5 months ago
Holy crap Matt had hair! If only for a moment...
PlasteredDragon 5 months ago
There may not be an actual goal such as there is no intended end product in mind, because natural selection is a NATURAL process, but certainly the "goal" is ultimately the preservation of those desirable traits as passed on by reproductively fit individuals. Creationists can't seem to comprehend the idea of natural laws. They seem to think that if something is lacking in consciousness or mind, then it must be random by definition. It's simplistic and ignorant, but that's creationism isn't it?
brandnubian69 6 months ago
Then genetic drift and these variations ultimately result in speciation, or the creation of a new species. This is roughly an outline of macroevolution. It makes me incredibly angry when I hear creationists call evolution random, because it is anything but that.
brandnubian69 6 months ago 5
Evolution is random variation followed by selective pressures (natural selection). For macroevolution to occur aka speciation, a part of a population becomes geographically isolated from the other part of the population. These two groups, now separated by a geographic boundary, undergo random variation which is then acted upon by natural selection. The variations better suited for the environment will be preserved through the passing on of genes from reproductively fit individuals.
brandnubian69 6 months ago
hahahahahaha the intro. awesome.
Sc0ttPrian 6 months ago 2
Matt your shiny bald head acts like a beacon of hope to us
sl31pn1r 7 months ago 9
When i was really young like 4 or 5 i think, i used to pray and i used to hear answers. but as i grew older and matured a little by about 6 or 7 i think, i realised the answers from god were actually my own conscious thought telling me what i wanted to hear. I think people who are still christians somehow didn't make that transition and are still living in the minds of 5 year olds.
youbetzler 7 months ago 8
@youbetzler It's no wonder the Holy Babble has Jesus saying "unless you become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven".
Strangerinasland 7 months ago
But isn't this guy asking for a bit TOO much? We're lucky to have ANY tidbits of information from 1rst Century Palestine let alone 4 different accounts that tell largely the same story.
hopop313 7 months ago
@hopop313
Copy/paste worked wonders, and they also failed. Largely the same story? There are so many inconsistencies between them and they also contradict the old testament. I would expect nothing but perfection from verses inspired by the an all-powerful entity.
Roflsinternets 7 months ago
@Roflsinternets They DO tell largely the same story, why do you think matt,mark, and luke are called SYNOPTIC gospels?John on the fundamentals too. Nearly all of the inconsistensies within the gospels are on insidental points anyway.Have you ever read Daniel 9? There's different opions about what "inspired" implies, but when paul said "all scipture is inspired" 2timothy3:16 he couldn't have been referring to the gospels too coz none of the gospels would have been written yet.
hopop313 7 months ago
@hopop313
"But isn't this guy asking for a bit TOO much? We're lucky to have ANY tidbits of information from 1rst Century Palestine let alone 4 different accounts that tell largely the same story. "
you make a valid point here...
were SO LUCKY that when the christians burned ancient repositories of knowledge... they didnt get them all....
did you forget about the crusades?
Arteanor 7 months ago
@Arteanor The crusades are basically still going on right now.
PyrohailMan 6 months ago
There is no GOD in this dimension. But there is a GOD in the other dimension and there are probably 11 dimensions.
ilyreggie 7 months ago
@ilyreggie How do you know..?
mstachife 7 months ago
@ilyreggie why u say that?
yungchieffer 7 months ago
@SonnyDelight55 Yeah, is saw you bragging about this "victory" on shockofgod's channel....you kinda fail, to every possible human extend of fail. You clearly dont understand the argument they're making, that the bible alone doesn't prove the existence of god any more than the lord of the rings proves the existence of frodo without external evidence.
Heres ur argument back to u - I write on a piece of paper that i am god. The paper must be true cuz I am god, and i am god cuz the paper says so.
AtheismoTheGreat 8 months ago
Matthew and Luke both used Mark as a source. Whenever we compare the two we see that they stuck to their sources better than any other writer in the ancient world. We have four ancient biographies written by eyewitnesses or associates of eyewitnesses 20-40 years after his life. There is nothing else like that in history. Please explain to me why you don't apply the same criteria to other history. And please give me one good reason to doubt apostolic authorship of the gospels. Good luck.
SonnyDelight55 8 months ago
You make a lot of claims but you don't bother to back any of it up. "The gospels were written in Greek"...I already answered that objection. Please explain why the gospels being written in greek prohibits apostolic authorship. The gospels are more reliable than any other accounts in history. Luke is a historian of the first rank. Almost everything in the book of Acts is confirmed from outside sources
SonnyDelight55 8 months ago
I'm afraid you are ignorant. Paul was a contemporary with Jesus and he was very close to his disciples. His earliest epistle was written in about the year 50. How does the gospels being written in greek prohibit them from being written by Matthew Mark Luke and John. Matthew was a tax collector. Mark and Luke were both greek speaking gentiles. There is no evidence that John was illiterate, even if he was he still could have used a scribe. The author tells us that he is an eyewitness.
SonnyDelight55 8 months ago
I wrote the gospels ! Well I wrote in the bibles in RE class anyway, I say wrote , more like drawings of a cock and balls but you get my point.
MonsterMunchAreAce 8 months ago
The key is in the title "Gospel according to ..." - normally when you write somehting you dont say "according to". So you can see that it wasnt even authored by the author. Its urban legend retold and retold and eventually written down.
shagster1970 8 months ago
@Rockland19621947 get help, please.
majorblood87 8 months ago
@BiblePreacher889 And you know this...how? God speaks directly to people in the bible? Well, Batman spoke directly to Robin in the comic books. The bible proves nothing. When will people learn this?
metalhead2508 8 months ago
@Rockland19621947 Yea....any evidence to support all that crap you just spewed? Or is it just a "feeling" that you get.
metalhead2508 8 months ago
I wanna read the gospel according to Matthew ........Matthew Dillahunty that is.
HaselRah 8 months ago
Just like bears, cats, wolves, sloths, and elephants. They were much bigger in prehistoric times. Now they are much smaller. Things change over time. Why can't creationists accept that? I don't get it.
Severe777 8 months ago
What really pisses me off the most is when they say, "But it's in the bible" or "It's in the scriptures of ______ "
stoicfan 8 months ago
Is it not obvious the bible was made to control people's beliefs?
Severe777 8 months ago
@Severe777 Apparently not XD sadly
stoicfan 8 months ago
God sucks
CatFacedKillers 9 months ago
You guy havent backed up zip,,,you guys kill me...you guys high on drugs,,,,you worse the heathens!
flatop59 9 months ago
Not even the Bible says Luke and Mark were disciples. Its ironic that those who assume that the gospels were written by those who walked with Jesus, haven't read it carefully enough to know that.
estragon9 9 months ago
@estragon9 wait!! You mean we are supposed to read that book and not just listen to what the good preacher says it says?!!?!? The world would end if I read the good book. I am just a sinner and could not possibly understand what it all means. I am not worthy enough to read the holy words in all its holiness. Thats why the good preacher has to read it to me and TELL me what it all means :)
bigsubwayman1 9 months ago
One should read the Gnostic Bible if one wants an alternate outside the bible. the Gnostic Jesus is cooler I think. He's like a super mystical Yoda teacher! :D xD
warmsteel 9 months ago
my own 98yr old grandmother who has been a devout christian all her life shocked me when she told me that the church is just a way to control the people!
bw2182 9 months ago 2
@bw2182 Your grandmas intelligent.
stoicfan 8 months ago
WELCOME!!!
Enjoy our fine selection of bullshit comments.
Troll for hours. Bash on christians, muslims & athiests alike.
Explore deep concepts, without hope of revelation.
Bask in the arrogance of having read a book someone else has not or simply dine on the ignorance of a bigoted homophobic.
We have it all; witty one liners, logical fallacies, tall tales.. But most importantly absolute freedom from constructive discussion.
ENJOY!!!! =D
MrLittletomdj 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BiblePreacher889 LOL! Ridiculous.
FaganRoberts 9 months ago
@Rockland19621947 LOL! Ridiculous.
FaganRoberts 9 months ago
@Rockland19621947 you sir are moronic. Energy can neither be created or destroyed so how the fuck can "he create or destroy at will"
tommythmpson 9 months ago
Comment removed
Rockland19621947 8 months ago
well if u seen a giants skeleton then would you believed that giants existed thousands of years ago
ugo56001 9 months ago
@Rockland19621947
A lot of claims there, care to show some evidence? Anecdotes, scripture and ignorance will not be accepted.
sonykroket 9 months ago 39
@sonykroket - Damn. I got nothing, then. Would an offer of faith, work?
YourDarkAccomplice 7 months ago
@YourDarkAccomplice
Haha, nope sorry
sonykroket 7 months ago
@sonykroket They're people who accept stuff on authoritative basis and will defend them even if there's no basis to do so.
petion2010 7 months ago
@petion2010
Yes, sadly that is the case.
sonykroket 7 months ago
@BiblePreacher889 I really don't want to get into one of those useless YT argument wars, but why would the all powerful creator of everything need mortals to speak for him?
navychucktaylors 9 months ago
(early part of video) These are Lemarkian concepts, often confused for evolution. (Jean-Baptiste Lamarck) The whole girraffes endowing their offspring with linger necks by stretching for higher tree limbs ect.
Cougar139tweak 9 months ago
ima get them to 1000 thumbs up^^
RzzRBladez 10 months ago
I could be wrong but I think (by giving lots of credit here) that back then medicine wasn't great and well we know that people used to bury people alive, mistaking them for being dead plus the whole bury them the same day ignorance would contribute. So depending on how deep they were buried and the type of soil it's perhaps plausible that someone could 'rise from the dead' except for the fact that they were never dead in the first place... That's the best I can do for zombie theory. (guessing)
tandemkgsd 10 months ago
@tandemkgsd And back then in that culture people were not buried they were just put inside a cave. So again there are more questions than answers.
ecuenvivo 9 months ago
If the Bible is the word of God, then God sure is a bad communicator.
dutchbb1979 10 months ago 2
@dutchbb1979
Yeah i thought about that for a long time, Why not magically make a book that changes its language to what the viewer is reading, that would fix translation idiocy.
EndlessCrossbow 10 months ago
@EndlessCrossbow Yes, and it's not just the language problem, but the fact that the message is not clear.
dutchbb1979 10 months ago
i cannot fall victim to the bible. humans are famous for exaggerating stories or plain lie for gain.the human race are followers the`ll believe anything if told over and over about a certain subject.at the same time they wont believe something even if they just witnessed it. hence the term wow! thats unbelievable.right after they have been smacked in the face by reality.science is the answer.
MegaRaidersrule 11 months ago 34
Before the bible canon was assembled each gospel and such were its own book..therefore it is accurate to say that Jesus is mentioned in many books, not necessarily that that is evidence of his existence, but the possibility is more plausible. Like Matt said though..the details are murky and it is safe to say that the major miracles did not happen if they are not recored elsewhere. If a miracle is stated only in 1 gospel or 1+another plagarized that is definitley insufficient evidence4the claim.
SkinnyWmn69 11 months ago
@Fangalatic
I'll answer that: in the bible the killing of ten people by Satan are recorded, one of them permitted by God, while God personally kills many millions more on several occasions and orders killings about as often, often the exact amount of people killed is not specified.
AXp has made a show about it actually.
Quintinohthree 11 months ago 2
Love the Dr.Who intro.
quietjedi1010101 11 months ago
Christians perpetuate this lie all the time also. "Mark wrote...", "Mathew wrote...", etc. Just add that to the list of lies, like "Einstein believed in god," or "Anthony Flew, famous atheists, converted to Christianity," or "Evolution says we came from monkeys," or, "Atheists say there absolutely is no god." How is it ok to lie in service of your belief, when your belief says thou shalt not bear false witness? Just add that to the list of hypocrasies next to the list of lies.
greyeyed123 1 year ago
Debbie wrote 'Matthew', Gladys-Inez wrote 'Mark', Shahnaynay! wrote 'Luke', and Gertrude Ethelbert wrote 'John'. Lady Gaga wrote 'Revelation', and Chuck Norris edited the whole shit-n-kiboodle to 'harmonize' them. Chuck don't know shit about harmony!
yeshuahfullofit 1 year ago
ok u christians arround who decided what books were put in the bible?cause i see the book of tobias nowhere in the normal bible.and thats one of my favorite books.but i take it that they left it out because he did an exorsism not in the name of jesus but it looked like witchcraft.
witchcerridwen 1 year ago
@witchcerridwen Athanasius of Alexandria, a 4th century Bishop, in his 39th letter to the Christians he wrote to anually to tell when to celebrate Easter, he made a list of the 27 books that make up the canon, saying that these books and only these books should be permitted. Gospels of Matt,Mark,Luke, and John permitted. Gospels of Mary,Phillip and Peter not. Acts of Apostles allowed but Acts of Teklah not. 1st and 2nd letters to the Corithians accepted, the 3rd was condemned...and so on.
SkinnyWmn69 11 months ago
@SkinnyWmn69 Back in Jerusleum during the days of jesus, There had to be a census and concensus to have people (Mary) from outside to give birth in their town. There was NO such records at this time, there are records before and after. Why would they make this ONE exception, for a known whore nonetheless . Its hogwash man you know this.
2ndBestAllTime 10 months ago
@2ndBestAllTime Thats fine, I'm not professing that any of it is true, just stating facts. However, according to those books,it wasn't in Jerusalem.the family was from Nazareth and he was born at Bethlehem, just outside of the town. I'm sure there are way more than this one exception as well to be fair.we are talking about a famous story, how would we know of any of the others.And known whore?Where do you get that information? I DO NOT SAY THE STORY IS TRUE!You must know where you get your facts
SkinnyWmn69 10 months ago
@Omnicron777 can i get a job ,,i dont mind doing the killing on your behalf as long as i get rich out of it and can keep a few of the women ,,oh and a yacht would be pretty cool for weekends ,,i can start anytime
simpleearthling 1 year ago
Cool intro, and Matt gives a creepy smile during it.
capoman1 1 year ago
@Omnicron777 Pleasure to meet you.
nebogipfel11 1 year ago
ive never seen them mention the truth of how the bible was compiled and all that. that was a big turning point for me back when i went to church and everything
autopsy87 1 year ago
@Omnicron777
I think I love satan too! - He sure as hell killed a lot less people than God did!
FatRakoon 1 year ago 2
@Omnicron777 lol david icke is crazy, but alex jones is cool to an exent
gphhawkins 1 year ago
@Omnicron777 mazel tov
bigdaddyaen 1 year ago
I like that he hold the bible like its sticky and gross lol
evkero 1 year ago 2
@Omnicron777 You too eh?
TatsujinSan 1 year ago
@SampleArtist91 We and almost every creature on this planet are still evolving.Not physically in our lifetimes but through passing on our DNA.Evolution does not happen in a generation,its minor changes that occur over many many years(depending on the species,fruit flies for example reproduce within a few days of being hatched).Some animals are at there evolutionary peak and therefore have no need to evolve anymore.Primates (thats us) still have a way to go before evolutionary perfection.
gazt1984 1 year ago
Do you know anything about Jewish tradition? Do you know that most Biblical accounts were passed down through the word of mouth through oral tradition? Well, it is not surprising that the books are anomyous......
nowayout001 1 year ago
Idk... if evolotion were true, wouldnt we still be evolving?? I wan't someone to sincerely answer me. I'm not looking for an argument.
SampleArtist91 1 year ago
@SampleArtist91 If evolution is true, it is highly likely that we are still evolving, but I don't really like the direction humanity is most likely to be going...
nowayout001 1 year ago
@nowayout001 well what direction would that be?
SampleArtist91 1 year ago
@SampleArtist91 Increased rates of suicide and more prevalence of mental health problems, especially in young people... And decreased physical activity and natural immunity, etc. Too much dependence on technology, I see people use their cars when the destination was just across 2 or 3 short streets.
nowayout001 1 year ago
@nowayout001 yup. we live in a "give it to me now" generation.
SampleArtist91 1 year ago
@SampleArtist91 Um, but you know Physical Inactivity is actually highly dangerous to human health. I have done this in Health Promotion, it is shocking.
nowayout001 1 year ago
@nowayout001 I wouldnt be surprised if it is. as humans we werent meant to lay slothfully around. thats just my opinion
SampleArtist91 1 year ago
@SampleArtist91
QUESTION : You asked - Wouldnt we still be evolving?
ANSWER:
Erm, yes, and we are.
Evolution is a very very slow process that takes many many generations.
We, and indeed everythign that is alive is evolving and will never stop evolving although some things have adapted to its lifestyle perfectly and will change VERY SLOWLY while other things will change quicker if their environment isnt well suited to them.
the various Human races alone are a very good example of evolution.
FatRakoon 1 year ago
Thumbs up if the intro was trippy!
QuestionPerception 1 year ago 2
Hi, my name is Ed. God revealed his word to me last night in my kitchen. I wrote it all down. He told me that it's the final addition to the bible. You should read it. You must read it. It tells you how to get to heaven. God himself told me this, so you better believe it. I have proof, remember, because I wrote it down. In a book.
sketto 1 year ago
Sounds like the way my anthropology teacher described his grasp of evolution. Chuckles...
FlexibleElf 1 year ago
THAT INTRO WAS AWESOME!!
RpgdUd3 1 year ago
if you bury a bible thumper in the back yard and wait 60 years then dig him back up he wont have evolved at all, ergo evolution is false.
vengencefrom1979 1 year ago
i wanna punch him in the head for jesus
PooeyBum11 1 year ago
Tom Baker was still better.
gillyssquashball 1 year ago
It is a funny thing that as of now there are 157 dislikes for this video when all that is stated is what believing and non-believing bible scholars agree on - the 157 dislikes are people who simply vote down the video based on "The Atheist Experience" title and/or they have not studied this subject in detail with honesty.
I am not an atheist but I agree completely with what was discussed in this video. The info is valid regardless of religious belief or the lack of it by the people speaking.
dannysees 1 year ago
4:57 - Agreed. Considering the Roman Empire was one of the most well documented eras in the ancient world.
riffmagos 1 year ago
@Omnicron777 Thanks for clearing it up.
theshaggyskinhead 1 year ago
0.0 the doctor who reference blew my mind
electorg 1 year ago
@Omnicron777 I suppose I'll just have to believe you because I can't prove you wrong then
xavtron 1 year ago
@Omnicron777 If your kind created humans, then what are you?!?! O.O mind=blown
bangNL94 1 year ago
Zombies? Every book I have says "The Gospel According to Matthew."
iluvugo 1 year ago
@iluvugo Yes, Zombies (people who come back from the dead). Matthew 27:52-53 specifically states that the dead saints crawled out of their graves and walked into Jerusalem, being witnessed by many.
The Hobbit is actually referred to in the Lord of the Rings, as a book called "There and Back Again, by Bilbo Baggins". Does that mean Bilbo was a real living person?
eurisko67 1 year ago
@eurisko67 As for the Hobbit, I vaguely remember someone doing something on that in grade school as for the Lord of Rings I never watched the movie. So I don't know if Bilbo Baggins was a real living person or not. Ok but it doesn't use the word Zombies. Zombies are the dead that are raised by magic and are still dead, ghosts. Here it says"...and the bodies of many holy people...were raised to life" life being the key word. whereas zombies would be raised and still dead. and no magic was used.
iluvugo 1 year ago
@iluvugo Bud, according to the bible, the dead were raised through the magic of Christ's resurrection. I fail to see your distinction. Also, I'm not sure what bible you're reading from but the King James Version (the original English version) states nothing about them coming back to life. Quote "and many bodies of the saints which slept arose; and came out of their graves; and went into the holy city". Coming back to life is never claimed.
eurisko67 1 year ago
@eurisko67 I am not a bud, unless it's a rosebud. The scripture you quoted never said anything about magic either. I am reading the Complete Jewish Version and it is the same as the KJV. Neither say Zombie. Look up the word Zombie in the dictionary. If you can find anywhere in the bible where the word "magic" is used to describe any miracle Jesus or God the Father did then I will give you a million dollars. You have to find the word "magic" or doesn't count. Have fun reading.
iluvugo 1 year ago
@iluvugo So you're a fundamentalist? The words must be present for the meaning to be understood? Magic, Noun: The power of apparently influencing events by using supernatural forces. This accurately describes Jesus supposed "miracles". Zombie, Noun: The revival of a corpse using magic, especially in African/Caribbean religions (I would add Christianity to that list). Also accurately describing what Jesus supposedly did. The scripture I quoted describes Jesus making Zombies via magic. Get it?
eurisko67 1 year ago
@eurisko67 YOU ARE EVIL! DONT WRITE ME AGAIN! GET IT?
iluvugo 1 year ago
@eurisko67 Fundamentalist: one who remains faithful to the fundamental tenets or doctrines, especially of faith.
Magic would also include the appearance of existence from nothing.
A zombie is missing a soul, or consciousness. the bokkor kills the zombie, extracts the soul, and then revives the unconscious zombie. Zombi is also the name of a voudun loa of death. Christians come back to life with their souls, and Jesus came back to life with His "soul" (consciousness).
Clever semantics...
dameon692002 1 year ago
@Omnicron777 oh no!
now we are doomed!!!
^_^
h0pl1t 1 year ago
@Omnicron777 you are atheist :p
TheMasterKingz 1 year ago
@Omnicron777 AH HAH! Now ive got proof i can tell the world!!
Th3Shadow0fDeath 1 year ago
@vikeyev1 disbelief and lack of belief are similar. both are passive positions. which is accurate. some dictionaries. even say atheist is a person that does not believe in god. true still. but it is not believing that there is no god.
brownbigb 1 year ago
That was the Tom Baker's "Doctor Who" opening credits, and the girl who played his companion "Romana" played by Larla Ward who married Tom Baker, is now married to richard Dawkins.
LouisPlume 1 year ago
there are arguments for accepting the gospels as valid and there are arguments for rejecting it. no one can be absolutely sure either way. the best explanation i've heard for accepting the bible is that extensive study of its true teachings and practice of these teachings have made certain person's lives much happier and peaceful. my brother is a perfect example. he believed based on various apologetics arguments. he then studied and practiced and now continues to believe because it truly helped
4woffd4 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@4woffd4 "there are arguments for accepting the gospels as valid and there are arguments for rejecting it"
that is true, however, something being true and something being valid are two different things.
scottpastry 1 year ago
i really like this guy.
thatsbalone 1 year ago
@service2others And what about Bill Gates, who is an atheist who has given tens of billions to charity? You think that the only way to be unselfish is to have religion? In the end, religion IS about selfishness in order to avoid the wrong afterlife. Some of the biggest philanthropists are atheists and they're not doing it in the hope of some reward in the afterlife, they just do it because they feel it's the right thing to do.
trtnec 1 year ago
God is amazing indeed. :) Jesus, my Savior, in You I trust!
Addy4473 1 year ago
@Addy4473
I take great pleasure in imagining the eventual disappointment you will feel*, although I pity you somewhat.
*I know you probably won't, but I'd like it if you read "The Jilting of Granny Weatherall"
thatsbalone 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience You wouldn't be surprised how often I've argued that very same point to stubborn ears (or eyes as the case may be) who simply stoically choose to ignore or disbelieve it. Basic dictionary definitions even fail to dislodge the almost religious need of the religious to brand atheism as something akin to themselves. The false sense of legitimacy by way of false association simply never materializes, and yet they hold on to it with, well, zealous devotion.
GermanChocolateCake 1 year ago
Lots of time and very gradual changes.
GermanChocolateCake 1 year ago
If I woke up with a real hangover and realized what bull shit I had written the night before I wouldn't have signed it either.
Jostedalsosten 1 year ago
I can definitely see why Atheists are the way they are. If the idea of God that you all have gotten is one of a "celestial child abuser", I understand your resentment. I argue with any Christian who thinks that God is "out to get us". Why cant God be a kind and loving God? why must we all be "fucked",(only word that seems to have the gravity I'm looking for), if we don't acknowledge him? Do me a favor, look up Pascal's Wager...seems to fit in this circumstance...
FXMaster03 1 year ago
@FXMaster03 Wait, are you actually advocating Pascal's Wager? You don't see the flaws in it? Seriously?
Proletariat12 1 year ago
@FXMaster03
Pascal's wager is for chickens who does not dare follow the evidence.
DESPERATE after worshipping a genocidal maniac in ETERNITY.
It is YOU religious fanatics who claim we are all fucked, and we NEED jeebus to save us. Original sin and all. Don't project your own flaws unto others.
"Why can't god be a kind and loving god?" - Because the bible clearly contradicts that.
tdjdk 1 year ago
@FXMaster03
Are you saying Pascal's Wager as a GOOD thing?
Uh oh.
Delivery for Mr. Pandora!
boyinthedrain 1 year ago
If jesus existed, then why don't we find artwork with jesus depicted from that time period? Cave paintings? Papyrus scrolls with his portrait on? At least his name should be written everywhere when he performed his miracles. Woodwork, small statues as a souvenir of the miracle....
Why only a story in a book so many years later?
obaeyens 1 year ago
@obaeyens ummm....there were writings about him from that time period...the earliest of the synoptic gospel was written 40 years after the crucifixion. What about Paul's letters?? those were written during that time. The way you say it, its as if they came up with those stories at the council of Nicaea and threw them into a book. research first before commenting please.
FXMaster03 1 year ago
@FXMaster03 if you do miracles like converting wine and replicating fish, walk over water and return dead people then people would have painted this on walls, caves, made artwork,.... Probably souvenirs depicting him. And all you have is this lousy letter?
obaeyens 1 year ago
@obaeyens well there are several letters actually. The point you make supports Aryanism. Aryanism was based on the idea that Jesus' divinity was not given by God...or plainly, that Jesus was not God. This was popular from the 2nd to 4th century I believe. It was of course tossed out by Irenaeus and later by Constantine as being works of heresy. Gnosticism ran rampant from the late first century to around the 4th...there are more works on the subject and are called the Gnostic Gospels.........
FXMaster03 1 year ago
@FXMaster03
But even if jesus is not god or son as god. He did these cool magical tricks. You expect some pottery with his picture on it as a souvenir or remembrance to be dug up by now. Wall paintings, stone figures, wood carvings of him form the years 30-33 itself.
obaeyens 1 year ago
@obaeyens ...It wasn't a "get rich quick" scheme,lol. Jesus was not popular back then, he was a peasant. Society as a whole was mainly Jewish, several Pagans(among the Romans). So, when he was crucified, he was only known among his followers. I'm sure if this happened in our time, the internet would have spread his word quicker. There just wasn't any quick way to communicate then. That is why it took a good 300 years to gain a foothold. So by the time it was popular you DID see art and writings
FXMaster03 1 year ago
@FXMaster03 Uhmm, didnt everyone say that Jesus was a carpenter and a jude?
Not that it matters since i think the same as the others in the video, wheres the eyewitnesses?
Sweddude 1 year ago
@obaeyens truth or fiction is for you to decide though. I know the early church threw them out quickly. The Gospel of Thomas for instance, portrays Jesus as a Buddhist would portray Buddha. A prominent Roshi even went as far as to say, "If I had know of the Gospel of Thomas, I wouldn't have needed Buddhism!"
FXMaster03 1 year ago
When ever I speak ill of our government and I don't use nasty words I keep getting Error, try again
pchtermino1 1 year ago
ok first off, it takes much faith to be an atheist...think on that. Secondly, after the crucifixion, the disciples thought that the second coming of Christ was going to happen in their lifetime...hence the reason for not writing anything down. The disciples left, preaching the word of God and had many followers of their own. For instance, Polycarp was a student of John the Apostle and Irenaeus was a student of Polycarp....and Irenaeus was responsible for most of the New Testament...
FXMaster03 1 year ago
@FXMaster03
You're exactly wrong! Atheists have NO faith, not 'much' faith. We don't say "There is no God coz thats what I want to believe." In fact what we do say is "There has yet to any testable scientific evidence presented for the existance of a God, therefore we do not believe in one."
cherylsalo 1 year ago
@cherylsalo have you any idea the definition of Atheist and Agnostic? Atheist= "there is no God" Agnostic= "I don't know" Your response would fall under the Agnostic category...since "you don't know" because you are looking for scientific proof. You cant say, "until there is scientific proof that there is a God, I'm going to go ahead and disprove it" What kind of scientific hypothesis is that? you can neither prove or disprove sounds more scientific than what you say.
FXMaster03 1 year ago
Comment removed
FXMaster03 1 year ago
@FXMaster03
You have completely misread and misinterpreted what I have said. No where did I said "I do not know if there is a God" I am not agnostic. I am an atheist = I do not believe in any gods.
Speaking of points...you get 10 for following blindly just as your bible would dictate that you do!
cherylsalo 1 year ago
@cherylsalo ...I know you say you are atheist, but you are backing up your point with the assumption that SCIENCE says there is no God. If you were using the proper logic of science, you would have to hypothesize that since science cannot prove God's existence, therefore it cannot disprove God's existence as well. Catch my drift?
FXMaster03 1 year ago
@FXMaster03 I think you confusing Atheism with what is known as "Strong Atheism".
Basically its like this:
There are Theists and there are Atheists. Seperate from this there are Gnostics and Agnostics. These 4 terms can form 4 combinations:
1: Gnostic Theists, who believe there is a god, and believe that it is possible to find knowledge(evidence, proof) of this god
2: Agnostic Theists, who believe there is a god, but believe that it is impossible to find knowledge(evidence, proof) of this god
omegastar19 1 year ago
@omegastar19
3: Gnostic Atheists, who believe there is no god, and believe it is possible to prove that there is no god. (This position is also known as Strong Atheism)
4: Agnostic Atheists, who believe there is no god, but dont believe that it is possible to proof this. (This position is also known as Weak Atheism)
The truth is that almost all Atheists are of the 4th combination, and almost none are of the 3rd combination.
omegastar19 1 year ago
@omegastar19 Really? But the most outspoken ones appear more like 3...
nowayout001 1 year ago
@nowayout001 Well, its similar to saying that you are quite sure that no Fairies or Unicorns exist. You cant say with 100% certainty that they dont exist, but you can say that you are pretty sure that they dont exist.
Furthermore, the biblical God as described in the bible contains contradictions so it cannot exist exactly as the bible says it does.
omegastar19 1 year ago
@omegastar19 I agree with what you said, this biblical God can still exist (as an imperfect entity mightier than we are). God doesn't have to be perfectly good and holy. If someone keeps on telling you that he is perfectly holy, will you be gullible enough just to believe him. Just because someone said something doesn't mean that he really is who he says he is. If you see contradictions between his actions and words, and changes of attitudes, that only means God is not unchangable.
nowayout001 1 year ago
@cherylsalo As a matter of fact, I do NOT follow the bible "blindly". I am not Southern Baptist,lol. I support the theory that the Gospels were probably(most likely) not written by their supposed authors. Since the synoptic Gospels contradict each other...(Matthew and Luke) for instance, one cannot take the bible "literally". Nor do I think Revelation holds any water. Remember, even 2nd century theologians wanted the Gospel of John tossed out as heresy.
FXMaster03 1 year ago
@cherylsalo so, because of your response, everyone reading your post is now stupider. I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul.
FXMaster03 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FXMaster03
"ok first off, it takes much faith to be an atheist"
Faith to be an atheist? Did I miss some memo in the last week?
obaeyens 1 year ago
AHAHA! Best intro ever!
mikeyman211 1 year ago
so what do YOU beleive in then? You like to ridicule others' beleifs, what are your beleifs? do you have any?. Me thinks thou protest too much, you seem to want Christians to prove to you there is a God. What do you beleve in ?
service2others 1 year ago
@service2others Okay, here is one of Jesus teachings. you need to read Rev 2:18-29. here a a few highlights of his fantastic teachings. "22 So I will cast her on a bed of suffering", "23 I will strike her children dead." ... What a great, loving teacher..
darkhumanoid 1 year ago
@service2others If you truely believe the words inthe Bible are from your God, then you can have him. What kind of person would say Murder, Rape and selling your children as sex slaves is a good thing? You can't "Pick and choose" what you want from the Bible, you rather believe in it all, or nothing at all. If this is your God, you can have him.
JimaaaH 1 year ago
WTF! What a creepy, wierd intro.
BELIALNEW 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@service2others
If the lie is to love your neighbour and to do as you would have those do unto you
are you kidding?
Luke 14:26
"If any man come to me, and HATE not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, HE CANNOT BE MY DISCIPLE.open your eyes fool.
adlerbr12 1 year ago
@service2others
I'm not even making a claim about your faith, and, in fact, I don't even know what you believe. I'm just making a claim about what you said; I was just outlining that nearly all of the time, atheists aren't concerned with Jesus' moral teachings as much as they are concentrating on the supernatural accounts regarding Christ, and his crucifixion and the purpose that supposedly proposed his death. That's all I was getting at.
TwentyYearDenial 1 year ago
jesus wasnt born dec. 25th. staring at Luke 2:8 the new testement says that the day jesus was born, the shepherds watch over their flock all night long. the only time of year they would do this is when their live stock were reering young, and they had to protect the offspring from preditors, that would have been spring time. not in the middle of winter. isnt it strange that people wouldnt have recorded the birthday of their own messiah? until centuries after he died no-one gave it any thought,
TheOnemandigitaljam 1 year ago
the bible was re-written by a blue blood illumiati, that why it's called the "king James version" lies mixed with truth. most of you on this channell havn't woken up. You just bicker with you egos
service2others 1 year ago
@service2others He also said:
"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me" Luke 19:27
54NT14G0 1 year ago
@service2others
Loving your neighbour is a beneficial value. But to worship and believe that your life is infinite over that is another thing. I believe Christ existed, but not in the form that is described in the Bible. The idea that Jesus resurrected people, healed by miracle, and that he rose from the dead and was crucified by "God's will" is extremely asinine. Why is it that God can allegedly create everything, but a human being must be crucified for humans to enter Heaven?
TwentyYearDenial 1 year ago
@TwentyYearDenial you havn't the faintest idea about my beliefs. Go back to the start. Read my "aboutme' info on my channel. Don't speak thru your ego.
Peace.
service2others 1 year ago
Abject intellectual rubbish. Typical of men attempting to understand the scriptures with their own minds. Read "Behold Your God" by Fred Wright
otnt66 1 year ago
The head of Matt in the beginning and also the end really cracks me up :P
gunblade64 1 year ago
@service2others Us Atheists don't need a book to tell us what is right from wrong, and what morals are. In fact, if you get your morals from the Bible, I truly feel sorry for you. I love helping others and being a good person, and I do it because I want to, not because I think there's an invisible man watching me and is going to punish me if I don't. I'm glad I am not brainwashed like you are. :)
Hyourinmaru8 1 year ago
after a very short time of living in space e.g working on the space station the body starts to adapt very fast to its new surroundings for instance ...sheading body mass this shows how fast we can evolve....
dilwich123 1 year ago
should i believe the bible or this guy who cant get out of his head god wants your heart thats why you dont know him open your heart to christ jesus.
MrFresco88 1 year ago
I should add that in my opinion the Bible is just bad fantasy and it is a shame so many people think it is an historical textbook. To me, the "Religion" section at the local bookstore is just another name for institutionalised science fiction and/or fantasy.
seamuswarren 1 year ago
I think there were dozens of Gospels at one time - even a Gospel of Judas - and some bishop back in the second century decided to just use four of them. On what basis was this decision made?
seamuswarren 1 year ago
@seamuswarren
Constantine (the emperor who converted to this superstition after seeing clouds that looked like an "X") set up the Council of Nicea to decide what would get included and what wouldn't; the simple answer is, the bishops on that council had a vote.
StaceyC123 1 year ago